Memorandum SAN JOSE CAPITAL OF SILICON VALLEY TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL. FROM: Harry Freitas. SUBJECT: SEE BELOW DATE: My 27, 2016

Transcription

1 COUNCIL AGENDA: 08/16/16 ITEM: it n CITYOP SAN JOSE CAPITAL OF SILICON VALLEY Memorandum TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: Harry Freitas SUBJECT: SEE BELOW DATE: My 27, 2016 Approved: Date: COUNCIL DISTRICT: 1 SUBJECT: FILE NO. CP APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DECISION TO APPROVE A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT A 50-FOOT TALL WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITY (MONOPOLE), ASSOCIATED EQUIPMENT ENCLOSURE, AND EMERGENCY GENERATOR IN THE CN COMMERCIAL NEIGHBORHOOD ZONING DISTRICT ON AN APPROXIMATELY 1.85 GROSS ACRE SITE, LOCATED ON THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF BOLLINGER ROAD AND MILLER AVENUE (6164 BOLLINGER ROAD). RECOMMENDATION (a) Consideration of the categorical exemption pursuant to Section (New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures) of the Guidelines for the Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended. (b) Conduct an Administrative Hearing on and consider an Appeal of the Planning Commission's approval of a Conditional Use Permit to construct a 50-foot tall wireless communication facility (monopole), associated equipment enclosure, and emergency generator in the CN Commercial Neighborhood Zoning District, located at the southeast comer of Bollinger Road and Miller Avenue (6164 Bollinger Road), (Marchese Christopher Trustee & Et Al, Owner). (c) Adopt a resolution denying a permit appeal and upholding the Planning Commission's approval of a Conditional Use Permit to construct a 50-foot tall wireless communication facility (monopole), associated equipment enclosure, and emergency generator in the CN Commercial Neighborhood Zoning District, located at the southeast comer of Bollinger Road and Miller Avenue (6164 Bollinger Road).

2 HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL My 27, 2016 Subject: File No. CP Page 2 ' OUTCOME Although the Conditional Use Permit is before the City Council on appeal, the hearing before the City Council is a new (de novo) hearing, and the City Council's decision on the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) must reflect the Council's independent determination based on the evidence and testimony presented at the City Council hearing. The City Council must make its own findings for approval or denial of the Conditional Use Permit. Should the City Council deny the proposed Conditional Use Permit, the applicant would not be able to construct a 50-foot tall wireless communication facility, an associated equipment enclosure, or an emergency generator. Should the City Council approve the Conditional Use permit, the applicant would be able to move forward in the process to construct the 50-foot tall wireless communication facility, an associated equipment enclosure, and an emergency generator. BACKGROUND On December 15, 2015, the applicant, NSA Wireless Inc., filed an application for a Conditional Use Permit to construct a 50-foot tall wireless communication facility (monopole), an associated equipment enclosure, and an emergency generator. A wireless communication antenna is a conditionally permitted use in the CN Commercial Neighborhood Zoning District. The site is bounded by the Bollinger Road to the north and residential uses to the south and east and Miller Road and residential uses to the west. The residential uses to the south are located approximately 78 feet from the proposed monopole. The project site is located along Bollinger Road and Miller Avenue and contains commercial uses including retail, public eating and personal enrichment establishments. The proposed wireless telecommunication facility is located on the southern portion of the site in the existing parking lot. An aerial map and depiction of the proposed wireless facility is provided as part of the attached Planning Commission packet. The public hearing on the Conditional Use Permit was scheduled for May 4, 2016 before the Planning Commission in accordance with Section of the San Jose Municipal Code. As part of the public hearing process, notices of the public hearing were mailed to property owners and occupants within 500 feet of the project site on April 21, 2016 (13 days prior to the public hearing). Per City Council Policy number 6-30: (Public Outreach Policy for Pending Land Use and Development Proposals), a Conditional Use Permit requires standard noticing of 500 feet. The project is not identified as a project with significant community interest pursuant to Council Policy Therefore, a community meeting was not held and publishing requirements were not required for the subject application. Lastly, staff received and responded to less than ten public correspondences prior to the Planning Commission public hearing.

3 HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL July 27,2016 Subject: File No. CP Page 3 Public Comments Received. Between March 29, 2016, and July 17, 2016, staff received approximately five phone calls and s from nearby residents inquiring about the project or opposing the project prior to the Planning Commission Meeting. The public concerns were focused on the following: Radio frequency emissions Aesthetics Number of existing roof-mounted antennae Staff responded to the concerns raised prior to the public hearing and stated the following: The City is preempted by federal law and cannot regulate radio frequency emissions provided the proposed wireless facility meets federal radio frequency emission guidelines for health and safety. The applicant, per City request, has utilized a pine tree aesthetic to assist with screening the monopole facility and has also lowered the height of the monopole from 60-feet to 50-feet. The Alternatives Analysis was provided by the applicant and is included as Attachment 2. Planning Commission Hearing On May 4, 2016, the Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider the proposed Conditional Use Permit (File No. CP ). The Director of Planning recommended approval of the Conditional Use Permit. As stated in the Planning Commission Staff Report, staff found the proposed project to be consistent with the Envision San Jose 2040 General Plan, the Zoning Ordinance, City Council Policy 6-20: Land Use Policy for Wireless Communication Facilities, the CEQA, and Conditional Use Permit Findings. After the public hearing, summarized below, the Planning Commission voted (Pham and Yob absent) to consider the exemption in accordance with CEQA, specifically Section (New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures) of the CEQA Guidelines and approve the Conditional Use Permit. Below is a summary of the major points raised in public testimony at the May 4, 2016 Planning Commission hearing. Public Testimony Summary At the Planning Commission hearing, Planning staff presented the proposed project description, compliance with applicable City policies and regulations, and recommendation for approval. Prior to public comment, Commissioner O'Halloran asked if radiation issues could be considered in making a land use decision. The Senior Deputy City Attorney stated that the Planning Commission is preempted by federal law to use health hazards as a basis to deny a wireless telecommunication facility. The applicant, on behalf of Verizon Wireless, discussed the project and mentioned that roof mounted antennas were originally explored in 2014, but there were staff concerns regarding clutter as it relates to stealth. Too many roof top antennas would be seen as visual clutter and, therefore, would

4 HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL July 27,2016 Subject: File No. CP Page 4 not be stealth. The applicant stated that an independent study was conducted to evaluate the radio frequency (RF) emissions with the proposed wireless facility from the project site and surrounding areas, and RF emissions were found to be in compliance with Federal Communications Commission (FCC) standards. The RF Emissions study states that the proposed monopole facility is 3.9% of the applicable public exposure limit, 4.1% of the public exposure limit of the maximum calculated level at any nearby building and 1.2% of the public exposure limit calculated at the second-floor elevation of any nearby residence. During the public hearing, four members of the public spoke in opposition to the project. Primary issues raised were: The radio frequency emissions as related to public health. A limited number of the neighbors knew about the project. The location of the proposed wireless telecommunication facility is too close to the residential units nearby. Noise concerns related to the wireless telecommunication facility. During the public hearing, Commissioner Yesney asked a member of the public whether she has and uses a cell phone. The member of the public responded that she did use a cell phone, and she understands the need for cell phones. Planning Commission Discussion Commissioner O'Halloran made a motion to consider the exemption in accordance with CEQA, specifically Section (New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures) of the CEQA Guidelines, and to approve the Conditional Use Permit. Commissioner Yesney seconded the motion. Commissioner O'Halloran provided the following comments on his motion: He appreciates the concerns that people have about the radiation issues, and there has been a report that has been prepared stating there are no health impacts with the installation of the monopole. It is his understanding that federal law precludes the Planning Commission from using health-related issues as a basis for land use decisions. Vice Chair Abelite stated that the signal strength issues are not in the Planning Commission's purview, and the Planning Commission is specifically blocked from considering those issues. The Planning Commission voted (Yob and Pham absent) to adopt Resolution No (attached) to approve the Conditional Use Permit. APPEAL On May 12, 2016, an appeal of the Planning Commission's decision to approve the Conditional Use Permit was filed and received by Planning staff (see attached Notice of Permit Appeal and associated letter). The Permit Appeal requests that the City Council over turn the Planning Commission's decision to approve a Conditional Use Permit to construct a 50-foot tall wireless -

5 HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL My 27,2016 Subject: File No. CP Page 5 communication facility (monopole), an associated equipment enclosure, and an emergency generator in the CN Commercial Neighborhood Zoning District. Specific Comments raised by Appellant The appeal presents the following points, which are followed by Staff's response. 1. Negative health effects of continuous low-dose cell tower radiation. Response: Pursuant to the Telecommunications Act of 1996, the City cannot deny a Conditional Use Permit on the basis of environmental effects of radio frequency emissions to the extent that such facilities comply with the Federal Communications Commission's regulations concerning such emissions. As stated previously, the Radio Frequency Emissions Report prepared for the project states that the project is under 5% of the applicable public exposure limit. Specifically, the RF Emissions study states that the proposed monopole facility is 3.9% of the applicable public exposure limit, 4.1% of the public exposure limit of the maximum calculated level at any nearby building and 1.2% of the public exposure limit calculated at the second-floor elevation of any nearby residence. 2. The height of the tower Verizon will bring a great potential risk in natural disasters, such as earthquakes or strong winds. Response: The project will be required to demonstrate structural integrity of the monopole in order to obtain building permits. Additionally, the maximum height in the CN Commercial Neighborhood zoning district is 50 feet, unless a different height maximum is established in Chapter (Specific Height Restrictions) of the San Jose Municipal Code. The proposed height of the monopole is 50-feet tall meeting the Zoning Code requirement. City Council Policy 6-20 (Land Use Policy for Wireless Communication Facilities) states that freestanding monopoles should be located no closer to a parcel developed for use as singlefamily or multi-family residence than 35 feet or a distance equal to 1 foot for every 1 foot of structure height, whichever is greater. The monopole is located approximately 78 feet from the residential property line and the associated equipment enclosure in which the monopole is located in is located approximately 70 feet from the residential property line. The height of the monopole complies with the zoning ordinance in that the proposed height is 50 feet tall, where 50 feet or greater is allowed in the CN Commercial Neighborhood Zoning District. Furthermore, proposed height of the monopole complies with Council Policy 6-20, in that the monopole should be located no closer than 50 feet to a parcel used for single-family or multi-family residential purposes. The proposed monopole is located 78 feet from the residential property line. 3. Along with the tower, Verizon will also mount a diesel generator with a large diesel fuel tank. This facility presents a variety of explosive and toxic hazards, as well as potential noise pollution as the generator ages. Response: The project is required to comply with the noise standards set forth in Table Noise Standards in the San Jose Municipal Code. Table states that a commercial or

6 HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL My 27, 2016 Subject: File No. CP Page 6, Public/Quasi-Public (PQP) use adjacent to a property used or zoned for residential purposes bas a maximum noise level in decibels (db) of 55 at the property line. The applicant has provided a noise study which states that the fans and emergency generator would operate at 45.6 db and 54.7 db, respectively. The project is conditioned to not exceed 55 db at any site property line adjacent to a property used or zoned for residential uses. Lastly, the project will be required to comply with all applicable building and fire codes. 4. Verizon's coverage map shows good to excellent coverage in the area surrounding the proposed cell tower, in respective of 4G LTE [sic] data coverage and voice and messaging. Sub-optimal site selection will end up causing more cell towers to be constructed in order to cover the poor-reception areas. Response: The City does not evaluate installations of monopoles based on service need. NSA Wireless has submitted coverage maps which indicate coverage gaps in this area. The applicant submitted an alternatives analysis which explored four different sites and described the reasons why other locations were not feasible. The reasons given were related to unavailable ground space, visual clutter on rooftops, and non-allowance from the property owners. The alternatives analysis is included as Attachment There should be additional public hearings to include residents within 1,000 feet, and these residents should have been informed. Response: Section (Notice of Public Hearing) of the San Jose Municipal Code requires a noticing radius of 300 feet. City Council Policy 6-30 requires public hearing notices to be mailed to properties within 500 feet of the project site and posted on the City's website. City staff followed this policy and mailed public hearing notices to properties within 500 feet of the project site. City staff also verified that the required number of on-site signs was posted, in addition to sending out notices of public hearing. The City received confirmation that the on-site signs were posted on December 28, The City has satisfied the noticing requirement per the San Jose Municipal Code and City Council Policy Property values in the surrounding neighborhood area will undoubtedly decrease, because the risks of cell towers have become a major consideration in the real estate valuation of homes. Response: As discussed in detail above, the project complies with the requirements contained in the Zoning Ordinance as it relates to height, setbacks, off-street parking and noise standards. Furthermore, the project complies with City Council Policy 6-20 and, therefore, the project does not have any impacts to the surrounding neighborhood area and will not decrease property values in the surrounding neighborhood.

7 HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL My 27,2016 Subject: File No. CP Page 7 ANALYSIS The Planning Commission staff report (attached) provides staffs analysis of this project, as well as the findings to support approval of a Conditional Use Permit. Additionally, the subject Planning Commission's resolution approving the Conditional Use Permit on appeal before the City Council sets forth the findings to support the Conditional Use Permit. Should the City Council decide to deny the appeal and approve the Conditional Use Permit, the findings can be based on the analysis herein along with the Planning Commission staff report and resolution. However, if the City Council elects to make its discretionary determination to approve the appeal and deny the Conditional Use Permit, it would need to make findings to support denial. As the subject appeal will be considered de novo by the Council, the Council may also rely on other testimony in the record presented at the appeal hearing as well as the Council's own determination on whether this project Complies with the City Council Policy number 6-20 (Land Use Policy for Wireless Telecommunication Facilities), the Envision 2040 General Plan and the Zoning Ordinance, all as discussed above and in the attachments. EVALUATION AND FOLLOW-UP If the Conditional Use Permit is approved, the applicant would be able to proceed with application for Building Permits to construct a 50-foot tall wireless communication facility (monopole), associated equipment enclosure, and emergency generator. If the Conditional Use Permit is denied, the project will not be able to move forward with building permits at this time. PUBLIC OUTREACH Staff followed Council Policy 6-30: Public Outreach Policy. A notice of the public hearing was distributed to the owners and tenants of all properties located within 500 feet of the project site and posted on the City website. An on-site public notification sign has been posted as of December 28, 2015, on the subject site informing the neighbors of the development proposal. Per Council Policy 6 30, publication of a notice for the proposed project was not required. The Planning Commission staff report and City Council memo are also posted on the City's website. Staff has been available to respond to questions from the public. The public comments received are described in this memorandum. COORDINATION Preparation of this memorandum has been coordinated with the City Attorney's Office.

8 HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL My 27, 2016 Subject: File No. CP Page 8 CEOA Under the provisions of Section of the State Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), this project is found to be exempt from the environmental review requirements of Title 21 of the San Jose Municipal Code, implementing the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, in that the proposed project includes the construction and location of new, small facilities or structures. The proposed project includes the construction of an enclosure with equipment associated with the monopole. Section of the State Guidelines for Implementation of CEQA exempts the construction and location of limited numbers of new, small facilities or structures and installation of new small equipment and facilities in small structures. /s/ HARRY FREITAS, DIRECTOR Planning, Building and Code Enforcement For questions please contact Steve McHarris Planning Official at (408) Attachments: Planning Commission Staff Report Project Description Planning Commission Approval Resolution Notice of Permit Appeal and Associated Letter, Verizon Wireless Response to Appeal Radio Frequency Emissions and Noise Study

9 PC AGENDA: ITEM: 4.a PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT File No. CP Applicant Verizon Wireless Location Southeast corner of Bollinger Road and Miller Avenue (6164 Bollinger Road) Existing Zoning CN Commercial Neighborhood Council District 1 Historic Resource No Annexation Date March 5, 1956 CEQA Exempt per CEQA Guidelines Section for New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures APPLICATION SUMMARY: Conditional Use Permit to construct a 50-foot tall wireless communication facility (monopole), associated equipment enclosure, and emergency generator on an approximately 1.85 gross acre site. RECOMMENDATION: Planning staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the Conditional Use Permit based on the facts and findings in this staff report and proposed Resolution (attached), subject to the conditions stated in said Resolution. PROJECT DATA GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY General Plan Designation NCC Neighborhood/Community Commercial Consistent Inconsistent Goals: IN-6; Policies: IN-6.1 Consistent Policies Inconsistent Policies None SURROUNDING USES General Plan Land Use Zoning Existing Use North City of Cupertino City of Cupertino Church and Public School South East West Residential Neighborhood Residential Neighborhood Residential Neighborhood R-1-8(PD) Planned Development R-1-8(PD) Planned Development R-1-8 Single-Family Residence Residential Use Residential Use Residential Use

10 File No. CP Page 2 of 8 -RELATED APPROVALS Date Action 12/18/2007 C approved a conforming rezoning from A(PD) Planned Development Zoning District to CN Commercial Neighborhood Zoning District to allow for commercial uses. PROJECT DESCRIPTION On December 15, 2015, the applicant filed a Conditional Use Permit to allow the construction of a 50 foot tall wireless communication facility (monopole), associated equipment enclosure, and emergency generator on an approximately 1.85 gross acre site in the CN Commercial Neighborhood zoning district (Figure 1). The proposed monopole is approximately two feet wide and 50 feet tall and will contain 11 antennae and nine Remote Radio Units (RRUs). The purpose for the request is for the improvement of coverage, capacity gaps and overload. The project is not proposing to remove any existing trees and the proposed location of the monopole is located within 10 feet of four existing pine trees with similar heights as the proposed monopole. The proposed equipment and monopole enclosure are located approximately 70 feet and 78 feet, respectively, from the residential use to the south. The Generac SD030 generator commands 49 engine power, and would reach a maximum of 54.7 dba at the residential property line. The monopole would be constructed to look like a pine tree to blend in with the surrounding area. New Monopole Figure 1: Site Location The site is bounded by the Bollinger Road to the north and residential uses to the south and east and Miller Road and Residential uses to the west. The residential uses to the south are located approximately 78 feet from the monopole. The project site is located along Bollinger Road and Miller Avenue and contains commercial uses, including retail, public eating and personal enrichment establishments. The proposed wireless telecommunication facility is located on the southern portion of the site in the existing parking lot (Figure 2).

11 File No. CP Page 3 of 8 Figure 2: Enhanced Site Plan A 50-foot monopole is conditionally allowed in the CN Commercial Neighborhood Zoning District. The monopole, associated equipment and generator would be placed in an approximately 500 square foot, 8-foot tall equipment enclosure in the parking lot area at the rear of the existing retail building in order to reduce the visual and noise impacts on the surrounding area. The project would remove 3 parking spaces from the current 647 spaces and would relocate one of two existing trash enclosures elsewhere on the property. None of the existing trees at the site would be removed. ANALYSIS The proposed project was analyzed for conformance with the following: 1) the Envision San José 2040 General Plan, 2) the Zoning Ordinance, 3) the City Council Policy 6-20: Wireless Communications Facilities Wireless Communications Facilities Policy, and 4) the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Envision San José 2040 General Plan Conformance The subject site is designated as NCC Neighborhood/Community Commercial on the Envision San José 2040 General Plan Land Use/Transportation Diagram. These lands are intended to support a broad range of commercial activity, including commercial uses that serve communities in neighboring areas, such as neighboring serving retail and services and commercial/professional office development. The proposed project conforms to this General Plan designation in that wireless facilities may be allowed in a variety of land use designations

12 File No. CP Page 4 of 8 with a Conditional Use Permit provided the structure is not visually disruptive to existing environment, and that the facility follows the guidelines established in Council Policy 6-20 for Wireless Communication Facilities (further discussed below). In addition to conforming to the General Plan Land Use Diagram, the project conforms to the following General Plan policies as noted below: 1. Telecommunications Goal IN-6: Support the provision of state-of-the-art telecommunication services for households, businesses, institutions, and public agencies throughout the City to foster fiscal sustainability, an innovative economy, support environmental leadership, meet the needs of quality neighborhoods and advance other Envision General Plan goals. Analysis: The proposed project supports and improves coverage and capacity gaps, which serve the wider telecommunications needs of the City. 2. Telecommunications Policy IN-6.1: Work with service providers to ensure access to and availability of a wide range of state-of-the-art telecommunication systems and services for households, businesses, institutions, and public agencies throughout the City. Analysis: The proposed project improves coverage and capacity gaps in the area, which ensures continued wireless telecommunication service to the community by state-of-the-art facilities without interruption. Zoning Ordinance Conformance Setbacks and Height The existing structure conforms to the CN Commercial Neighborhood Zoning District setbacks and height requirements, which is 10 feet from the front property line, and zero feet from the side and rear property lines and 50 feet in height. The project is approximately 180 feet from the front property line and approximately 70 feet from the rear property line. The proposed project proposes a height of 50 feet and is not requesting a height increase above the height requirement allowed under the Zoning District. Noise Section of the San José Municipal Code, and as shown in Table , establishes a maximum noise level of 55 dba for a project adjacent to a property used or zoned for residential purposes. A noise report was prepared by Hammett & Edison, Inc. for the proposed project and it was found that the noise from the cooling fans located inside the equipment cabinet would result in a noise level of 45.6 dba at the nearest property line as a worst case scenario. When the generator is tested or in full operation or during a power outage, the noise study found that highest noise level could reach 54.7 dba at the nearest property. Per Table of the Municipal Code, the maximum noise level when located adjacent to a property used or zoned for residential purposes is 55 decibels. Therefore, the project will not exceed the Zoning Ordinance noise standards. Parking The project is proposing to remove three on-site parking spaces and relocate an existing trash enclosure elsewhere on the site. The project site currently has 647 parking spaces. After removal of the three parking spaces, the project would result in a total of 644 onsite parking spaces. The Zoning Ordinance requires 558 parking spaces for the neighborhood shopping center. Therefore, the project would still be in compliance for parking.

13 City Council Policy 6-20: Wireless Communication Facilities File No. CP Page 5 of 8 As stated in the City Council s Policy 6-20 for Wireless Communication Facilities, the City has a strong interest in achieving and maintaining a high level of wireless communication service for businesses and residents. The City encourages substantial competition among service providers to meet increasing demands for newer and better services. However, visual impact and residential interface concerns can result from the development of wireless communication facilities. The purpose of the Policy is to identify criteria that minimizes and appropriately locates monopole facilities. The relevant policy areas from the City Council Policy 6-20 are discussed below: 1. New freestanding monopoles should be located and designed to minimize public visibility and stealth pole designs should be utilized. Ancillary equipment should be adequately screened and landscaped to minimize potential for graffiti vandalism. The project is proposing a monopole with the aesthetics of a pine tree to assist with minimizing public visibility (Figure 3 and Figure 4). Figure 3: Existing Condition Figure 4: Proposed Condition

14 File No. CP Page 6 of 8 Based on a site visit and information supplied by the applicant, the surrounding trees are pine trees with similar heights as the proposed 50-foot tall monopine. The project is not proposing to remove any of the existing trees, and the proposed location of the monopine is located within 10 feet of four existing pine trees. The equipment associated with the monopine would be screened by an eight foot tall equipment enclosure with landscaping located at the rear of the enclosure, with colors and materials to match the trash enclosure. 2. New landscaping proposed for such purpose should be provided in the form of screening trees located near the antenna location, or as canopy trees for nearby parking areas. Although the project is not proposing screening trees, the site contains existing pine trees located within 10 feet of the proposed monopole. In addition, the monopole itself will be constructed to resemble a pine tree that will also screen the antennas from public view. 3. Freestanding monopoles should be located no closer to a parcel developed for use as singlefamily or multi-family residence than 35 feet or a distance equal to 1 foot for every 1 foot of structure height, whichever is greater. The monopole is located approximately 78 feet from the nearest residential parcel which is on the south side of the project site. The proposed height of the monopole is 50 feet; thus, the project complies with the distance requirement. 4. New freestanding monopoles should not be implemented where building-mounted or collocated facilities are feasible and would reduce visual impacts. Based on the Alternatives Analysis provided by the applicant, a roof mounted facility in this location is infeasible due to insufficient heights where coverage objectives would not be achieved. There are no co-location opportunities at this property. Pursuant to the analysis provide above, the proposed project is consistent with the City Council Policy 6-20 Land Use Policy for Wireless Communication Facilities. Conditional Use Permit Findings In order to make the Conditional Use Permit findings and recommend approval to the Planning Commission, staff must determine that: 1. The proposed use at the location requested will not: a. Adversely affect the peace, health, safety, morals or welfare of persons residing or working in the surrounding area; or b. Impair the utility or value of property of other persons located in the vicinity of the site; or c. Be detrimental to public health, safety or general welfare. As discussed in detail above, the proposed equipment and monopole enclosure is located approximately 70 feet and 78 feet, respectively, from the residential use to the south. The monopole is designed to look like a pine tree, similar to the surrounding trees on site and on the adjacent residential property. The Radio Frequency report concludes that the facility will comply with the standards for limiting public exposure to radio frequency as required by the Federal Communications Commission. The proposed monopole and generator also comply with the City s noise and air quality standards, in addition to complying the FCC requirements in regards with radio frequency levels, thus ensuring that the monopole and associated equipment would not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare. Lastly, Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) has made the determination that the generator is exempt from the requirement to obtain an Authority to Construct and Permit to Operate under BAAQMD Regulation given that the generator is 50 brake horsepower or less.

15 File No. CP Page 7 of 8 2. The proposed site is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the yards, walls, fences, parking and loading facilities, landscaping and other development features prescribed in this title, or as is otherwise required in order to integrate said use with the uses in the surrounding area; and As discussed in detail above, the project would be contained within the proposed 500 square foot equipment enclosure. In accordance with City Council Policy 6-20, the applicant proposes landscaping around the equipment enclosure to screen the enclosure and minimize the potential for graffiti. The colors and materials of the proposed equipment enclosure would match the trash enclosure. 3. The proposed site is adequately served: a. By highways or streets of sufficient width and improved as necessary to carry the kind and quantity of traffic such use would generate; or by other forms of transit adequate to carry the find and quantity of individuals such use would generate; and b. By other public or private service facilities as are required. As discussed in detail above, the project site is adequately served by the Bollinger Road and Miller Avenue with access off both public streets and is accessible to those who are involved in the maintenance of the equipment from the existing shopping center parking lot. 4. The Conditional Use Permit, as issued, is consistent with and will further the policies of the General Plan. As discussed in detail above, the subject site is designated as NCC Neighborhood/Community Commercial on the Envision San José 2040 General Plan Land Use/Transportation Diagram. These lands are intended to support a very broad range of commercial activity, including commercial uses that serve communities in neighboring areas, such as neighborhood serving retail and services and commercial/professional office development. The proposed project conforms to this General Plan designation in that wireless facilities may be allowed in a variety of land use designations with a Conditional Use Permit provided the structure is not visually disruptive to the existing environment, and that the facility follows the guidelines established in Council Policy 6-20 for Wireless Communication Facilities. The project is found to be in conformance with the General Plan. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) Under the provisions of Section of the State Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, the Conditional Use Permit is found to be exempt from the environmental review requirements of Title 21 of the San José Municipal Code, implementing the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended (CEQA). Section (New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures) exemption applies to the construction and location of new, small facilities or structures. As for environmental impacts from radiofrequency (RF) radiation, the Telecommunications Act of 1996 contains provisions concerning the placement of antenna structures and other facilities for use in providing personal wireless services. As required by this law, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) adopted guidelines for environmental RF emissions. These guidelines apply to all transmitters licensed or authorized by the FCC, including antennae licensed to wireless service providers and the cellular telephones used by subscribers to the service. The guidelines are based upon recommendations of federal agencies with expertise in health and safety issues. The FCC has created guidelines for human exposure to RF fields. Specifically, the Act states, No State or local government or instrumentality thereof may regulate the placement, construction, and modification of personal wireless service facilities on

16 File No. CP Page 8 of 8 the basis of the environmental effects of radio frequency emissions to the extent that such facilities comply with the Commission's regulations concerning such emissions. The Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) has determined that the generator is exempt from the requirement to obtain an Authority to Construct and Permit to Operate under BAAQMD Regulation since the engine is 50 brake horsepower or less. Based on the equipment specifications, the radio frequency study, the noise study, BAAQMD determination and the project design features, the noise of the wireless facility and associated generator will be a maximum of 54.7 dba, not exceeding the 55 dba requirement at the property line, and is therefore in conformance with the General Plan. PUBLIC HEARING NOTIFICATION In order to inform the public of the proposed project, staff followed City Council Policy 6-30: Public Outreach Policy. A notice of the public hearing was distributed to the owners and tenants of all properties located within 500 feet of the project site and posted on the City website. The staff report is also posted on the City s website. Staff has been available to respond to questions from the public. Project Manager: Approved by: Date: Tracy Tam, Planning Official for Harry Freitas, Planning Director Attachments: Exhibit A: Legal Description Exhibit B: Draft Resolution Exhibit C: Reduced Plan Set Owner: Christopher Marchese P.O Box 3148 Saratoga, CA Applicant: Verizon Wireless Alcosta Blvd #G San Ramon, CA 94583

17 Project Description-Proposal - Revised March Site Name: Bollinger & Miller Proposed Verizon Wireless facility located 6164 Bollinger Road San Jose, CA APN: , 020 Introduction CITY OF SAN JOSE.PLANNING, BUILDING AND CODE ENFORCEMENT Verizon Wireless is the largest wireless communications provider in the U.S. with more than 27 million wireless voice and data customers. Verizon and its affiliates have acquired licenses from the Federal Communication Commission ("FCC") and the CPUC. These licenses include Santa Clara County, California. The regional system operates under the name GTE Mobilnet of California Limited Partnership, a California limited partnership, d/b/a Verizon Wireless, by Cellco Partnership, its general partner. Applicant's Request Verizon Wireless formally requests approval of a Zoning permit for a new commercial telecommunications facility pursuant to City Council Policy for Land Use Policy for Wireless Communications Facilities, Policy Number 6-20, revised 9/16/03. Site Justification This site is required to improve both coverage and capacity gaps and overload at the intersection of Bollinger and Miller and the surrounding neighborhood between Stevens Creek Blvd, So. DeAnza, Johnson and Rainbow Drive. Increased usage of voice and data demand has exhausted the current Project Description Installation of an unmanned Verizon Wireless telecommunications facility to be located at 6164 Bollinger Road in the City of San Jose, California. The proposed facility will include installation of a new 50 foot monopine with 9 new panel antennas, associated cables, coax/gps/rru's mounted to monopole with outdoor equipment shelter, and standby generator with a 26 foot by 19.3 foot compound enclosed by a CMU wall to match relocated Trash Enclosure. Relocated trash enclosure to comply with San Jose Solid Waste Enclosure Area Guidelines. Verizon also proposes to place a new stand-by 30KW diesel generator set with a 132- gallon diesel fuel tank (UL142). This generator will supply power in emergency situations only. This is part of Verizon's homeland security initiative. Verizon wants the entire network to be able to sustain itself in the event of blackout situations. The generator will meet all noise standards of City of San Jose. Maintenance The facility will be unmanned and will be visited only monthly for routine maintenance. The facility will emit no glare, odor or noise above acceptable levels, and will not have Page 1 of 3

18 any signage other than those required for identification as mandated by the FCC and FAA, which are designed to protect public safety. To ensure structural integrity of the facility, Verizon Wireless will construct and maintain the site in compliance with all federal, state and local building codes and standards. In addition, each facility is monitored 24 hours a day, electronically for intrusion and environmental disruption. The facility will also contain a sign identifying a number to call in case of an emergency (manned 24 hours a day by Verizon employees) and identifying it as a Verizon facility. Verizon will be in compliance with all FCC regulations regarding signage at the facility. Alternative Site Analysis The applicant searched for existing structures, buildings and other wireless monopoles in the area. The following locations were aggressively pursued and were not viable as follows: Alternative 1: West Valley Presbyterian Church Bollinger Road - Cupertino No room for Verizon equipment on roof nor available ground space. Alternative 2: Orchard Shopping Center Bollinger Road - Rooftop with existing rooftop carriers. Attempted submittal to City of San Jose several times in 2014 through the Permit Adjustment Process with Susan Walsh but was rejected by City Staff as too visually impactful. Attempted other rooftops on shopping center - structurally or no high enough to achieve coverage objective. Alternative 3: Safeway -Orchard Shopping Center Bollinger Road - San Jose Rooftop not high enough - Safeway merged with Albertson and is no longer a viable candidate for location on Safeway rooftops at this time. Alternative 4: Hyde Middle School Bollinger Road Cupertino School Districts will not allow new wireless facility. Neighboring Cupertino High School was vehemently protested by surrounding neighborhood parents DEMANDING no cell sites on school properties - (408) Principal Todd Shimada - Cupertino High School - Polly Bove- Superintendent (408) Noise & Acoustical Information Standby Generator for emergency back up power supply: In order for Verizon to maintain the site's operational capability in the event of an emergency or extended power outage, a 30 kw diesel fired generator will be installed at time of construction. The generator itself is enclosed in a sound attenuated enclosure, utilizes a muffler with the exhaust pipe directed vertically approximately 8 feet above ground level. The generator would run for extended periods of time only in the event of a natural disaster, other emergency or prolonged power outage. Sound test results are available for the proposed generator and are attached for review. (Report dated 3/21/16) Page 2 of 3

19 Radio Frequency The proposed facility will be designed and constructed to meet applicable governmental and industry safety standards. Verizon Wireless continues to comply with all FCC governing construction requirements, technical standards, interference protection, power limitations, and radio frequency standards. Any and all RF emissions are subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of the FCC. Safety The proposed site will be entirely self-monitored by sophisticated computers which connect directly to a central office and which alert personnel to equipment malfunction or breach of security. Moreover, no smoke, debris or other nuisance will be generated by the proposed facility. The site will fully comply with all FCC standards and regulations. The proposed facility will not be detrimental to nor will it endanger the public health, safety, morals, comfort, or general welfare of the community. The proposed facility will not pose a risk of explosion, fire or other danger to life or property due to proximity to other materials and the facility will be designed and a State of California qualified engineer will certify that the proposed facility will be structurally sound. In Conclusion According to the FCC in March 2015, more than 70% of the 911 calls are made from wireless phones. As of September 2015, roughly 44% of households only have a wireless phone. The proposed Verizon Wireless Telecommunications Facility enhances the general welfare of the community by providing the infrastructure for these calls, as well as providing vital means of communication during times of emergency when traditional land lines are not available or in cases of power failure. The carefully selected and designed facility allows these calls to occur while remaining a site that meets the needs of the community now and in the future. For the purpose and duration of this application, the project manager is NSA Wireless, Inc. located at Alcosta Blvd. Suite G San Ramon CA 94583, contact Pamela Nobel direct at (707) or NSA Wireless at (925) Verizon Wireless long-term responsible party and agent for service of process is: GTE Mobilnet of California Limited Partnership, dba Verizon Wireless 180 Washington Valley Road Bedminster, New Jersey Attention: Network Real Estate Page 3 of 3

20 RESOLUTION NO A Resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of San José granting, subject to conditions, a Conditional Use Permit to allow for the installation of a 50-foot tall wireless communication facility (monopole), associated equipment enclosure, and emergency generator on a 1.85-gross acre site, located at the southeast corner of Bollinger Road and Miller Avenue (6164 Bollinger Road). FILE NO. CP WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of Chapter of Title 20 of the San José Municipal Code, on December 15, 2015, an application (File No. CP15-085) by Verizon Wireless was filed with the City of San José for a Conditional Use Permit to allow the installation of a 50 foot tall wireless communication facility (monopole), associated equipment enclosure, and emergency generator on a 1.85-gross acre site, on that certain real property situated in the CN Commercial Neighborhood Zoning District and located on the southeasterly corner of Bollinger Road and Miller Avenue (6164 Bollinger Road, San José, which real property is sometimes referred to herein as the subject property ); and WHEREAS, the subject property is all that real property more particularly described in Exhibit "A," entitled Legal Description, which is attached hereto and made a part hereof by this reference as if fully set forth herein; and WHEREAS, pursuant to and in accordance with Chapter of Title 20 of the San José Municipal Code, this Planning Commission conducted a hearing on said application, notice of which was duly given; and WHEREAS, at said hearing, this Planning Commission gave all persons full opportunity to be heard and to present evidence and testimony respecting said matter; and WHEREAS, at said hearing this Planning Commission received and considered the reports and recommendation of the Director of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement; and WHEREAS, at said hearing, this Planning Commission received in evidence a development plan for the subject property entitled, "Bollinger & Miller," dated received on March 25, 2016, said plan is on file in the Department of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement and is available for inspection by anyone interested herein, and said development plan is incorporated herein by this reference, the same as if it were fully set forth herein; and WHEREAS, said public hearing before the Planning Commission was conducted in all respects as required by the San José Municipal Code and the rules of this Planning Commission; P.C. Agenda: Item No.: 4.a

21 File No. CP Page 2 of 9 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SAN JOSÉ THAT: The Planning Commission determines, concludes and finds as follows: 1. Site Development and Surrounding Uses. The project site is a 1.85-gross acre site located at 6164 Bollinger Road. The leased area is located behind the existing building in an existing parking lot on the south end of the site. The project site is currently developed as a shopping center with commercial uses, including retail, public eating establishments, and personal enrichment. The site is bound by the City of Cupertino and a public middle school to the north, and residential uses to the west, east, and south. 2. Project Description. The Conditional Use Permit would allow the construction of a 50 foot tall wireless communication facility (monopole), associated equipment enclosure, and emergency generator on an approximately 1.85 gross acre site in the CN Commercial Neighborhood Zoning District. The proposed monopole is approximately two feet wide and 50 feet tall and will contain nine antennae and 11 Remote Radio Units (RRUs). The purpose for the request is for the improvement of coverage, capacity gaps and overload. The project is not proposing to remove any existing trees and the proposed location of the monopole is located within 10 feet of four existing pine trees with similar heights as the proposed monopole. The proposed equipment and monopole enclosure are located approximately 70 feet and 78 feet, respectively, from the residential use to the south. The Generac SD030 generator commands 49 engine power, and would reach a maximum of 54.7 dba at the residential property line. The monopole would be constructed to look like a pine tree to blend in with the surrounding area. A 50 foot monopole is conditionally allowed in the CN Commercial Neighborhood Zoning District. The monopole, associated equipment and generator would be placed in an approximately 500 square foot, eight foot tall equipment enclosure in the parking lot area at the rear of the existing retail building in order to reduce the visual and noise impacts on the surrounding area. The project would remove 3 parking spaces from the current 647 spaces and would relocate one of two existing trash enclosures elsewhere on the property. None of the existing trees at the site would be removed. a. General Plan Conformance. The subject site is designated as NCC Neighborhood/Community Commercial on the Envision San José 2040 General Plan Land Use/Transportation Diagram. These lands are intended to support a very broad range of commercial activity, including commercial uses that serve communities in neighboring areas, such as neighboring serving retail and services and commercial/professional office development. The proposed project conforms to this General Plan designation in that wireless facilities may be allowed in a variety of land use designations with a Conditional Use Permit provided the structure is not visually disruptive to existing environment, and that the facility follows the guidelines established in Council Policy 6-20 for Wireless Communication Facilities (further discussed below). In addition to conforming to the General Plan Land Use Diagram, the project conforms to the following General Plan policies as noted below: i. Telecommunication Goal IN-6: Support the provision of state-of-the-art telecommunication services for households, business, institutions, and public agencies throughout the city to foster fiscal sustainability, an innovated economy, support environmental leadership, meet the needs of quality neighborhoods and advance other Envision General Plan goals.

22 File No. CP Page 3 of 9 Analysis: The proposed project supports and improves coverage and capacity gaps, which serve the wider telecommunications needs of the City. ii. Telecommunications Policy IN-6.1: Work with service providers to ensure access to and availability of a wide range of state-of-the-art telecommunication systems and services for households, businesses, institutions, and public agencies throughout the city. Analysis: The proposed project improves coverage and capacity gaps in the area, which ensures continued wireless telecommunication service to the community by state-of-the-art facilities without interruption. The project is consistent with City Council Policy 6-20, Wireless Communications Facilities: 1) New freestanding monopoles should be located and designed to minimize public visibility and stealth pole designs should be utilized. Ancillary equipment should be adequately screened and landscaped to minimize potential for graffiti vandalism. Analysis: The project is proposing a monopole with the aesthetics of a pine tree to assist with minimizing public visibility. Based on a site visit and information supplied by the applicant, the surrounding trees are pine trees with similar heights as the proposed 50 foot tall monopine. The project is not proposing to remove any of the existing trees, and the proposed location of the monopine is located within 10 feet of four existing pine trees. The equipment associated with the monopine would be screened by an eight foot tall equipment enclosure with landscaping located at the rear of the enclosure, with colors and materials to match the trash enclosure. 2) New landscaping proposed for such purpose should be provided in the form of screening trees located near the antenna location, or as canopy trees for nearby parking areas. Although the project is not proposing screening trees, the site contains existing pine trees located within 10 feet of the proposed monopole. In addition, the monopole itself will be constructed to resemble a pine tree that will also screen the antennas from public view. 3) Freestanding monopoles should be located no closer to a parcel developed for use as single-family or multi-family residence than 35 feet or a distance equal to 1 foot for every 1 foot of structure height, whichever is greater. The monopole is located approximately 78 feet from the nearest residential parcel which is on the south side of the project site. The proposed height of the monopole is 50 feet; thus, the project complies with the distance requirement. 4) New freestanding monopoles should not be implemented where building-mounted or collocated facilities are feasible and would reduce visual impacts. Based on the Alternatives Analysis provided by the applicant, a roof mounted facility in this location is infeasible due to insufficient heights where coverage objectives would not be achieved. There are no collocations opportunities at this property. b. Zoning Ordinance Conformance. The existing structure conforms to the CN Commercial Neighborhood Zoning District setbacks and height requirements, which is 10 feet from the front property line, and zero feet from the side and rear property lines and 50 feet in height. The project is approximately 180 feet from the front property line and approximately 70 feet from the rear property line. The proposed project proposes a height of 50 feet and is not requesting a height increase above the height requirement allowed under the Zoning District.

23 File No. CP Page 4 of 9 Section of the San José Municipal Code, and as shown in Table , establishes a maximum noise level of 55 dba for a project adjacent to a property used or zoned for residential purposes. A noise report was prepared by Hammett & Edison, Inc. for the proposed project and it was found that the noise from the cooling fans located inside the equipment cabinet would result in a noise level of 45.6 dba at the nearest property line as a worst case scenario. When the generator is tested or in full operation or during a power outage, the noise study found that highest noise level could reach 54.7 dba at the nearest property. Per Table of the Municipal Code, the maximum noise level when located adjacent to a property used or zoned for residential purposes is 55 decibels. Therefore, the project will not exceed the Zoning Ordinance noise standards. The project is proposing to remove three on-site parking spaces and relocate an existing trash enclosure elsewhere on the site. The project site currently has 647 parking spaces. After removal of the three parking spaces, the project would result in a total of 644 onsite parking spaces. The Zoning Ordinance requires 558 parking spaces for the neighborhood shopping center. Therefore, the project would still be in compliance for parking. 3. Conditional Use Permit Findings. Chapter of Title 20 of the San José Municipal Code establishes required findings for issuance of a Conditional Use Permit, which findings are made for the Project based on the above-stated findings related to General Plan, Zoning and CEQA conformance and for the reasons stated below, and subject to the conditions set forth in this Permit. a. The proposed use at the location requested will not (i) adversely affect the peace, health, safety, morals or welfare of persons residing or working in the surrounding area, or (ii) impair the utility or value of property of other persons located in the vicinity of the site, or (iii) be detrimental to public health, safety or general welfare; As discussed in detail in the staff report and herein, the proposed equipment and monopole enclosure is located approximately 70 feet and 78 feet, respectively, from the residential use to the south. The monopole is designed to look like a pine tree, similar to the surrounding trees on-site and on the adjacent residential property. The Radio Frequency report concludes that the facility will comply with the standards for limiting public exposure to radio frequency as required by the Federal Communications Commission. The proposed monopole and generator also comply with the City s noise and air quality standards, thus ensuring that the monopole and associated equipment would not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare. Lastly, Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) has made the determination that the generator is exempt from the requirement to obtain an Authority to Construct and Permit to Operate under BAAQMD Regulation given that the generator is 50 brake horsepower or less. b. The proposed site is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the yards, walls, fences, parking and loading facilities, landscaping and other development features prescribed in this title, or as is otherwise required in order to integrate said use with the uses in the surrounding areas; As discussed in detail in the staff report and herein, the project would be contained within the proposed 500 square foot equipment enclosure. In accordance with City Council Policy 6-20, the applicant proposes landscaping around the equipment enclosure to screen the enclosure and minimize the potential for graffiti. The colors and materials of the proposed equipment enclosure would match the trash enclosure. c. The proposed site is adequately served by highways or streets of sufficient width and improved as necessary to carry the kind and quality of traffic such use would generate, and by other public or private service facilities as are required; and

24 File No. CP Page 5 of 9 As discussed in detail in the staff report and herein, the project site is adequately served by the adjacent public streets and is accessible to those who are involved in the maintenance of the equipment from the existing shopping center parking lot. d. The Conditional Use Permit, as issued, is consistent with and will further the policies of the General Plan. As discussed in detail in the staff report and herein, the subject site is designated as NCC Neighborhood/Community Commercial on the Envision San José 2040 General Plan Land Use/Transportation Diagram. These lands are intended to support a very broad range of commercial activity, including commercial uses that serve communities in neighboring areas, such as neighborhood serving retail and services and commercial/professional office development. The proposed project conforms to this General Plan designation in that wireless facilities may be allowed in a variety of land use designations with a Conditional Use Permit provided the structure is not visually disruptive to the existing environment, and that the facility follows the guidelines established in Council Policy 6-20 for Wireless Communication Facilities. The project is found to be in conformance with the General Plan. 4. Environmental Review. Under the provisions of Section of the State Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, the Conditional Use Permit is found to be exempt from the environmental review requirements of Title 21 of the San José Municipal Code, implementing the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended (CEQA). Section (New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures) exemption applies to the construction and location of new, small facilities or structures. As for environmental impacts from radiofrequency (RF) radiation, the Telecommunications Act of 1996 contains provisions concerning the placement of antenna structures and other facilities for use in providing personal wireless services. As required by this law, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) adopted guidelines for environmental RF emissions. These guidelines apply to all transmitters licensed or authorized by the FCC, including antennae licensed to wireless service providers and the cellular telephones used by subscribers to the service. The guidelines are based upon recommendations of federal agencies with expertise in health and safety issues. The FCC has created guidelines for human exposure to RF fields. Specifically, the Act states, No State or local government or instrumentality thereof may regulate the placement, construction, and modification of personal wireless service facilities on the basis of the environmental effects of radio frequency emissions to the extent that such facilities comply with the Commission's regulations concerning such emissions. The Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) has determined that the generator is exempt from the requirement to obtain an Authority to Construct and Permit to Operate under BAAQMD Regulation since the engine is 50 brake horsepower or less. Based on the equipment specifications, the noise study, BAAQMD determination and the project design features, the noise of the wireless facility and associated generator will be a maximum of 54.7 dba at the nearest residential property line, which does not exceed the City s 55dBA maximum requirement, and is therefore in conformance with the General Plan. In accordance with the findings set forth above, a Conditional Use Permit to allow the construction of a 50 foot tall wireless communication antenna (monopole), associated equipment closure, and emergency generator subject to each and all of the conditions hereinafter set forth is hereby approved. This Planning Commission expressly declares that it would not have granted this Conditional Use Permit upon and subject to each and all of said conditions, each and all of which conditions shall run with the land and be binding upon the owner and all subsequent owners of the subject property, and all persons who use the subject property for the use conditionally permitted hereby.

25 CONDITIONS File No. CP Page 6 of 9 1. Acceptance of Permit. Per Section (B) of Title 20 of the San José Municipal Code, should the applicant fail to file a timely and valid appeal of this Conditional Use Permit within the applicable appeal period, such inaction by the applicant shall be deemed to constitute all of the following on behalf of the applicant: a. Acceptance of the Conditional Use Permit by the applicant; and b. Agreement by the applicant to be bound by, to comply with, and to do all things required of or by the applicant pursuant to all of the terms, provisions, and conditions of this Permit or other approval and the provisions of Title 20 of the San José Municipal Code applicable to such Permit. 2. Permit Expiration. This Conditional Use Permit shall automatically expire two (2) years from and after the date of issuance hereof by the Planning Commission, if within such time period, a Building Permit has not been obtained or the use, if no Building Permit is required, has not commenced, pursuant to and in accordance with the provision of this Permit. The date of issuance is the date this Permit is approved by the Planning Commission. However, the Director of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement may approve a Permit Adjustment/ Amendment to extend the validity of this Permit in accordance with Title 20 of the San José Municipal Code. The Permit Adjustment/Amendment must be approved prior to the expiration of this Permit. 3. Building Permit. Procurement of a Building Permit from the Building Official for the structures described or contemplated under this Conditional Use Permit shall be deemed acceptance of all conditions specified in this Conditional Use Permit and the applicant's agreement to fully comply with all of said conditions. No change in the character of occupancy or change to a different group of occupancies as described by the Building Code shall be made without first obtaining a Certificate of Occupancy from the Chief Building Official, as required under San José Municipal Code Section , and any such change in occupancy must comply with all other applicable local and state laws. 4. Sewage Treatment Demand. Chapter of Title 15 of the San José Municipal Code requires that all land development approvals and applications for such approvals in the City of San José shall provide notice to the applicant for, or recipient of, such approval that no vested right to a Building Permit shall accrue as the result of the granting of such approval when and if the City Manager makes a determination that the cumulative sewage treatment demand of the San José-Santa Clara Regional Wastewater Facility represented by approved land uses in the area served by said Plant will cause the total sewage treatment demand to meet or exceed the capacity of San José-Santa Clara Regional Wastewater Facility to treat such sewage adequately and within the discharge standards imposed on the City by the State of California Regional Water Quality Control Board for the San Francisco Bay Region. Substantive conditions designed to decrease sanitary sewage associated with any land use approval may be imposed by the approval authority. 5. Conformance to Plans. The development of the site shall conform to the approved Conditional Use Permit plans entitled, Bollinger & Miller, dated received on March 25, 2016 on file with the Department of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement as may be amended and approved by the Director of Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement, and to the San José Building Code (San José Municipal Code, Title 24). The approved Conditional Use Permit plans are referred to herein as the approved plans or Approved Plan Set. 6. Use Authorization. This Conditional Use Permit authorizes the construction of a 50 foot wireless communication facility (monopole) designed as a monopine, nine antennae and 11 Remove Radio Units, one Generac SD303 engine generator and associated equipment enclosure.

26 File No. CP Page 7 of 9 7. Wires for Monopoles. All wires shall be located either within the pole or otherwise enclosed so as to not be visible outside the equipment enclosure. All cables shall be within the trunk of the monopole from the point where they enter at the level of the antennae to the point where they exit to transit to the base station building. 8. Discontinuation of Wireless Use. Upon discontinuation of the use of the subject antennae, the applicant shall remove all antenna improvements and related equipment/enclosures associated with this Permit within thirty (30) days. 9. Co-location. The owner(s) and operators of the proposed antenna support structure shall fully cooperate and allow the co-location of antennae for other providers. Other wireless providers shall also be allowed to add on to existing at grade equipment enclosures in full compliance with all conditions of this Conditional Use Permit. 10. Compliance with FCC Standards. The proposed wireless communication facility shall comply with all applicable Federal Communications Commission (FCC) standards with regards to the emission of electromagnetic frequency radiation. 11. Nuisance. This use shall be operated in a manner which does not create a public or private nuisance. Any such nuisance must be abated immediately upon notice by the City. 12. Compliance with Local, State and Federal Laws. The subject use shall be conducted in full compliance with all local, state and federal laws and regulations. No part of this approval shall be construed to permit a violation of any part of the San José Municipal Code. 13. Discretionary Review. The Director of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement maintains the right of discretionary review of requests to alter or amend structures, conditions, or restrictions of this Conditional Use Permit incorporated by reference in accordance with Chapter of Title 20 of the San José Municipal Code. 14. Generator. This Conditional Use Permit includes approval of one Generac SD303 Engine generator. The permittee shall secure the appropriate permits for use of the stand-by/backup generator and shall conform to the regulations of the Municipal Code. 15. Noise. Maximum noise levels emanating from the wireless facility and associated equipment, including the generator, shall not exceed 55 decibels at any site property line adjacent to a property used or zoned for residential uses. 16. Outdoor Storage. No outdoor storage is allowed or permitted unless designated on the final Approved Plan Set. 17. Utilities. All new on-site telephone, electrical, and other overhead service facilities shall be placed underground. 18. Anti-Graffiti. The permittee shall remove all graffiti from buildings and wall surfaces within 48 hours of defacement. 19. Anti-Litter. The site and surrounding area shall be maintained free of litter, refuse, and debris. Cleaning shall include keeping all publicly used areas free of litter, trash, cigarette butts and garbage. 20. Sign Approval. No signs are approved at this time. All proposed signs shall be subject to review and approval by the Director of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement through a subsequent Permit Adjustment.

27 File No. CP Page 8 of Property Maintenance. The permittee shall maintain the project site in good visual and functional condition. This shall include, but not be limited to all exterior elements of the site such as paint, roof, paving, fencing, signs, lighting and landscaping. 22. Building Division Clearance for Issuing Permits. Prior to the issuance of a Building Permit, the following requirements must be met to the satisfaction of the Chief Building Official: a. Construction Plans. These permit file number, CP shall be printed on all construction plans submitted to the Building Division. b. Construction Conformance. A project construction conformance review by the Planning Division is required. Planning Division review for project conformance will begin with the initial plan check submittal to the Building Division. Prior to final inspection approval by the Building Department, applicant shall obtain a written confirmation from the Planning Division that the project, as constructed, conforms to all applicable requirements of the subject Permit, including the plan sets. To prevent delays in the issuance of Building Permits, please notify Planning Division staff at least one week prior to the final Building Division inspection date. 23. Public Works Clearance for Building Permit(s) or Map Approval. Prior to the approval of the Tract or Parcel Map (if applicable) by the Director of Public Works, or the issuance of Building permits, whichever occurs first, the applicant will be required to have satisfied all of the following Public Works conditions. The applicant is strongly advised to apply for any necessary Public Works permits prior to applying for Building permits. Standard review timelines and submittal instructions for Public Works permits may be found at the following link: a. Transportation: The projected traffic for this project was reviewed by the Department of Public Works and found to be minimal; therefore no further traffic analysis is required. b. Grading/Geology: i. A grading permit may be required prior to the issuance of a Public Works Clearance. The construction operation shall control the discharge of pollutants (sediments) to the storm drain system from the site. An erosion control plan may be required with the grading application. ii. All on-site storm drainage conveyance facilities and earth retaining structures 4 feet in height or greater (top of wall to bottom of footing) or is being surcharged (slope of 3:1 or greater abutting the wall) shall be reviewed and approved under Public Works grading and drainage permit prior to the issuance of Public Works Clearance. The drainage plan should include all underground pipes, building drains, area drains and inlets. The project shall provide storm drainage calculations that adhere to the 2010 California Plumbing Code or submit a stamped and signed alternate engineered design for Public Works discretionary approval and should be designed to convey a 10 year storm event. c. Stormwater Runoff Pollution Control Measures: This project must comply with the City s Post-Construction Urban Runoff Management Policy (Policy 6-29) which requires implementation of Best Management Practices (BMPs) which includes site design measures, source controls and measures to minimize stormwater pollutant discharges. d. Stormwater Peak Flow Control Measures: Although the project is located in a Hydromodification Management (HM) area, it will not create and/or replace one acre or more of impervious surface. Therefore, the proposed project will not be required to comply with the City s Post-Construction Hydromodification Management Policy (Council Policy 8-14).

28 File No. CP Page 9 of 9 e. Undergrounding: Bollinger Road and Miller Avenue are designated streets for In-Lieu Undergrounding fees. The In-Lieu Undergrounding fee is a percentage of the intensification of the project. However, this project proposes no significant intensification as defined by the San Jose Municipal Code (SJMC); therefore no In-Lieu undergrounding fee will be due. 24. Revocation, Suspension, Modification. This Conditional Use Permit may be revoked, suspended or modified by the Planning Commission, or by the City Council on appeal, at any time regardless of who is the owner of the subject property or who has the right to possession thereof or who is using the same at such time, whenever, after a noticed hearing in accordance with Part 2, Chapter , Title 20 of the San José Municipal Code it finds: a. A violation of any conditions of the Conditional Use Permit was not abated, corrected or rectified within the time specified on the notice of violation; or b. A violation of any City ordinance or State law was not abated, corrected or rectified within the time specified on the notice of violation; or c. The use as presently conducted creates a nuisance. In accordance with the findings set forth above, a permit to use the subject property for said purpose specified above is hereby approved. APPROVED and issued this 4 th day of May, 2016, by the following vote: AYES: ABELITE, BALLARD, BIT-BADAL, O HALLORAN, YESNEY NOES: NONE ABSENT: YOB, PHAM ABSTAIN: NONE ATTEST: HARRY FREITAS Director of Planning, Building & Code Enforcement Planning Commission Secretary DORI YOB Chairperson NOTICE TO PARTIES The time within which judicial review must be sought to review this decision is governed by the provisions of the California Code of Civil Procedure Section

29 CAPITAL OF SILICON VALLEY FILE NUMBER PROJECT LOCATION Q \L\($ feohi p Ol S CITY OF SAN JOSE Planning, Building and Code Enforcement 200 East Santa Clara Street San Jose, CA tel (408) fax (408) Website: NOTICE OF PERMIT APPEAL TO BE COMPLETED BY PLANNING STAFF RECEIPT # AMOUNT DATE rv StfnJvh^ $ TO BE COMPLETED BY PERSON FILING APPEAL PLEASE REFER TO PERMIT APPEAL INSTRUCTIONS BEFORE COMPLETING THIS PAGE. THIS FORM MUST BE ACCOMPANIED BY THE APPROPRIATE FILING FEE. THE UNDERSIGNED RESPECTFULLY REQUESTS AN APPEAL FOR THE PROPERTY WHICH IS LOCATED AT: REAS.ON(S) FOR APPEAL (For additional comments, please attach a separate sheet.): ^ A lot of Darted fieceik WrS FWt ike. "\ kv 1'i - kp fw +r. J! '!. cue l\t T«!.KA ii"us (/M>i> n ISi ZJc ckp T - ", -C, PERSON FILING APPEAL NAME ~r f. ;3/Witt ADDRESS, SIGNATURE t/v" lt>at WkiipkT P r ^ CITY,, to-w (J' lf%& DAYTIME TELEPHONE STAT^ ZIP CODE Ok > he 2o i t> RELATIONSHIP TO SUBJECf SITE: (e.g., adjacent property owner, property owner within one thousand (1,000) feet) \/wryh T A tit XL-U ( 1 ] NAME. ^ (. CONTACT PERSON (IF DIFFERENT FROM PERSON FILING APPEAL) i;h"fa\k (Jjiry'tkEfi ep.. ( ) ADDRESS _ ^ ' J ' 1 CITY 0 6^ V-T t'viato ticl P r $W SoW DAYTIME TELEPHONE FAX NUMBER ( ) i(ilofa NAME A/uVr ck.2 ADD RESS 1 </). PROPERTY OWNER 6-kr5 "to P I 5,er Iriutet. %. bir A CITY Scurcx 1TH] A DATE STATE ZIP CODE ADDRESS ^ ' ft 7r.,. A kvavt W C- (X, vm \ - **V \ DATE STATE oa ZIP CODE l holo Please submit this application IN PERSON to the Development Services Center, 1 s1 FLOOR. City Hall. Appointments are not required but may be accommodated by calling (408) or by visiting the Planning Division's website: For Assistance, call (408) Permit Appeal.pm65/Applicatioris Rev. 10/13/2009 '

30 QjvA*d~ je>rsm. fofn {vfevwe (xd-dtml ) oys - 1 brnmz fretmn ^2 BUrhlf lr. 4^7^^ /dmi c% 1 HwTt /jwif clntterjiz {o286<wiemmc{ cir 4d2~7HS& fai J'>j rbfookdr. kai-jti*fs)ym;l-cw z/rnj lott fvrtst faih, 4o$-f7f-fao-i yimin. iffft 1 ^

31 We are strongly against Verizon's plan for the following reasons: 1. NEGATIVE HEALTH EFFECTS OF CONTINUOUS LOW-DOSE CELL TOWER RADIATION In May 2011 the World Health Organization classified the type of radiation that cell towers emit as a Class 2B carcinogen, meaning "possibly carcinogenic to humans", putting it in the same category as lead and DDT. Once this tower were built, the exposures would be up to 24 hours a day for the nearby residents. Moreover, Verizon could increase exposure levels with more antennas without informing anyone. A clear explanation of the health impacts can be found in the archives of the Mount Shasta Bioreaional Ecology Center. The International Association of Firefighters has documented many reasons for their opposition to installation of cell towers close to where people live. Other countries now limit public exposure to levels far lower than the standards currently set by our FCC. Unfortunately, the city legally cannot reject a cell tower permit as long as it meets FCC safety regulations, even though those regulations were enacted in 1996 and are based on limited info from 16 years ago! 2. HEIGHT OF THE TOWER INCURS PUBLIC SAFETY HAZARD The height of the tower Verizon will bring a great potential risk in natural disasters, such as earthquakes or strong winds. 3. TOWER FACILITIES PRESENTS EXPLOSIVE HAZARD Along with the tower, Verizon will also mount a diesel generator with a large diese! fuel tank. This facility presents a variety of explosive and toxic hazards, as well as potential noise pollution as the generator ages.

32 4. NO GAP IN COVERAGE Verizon's coverage map shows good to excellent coverage in the area surrounding the proposed cell tower, in respective of 4G LTE data coverage and voice & messaging. Sub-optimal site selection will end up costing more cell towers to be constructed in order to cover the poor-reception areas. See detailed information about coverage in your area by searching this map Whitebick Dr, San Jose, CA 4G LTE Data Coverage ( ) Data (' ) Voice & Messaging m O O Push to Talk (Verizon 4G LTE 9 Verizon 3G 9 Extended 3G. International 4G International 3G ONo Coverage (g)vzw Store 5. INSUFFICIENT DISCLOSURE FOR A PROJECT WITH HUGE POTENTIAL IMPACTS ON THE COMMUNITY Only residents within 500 ft were notified. Most nearby residents were unaware of the project or the public hearing meetings. There should be further public hearing to include residents within 1000 ft and these residents should have been informed. We do support responsible use of wireless technology and careful placement of cell towers that uses the best safety information available, protects property values, and meets environmental requirements. However, this proposal does not. 6. DEVALUATION OF RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY VALUES IN THE ENTIRE NEIGHBORHOOD

33 Property values In the surrounding neighborhood area will undoubtedly decrease, because the risks of cell towers have become a major consideration in the real estate valuation of homes. Especially, parents are being cautioned to limit exposure of young children's brains to cell phone transmissions. So parents will prefer to err on the side of caution with the health of their children, and choose homes that are NOT located right next door to a cell tower.

34 pwt j We, undersigned, strongly oppose: Construct a 50-foot tali wireless communication facility (monopoie), associated equipment enclosure, and emergency generator on an approximately 1.85 gross acre site in the CN Neighborhood Commercial Zoning District located at southeast corner of Bollinger Road and Miller Avenue (6146 Bollinger Road). Name (Print) Signature Address /Phone Che* U/anj fwik 2l\^n *) - [ozlj, forest' fait t)f. fa- "Mc CA?n^c) 4c$~ ( )]y $* <>& 6 V,V\ -"V'tA V) >1 rjlo 5m ca c isii i i Wl -fam p/fa k-f, IN] fa~ c 'itfl2-n 0U& / >& r? r A fvt>0-ppf HD hi srwy I c. -S^/aj JfoS' 2 - c r ^ if/b " Aw f-* (D 2-2 fkavdbjr- <UM)(P fa kv~ 3b Se. ICIZJ^ I6vl3 Ve^hcfc,, fov vhi^ru/. Y1^ f^c-ofafa i0^yvvx/1zma <fcmiy, cl^cdi^rj^ g-meat,- CfcrvN. b/«" 9fPcco>\ CJut CM'fvK, C 1^7 j ly^ /o?/ <tpan4a\( oll> d X^>". -X^.v,~r,.cvi y//-k /0$$~ ^4I-4&/Wi>t4 Qy - Sk*/ J?.r CA?4~t2? 11)3"( Gf^WrpOOd 4 Pv. v) >Xfi) /$ p CAr } / A??f /^K4- m (J 1MAK.IJ, COIM. y ^ce»*f c V)ft\(\j?x (9) ^faod ZDWI jiopvkfc: 7?7(^) jr'zfh ^,$9243^ y ^ /'.-tv/ )/«a f/ LfiA, -Jb^e C4 ftrfzp fo45~ ffatvir 1 cskia *3^se r Y4ii^' 6 * H (5 -e (fa o (SwJo^fAl.qP yylprji VJ #» ( ' / / / / / l

35 We, undersigned, strongly oppose; Construct a 50-foot tali wireless communication facility (monopole), associated equipment enclosure, and emergency generator on an approximately 1.85 gross acre site in the CM Neighborhood Commercial Zoning District located at southeast corner of Bollinger Road and Miller Avenue (6146 Bollinger Road). Name (Print) Signature Address /Phone C,U1/a (JfiU /'"O /- fa 3 -rx^ Q X(- UWt^UratU. 0r~ so:s <S5q S5az_. lll pr> 1^,1 d&vi im (,Uv Je4iM dr, 9n^7ns& / ca fx. i

36 We, undersigned, strongly oppose: Construct a 50-foot tall wireless communication facility (monopole), associated equipment enclosure, and emergency generator on an approximately 1.85 gross acre site in the CN Neighborhood Commercial Zoning District located at southeast corner of Bollinger Road and Miller Avenue (6146 Bollinger Road). Name(Print) Signature Address /Phone $v ffkibftiyz cbf. im\ W, 1. Coow GJAMJ i t. (3>S ^ / 7 ^? dw\ nkmffrrtc^ i 13 1, va^y#y)ou^t) rfjjwu/,. r /-rv-^ NIRAMCA jjo- 6/2^ ; G/^biiatQ.0^ I iuv> c CHA-MI^A 1 K1 M Pfij A/ 3 0-2W 6,1 2>^ fmmbrioue cir ckanal^/ct -valuf veer-cow /-I A/ (8 > L fa> 0LL ~!) V\Z\*AM^W ' >*. < ^. n ' (2, IPRA F 4jL//<t cejljajj 5> ( 6/02 C A T L-J= L L CvA b i ^ y^- d ^ -fczkaq Z,otY i '. ^ S/jfAA. /A- 7 &(0lQct9[s ZxUr tjl f)/ y - c* o J o/-

37 We, undersigned, strongly oppose: Construct a 50-foot tall wireless communication facility (monopole), associated equipment enclosure, and emergency generator on an approximately 1.85 gross acre site in the CN Neighborhood Commercial Zoning District located at southeast corner of Bollinger Road and Miller Avenue (6146 Bollinger Road) '

38 1 We, undersigned, strongly oppose: Construct a 50-foot tall wireless communication facility (monopole), associated equipment enclosure, and emergency generator on an approximately 1.85 gross acre site in the CN Neighborhood Commercial Zoning District located at southeast corner of Bollinger Road and Miller Avenue (6146 Bollinger Road) Name(Print) Signature Address /Phone Hdg&kU G)\/Pon V/\ \ t /VlfX J J J s ps - py 0 sir 'T',aC^ ( A J ^ 1 j ' 0/ \ I ^{7lM ohfpy^ A & yciinoo. t, \. v jjai] f)py\b>i i 9s\ jtfi'] 4 k K/4 - - j 7 ) 4 L, y. /.p y fj?ci I-& S'Am erf-- r'h.o^ohio CH'/riG /ddgifielicjz >y ]A/2df)dodffi < /v%voh I'^'ich- )>' 1 /) -l 1 1 i) /U4 C>'! ' A"* ^ «'>'»C^-vy Tj-'j "id d /o2 L f cjh f4-t'( >/c. t- "bn /) ca' O/f 441 ttc4. io$o ijh- hb'~zjr t>?~ loei i o 5 o bvfvic b h Dr ; c,,, "5 C/-, /V pi4 ^..... &A.^..Cy C,.,, C A*> <AJ i u- * ckcl\c\ ^ 66 j 5 <? Af VM s

39 We, undersigned, strongly oppose: Construct a 50-foot tall wireless communication facility (monopole), associated equipment enclosure, and emergency generator on an approximately 1.85 gross acre site in the CN Neighborhood Commercial Zoning District located at southeast corner of Bollinger Road and Miller Avenue (6146 Bollinger Road). Name (Print) Signature Address /Phone or^ui; Xore. f 7 ^ C$ - o^o o W U & tf I' Y"> 6^1 o<x\dv y<^ u^y- S^hToi^. C(\ _ q^rfa^l 0M, [y^^y\cl Pv S>(Kv\ "3 / CA - c ls l2~ ) i{() % L x L{i\ " t & ^0-6^ &S11 T rp J CV LsnJLv\ \ a j_j_ l \ J}> U9'i. /v. - So+iToto CA-^^9 /' /Jli L;dc i>,,~, l/ii/ltxm. () 6 9h0 ^ ir;^/ loha'-fr?y»& Qy' Jfk. ^ 9 fldj ( i,. ' l6'7"l 1 (>k, 3^'J^' 4^/ t/ H- - i]>b <joz-lg6~ifc(«6. Nffc^NVT f^ ^ o7 4 '^ / t L f f ^ [, 1 #f QS\k& J)vcA ') \/ to Kl Oc-^.s D-r - **W c ; 4 u-ol-fjo ~ an'] psjc k 5(S~uyJ x ^ % (.Oi^K. {. &-$& A I S '

40 We, undersigned, strongly oppose: Construct a 50-foot tall wireless communication facility (monopole), associated equipment enclosure, and emergency generator on an approximately 1.85 gross acre site in the CN Neighborhood Commercial Zoning District located at southeast corner of Bollinger Road and Miller Avenue (6146 Bollinger Road}. Name (Print) Signature Address /Phone J uvj zk&o loj-5 (/Otatebfz-U. Pr, Saw [V J 0«CA hi 2? tokrtelji ck. Dt-,&n Jose. bh - 2b' 2 -fctfj juwllu/ci) > c^n, a %\iy 10*>7 ct jpp, J~L > CfK \Of] VUl^Kl- ZJ // j(j Q) yfoxcu (,c^) J-n 1 ) zlim CA 7 7/2^ /fofc- lob i-4 j 1 Q i V ( if kx^so^io CA 267 4t0l ' N. \DIsV ^ CLV\\Jd<JL, fa py y 4<>8-16 f & f uww cu*j CMA s'^. CA KUf 106 <T /D/y4 i 1 r^f JA/- Ln ]JJk^,44 CTl 1 '/ a MS2 Regency OGV-j Dr. ian TO^, CA ^ll'j "^Jtatzu 4 6 f- yc/c'-f W-ns-%%^ few?ycm<jl V SvJ\aJxJbww) 1 (\9^ i '^>Uk ^ 2 ^xy. <l. -? s") j.fc A -irn-/ if 08' 7^~- CC^o ifol -'im

41 We, undersigned, strongly oppose: Construct a 50-foot tall wireless communication facility (monopole), associated equipment enclosure, and emergency generator on an approximately 1.85 gross acre site in the CN Neighborhood Commercial Zoning District located at southeast corner of Bollinger Road and Miller Avenue (6146 Bollinger Road) Name(Print) Signature Address /Phone /V 0 (/>% SjrOl'S^f- H T(hp. C-/1 13 o U OC L,0 C '<Xyb do>k &"l S*. (ah\i\. /ah ^0*^ GUJLa i d - ihf> A A (ZMAKAA j)!,. Zf Qous P y Co? Cc^ 1 C>^ tit Vr, ' \>ocm@>(fdv. CM v (u//i XXM Lot f 14 tsu-lcvh^ l)y. \j Ouh fvv(j) p> ^ t c$d/ J?/) jj-wbh t 00$f\f J i C7-D 2)y <? W <-V (o?4 bbd^u,wr- Oy- Cl!> ^{4nmz py (yx^vu\ciw< c

42 We, undersigned, strongly oppose: Construct a 50-foot tall wireless communication facility (monopole), associated equipment enclosure,.and emergency generator on an approximately 1.85 gross acre site in the CN Neighborhood Commercial Zoning District located at southeast corner of Bollinger Road and Miller Avenue (6146 Bollinger Road) Name(Print) Signature Address /Phone (rj ^/\fe (j 1040 WhMitk i ') O -'j /V ^ 105 b 4U fci&ib" faooj A $ jpvuzif, OQi^_

43 We, undersigned, strongly oppose: Construct a 50-foot tall wireless communication facility (monopole), associated equipment enclosure, and emergency generator on an approximately 1.85 gross acre site in the CN Neighborhood Commercial Zoning District located at soutlieast corner of Bollinger Road and Miller Avenue (6146 Bollinger Road) Name(Print) Signature Address /Phone CJ /_ r-% / / 1) l Y'jf;.j ' ( f A 2.1 It bo ty/ncz] /^- oyv t «./ - -,.8-lsr- / CAv-rifcu rra UrTX hi^ouk I>^ 4XJJXyL 'bictt^'vk &Y D a ck^'f\ (fhay lr- 2c:ka«i # c4 ^ c:; A '! - % kyj^&vo^x^..-a 'c^vv - i\ca ' 7s 1A v A$ IC.SS c9 K ^ A SAA^C i i 'A.' ra A, fa^ujwp, L s o v)v ^ ^ o H- i^txths?^ ' (} i\ / 2-. ^ T ^7 i-n ftfcjaar^y / A/ Qi) h ( n i ' ^ ; 'X " -' * 2-^^024 lc2>e C/r' J\<AV i^la \o^ S ; r^' / (t' 71 ^ ^.VirvXd^- t Ar i <Qf^yy r % f)/1 ^g-ioo- yzoa. V e>i'o ^ ^ < -- ^ bil, S&mvks. Cfe - X? f ' - 5"rW x \G > Ab o I ^ c e-_ cvt, s OC±H W- Ucg - fe'7 A.-; C-A^ Jir/ ~ fh (M 1 e> 91 (y-r l W2 -'Vbik'Wiy Srf (A W?^ V* -A-1 \ O^j 1... f\l e k /*? v l {ot u-n-maii- S A V( ) -J/:'

44 We, undersigned, strongly oppose: Construct a 50-foot tall wireless communication facility (monopole), associated equipment enclosure, and emergency generator on an approximately 1.85 gross acre site in the CN Neighborhood Commercial Zoning District located at southeast corner of Bollinger Road and Miller Avenue (6146 Bollinger Road) Name(Print) Signature : Address /Phone f.o^c < XUvtxk. r^c (-0<\6 ^Uc 9L. rtyt\ L A a> f / 4 ) /sf$ fi/offemt?(? Mcv/ iw m 99M Y5- P/W Mr ' v\k< Me m MM ( 5? C' '7/P-?PPP io.gi **' mi ii#p [>t<. ^ jki Jci^O ^' mmm qep^-lu-aa^

45 We, undersigned, strongly oppose: Construct a 50-foot tali wireless communication facility (monopole), associated equipment enclosure, and emergency generator on an approximately 1.85 gross acre site in the CM Neighborhood Commercial Zoning District located at southeast corner of Bollinger Road and Miller Avenue (6146 Bollinger Road). Name (Print) Signature Address /Phone )ojs Qyo WifjonJfto J&-- Javy Z/o«_, <7//^ / jfc V v 0 fy\a.vtro 0 y /fk tz/%6 MyJ^4^- > cs?- fj72 *9 ^os0zs5 -a^-pc Y ttyiy th/c $&as J(p$ WYZJ fifz. 11 go, AVQ- Uf XZm jbce, CA- -!f j yef ffa/vcy / & 3/ 6tv b Sohott Lif^E Vr i; ( ff my ' /o/f /Of7'^ /4-iZ^ "7/51M C 70^t fy 'jtly 7«f iv7?<xv\1 ^Jj ion p^nw 7m 7o?e I CM?'">4 4o^zj-w/ SWIcmCl \ fnohtyr m- 7(57-?. w HV Y?VA"\Y%V\ t ^013 TThVv* ftvx, E>Vr\ -JoTff CP- 17 ^) \ I

46 We, undersigned, strongly oppose: Construct a 50-foot tall wireless communication facility (monopofe), associated equipment enclosure* and emergency generator on an approximately 1.85 gross acre site in the CN Neighborhood Commercial Zoning District located at southeast corner of Bollinger Road and Miller Avenue (6146 Boliinger Road). Name (Print) Signature Address /Phone rlft.u.-d»n KA«. /^8/ Di AJ^Ii Dr Sfihjo / >? lufife CM$'^oo SCUA j^e Cf /<?_y \A of~c afcow-s OucQ cgftm OLC, CO \j j f J '\1 l'r\\ \JA 1/i\ Hoi ^lilt cui jjc*. "3«jv cj\ Cf\%n n ChlF. A/ Jl [IK/ (A \ (C^WiCfc Cirff S) r. iof-> oct cjljj A\ CJ ca 9XU9 iovurfcl Cciff T^C S.<SU/v "tk^v CA IS ('2- C? ^wui n/7 U/Hire V/4 Hoo< Jj-V, C haq \ 1C2 H_y dc 4> rr/^7 / [ \ U n 4'(7 ^ VI \ (/tva^/l J 3*9 (0"1 r Au? T372. f *^v 1 A -Kctu, O oia- WSaW^os. Co- ^si as

47 We, undersigned, strongly oppose: Construct a 50-foot tall wireless communication facility (monopole), associated equipment enclosure, and emergency generator on an approximately 1.85 gross acre site in the CN Neighborhood Commercial Zoning District located at southeast corner of Bollinger Road and Miller Avenue (6146 Bollinger Road}. Name (Print) Signature Address /Phone St u\c AfVT ^JDSg dh^-lsj Cj 0 ' ^0^ 4^ 12 W / fo/ f"~/y d< /K^- ' / sx, v ' i ' c c. Z- 1 '/c./;-'/ YMA" tflu/ca-rfastt, Vu. hn /01Z H/P* M SJ- OA < 7J~r 2 ^ L-Qrpfy- 0 jod^ Hyde dot- ^ r/2/ c.7 /W / C.nu.^ CL.Z / o&t MfA {^Ixgis^ch t^auui <S> ^ ^ Cs ta^y LeHu C^xc -^A ^>76 d, O, [j> 5*//^

48 We, undersigned, strongly oppose: Construct a 50-foot tali wireless communication facility (monopote), associated equipment enclosure, and emergency generator on an approximately 1.85 gross acre site in the CN Neighborhood Commercial Zoning District located at southeast corner of Bollinger Road and Miller Avenue (6146 Bollinger Road). Name (Print) Signature Address /Phone j /^3 Sa* J%e, CA 9&y? t c ] Cci^Aie. ido'od f)y-x - c^>#- 4,6 7- \Hf~fj3-- c ATD [/LMt-fe/i (4\o 7 t&f cthd(ew*%( L)h cxi (4~vS-~ - J&STO --//J, / '(A Hoif- tyju/r* SA Aoie. & A ~f!> /"z-i) G?ctl i M' 7^0 u\ ' i ' / 41 M lost, a H && 4ydt Ao^e, Cfi tstxl -n?j

49 part^ We, undersigned, strongly oppose: Construct a 50-foot tall wireless communication facility (monopole), associated equipment enclosure, and emergency generator on an approximately 1.85 gross acre site in the CN Neighborhood Com nerciai Zoning District located at southeast corner of Bollinger Road and Miller Avenue (6146 Bollinger Road). Name(Print) Signature Address /Phone V 5'hjLC 1 6otf I ^, CA 1$ I jfwej-p of, txyk 5fce^' 7-Utfpp \A/fi) % 5>/7?<Z, CtflPl bcrtf n 5 ^ Uj2- p/- A A %DUUE(K(p {p Ho7X^: (o-aj b\0& bv, kotv^l-df* \ S^jose Cfl OS! '25\ fe>i't Pr-fCfif la t) Cftdy 7fM is 4 ns 72. i\ih^- f! J / kt. ( vya oi5i"" ^-*-3 s&mlm 5<rm Jt^e, p ' tnrj ]/^\ tk. L± ^ A< vs/r ca^c7\r/hf -b l '2-o 15 CTo <^<2. > /.2-^ 12 0 J>» Jbfe ca ~ c 15 U c \ Tc&g. C/l9X"/^9 jd <?jdtf>\ & che/t^ /\fap&<*p$'q y J " ( ' e,

50 We, undersigned, strongly oppose: Construct a 50-foot tail wireless communication facility {monopole), associated equipment enclosure, and emergency generator on an approximately 1.85 gross acre site In the CN Neighborhood Commercial Zoning District located at southeast corner of Bollinger Road and Miller Avenue (6146 Bollinger Road). Name (Print) Signature Address /Phone Ooiitt ^L-5 ft (ai / Dd" I knoll Vetf <T7 0 ff" r KJ * 1 * <j ' LIA Jo^f7 ^pvxy ov>m p/ <T?j> ^ 6 S^lv (KK 1 6C4^ Y J _J f/j / L Y 9 -- y? A Uo S r j f) ^ O&slr? ft /. fof-ijj 7)fp, / h ^^ ^ (f yc - yyy~ 0 / 9 ptywi'lo CA L*-<j /^\vv7 A/' / s *~ft] C> ^ S-^\ ^ >v yr*/ L lc>s-llo l )3>iS cu J Y '3>4n "f^cl f-appjto / ^/"/ / mi c (c (X M flu - Yyl^ui Jose iriz^t j-i-hmu loqlf CuttirflglC/t ih W ftz/a I vj'/k JQ ix -'^y>a \S>^ boy^ BL-rrjhY}d*) fr/2^ Or. SAV7 >S<?, </ -*)Sn#\ J-loy-liT-rWa tfo&-7ir-c>/6 O fc" S2 ' 4 ^ utsy\m'\ e-075 fltnpti ^ae Pt. M.n w wag ca Pe»i?i

51 We, undersigned, strongly oppose: Construct a 50-foot tall wireless communicadon facility (monopole), associated equipment enclosure, and emergency generator on an approximately 1.85 gross acre site in the CN Neighborhood Commercial Zoning District located at southeast corner of Bollinger Road and Miller Avenue (6146 Bollinger Road) Name(Print) Signature Address /Phone (jjls M/,? o J PU XU fyl.x 0 fi. ^ X 1 / fa? \ WM hb I on 3 lt>$i )) K,((o ^ cdr 4*%i8rnf] f\ ( pcp(/$) j?. _ n 1. cu^vnmtfg) 10 %P$ -An.p^ <n»_ ( JuQ MO s n l^wli P> (6% 1 m^ci )^{j\ Q r tylvy JiHnj (Ogf Reg&Ky tf HP [ { O r Q^K ivj fs olfi^(s>yctioe> Cc RWft, 3 to SA fu^tnuj \cy\ori \> r. ldw-» Wewg. k H gfwjj e?7^ l^n njj[ )[% /^7 " /CrtoU th I. lesc?t,g>'*,ca : ' n-c.tr $n ^chm -tr if f C-Cfv'-V

52 We, undersigned, strongly oppose: Construct a 50-foot tail wireless communication facility (monopole), associated equipment enclosure, and emergency generator on an approximately 1.85 gross acre site in the CN Neighborhood Commercial Zoning District located at southeast corner of Bollinger Road and Miller Avenue (6146 Bollinger Road), Name (Print) Signature Address /Phone Xalk. P vav <A*- fj ok: ^ ^po S t. 1 S ('"cvlv (V-C <r^'i &-a (, (Vjv^ b JL ro6f wfuf? L(cJ<- 3iC * C /tv -. Jtoi/ M,, 06f ; W-fi T fcfca_ j)ft ' $AK.rc>s CA <va a n arm c? cc ^ jynoxj- Co wc- tofr 'fwselene- (CiiWii C/L'fckt ai(? 1. Om IW*-8 ui^cro^l WiW CXW^ (Q cjmou. - c$*s\. ie?9 ~** AMU- WW C/ ^<ri~2jf OLO^ COyf) 5 u& iol\ 6^Ki+ebkk lv-y C^e-^jJae Do f ^ Ekr, o Ok, '^SjyPf ^b<y(ob<d.nef /V*r\ (RoJ St Caxo^C. RsuSe (m^y ib-j if wwwt-w &. CA JflCuCA- GCLA^C I 6 7^-V VnjH i i c-iwdf Ssun CA ^S(2- ^ IqSS Rej An ( \j NA/6 *- C&$jr (P dji^l Cofl*. cc^o-le 22S@, rr^d t CiQvr\ ib & ^ Oh l f jlfs 0 "TatW 5u * W ca) Ce~H 7 loc^ fceccncv KNLXX PI Apa^na ^ivh-wi Tl </\I\I i\:\c rc (jj < ivuu I ov-k,

53 We, undersigned, strongly oppose: Construct a 50-foot tall wireless communication facility (monopole), associated equipment enclosure, and emergency generator on an approximately 1.85 gross acre site in the CN Neighborhood Commercial Zoning District located at southeast corner of Bollinger Road and Miller Avenue (6146 Bollinger Road) Name(Print) Signature Address /Phone Lisa- / <3 0 OikXX r) s br&sl c- {4u~?P'f f4 ajx Uv\ Bess&is t^ 4- - C 65- D k t t j a st $fy 7C J / Sa in Xfv <i & 0$"/X <7 ' > ' / jqtrb fa 1fM $6aUSi^fy-ttok-i Ja^t J***, rr&f \&b!$ (^ix^tmbr^mx *- ~ [ <(3 C 6t > / "-/4l I X i, o(x (SjuwXftolt fry )

54 We, undersigned, strongly oppose: Construct a 50-foot tall wireless communication facility (monopole), associated equipment enclosure, and emergency generator on an approximately 1.85 gross acre site in the CN Neighborhood Commercial Zoning District located at southeast corner of Bollinger Road and Miller Avenue (6146 Bollinger Road)

55 We, undersigned, strongly oppose: Construct a 50-foot tali wireless communication facility (monopoie), associated equipment enclosure, and emergency generator on an approximately 1.85 gross acre site in the CN Neighborhood Commercial Zoning District located at southeast corner of Bollinger Road and Miller Avenue (6146 Bollinger Road). Name (Print) Signature Address /Phone rfab$rf^g i-v-e- (zt^--s»7' 0^5>- y f&v\ c/c^h! / (03% ^cercl^-a-iljcj c?j Ot. 7^-c 7P K, ^ ' Kobe^ c A Irkf 1, Ollvtf IT") \ j S<h-\ ct(h ^5^2-^ 1037^ Q <^fx T)/ l 5r- C* "/ s~ <?_> (y/b j)&v ts&d P <p4?j -aos-c^ Q4 fsvx-^ /o 3 (9 -/O / fjx $~ c l 1 y. LfOj> fqc ' ->go-^ 0l^^er. "w. vue, ca?jt/2? m~2m^ f'/a/s) i^sb- vc* ply ioif "Pprf\J PK itb r r, &<-) y. / i ^ M) ^3 - f r^o "T(A kpc dh'l

56 We, undersigned, strongly oppose: Construct a 50-foot tali wireless communication facility (monopole), associated equipment enclosure, and emergency generator on an approximately 1.85 gross acre site in the CN ( Neighborhood Commercial Zoning District located at southeast corner of Bolilnger Road and Miller Avenue \ ' (6146 Bollinger Road)., M " \. Name (Print) Signature Address /Phone l-ltu/aftd ISA i ISA / Gfss~> Jtti A. ^ Xt&V )b r\v>^ P-V]i /A p I lwdgl'.jc Dv- ~ S'Ak J 4.je 7 Cfr / 2 7 fi 2 ^A'rfe-^Jc Vv- y inii fd)) fy(y AyFW$ PY, ^U\ fae. f 4 91/? '/ l-vs^ PK»t-t&ic Li ' S«r\ CA IS "\ 0 \ b\\0u^ SojOiu 4> J. c i^o << tc. y\ o cuav-ct-fc &3^L' n * ' a IAA*1 n d c, M-779-?6< U ' c* m c\or\nm ov /^M^ ^ fyva \ ^0ivu\

57 We, undersigned, strongly oppose: Construct a 50-foot tall wireless communication facility (monopole), associated equipment enclosure, and emergency generator on an approximately 1.85 gross acre site in the CN Neighborhood Commercial Zoning District located at southeast corner of Bollinger Road and Miller Avenue (6146 Bollinger Road) Name(Print) Signature Address /Phone 7(4 SUjJ rfc4-.? 2_W\ 2Jj^ -j * Lbm C\\a. c ( C]3 InCfc c, t. h,u 1 CC? < // > BdeuM 3>uvt Jute, y hw/i <; ^

58 We, undersigned, strongly oppose: Construct a 50-foot tall wireless communicadon facility (monopole), associated equipment enclosure, and emergency generator on an approximately 1.85 gross acre site in the CN Neighborhood Commercial Zoning District located at southeast corner of Bollinger Road and Miller Avenue (6146 Bollinger Road) Name(Print) Signature Address /Phone 7Jqc\ c $ k. 37D7 fedghhatt j ex# ^ ^ V V 7i G o Ct*, #- t1 Vv ' /? yf (hr '2o3 203 zk > P>u ' fj hi A'h fci&s- jie^hcm Dr. (<em Q\ol 6 j <?nh«u ~ y - (/#&5tv\v/<7 t-kfcx) hd'hw. f PA lv\ svecj^y Thqlu cvf TV ' Y^a^ivvkcd cj^i J (TA^a K kv" Ot) SsCitywti^ G- <=t.mil A )& 9 febyfa) U. 0^. (po$p it//- ty BeiAiwtl bld^bciqr^rhive 3V. 4)% "c35 i 7-63'/4 feygw y Pn-o v.ciu s ^ LtJv C-, d b 1 /2> yi^ianli^p V - pkp^jtl i^yatlcu^, t i \a c A x 0!<>& te DA - ly /c ^ 2-7 SrJ-7-P^i i ocona/n_c^kk^&r^ L-0,. Orn<) N / J V 7trj /)K j-p r 3/kj ftn / y/k/( <2e^ ^ 0>^'^ (

59 We, undersigned, strongly oppose: Construct a 50-foot tall wireless communication facility (monopole), associated equipment enclosure, and emergency generator on an approximately 1.85 gross acre site in the CN Neighborhood Commercial Zoning District located at southeast corner of Bollinger Road and Miller Avenue (6146 Bollinger Road) Name(Print) Signature Address /Phone (J finsi PK fate (A 9 &u,htta~ youuj $) hot Mai (. Ci Xu t)[)%{? 2<9 X u <*/<X A'ta fpw Zol - 1,

60 MACKENZIE & ALBRITTON LLP 220 SANSOME STREET, 14 TH FLOOR SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA TELEPHONE 415 / FACSIMILE 415 / June 3, 2016 VIA City Council City of San José 200 East Santa Clara Street San José, California Re: Appeal of Verizon Wireless Application CP Telecommunications Facility, 6164 Bollinger Road City Council Agenda, June 28, 2016 Dear Mayor Liccardo, Vice Mayor Herrera and Councilmembers: We write on behalf of our client Verizon Wireless to urge you to follow the recommendation of Planning Division Staff and uphold the Planning Commission s unanimous approval of a wireless facility disguised as a pine tree (the Approved Facility ). The appeal filed by Jingzhao Ou ( Appellant ) provides no substantial evidence to warrant denying the application and must be rejected. The Approved Facility complies with the San Jose Code of Ordinances (the Code ) and Council Policy 6-20 regarding wireless facilities (the Policy ), and it meets all findings for issuance of a conditional use permit. Further, as the Approved Facility represents the least intrusive means to fill a significant gap in Verizon Wireless service in the vicinity, denial of Verizon Wireless s application would violate the federal Telecommunications Act. We urge you to deny the appeal and uphold the Planning Commission s approval. I. The Project The Approved Facility has been thoughtfully designed to minimize any impact on the adjacent community. Verizon Wireless proposes to place its antennas on a 45 foot tower disguised as a pine tree placed near four existing pine trees of similar or greater height. Antennas will be concealed within faux foliage and branches, and branches will extend an additional five feet above the tower to 50 feet, providing a realistic tapered appearance. Antennas will be covered with pine needle socks for further concealment. The treepole will be placed within an approximately 500 square foot equipment area that will also contain radio cabinets and a generator to provide continued service in case of emergency. The equipment area will be surrounded by an eight foot concrete block wall textured and painted to match a proposed waste enclosure on the property. Verizon Wireless will plant bushes immediately north of the equipment area that match existing landscaping on the property.

61 San José City Council June 3, 2016 Page 2 of 8 To demonstrate its insignificant visual impact, we have attached photosimulations of the Approved Facility as Exhibit A. A report prepared by Hammett & Edison, Inc., Consulting Engineers, attached as Exhibit B (the H&E RF Study ), confirms that the Approved Facility will operate within Federal Communications Commission ( FCC ) radio-frequency ( RF ) exposure guidelines. Another report prepared by the same firm, attached as Exhibit C (the H&E Noise Study ), confirms that the Approved Facility will comply with the City s noise standards. II. The Approved Facility Complies with All Code and Policy Requirements and Meets All Findings for Issuance of a Use Permit. As confirmed in the Staff Report to the Planning Commission, the Approved Facility complies with all applicable requirements of the Code and Policy and meets all findings for issuance of a conditional use permit. The 50-foot tower complies with the height limit of the CN-Commercial Neighborhood zone under Code At 57 feet from the closest property line, the Approved Facility complies with setback requirements of both Code Chapter and Policy 3(c). Designed to resemble a pine tree placed next to four established pine trees of similar or greater height, the Approved Facility complies with Policy 3(a) encouraging use of stealth designs and screening trees to minimize public visibility. Staff have also confirmed that the Approved Facility poses no detriment to peace, health, safety or welfare and does not impair the utility or value of nearby property, consistent with the conditional use permit finding of Code (A)(1). As the subject property is 1.85 acres, it is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the Approved Facility which occupies only 500 square feet and meets all height and setback requirements, satisfying the finding of Code (A)(2). The Approved Facility will generate no traffic other than infrequent maintenance visits and is served by available utilities, meeting the finding of Code (A)(3). The Approved Facility is also consistent with Envision San José 2040 General Plan requirements for the neighborhood/community commercial designation, consistent with the finding of Code (A)(4). Notably, the Approved Facility fulfils General Plan Telecommunications Goal IN-6 and Telecommunications Policy IN-6.1 as it provides an important public benefit through improved communications for residents, visitors and emergency response personnel. Because the Approved Facility meets all findings for approval, the Council should deny the appeal and affirm the Planning Commission s approval. III. Federal Law Compels Approval of the Application. Verizon Wireless is licensed by the FCC to provide wireless telecommunications services throughout the United States, including San José. The siting of wireless communications facilities ( WCFs ), including the one at issue here, is governed by the federal Telecommunications Act (the TCA ). While the TCA reserves to local governments traditional land use control over the siting, placement and modification of

62 San José City Council June 3, 2016 Page 3 of 8 WCFs, it places certain restrictions on such local regulation. The following restrictions are relevant here: Any denial of an application must be in writing and supported by substantial evidence contained in a written record (47 U.S.C. 332(c)(7)(B)(iii)); The local government cannot regulate the placement, construction, or modification of WCFs on the basis of their RF emissions so long as those emissions are below the limits set by the FCC (47 U.S.C. 332(c)(7)(B)(iv)); and Local regulation or decisions must not prohibit or have the effect of prohibiting the provision of personal wireless services (47 U.S.C. 332(c)(7)(B)(i)(II)). With this legal framework in mind, we address below the specific federal law issues before the Council with respect to this application. IV. Substantial Evidence for Approval, Lack of Substantial Evidence for Denial As interpreted under controlling federal court decisions, the substantial evidence requirement means that a local government s decision to deny a WCF application must be based on requirements set forth in the local code and supported by evidence in the record. (See Metro PCS, Inc. v. City and County of San Francisco, 400 F.3d 715, 725 (9th Cir. 2005) [denial of application must be authorized by applicable local regulations and supported by a reasonable amount of evidence ].) While a local government may regulate the placement of WCFs based on aesthetics, mere generalized concerns or opinions about aesthetics or compatibility with a neighborhood do not constitute substantial evidence upon which a local government could deny a permit. See City of Rancho Palos Verdes v. Abrams, 101 Cal. App. 4th 367, 381 (2002). As set forth above, Verizon Wireless has provided substantial evidence to show that the Approved Facility complies with all requirements for approval under the Code and Policy. Among other evidence, photosimulations demonstrate the minimal visual impacts of the disguised treepole placed among established trees that provide ample screening. The H&E RF Study confirms that emissions from the Approved Facility will comply with FCC guidelines, and the H&E Noise Study confirms compliance with noise standards of Code In contrast, Appellant has provided no evidence let alone the substantial evidence required by federal law to support denial of the Approved Facility. We respond briefly below to the points raised in the appeal, which fall into four general categories. As we will explain, none are supported by substantial evidence.

63 San José City Council June 3, 2016 Page 4 of 8 A. The Alleged Impacts of RF Emissions Have No Bearing on the City s Decision. Appellant s first and sixth grounds for appeal raise unfounded concerns over the health effects of RF emissions and the related concern over decline in property values. This issue is entirely preempted by federal law. As noted above, the TCA expressly prohibits local governments from considering any alleged health or environmental effects of RF emissions so long as a proposed wireless facility complies with FCC limits on such emissions. Here, there is no dispute that the Approved Facility will comply with those limits, as the H&E RF Study confirms. Indeed, the study concludes that the maximum exposure anywhere accessible at ground level will be only 3.9% or 25 times below the FCC public limit and at any nearby residence will be only 1.2% or 83 times below the public limit. Thus, there is no dispute that federal preemption applies here. Moreover, federal preemption goes beyond decisions that are explicitly based on RF emissions. It also bars efforts to skirt such preemption through some proxy such as property values. See, e.g., AT&T Wireless Servs. of Cal. LLC v. City of Carlsbad, 308 F. Supp. 2d 1148, 1159 (S.D. Cal. 2003) (in light of federal preemption, concern over the decrease in property values may not be considered as substantial evidence if the fear of property value depreciation is based on concern over the health effects caused by RF emissions ); Calif. RSA No. 4, d/b/a Verizon Wireless v. Madera County, 332 F. Supp. 2d 1291, 1311 (E.D. Cal. 2003) ( complaints about property values were really a proxy for concerns about possible environmental effects of RF [emissions], which cannot provide the basis to support a decision ). Where, as here, a WCF has been shown to comply with FCC guidelines, neither health concerns nor any proxy for health concerns can justify denial of the Approved Facility. In short, these grounds for the appeal must be rejected. B. The City Will Ensure the Approved Facility Complies with Building and Safety Codes. Appellant s second and third grounds for appeal express an alarmist, unfounded concern over earthquakes and explosion, but the Approved Facility is engineered to rigorous structural and safety standards. Structural analysis reports will be submitted as part of a building permit application. The City Building Division will review and inspect the facility to ensure compliance with all building and safety codes prior to operation. The generator will be reviewed by the Santa Clara County Department of Environmental Health for compliance with safety regulations. And, will also comply with all requirements of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District. This ground for appeal does not raise any considerations relevant to zoning requirements of the Code and must be rejected. C. Federal Courts Have Determined That Marketing and Sales Maps Are Irrelevant to The Engineering and Design of Wireless Networks. Appellant s fourth ground for appeal challenges the need for the Approved Facility, referring to a marketing map on Verizon Wireless s website. However, federal

64 San José City Council June 3, 2016 Page 5 of 8 courts have determined that maps used by a wireless provider for purposes of marketing their services are unrelated to and have no bearing on the validity of mapping tools used by radio frequency engineers. See T-Mobile West Corporation v. City of Huntington Beach WL , at *12 (C.D. Cal. 2012) ( PCC Maps are not system engineering or design tools ). While the Verizon Wireless online Coverage Locator maps show that Verizon Wireless provides outdoor coverage in most of the area in question, these generic maps do not reflect the more precise mapping of in-building and in-vehicle coverage used to improve network performance. The coverage maps used by Verizon Wireless engineers to design its network are further refined by actual performance tests to accurately measure existing levels of service in the field. In contrast, the Coverage Locator maps clearly indicate that they are a rough approximation of service, as reflected in the following disclaimer: These maps are not a guarantee of coverage and contain areas of no service, and are a general prediction of where rates apply based on our internal data. Wireless service is subject to network and transmission limitations, including cell site unavailability, particularly near boundaries and in remote areas. Customer equipment, weather, topography and other environmental considerations associated with radio technology also affect service and service may vary significantly within buildings. Some information on service outside the Verizon Wireless proprietary network, and we can not vouch for its accuracy. 1 Verizon Wireless engineers have provided substantial evidence of the need for the Approved Facility in the Cell Site Necessity Case referenced below. This ground for appeal is not based on substantial evidence and must be rejected. D. The Approved Facility Was Noticed in Compliance with Code Requirements. Appellant s fifth ground for appeal pertains to public notice for the Planning Commission hearing, but Appellant acknowledges that residents within 500 feet were notified and merely wishes that residents at a greater distance were noticed. The Staff Report to the Planning Commission verifies that Staff provided mailed notice to residents of the May 4, 2016, Planning Commission hearing as required by Council Policy 6-30 regarding public outreach, and Verizon Wireless provided posted notice of the application. Public notice materials are shown in Exhibit D. This ground for appeal does not allege any violation of Code requirements and must be rejected. V. Approval is Required in Order to Avoid Unlawful Prohibition of Service. 1

65 San José City Council June 3, 2016 Page 6 of 8 A local government s denial of a permit for a wireless facility violates the effective prohibition clause of the TCA if the wireless provider can show two things: (1) that it has a significant gap in service; and (2) that the proposed facility is the least intrusive means, in relation to the land use values embodied in local regulations, to address the gap. See T-Mobile USA, Inc. v. City of Anacortes, 572 F.3d 987 (9 th Cir. 2009). If a provider proves both elements, the local government must approve the facility, even if there is substantial evidence to deny the permit under local land use provisions. This is because the provider has met the requirements for federal preemption; i.e., denial of the permit would have the effect of prohibiting the provision of personal wireless services. 47 U.S.C. 332(c)(7)(B)(1)(ii); T-Mobile v. Anacortes, 572 F.3d at 999. To avoid such preemption, the local government must show that another alternative is available, technologically feasible, and less intrusive than the proposed facility. T- Mobile v. Anacortes, 572 F.3d at A. Verizon Wireless Has Demonstrated a Significant Gap in Service. Verizon Wireless has identified a significant gap in service in the vicinity of Bollinger Road and Miller Avenue. The significant gap is described in the Cell Site Necessity Case prepared by Verizon Wireless RF engineer Brian Ung attached as Exhibit E (the RF Engineer s Statement ). As shown through coverage maps and capacity graphics included in the RF Engineer s Statement, there is a significant gap in Verizon Wireless coverage and capacity in the vicinity and proposed facility. This affects local residents and visitors as well as communication with emergency response personnel. B. The Approved Facility is the Least Intrusive Means to Fill the Significant Gap in Service. In an effort to address the significant gap, Verizon Wireless reviewed the area near Bollinger Road and Miller Avenue determined by RF engineers to be suitable for a new facility to serve the gap. The area is primarily residential, but Verizon Wireless evaluated four non-residential locations, as follows: West Valley Presbyterian Church, 6191 Bollinger Road, Cupertino This location was determined to be unsuitable due to structural impediments of a steeply sloped roof and lack of ground space for equipment. Hyde Middle School, Bollinger Road, Cupertino The Cupertino School District will not allow a new wireless facility at this school. Orchard Shopping Center, 6150 Bollinger Road Verizon Wireless considered rooftop designs at Orchard Shopping Center that could potentially be approved with a permit adjustment. There are existing wireless carriers at this location. When Verizon Wireless reviewed designs with Planning Division Staff in 2014, Staff was not supportive due to visual impacts the of rooftop projections required to elevate antennas to a sufficient height to serve the significant gap.

66 San José City Council June 3, 2016 Page 7 of 8 Safeway, 6150 Bollinger Road Safeway was not willing to entertain a rooftop facility at this location following its merger with Albertsons. In addition, a 24 height of the Safeway building is inadequate to provide the single propagation required by Verizon Wireless. Verizon Wireless s review of alternatives confirms that the Approved Facility is the least intrusive means of providing wireless service to the significant gap. When comparing the locations of the Approved Facility to other potential alternatives, it is important to note that federal law does not require that a site be the only alternative, but rather that no feasible alternative is less intrusive than the Approved Facility. MetroPCS v. San Francisco, 400 F.3d at In this case, there is no feasible location that would be less intrusive. In short, Verizon Wireless has identified a significant gap in service and has shown that the Approved Facility is the least intrusive means to address it, based on the values expressed in the Code and Policy. Under these circumstances, Verizon Wireless has established the requirements for federal preemption such that denial of the permit would constitute an unlawful prohibition of service. Conclusion Verizon Wireless has worked diligently to identify the ideal location and design for a camouflaged wireless facility to serve the vicinity of Bollinger Road and Miller Avenue. The Approved Facility is consistent with all Code and Policy requirements, and it meets all findings for issuance of a conditional use permit. It also represents the least intrusive means to address a significant gap in Verizon Wireless service. Bringing improved Verizon Wireless service to this area is essential to reliable communications with emergency services providers, and to the health, safety, and welfare of residents and visitors in the surrounding community. We strongly encourage you to affirm the Planning Commission s approval and deny the appeal. Very truly yours, Paul B. Albritton cc: Richard Doyle, Esq. Tracy Tam Schedule of Exhibits Exhibit A: Photosimulations

67 San José City Council June 3, 2016 Page 8 of 8 Exhibit B: H&E RF Study Exhibit C: H&E Noise Study Exhibit D: Public Notice Materials Exhibit E: RF Engineer s Statement

68

69

70

71 Verizon Wireless Proposed Base Station (Site No Bollinger and Miller ) 6164 Bollinger Road San Jose, California Statement of Hammett & Edison, Inc., Consulting Engineers The firm of Hammett & Edison, Inc., Consulting Engineers, has been retained on behalf of Verizon Wireless, a personal wireless telecommunications carrier, to evaluate the base station (Site No Bollinger and Miller ) proposed to be located at 6164 Bollinger Road in San Jose, California, for compliance with appropriate guidelines limiting human exposure to radio frequency ( RF ) electromagnetic fields. Executive Summary Verizon proposes to install directional panel antennas on a tall pole, configured to resemble a palm tree, to be sited at 6164 Bollinger Road in San Jose. The proposed operation will comply with the FCC guidelines limiting public exposure to RF energy. Prevailing Exposure Standards The U.S. Congress requires that the Federal Communications Commission ( FCC ) evaluate its actions for possible significant impact on the environment. 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 FCC limit for exposures of unlimited duration to radio frequency energy for several personal wireless services are as follows: Wireless Service Frequency Band Occupational Limit Public Limit Microwave (Point-to-Point) 5 80 GHz 5.00 mw/cm mw/cm 2 WiFi (and unlicensed uses) BRS (Broadband Radio) 2,600 MHz WCS (Wireless Communication) 2, AWS (Advanced Wireless) 2, PCS (Personal Communication) 1, Cellular SMR (Specialized Mobile Radio) MHz [most restrictive frequency range] 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. A small antenna for reception of GPS signals is also required, mounted with a clear view of the sky. R0NR.2 Page 1 of 4

72 Verizon Wireless Proposed Base Station (Site No Bollinger and Miller ) 6164 Bollinger Road San Jose, California 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 the horizon, with very little energy wasted toward the sky or the ground. 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 Figure 2 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 at greater distances 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 Verizon, including zoning drawings by Infinigy, dated March 11, 2016, it is proposed to install nine Andrew Model SBNHH-1D65B directional panel antennas on a new 45-foot steel pole, configured to resemble a pine tree, to be sited in the parking lot behind the retail center located at 6164 Bollinger Road in San Jose. The antennas would employ no downtilt, would be mounted at an effective height of about 42 feet above ground, and would be oriented in groups of three toward 20 T, 135 T, and 260 T, to provide service in all directions. The maximum effective radiated power in any direction would be 10,070 watts, representing simultaneous operation at 4,210 watts for AWS, 3,840 watts for PCS, and 2,020 watts for 700 MHz service; no operation on cellular frequencies is presently proposed from this site. Presently located on the retail center building, at a distance of about 275 feet from the Verizon pole, are similar antennas for use by AT&T Mobility, Sprint, and T-Mobile. Study Results For a person anywhere at ground, the maximum RF exposure level due to the proposed Verizon operation is calculated to be mw/cm 2, which is 3.9% of the applicable public exposure limit. The maximum calculated level at any nearby building is 4.1% of the public exposure limit. The maximum calculated level at the second-floor elevation of any nearby residence * is 1.2% of the public * Located at least 70 feet away, based on photographs from Google Maps. R0NR.2 Page 2 of 4

73 Verizon Wireless Proposed Base Station (Site No Bollinger and Miller ) 6164 Bollinger Road San Jose, California exposure limit. It should be noted that these results include several worst-case assumptions and therefore are expected to overstate actual power density levels from the proposed operation. Because power density levels in all areas from the proposed Verizon operation are calculated to be less than 5% of the applicable FCC limit, it is excluded under FCC Rules (b)(1) Table 1 and (b)(3) from having to consider the effects of other stations at the site or nearby in determining its own compliance with FCC exposure guidelines in publicly accessible areas. No Recommended Mitigation Measures Due to their mounting location and height, the Verizon antennas would not be accessible to unauthorized persons, and so no mitigation measures are necessary to comply with the FCC public exposure guidelines. It is presumed that Verizon will, as an FCC licensee, take adequate steps to ensure that its employees or contractors receive appropriate training and 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 operation of the base station proposed by Verizon Wireless at 6164 Bollinger Road in San Jose, California, will comply with the prevailing standards for limiting public exposure to radio frequency energy and, therefore, will 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. R0NR.2 Page 3 of 4

74 Verizon Wireless Proposed Base Station (Site No Bollinger and Miller ) 6164 Bollinger Road San Jose, California Authorship The undersigned author of this statement is a qualified Professional Engineer, holding California Registration Nos. E and M-20676, which expire on June 30, This work has been carried out 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. March 21, 2016 William F. Hammett, P.E. 707/ R0NR.2 Page 4 of 4

75 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 ( NCRP ). Separate limits apply for occupational and public exposure conditions, with the latter limits generally five times more restrictive. The more recent standard, developed by the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers and approved as American National Standard ANSI/IEEE C , Safety Levels with Respect to Human Exposure to Radio Frequency Electromagnetic Fields, 3 khz to 300 GHz, includes similar limits. 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: Frequency Applicable Range (MHz) Electromagnetic Fields (f is frequency of emission in MHz) Electric Field Strength (V/m) Magnetic Field Strength (A/m) Equivalent Far-Field Power Density (mw/cm 2 ) / f / f / f / f 823.8/ f 4.89/ f 2.19/ f 900/ f 2 180/ f , f 1.59 f f /106 f /238 f/300 f/1500 1, , Occupational Exposure Power Density (mw/cm 2 ) PCS Cell FM 0.1 Public Exposure Frequency (MHz) 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 (August 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. FCC Guidelines Figure 1

76 RFR.CALC 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 from 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 base stations, as well as dish (aperture) antennas, typically used for microwave links. The antenna patterns are not fully formed in the near field at these antennas, and the FCC Office of Engineering and Technology Bulletin No. 65 (August 1997) gives suitable formulas for calculating power density within such zones. For a panel or whip antenna, power density S = and for an aperture antenna, maximum power density Smax = 180 BW 0.1 P net D 2 h, in mw /cm 2, where BW = half-power beamwidth of the antenna, in degrees, and Pnet = net power input to the antenna, in watts, D = distance from antenna, in meters, h = aperture height of the antenna, in meters, and = aperture efficiency (unitless, typically ) P net h 2, in mw /cm 2, The factor of 0.1 in the numerators converts to the desired units of power density. Far Field. OET-65 gives this formula for calculating power density in the far field of an individual RF source: power density S = RFF 2 ERP 4 D 2, in mw /cm 2, where ERP = total ERP (all polarizations), in kilowatts, RFF = relative field factor at the direction to the actual point of calculation, and D= distance from 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 from any number of individual radiation sources. The program also allows for the description of uneven terrain in the vicinity, to obtain more accurate projections. Methodology Figure 2

77 Verizon Wireless Proposed Base Station (Site No Bollinger & Miller ) 6164 Bollinger Road San Jose, California Statement of Hammett & Edison, Inc., Consulting Engineers The firm of Hammett & Edison, Inc., Consulting Engineers, has been retained on behalf of Verizon Wireless, a personal telecommunications carrier, to evaluate the base station (Site No Bollinger & Miller ) proposed to be located at 6164 Bollinger Road in San Jose, California, for compliance with appropriate guidelines limiting sound levels from the installation. Executive Summary Verizon proposes to install a new wireless telecommunications base station, consisting of equipment cabinets, a back-up generator, and antennas on a tall pole, to be sited at 6164 Bollinger Road in San Jose. Noise levels from the equipment operations will comply with the City of San Jose limits. Prevailing Standard The City of San Jose sets forth limits on sound levels in its Zoning Ordinance Chapter Part 6 Performance Standards, in which Table , applying to parcels zoned for commercial use, states the noise limit as 55 dba at any adjacent property zoned for residential use and as 60 dba for any adjacent property zoned for non-residential use. Figure 1 attached describes the calculation methodology used to determine applicable noise levels for evaluation against the prevailing standard. General Facility Requirements Wireless telecommunications facilities ( cell sites ) typically consist of two distinct parts: electronic base transceiver stations ( BTS or cabinets ) that are connected to traditional wired telephone lines, and the antennas that wireless signals created by the BTS out to be received by individual subscriber units. The BTS are often located outdoors at ground level and are connected to the antennas by coaxial cables. The BTS typically require environmental units to cool the electronics inside. Such cooling is often integrated into the BTS, although external air conditioning may be installed, especially when the BTS are housed within a larger enclosure. Most cell sites have back-up battery power available, to run the base station for some number of hours in the event of a power outage. Many sites have back-up power generators installed, to run the station during an extended power outage. the E9BD Page 1 of 3

78 Verizon Wireless Proposed Base Station (Site No Bollinger & Miller ) 6164 Bollinger Road San Jose, California Site & Facility Description Based upon information provided by Verizon, including zoning drawings by Connell Design Group, LLC, dated May 11, 2015, that carrier proposes to install several equipment cabinets and a back-up power generator within a walled compound by the south side of the Orchard Farms Shopping Center, located at 6164 Bollinger Road in San Jose. For the purpose of this study, the four equipment cabinets with active cooling fans are assumed to be one CUBE Model SS4C215XC1, one CUBE Model PM63912JF1, and two Ericsson Model RBS6101. A Generac Model SD030 back-up diesel generator, configured with the manufacturer s Level 2A * sound enclosure, is to be installed within the compound, for emergency use in the event of an extended commercial power outage. The generator is typically operated with no load for a single 15-minute period once a week during daytime hours on a weekday, to maintain its readiness for emergency operation. Several directional panel antennas are proposed to be installed on a tall pole within the compound; this portion of the base station is passive, generating no noise. The nearest adjacent property is to the south, at about 60 feet from the compound, and is zoned for residential use. Study Results Information provided by the manufacturers gives the following maximum noise levels from the proposed equipment: Maximum Reference Equipment Noise Level Distance CUBE SS4C215XC dba 1.5 meters CUBE PM63912JF1 62 dba 1.5 meters Ericsson RBS dba 1 meter Generac SD dba 23 feet The calculated noise level at the nearest adjacent property for the simultaneous operation of all fans in all four cabinets is 45.6 dba, well below the City s 55 dba limit. During the time that the generator is tested, or when it is in full operation during a power outage, the maximum calculated noise level at the nearest property is 54.7 dba, still below the City s limit. * A custom version for Verizon s use. E9BD Page 2 of 3

79 Verizon Wireless Proposed Base Station (Site No Bollinger & Miller ) 6164 Bollinger Road San Jose, California Conclusion Based on the information and analysis above, it is the undersigned s professional opinion that the operation of the Verizon Wireless base station proposed to be located at 6164 Bollinger Road in San Jose, California, will comply with the City s requirements for limiting acoustic noise emission levels. Authorship The undersigned author of this statement is a qualified Professional Engineer, holding California Registration Nos. E and M-20676, which expire on June 30, This work has been carried out 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. William F. Hammett, P.E. January 5, / E9BD Page 3 of 3

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`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a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

81 PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE The Planning Commission of the City of San José will consider a Conditional Use Permit at a public hearing in accordance with the San José Municipal Code on: The project being considered is: Wednesday, May 4, :30 p.m. City Council Chambers City Hall 200 East Santa Clara Street San Jose, CA File No. CP15-085: Conditional Use Permit to construct a 50-foot tall wireless communication facility (monopole), associated equipment enclosure, and emergency generator on an approximately 1.85 gross acre site in the CN Neighborhood Commercial Zoning District located at southeast corner of Bollinger Road and Miller Avenue (6164 Bollinger Road) (Marchese Christopher Trustee & Et Al, Owner). Council District 1. CEQA: Exempt per CEQA Guidelines Section for New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures. Reports, drawings, and documents are available for review from 9:00 a.m. 12:00 p.m. and 1:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, and a draft permit and recommendations will be available for review seven calendar days prior to the public hearing at: Department of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement 200 East Santa Clara Street, 3 rd Floor Tower San José, CA (408) You are welcome to attend and to speak on this issue. To arrange an accommodation under the Americans with Disabilities Act to participate in this meeting, please call (Voice) or (TTY) at least 48 hours before the meeting. Muốn biết tin tức bằng tiếng Việt Nam về tờ thông tin này, xin quý vị liên lạc Sylvia Do ở số và đọc số dự án CP Para información en Español acerca de esta solicitud, comuníquese con Elizabeth Zepeda al , e índique el número de proyecto CP * If you choose to challenge this land use decision in court, you may be limited to only those issues you, or someone else, raised and discussed at the public hearing or in written correspondence delivered to the City at or prior to the public hearing. Comments and questions are welcome and should be referred to the Project Manager, Tracy Tam in the Department of Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement via at tracy.tam@sanjoseca.gov or by phone at Please refer to the above file number, or scan the QR code below, for further information on this project. Dated: April 21, 2016 Noticing Radius: 500ft

82 P.Nobel 12/23/15 12/28/15 12/28/15 San Jose P.D. Nobel Project Manager

83

84 2785 Mitchell Drive Walnut Creek, CA June 3, 2016 To: San Jose City Council From: Brian Ung, Radio Frequency Design Engineer, Verizon Wireless Network Engineering Department Subject: Statement in Support of Verizon Wireless s Proposed Telecommunications Facility at 6164 Bollinger Road, San Jose Executive Summary Verizon Wireless has identified a significant gap in its wireless services in western San Jose. This area is currently served by distant existing Verizon Wireless facilities. The nearest Verizon Wireless facility to the east is located at 5300 Steven Creek BLVD, Cupertino, CA (known as the Cupertino site ) and is 1.3 miles distant. The nearest Verizon Wireless facility to the northwest, on the Apple campus and at (known as the Apple Computer site ), is 1.9 miles distant, and the nearest existing site to the southwest, located at 7246 Sharon Drive, San Jose, is approximately 1.3 miles distant. As a result, there is an absence of in-building coverage and spotty in-vehicle coverage that is particularly pronounced to the north, west, and south of the intersection of Bollinger and Miller Road, and a network capacity short fall, particularly to the northeast toward the Cupertino site. Accelerated growth in voice and data usage by Verizon Wireless customers in San Jose has increased the demand on network facilities in a manner that compromises network accessibility and reliability. This accelerating growth in demand has already led to capacity exhaustion of the Verizon Wireless facilities serving this area. This capacity gap must be remedied through new infrastructure to avoid further degradation of Verizon Wireless service in San Jose. The coverage gap and capacity gap described below constitute the significant gap Verizon Wireless seeks to serve through a new facility (the Significant Gap ). Coverage Gap Verizon Wireless is experiencing a gap in its 4G LTE service coverage in an area of western San Jose roughly bounded by Stevens Creek Boulevard to the north, S De Anza Blvd to the west, Rainbow Drive to the south and Lawrence Expressway to the east (the Coverage Gap ). The Coverage Gap includes approximately 4.5 square miles in area and a population of nearly 29,000 residents. The Coverage Gap also includes heavily trafficked Miller Avenue and

85 Bollinger Road, which currently experience over 35,000 vehicle trips per day. 1 graphic description of the Coverage Gap and the service provided by the proposed facility are shown in the maps below. A Coverage plots like that below provide important information regarding the anticipated level of signal, and therefore the projected coverage provided by a site at a given location. The areas in green reflect good coverage that meets or exceed thresholds to provide consistent and reliable network coverage in vehicles and in homes. The areas in yellow and red depict decreasing levels of coverage, respectively, with yellow areas generally representing reliable invehicle coverage, and red areas depicting areas reliable for outdoor use only. 1 City of Cupertino Public Works Data.

86 Capacity Gap As noted, the identified gap area is currently served by distant sites. At times of high traffic volume, the coverage area of these distant sites shrinks to accommodate an increasing number of mobile devices adjacent to the sites. As a result, the Coverage Gap area actually expands during times of high customer usage. In addition, the volume of voice and data services used by Verizon Wireless customers has been increasing rapidly over time. As a result, the Coverage Gap area actually expands during times of high customer usage. In addition, the volume of voice and data services used by Verizon Wireless customers has been increasing rapidly over time, nearly doubling every year. 2 Verizon Wireless has modified its adjacent facilities in an effort to maximize the capacity available;; however, as shown in the graphic below, increased demand for voice and data services has already outstripped the capacity of adjacent sites. The below graph shows the increased usage over the last year as well as predicted usage through July 1, 2016 for the existing Cupertino Verizon Wireless facility shown in the previous map. By comparing the orange trend line of increasing usage with the absolute maximum capacity throughput of these facilities shown by the red line, Verizon Wireless RF engineering demonstrates that the identified gap area is now at capacity exhaustion. Achieving capacity exhaustion severely compromises the Verizon Wireless network, leading to failed call attempts, dropped calls, poor call quality and slow data speeds (the Capacity Gap ). 2 Federal Communications Commission Report & Order , October 17, 2014, 7.