CC SR 20180619 03 - Wireless ASG33
PUBLIC HEARING
Date: June 19, 2018
Subject: Consideration and possible action to grant an appeal and overturn the Planning
Commission’s denial of Major Wireless Telecommunication Facility Permit ASG No. 33
to install a Wireless Telecommunications Facility (WTF) on a replacement streetlight
pole on Hawthorne Boulevard at its intersection with Los Verdes Drive
Subject Property/Location: Hawthorne Boulevard at its intersection with Los Verdes Drive
1. Report of Notice Given: City Clerk
2. Declare Public Hearing Open: Mayor Brooks
3. Request for Staff Report: Mayor Brooks
4. Staff Report & Recommendation: Art Bashmakian, Contract Planner
5. Council Questions of Staff (factual and without bias):
6. Testimony from members of the public:
The normal time limit for each speaker is three (3) minutes. The Presiding Officer may grant additional time to a representative speaking
for an entire group. The Mayor also may adjust the time limit for individual speakers depending upon the number of speakers who
intend to speak.
7. Declare Hearing Closed/or Continue the Public Hearing to a later date: Mayor Brooks
8. Council Deliberation:
The Council may ask staff to address questions raised by the testimony, or to clarify matters. Staff and/or Council may also answer
questions posed by speakers during their testimony. The Council will then debate and/or make motions on the matter.
9. Council Action:
The Council may: vote on the item; offer amendments or substitute motions to decide the matter; reopen the hearing for additional
testimony; continue the matter to a later date for a decision.
Cover Page
RANCHO PALOS VERDES CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: 06/19/2018
AGENDA REPORT AGENDA HEADING: Public Hearing
AGENDA DESCRIPTION:
Consideration and possible action to grant an appeal and overturn the Planning
Commission’s denial of Major Wireless Telecommunication Facility Permit ASG No. 33
to install a Wireless Telecommunication Facility (WTF) on a replacement streetlight pole
on Hawthorne Boulevard at its intersection with Los Verdes Drive.
RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION:
(1) Adopt Resolution No. 2018-___, A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES APPROVING MAJOR WIRELESS
TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITY PERMIT ASG NO. 33 TO ALLOW THE
INSTALLATION OF AN ANTENNA ENCASED IN A CANISTER MEASURING 2’
TALL AND 14.6” IN DIAMETER MOUNTED ON REPLACEMENT
STREETLIGHT POLE NOT TO EXCEED 36’ IN TOTAL HEIGHT WITH
RELATED VAULTED MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT AT THE SOUTHWEST
CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF HAWTHORNE BOULEVARD AND LOS
VERDES DRIVE.
FISCAL IMPACT: The Appellant has paid the applicable appeal fees, as established
by Resolution of the City Council. If the Appellant is successful in the appeal, and the
City Council overturns the Planning Commission’s decision to deny the project, the
Appellant will receive a full refund of their appeal fee. Thus, all in-house Staff costs
associated with the processing of the appeal will be borne by the City’s General Fund.
Costs for work conducted by the City’s consultants, including the City Attorney, the
City’s contract planner and the City’s RF Consultant, are borne by the Appellant (Crown
Castle).
Amount Budgeted: N/A
Additional Appropriation: N/A
Account Number(s): N/A
Quasi-Judicial Decision
This item is a quasi-judicial decision in which the City Council is being asked to affirm
whether specific findings of fact can be made in order to overturn the denial of the
Planning Commission’s decision. The specific findings of fact are listed in the
Resolution per Chapter 12.18 of the Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code
(RPVMC).
1
ORIGINATED BY: Art Bashmakian, AICP, Contract Planner AB
REVIEWED BY: Ara Mihranian, AICP, Director of Community Development
APPROVED BY: Doug Willmore, City Manager
ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS:
A. Draft Resolution No. 2018 - __ (page A-1)
B. Project Plans and Photo Simulations (page B-1)
C. Coverage Maps and Supporting Documents (page C-1)
D. Technical information from the City’s RF Consultant (D-1)
E. P.C. Resolution No. 2018-16 (page E-1)
F. Crown Castle Appeal Letter (page F-1)
G. P.C. Resolution No. 2017-25 (page G-1)
H. Tolling Agreement (page H-1)
Click on the link below to view the May 8, 2018, Planning Commission Staff Report and
meeting video on ASG No. 33 - Agenda Item No. 3 (time stamp: 24:39):
http://rpv.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=5&clip_id=3150&meta_id=55454
Click on the link below to view the August 22, 2017, Planning Commission meeting on
ASG No. 33 - Agenda Item No. 5 (time stamp: 1:43:16):
http://rpv.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=5&clip_id=2872
BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION:
Crown Castle, the Applicant (and Appellant), is a tower company hired by wireless
companies for the purpose of acquiring sites for the construction and deployment of
wireless telecommunications antennas throughout local jurisdictions. Pursuant to
Chapter 12.18 of the Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code (RPVMC), Crown Castle is
proposing to install approximately 26 new antennas in the City’s public rights-of-way
(PROW), including the subject application, to provide services to AT&T customers
throughout the City.
On August 22, 2017, the Planning Commission considered the Applicant’s request
involving a replacement of an existing 11’-tall stop sign pole at the northeast corner of
Cartier Drive and Chartres Drive in the Monaco neighborhood with a 14’-tall stop sign
pole measured to the top of a canister encasing the antennas. At this meeting, after
considering evidence introduced in the record including public testimony from the
Applicant, the public, Staff, and the City’s RF Consultant, the Planning Commission
adopted P.C. Resolution No. 2017–25 denying the Project, without prejudice, on a vote
of 4-0 (Commissioners Leon and Tomblin, and Vice Chairman James were absent). The
basis of the Commission’s denial can be found in P.C. Resolution No. 2017-25
(Attachment G).
2
On September 14, 2017, the Applicant filed a timely appeal of the Planning
Commission’s denial of the project contending that the denial and the reasons for the
denial effectively prohibited or has the effect of prohibiting the provision of personal
wireless services (Attachment F). The Applicant believed that the Planning
Commission’s decision was not based on substantial evidence and that the denial
violated the Applicant’s right to deploy its facilities in the public rights-of-way in violation
of Public Utilities Code section 7901, in that the Planning Commission’s action
exceeded local control over the “time, place and manner” of access to the right-of-way.
On November 30, 2017, the City Council held a special, duly-noticed public hearing on
the appeal filed by the Applicant. At this meeting, in response to the Planning
Commission’s decision, the Applicant reassessed its proposal and presented, in
addition to the original design, five new design options, including a slimmer canister
design and new locations for the City Council’s consideration as part of the appeal
proceedings. After taking public testimony, the City Council voted to refer the Project
back to the Planning Commission for reconsideration while maintaining jurisdiction over
the appeal. The City Council referred the Project back to the Planning Commission
because the Planning Commission had not seen the revised slimmer canister design
and a faux King Palm tree design. The City Council felt it would be appropriate to allow
the Planning Commission to review the matter again with the updated information. The
City Council also directed the Applicant to explore locating the facility along Hawthorne
Boulevard near one of the three entrances to the Monaco neighborhood and to present
the results of the analysis to the Planning Commission.
On January 30, 2018, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the
revised design options and the latest RF analysis that had been updated based on the
City Council’s direction to consider locating the facility along Hawthorne Boulevard near
the three entrances to the Monaco neighborhood. After considering the information
presented that evening, the Planning Commission directed the Applicant to continue
exploring Hawthorne Boulevard as an alternative location, and to explore splitting the
proposed wireless facility into two separate wireless facilities within the neighborhood
rather than a single wireless facility at the intersection of Chartres Drive and Cartier
Drive. The Planning Commission felt that locating two facilities in the neighborhood
would meet the Applicant’s coverage objective while being less intrusive if located in an
area that was less visible than the proposed intersection. The public hearing was
continued to May 8, 2018.
On May 8, 2018, pursuant to City Council and Planning Commission direction, the
Applicant proposed to install the wireless telecommunication facility on an existing
streetlight pole located at the intersection of Hawthorne Blvd and Los Verdes Drive. The
revised Project (Attachment B) involves the removal of an existing 28’-5” tall streetlight
pole to accommodate a 33’-5” tall replacement streetlight pole with antennas encased in
a canister measuring 2’ tall and 14.6” in diameter mounted to top of the replacement
streetlight pole. The total height of the streetlight pole as measured from grade to the
top of the canister will be 36’ with related vaulted mechanical equipment within the
parkway. The antennas will be connected to the pole with a 2’ tall tapered shroud and
3
the proposed mast arm and luminaire may be reduced in length as deemed acceptable
by the Director of Public Works. Below are photographs of the existing site and photo
simulations of the proposed Project provided by the Applicant.
Existing Site Photo Simulation Photo Simulation
After considering evidence introduced in the record including public testimony from the
Applicant, neighbors, Staff and the City’s RF Consultant, the Planning Commission
adopted P.C. Resolution No. 2018-16 (Attachment E) on a vote of 6-0, recommending
conditional approval of the revised Project to allow the installation of a wireless facility
on a replacement streetlight pole at the intersection of Hawthorne Boulevard and Los
Verdes Drive. The Planning Commission’s recommendation is based upon the revised
location being less intrusive than the original project because it does not involve the
introduction of new vertical infrastructure and is not located directly in front of homes.
The Planning Commission is forwarding its recommendation to the City Council who
maintains jurisdiction over the appeal. In forwarding a recommendation to the City
Council, the Planning Commission was able to make the required findings in
accordance with Chapter 12.18.090 of the RPVMC which is memorialized in the
attached resolution (Attachment A).
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
City Council Site Visit
The City Council is encouraged to visit the project site and the proposed installation for,
among other things, design assessment and location. The City Council will be asked to
disclose whether they visited the project site before opening the public hearing.
Coverage Gap Analysis
Sections 12.18.050(B)(19)(a) and (b) of the Municipal Code states that in the event an
applicant seeks to install a WTF to address service coverage concerns and/or service
4
capacity concerns, the applicant needs to submit propagation maps with objective units
of signal strength measurement regarding current service coverage, and a written
explanation identifying the existing facilities with service capacity issues. The
Applicant’s maps and written explanations (Attachment C) have been reviewed by the
City’s RF Consultant, who has concluded that the signal levels are lower than the levels
industry guidelines suggest to support modern 3G/4G customer needs. The City’s
Consultant concluded that there are gaps in coverage in small pocketed areas and the
subject facility will provide ample signal intensity to support AT&T’s 3G/4G wireless
services (Attachment D).
Revised Mock-up Notice
On April 17, 2018, property owners within 500’ of the new Project location were notified
of the mock-up, which was installed at least 30 days in advance of tonight’s City Council
meeting. This is a required step in the Wireless Telecommunications Facilities
Application for all proposed wireless facility installations. Pursuant to RPVMC Chapter
12.18, the City Council is to review this specific proposed installations for, among other
things, design assessment and location. The temporary mock-up installation will remain
in-place as a matter of public notice up to and during the appeal proceedings. The
mock-up will be required to be removed by the Applicant after a final decision has been
rendered.
Public Notice and Comments
On May 31, 2018, a public notice was published in the Peninsula News, mailed to
property owners within a 500’ radius of the project site, and sent to listserv subscribers
announcing tonight’s public hearing and inviting public comments. To date, the City has
not received any public comments in response to the public notice.
Planning Commission Chairman Attendance
Pursuant to City Council Policy No. 24, Planning Commission Chairman James will
attend tonight’s meeting in the event the City Council has any questions pertaining to
the Commission’s decisions in this matter.
Shot Clock
In response to the City Council’s decision to refer the appeal application back to the
Planning Commission, the Applicant agreed to toll the shot clock to July 30, 2018
(Attachment H).
CONCLUSION:
Based on the Planning Commission’s recommendation, Staff recommends that the City
Council adopt Resolution No. 2018- __, thereby approving Major Wireless
Telecommunication Facility Permit ASG No, 33 to allow the installation of antennas
5
encased in a canister measuring 2’ tall and 14.6” in diameter to a replacement
streetlight pole not to exceed 36’ in total height as measured to the top of the canister
with related vaulted mechanical equipment at the southwest corner of the intersection of
Hawthorne Boulevard and Los Verdes Drive.
ALTERNATIVES:
In addition to the Staff recommendation, the following alternatives actions are available
for the City Council’s consideration:
1. Deny the appeal and deny Major Wireless Telecommunication Facility
Permit ASG No. 33 and direct Staff to return with a revised Resolution at
the July 17, 2018 City Council Meeting.
2. Modify the appeal and direct Staff to return with a revised Resolution at
the July 17, 2018, City Council Meeting. This action would entitle the
Appellants to a refund of one-half of their appeal fee.
3. Identify any issues of concern with the proposed project, provide Staff
and/or the Appellant with direction in modifying the project, and continue
the public hearing to date certain.
6
Resolution No. 2018-08 Page 1 of 20
RESOLUTION NO. 2018-__
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO
PALOS VERDES APPROVING MAJOR WIRELESS
TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITY PERMIT ASG NO. 33 TO
ALLOW THE INSTALLATION OF AN ANTENNA ENCASED IN A
CANISTER MEASURING 2’ TALL AND 14.6” IN DIAMETER
MOUNTED ON REPLACEMENT STREETLIGHT POLE NOT TO
EXCEED 36’ IN TOTAL HEIGHT WITH RELATED VAULTED
MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF
THE INTERSECTION OF HAWTHORNE BOULEVARD AND LOS
VERDES DRIVE.
WHEREAS, Chapter 12.18 of the Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code (RPVMC
or Municipal Code) governs the permitting, development, siting, installation, design,
operation and maintenance of wireless telecommunications facilities (“WTFs”) in the
City's public right-of-way (“PROW”) (RPVMC § 12.18.010); and,
WHEREAS, beginning in May 2016, Crown Castle (the “Applicant”) applied to the
City for an Wireless Telecommunications Facility Permit (“WTFP”), pursuant to Section
12.18.040(A) of the Municipal Code, to install 26 antennas in the public right-of-way
(PROW) to service AT&T customers throughout the City (the “Project”) including ASG
No. 33; and,
WHEREAS, the original Project, located adjacent to 6480 Chartres Drive, called
for installation of two 21.4” panel antennas on a new 14’-tall steel pole in a neighborhood
with no utility poles and the installation of above-ground mechanical equipment and meter
box measuring 9.7 cubic feet in area within the public right-of-way (PROW); and,
WHEREAS, on July 25, 2017, the Planning Commission held a duly-noticed public
hearing, at which time all interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard and
present evidence; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission subsequently continued the public hearing
to August 8, 2017, and August 22, 2017; and,
WHEREAS, an alternative proposal called for a replacement 14’-tall stop sign pole
measuring 12” in diameter with a 3.5’ tall and 2’ diameter canister encasing the antennas
at the top of the pole located at the intersection of Chartres Drive and Cartier Drive; and,
A-1
Resolution No. 2018-__
Page 2 of 20
WHEREAS, because the Project’s location is within a residential zone and within
the PROW of local streets as identified in the General Plan, approval of a WTFP also
requires an exception under Section 12.18.190 of the Municipal Code; and,
WHEREAS, the Project is exempt from review under the California Environmental
Quality Act (“CEQA”) because the Project constitutes a small scale installation of new a
new facility (14 CCR § 15303(d)); and,
WHEREAS, on August 22, 2017, after considering testimony and evidence
presented at the public hearings, the information and findings included in the Staff
Reports, and other records of proceedings, the Planning Commission of the City of
Rancho Palos Verdes moved to deny, without prejudice, the alternative proposal for ASG
No. 33, on a vote of 4-0 (Commissioners Leon and Tomblin, and Vice Chairman James
were absent); and,
WHEREAS, on September 14, 2017, a timely appeal of the denial was filed by the
Applicant; and,
WHEREAS, on November 15, 2017, a public notice was mailed to property owners
within a 500-foot radius of the subject site and published in the Daily Breeze, pursuant to
the requirements of the Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code announcing the appeal
hearing before the City Council. A courtesy public notice was also published in the
Peninsula News on November 23, 2017; and a notification was sent to listserv
subscribers; and,
WHEREAS, on November 30, 2017, the City Council held a duly-noticed public
hearing, at which time all interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard and
present evidence; and,
WHEREAS, on November 30, 2017, the City Council voted to refer the Project
back to the Planning Commission for reconsideration while maintaining its jurisdiction
over the appeal in order to allow the Planning Commission the opportunity to weigh in on
the revised design options presented to the City Council, and directed the Appellant to
explore locating the facility along Hawthorne Boulevard near one of the three entrances
to the Monaco neighborhood and to present the results of the analysis to the Planning
Commission; and,
WHEREAS, on January 30, 2018, the Planning Commission conducted a public
hearing on the revised design options and the latest RF analysis that was updated based
on the Council’s direction to consider locating the facility along Hawthorne Boulevard near
the three entrances to the Monaco neighborhood. After considering the information
presented, the Planning Commission directed the Applicant to explore splitting the
proposed wireless facility into two separate wireless facilities within the neighborhood
A-2
Resolution No. 2018-__
Page 3 of 20
rather than the one wireless facility proposed at the intersection of Chartres Drive and
Cartier Drive, in addition to consider locating the wireless facility on Hawthorne Boulevard,
and continued the public hearing to March 13, 2018; and,
WHEREAS, on February 15, 2018, the City Council, who was scheduled to
consider the Commission’s recommendation, continued the matter to a date uncertain
while continuing to maintain jurisdiction in order to allow the Applicant to continue
exploring alternative locations for further review by the Planning Commission; and,
WHEREAS, on March 13, 2018, the Planning Commission conducted the
continued public hearing at which time Staff reported on the ongoing efforts to identify an
alternative location within the Monaco neighborhood, and indicated that pursuant to
Commission and Council direction, the Applicant had identified an existing streetlight pole
at the intersection of Hawthorne Boulevard and Los Verdes Drive that met their coverage
objective. In light of this, at the Applicant’s request, the public hearing was continued to a
date uncertain to allow the Applicant additional time to proceed with the mock-up and
public notification process for the alternative location at the intersection of Hawthorne
Boulevard and Los Verdes Drive; and,
WHEREAS, on April 17, 2018, property owners within 500’ of the proposed
wireless facility were notified that the WTF mock-up would be installed at least 30 days in
advance of the City Council public hearing; and,
WHEREAS, on April 19, 2018, a public notice was mailed to property owners within
a 500’ radius of the subject site and published in the Peninsula News, announcing that a
public hearing on the proposed facility is scheduled to occur on May 8, 2018; and,
WHEREAS, on May 8, 2018, the Planning Commission held a duly-noticed public
hearing, at which time all interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard and
present evidence; and,
WHEREAS, on May 8, 2018, after considering testimony and evidence presented
at the public hearing, the information and findings included in the Staff Report, and other
records of proceedings, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes
moved to recommend to the City Council approval of ASG No. 33 on a vote of 6-0 to allow
the installation of a wireless facility on a replacement streetlight pole with related vaulted
mechanical equipment at the southwest corner of the intersection of Hawthorne
Boulevard and Los Verdes Drive; and,
WHEREAS, on May 31, 2018, a public notice was mailed to property owners within
a 500’ radius of the subject site and published in the Peninsula News, announcing that
the City Council will conduct a public hearing on the Project; and,
A-3
Resolution No. 2018-__
Page 4 of 20
WHEREAS, on June 19, 2018, the City Council held a duly-noticed public hearing,
at which time all interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard and present
evidence.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS
VERDES DOES HEREBY FIND, DETERMINE AND RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1: The City Council hereby approves a Major Telecommunications
Facility Permit (“WTFP”) ASG No. 33 involving the installation of antennas encased in a
canister measuring 2’ tall and 14.6” in diameter to a replacement streetlight pole not to
exceed 36’ in total height as measured to the top of the canister with related vaulted
mechanical equipment at the proposed new location within the PROW at the southwest
corner of the intersection of Hawthorne Boulevard and Los Verdes Drive.
Section 2: Approval of a WTFP is warranted because the Project meets the
findings required by Section 12.18.090 of the Municipal Code:
A. All notices required for the proposed installation have been given.
On May 31, 2018, a public notice announcing the June 19, 2018, public hearing on
the appeal of the Planning Commission’s denial of ASG No. 33 was published in
the Peninsula News and provided to property owners within 500’ of the proposed
Project and to listserv subscribers. Accordingly, all notice requirements have been
met. The Applicant agreed, in writing, to toll the shot clock to July 30, 2018.
B. The proposed facility has been designed and located in compliance with all
applicable provisions of this chapter.
12.18.080(A)(1)(a): The Applicant shall employ screening, undergrounding and
camouflage design techniques in the design and placement of wireless
telecommunications facilities in order to ensure that the facility is as visually
screened as possible, to prevent the facility from dominating the surrounding area
and to minimize significant view impacts from surrounding properties all in a manner
that achieves compatibility with the community and in compliance with Section
17.02.040 (View Preservation and Restoration) of this code.
The Project employs screening and a camouflage design with the use of a canister
shroud measuring 2’ tall and 14.6” in diameter that will be mounted to the top of a
replacement streetlight pole that is conditioned not to exceed a total height of 36’ as
measured from grade to the top of the canister. The wireless facility will not be placed
in front of homes or adjacent to side or rear yards of residences, and will not create
potential view and visual impacts. All cabling will be obscured by the use of clips or
the like, and screened by the canister. The light standard will match the
A-4
Resolution No. 2018-__
Page 5 of 20
decommissioned light standard and those in the immediate area. All of the related
mechanical equipment will be undergrounded in three vaults. The Project will not
result in any significant view impairment to surrounding properties pursuant to
Chapter 17.02.040 of the RPVMC. In terms of cumulative visual or view impacts, a
significant view impairment will not occur if other streetlight poles in this location of
the City were replaced to accommodate a similar WTF.
12.18.080(A)(1)(b): Screening shall be designed to be architecturally compatible
with surrounding structures using appropriate techniques to camouflage, disguise,
and/or blend into the environment, including landscaping, color, and other
techniques to minimize the facility's visual impact as well as be compatible with the
architectural character of the surrounding buildings or structures in terms of color,
size, proportion, style, and quality.
The proposed WTF will be affixed to a replacement street light pole that matches
other street light poles located along Hawthorne Boulevard in terms of color, size,
proportion, style, and quality. The canister will be painted a concrete color to match
the light pole. All cables and wires will be routed directly into the pole with no loops
or exposed cables, and all cables will be clipped at the antenna-meeting point and
contained within the canister and the shroud that connects the canister to the top of
the pole.
12.18.080(A)(1)(c): Facilities shall be located such that views from a residential
structure are not significantly impaired. Facilities shall also be located in a manner
that protects public views over city view corridors, as defined in the city's general
plan, so that no significant view impairment results in accordance with this code
including Section 17.02.040 (View Preservation and Restoration). This provision
shall be applied consistent with local, state and federal law.
The Project does not result in a significant view impairment to surrounding
residences nor will create a significant view impairment from the public view corridor
located along Hawthorne Boulavard, as identified in the City’s General Plan.
12.18.080(A)(3): Traffic Safety. All facilities shall be designed and located in such
a manner as to avoid adverse impacts to traffic safety.
The proposed Project involves a replacement streetlight pole with the installation of
antennas encased in a canister shroud that will be mounted to the top of a
replacement streetlight pole. No portion of the antenna will be over the drivable road
and the height of the replacement streetlight pole will not distract motorists or
pedestrians. Additionally, the related mechanical equipment will be vaulted
underground to avoid traffic safety impacts.
A-5
Resolution No. 2018-__
Page 6 of 20
12.18.080(A)(4): Blending Methods. All facilities shall have subdued colors and
non-reflective materials that blend with the materials and colors of the surrounding
area and structures.
The proposed replacement streetlight pole will consist of a color and material that is
subdued and non-reflective. Further, it will be the same as the existing streetlight
pole and other streetlight poles in the general area.
12.18.080(A)(5): Equipment. The Applicant shall use the least visible equipment
possible. Antenna elements shall be flush mounted, to the extent feasible. All
antenna mounts shall be designed so as not to preclude possible future collocation
by the same or other operators or carriers. Unless otherwise provided in this
section, antennas shall be situated as close to the ground as possible.
The Project includes the installation of antennas encased in a canister shroud
measuring 2’ tall and 14.6” in diameter to the top of a replacement streetlight pole
that will not exceed a maximum height of 36’, as measured to the top of the canister,
with mechanical equipment that will be vaulted within the parkway. The canister
would be visible to the public, but it screens the antenna and cables from the public’s
view. In order to accommodate additional antennas, the height of the streetlight pole
would have to be increased by approximately 5’ to accommodate collocation
because of the size of the panel antennas combined with there being a need to
provide a separation of at least 1’ between antenna panels for functionality purposes.
The design does not preclude the possibility of collocation by the same or other
operators or carriers but it may not always minimize visual impact.
12.18.080(A)(6)(a): Facilities shall be located consistent with Section 12.18.200
(Location Restrictions) unless an exception pursuant to Section 12.18.190
(Exceptions) is granted.
The proposed location is within the PROW as identified in the City’s General Plan.
The findings for an Exception are required.
12.18.080(A)(6)(b): Only pole-mounted antennas shall be permitted in the right-of-
way. All other telecommunications towers are prohibited, and no new poles are
permitted that are not replacing an existing pole. (For exceptions see subparagraph
(6)(h) below and sections 12.18.190 (Exceptions) and 12.18.220 (State or Federal
Law).) Sections 12.18.080(6)(c) through (f) are not applicable.
The proposal meets this finding because it involves a replacement streetlight pole.
12.18.080(A)(6)(d): Light Poles. The maximum height of any antenna shall not
exceed four feet above the existing height of a light pole. Any portion of the antenna
A-6
Resolution No. 2018-__
Page 7 of 20
or equipment mounted on a pole shall be no less than 16½ feet above any drivable
road surface.
The antennas are not proposed to be installed on an existing streetlight pole but
rather on a replacement light pole. The height of the antennas will be approximately
2’ above the height of the new streetlight pole. No portion of the antenna or
equipment is less than 16½’ above the drivable road surface.
12.18.080(A)(6)(e): Replacement Poles. If an Applicant proposes to replace a pole
in order to accommodate a proposed facility, the pole shall be designed to resemble
the appearance and dimensions of existing poles near the proposed location,
including size, height, color, materials and style to the maximum extent feasible.
The proposed replacement streetlight pole will match the appearance, in terms of
color, size and dimensions of the existing pole and all other streetlight poles in the
immediate area. The replacement pole will be approximately 5’ taller than the
existing pole and other poles on the street, but will continue to resemble the existing
pole in terms of size, color, and materials.
12.18.080(A)(6)(f): Pole mounted equipment, exclusive of antennas, shall not
exceed six cubic feet in dimension.
There will not be pole mounted equipment, excluding antennas. The related
mechanical equipment will be vaulted.
12.18.080(A)(6)(i): All cables, including, but not limited to, electrical and utility
cables, shall be run within the interior of the pole and shall be camouflaged or
hidden to the fullest extent feasible.
All cables and wires are required to be short, encased in the shroud and directly
routed to the pole in order to be hidden from view with no loops, exposed cables,
splitters or unsightly wires.
12.18.080(A)(7): Space. Each facility shall be designed to occupy the least amount
of space in the right-of-way that is technically feasible.
The replacement streetlight pole is similar in dimension to the existing streetlight pole
and is approximately 5’ taller than the existing pole measured to the base of the
canister to accommodate the 2’ tall canister and the tapered shroud. The placement
of the antennas within the canister will occupy limited air space above the right-of-
way. The supporting mechanical equipment will be undergrounded within a vault
necessary to house the equipment. This space is the least amount of space that is
technically feasible for equipment owned by AT&T.
A-7
Resolution No. 2018-__
Page 8 of 20
12.18.080(A)(8): Wind Loads. Each facility shall be properly engineered to
withstand wind loads as required by this code or any duly adopted or incorporated
code. An evaluation of high wind load capacity shall include the impact of
modification of an existing facility.
Based on the information submitted by the Applicant, the City Council finds that the
proposed installation complies with all building codes related to wind loads.
12.18.080(A)(9): Obstructions. Each component part of a facility shall be located
so as not to cause any physical or visual obstruction to pedestrian or vehicular
traffic, incommode the public's use of the right-of-way, or safety hazards to
pedestrians and motorists and in compliance with Section 17.48.070 (Intersection
Visibility) so as not to obstruct the intersection visibility triangle.
The Project design, height and size, including the undergrounding of the mechanical
equipment, will not cause an obstruction to the public's use of the PROW, does not
constitute a safety hazard and/or does not interfere with the City-defined intersection
visibility triangle because replacement streetlight pole provides the same lighting,
and setback parameters applicable to other streetlight poles, and the related
mechanical equipment will be undergrounded.
12.18.080(A)(10): Public Facilities. A facility shall not be located within any portion
of the public right-of-way interfering with access to a fire hydrant, fire station, fire
escape, water valve, underground vault, valve housing structure, or any other public
health or safety facility.
The installation, including the undergrounding of the mechanical equipment, will not
interfere with fire hydrants, fire stations, water lines or any other public health or
safety facilities as determined by the Public Works Department. Furthermore, part
of the plan check review process and site inspections, Public Works Staff will ensure
that the Project will not interfere with any of the stated utilities.
12.18.080(A)(11): Screening. All ground-mounted facility, pole-mounted
equipment, or walls, fences, landscaping or other screening methods shall be
installed at least 18 inches from the curb and gutter flow line.
The Project does not have pole-mounted equipment, excluding the antennas. The
related mechanical equipment will be undergrounded.
12.18.080(A)(12): Accessory Equipment. Accessory Equipment. Not including the
electric meter, all accessory equipment shall be located underground, except as
provided below.
A-8
Resolution No. 2018-__
Page 9 of 20
The related accessory equipment, including the meter, will be located underground.
12.18.080(A)(13) Landscaping. Where appropriate, each facility shall be installed
so as to maintain and enhance existing landscaping on the site, including trees,
foliage and shrubs. Additional landscaping shall be planted, irrigated and
maintained by applicant where such landscaping is deemed necessary by the city
to provide screening or to conceal the facility.
Conditions have been added requiring the installation of landscaping within
parkway to help soften, as well as screen, the appearance of the Project.
12.18.080(A)(14) Signage. No facility shall bear any signs or advertising devices
other than certification, warning or other signage required by law or permitted by
the city.
The facility does not include any signs or advertising devices other than certification,
warning or other signage required by law.
12.18.080(A)(15)(a-e) Lighting.
The facility does not include any such lighting other than the luminaire on the light
pole.
C. If applicable, the Applicant has demonstrated its inability to locate on existing
infrastructure.
This finding is not applicable as the proposed WTF antenna is proposed to be
installed on a replacement streetlight pole that's currently an existing infrastructure.
D. The Applicant has provided sufficient evidence supporting the Applicant's
claim that it has the right to enter the public right-of-way pursuant to state or
federal law, or the Applicant has entered into a franchise agreement with the
city permitting them to use the public right-of-way.
The Applicant has submitted to the City a Right-of-Way Use Agreement (RUA)
entered into with the City in 2011, which allows the Applicant to install wireless
antennas in the PROW. Further, the Applicant has submitted a Certificate of Public
Convenience and Necessity (CPCN) issued by the California Public Utilities
Commission (CPUC) which provides that the Applicant has been authorized to
install wireless telecommunications infrastructure in the PROW.
A-9
Resolution No. 2018-__
Page 10 of 20
E. The Applicant has demonstrated the proposed installation is designed such
that the proposed installation represents the least intrusive means possible
and supported by factual evidence and a meaningful comparative analysis to
show that all alternative locations and designs identified in the application
review process were technically infeasible or not available.
Ten alternative locations, including the original location at Cartier Drive and
Chartres Drive, were studied. Many of these locations were not viable and a few
others required poles to be 65’ to 85’ in height. The proposed location is now on
a major arterial which meets the objective of the Code to avoid local residential
streets. This new location is set back from nearby residences and is the least
intrusive means compared to the alternatives that are within residential
neighborhoods with no existing appropriate vertical infrastructure that can
accommodate the facility.
There is technology that is possible to use to reduce the size of the antenna, but
that would require a greater number of facilities, including the introduction of new
pole structures, throughout the community to provide the Applicant’s coverage and
capacity objective. The supporting mechanical equipment will be vaulted meeting
the objective of installing the least intrusive facility. Other locations and designs
considered for purposes of filling the coverage gap claimed by the Applicant will
be more intrusive than the Project because:
• The location utilizes an existing or replacement pole as opposed to
installing a new pole.
• The location is preferred to the Applicant’s original location because it is
further away from houses, located on an arterial street, involves a
replacement streetlight pole, and is located adjacent to tall mature trees
and existing buildings.
• A smaller or lower pole could be utilized, but it would require a multiplicity
of wireless poles in the coverage area as claimed by the Applicant and
discussed by the City's RF Consultant, as opposed to having one AT&T
WTF in this area.
• Staff looked at other design options from other (non-AT&T) carriers. While
some carriers offer antenna panels that may be smaller in overall size,
such designs from other carriers are not engineered to carry the
bandwidths owned by AT&T.
Section 3: Conditions regarding any of the requirements listed above which the
City Council finds to be necessary to protect the health, safety and general welfare, have
been imposed in the attached Exhibit A
A-10
Resolution No. 2018-__
Page 11 of 20
Section 4: The City Council hereby grants the appeal and approves ASG No.
33 as revised and recommended for approval by the Planning Commission, based on the
evidence in the record and the findings contained in this Resolution.
Section 5: The City Clerk shall certify to the passage, approval, and adoption of
this Resolution, and shall cause this Resolution and her certification to be entered in the
Book of Resolutions of the City Council.
Section 6: The time within which judicial review of the decision reflected in this
Resolution must be sought is governed by Section 1094.6 of the California Code of Civil
Procedure or other applicable short periods of limitation.
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 19th day of June 2018.
_________________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________
Emily Colborn, City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) ss
CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES )
I, Emily Colborn, City Clerk of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes, do hereby certify that
the above Resolution No. 2018-__, was duly and regularly passed and adopted by the
said City Council at a regular meeting thereof held on June 19, 2018.
__________________________________
CITY CLERK
A-11
Resolution No. 2018-__
Page 12 of 20
EXHIBIT “A”
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
WTF ASG NO. 33
HAWTHORNE BOULEVARD
AT THE INTERSECTION OF LOS VERDES DRIVE
General Conditions:
1. Prior to obtaining a permit from the Public Works Department to install the street
light pole, the Applicant and the property owner shall submit to the City a statement,
in writing, that they have read, understand, and agree to all conditions of approval
contained in this Resolution. Failure to provide said written statement within ninety
(90) days following the date of this approval shall render this approval null and void.
2. The Applicant shall indemnify, protect, defend, and hold harmless, the City, and/or
any of its officials, officers, employees, agents, departments, agencies, and
instrumentalities thereof, from any and all claims, demands, lawsuits, writs of
mandamus, and other actions and proceedings (whether legal, equitable,
declaratory, administrative or adjudicatory in nature), and alternative dispute
resolutions procedures (including, but not limited to arbitrations, mediations, and
other such procedures) (collectively “Actions”), brought against the City, and/or any
of its officials, officers, employees, agents, departments, agencies, and
instrumentalities thereof, that challenge, attack, or seek to modify, set aside, void,
or annul, the action of, or any permit or approval issued by, the City and/or any of its
officials, officers, employees, agents, departments, agencies, and instrumentalities
thereof (including actions approved by the voters of the City), for or concerning the
Project.
3. Prior to conducting any work in the public right of way (PROW), such as for curb
cuts, dumpsters, temporary improvements and/or permanent improvements, the
Applicant shall obtain an encroachment permit from the Director of Public Works.
4. Approval of this permit shall not be construed as a waiver of applicable and
appropriate zoning regulations, or any Federal, State, County and/or City laws and
regulations. Unless otherwise expressly specified, all other requirements of the City
of Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code (RPVMC) shall apply.
5. The Public Works Director or Director of Community Development are authorized to
make minor modifications to the approved plans and any of the conditions of
approval if such modifications will achieve substantially the same results as would
strict compliance with the approved plans and conditions. Otherwise, any
substantive change to the Project shall require approval of a revision by the final
A-12
Resolution No. 2018-__
Page 13 of 20
body that approved the original Project, which may require new and separate
environmental review.
6. Failure to comply with and adhere to all of these conditions of approval may be cause
to revoke the approval of the Project pursuant to the RPVMC.
7. If the Applicant has not obtained approvals and/or permits from the Departments of
Public Works and/or Community Development for the approved Project or not
commenced the approved Project within one year of the final effective date of this
Resolution, approval of the Project shall expire and be of no further effect unless,
prior to expiration, a written request for extension is filed with the Community
Development Department and approved by the Director of Community
Development.
8. In the event that any of these conditions conflict with the recommendations and/or
requirements of another permitting agency or City department, the stricter standard
shall apply.
9. The construction site and adjacent public and private properties and streets shall be
kept free of all loose materials resembling trash and debris in excess of that material
used for immediate construction purposes. Such excess material may include, but
not be limited to: the accumulation of debris, garbage, lumber, scrap metal, concrete
asphalt, piles of earth, salvage materials, abandoned or discarded furniture,
appliances or other household fixtures.
10. Permitted hours and days for construction activity are 7:00 AM to 6:00 PM, Monday
through Friday, 9:00AM to 5:00PM on Saturday, with no construction activity
permitted on Sundays or on the legal holidays specified in Section 17.96.920 of the
Rancho Palos Verdes Development Code. During demolition, construction and/or
grading operations, trucks shall not park, queue and/or idle at the Project site or in
the adjoining street rights-of-way before 7AM Monday through Friday and before
9AM on Saturday, in accordance with the permitted hours of construction stated in
this condition. When feasible to do so, the construction contractor shall provide
staging areas on-site to minimize off-site transportation of heavy construction
equipment. These areas shall be located to maximize the distance between staging
activities and neighboring properties, subject to approval by the building official.
11. All grading, landscaping and construction activities shall exercise effective dust
control techniques, either through screening and/or watering.
12. Prior to commencement work, the Applicant shall obtain approval of a haul route, if
applicable, from the Director of Public Works.
A-13
Resolution No. 2018-__
Page 14 of 20
13. All construction sites shall be maintained in a secure, safe, neat and orderly manner,
to the satisfaction of the City’s Inspector. All construction waste and debris resulting
from a construction, alteration or repair of the Project shall be removed on a daily
basis by the contractor or property owner.
14. Unless otherwise designated in these conditions, all construction shall be completed
in substantial conformance with the plans stamped APPROVED by the City (Public
Works and Community Development Departments) with the effective date of this
Resolution.
15. The mock-up shall be removed within seven (7) days after all appeal periods have
been exhausted.
Project-specific Conditions:
16. This approval allows for the following:
a. Install a WTF at the southwest intersection of Hawthorne Boulevard and Los
Verdes Drive,
b. Decommission and remove an existing 28’-5” tall streetlight pole with a mast
arm and luminaire to be replaced with a 36’ tall streetlight pole, as measured
to the top of the canister, with an antenna encased in a canister measuring
2’ tall and 14.6” in diameter,
c. Install vaulted underground mechanical equipment in the PROW.
17. The proposed Project is subject to the following Conditions to the satisfaction of
the Director of Public Works and the Director of Community Development:
a. The proposed WTF shall be installed on a replacement streetlight pole that
shall match other light standards in the area in terms of color, size,
proportion, style, and quality. The canister and canister shroud shall be
professionally painted and maintained to match the streetlight pole and
other streetlight poles located along Hawthorne Blvd.
b. The Applicant shall install landscaping in the parkway near the proposed
installation to screen the equipment consistent with existing landscaping.
c. The facility shall be designed and located in such a manner as to avoid
adverse impacts on traffic safety; construction and operation of the facility
shall comport with a duly-approved traffic control plan as required.
A-14
Resolution No. 2018-__
Page 15 of 20
d. Colors and materials shall be subdued and non-reflective, and shall be the
same as the existing light standard and other lights standards in the nearby
area.
e. All cables and wires shall be directly routed to the pole and encased within
the pole and shroud, and hidden from view. No loops, exposed cables,
splitters or unsightly wires shall be permitted.
f. No cable or wires shall be visible.
g. All ground-mounted facilities including mechanical equipment, or walls,
fences, landscaping or other screening methods shall be installed at least
18 inches from the curb and gutter flow line.
h. All accessory equipment shall be located underground including meter
boxes and cabinets.
i. The vault cover shall be painted green to match the ground covering in the
parkway.
j. The facility shall be installed so as to maintain and enhance existing
landscaping on the site, including trees, foliage and shrubs. Additional
landscaping shall be planted, irrigated and maintained by Applicant where
such landscaping is feasible and deemed necessary by the City to provide
screening or to conceal the facility.
k. The facility shall not bear any signs or advertising devices other than
certification, warning or other signage required by law or permitted by the
City.
l. The facility shall not be illuminated except for the existing streetlight
luminaire. All other illumination shall be restricted pursuant to RPVMC
§ 12.18.080(A)(15).
m. Noise:
i. Backup generators shall only be operated during periods of power
outages, and shall not be tested on weekends or holidays, or
between the hours of 7:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m.
ii. At no time shall equipment noise from any facility exceed an exterior
noise level of 55 dBA three feet from the source of the noise if the
facility is located in the public right-of-way adjacent to a business,
commercial, manufacturing, utility or school zone; provided,
A-15
Resolution No. 2018-__
Page 16 of 20
however, that for any such facility located within 500 feet of any
property zoned residential or improved with a residential use, such
equipment noise shall not exceed 45 dBA three feet from the sources
of the noise. The foregoing noise level limitations shall govern
facilities subject to RPVMC Chapter 12.18.080(A)(16) until such time
that a specific noise regulation ordinance is adopted and effective in
this code, at which time such noise ordinance shall govern.
n. The facility shall be designed to be resistant to, and minimize opportunities
for, unauthorized access, climbing, vandalism, graffiti and other conditions
that would result in hazardous situations, visual blight or attractive
nuisances. The Public Works Director may require the provision of warning
signs, fencing, anti-climbing devices, or other techniques to prevent
unauthorized access and vandalism when, because of their location and/or
accessibility, a facility has the potential to become an attractive nuisance.
Additionally, no lethal devices or elements shall be installed as a security
device.
o. Consistent with current state and federal laws and if permissible under the
same, at the time of modification of the facility, existing equipment shall, to
the extent feasible, be replaced with equipment that reduces visual, noise
and other impacts, including, but not limited to, undergrounding the
equipment and replacing larger, more visually intrusive facilities with
smaller, less visually intrusive facilities.
p. The installation and construction of the facility shall begin within one year
after its approval or it will expire without further action by the City.
18. All wireless telecommunications facilities shall comply at all times with the following
operation and maintenance standards:
a. Unless otherwise provided herein, all necessary repairs and restoration
shall be completed by the Applicant, owner, operator or any designated
maintenance agent within 48 hours:
i. After discovery of the need by the Applicant, owner, operator or any
designated maintenance agent; or
ii. After Applicant, owner, operator or any designated maintenance agent
receives notification from the City.
19. Each Applicant of a wireless telecommunications facility shall provide the Public
Works Director with the name, address and 24-hour local or toll free contact phone
A-16
Resolution No. 2018-__
Page 17 of 20
number of the Applicant, the owner, the operator and the agent responsible for the
maintenance of the facility ("contact information"). Contact information shall be
updated within seven days of any change.
20. Prior to any construction activities, the Applicant shall submit a security instrument
(bond or letter of credit as approved by the City Attorney) in an amount determined
by the City to be sufficient to cover all potential costs (including removal costs)
listed herein or in the RPVMC.
21. Prior to permit issuance, the Applicant shall provide additional information to
establish that the proposed accessory equipment is designed to be the smallest
equipment technologically feasible. The City may consider equipment installed or
proposed to be installed in other jurisdictions.
22. All facilities, including, but not limited to, telecommunication towers, poles,
accessory equipment, lighting, fences, walls, shields, cabinets, artificial foliage or
camouflage, and the facility site shall be maintained in good condition, including
ensuring the facilities are reasonably free of:
a. General dirt and grease;
b. Chipped, faded, peeling, and cracked paint;
c. Rust and corrosion;
d. Cracks, dents, and discoloration;
e. Missing, discolored or damaged artificial foliage or other camouflage;
f. Graffiti, bills, stickers, advertisements, litter and debris;
g. Broken and misshapen structural parts; and
h. Any damage from any cause.
23. Applicant shall install, to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director or Director
of Community Development, landscaping near the proposed installation of the
vaulted accessory equipment to screen the vaulted equipment consistent with
existing landscaping prior to final inspection.
24. All trees, foliage or other landscaping elements approved as part of the facility shall
be maintained in good condition at all times, and the Applicant, owner and operator
of the facility shall be responsible for replacing any damaged, dead or decayed
A-17
Resolution No. 2018-__
Page 18 of 20
landscaping. No amendment to any approved landscaping plan may be made until
it is submitted to and approved by the Public Works Director or the Director of
Community Development.
25. The Applicant shall replace its facilities, after obtaining all required permits, if
maintenance or repair is not sufficient to return the facility to the condition it was in
at the time of installation.
26. Each facility shall be operated and maintained to comply with all conditions of
approval. Each owner or operator of a facility shall routinely inspect each site to
ensure compliance with the same and the standards set forth in the RPVMC.
27. No person shall install, use or maintain any facility which in whole or in part rests
upon, in or over any public right-of-way, when such installation, use or
maintenance endangers or is reasonably likely to endanger the safety of persons
or property, or when such site or location is used for public utility purposes, public
transportation purposes or other governmental use, or when such facility
unreasonably interferes with or unreasonably impedes the flow of pedestrian or
vehicular traffic including any legally parked or stopped vehicle, the ingress into or
egress from any residence or place of business, the use of poles, posts, traffic
signs or signals, hydrants, mailboxes, permitted sidewalk dining, permitted street
furniture or other objects permitted at or near said location.
28. Unless California Government Code Section 65964, as may be amended,
authorizes the city to issue a permit with a shorter term, a permit for any wireless
telecommunications facility shall be valid for a period of ten years, unless pursuant
to another provision of the RPVMC or these Conditions of Approval, it lapses
sooner or is revoked. At the end of ten years from the date of issuance, such permit
shall automatically expire.
29. An Applicant may apply for a new permit within 180 days prior to expiration. Said
application and proposal shall comply with the City's current Code requirements
for WTF’s.
30. A WTF is considered abandoned and shall be promptly removed as provided
herein if it ceases to provide wireless telecommunications services for 90 or more
consecutive days unless the Applicant has obtained prior written approval from the
Director of Public Works, which shall not be unreasonably denied.
31. The operator of a facility shall notify the City in writing of its intent to abandon or
cease use of a permitted site or a nonconforming site (including unpermitted sites)
within ten days of ceasing or abandoning use. Notwithstanding any other provision
A-18
Resolution No. 2018-__
Page 19 of 20
herein, the operator of the facility shall provide written notice to the Director of
Public Works any discontinuation of operations of 30 days or more.
32. Failure to inform the Director of Public Works of cessation or discontinuation of
operations of any existing facility as required by this section shall constitute a
violation of any approvals and be grounds for:
a. Litigation;
b. Revocation or modification of the permit;
c. Acting on any bond or other assurance required by the RPVMC or
Conditions of Approval of the permit;
d. Removal of the facilities by the City in accordance with the procedures
established under the RPVMC for abatement of a public nuisance at the
owner's or permitee’s expense; and/or
e. Any other remedies permitted by law.
33. Upon the expiration date of the permit, including any extensions, earlier termination
or revocation of the permit or abandonment of the facility, the Applicant, owner or
operator shall remove its WTF and restore the site to its natural condition except
for retaining the landscaping improvements and any other improvements at the
discretion of the City. Removal shall be in accordance with proper health and
safety requirements and all ordinances, rules, and regulations of the City. The
facility shall be removed from the property, at no cost or expense to the City.
34. Failure of the Applicant, owner or operator to promptly remove its facility and
restore the property within 90 days after expiration, earlier termination or
revocation of the permit, or abandonment of the facility, shall be a violation of these
Conditions of Approval. Upon a showing of good cause, an extension may be
granted by the Public Works Director where circumstances are beyond the control
of the Applicant after expiration. Further failure to abide by the timeline provided in
this section shall be grounds for:
a. Prosecution;
b. Acting on any security instrument required by the RPVMC or these
Conditions of Approval;
A-19
Resolution No. 2018-__
Page 20 of 20
c. Removal of the facilities by the City in accordance with the procedures
established under the RPVMC for abatement of a public nuisance at the
owner's or permitee’s expense; and/or
d. Any other remedies permitted by law.
35. In the event the Public Works Director or City Engineer determines that the
condition or placement of a WTF located in the public right-of-way constitutes a
dangerous condition, obstruction of the public right-of-way, or an imminent threat
to public safety, or determines other exigent circumstances require immediate
corrective action (collectively, "exigent circumstances"), the Director or City
Engineer may cause the facility to be removed summarily and immediately without
advance notice or a hearing. Written notice of the removal shall include the basis
for the removal and shall be served upon the Applicant and person who owns the
facility within five business days of removal and all property removed shall be
preserved for the owner's pick-up as feasible. If the owner cannot be identified
following reasonable effort or if the owner fails to pick-up the property within 60
days, the facility shall be treated as abandoned property.
36. In the event the City removes a facility in accordance with nuisance abatement
procedures or summary removal, any such removal shall be without any liability to
the City for any damage to such facility that may result from reasonable efforts of
removal. In addition to the procedures for recovering costs of nuisance abatement,
the City may collect such costs from the performance bond or security instrument
posted and to the extent such costs exceed the amount of the security instrument,
collect those excess costs in accordance with the RPVMC. Unless otherwise
provided herein, the City has no obligation to store such facility. Neither the
Applicant, owner nor operator shall have any claim if the city destroys any such
facility not timely removed by the permitee, owner or operator after notice, or
removed by the City due to exigent circumstances.
37. Consistent with current state and federal laws and if permissible under the same,
at the time of modification of a WTF, existing equipment shall, to the extent
feasible, be replaced with equipment that reduces visual, noise and other impacts,
including, but not limited to, undergrounding any equipment installed above ground
and replacing larger, more visually intrusive facilities with smaller, less visually
intrusive facilities.
A-20
SHEET INDEX
SHEET NO.DESCRIPTION
VICINITY MAP
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
TITLE SHEET
DETAILS & NOTES
SITE PLAN
SITE PHOTOS
PROJECT TEAM
TITLE SHEET
GENERAL CONTRACTOR NOTES:
CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY ALL PLANS AND
EXISTING DIMENSIONS AND CONDITIONS ON THE
JOB SITE AND SHALL IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY THE
ENGINEER IN WRITING OF ANY DISCREPANCIES
BEFORE PROCEEDING WITH THE WORK OR
RESPONSIBLE FOR SAME.
PROJECT SUMMARY
ASG33
HAWTHORN BLVD
RANCHO PALOS VERDES, CA
T-1
T-1
D-1
S-1
P-1
N.T.S.
DETAILS & NOTESD-2
DETAILS & NOTESD-3
DATE
ASG33
HAWTHORNE BLVD
RANCHO PALOS VERDES, CA
SITE NAME & ADDRESS:
PHASE II
ASG33
242727
CROWN CASTLE PROJECT NO.
TICKET #______________________
UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERT
1-800-227-2600
CALL AT
LEAST TWO
DAYS BEFORE
YOU DIG
PROPRIETARY INFORMATION
THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS
SET OF DRAWINGS IS PROPRIETARY AND
CONFIDENTIAL TO AT&T. ANY USE OR
DISCLOSURE OTHER THAN AS IT RELATES
TO AT&T IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
SHEET NO.
DRAWN BY: DRAFT DATE: APPROVED BY:
J.E. 03/1/18 C.J.
REVISION / ISSUE
03/01/17ALTERNATE LOCATION
PREPARED BY:
5841 EDISON PLACE, SUITE 200
CARLSBAD, CA 92008
PHONE: (760) 929-0910
FAX: (760) 929-0936
Communications
Telecommunications Engineering
Coastal
CLIENT:
200 SPECTRUM CENTER DRIVE, 18 FLOOR
IRVINE, CA 92618
www.crowncastle.com
CROWN
CASTLE
TH
·DECOMMISSION EXISTING STREETLIGHT POLE #N/A & INSTALL (1) NEW 33' 5"
HIGH STEEL POLE WITH MAST ARM & LUMINAIRE
·INSTALL (1) AMPHENOL CUUB070X06FXYZ0 ANTENNA.
·INSTALL (1) CROWN CASTLE 2' X 3' WTR HANDHOLE WITH (1) POWER
DISCONNECT BOX INSIDE.
·INSTALL (1) CROWN CASTLE 4' X 6' VAULT WITH FLUSH MOUNT VENTS & (2) ML
IONS INSIDE.
·EQUIPMENT AND ANTENNAS TO BE PAINTED TO MATCH POLE.
DETAILS & NOTESD-4
POLE PROFILEP-2
SIGN OFF
TITLE SIGNATURE DATE
NETWORK REAL ESTATE
PROJECT MANAGER
CONSTRUCTION MANAGER
RADIO FREQUENCY
PROJECT MANAGER:
CROWN CASTLE
200 SPECTRUM CENTER DR 18TH FLOOR
IRVINE, CA 92618
JON COWELL
(925) 200-6857
JON.COWELL.VENDOR@CROWNCASTLE.COM
CONSTRUCTION ENGINEER:
CROWN CASTLE
200 SPECTRUM CENTER DR 18TH FLOOR
IRVINE, CA 92618
MARC CRAM
(909) 630-4738
MARC.CRAM@CROWNCASTLE.COM
NODE ENGINEER:
COASTAL COMMUNICATIONS
9524 TOPANGA CANYON BLVD.
CHATSWORTH, CA 91311
CURTISS JOHNSON
(760) 932-4312
CURTISS@COASTALCOMMINC.COM
D-5 DETAILS & NOTES
PHOTO SIMS-2
PHOTO SIMS-3
B-1
LEGEND
SYMBOL DESCRIPTION
EXISTING
STATION POINTS
(100' INCREMENTS)
EXISTING UTILITY POLE
EXISTING RIGHT OF WAY
EXISTING CURB RAMP
PCC SIDEWALK
PROPOSED
C&G
R/W
EXISTING CENTER LINEL
EXISTING CENTER LINEL
EXISTING ASPHALT CURBA/C
EOP
EXISTING BERMBERM
NEW POLE
SUBDIVISION BOUNDARYS/B
EXISTING FIRE HYDRANT
EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL NOTES:
TEMPORARY EROSION/SEDIMENT CONTROL, PRIOR TO COMPLETION OF FINAL IMPROVEMENTS, SHALL BE
PERFORMED BY THE CONTRACTOR OR QUALIFIED PERSON AS INDICATED BELOW:
1. ALL REQUIREMENTS OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES ``LAND DEVELOPMENT MANUAL, STORM
WATER STANDARDS" MUST BE INCORPORATED INTO THE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF THE
PROPOSED PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS CONSISTENT WITH THE EROSION CONTROL PLAN AND/OR WATER
POLLUTION CONTROL PLAN (WPCP), IF APPLICABLE.
2. FOR STORM DRAIN INLETS, PROVIDE A GRAVEL BAG SILT BASIN IMMEDIATELY UPSTREAM OF INLET AS
INDICATED ON DETAILS.
3. THE CONTRACTOR OR QUALIFIED PERSON SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR CLEANUP OF SILT AND MUD ON
ADJACENT STREET(S) AND STORM DRAIN SYSTEM DUE TO CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY.
4. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE SILT AND DEBRIS AFTER EACH MAJOR RAINFALL.
5. EQUIPMENT AND WORKERS FOR EMERGENCY WORK SHALL BE MADE AVAILABLE AT ALL TIMES DURING
THE RAINY SEASON.
6. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL RESTORE ALL EROSION/SEDIMENT CONTROL DEVICES TO WORKING ORDER TO
THE SATISFACTION OF THE CITY ENGINEER OR RESIDENT ENGINEER AFTER EACH RUN-OFF PRODUCING
RAINFALL.
7. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL ADDITIONAL EROSION/SEDIMENT CONTROL MEASURES AS MAY BE
REQUIRED BY THE RESIDENT ENGINEER DUE TO UNFORESEEN CIRCUMSTANCES, WHICH MAY ARISE.
8. ALL EROSION/SEDIMENT CONTROL MEASURES PROVIDED PER THE APPROVED IMPROVEMENT PLAN
SHALL BE INCORPORATED HEREON. ALL EROSION/SEDIMENT CONTROL FOR INTERIM CONDITIONS SHALL
BE DONE TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE RESIDENT ENGINEER.
9. ALL REMOVABLE PROTECTIVE DEVICES SHOWN SHALL BE IN PLACE AT THE END OF EACH WORKING DAY
WHEN RAIN IS IMMINENT.
10. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL ARRANGE FOR WEEKLY MEETINGS DURING OCTOBER 1ST TO APRIL 30TH FOR
PROJECT TEAM (GENERAL CONTRACTOR, QUALIFIED PERSON, EROSION CONTROL SUBCONTRACTOR IF
ANY, ENGINEER OF WORK, OWNER/DEVELOPER AND THE RESIDENT ENGINEER) TO EVALUATE THE
ADEQUACY OF THE EROSION/SEDIMENT CONTROL MEASURES AND OTHER RELATED CONSTRUCTION
ACTIVITIES.
NOTES:
1. CONTRACTOR TO POTHOLE ALL UTILITY CROSSINGS.
2. CONTRACTOR TO PLACE SANDBAGS AROUND ANY/ALL STORM DRAIN INLETS TO PREVENT
CONTAMINATED WATER.
3. SPOILS PILE WILL BE COVERED AND CONTAINED AND STREET WILL BE SWEPT AND CLEANED AS
NEEDED.
4. CONTRACTOR TO REPAIR DAMAGED PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE CITY
ENGINEER.
5. CURB & GUTTER TO BE PROTECTED IN PLACE. SIDEWALK TO BE REPLACED TO THE SATISFACTION
OF THE CITY ENGINEER.
6. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL RESTORE THE ROADWAY BACK TO ITS ORIGINAL CONDITION
SATISFACTORY TO THE CITY ENGINEER INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO PAVING, STRIPING, BIKE
LANES, PAVEMENT LEGENDS, SIGNS, AND TRAFFIC LOOP DETECTORS.
7. SIDEWALK SHALL BE RESTORED/REPLACED PER CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES STANDARD
DRAWINGS.
8. PEDESTRIAN RAMP WILL NOT BE DISTURBED.
ROW GROUND CONSTRUCTION NOTES:
1. GROUND CONSTRUCTION TO REMOVE/CLEAN ALL DEBRIS, NAILS, STAPLES, OR NON-USED
VERTICALS OFF THE POLE.
2. ALL CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH MUNICIPAL, COUNTY, STATE,
FEDERAL, GO95 AND GO128 STANDARDS AND REGULATIONS.
3. CALL USA 48 HOURS PRIOR TO EXCAVATING AT (800) 227-2600 OR 811.
4. ALL LANDSCAPING TO BE RESTORED TO ORIGINAL CONDITION OR BETTER.
5. ALL EQUIPMENT TO BE BONDED.
6. METERING CABINET REQUIRES 36" CLEARANCE AT DOOR OPENING.
7. CAULK CABINET BASE AT PAD.
NORMAL LOCATION OF
UNDERGROUND UTILITIES NOTES:
1. LOCATION AND DEPTH OF EXISTING AND PROPOSED UTILITIES MUST BE PROVIDED BY THE
SUBDIVIDER AND SHOWN ON ANY PLANS SUBMITTED TO THE DEPT. OF PUBLIC WORKS FOR
APPROVAL.
2. CHANGES MAY BE PERMITTED BY THE DEPT. OF PUBLIC WORKS IN CASES OF CONFLICTING
FACILITIES.
3. CONFLICTS BETWEEN UTILITY COMPANIES FACILITIES, EXISTING AND PROPOSED, MUST BE
MUTUALLY RESOLVED BY THE UTILITY COMPANIES.
4. FOR COMMERCIAL SIDEWALKS, THE FIRE HYDRANT SHALL BE PLACED WITHIN THE SIDEWALK
1'-6" BEHIND FACE OF CURB.
5. MAXIMUM 2" DIAMETER GAS MAINS MAY BE PLACED IN JOINT UTILITIES TRENCH SUBJECT TO
APPROVAL OF CITY ENGINEER (IN TRACTS).
CALIFORNIA STATE CODE COMPLIANCE:
ALL WORK AND MATERIALS SHALL BE PREFORMED AND INSTALLED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CURRENT
EDITIONS OF THE FOLLOWING CODES AS ADOPTED BY THE LOCAL GOVERNING AUTHORITIES. NOTHING IN
THESE PLANS IS TO BE CONSTRUCTED TO PERMIT WORK NOT CONFORMING TO THESE CODES:
·CALIFORNIA ADMINISTRATIVE CODE (INCLUDING TITLES 24 & 25) 2010
·2010 CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODES WHICH ADOPTS THE 2010 UBC, 2010 UMC, 2010 UPC AND THE 2010
NEC.
·BUILDING OFFICIALS & CODE ADMINISTRATORS (BOCA)
·2010 CALIFORNIA MECHANICAL CODE
·ANSI/EIA-222-F LIFE SAFETY CODE NFPA-101
·2010 CALIFORNIA PLUMBING CODE
·2010 CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL CODE
·2010 LOCAL BUILDING CODE
·CITY/COUNTY ORDINANCES
ACCESSIBILITY REQUIREMENTS:
FACILITY IS UNMANNED AND NOT FOR HUMAN HABITATION. HANDICAPPED ACCESS REQUIREMENTS DO
NOT APPLY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE 2010 CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE.
FCC NOTE:
THIS WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITY COMPLIES WITH FEDERAL STANDARDS FOR RADIO
FREQUENCY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TELECOMMUNICATION ACT OF 1996 AND SUBSEQUENT
AMENDMENTS AND ANY OTHER REQUIREMENTS IMPOSED BY STATE OR FEDERAL REGULATORY
AGENCIES.
D-1
DETAILS & NOTES
DATE
ASG33
HAWTHORNE BLVD
RANCHO PALOS VERDES, CA
SITE NAME & ADDRESS:
PHASE II
ASG33
242727
CROWN CASTLE PROJECT NO.
TICKET #______________________
UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERT
1-800-227-2600
CALL AT
LEAST TWO
DAYS BEFORE
YOU DIG
PROPRIETARY INFORMATION
THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS
SET OF DRAWINGS IS PROPRIETARY AND
CONFIDENTIAL TO AT&T. ANY USE OR
DISCLOSURE OTHER THAN AS IT RELATES
TO AT&T IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
SHEET NO.
DRAWN BY: DRAFT DATE: APPROVED BY:
J.E. 03/1/18 C.J.
REVISION / ISSUE
03/01/17ALTERNATE LOCATION
PREPARED BY:
5841 EDISON PLACE, SUITE 200
CARLSBAD, CA 92008
PHONE: (760) 929-0910
FAX: (760) 929-0936
Communications
Telecommunications Engineering
Coastal
CLIENT:
200 SPECTRUM CENTER DRIVE, 18 FLOOR
IRVINE, CA 92618
www.crowncastle.com
CROWN
CASTLE
TH
TRENCH AND FIBER
CONDUIT (PVT)
EXISTING EDGE OF
PAVEMENT
EXISTING CURB &
GUTTER
B-2
D-2
DETAILS & NOTES
DATE
ASG33
HAWTHORNE BLVD
RANCHO PALOS VERDES, CA
SITE NAME & ADDRESS:
PHASE II
ASG33
242727
CROWN CASTLE PROJECT NO.
TICKET #______________________
UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERT
1-800-227-2600
CALL AT
LEAST TWO
DAYS BEFORE
YOU DIG
PROPRIETARY INFORMATION
THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS
SET OF DRAWINGS IS PROPRIETARY AND
CONFIDENTIAL TO AT&T. ANY USE OR
DISCLOSURE OTHER THAN AS IT RELATES
TO AT&T IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
SHEET NO.
DRAWN BY: DRAFT DATE: APPROVED BY:
J.E. 03/1/18 C.J.
REVISION / ISSUE
03/01/17ALTERNATE LOCATION
PREPARED BY:
5841 EDISON PLACE, SUITE 200
CARLSBAD, CA 92008
PHONE: (760) 929-0910
FAX: (760) 929-0936
Communications
Telecommunications Engineering
Coastal
CLIENT:
200 SPECTRUM CENTER DRIVE, 18 FLOOR
IRVINE, CA 92618
www.crowncastle.com
CROWN
CASTLE
TH
32.2"
817mm
9.6"
245mm
8.6"
218mm
Front SideSide
Top
SCALE
N.T.S.
Electrical
Power Supply
Mains Power, Vac. ......................................85 to 264
......................................115 or 230
Power consumption, watts ......................................1150
Optical
Connectors ..............................................................E2000/APC 8°
Optical return loss, dB .............................................45 minimum
Fiber type, mm ..........................................................Single mode E9/125
Optical link budget, dB .............................................0 to 10
Composite input power
@ OTRx master side, dBm
1900 MHz .....................+5 composite
1700 / 2100 MHz...........+5 composite
Interface
BTS Side
Number of connectors
1900 MHz .....................4
1700/2100 MHz ............4
System optimized for BTS power, dBm
.......................................33
.......................................43
Antenna Port
Connector .......................................7/16 Female
Output power .......................................See band specification
Return loss, dB .......................................15
1700/2100 MHz (AWS)
Frequency range, MHz
Uplink............................1710 to 1755
Downlink........................2110 to 2155
Output power per carrier, dBm*
Number of Carriers 1 2 4 8
GSM 45 42 39 36
CDMA 45 42 39 36
UMTS 45 42 39 36
LTE 45 42** 39 36
Spurious emission ..............................................< -13 dBm / 1 MHz
Adjacent channel power, dBc .........................................-48
DL output tolerance over frequency, dB ............................±1
DL output tolerance over temperature, dB ..........................0.5***
Input ICP3, dBm
ICP3 optimized ..............................-12
Noise figure optimized ..............................-18
Noise figure, dB
ICP3 optimized ..............................7
..............................11 max.
Noise figure optimized ..............................4.5
..............................6 max.
1900 MHz (AWS)
Frequency range, MHz
Uplink............................1850 to 1915
Downlink........................1930 to 1995
Output power per carrier, dBm*
Number of Carriers 1 2 4 8
GSM 45 42 39 36
CDMA 45 42 39 36
UMTS 45 42 39 36
LTE 45 42** 39 36
Spurious emission ..............................................< -13 dBm / 1 MHz
DL output tolerance over frequency, dB ............................±1
DL output tolerance over temperature, dB ..........................0.5***
Input ICP3, dBm
ICP3 optimized ..............................-12
Noise figure optimized ..............................-18
Noise figure, dB
ICP3 optimized ..............................7
..............................11 max.
Noise figure optimized ..............................4.5
..............................6 max.
ANDREW ION-M17HP/19HP
MULTI-BAND, MULTI-OPERATOR
REMOTE OPTICAL SYSTEM
System Supervision and Control
Commands ...............................RF on/off
External control parts
Alarms ...............................Summary
...............................Power Supply
...............................Optical UL and DL failure
...............................Temperature
Supervision ...............................Output power on a per-
channel and per-band
basis (optional)
Mechanical****
Height, width, depth mm (in)...............................817 x 245 x 218
(32.2 x 9.61 x 8.6)
Weight, kg (lb)...............................40 (88.2)
Environmental
Operation temperature range .............................-33° C to +50° C
Ingress protection RF part...................IP67
Fan part.................IP55
* Applicable to single modulation mode only
** 3db power reduction @ < 5MHz carrier bandwith
*** With active cooling
**** Spacing required 40 mm (1.58 in) around unit
****With passive cooling maximum temperature +40° C
All figures are typical values.
3
SCALE
N.T.S.2SCALE
N.T.S.1
B-3
D-3
DETAILS & NOTES
DATE
ASG33
HAWTHORNE BLVD
RANCHO PALOS VERDES, CA
SITE NAME & ADDRESS:
PHASE II
ASG33
242727
CROWN CASTLE PROJECT NO.
TICKET #______________________
UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERT
1-800-227-2600
CALL AT
LEAST TWO
DAYS BEFORE
YOU DIG
PROPRIETARY INFORMATION
THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS
SET OF DRAWINGS IS PROPRIETARY AND
CONFIDENTIAL TO AT&T. ANY USE OR
DISCLOSURE OTHER THAN AS IT RELATES
TO AT&T IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
SHEET NO.
DRAWN BY: DRAFT DATE: APPROVED BY:
J.E. 03/1/18 C.J.
REVISION / ISSUE
03/01/17ALTERNATE LOCATION
PREPARED BY:
5841 EDISON PLACE, SUITE 200
CARLSBAD, CA 92008
PHONE: (760) 929-0910
FAX: (760) 929-0936
Communications
Telecommunications Engineering
Coastal
CLIENT:
200 SPECTRUM CENTER DRIVE, 18 FLOOR
IRVINE, CA 92618
www.crowncastle.com
CROWN
CASTLE
TH
30" ROUND
NOTE:
GROUND ROD SHALL BE MINIMUM
0.625" DIA. x 9' LONG. COPPER CLAD.
MINIMUM 3" EXPOSURE AT TOP OF
FOUNDATION WITHIN BOLT CIRCLE.
COVERING.
ALL REBAR SHALL HAVE 3" MINIMUM
EMBEDMENT IN CONCRETE).
3"
TYP
R4
R3
R1
C3
C2
C1
A5
A4
A3
A2
A1
G2
G1
AS GIVEN IN SPECIFICATIONS ASTM A449.
ANCHOR BOLTS SHALL BE 4-1" DIAMETER.
WITH 6" MINIMUM STUB-OUT.
STUB UP TO WITHIN 4" FROM HAND
12" MIN. FROM THE ANCHOR BOLTS TO
HOOPS SHALL BE #4 X 18" I.D., SPACED
4" O/C FROM TOP OF FOUNDATION TO
HOOPS SHALL BE #4 X 18" I.D., SPACED
42" MAXIMUM BURIAL
36" MINIMUM BURIAL
1/4"
ANCHOR BOLTS SHALL BE EMBEDDED 33"
BOLT CIRCLE DIAMETER TO MATCH POLE
ROUND PIER
BOTTOM OF FOUNDATION.
END OF ANCHOR BOLTS.
VERTICAL REBAR SHALL BE (7) #6
REINFORCEMENT:
EQUALLY SPACED INSIDE OF HOOPS.
GROUND ROD:
ANCHOR BOLTS:
CONDUIT:
HOLE.
BE RGS OR SCH 80 PVC, AS REQUIRED.
SERVICE AND FEED CONDUITS SHALL
GALVANIZED, INSIDE THE FOUNDATION,
CONDUIT SHALL BE RIGID STEEL.
CONNECTOR
BY THE MANUFACTURER.
BOLT PROJECTION AS RECOMMENDED
MINIMUM, BELOW STREET GRADE (63"
TWO PLACES BELOW THE NUT,
EMBEDDED IN FOUNDATION.
NUTS WITH THE THREADS STAKED AT
ANCHOR BOLTS SHALL HAVE HEADS, OR
BASEPLATE.
CLR
NOT TO SCALE
R2
GROUND LEVEL
24" ROUND
A2
C3 A1 A5
R1
R2
F3
F4 R3
A4 A3
C1
C2
NEW POLE FOUNDATION
POUR FOOTING
AGAINST
UNDISTURBED
MATERIAL
CONCRETE TO
BE32/50 MIX
ANCHOR BOLTS TO BE
SUPPLIED BY POLE
MANUFACTURER
5' DEPTHF3
2' DEPTHF4
CUUB070C06Fxyz0
7.812
3.251
0.437
9.13
9.88
23
.
3
8
3.
8
1
RIGHT SIDE
Ø9.99
4.6715.90
Ø0.22
9.88
Ø0.22
3.02
Ø9.88
15
.
9
0
0.630.50
Ø9.88
1.00
0.50
1.00
9.40
Ø9.408.
0
0
15.65
Ø0.69
7.
6
3
15
.
7
5
8.66
4.
7
2
4.
0
9
Ø0.25
4.
7
2
6.00
Ø0.25
1.
0
0
8.06
0.50R4.37
R0.75
LEFT SIDE
2.04
0.50
3.26
2.67
Ø0.31
3.38
8.66
3.26
Ø2.00
0.81
Ø0.45
Ø4.50
Ø1.90
Ø1.00
0.74
R1.00
1.11
6.
9
6
2
.
6
2
9
.
8
8
1
2
.
5
0
1.56
R7.81
Ø14.28
7.07 7.07
Ø14.28
1
5
.
9
0
ASSEMBLY
ANTENNA NOT
INCLUDED IN KIT
BRACKET
ANTENNA MOUNT
G&K WASHER
(INVERT WASHER)
BRACKET
COLUMNS (3)
SPLITTER BRACKET
(MOUNTING HOLES ON
COLUMNS TO BE FIELD
DRILLED)
BRACKET BASE
FOR METAL POLE
G&K WASHER
TOP VIEW
FRONT VIEW
9.375
BRACKET SKIRT
FRONT VIEW
BRACKET SKIRT
INDIVIDUAL PIECES
SPLITTER BRACKET
FRONT VIEW
TOP VIEW
TOP VIEW
BRACKET SKIRT
TOP VIEW
NOTES:
1. FITS AMPHENOL ANTENNA MODEL #CWB070X06Fxy-0;
#CWD070X06Fxy-0; #CWT070X06Fxy-0; #CWB070X12Fxy-0;
#CWD070X12Fxy-0 AND SIMILAR ANTENNA BASES
2. SPLITTER BRACKET (1-LOW POWER) IS INCLUDED.
BRACKET
(INDIVIDUAL PIECES)
TOP VIEW
ANTENNA BRACKET MOUNT
TOP VIEW
BRACKET BASE
SPLITTER
BRACKET
*ALL DIMENSIONS ARE IN INCHES.
ANTENNA TOP MOUNT & SHROUD
KIT #008H
1.56
4.17
BRACKET COLUMN
1.00
WIRELESS STRUCTURES CONSULTING, PC
TOP MOUNT
PRIVATE - N.T.S.
NOTE: 7" CLEARANCE NEEDED FOR
CABLE MANAGEMENT & BEND RADIUS
CONCRETE
FOUNDATION
CONCRETE TEXTURED
STEEL POLE
FINISH GRADE
GROUND ROD INSTALLATION FOR STEEL POLE
TYPICAL SECTION: N.T.S.
#5 (5/8" X 8') COPPER
CLAD GROUND ELECTRODE
Cu GROUND CLAMP
FCI No. GBL3-T8,
TYCO No. 83749-1,
OR EQUAL
BAREN Cu GROUND
CONDUCTOR
SCALE
N.T.S.8
SCALE
N.T.S.5SCALE
N.T.S.4
SCALE
N.T.S.6 SCALE
N.T.S.7
B-4
D-4
DETAILS & NOTES
DATE
ASG33
HAWTHORNE BLVD
RANCHO PALOS VERDES, CA
SITE NAME & ADDRESS:
PHASE II
ASG33
242727
CROWN CASTLE PROJECT NO.
TICKET #______________________
UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERT
1-800-227-2600
CALL AT
LEAST TWO
DAYS BEFORE
YOU DIG
PROPRIETARY INFORMATION
THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS
SET OF DRAWINGS IS PROPRIETARY AND
CONFIDENTIAL TO AT&T. ANY USE OR
DISCLOSURE OTHER THAN AS IT RELATES
TO AT&T IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
SHEET NO.
DRAWN BY: DRAFT DATE: APPROVED BY:
J.E. 03/1/18 C.J.
REVISION / ISSUE
03/01/17ALTERNATE LOCATION
PREPARED BY:
5841 EDISON PLACE, SUITE 200
CARLSBAD, CA 92008
PHONE: (760) 929-0910
FAX: (760) 929-0936
Communications
Telecommunications Engineering
Coastal
CLIENT:
200 SPECTRUM CENTER DRIVE, 18 FLOOR
IRVINE, CA 92618
www.crowncastle.com
CROWN
CASTLE
TH
WTR FUSE BOX
(FOR NEW POLES & STREET LIGHTS
HANDHOLE DETAIL
(FLUSH MOUNT)
(PRIVATE)
GROUND ROD INSTALLATION
6'MIN.
#5 COPPER CLAD
GROUND ROD (5/8" X 8")
BAREN Cu GROUND
CONDUCTOR
Cu GROUND CLAMP FCI
No.GBL3-T8, TYCO No.
83749-1, OR EQUAL
6" GRAVEL
#5 COPPER CLAD
GROUND ROD (5/8" X 8')
35 5/8"
37 7/8"
24"
26 1/4"
30"
SIDE VIEW
TOP VIEW
HANDHOLE
FRP BODY
POLYMER
CONCRETE
RING
LIFTING EYE
IDENTIFICATION
(CROWN CASTLE)
COVER FEATURES:
* PW - 10,400 LBS. WHEEL LOAD ON 10" X 10" PLATE.
* APPROX. WT. = 72 LBS.
* POLYMER CONCRETE
* ONE PIECE COVER
* FOUR BOLT DOWN
* COLOR: CONCRETE GREY
* NON - SKID SURFACE
* LID TO HAVE H-20 TRAFFIC LOAD FRICTION
COEFFICIENT TO BE 0.5 OR MORE
HANDHOLE FEATURES:
* POLYMER CONCRETE RING AND FIBERGLASS REINFORCED
POLYMER BODY
* COLOR OF RING:CONCRETE GREY
* APPROX. WT. = 123 LBS.
SCALE
N.T.S.14
SCALE
N.T.S.11SCALE
N.T.S.9
SCALE
N.T.S.12 SCALE
N.T.S.13
SCALE
N.T.S.10
24"
6" TO 12"
ASPHALT TRENCH DETAIL
(PRIVATE)
(N.T.S.)
NEW ASPHALT CONCRETE
EXISTING A.C.
AND BASE
PROPOSED (1) 3" CONDUIT
NATIVE SOIL
ORIGINAL MATERIAL BACKFILL
6" MAX.
18" MIN.
INSTALLATION NOTES:
-CUT 6" MAX. WIDTH X 18" + DEPTH TRENCH
-BACKFILL WITH THE ORIGINAL MATERIAL FROM THE
TRENCH
-RESTORE THE SURFACE
(1) 3" PVC CONDUIT
IN DIRT TRENCH DETAIL
TYPICAL SECTION
(N.T.S.)
EXISTING SCE VAULT
4" MIN.
TRENCH
24" MIN.
GREENBELT
(1) 3" DUCT
PUNCH THRU CROSS SECTION
TYPICAL SECTION: N.T.S.
R/WLC
PAVEMENT
18'
EX. CURB
& GUTTER
12" MIN.
12'
SIDEWALK
B-5
D-5
DETAILS & NOTES
DATE
ASG33
HAWTHORNE BLVD
RANCHO PALOS VERDES, CA
SITE NAME & ADDRESS:
PHASE II
ASG33
242727
CROWN CASTLE PROJECT NO.
TICKET #______________________
UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERT
1-800-227-2600
CALL AT
LEAST TWO
DAYS BEFORE
YOU DIG
PROPRIETARY INFORMATION
THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS
SET OF DRAWINGS IS PROPRIETARY AND
CONFIDENTIAL TO AT&T. ANY USE OR
DISCLOSURE OTHER THAN AS IT RELATES
TO AT&T IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
SHEET NO.
DRAWN BY: DRAFT DATE: APPROVED BY:
J.E. 03/1/18 C.J.
REVISION / ISSUE
03/01/17ALTERNATE LOCATION
PREPARED BY:
5841 EDISON PLACE, SUITE 200
CARLSBAD, CA 92008
PHONE: (760) 929-0910
FAX: (760) 929-0936
Communications
Telecommunications Engineering
Coastal
CLIENT:
200 SPECTRUM CENTER DRIVE, 18 FLOOR
IRVINE, CA 92618
www.crowncastle.com
CROWN
CASTLE
TH
SCALE
N.T.S.15
B-6
SITE PHOTOS
KEY MAPA NORTHWEST VIEWB
NORTHWEST VIEWC SOUTHWEST VIEWD S-1
DATE
ASG33
HAWTHORNE BLVD
RANCHO PALOS VERDES, CA
SITE NAME & ADDRESS:
PHASE II
ASG33
242727
CROWN CASTLE PROJECT NO.
TICKET #______________________
UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERT
1-800-227-2600
CALL AT
LEAST TWO
DAYS BEFORE
YOU DIG
PROPRIETARY INFORMATION
THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS
SET OF DRAWINGS IS PROPRIETARY AND
CONFIDENTIAL TO AT&T. ANY USE OR
DISCLOSURE OTHER THAN AS IT RELATES
TO AT&T IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
SHEET NO.
DRAWN BY: DRAFT DATE: APPROVED BY:
J.E. 03/1/18 C.J.
REVISION / ISSUE
03/01/17ALTERNATE LOCATION
PREPARED BY:
5841 EDISON PLACE, SUITE 200
CARLSBAD, CA 92008
PHONE: (760) 929-0910
FAX: (760) 929-0936
Communications
Telecommunications Engineering
Coastal
CLIENT:
200 SPECTRUM CENTER DRIVE, 18 FLOOR
IRVINE, CA 92618
www.crowncastle.com
CROWN
CASTLE
TH
SITE LOCATION
HA
W
T
H
O
R
N
E
B
L
V
D
LOS
V
E
R
D
E
S
D
R
B-7
SITE PHOTOS
S-2
DATE
ASG33
HAWTHORNE BLVD
RANCHO PALOS VERDES, CA
SITE NAME & ADDRESS:
PHASE II
ASG33
242727
CROWN CASTLE PROJECT NO.
TICKET #______________________
UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERT
1-800-227-2600
CALL AT
LEAST TWO
DAYS BEFORE
YOU DIG
PROPRIETARY INFORMATION
THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS
SET OF DRAWINGS IS PROPRIETARY AND
CONFIDENTIAL TO AT&T. ANY USE OR
DISCLOSURE OTHER THAN AS IT RELATES
TO AT&T IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
SHEET NO.
DRAWN BY: DRAFT DATE: APPROVED BY:
J.E. 03/1/18 C.J.
REVISION / ISSUE
03/01/17ALTERNATE LOCATION
PREPARED BY:
5841 EDISON PLACE, SUITE 200
CARLSBAD, CA 92008
PHONE: (760) 929-0910
FAX: (760) 929-0936
Communications
Telecommunications Engineering
Coastal
CLIENT:
200 SPECTRUM CENTER DRIVE, 18 FLOOR
IRVINE, CA 92618
www.crowncastle.com
CROWN
CASTLE
TH
B-8
SITE PHOTOS
S-3
DATE
ASG33
HAWTHORNE BLVD
RANCHO PALOS VERDES, CA
SITE NAME & ADDRESS:
PHASE II
ASG33
242727
CROWN CASTLE PROJECT NO.
TICKET #______________________
UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERT
1-800-227-2600
CALL AT
LEAST TWO
DAYS BEFORE
YOU DIG
PROPRIETARY INFORMATION
THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS
SET OF DRAWINGS IS PROPRIETARY AND
CONFIDENTIAL TO AT&T. ANY USE OR
DISCLOSURE OTHER THAN AS IT RELATES
TO AT&T IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
SHEET NO.
DRAWN BY: DRAFT DATE: APPROVED BY:
J.E. 03/1/18 C.J.
REVISION / ISSUE
03/01/17ALTERNATE LOCATION
PREPARED BY:
5841 EDISON PLACE, SUITE 200
CARLSBAD, CA 92008
PHONE: (760) 929-0910
FAX: (760) 929-0936
Communications
Telecommunications Engineering
Coastal
CLIENT:
200 SPECTRUM CENTER DRIVE, 18 FLOOR
IRVINE, CA 92618
www.crowncastle.com
CROWN
CASTLE
TH
B-9
101
101
99
14'
32'
32'
78'
11'
11'
100'R/W
C&
GR/W
C&
G
32'4'
42'78'
11'
11'
100'
R/
W
C&
GR/W
C&
G
5'
G
R
E
E
N
B
E
L
T
5'
S
I
D
E
W
A
L
K
5' G
R
E
E
N
B
E
L
T
4' SI
D
E
W
A
L
K
10'
S
I
D
E
W
A
L
K
4'
S
I
D
E
W
A
L
K
4'
S
I
D
E
W
A
L
K
5'
G
R
E
E
N
B
E
L
T
14
'
R
A
I
S
E
D
M
E
D
I
A
N
4'
R
A
I
S
E
D
M
E
D
I
A
N
HAWTHORNE BLVD STA. 100 + 00
LOS VERDES DR STA. 100 + 00
12
'
B
U
S
P
A
D
12
'
B
U
S
P
A
D
HA
W
T
H
O
R
N
E
B
L
V
D
LOS
V
E
R
D
E
S
D
R
R/W
C&G
R/W
C&G
60'40'
10'
10'
P-1
DATE
ASG33
HAWTHORNE BLVD
RANCHO PALOS VERDES, CA
SITE NAME & ADDRESS:
PHASE II
ASG33
242727
CROWN CASTLE PROJECT NO.
TICKET #______________________
UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERT
1-800-227-2600
CALL AT
LEAST TWO
DAYS BEFORE
YOU DIG
PROPRIETARY INFORMATION
THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS
SET OF DRAWINGS IS PROPRIETARY AND
CONFIDENTIAL TO AT&T. ANY USE OR
DISCLOSURE OTHER THAN AS IT RELATES
TO AT&T IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
SHEET NO.
DRAWN BY: DRAFT DATE: APPROVED BY:
J.E. 03/1/18 C.J.
REVISION / ISSUE
03/01/17ALTERNATE LOCATION
PREPARED BY:
5841 EDISON PLACE, SUITE 200
CARLSBAD, CA 92008
PHONE: (760) 929-0910
FAX: (760) 929-0936
Communications
Telecommunications Engineering
Coastal
CLIENT:
200 SPECTRUM CENTER DRIVE, 18 FLOOR
IRVINE, CA 92618
www.crowncastle.com
CROWN
CASTLE
TH
·DECOMMISSION EXISTING STREETLIGHT POLE #N/A & INSTALL (1) NEW 33' 5" HIGH STEEL POLE WITH MAST ARM
& LUMINAIRE
·INSTALL (1) AMPHENOL CUUB070X06FXYZ0 ANTENNA.
·INSTALL (1) CROWN CASTLE 2' X 3' WTR HANDHOLE WITH (1) POWER DISCONNECT BOX INSIDE.
·INSTALL (1) CROWN CASTLE 4' X 6' VAULT WITH FLUSH MOUNT VENTS & (2) ML IONS INSIDE.
·EQUIPMENT AND ANTENNAS TO BE PAINTED TO MATCH POLE.
UNDERGROUND UTILITY NOTE:
THE LOCATIONS AND EXISTENCE OF ANY UNDERGROUND PIPES,
STRUCTURES OR CONDUITS SHOWN ON THIS PLAN WERE OBTAINED BY A
SEARCH OF AVAILABLE RECORDS. THERE MAY BE EXISTING UTILITIES
OTHER THAN THOSE SHOWN ON THE THIS PLAN. THE CONTRACTOR IS
REQUIRED TO TAKE PRECAUTIONARY MEASURES TO PROTECT THE
UTILITY LINES SHOWN AND ANY OTHER LINES NOT SHOWN ON THIS PLAN.
NORTH
SCALE: 1" = 50'
LATITUDE:
LONGITUDE:
33.755158
-118.396360
NODE COORDINATE
NEW CONSTRUCTION
SITE PLAN
FOOTAGE TOTALS
ASPHALT TRENCH 106'
PUNCH THRU 8'
DIRT TRENCH 12'
BORE 0'
TOTAL 126'
R&R SIDEWALK TOTAL 56 SQ. FT.
BILL OF MATERIALS
DESCRIPTION QTY
VAULTS
(PVT)
2' X 3'1
4' X 6'1
CONDUIT
(PVT)
1-1/4" PVC 0
3" PVC 0
A
B
A EXISTING WATER VALVE
(4' B.O.C.) STA. 101 + 74
EXISTING STOP SIGN
(1' B.O.C.) STA. 101 + 75
EXISTING CROWN CASTLE VAULT
(6' B.O.C.) STA. 101 + 74
EXISTING PIPES
(2' B.O.C.) STA. 101 + 95
EXISTING CWS HANDHOLE
(1' B.O.C.) STA. 101 + 97
EXISTING VENT
(3' B.O.C.) STA. 101 + 75
EXISTING WATER VALVE
(6' B.O.C.) STA. 101 + 69
EXISTING TREE
(1' B.O.C.) STA. 101 + 68
EXISTING SIGN
(1' B.O.C.) STA. 101 + 61
B
EXISTING MONUMENT
(0' B.O.C.) STA. 99 + 52
EXISTING STREETLIGHT HANDHOLE
(1' B.O.C.) STA. 99 + 48
EXISTING FIRE HYDRANT
(2' B.O.C.) STA. 99 + 46
PROPOSED SITE LOCATION
DECOMMISSION EXISTING STREETLIGHT
POLE #N/A & INSTALL NEW 33' 5" HIGH STEEL POLE
S/E CORNER OF LOS VERDES DR & HAWTHORNE BLVD
(2' B.O.C.) STA. 99 +43
6' DIRT TRENCH
(SEE DETAIL 11 ON D-4)
PROPOSED CROWN CASTLE
2' X 3' WTR HANDHOLE
WITH (1) DISCONNECT BOX
(3' B.O.C.) STA. 99 + 43
9' DIRT TRENCH
(SEE DETAIL 11 ON D-4)
INSTALL (1) CROWN CASTLE 4' X 6' VAULT WITH
FLUSH MOUNT VENTS & (2) ML IONS INSIDE
(1' B.O.C.) STA. 99 + 30
REMOVE & REPLACE
4' x 14' SIDEWALK PANEL
EXISTING TRAFFIC HANDHOLE
(0' B.O.C.) STA. 99 + 40
106' ASPHALT TRENCH
(SEE DETAIL 12 ON D-4)
5' PUNCH THRU
(SEE DETAIL 13 ON D-4)
4' PUNCH THRU
(SEE DETAIL 13 ON D-4)
B-10
GROUND LEVEL
CURBASPHALT
DECOMMISSION EXISTING 28' 5" STREETLIGHT POLE #N/A
& INSTALL 33' 5" HIGH STEEL POLE
2'
SIDEWALK
TOP OF
ANTENNA
36' 0"
RAD
CENTER
35' 0"
7"
INSTALL MAST ARM & LUMINAIRE
TOP OF POLE 33' 5"
INSTALL (1) TOP MOUNT & SHROUD WITH
AMPHENOL CUUB070X06Fxyz0 ANTENNA
(SEE DETAIL 4, 5 & 6, SHEET D-3)
PROPOSED CROWN CASTLE 2' X 3' WTR HANDHOLE
WITH (1) DISCONNECT BOX
(SEE DETAILS 9 & 10, SHEET D-4)
GROUND LINE
4'
TOP OF
ANTENNA
36' 0"
RAD
CENTER
35' 0"
7"
TOP OF POLE 33' 5"
DECOMMISSION EXISTING 28' 5" STREETLIGHT POLE #N/A
& INSTALL 33' 5" HIGH STEEL POLE
INSTALL MAST ARM & LUMINAIRE
INSTALL (1) TOP MOUNT & SHROUD WITH
AMPHENOL CUUB070X06Fxyz0 ANTENNA
(SEE DETAIL 4, 5 & 6, SHEET D-3)
PROPOSED CROWN CASTLE 2' X 3' WTR HANDHOLE
WITH (1) DISCONNECT BOX
(SEE DETAILS 9 & 10, SHEET D-4)
C
&
G
C
&
G
H
A
W
T
H
O
R
N
E
B
L
V
D
INSTALL 33' 4" STEEL POLE
INSTALL (1) TOP MOUNT & SHROUD KIT
WITH AMPHENOL
#CUUB070X06Fxyz0 ANTENNA
Ø14"
INSTALL MAST ARM & LUMINAIRE
P-2
DATE
ASG33
HAWTHORNE BLVD
RANCHO PALOS VERDES, CA
SITE NAME & ADDRESS:
PHASE II
ASG33
242727
CROWN CASTLE PROJECT NO.
TICKET #______________________
UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERT
1-800-227-2600
CALL AT
LEAST TWO
DAYS BEFORE
YOU DIG
PROPRIETARY INFORMATION
THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS
SET OF DRAWINGS IS PROPRIETARY AND
CONFIDENTIAL TO AT&T. ANY USE OR
DISCLOSURE OTHER THAN AS IT RELATES
TO AT&T IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
SHEET NO.
DRAWN BY: DRAFT DATE: APPROVED BY:
J.E. 03/1/18 C.J.
REVISION / ISSUE
03/01/17ALTERNATE LOCATION
PREPARED BY:
5841 EDISON PLACE, SUITE 200
CARLSBAD, CA 92008
PHONE: (760) 929-0910
FAX: (760) 929-0936
Communications
Telecommunications Engineering
Coastal
CLIENT:
200 SPECTRUM CENTER DRIVE, 18 FLOOR
IRVINE, CA 92618
www.crowncastle.com
CROWN
CASTLE
TH
POLE #_N/T:
TOP OF POLE: 33' 5"
TOP OF ANTENNA: 36' 0"
RAD CENTER: 35' 0"
AZIMUTH: OMNI
EQUIPMENT AND ANTENNAS TO BE PAINTED TO
MATCH POLE.
POLE PROFILE
B 3 O'CLOCK VIEWA ANTENNA DETAILS SCALE: 1:5
0°
90°
NO
R
T
H
B 12 O'CLOCK VIEW
SCALE: 1:10
SCALE: 1:10
B-11
ASG33 Coverage Analysis
May 02,2018
C-1
Agenda
ASG33 map of primary and alternate candidates
ASG33 viability of the primary and alternate candidates
ASG33 –RF service objective
RF (“drive test”) test set up (see last 3 slides)
ASG33 elevation challenge
Views from proposed primary candidate
ASG33 primary candidate vs. all ASG33 alternate candidates
|2C-2
ASG33 Map of the Primary and Alternate Sites
|3
Service Objective
ASG33_HAW Primary
ASG33_E
ASG33_M2
ASG33_M3
ASG33_F
ASG33_M1
ASG33_Matisse
ASG33_D
ASG33_B
ASG33_A
ASG33_C
C-3
ASG33 Viability of the Primary and Alternate Sites
Node ID Average RSRP (dBm)
1900 MHz Loss of RSRP signal (%)Viability
ASG33_HAW_30FT -90.9492 -2.03 Viable
ASG33_HAW_35FT -89.1382 Baseline Primary Candidate
ASG33_A -94.3013 -5.79 Viable
ASG33_B -85.7522 3.79 Viable
ASG33_C -99.6984 -11.84 Not Viable
ASG33_D -91.0162 -2.10 Not Viable
ASG33_E -98.8683 -10.91 Not Viable
ASG33_F -102.739 -15.25 Not Viable
ASG33_Matisse -107.818 -20.95 Not Viable
ASG33_M1 -120.184 -34.82 Not Viable
ASG33_M2 -104.109 -16.79 Not Viable
ASG33_M3 -103.912 -16.57 Not ViableC-4
ASG33 -Service Objective
Proprietary &
Confidential |5
Service Objective
ASG33_A Primary
Dupre Dr
Cartier Dr
Chartres Dr
Rhone Dr
Matisse Dr
C-5
ASG33_Elevation Challenges
The neighboring existing site (AHW13) is not able to serve this RF objective area due to hilly area
AHW13_Existing site
Poor coverage area
Poor coverage area
AHW13_Existing site
C-6
ASG33_Elevation Challenges
The neighboring existing site (AHW03) is not able to serve this RF objective area due to hilly area
AHW03_Existing site
Poor coverage area
Poor coverage area
AHW03_Existing site
C-7
ASG33_Elevation Challenges from Primary candidate at 35ft
ASG33_HAW
ASG33_HAW
ASG33_A
ASG33_A
35ft Antenna height narrowly goes above the hill, trees, and the first barrier of houses . (Red Line)
Line of sight just above roofline.
35ft
C-8
ASG33_Elevation Challenges from Primary candidate at 30Ft
ASG33_HAW
ASG33_A
ASG33_A
30ft Antenna height IS BLOCKED by the hill, trees, and the first barrier of houses. (White Line)
Line of Sight no longer above roofline.
30ft
ASG33_HAW
35ft
C-9
ASG33_Elevation Challenges from Primary candidate at 28Ft
ASG33_HAW
ASG33_A
ASG33_A
28ft Antenna height IS BLOCKED by the hill, trees, and the first barrier of houses. (Magenta Line)
Line of sight does not go above roofline.
28ft
ASG33_HAW
35ft 30ft
C-10
Existing and Proposed Coverage
1900MHz and 700MHz Maps
ASG33
|11C-11
ASG33 Existing Coverage
1900 MHz
|12
Existing surrounding sites can’t serve this community because of the change
in elevation and distance between the nodes around the community.
AHW13_Existing site
ASG33_HAW Primary
ASG33_E
ASG33_M2
ASG33_F ASG33_M1
ASG33_Matisse
ASG33_D
ASG33_B
ASG33_A
ASG33_C
AHW03_Existing site
C-12
ASG33-HAW_Primary Proposed Coverage @ 30 ft Antenna Height
|13
ASG33_HAW
1900 MHz
Significant improvement
With 35ft Antenna Height
C-13
ASG33-HAW_Primary Proposed Coverage @ 35 ft Antenna Height
|14
ASG33_HAW
1900 MHz
Average 10-20db improvement
That will help bring coverage
Indoors rather than have no
Service.
C-14
1900 MHz
ASG33-A Proposed Coverage @ 15.2 ft Antenna Height
1900 MHz
|15
ASG33_A
C-15
1900 MHz
ASG33-B Proposed Coverage @14 ft Antenna Height
|16
1900 MHz
ASG33_B
C-16
1900 MHz
ASG33-C Proposed Coverage @ 15.9 ft Antenna Height
1900 MHz
|17
ASG33_C
C-17
1900 MHz
ASG33-D Proposed Coverage @ 15 ft Antenna Height
1900 MHz
|18
ASG33_D
C-18
1900 MHz
ASG33-E Proposed Coverage @ 15 ft Antenna Height
1900 MHz
|19
ASG33_E
C-19
1900 MHz
ASG33-F Proposed Coverage @ 14 ft Antenna Height
1900 MHz
|20
ASG33_F
C-20
1900 MHz
ASG33-Matisse Proposed Coverage @ 14 ft Antenna Height
1900 MHz
|21
ASG33_Matisse
C-21
1900 MHz
ASG33-M1 Proposed Coverage @ 35 ft Antenna Height
1900 MHz
|22
ASG33_M1
C-22
1900 MHz
ASG33-M2 Proposed Coverage @ 34.3 ft Antenna Height
1900 MHz
|23
ASG33_M2
C-23
1900 MHz
ASG33-M3 Proposed Coverage @ 35.4 ft Antenna Height
1900 MHz
|24
ASG33_M3
C-24
ASG33 Existing Coverage
700 MHz
|25
AHW13_Existing site
ASG33_HAW Primary
ASG33_E
ASG33_M2
ASG33_F ASG33_M1
ASG33_Matisse
ASG33_D
ASG33_B
ASG33_A
ASG33_C
AHW03_Existing site
C-25
ASG33-HAW_Primary Proposed Coverage @ 30 ft Antenna Height
|26
ASG33_HAW
700 MHz
C-26
ASG33-HAW_Primary Proposed Coverage @ 35 ft Antenna Height
|27
ASG33_HAW
700 MHz
C-27
1900 MHz
ASG33-A Proposed Coverage @ 15.2 ft Antenna Height
700 MHz
|28
ASG33_A
C-28
1900 MHz
ASG33-B Proposed Coverage @14 ft Antenna Height
|29
700 MHz
ASG33_B
C-29
1900 MHz
ASG33-C Proposed Coverage @ 15.9 ft Antenna Height
700 MHz
|30
ASG33_C
C-30
1900 MHz
ASG33-D Proposed Coverage @ 15 ft Antenna Height
700 MHz
|31
ASG33_D
C-31
1900 MHz
ASG33-E Proposed Coverage @ 15 ft Antenna Height
700 MHz
|32
ASG33_E
C-32
1900 MHz
ASG33-F Proposed Coverage @ 14 ft Antenna Height
700 MHz
|33
ASG33_F
C-33
1900 MHz
ASG33-Matisse Proposed Coverage @ 14 ft Antenna Height
700 MHz
|34
ASG33_Matisse
C-34
1900 MHz
ASG33-M1 Proposed Coverage @ 35 ft Antenna Height
700 MHz
|35
ASG33_M1
C-35
1900 MHz
ASG33-M2 Proposed Coverage @ 34.3 ft Antenna Height
700 MHz
|36
ASG33_M2
C-36
1900 MHz
ASG33-M3 Proposed Coverage @ 35.4 ft Antenna Height
1900 MHz
|37
ASG33_M3
C-37
Drive Test Set Up
ASG33
|38C-38
Drive Test Set Up
A continuous wave (CW)test is performed to simulate the coverage expected for the new node locations
PCTEL EX flex Receiver
696MHz-2120 MHz GPS
This is in the vehicle
BVSDragon
850 /1900
TXPower
Crossband
Coupler
Ground
Tripod
40 Feet LMR400
UltraFlex
Hotstick
Adjustable height
Comba Omni
AntennaOmniAntenna
Scanner used to collect benchmark data for existing carrier.
|18C-39
Drive Test Set Up
C-40
Link Budget and Gain Adjust 1900 MHz –ASG33
| 41C-41
Link Budget and Gain Adjust 700 MHz –ASG33
| 42C-42
Columbia Telecommunications Corporation
Wireless Facility Application Evaluation
Applicant: Crown Castle
Site # ASG-33_HAW
UPDATED 5/3/18 based on latest site info received from Crown Castle
Description: Investigation of New Site west of Target Area
Site Location: Hawthorne Boulevard near Los Verdes Drive
Review of Crown Castle Documentation:
After much discussion, Crown Castle has provided documentation in early May 2018 to substantiate a
new location for ASG #33. This new proposed location (at a replacement street lamp near the
intersection of Hawthorne Blvd near Los Verdes Drive) is approximately 950 feet west of the original
ASG #33 site, completely outside the designated target area. Exhibit 1 shows the proposed location.
Exhibit 1 – Photosimulation of New Site Location
Exhibit 2, below, shows the location for the new site, along with the new target area as well as 10
other locations that have been previously under consideration.
D-1
Exhibit 2 – Latest Crown Castle Exhibit for Primary and Alternate Sites
It is worth noting the original target area for ASG 33 was smaller, without Rhone Drive included.
Exhibit 3, below shows the original target area for ASG 33.
Exhibit 3 – Original ASG Target Area
2
D-2
Crown Castle provided data for existing AT&T coverage in the 1900 MHz and 700 MHz bands in the
target area and they are provided here as Exhibit 4 and 5.
Exhibit 4 – Existing 1900 MHz Coverage
Exhibit 5 – Existing 700 MHz Coverage
3
D-3
The Crown Castle drive test data is similar to the data we found as tested on August 9, 2017; with
marginal LTE coverage to the south on Chartres Drive and a mix of 3G/4G LTE on Cartier Drive to the
north. (Our drive test data did not include Rhone Drive since that was not in the original target area).
Additionally, the lack of a dominant server for the area meant connecting to multiple nearby donor
cells, all with marginal signal coverage.
Crown Castle documents also shows proposed coverage for the new ASG33_HAW site with antennas
placed at 30 and 35 feet. The existing streetlamp at that location on Hawthorne Boulevard reaches 33
feet 5 inches at its highest point. The replacement streetlamp would now have the antennas directly
over the top of the pole (with the streetlight arm arcing out), so that the center of radiation for the
new antennas would reach 35 feet. Their analysis of the surrounding topology supports the additional
5 feet, which would provide better signal strength, especially inside buildings on Chartres Drive, on
the southern end of the target area. Exhibits 6 and 7 show the expected coverage for the Hawthorne
Blvd site at 35 feet for 1900 MHz and 700 MHz.
Exhibit 6 – Expected 1900 MHz Coverage at 35 feet
4
D-4
Exhibit 7 – Expected 700 MHz Coverage at 35 feet
Findings and conclusions:
From an engineering perspective, Crown Castle has provided engineering measurement data defining
gaps in AT&T coverage in small pocketed areas. I have independently examined these areas and find
that the signal levels are lower than the levels industry guidelines suggested to support modern
3G/4G customer needs. Further, the engineering design provided by Crown Castle supports that, if
constructed, DAS site ASG 33_HAW to support AT&T’s 3G/4G wireless services throughout the target
area. Currently from the information obtained in the drive tests, it appears that approximately half of
the proposed service area currently is served with legacy 3G service.
Signature:
Michael Afflerbach
RF Specialist
Date: 5/3/18
5
D-5
P. C. RESOLUTION NO. 2018-16
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO PALOS VERDES RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY
COUNCIL THE APPROVAL, WITH CONDITIONS, OF MAJOR
WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITY PERMIT ASG NO.
33 TO ALLOW THE INSTALLATION OF AN ANTENNA ENCASED IN
A CANISTER MEASURING 2' TALL AND 14.6" IN DIAMETER
MOUNTED ON REPLACEMENT STREETLIGHT POLE NOT TO
EXCEED 36' IN TOTAL HEIGHT WITH RELATED VAULTED
MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT AT THE SOUTHWEST INTERSECTION
OF HAWTHORNE BOULEVARD AND LOS VERDES DRIVE
WHEREAS, Chapter 12.18 of the Rancho Palo Verde Municipal Code (RPVMC or
Municipal Code) governs the permitting, development, siting, installation, design,
operation and maintenance of wireless telecommunications facilities ("WTFs") in the city's
public right-of-way ("PROW") (RPVMC § 12.18.010);
WHEREAS, beginning in May of 2016, Crown Castle (the "Applicant") applied to
the City for an Wireless Telecommunications Facility Permit ("WTFP"), pursuant to
Section 12.18.040(A) of the Municipal Code, to install 26 antennas in the public right-of-
way (PROW) to service AT&T customers throughout the City including ASG No. 33
Project") across from property located at 6480 Chartres Drive in the midst of a residential
neighborhood;
WHEREAS, the Project called for the installation of two 21.4"panel antennas on a
new 14' tall steel pole in a neighborhood with no utility poles;
WHEREAS, on July 25, 2017, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public
hearing, at which time all interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard and
present evidence;
WHEREAS, on July 25, 2017, the Planning Commission continued the public
hearing to August 8, 2017;
WHEREAS, on August 8, 2017, the Planning Commission continued the public
hearing to August 22, 2017;
WHEREAS, an alternative proposal called for a replacement 14' tall stop sign pole
measuring 12" in diameter with a 3.5' tall and 2' diameter canister encasing the antennas
at the top of the pole located at the intersection of Chartres Drive and Cartier Drive;
Resolution No. 2018-16
Page 1 of 21
E-1
WHEREAS, because the Project's location was within a residential zone and within
the PROW of local streets as identified in the General Plan, approval of a WTFP also
required an exception under Section 12.18.190 of the Municipal Code;
WHEREAS, the Project was found to be exempt from review under the California
Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") because the Project constituted a small scale
installation of new a new facility (14 CCR § 15303(d));
WHEREAS, on August 22, 2017 after considering testimony and evidence
presented at the public hearings, the information and findings included in the Staff
Reports, and other records of proceedings, the Planning Commission of the City of
Rancho Palos Verdes moved to deny, without prejudice, ASG No. 33, on a vote of 4-0
Commissioners Leon and Tomblin, and Vice Chairman James were absent);
WHEREAS, on September 14, 2017, a timely appeal of the denial was filed by the
Applicant for an appeal to the City Council;
WHEREAS, on November 15, 2017, a public notice of the appeal was mailed to
property owners within a 500' radius of the subject site and published in the Daily Breeze,
pursuant to the requirements of the Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code. A courtesy
public notice was also published in the Palos Verdes Peninsula News on November 23,
2017; and a notification was sent to list-serve subscribers;
WHEREAS, on November 30, 2017, the City Council held a duly noticed public
hearing on the appeal, at which time all interested parties were given an opportunity to
be heard and present evidence. At this meeting, the City Council voted to refer the Project
back to the Planning Commission for reconsideration while maintaining jurisdiction over
the appeal in order to allow the Planning Commission the opportunity to weigh in on the
revised design options presented to the City Council, and directed the Appellant to
explore locating the facility along Hawthorne Boulevard near one of the three entrances
to the Monaco neighborhood and to present the results of the analysis to the Planning
Commission;
WHEREAS, on January 11, 2018, a public notice was mailed to property owners
within a 500' radius of the subject site and published in the Palos Verdes Peninsula News,
pursuant to the requirements of the Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code; and a
notification was sent to list-serve subscribers, announcing the January 30, 2018 Planning
Commission meeting;
WHEREAS, on January 30, 2018, the Planning Commission conducted a public
hearing on the revised design options and the latest RF analysis that was updated based
on the Council's direction to consider locating the facility along Hawthorne Boulevard near
the three entrances to the Monaco neighborhood. After considering the information
P.C. Resolution No. 2018-16
Page 2 of 21
E-2
presented, the Planning Commission directed the Applicant to explore splitting the
proposed wireless facility into two separate wireless facilities within the neighborhood
rather than the one wireless facility proposed at the intersection of Chartres Drive and
Cartier Drive, in addition to consider locating the wireless facility on Hawthorne Blvd., and
continued the public hearing to March 13, 2018;
WHEREAS, on February 15, 2018, the City Council, who was scheduled to
consider the Commission's recommendation at this meeting, continued the matter to a
date uncertain while continuing to maintain jurisdiction in order to allow the Applicant to
continue exploring alternative locations for further review by the Planning Commission;
WHEREAS, on March 13, 2018, the Planning Commission conducted the
continued public hearing at which time Staff reported on the ongoing efforts to identify an
alternative location within the Monaco Tract, and indicated that pursuant to Commission
and Council direction, the Applicant had identified an existing streetlight pole at the
intersection of Hawthorne Boulevard and Los Verdes Drive that meets their coverage
objective. In light of this, at the Applicant's request, the public hearing was continued to a
date uncertain to allow the Applicant additional time to proceed with the mock-up and
public notification process for the alternative location at the intersection of Hawthorne
Boulevard and Los Verdes Drive;
WHEREAS, on April 19, 2018, a public notice was mailed to property owners within
a 500' radius of the subject site and published in the Palos Verdes Peninsula News,
announcing that a public hearing on the proposed facility is scheduled to occur on
Tuesday, May 8, 2018;
WHEREAS, on May 8, 2018, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public
hearing, at which time all interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard and
present evidence.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO PALOS VERDES DOES HEREBY FIND, DETERMINE AND RESOLVE AS
FOLLOWS:
Section 1: The proposed Project is a request to:
A. Install a WTF at the southwest intersection of Hawthorne Boulevard and Los
Verdes Drive,
B. Decommission and remove an existing 28'-5" tall streetlight pole with a mast arm
and luminaire to be replaced with a 36' tall streetlight pole, as measured to the top
of the antenna canister measuring 2' tall and 14.6" in diameter, and
P.C. Resolution No. 2018-16
Page 3 of 21
E-3
C. Install vaulted underground mechanical equipment in the PROW.
Section 2: Approval of a WTFP is warranted because the Project meets the
findings required by Section 12.18.090 of the Municipal Code:
A. All notices required for the proposed installation have been given.
On April 19, 2018, a new public notice was published in the Palos Verdes Peninsula
News, and a public notice was mailed to property owners within a 500' radius of the
subject site announcing the May 8, 2018 public hearing and inviting public comments
on the proposed facility. The notice mentioned that the hearing is a result of the City
Council referring the application back to the Commission for review with a new
recommendation for the City Council's consideration at a future duly noticed public
hearing. The Applicant notified the City 20 days prior to the expiration of the shot
clock for this application, which was April 30, 2018. On April 30, 2018, the Applicant
provided the City with a Shot Clock Tolling Agreement (See Attachment)
establishing a new expiration date of July 30, 2018
B. The proposed facility has been designed and located in compliance with all
applicable provisions of this chapter.
12.18.080(A)(1)(a): The Applicant shall employ screening, undergrounding and
camouflage design techniques in the design and placement of wireless
telecommunications facilities in order to ensure that the facility is as visually screened
as possible, to prevent the facility from dominating the surrounding area and to
minimize significant view impacts from surrounding properties all in a manner that
achieves compatibility with the community and in compliance with Section 17.02.040
View Preservation and Restoration) of this code.
The Project employs screening and a camouflage design with the use of a canister
shroud measuring 2' tall and 14.6" in diameter that will be mounted to the top of a
replacement streetlight pole that is conditioned not to exceed a total height of 36' as
measured from grade to the top of the canister. The wireless facility will not be placed
in front of homes or adjacent to side or rear yards of residences, and will not create
potential view and visual impacts. All cabling will be obscured by the use of clips or
the like, and screened by the canister. The light standard will match the
decommissioned light standard and those in the immediate area. All of the related
mechanical equipment will be undergrounded in three vaults. The Project will not
have any significant view impairment to surrounding properties pursuant to Chapter
17.02.040 of the RPVMC. In terms of cumulative visual or view impacts, a significant
view impairment will not occur if other streetlight poles in this location of the City were
replaced to accommodate a similar WTF.
P.C. Resolution No. 2018-16
Page 4 of 21
E-4
12.18.080(A)(1)(b): Screening shall be designed to be architecturally compatible
with surrounding structures using appropriate techniques to camouflage, disguise,
and/or blend into the environment, including landscaping, color, and other techniques
to minimize the facility's visual impact as well as be compatible with the architectural
character of the surrounding buildings or structures in terms of color, size, proportion,
style, and quality.
The proposed WTF will be affixed to a replacement street light pole that matches
other street light poles located along Hawthorne Blvd. in terms of color, size,
proportion, style, and quality. The canister will be painted a concrete color to match
the light pole. All cables and wires will be routed directly into the pole with no loops
or exposed cables, and all cables will be clipped at the antenna-meeting point and
contained within the canister and the shroud that connects the canister to the top of
the pole.
12.18.080(A)(1)(c): Facilities shall be located such that views from a residential
structure are not significantly impaired. Facilities shall also be located in a manner
that protects public views over city view corridors, as defined in the city's general
plan, so that no significant view impairment results in accordance with this code
including Section 17.02.040 (View Preservation and Restoration). This provision
shall be applied consistent with local, state and federal law.
The Project does not result in a significant view impairment to surrounding
residences nor will create a significant view impairment from the public view corridor
located along Hawthorne Blvd., as identified in the City's General Plan.
12.18.080(A)(3): Traffic Safety. All facilities shall be designed and located in such a
manner as to avoid adverse impacts to traffic safety.
The proposed Project involves a replacement streetlight pole with the installation of
antennas encased in a canister shroud that will be mounted to the top of a
replacement streetlight pole. No portion of the antenna will be over the drivable road
and the height of the replacement streetlight pole will not distract motorists or
pedestrians. Additionally, the related mechanical equipment will be vaulted
underground to avoid traffic safety impacts.
12.18.080(A)(4): Blending Methods. All facilities shall have subdued colors and non-
reflective materials that blend with the materials and colors of the surrounding area
and structures.
P.C. Resolution No. 2018-16
Page 5 of 21
E-5
The proposed replacement streetlight pole will consist of a color and material that is
subdued and non-reflective. Further, it will be the same as the existing streetlight
pole and other streetlight poles in the general area.
12.18.080(A)(5): Equipment. The Applicant shall use the least visible equipment
possible. Antenna elements shall be flush mounted, to the extent feasible. All
antenna mounts shall be designed so as not to preclude possible future collocation
by the same or other operators or carriers. Unless otherwise provided in this section,
antennas shall be situated as close to the ground as possible.
The Project includes the installation of antennas encased in a canister shroud
measuring 2' tall and 14.6" in diameter to the top of a replacement streetlight pole
that will not exceed a maximum height of 36', as measured to the top of the canister,
with mechanical equipment that will be vaulted within the parkway. The canister
would be visible to the public, but it screens the antenna and cables from the public's
view. In order to accommodate additional antennas, the height of the streetlight pole
would have to be increased by approximately 5' to accommodate collocation
because of the size of the panel antennas combined with there being a need to
provide a separation of at least 1' between antenna panels for functionality purposes.
The design does not preclude the possibility of collocation by the same or other
operators or carriers but it may not always minimize visual impact.
12.18.080(A)(6)(a): Facilities shall be located consistent with Section 12. 18.200
Location Restrictions) unless an exception pursuant to Section 12.18.190
Exceptions) is granted.
The proposed location is within the PROW of an arterial street as identified in the
City's General Plan. As such, an exception is not required in this case.
12. 18.080(A)(6)(b): Only pole-mounted antennas shall be permitted in the right-of-
way. All other telecommunications towers are prohibited, and no new poles are
permitted that are not replacing an existing pole. (For exceptions see subparagraph
6)(h) below and sections 12.18.190 (Exceptions) and 12.18.220 (State or Federal
Law).) Sections 12.18.080(6)(c) through (t) are not applicable.
The proposal meets this finding because it involves a replacement streetlight pole.
12.18.080(A)(6)(d): Light Poles. The maximum height of any antenna shall not
exceed four feet above the existing height of a light pole. Any portion of the antenna
P.C. Resolution No. 2018-16
Page 6 of 21
E-6
or equipment mounted on a pole shall be no less than 16% feet above any drivable
road surface.
The antennas are not proposed to be installed on an existing streetlight pole but
rather on a replacement light pole. The height of the antennas will be approximately
2' above the height of the new streetlight pole. No portion of the antenna or
equipment is less than 16W above the drivable road surface.
12.18.080(A)(6)(e): Replacement Poles. If an Applicant proposes to replace a pole
in order to accommodate a proposed facility, the pole shall be designed to resemble
the appearance and dimensions of existing poles near the proposed location,
including size, height, color, materials and style to the maximum extent feasible.
The proposed replacement streetlight pole will match the appearance, in terms of
color, size and dimensions of the existing pole and all other streetlight poles in the
immediate area. The replacement pole will be approximately 5' taller than the
existing pole and other poles on the street, but will continue to resemble the existing
pole in terms of size, color, and materials.
12.18.080(A)(6)(f): Pole mounted equipment, exclusive of antennas, shall not
exceed six cubic feet in dimension.
There will not be pole mounted equipment, excluding antennas. The related
mechanical equipment will be vaulted underground.
12.18.080(A)(6)0): All cables, including, but not limited to, electrical and utility
cables, shall be run within the interior of the pole and shall be camouflaged or hidden
to the fullest extent feasible.
All cables and wires are conditioned to be short, encased in the canister and the
shroud, and directly routed to the pole in order to be hidden from view with no loops,
exposed cables, splitters or unsightly wires.
12.18.080(A)(7): Space. Each facility shall be designed to occupy the least amount
of space in the right-of-way that is technically feasible.
The replacement streetlight pole is similar in dimension to the existing streetlight pole
and is approximately 5' taller than the existing pole measured to the base of the
canister to accommodate the 2' tall canister and the tapered shroud. The placement
of the antennas within the canister will occupy limited air space above the right-of-
P.C. Resolution No. 2018-16
Page 7 of 21
E-7
way. The supporting mechanical equipment will be undergrounded within a vault
necessary to house the equipment. This space is the least amount of space that is
technically feasible for equipment owned by AT&T.
12.18.080(A)(8): Wind Loads. Each facility shall be properly engineered to withstand
wind loads as required by this code or any duly adopted or incorporated code. An
evaluation of high wind load capacity shall include the impact of modification of an
existing facility.
Based on the information submitted by the Applicant, the Planning Commission finds
that the proposed installation complies with all building codes related to wind loads.
12.18.080(A)(9): Obstructions. Each component part of a facility shall be located so
as not to cause any physical or visual obstruction to pedestrian or vehicular traffic,
incommode the public's use of the right-of-way, or safety hazards to pedestrians and
motorists and in compliance with Section 17.48.070 (Intersection Visibility) so as not
to obstruct the intersection visibility triangle.
The Project design, height and size, including the undergrounding of the mechanical
equipment, will not cause an obstruction to the public's use of the PROW, does not
constitute a safety hazard and/or does not interfere with the City-defined intersection
visibility triangle because replacement streetlight pole provides the same lighting,
and setback parameters applicable to other streetlight poles, and the related
mechanical equipment will be undergrounded.
12.18.080(A)(10): Public Facilities. A facility shall not be located within any portion
of the public right-of-way interfering with access to a fire hydrant, fire station, fire
escape, water valve, underground vault, valve housing structure, or any other public
health or safety facility.
The installation, including the undergrounding of the mechanical equipment, will not
interfere with fire hydrants, fire stations, water lines or any other public health or
safety facilities as determined by the Public Works Department. Furthermore, part
of the plan check review process and site inspections, Public Works staff will ensure
that the Project will not interfere with any of the stated utilities.
12.18.080(A)(11): Screening. All ground-mounted facility, pole-mounted equipment,
or walls, fences, landscaping or other screening methods shall be installed at least
18 inches from the curb and gutter flow line.
P.C. Resolution No. 2018-16
Page 8of21
E-8
The Project does not have pole-mounted equipment, excluding the antennas. The
related mechanical equipment will be undergrounded.
12.18.080(A)(12): Accessory Equipment. Accessory Equipment. Not including the
electric meter, all accessory equipment shall be located underground, except as
provided below.
The related accessory equipment, including the meter, will be located underground.
12.18.080(A)(13): Landscaping. Where appropriate, each facility shall be installed
so as to maintain and enhance existing landscaping on the site, including trees,
foliage and shrubs. Additional landscaping shall be planted, irrigated and maintained
by applicant where such landscaping is deemed necessary by the city to provide
screening or to conceal the facility.
Conditions have been added requiring the installation of landscaping within parkway
to help soften, as well as screen, the appearance of the Project.
12.18.080(A)(14): Signage. No facility shall bear any signs or advertising devices
other than certification, warning or other signage required by law or permitted by the
city.
The facility does not include any signs or advertising devices other than certification,
warning or other signage required by law.
12.18.080(A)(15)(a-e): Lighting.
The facility does not include any such lighting other than the luminaire on the light
pole.
C. If applicable, the Applicant has demonstrated its inability to locate on existing
infrastructure.
This finding is not applicable as the proposed WTF antenna is proposed to be
installed on a replacement streetlight pole that's currently an existing infrastructure.
D. The Applicant has provided sufficient evidence supporting the Applicant's
claim that it has the right to enter the public right-of-way pursuant to state or
P.C. Resolution No. 2018-16
Page 9of21
E-9
federal law, or the Applicant has entered into a franchise agreement with the
city permitting them to use the public right-of-way.
The Applicant has submitted to the City a Right of Way Use Agreement (RUA)
entered into with the City in 2011, which allows the Applicant to install wireless
antennas in the PROW. Further, the Applicant has submitted a Certificate of Public
Convenience and Necessity (CPCN) issued by the California Public Utilities
Commission (CPUC) which provides that the Applicant has been authorized to install
wireless telecommunications infrastructure in the PROW.
E. The Applicant has demonstrated the proposed installation is designed such
that the proposed installation represents the least intrusive means possible
and supported by factual evidence and a meaningful comparative analysis to
show that all alternative locations and designs identified in the application
review process were technically infeasible or not available.
Ten alternative locations including the original location at Cartier Drive and
Chartres Drive, were studied. Many of these locations were not viable and a few
others required poles to be 65' to 85' in height. The proposed location is now on
a major arterial which meets the objective of the Code to avoid local residential
streets. This new location is set back from nearby residences and is the least
intrusive means compared to the alternatives that are within residential
neighborhoods with no existing appropriate vertical infrastructure that can
accommodate the facility.
There is technology that is possible to use to reduce the size of the antenna, but
that would require a greater number of facilities, including the introduction of new
pole structures, throughout the community to provide the Applicant's coverage and
capacity objective. The supporting mechanical equipment will be vaulted meeting
the objective of installing the least intrusive facility. Other locations and designs
considered for purposes of filling the coverage gap claimed by the Applicant will
be more intrusive than the Project because:
The location utilizes an existing or replacement pole as opposed to
installing a new pole.
The location is preferred to the Applicant's original location because it is
further away from houses, located on an arterial street, involves a
replacement streetlight pole, and is located adjacent to tall mature trees
and existing buildings.
A smaller or lower pole could be utilized, but it would require a multiplicity
of wireless poles in the coverage area as claimed by the Applicant and
P.C. Resolution No. 2018-16
Page 10 of 21
E-10
discussed by the City's RF Consultant, as opposed to having one AT&T
WTF in this area.
Staff looked at other design options from other(non-AT&T) carriers. While
some carriers offer antenna panels that may be smaller in overall size,
such designs from other carriers are not engineered to carry the
bandwidths owned by AT&T.
Section 3: Conditions regarding any of the requirements listed above which the
Planning Commission finds to be necessary to protect the health, safety and general
welfare, have been included in the attached Exhibit A
Section 4: The Project is exempt from review under the California
Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") because the Project constitutes a small scale
installation of new a new facility (14 CCR § 15303(d)).
Section 5: For the foregoing reasons and based on the information and findings
included in the Staff Report, Minutes and other records of proceedings, the Planning
Commission of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes hereby conditionally recommends that
the City Council approve the WTFP application for the proposed installation at the
southwest intersection of Hawthorne Boulevard and Los Verdes Drive (ASG NO. 33).
P.C. Resolution No. 2018-16
Page 11 of 21
E-11
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 8th day of May 2018, by the
following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS LEON, NELSON, PERESTAM, SAADATNEJADI, VICE
CHAIRMAN BRADLEY, AND CHAIRMAN JAMES
NOES: NONE
RECUSALS: NONE
ABSTENTIONS: NONE
ABSENT: NONE
William J. me
Chairman
Ara Mihranian, CP
Community Development Director; and,
Secretary of the Planning Commission
P.C. Resolution No. 2018-16
Page 12 of 21
E-12
EXHIBIT "A"
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
WTF ASG NO. 33
HAWTHORNE BOULEVARD
AT THE INTERSECTION OF LOS VERDES DRIVE
General Conditions:
1.Prior to obtaining a permit from the Public Works Department to install the street
light pole, the Applicant and the property owner shall submit to the City a
statement, in writing, that they have read, understand, and agree to all conditions
of approval contained in this Resolution. Failure to provide said written statement
within ninety (90) days following the date of this approval shall render this approval
null and void.
2. The Applicant shall indemnify, protect, defend, and hold harmless, the City, and/or
any of its officials, officers, employees, agents, departments, agencies, and
instrumentalities thereof, from any and all claims, demands, lawsuits, writs of
mandamus, and other actions and proceedings (whether legal, equitable,
declaratory, administrative or adjudicatory in nature), and alternative dispute
resolutions procedures (including, but not limited to arbitrations, mediations, and
other such procedures) (collectively "Actions"), brought against the City, and/or
any of its officials, officers, employees, agents, departments, agencies, and
instrumentalities thereof, that challenge, attack, or seek to modify, set aside, void,
or annul, the action of, or any permit or approval issued by, the City and/or any of
its officials, officers, employees, agents, departments, agencies, and
instrumentalities thereof (including actions approved by the voters of the City), for
or concerning the Project.
3.Prior to conducting any work in the public right of way (PROW), such as for curb
cuts, dumpsters, temporary improvements and/or permanent improvements, the
Applicant shall obtain an encroachment permit from the Director of Public Works.
4. Approval of this permit shall not be construed as a waiver of applicable and
appropriate zoning regulations, or any Federal, State, County and/or City laws and
regulations. Unless otherwise expressly specified, all other requirements of the
City of Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code (RPVMC) shall apply.
5. The Public Works Director or Director of Community Development are authorized
to make minor modifications to the approved plans and any of the conditions of
approval if such modifications will achieve substantially the same results as would
strict compliance with the approved plans and conditions. Otherwise, any
substantive change to the Project shall require approval of a revision by the final
P.C. Resolution No. 2018-16
Page 13 of 21
E-13
body that approved the original Project, which may require new and separate
environmental review.
6.Failure to comply with and adhere to all of these conditions of approval may be
cause to revoke the approval of the Project pursuant to the RPVMC.
7.If the Applicant has not obtained approvals and/or permits from the Departments
of Public Works and/or Community Development for the approved Project or not
commenced the approved Project within one year of the final effective date of this
Resolution, approval of the Project shall expire and be of no further effect unless,
prior to expiration, a written request for extension is filed with the Community
Development Department and approved by the Director of Community
Development.
8.In the event that any of these conditions conflict with the recommendations and/or
requirements of another permitting agency or City department, the stricter standard
shall apply.
9. The construction site and adjacent public and private properties and streets shall
be kept free of all loose materials resembling trash and debris in excess of that
material used for immediate construction purposes. Such excess material may
include, but not be limited to: the accumulation of debris, garbage, lumber, scrap
metal, concrete asphalt, piles of earth, salvage materials, abandoned or discarded
furniture, appliances or other household fixtures.
10. Permitted hours and days for construction activity are 7:00 AM to 6:00 PM, Monday
through Friday, 9:00AM to 5:00PM on Saturday, with no construction activity
permitted on Sundays or on the legal holidays specified in Section 17.96.920 of
the Rancho Palos Verdes Development Code. During demolition, construction
and/or grading operations, trucks shall not park, queue and/or idle at the Project
site or in the adjoining street rights-of-way before 7AM Monday through Friday and
before 9AM on Saturday, in accordance with the permitted hours of construction
stated in this condition. When feasible to do so, the construction contractor shall
provide staging areas on-site to minimize off-site transportation of heavy
construction equipment. These areas shall be located to maximize the distance
between staging activities and neighboring properties, subject to approval by the
building official.
11. All grading, landscaping and construction activities shall exercise effective dust
control techniques, either through screening and/or watering.
12. Prior to commencement work, the Applicant shall obtain approval of a haul route,
if applicable, from the Director of Public Works.
P.C. Resolution No. 2018-16
Page 14 of 21
E-14
13. All construction sites shall be maintained in a secure, safe, neat and orderly
manner, to the satisfaction of the City's Inspector. All construction waste and
debris resulting from a construction, alteration or repair of the Project shall be
removed on a daily basis by the contractor or property owner.
14. Unless otherwise designated in these conditions, all construction shall be
completed in substantial conformance with the plans stamped APPROVED by the
City (Public Works and Community Development Departments) with the effective
date of this Resolution.
15. The mock-up shall be removed within seven (7) days after all appeal periods have
been exhausted.
Project-specific Conditions:
16. This approval allows for the following:
A. Install a WTF at the southwest intersection of Hawthorne Boulevard and
Los Verdes Drive,
B. Decommission and remove an existing 28'-5"tall streetlight pole with a mast
arm and luminaire to be replaced with a 36'tall streetlight pole, as measured
to the top of the canister, with an antenna encased in a canister measuring
2' tall and 14.6" in diameter,
C. Install vaulted underground mechanical equipment in the PROW.
17. The proposed Project is subject to the following Conditions to the satisfaction of
the Director of Public Works and the Director of Community Development:
o The proposed WTF shall be installed on a replacement streetlight pole that
shall match other light standards in the area in terms of color, size,
proportion, style, and quality. The canister and canister shroud shall be
professionally painted and maintained to match the streetlight pole and
other streetlight poles located along Hawthorne Blvd.
o The Applicant shall install landscaping in the parkway near the proposed
installation to screen the equipment consistent with existing landscaping.
o The facility shall be designed and located in such a manner as to avoid
adverse impacts on traffic safety; construction and operation of the facility
shall comport with a duly-approved traffic control plan as required.
P.C. Resolution No. 2018-16
Page 15 of 21
E-15
o Colors and materials shall be subdued and non-reflective, and shall be the
same as the existing light standard and other lights standards in the nearby
area.
o All cables and wires shall be directly routed to the pole and encased within
the pole and shroud, and hidden from view. No loops, exposed cables,
splitters or unsightly wires shall be permitted.
o No cable or wires shall be visible.
o All ground-mounted facilities including mechanical equipment, or walls,
fences, landscaping or other screening methods shall be installed at least
18 inches from the curb and gutter flow line.
o All accessory equipment shall be located underground including meter
boxes and cabinets.
o The vault cover shall be painted green to match the ground covering in the
parkway.
o The facility shall be installed so as to maintain and enhance existing
landscaping on the site, including trees, foliage and shrubs. Additional
landscaping shall be planted, irrigated and maintained by Applicant where
such landscaping is feasible and deemed necessary by the City to provide
screening or to conceal the facility.
o The facility shall not bear any signs or advertising devices other than
certification, warning or other signage required by law or permitted by the
City.
o The facility shall not be illuminated except for the existing streetlight
luminaire. All other illumination shall be restricted pursuant to RPVMC
12.18.080(A)(15).
o Noise:
Backup generators shall only be operated during periods of power
outages, and shall not be tested on weekends or holidays, or
between the hours of 7:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m.
At no time shall equipment noise from any facility exceed an exterior
noise level of 55 dBA three feet from the source of the noise if the
facility is located in the public right-of-way adjacent to a business,
commercial, manufacturing, utility or school zone; provided,
P.C. Resolution No. 2018-16
Page 16 of 21
E-16
however, that for any such facility located within 500 feet of any
property zoned residential or improved with a residential use, such
equipment noise shall not exceed 45 dBA three feet from the sources
of the noise. The foregoing noise level limitations shall govern
facilities subject to RPVMC Chapter 12.18.080(A)(16) until such time
that a specific noise regulation ordinance is adopted and effective in
this code, at which time such noise ordinance shall govern.
o The facility shall be designed to be resistant to, and minimize opportunities
for, unauthorized access, climbing, vandalism, graffiti and other conditions
that would result in hazardous situations, visual blight or attractive
nuisances. The Public Works Director may require the provision of warning
signs, fencing, anti-climbing devices, or other techniques to prevent
unauthorized access and vandalism when, because of their location and/or
accessibility, a facility has the potential to become an attractive nuisance.
Additionally, no lethal devices or elements shall be installed as a security
device.
o Consistent with current state and federal laws and if permissible under the
same, at the time of modification of the facility, existing equipment shall, to
the extent feasible, be replaced with equipment that reduces visual, noise
and other impacts, including, but not limited to, undergrounding the
equipment and replacing larger, more visually intrusive facilities with
smaller, less visually intrusive facilities.
o The installation and construction of the facility shall begin within one year
after its approval or it will expire without further action by the City.
18. All wireless telecommunications facilities shall comply at all times with the following
operation and maintenance standards:
o Unless otherwise provided herein, all necessary repairs and restoration
shall be completed by the permittee, owner, operator or any designated
maintenance agent within 48 hours:
After discovery of the need by the permittee, owner, operator or any
designated maintenance agent; or
After permittee, owner, operator or any designated maintenance
agent receives notification from the City.
19 Each permittee of a wireless telecommunications facility shall provide the Public
Works Director with the name, address and 24-hour local or toll free contact phone
P.C. Resolution No. 2018-16
Page 17 of 21
E-17
number of the permittee, the owner, the operator and the agent responsible for the
maintenance of the facility ("contact information"). Contact information shall be
updated within seven days of any change.
20 Prior to any construction activities, the permittee shall submit a security instrument
bond or letter of credit as approved by the City Attorney) in an amount determined
by the City to be sufficient to cover all potential costs (including removal costs)
listed herein or in the RPVMC.
21 Prior to permit issuance, the permittee shall provide additional information to
establish that the proposed accessory equipment is designed to be the smallest
equipment technologically feasible. The City may consider equipment installed or
proposed to be installed in other jurisdictions.
22 All facilities, including, but not limited to, telecommunication towers, poles,
accessory equipment, lighting, fences, walls, shields, cabinets, artificial foliage or
camouflage, and the facility site shall be maintained in good condition, including
ensuring the facilities are reasonably free of:
a. General dirt and grease;
b. Chipped, faded, peeling, and cracked paint;
c.Rust and corrosion;
d. Cracks, dents, and discoloration;
e.Missing, discolored or damaged artificial foliage or other camouflage;
f.Graffiti, bills, stickers, advertisements, litter and debris;
g.Broken and misshapen structural parts; and
h. Any damage from any cause.
23 Applicant shall install, to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director or Director of
Community Development, landscaping near the proposed installation of the
vaulted accessory equipment to screen the vaulted equipment consistent with
existing landscaping prior to final inspection.
24 All trees, foliage or other landscaping elements approved as part of the facility shall
be maintained in good condition at all times, and the permittee, owner and operator
P.C. Resolution No. 2018-16
Page 18 of 21
E-18
of the facility shall be responsible for replacing any
damaged, dead or decayed
landscaping. No amendment to any approved landscaping plan may be made until
it is submitted to and approved by the Public Works Director or the Director of
Community Development.
25 The permittee shall replace its facilities, after obtaining all required permits, if
maintenance or repair is not sufficient to return the facility to the condition it was in
at the time of installation.
26 Each facility shall be operated and maintained to comply with all conditions of
approval. Each owner or operator of a facility shall routinely inspect each site to
ensure compliance with the same and the standards set forth in the RPVMC.
27 No person shall install, use or maintain any facility which in whole or in part rests
upon, in or over any public right-of-way, when such installation, use or
maintenance endangers or is reasonably likely to endanger the safety of persons
or property, or when such site or location is used for public utility purposes, public
transportation purposes or other governmental use, or when such facility
unreasonably interferes with or unreasonably impedes the flow of pedestrian or
vehicular traffic including any legally parked or stopped vehicle, the ingress into or
egress from any residence or place of business, the use of poles, posts, traffic
signs or signals, hydrants, mailboxes, permitted sidewalk dining, permitted street
furniture or other objects permitted at or near said location.
28 Unless California Government Code Section 65964, as may be amended,
authorizes the city to issue a permit with a shorter term, a permit for any wireless
telecommunications facility shall be valid for a period of ten years, unless pursuant
to another provision of the RPVMC or these Conditions of Approval, it lapses
sooner or is revoked. At the end of ten years from the date of issuance, such permit
shall automatically expire.
29 A permittee may apply for a new permit within 180 days prior to expiration. Said
application and proposal shall comply with the City's current Code requirements
for WTF's.
30 A WTF is considered abandoned and shall be promptly removed as provided
herein if it ceases to provide wireless telecommunications services for 90 or more
consecutive days unless the permittee has obtained prior written approval from the
Director of Public Works, which shall not be unreasonably denied.
31 The operator of a facility shall notify the City in writing of its intent to abandon or
cease use of a permitted site or a nonconforming site (including unpermitted sites)
within ten days of ceasing or abandoning use. Notwithstanding any other provision
P.C. Resolution No. 2018-16
Page 19 of 21
E-19
herein, the operator of the facility shall provide written notice to the Director of
Public Works any discontinuation of operations of 30 days or more.
32 Failure to inform the Director of Public Works of cessation or discontinuation of
operations of any existing facility as required by this section shall constitute a
violation of any approvals and be grounds for:
a.Litigation;
b. Revocation or modification of the permit;
c. Acting on any bond or other assurance required by the RPVMC or
Conditions of Approval of the permit;
d.Removal of the facilities by the City in accordance with the procedures
established under the RPVMC for abatement of a public nuisance at the
owner's or permitee's expense; and/or
e. Any other remedies permitted by law.
33 Upon the expiration date of the permit, including any extensions, earlier termination
or revocation of the permit or abandonment of the facility, the permittee, owner or
operator shall remove its WTF and restore the site to its natural condition except
for retaining the landscaping improvements and any other improvements at the
discretion of the City. Removal shall be in accordance with proper health and
safety requirements and all ordinances, rules, and regulations of the City. The
facility shall be removed from the property, at no cost or expense to the City.
34 Failure of the permittee, owner or operator to promptly remove its facility and
restore the property within 90 days after expiration, earlier termination or
revocation of the permit, or abandonment of the facility, shall be a violation of these
Conditions of Approval. Upon a showing of good cause, an extension may be
granted by the Public Works Director where circumstances are beyond the control
of the permittee after expiration. Further failure to abide by the timeline provided in
this section shall be grounds for:
a.Prosecution;
b. Acting on any security instrument required by the RPVMC or these
Conditions of Approval;
P.C. Resolution No. 2018-16
Page 20 of 21
E-20
c.Removal of the facilities by the City in accordance with the procedures
established under the RPVMC for abatement of a public nuisance at the
owner's or permitee's expense; and/or
d. Any other remedies permitted by law.
35 In the event the Public Works Director or City Engineer determines that the
condition or placement of a WTF located in the public right-of-way constitutes a
dangerous condition, obstruction of the public right-of-way, or an imminent threat
to public safety, or determines other exigent circumstances require immediate
corrective action (collectively, "exigent circumstances"), the Director or City
Engineer may cause the facility to be removed summarily and immediately without
advance notice or a hearing. Written notice of the removal shall include the basis
for the removal and shall be served upon the permittee and person who owns the
facility within five business days of removal and all property removed shall be
preserved for the owner's pick-up as feasible. If the owner cannot be identified
following reasonable effort or if the owner fails to pick-up the property within 60
days, the facility shall be treated as abandoned property.
36 In the event the City removes a facility in accordance with nuisance abatement
procedures or summary removal, any such removal shall be without any liability to
the City for any damage to such facility that may result from reasonable efforts of
removal. In addition to the procedures for recovering costs of nuisance abatement,
the City may collect such costs from the performance bond or security instrument
posted and to the extent such costs exceed the amount of the security instrument,
collect those excess costs in accordance with the RPVMC. Unless otherwise
provided herein, the City has no obligation to store such facility. Neither the
permittee, owner nor operator shall have any claim if the city destroys any such
facility not timely removed by the permitee, owner or operator after notice, or
removed by the City due to exigent circumstances.
37 Consistent with current state and federal laws and if permissible under the same,
at the time of modification of a WTF, existing equipment shall, to the extent
feasible, be replaced with equipment that reduces visual, noise and other impacts,
including, but not limited to, undergrounding any equipment installed above ground
and replacing larger, more visually intrusive facilities with smaller, less visually
intrusive facilities.
P.C. Resolution No. 2018-16
Page 21of21
E-21
M ICHAEL W.S HONAFELT
Michael.Shonafelt@ndlf.com
File No.
2464.130
1333 N. CALIFONIA BLVD
SUITE 600
WALNUT CREEK, CA 94596
T 925 988 3200
F 925 988 3290
895 DOVE STREET
5TH FLOOR
NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660
T 949 854 7000
F 949 854 7099
3993 HOWARD HUGHES PKWY
SUITE 530
LAS VEGAS, NV 89169
T 702 777 7500
F 702 777 7599
November 29, 2017
VIA EMAIL AND HAND-DELIVERY
Brian Campbell, Mayor
and Members of the City Council
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
30940 Hawthorne Boulevard
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275
brian.campbell@rpvca.gov
Re: Crown Castle: Appeal of Wireless Telecommunications Facility ASG33
Dear Mayor Campbell and Members of the City Council,
This office is legal counsel for Crown Castle NG West LLC (“Crown Castle”) in the
above-referenced appeal (“Appeal”). This letter presents Crown Castle’s legal rights under both
federal and state law and presents an analysis of those rights as they pertain to the Appeal.
1. INTRODUCTION.
At the center of the Appeal is Crown Castle’s application for a Wireless
Telecommunications Facility Permit ASG33 within the City of Rancho Palos Verdes (“City”)
public right-of-way (“ROW”) at the northeast corner of Chartres Drive and Cartier Drive.
(“Project”). The Project is a low-power, small cell telecommunications facility that serves as an
integral and vital part of a larger telecommunications and broadband network in the City.
A. Original Proposal.
As originally proposed the Project would feature a new, 14-foot steel pole with two two-
foot-tall panel antennas topping the pole at 14 feet. (See Exhibit A, Original Design Photo-
simulations.) Radios, which convert light spectrum from fiber-optic cable into radio frequency
(“RF”) spectrum, an SCE power meter and a disconnect box would be located in or on a ground-
mounted cabinet adjacent to the pole. (Ibid.)
Notably, there is little existing vertical infrastructure in the Project area. The
neighborhood feature no streetlights or utility poles. Crown Castle selected a site that is on a
street intersection, in a landscaped parkway at the base of a landscaped slope that buffers the site
from the nearest home, located at 30182 Cartier Drive, and partially buffered by existing trees
and shrubs. The facility would be well outside ocean view corridors from any residence and
would be located entirely in the ROW. (See Exhibit A.)
In its initial staff report for the July 25, 2017, Planning Commission hearing, the Planning
Department Staff (“Staff”) noted that it had conducted view impact analyses of the Project and
F-1
Brian Campbell, Mayor and
Members of the City Council
November 29, 2017
Page 2
concluded that the Project did not impair views from surrounding residences or from Chartres
Drive and Cartier Drive. (See Staff Report: City of Rancho Palos Verdes Planning Commission
(July 25, 2017) at pp. 5-6, 8.) The Staff also concluded that “the proposed installation is likely
the least intrusive location for the wireless telecommunications facility in the immediate area,”
and recommended approval. (Id. at p. 10.) At the July 25, 2017, Planning Commission hearing,
the City’s legal counsel opined that, with the proposed conditions of approval, the Project met
“all” of the City’s application criteria. (See video of proceedings of July 25, 2017,
http://rpv.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=5&clip_id=2851, at 3:17:20.) The Planning
Commission voted to continue the matter to August 22, 2017, meeting to receive information
from the City’s radio frequency consultant.
B. Second Proposed Design.
Based on a range of freewheeling and open-ended comments received from the Planning
Commission on July 25, 2017, and subsequent site walks with the Staff, Crown Castle proposed
moving the pole further to the west, to replace an existing stop sign at the intersection of Cartier
and Chartres Drive with a 14-foot pole capable of accommodating both the stop sign and the
telecommunications antennas, thereby eliminating the need for a new pole in the ROW. The
replacement pole would be 12 inches in diameter and incorporate a 3.5-foot tall, 24-inch
diameter canister at its top. Crown Castle also agreed with a staff recommendation to place the
equipment cabinet underground, in a subterranean vault. (See Photo-simulations of First
Revision, attached as Exhibit B.) For a second time, the Staff recommended approval.
Notwithstanding Crown Castle’s efforts to reduce the visual profile of the Project, the
Planning Commission adopted a motion to deny the Project at its continued hearing on August
22, 2017, with no specific grounds, aside from an ill-defined concern about “setting precedent”
and “cumulative” aesthetic impacts for possible speculative future facilities that have not yet
seen the light of day. The Planning Commission otherwise provided Crown Castle with no
specific direction on what design or location alternatives would be considered less intrusive.
Crown Castle timely filed this appeal to the City Council, pursuant to City of Rancho Palos
Verdes Municipal Code (“RPVMC”) sections 12.18.060 (D) and 17.80.030 (A).
C. Third (Current) Proposal.
In the wake of the Planning Commission’s motion to deny the Project, Crown Castle’s
engineers took a hard look at the Project with an eye toward arriving at a slimmer profile, more
stealth design. Their goal was to see what designs could be feasibly employed to address the
generalized aesthetic concerns raised at the Planning Commission. The constraints faced by
Crown Castle in this endeavor are those posed by the radio frequency (“RF”) objectives that
must be achieved to fill the existing significant gap in service at this location. As Andrew
Afflerbach, Ph.D -- the City’s own RF expert -- noted, “there is no free lunch” with respect to
reducing antenna size. As antennas are reduced in size, so is their effectiveness in achieving RF
coverage objectives. (See Part 3.A.1, below.) For small cell gaps in coverage, such as this, the
tolerances for achieving network objectives are tight.
Nevertheless, the Crown Castle team worked with AT&T to arrive at a yet smaller
canister for the street sign location. The canister would be 14.6 inches in diameter, as opposed to
F-2
Brian Campbell, Mayor and
Members of the City Council
November 29, 2017
Page 3
24 inches in diameter. A tapered skirt at the base of the canister would provide a visual
transition from the canister to the 12-inch pole. The canister would still top out at 14 feet. A
conceptual photo-simulation of this third revised design is attached at Exhibit C. An excerpted
photo-simulation of the Third Design Proposal is presented here:
This third revision represents the smallest design solution for the Project; the reduction in
size and profile has a resultant negative impact on the Project’s ability to fill the significant gap
in service. Crown Castle and AT&T nevertheless are willing to accept the reduced signal
strength to achieve a mutually acceptable solution. As for locational alternatives, no least
intrusive site exists in the Project area. (See discussion, infra, at Part 3 A.)
2. APPLICABLE LEGAL STANDARDS FOR APPROVAL.
A. STATE LAW.
Crown Castle is a “competitive local exchange carrier” (“CLEC”). CLECs qualify as a
“public utility” and therefore have a special status under state law. By virtue of the CPUC’s
issuance of a “certificate of public convenience and necessity” (“CPCN”), CLECs have authority
under state law to “erect poles, posts, piers, or abutments” in the ROW subject only to local
municipal control over the “time, place and manner” of access to the ROW. (Pub. Util. Code, §§
1001, 7901; 7901.1; see Williams Communication v. City of Riverside (2003) 114 Cal.App.4th
642, 648 [upon obtaining a CPCN, a telephone corporation has “the right to use the public
highways to install [its] facilities.”].)
(1) Public Utilities Code Sections 7901, 7901.1.
The CPUC has issued a CPCN which authorizes Crown Castle to construct the Project
pursuant to its regulatory status under state law. Crown Castle’s special regulatory status as a
CLEC gives rise to a vested right under Public Utilities Code section 7901 to use the ROW in the
City to “construct … telephone lines along and upon any public road or highway, along or across
F-3
Brian Campbell, Mayor and
Members of the City Council
November 29, 2017
Page 4
any of the waters or lands within this State” and to “erect poles, posts, piers, or abutments for
supporting the insulators, wires, and other necessary fixtures of their lines, in such manner and at
such points as not to incommode the public use of the road or highway[.]” (Pub. Util. Code, §
7901.) The nature of the vested right was described by one court as follows:
… “[I]t has been uniformly held that [section 7901] is a
continuing offer extended to telephone and telegraph companies to
use the highways, which offer when accepted by the construction
and maintenance of lines constitutes a binding contract based on
adequate consideration, and that the vested right established
thereby cannot be impaired by subsequent acts of the Legislature.
[Citations.]” … Thus, telephone companies have the right to use
the public highways to install their facilities.
(Williams Communications v. City of Riverside, supra, 114 Cal.App.4th at p. 648 quoting
County of L. A. v. Southern Cal. Tel. Co. (1948) 32 Cal.2d 378, 384 [196 P.2d 773].) 1
Given the vested nature of the section 7901 right, Crown Castle contends that a
discretionary use permit -- like the Conditional Use Permit required by the City in this case --
constitutes an unlawful precondition for a CLEC’s entry into the ROW. (See, e.g., Michael W.
Shonafelt, Whose Streets? California Public Utilities Code Section 7901 in the Wireless Age, 35
HASTINGS COMM.&ENT. L. J. 371 (2013).) In a recent case, T-Mobile West LLC v. City and
County of San Francisco (2016) 3 Cal.App.5th 334 [2016 Cal. App. LEXIS 769], the First
Appellate District, Division Five, determined that aesthetic considerations are appropriate in
determining whether a facility “incommodes” the ROW. That case is being appealed to the
California Supreme Court. The court did not decide the specific issue of whether obtaining a
discretionary use permit is a lawful precondition to exercising the section 7901 franchise rights.
Public Utility Code section 7901.1 -- a sister statute to section 7901 -- grants local
municipalities the limited “right to exercise reasonable control as to the time, place, and manner
in which roads, highways, and waterways are accessed[,].” Nevertheless, such controls cannot
have the effect of foreclosing use of the ROW or otherwise prevent the company from exercising
its right under state law to “erect poles” in the ROW. That is because “the construction and
maintenance of telephone lines in the streets and other public places within the City is today a
matter of state concern and not a municipal affair.” (Williams Communication v. City of
Riverside, supra, 114 Cal.App.4th at p. 653.) Moreover, section 7901.1 specifies that such
controls, “to be reasonable, shall, at a minimum, be applied to all entities in an equivalent
manner.” (Ibid., emphasis added.) Accordingly, to the extent that other public utilities are
authorized to use the ROW in the City without having to obtain a discretionary land use permit,
such disparate treatment may run afoul of the “equivalent manner” provision of Public Utilities
Code section 7901.1.
1 Notwithstanding the submittal of this application, Crown Castle reserves its rights under Public Utilities Code
sections 7901 and 7901.1, including the right to proceed with construction of its networks without having to obtain
a local franchise and/or discretionary grant of entry in to the ROW.
F-4
Brian Campbell, Mayor and
Members of the City Council
November 29, 2017
Page 5
On the basis of Crown Castle’s status as a CLEC, and its concomitant rights to the ROW,
the Project is designed as part of an ROW telecommunications system. With respect to the siting
and configuration of the Project, the rights afforded under Public Utilities Code section 7901 and
7901.1 apply. Crown Castle reserves its rights under section 7901 and 7901.1, including, but not
limited to, its right to challenge any approval process, that impedes or infringes on Crown
Castle’s rights as a CLEC.
(2) Government Code Section 65964.1.
Recently, the California Legislature echoed the courts’ oft-repeated declaration that
“the construction and maintenance of telephone lines in the streets and other public places
within the City is today a matter of state concern and not a municipal affair.” (Williams
Communication v. City of Riverside, supra, 114 Cal.App.4th at p. 653.) It did so in the context
of enacting AB 57 in October 2015. AB 57 is codified as Government Code section 65964.1.
Under section 65964.1, if a local government fails to act on an application for a permit to
construct a wireless telecommunications facility within the prescribed Shot Clock timeframes
(150 days for a standalone site and 90 days for a collocation site), the application is deemed
approved by operation of law. When it enacted section 65964.1, the Legislature observed that:
The Legislature finds and declares that a wireless
telecommunications facility has a significant economic
impact in California and is not a municipal affair as that term
is used in Section 5 of Article XI of the California
Constitution, but is a matter of statewide concern.
(Gov. Code, § 65964.1, subd. (c).)
B. FEDERAL LAW.
The approval of the Project also is governed by the federal Telecommunications Act of
1996, Pub. L. No 104-104, 110 Stat. 56 (codified as amend in scattered sections of U.S.C., Tabs
15, 18, 47) (“Telecom Act”). When enacting the Telecom Act, Congress expressed its intent “to
promote competition and reduce regulation in order to secure lower prices and higher quality
services for American telecommunications consumers and encourage the rapid deployment of
new telecommunications technologies.” (110 Stat. at 56.) As one court noted:
Congress enacted the TCA to promote competition and higher
quality in telecommunications services and to encourage the rapid
deployment of new telecommunications technologies. Congress
intended to promote a national cellular network and to secure
lower prices and better service for consumers by opening all
telecommunications markets to competition.
(T-Mobile Central, LLC v. Unified Government of Wyandotte, 528 F.Supp. 2d 1128, 1146-47 (D.
Kan. 2007). One way in which the Telecom Act accomplishes those goals is by reducing
impediments imposed by local governments upon the installation of wireless communications
facilities, such as antenna facilities. (47 U.S.C. § 332(c)(7)(A).) Section 332(c)(7)(B) provides
the limitations on the general authority reserved to state and local governments. Those
limitations are set forth as follows:
F-5
Brian Campbell, Mayor and
Members of the City Council
November 29, 2017
Page 6
(1) State and local governments may not unreasonably discriminate among providers
of functionally equivalent services (§ 332 (c)(7)(B)(i)(I)).
(2) State and local governments may not regulate the placement, construction or
modification of wireless service facilities in a manner that prohibits, or has the
effect of prohibiting, the provision of personal wireless services (better known as
the “effective prohibition clause”) (§ 332 (c)(7)(B)(i)(II)).
(3) State and local governments must act on requests for authorization to construct or
modify wireless service facilities within a reasonable period of time (§ 332
(c)(7)(B)(ii)).
(4) Any decision by a state or local government to deny a request for construction or
modification of personal wireless service facilities must be in writing and
supported by substantial evidence contained in a written record (§ 332
(c)(7)(B)(iii)).
(5) Finally, no state or local government or instrumentality thereof may regulate the
placement, construction or modification of personal wireless service facilities on
the basis of the perceived environmental effects of radio frequency emissions to
the extent that such facilities comply with FCC regulations concerning such
emissions (§ 332 (c)(7)(B)(iv)).
3. UPHOLDING THE PLANNING COMMISSION’S DENIAL WOULD RESULT IN
A VIOLATION OF THE TELECOM ACT’S PROHIBITION OF SERVICE
PROVISION.
As noted above, section 332(c)(7)(B)(i)(II) of the federal Telecom Act bars local
governmental decisions from precluding the provision of wireless services:
The regulation of the placement, construction, and modification of
personal wireless service facilities by any State or local
government or instrumentality thereof—
***
(II) shall not prohibit or have the effect of prohibiting the provision
of personal wireless services.
(47 U.S.C. § 332(c)(7)(B)(i)(II).) In T-Mobile U.S.A. Inc. v. City of Anacortes (9th Cir. 2009)
572 F.3d 987, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals set forth a two-step analysis for determining
whether a local government’s denial has the effect of prohibiting the provision of wireless
telecommunications services in violation of Section 332(c)(7)(B)(i)(II) of the
Telecommunications Act of 1996. In the first step, the applicant must make a showing of a
“significant gap” in service. (Id. at p. 995.) In the second step, the applicant must demonstrate it
has selected the “least intrusive means” to fill that gap in service. (Ibid.) Each prong of the
Prohibition of Service Provision is addressed below.
F-6
Brian Campbell, Mayor and
Members of the City Council
November 29, 2017
Page 7
A. A Significant Gap in Service Exists at the Project Site.
(1) What Is a Significant Gap?
“Significant gap” is a legal term of art developed by the courts to guide a determination
of whether a local government’s decision on an application prohibits a carrier or other wireless
infrastructure developer from providing service. (See, e.g., T-Mobile USA, Inc. v. City of
Anacortes, supra, 572 F.3d at p. 995.) Put simply, “a locality could violate the [Telecom Act’s]
effective prohibition clause if it prevented a wireless provider from closing a ‘significant gap’ in
service coverage.” (Id., at p. 995; MetroPCS, Inc. v. City of San Francisco (9th Cir., 2005) 400
F.3d 715, 731.)
Significant gap is “a contextual term that must take into consideration the purposes of the
Telecommunications Act itself.”(T-Mobile Northeast LLC v. Loudoun County Bd. of
Supervisors (4th Cir. 2014) 748 F.3d 185,198.). Among the goals of the Telecom Act are to
“promote competition,” “secure . . . higher quality services for American telecommunications
consumers,” and “encourage the rapid deployment of new telecommunications technologies.”
(Ibid.) Significant gap therefore is a fluid term that invariably rests on a fact-intensive analysis.
The interpretation of the term must progress with the rapid development of wireless broadband
technologies in order to advance the larger goals of the Telecom Act to “encourage the rapid
deployment of new telecommunications technologies.” On that basis, the courts have counseled
against “mechanical” or fixed formulas that become outdated and therefore impede technological
advancement. (See, e.g., see T-Mobile Northeast LLC v. Fairfax Cnty. Bd. of Supervisors (4th
Cir., 2012) 672 F.3d 259, 267 [“reviewing courts should not be constrained by any specific
formulation, but should conduct a fact-based analysis of the record, as contemplated by the
[Telecom Act].”].) As the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals noted in a recently published
decision:
The technology of 10 years ago may have only supported wireless
service that had substantial gaps in coverage and high dropped call
rates. But the technology of today supports increased wireless
coverage with reduced rates of dropped calls. On this trajectory,
the technology of tomorrow may support 100% coverage with no
dropped calls, and the focus may instead be on subtler issues about
the nature and strength of signals for particular uses. The [TCA]
clearly intends to encourage this technological development and, to
that end, to protect such development from interference from state
and local governments when approving the design and location of
facilities. This is manifested in § 332(c)(7)(B). Thus, in construing
the level of service protected by § 332(c)(7)(B)(i)(II), we must take
a contextual approach and cannot rely on any specific formula.
(T-Mobile Northeast LLC v. Loudoun County Bd. of Supervisors, supra,748 F.3d at p. 198.)
In keeping with the principle of cutting-edge concepts of what constitutes a “significant
gap,” the courts have upheld the use of in-building minimum standards as a proper benchmark
for determining whether a significant gap in coverage exists. (See, e.g., MetroPCS Inc. v. City
F-7
Brian Campbell, Mayor and
Members of the City Council
November 29, 2017
Page 8
and County of San Francisco (N.D.Cal. 2006) 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 43985 [“careful reading of
existing cases that contain a significant gap analysis persuades the court that any analysis should
include consideration of a wireless carrier’s in-building coverage.”]; see also, AT&T Mobility
Servs., LLC v. Vill. of Corrales (10th Cir., 2016) 642 Fed. Appx. 886, 891.)
Moreover, it is important to note that a telephone network may reveal adequate
“coverage” but inadequate “capacity.” The distinction between coverage and capacity may be
better understood in terms of transportation infrastructure. A two-lane road may provide
“coverage,” but once that two lane road experiences high-levels of urban rush-hour traffic,
coverage becomes irrelevant, since the road does not have sufficient “capacity” to handle the
higher traffic volumes. In other words, a network may have adequate coverage, but inadequate
capacity, which results in the same problem: an impermissibly high level of dropped and
blocked calls.
The need to fill the existing significant coverage gap to a level that allows adequate in-
building coverage and to address growing capacity demands is underscored by the greater
numbers of customers dropping their landlines and relying solely on wireless
telecommunications for their phone service. The following additional considerations promote a
policy of employing more sophisticated notions of significant gap:
(a) In a recent international study, the United States dropped to fifteenth in the world
in broadband penetration, well behind South Korea, Japan, the Netherlands and
France.2
(b) Over 50 percent of all American homes are now wireless only.3
(c) More and more civic leaders and emergency response personnel cite lack of a
robust wireless network as a growing public safety risk. The number of 911 calls
placed by people using wireless phones has significantly increased in recent years.
It is estimated that about 70 percent of 911 calls are placed from wireless phones,
and that percentage is growing.4
(d) Data demand from new smartphones and tablets is leading to a critical deficit in
spectrum, requiring more wireless antennas and infrastructure. According to a
2011 report, wireless data traffic was 110 percent higher than in the last half of
2010. Similarly, AT&T reports that its wireless data volumes have increased 30-
fold since the introduction of the iPhone.5
(e) Wireless data traffic grew by a factor of 300 percent between 2010 and 2015.6
2 Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Directorate for Science, Technology, and
Industry, “Broadband Statistics,” (June 2010): <www.oecd.org/sti/ict/broadband>.
3 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for
Health Statistics (Released 05/2017); https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nhis/earlyrelease/wireless201705.pdf.
4 Federal Communications Commission (2012) http://www.fcc.gov/guides/wireless-911-services.
5 Executive Office of the President Council of Economic Advisors (White House, Feb. 2012) at 2-6.
6 https://www.ctia.org/industry-data/wireless-quick-facts.
F-8
Brian Campbell, Mayor and
Members of the City Council
November 29, 2017
Page 9
Global mobile data traffic is expected to reach a seven-fold increase by 2021.7
Determining what constitutes a “significant gap” therefore must incorporate metrics that
are based -- not just on basic cell phone coverage -- but also on network capacity for advanced
communications technologies. As more Americans depend on wireless communications
technologies and smartphones, reliable network capacity and in-building coverage are critical.
These are some of the reasons courts now recognize that a “significant gap” can exist on the
basis of capacity needs and inadequate in-building coverage. (See, e.g., MetroPCS Inc. v. City
and County of San Francisco, supra, U.S. Dist. LEXIS 43985; T-Mobile Central, LLC v. Unified
Government of Wyandotte County (D.Kans. 2007) 528 F.Supp.2d 1128.)
Wireless telecommunications are the primary mode of communication for Americans in
the twenty-first century. That fact is amply demonstrated by the latest surveys in the industry,
which reveal that over 49 percent of American homes rely wholly on wireless devices.8 The
marginal service currently at the Project site is inadequate to sustain current -- and future --
communications technologies and demands. In a recent report, the “National 911 Program,”
which is an office housed within the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, found that
“76 percent of consumers are using cellular phones to make calls to 911 while 21percent are
using wireline phones.”9 On that ground alone, this is a matter of health, safety and welfare for
the residents and visitors of the City. Notably, 911 service over systems like this is not just
limited to AT&T users -- the networks carries 911 calls of any mobile user.
(2) Data Support a Significant Gap at the Project Site.
Applying the above principles to the Project, data reveal that the project service area has
insufficient signal strength to address current data demand and statistical projections of data
demand. Crown Castle has undertaken drive-test data of existing conditions at the Project site in
two different frequencies that will be employed at the Project site. (See ASG33-Proposed
Primary and Alternate Node Analysis, attached as Exhibit D.) Exhibit D identifies levels of
service in terms of the following criteria:
7 http://digitalconqurer.com/news/cisco-mobile-visual-networking-index-vni-forecasts-seven-fold-increase-global-
mobile-data-traffic-2016-21/
8 See CTIA Annual Survey Report (http://www.ctia.org/industry-data/ctia-annual-wireless-industry-survey)
9 See https://www.911.gov/pdf/National-911-Program-2015-ProfileDatabaseProgressReport-021716.pdf
F-9
Brian Campbell, Mayor and
Members of the City Council
November 29, 2017
Page 10
(a) Outdoor Only –Unacceptable Coverage (Black) (>-105 dBm);
(b) In-Vehicle Only – Unacceptable Coverage (Blue) (>-95 dBm);
(c) Suburban/In-building, Acceptable (Red) (>-85 dBm);
(d) Urban/In-building, Acceptable (Yellow) (>-75 dBm);
(e) Dense Urban/Deep In-building, Optimum (Light/Dark Green) (>-75 dBm).
Each level is characterized by a minimum signal level. The key to coverage is having a signal
level strong-enough to allow customers to maintain contact with the network so they can make
and maintain calls. Signal level, the strength of the radio signal customers’ devices receive, is
measured in negative decibels per milliwatt (“dBm”). The larger the negative dBm number, the
weaker the coverage. For example, a signal strength of -100 dBm is weaker than a signal
strength of -80 dBm.
As a general rule, a minimum signal level of-75 dBM (yellow) is required for adequate
in-building coverage and a minimum of -95 dBm (blue) is required for adequate in-vehicle
coverage. As noted, the courts have upheld the use of in-building minimum standards as a
proper benchmark for determining whether a significant gap in coverage exists. (See, e.g.,
Verizon Inc. v. City and County of San Francisco (N.D.Cal. 2006) 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 43985
[“careful reading of existing cases that contain a significant gap analysis persuades the court that
any analysis should include consideration of a wireless carrier’s in-building coverage.”].)
Generally, there is a direct correlation between the height of the antenna and the strength of the
service. In this case, Crown Castle’s design seeks to strike a balance between service penetration
and antenna height by targeting a minimum service level of -75 dBM, which is sufficiently
powerful to reach indoor users while avoiding poles that may be too obtrusive.
Slide 4 of Exhibit D reveals existing RF coverage at the project site.
F-10
Brian Campbell, Mayor and
Members of the City Council
November 29, 2017
Page 11
This slide reveals that that the existing coverage varies from -95 to -120 dBm. In the
existing condition, users in the service area will experience an increasingly higher percentage of
blocked and dropped calls for outside use, with a commensurate decline in signal strength as one
moves toward the inside of existing buildings and homes. Moreover, as more and more uses
connect to the network, the number of dropped and blocked calls will increase, since more users
results in more demand on the network and resultant capacity problems. In short, there is a
serious capacity deficit within the service radius of the Project site. 911 calls in this area would
be unreliable. These conclusions were affirmed by the City’s own RF consultant, Andrew
Afflerbach, of CTC Technology & Energy, at the Planning Commission’s August 22, 2017,
meeting. CTC conducted its own significant gap analysis at the Project site and affirmed that the
levels of service are lower than the acceptable standards for “modern telecommunications
service.” Afflerbach also said the following: “I will tell you this that a 911 call could be
confusing in that area because it could end up in Santa Monica … [i]t’s not a stable
environment.” (2:50:00)
If the Project is approved and allowed put on-air, however, coverage and capacity
problems will be addressed, as can be seen in Exhibit D, Slide 6, which is excerpted here:
F-11
Brian Campbell, Mayor and
Members of the City Council
November 29, 2017
Page 12
The Project will provide sufficient signal strength to ensure not only adequate signal for
mobile and outdoor users, but reliable in-building coverage for all those customers who may
seek to abandon their home landlines. The Project also will add sufficient capacity to address
new data demands from smartphones and tablets. Wireless customers must be able to count on a
level of service commensurate with that once provided by their dropped landlines. Such
considerations are relevant -- if not critical -- to a determination of significant gap. (See, e.g., T-
Mobile Central LLC v. City of Fraser (E.D. Mich. 2009) 675 F.Supp.2d 721 [considering failure
rate of 911 emergency calls.])
One of the grounds invoked by the Planning Commission for denial of the Project was a
conclusory assertion that Crown Castle failed to demonstrate a significant gap in service. The
drive test data presented in Exhibit D refute that contention. Nor has this data been seriously
controverted by any competent evidence. Indeed, the City’s own RF expert concurred with the
conclusion of Crown Castle’s RF engineers that a significant gap indeed exists at the project site.
The Planning Commission is charged with addressing zoning and planning issues, not the
regulation of RF, which is a matter preempted by the Federal Communications Commission
(FCC). The City engaged CTC as an independent RF expert pursuant to Rancho Palos Verdes
Municipal Code section 12.18.050. For areas -- such as RF coverage issues -- that are outside
the scope of the Planning Commission’s competency and jurisdiction it should look to the
conclusions of its hired consultants and the actual data compiled by RF experts, not the
unsupported assertions of project opponents.
F-12
Brian Campbell, Mayor and
Members of the City Council
November 29, 2017
Page 13
B. Crown Castle Has Demonstrated That It Has Chosen the Least Intrusive
Means to Fill the Significant Gap in Service.
To establish least intrusive means, the applicant establishes a “prima facie showing of
effective prohibition by submitting a comprehensive application, which includes consideration of
alternatives, showing that the proposed [wireless communications facility] is the least intrusive
means of filling a significant gap.” (T-Mobile U.S.A. Inc. v. City of Anacortes,supra, 572 F.3d
at p. 995.) After that, the burden shifts to the local government: “When a locality rejects a prima
facie showing, it must show that there are some potentially available and technologically feasible
alternatives.” (Id. at p. 998.) The court further explained that the applicant then has an
opportunity to “dispute the availability and feasibility of the alternatives favored by the locality.”
(Ibid.)
Because Crown Castle is a CLEC entitled to construct its facilities in the ROW, its small-
cell and DAS networks are inherently ROW systems. On that basis, Crown Castle examined
those alternatives theoretically available to it in the ROW. The analysis below demonstrates why
the Project qualifies as the “least intrusive means” of filling the significant gap in service.
(1) Height and Location of the Project.
The antenna height and location of the Project were chosen to provide the minimum
signal level needed to meet critical coverage and capacity needs in the service area. Despite the
technical limitations of a low-profile, small-cell system, Crown Castle seeks to maximize the
coverage of each node location, since maximization of the node performance equates to a lower
overall number of facilities and a less intrusive system. Accordingly, the Project location was
chosen to provide an effective relay of signal from adjacent sites, so that ubiquitous coverage of
the minimum signal level is provided throughout the service area with the minimum number of
facilities.
The selected location maximizes the RF coverage of the Project and minimizes
interference/overlap with the other facilities, resulting in a lower overall number of facilities and
a less intrusive system. The ROW is ideal for the Project from an aesthetic standpoint because
the ROW is an area already impacted with utilities and similar features typical of developed
roadways.
Importantly, the currently proposed location and design were identified after exhausting
other possible locations in the relatively small DAS coverage area or “polygon.” (See Exhibit D,
Slide 5.) Crown Castle’s RF engineers examined five alternative locations in the immediate
Project area, as depicted in Slide 7 of Exhibit D and as excerpted here:
F-13
Brian Campbell, Mayor and
Members of the City Council
November 29, 2017
Page 14
While four of those five sites achieve RF objectives, only the proposed site is adequately
buffered from existing residences by expansive ROW landscaped parkways as can be seen
below:
F-14
Brian Campbell, Mayor and
Members of the City Council
November 29, 2017
Page 15
The proposed site best utilizes existing foliage, slope topography and the ROW
landscaping, which buffers the Project from surrounding homes on all sides. While the Project
may be visible at the proposed location, it is far less intrusive than other potential sites that are
immediately adjacent to residences. Only one other possible location is removed from homes. It
is located at Hawthorne Boulevard and Rhone Drive. It is too far away from the Project site and
is too far downhill from that site to qualify as a viable alternative location. (See Exhibit D, Slide
__.) the Crown Castle has satisfied its burden of proof under the burden-shifting process
established by T-Mobile U.S.A. Inc. v. City of Anacortes.
(2) Small Cells and DAS as Least Intrusive Means Technology, by Design.
Even apart from the careful siting of the facilities that are part of a small cells or DAS
system, the technological configuration of small cells and DAS nodes is inherently minimally
intrusive by design. Small cells and DAS were developed as a smaller-scale solution to the
larger macro-site or cell tower. It therefore represents a significant technological advance in the
development of reduced- profile wireless transmission devices. The nodes are designed to be
smaller scale and lower power to allow them to integrate more easily into their surroundings and
thereby render them less aesthetically intrusive. While it is impossible to make the facilities
invisible, each facility will be designed to blend with existing features in the road to the extent
feasible.
Crown Castle’s small cell network qualifies as the “least intrusive means” of filling the
identified significant gap for the following reasons, among others:
(a) Crown Castle small cells utilize the latest in wireless infrastructure technology,
incorporating smaller, low-power facilities instead of using larger -- and
sometimes more obtrusive -- cell towers;
(b) Crown Castle small cells utilize the ROW, thereby avoiding intrusions into
private property or undeveloped sensitive resource areas;
(c) Crown Castle small cells allow for collocation by multiple carriers, thereby
avoiding proliferation of nodes;
(d) Crown Castle small cells strike a balance between antenna height and coverage in
order to minimize visual impacts;
(e) Crown Castle small cells carefully are carefully spaced to effectively relay signal
with a minimum of facilities; and
(f) Crown Castle small cells utilize existing vertical elements in the ROW, such as
utility poles, or slim-profile new poles, thereby minimizing intrusions into the
ROW.
(3) The Project Location and Design Qualify as the Least Intrusive Means
of Filling the Demonstrated Significant Gap in Coverage.
The Project utilizes small cell technology, which, as discussed above, was designed to
avoid the need for larger profile macro-sites. As for the location, the Project is buffered from
residences on all sides by existing foliage, slope topography and the ROW landscaping. The
F-15
Brian Campbell, Mayor and
Members of the City Council
November 29, 2017
Page 16
Staff confirmed that the location was the least intrusive of all the other potentially feasible
locations. The facility, as revised, will replace an existing pole (a stop sign) and thereby
eliminate the need for a new pole in the ROW. It will be painted to blend into the existing
setting.
Moving this site to other locations elsewhere in the small RF objective ring would place
the facility directly adjacent to residences, resulting in greater visual impacts. Crown Castle
engaged in an exhaustive investigation of potential locations for the Project. If the City can
identify another feasible alternative location that allows Crown Castle to achieve its coverage
objective for this Project, it would be happy to investigate that location. Crown Castle submits,
however, that it already engaged in that search and that the proposed location is the least
intrusive location available.
4. CONCLUSION.
For the foregoing reasons, the City Council should grant this Appeal and approve the
Project. We look forward to answering your questions on the day of the hearing.
Very truly yours,
Michael W. Shonafelt
MWS
Enclosures
cc: Ara Mihranian, Director, Planning and Zoning Division, City of Rancho Palos Verdes,
aram@rpvca.gov
Christy Lopez, Special Counsel, City of Rancho Palos Verdes,
christy.lopez@bbklaw.com
Dave Aleshire, City Attorney, City of Rancho Palos Verdes, daleshire@awattorneys.com
Lizbeth Wincele, Government Relations Counsel – Southern California, Crown Castle,
Lizbeth.Wincele@crowncastle.com
Daniel Schweizer, Director, Government Relations, West Region, Crown Castle,
Daniel.Schweizer@crowncastle.com
Stephen Garcia, Manager Government Relations, Crown Castle,
Stephen.Garcia@crowncastle.com
Aaron Snyder, Government Relations Specialist-DAS & Small Cells-Southern California,
Crown Castle, Aaron.Snyder@crowncastle.com
7223446.1
F-16
EXHIBIT A
F-17
SHEET INDEX
SHEET NO.DESCRIPTION
VICINITY MAP
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
TITLE SHEET
DETAILS & NOTES
SITE PLAN
SITE PHOTOS
PROJECT TEAM
TITLE SHEET
GENERAL CONTRACTOR NOTES:
CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY ALL PLANS AND
EXISTING DIMENSIONS AND CONDITIONS ON THE
JOB SITE AND SHALL IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY THE
ENGINEER IN WRITING OF ANY DISCREPANCIES
BEFORE PROCEEDING WITH THE WORK OR
RESPONSIBLE FOR SAME.
PROJECT SUMMARY
ASG33
ACROSS FROM 6480 CHARTRES DR
RANCHO PALOS VERDES, CA
PROJECT MANAGER:
CROWN CASTLE NG WEST, INC
300 SPECTRUM CENTER DRIVE, STE 1200
IRVINE, CA 92618
HEIDI PAYNE
(949) 300-9493
HEIDI.PAYNE@CROWNCASTLE.COM
NODE ENGINEER:
COASTAL COMMUNICATIONS
5841 EDISON PLACE, SUITE 200
CARLSBAD, CA 92008
TODD THREW
(760) 929-0910 EXT. 101
TODD@COASTALCOMMINC.COM
T-1
T-1
D-1
S-1
P-1
N.T.S.
DETAILS & NOTESD-2
DETAILS & NOTESD-3
DATE
ASG33
ACROSS FROM
6480 CHARTERS DR
RANCHO PALOS VERDES, CA
SITE NAME & ADDRESS:
PHASE II
CLIENT:
ASG33
242727
CROWN CASTLE PROJECT NO.
TICKET #______________________
UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERT
1-800-227-2600
CALL AT
LEAST TWO
DAYS BEFORE
YOU DIG
PROPRIETARY INFORMATION
THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS
SET OF DRAWINGS IS PROPRIETARY AND
CONFIDENTIAL TO AT&T. ANY USE OR
DISCLOSURE OTHER THAN AS IT RELATES
TO AT&T IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
SHEET NO.
DRAWN BY: DRAFT DATE: APPROVED BY:
RG 10/26/16 TT
REVISION / ISSUE
PREPARED BY:
5841 EDISON PLACE, SUITE 200
CARLSBAD, CA 92008
PHONE: (760) 929-0910
FAX: (760) 929-0936
Communications
Telecommunications Engineering
Coastal
CROWN
CASTLE
300 SPECTRUM CENTER DR, STE. 1200
IRVINE, CA 92618
www.crowncastle.com
PHOTOSIMS-2
·INSTALL NEW 14' 0" HIGH CONCRETE POLE (POLE TO BE PAINTED DARK
GREEN).
·INSTALL CISH-51 CABINET WITH SIDE MOUNT METER & POWER DISCONNECT
BOX WITH (2) ML IONS INSIDE.
·INSTALL (2) 21.4" ANTENNAS #HPA-65F-BUU-H2 WITH MOUNTING BRACKET
#MBK-03.
·EQIPMENT AND ANTENNAS TO BE PAINTED TO MATCH POLE.
·142' TRENCH FOR POWER.
FIBER MANAGER:
CROWN CASTLE NG WEST LLC
300 SPECTRUM CENTER DR STE. 1200
IRVINE, CA 92618
ALFREDO ARZUBIAGA
(818) 939-5579
ALFREDO.ARZUBIAGA@CROWNCASTLE.COM
DETAILS & NOTESD-4
POLE PROFILEP-2
DETAILS & NOTESD-5
SIGN OFF
TITLE SIGNATURE DATE
NETWORK REAL ESTATE
PROJECT MANAGER
CONSTRUCTION MANAGER
RADIO FREQUENCY
NODE ENGINEER:
COASTAL COMMUNICATIONS
5841 EDISON PLACE, SUITE 200
CARLSBAD, CA 92008
TODD THREW
(760) 929-0910 EXT. 101
TODD@COASTALCOMMINC.COM
F-18
LEGEND
SYMBOL DESCRIPTION
EXISTING
STATION POINTS
(100' INCREMENTS)
EXISTING UTILITY POLE
EXISTING RIGHT OF WAY
EXISTING CURB RAMP
PCC SIDEWALK
PROPOSED
C&G
R/W
EXISTING CENTER LINEL
EXISTING CENTER LINEL
EXISTING ASPHALT CURBA/C
EOP
EXISTING BERMBERM
NEW POLE
SUBDIVISION BOUNDARYS/B
EXISTING FIRE HYDRANT
EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL NOTES:
TEMPORARY EROSION/SEDIMENT CONTROL, PRIOR TO COMPLETION OF FINAL IMPROVEMENTS, SHALL BE
PERFORMED BY THE CONTRACTOR OR QUALIFIED PERSON AS INDICATED BELOW:
1. ALL REQUIREMENTS OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES ``LAND DEVELOPMENT MANUAL, STORM
WATER STANDARDS" MUST BE INCORPORATED INTO THE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF THE
PROPOSED PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS CONSISTENT WITH THE EROSION CONTROL PLAN AND/OR WATER
POLLUTION CONTROL PLAN (WPCP), IF APPLICABLE.
2. FOR STORM DRAIN INLETS, PROVIDE A GRAVEL BAG SILT BASIN IMMEDIATELY UPSTREAM OF INLET AS
INDICATED ON DETAILS.
3. THE CONTRACTOR OR QUALIFIED PERSON SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR CLEANUP OF SILT AND MUD ON
ADJACENT STREET(S) AND STORM DRAIN SYSTEM DUE TO CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY.
4. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE SILT AND DEBRIS AFTER EACH MAJOR RAINFALL.
5. EQUIPMENT AND WORKERS FOR EMERGENCY WORK SHALL BE MADE AVAILABLE AT ALL TIMES DURING
THE RAINY SEASON.
6. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL RESTORE ALL EROSION/SEDIMENT CONTROL DEVICES TO WORKING ORDER TO
THE SATISFACTION OF THE CITY ENGINEER OR RESIDENT ENGINEER AFTER EACH RUN-OFF PRODUCING
RAINFALL.
7. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL ADDITIONAL EROSION/SEDIMENT CONTROL MEASURES AS MAY BE
REQUIRED BY THE RESIDENT ENGINEER DUE TO UNFORESEEN CIRCUMSTANCES, WHICH MAY ARISE.
8. ALL EROSION/SEDIMENT CONTROL MEASURES PROVIDED PER THE APPROVED IMPROVEMENT PLAN
SHALL BE INCORPORATED HEREON. ALL EROSION/SEDIMENT CONTROL FOR INTERIM CONDITIONS SHALL
BE DONE TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE RESIDENT ENGINEER.
9. ALL REMOVABLE PROTECTIVE DEVICES SHOWN SHALL BE IN PLACE AT THE END OF EACH WORKING DAY
WHEN RAIN IS IMMINENT.
10. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL ARRANGE FOR WEEKLY MEETINGS DURING OCTOBER 1ST TO APRIL 30TH FOR
PROJECT TEAM (GENERAL CONTRACTOR, QUALIFIED PERSON, EROSION CONTROL SUBCONTRACTOR IF
ANY, ENGINEER OF WORK, OWNER/DEVELOPER AND THE RESIDENT ENGINEER) TO EVALUATE THE
ADEQUACY OF THE EROSION/SEDIMENT CONTROL MEASURES AND OTHER RELATED CONSTRUCTION
ACTIVITIES.
NOTES:
1. CONTRACTOR TO POTHOLE ALL UTILITY CROSSINGS.
2. CONTRACTOR TO PLACE SANDBAGS AROUND ANY/ALL STORM DRAIN INLETS TO PREVENT
CONTAMINATED WATER.
3. SPOILS PILE WILL BE COVERED AND CONTAINED AND STREET WILL BE SWEPT AND CLEANED AS
NEEDED.
4. CONTRACTOR TO REPAIR DAMAGED PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE CITY
ENGINEER.
5. CURB & GUTTER TO BE PROTECTED IN PLACE. SIDEWALK TO BE REPLACED TO THE SATISFACTION
OF THE CITY ENGINEER.
6. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL RESTORE THE ROADWAY BACK TO ITS ORIGINAL CONDITION
SATISFACTORY TO THE CITY ENGINEER INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO PAVING, STRIPING, BIKE
LANES, PAVEMENT LEGENDS, SIGNS, AND TRAFFIC LOOP DETECTORS.
7. SIDEWALK SHALL BE RESTORED/REPLACED PER CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES STANDARD
DRAWINGS.
8. PEDESTRIAN RAMP WILL NOT BE DISTURBED.
ROW GROUND CONSTRUCTION NOTES:
1. GROUND CONSTRUCTION TO REMOVE/CLEAN ALL DEBRIS, NAILS, STAPLES, OR NON-USED
VERTICALS OFF THE POLE.
2. ALL CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH MUNICIPAL, COUNTY, STATE,
FEDERAL, GO95 AND GO128 STANDARDS AND REGULATIONS.
3. CALL USA 48 HOURS PRIOR TO EXCAVATING AT (800) 227-2600 OR 811.
4. ALL LANDSCAPING TO BE RESTORED TO ORIGINAL CONDITION OR BETTER.
5. ALL EQUIPMENT TO BE BONDED.
6. METERING CABINET REQUIRES 36" CLEARANCE AT DOOR OPENING.
7. CAULK CABINET BASE AT PAD.
NORMAL LOCATION OF
UNDERGROUND UTILITIES NOTES:
1. LOCATION AND DEPTH OF EXISTING AND PROPOSED UTILITIES MUST BE PROVIDED BY THE
SUBDIVIDER AND SHOWN ON ANY PLANS SUBMITTED TO THE DEPT. OF PUBLIC WORKS FOR
APPROVAL.
2. CHANGES MAY BE PERMITTED BY THE DEPT. OF PUBLIC WORKS IN CASES OF CONFLICTING
FACILITIES.
3. CONFLICTS BETWEEN UTILITY COMPANIES FACILITIES, EXISTING AND PROPOSED, MUST BE
MUTUALLY RESOLVED BY THE UTILITY COMPANIES.
4. FOR COMMERCIAL SIDEWALKS, THE FIRE HYDRANT SHALL BE PLACED WITHIN THE SIDEWALK
1'-6" BEHIND FACE OF CURB.
5. MAXIMUM 2" DIAMETER GAS MAINS MAY BE PLACED IN JOINT UTILITIES TRENCH SUBJECT TO
APPROVAL OF CITY ENGINEER (IN TRACTS).
CALIFORNIA STATE CODE COMPLIANCE:
ALL WORK AND MATERIALS SHALL BE PREFORMED AND INSTALLED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CURRENT
EDITIONS OF THE FOLLOWING CODES AS ADOPTED BY THE LOCAL GOVERNING AUTHORITIES. NOTHING IN
THESE PLANS IS TO BE CONSTRUCTED TO PERMIT WORK NOT CONFORMING TO THESE CODES:
·CALIFORNIA ADMINISTRATIVE CODE (INCLUDING TITLES 24 & 25) 2010
·2010 CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODES WHICH ADOPTS THE 2010 UBC, 2010 UMC, 2010 UPC AND THE 2010
NEC.
·BUILDING OFFICIALS & CODE ADMINISTRATORS (BOCA)
·2010 CALIFORNIA MECHANICAL CODE
·ANSI/EIA-222-F LIFE SAFETY CODE NFPA-101
·2010 CALIFORNIA PLUMBING CODE
·2010 CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL CODE
·2010 LOCAL BUILDING CODE
·CITY/COUNTY ORDINANCES
ACCESSIBILITY REQUIREMENTS:
FACILITY IS UNMANNED AND NOT FOR HUMAN HABITATION. HANDICAPPED ACCESS REQUIREMENTS DO
NOT APPLY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE 2010 CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE.
FCC NOTE:
THIS WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITY COMPLIES WITH FEDERAL STANDARDS FOR RADIO
FREQUENCY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TELECOMMUNICATION ACT OF 1996 AND SUBSEQUENT
AMENDMENTS AND ANY OTHER REQUIREMENTS IMPOSED BY STATE OR FEDERAL REGULATORY
AGENCIES.
D-1
DETAILS & NOTES
DATE
ASG33
ACROSS FROM
6480 CHARTERS DR
RANCHO PALOS VERDES, CA
SITE NAME & ADDRESS:
PHASE II
CLIENT:
ASG33
242727
CROWN CASTLE PROJECT NO.
TICKET #______________________
UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERT
1-800-227-2600
CALL AT
LEAST TWO
DAYS BEFORE
YOU DIG
PROPRIETARY INFORMATION
THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS
SET OF DRAWINGS IS PROPRIETARY AND
CONFIDENTIAL TO AT&T. ANY USE OR
DISCLOSURE OTHER THAN AS IT RELATES
TO AT&T IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
SHEET NO.
DRAWN BY: DRAFT DATE: APPROVED BY:
RG 10/26/16 TT
REVISION / ISSUE
PREPARED BY:
5841 EDISON PLACE, SUITE 200
CARLSBAD, CA 92008
PHONE: (760) 929-0910
FAX: (760) 929-0936
Communications
Telecommunications Engineering
Coastal
CROWN
CASTLE
300 SPECTRUM CENTER DR, STE. 1200
IRVINE, CA 92618
www.crowncastle.com
TRENCH AND FIBER
CONDUIT (PVT)
EXISTING EDGE OF
PAVEMENT
EXISTING CURB &
GUTTER
F-19
32.2"
817mm
9.6"
245mm
8.6"
218mm
Front SideSide
Top
SCALE
N.T.S.
Electrical
Power Supply
Mains Power, Vac. ......................................85 to 264
......................................115 or 230
Power consumption, watts ......................................1150
Optical
Connectors ..............................................................E2000/APC 8°
Optical return loss, dB .............................................45 minimum
Fiber type, mm ..........................................................Single mode E9/125
Optical link budget, dB .............................................0 to 10
Composite input power
@ OTRx master side, dBm
1900 MHz .....................+5 composite
1700 / 2100 MHz...........+5 composite
Interface
BTS Side
Number of connectors
1900 MHz .....................4
1700/2100 MHz ............4
System optimized for BTS power, dBm
.......................................33
.......................................43
Antenna Port
Connector .......................................7/16 Female
Output power .......................................See band specification
Return loss, dB .......................................15
1700/2100 MHz (AWS)
Frequency range, MHz
Uplink............................1710 to 1755
Downlink........................2110 to 2155
Output power per carrier, dBm*
Number of Carriers 1 2 4 8
GSM 45 42 39 36
CDMA 45 42 39 36
UMTS 45 42 39 36
LTE 45 42** 39 36
Spurious emission ..............................................< -13 dBm / 1 MHz
Adjacent channel power, dBc .........................................-48
DL output tolerance over frequency, dB ............................±1
DL output tolerance over temperature, dB ..........................0.5***
Input ICP3, dBm
ICP3 optimized ..............................-12
Noise figure optimized ..............................-18
Noise figure, dB
ICP3 optimized ..............................7
..............................11 max.
Noise figure optimized ..............................4.5
..............................6 max.
1900 MHz (AWS)
Frequency range, MHz
Uplink............................1850 to 1915
Downlink........................1930 to 1995
Output power per carrier, dBm*
Number of Carriers 1 2 4 8
GSM 45 42 39 36
CDMA 45 42 39 36
UMTS 45 42 39 36
LTE 45 42** 39 36
Spurious emission ..............................................< -13 dBm / 1 MHz
DL output tolerance over frequency, dB ............................±1
DL output tolerance over temperature, dB ..........................0.5***
Input ICP3, dBm
ICP3 optimized ..............................-12
Noise figure optimized ..............................-18
Noise figure, dB
ICP3 optimized ..............................7
..............................11 max.
Noise figure optimized ..............................4.5
..............................6 max.
ANDREW ION-M17HP/19HP
MULTI-BAND, MULTI-OPERATOR
REMOTE OPTICAL SYSTEM
System Supervision and Control
Commands ...............................RF on/off
External control parts
Alarms ...............................Summary
...............................Power Supply
...............................Optical UL and DL failure
...............................Temperature
Supervision ...............................Output power on a per-
channel and per-band
basis (optional)
Mechanical****
Height, width, depth mm (in)...............................817 x 245 x 218
(32.2 x 9.61 x 8.6)
Weight, kg (lb)...............................40 (88.2)
Environmental
Operation temperature range .............................-33° C to +50° C
Ingress protection RF part...................IP67
Fan part.................IP55
* Applicable to single modulation mode only
** 3db power reduction @ < 5MHz carrier bandwith
*** With active cooling
**** Spacing required 40 mm (1.58 in) around unit
****With passive cooling maximum temperature +40° C
All figures are typical values.
3
12.6
10.1
49.0
22.5
22.5
NOTES:
CUBE APPROX. WEIGHT W/PEDESTAL = 105 LBS
59.1
CISH-51 PEDESTAL
SIDE VIEW FRONT VIEW SIDE VIEW
* ALL DIMENSIONS ARE IN INCHES UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED.SCALE
N.T.S.2SCALE
N.T.S.1
CONCRETE
FOUNDATION
STEEL POLE
FINISH GRADE
GROUND ROD INSTALLATION FOR STEEL POLE
TYPICAL SECTION: N.T.S.
#5 (5/8" X 8') COPPER
CLAD GROUND ELECTRODE
Cu GROUND CLAMP
FCI No. GBL3-T8,
TYCO No. 83749-1,
OR EQUAL
BAREN Cu GROUND
CONDUCTOR
D-2
DETAILS & NOTES
DATE
ASG33
ACROSS FROM
6480 CHARTERS DR
RANCHO PALOS VERDES, CA
SITE NAME & ADDRESS:
PHASE II
CLIENT:
ASG33
242727
CROWN CASTLE PROJECT NO.
TICKET #______________________
UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERT
1-800-227-2600
CALL AT
LEAST TWO
DAYS BEFORE
YOU DIG
PROPRIETARY INFORMATION
THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS
SET OF DRAWINGS IS PROPRIETARY AND
CONFIDENTIAL TO AT&T. ANY USE OR
DISCLOSURE OTHER THAN AS IT RELATES
TO AT&T IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
SHEET NO.
DRAWN BY: DRAFT DATE: APPROVED BY:
RG 10/26/16 TT
REVISION / ISSUE
PREPARED BY:
5841 EDISON PLACE, SUITE 200
CARLSBAD, CA 92008
PHONE: (760) 929-0910
FAX: (760) 929-0936
Communications
Telecommunications Engineering
Coastal
CROWN
CASTLE
300 SPECTRUM CENTER DR, STE. 1200
IRVINE, CA 92618
www.crowncastle.com
F-20
SCALE
N.T.S.5
POWER METER
METER CABINET WTR PART # 2 POLE 120/140 SINGLE PHASE
4' X 1"Ø LIQUID TIGHT METALLIC FLEX CONDUIT
1" Ø LIQUID TIGHT CONNECTOR STR POINT
1" Ø LIQUID TIGHT CONNECTOR- 45°
5/16" X 1" BOLT - STAINLESS STEEL
C
D
B
12"
A
1" Ø BOTTOM
KNOCK OUT
8"
6"
4 3/4"G
F
E
UL APPROVED ONLY
5/16" LOCK WASHER - STAINLESS STEEL
5/16" NUT - STAINLESS STEEL
NOTES:
1. TOP KNOCK OUT WITH LIQUID FLEX 45° AND STRAIGHT CONNECTORS AVAILABLE TO POWER UTILITY CREW
CONNECTION.
2. BOTTOM KNOCK OUT FOR CONNECTING TO CUSTOMER FUSE DISCONNECT BOX.
3. HEIGHT MAY BE DETERMINED BY POWER UTILITY.
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
PARTS LIST
CALLOUT QTY DESCRIPTION CALLOUT QTY DESC.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
SCALE
N.T.S.6
SCALE
N.T.S.8SCALE
N.T.S.7
HPA-65F-BUU-H2
4 SCALE
N.T.S.
SCALE
N.T.S.9
TECHNICAL CHARACTERISTICS
AMPERE RATING 70A
MAXIMUM SINGLE POLE CIRCUITS 4
WIDTH 4.88 INCHES
APPLICATION DESIGNED TO MEET RESIDENTIAL, COMMERCIAL AND
INDUSTRIAL REQUIREMENTS TO PROTECT ELECTRICAL
SYSTEMS, EQUIPMENT AND PEOPLE.
SPACES 2
WIRE SIZE #12 TO 3 AWG(AL) - #14 TO 4 AWG(CU)
MAXIMUM TANDEM CIRCUIT BREAKERS 2
VOLTAGE RATING 120/240VAC
WIRING CONFIGURATION 3-WIRE
PHASE 1-PHASE
DEPTH 4.00 INCHES
HEIGHT 9.38 INCHES
BUS MATERIAL TIN PLATED ALUMINUM
COVER TYPE SURFACE
CATALOG REFERENCE NUMBER 1100CT9901
ENCLOSURE TYPE OUTDOOR/RAINPROOF
ENCLOSURE RATING NEMA 3R
GROUNDING BAR ORDER SEPARATELY
APPROVALS UL LISTED
SHORT CIRCUIT CURRENT RATING 10KA
MAIN TYPE FIXED - FACTORY INSTALLED MAIN LUGS
SQUARE D BY SCHNEIDER ELECTRIC
LOAD CENTER, 70A
(MODEL #QO24L70RB)
SHIPPING AND ORDERING
CATEGORY 00101 - LOAD CENTERS, 1 PHASE, NEMA1 & 3R, 2 - 8
CIRCUIT, TYPE QO
DISCOUNT SCHEDULEDE 3A
ARTICLE NUMBER 785901785132
PACKAGE QUANTITY 1
WEIGHT 5 LBS.
AVAILABILITY CODE S
RETURNABILITY Y
D-3
DETAILS & NOTES
DATE
ASG33
ACROSS FROM
6480 CHARTERS DR
RANCHO PALOS VERDES, CA
SITE NAME & ADDRESS:
PHASE II
CLIENT:
ASG33
242727
CROWN CASTLE PROJECT NO.
TICKET #______________________
UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERT
1-800-227-2600
CALL AT
LEAST TWO
DAYS BEFORE
YOU DIG
PROPRIETARY INFORMATION
THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS
SET OF DRAWINGS IS PROPRIETARY AND
CONFIDENTIAL TO AT&T. ANY USE OR
DISCLOSURE OTHER THAN AS IT RELATES
TO AT&T IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
SHEET NO.
DRAWN BY: DRAFT DATE: APPROVED BY:
RG 10/26/16 TT
REVISION / ISSUE
PREPARED BY:
5841 EDISON PLACE, SUITE 200
CARLSBAD, CA 92008
PHONE: (760) 929-0910
FAX: (760) 929-0936
Communications
Telecommunications Engineering
Coastal
CROWN
CASTLE
300 SPECTRUM CENTER DR, STE. 1200
IRVINE, CA 92618
www.crowncastle.com
30" ROUND
NOTE:
GROUND ROD SHALL BE MINIMUM
0.625" DIA. x 9' LONG. COPPER CLAD.
MINIMUM 3" EXPOSURE AT TOP OF
FOUNDATION WITHIN BOLT CIRCLE.
COVERING.
ALL REBAR SHALL HAVE 3" MINIMUM
EMBEDMENT IN CONCRETE).
3"
TYP
R4
R3
R1
C3
C2
C1
A5
A4
A3
A2
A1
G2
G1
AS GIVEN IN SPECIFICATIONS ASTM A449.
ANCHOR BOLTS SHALL BE 4-1" DIAMETER.
WITH 6" MINIMUM STUB-OUT.
STUB UP TO WITHIN 4" FROM HAND
12" MIN. FROM THE ANCHOR BOLTS TO
HOOPS SHALL BE #4 X 18" I.D., SPACED
4" O/C FROM TOP OF FOUNDATION TO
HOOPS SHALL BE #4 X 18" I.D., SPACED
42" MAXIMUM BURIAL
36" MINIMUM BURIAL
1/4"
ANCHOR BOLTS SHALL BE EMBEDDED 33"
BOLT CIRCLE DIAMETER TO MATCH POLE
ROUND PIER
BOTTOM OF FOUNDATION.
END OF ANCHOR BOLTS.
VERTICAL REBAR SHALL BE (7) #6
REINFORCEMENT:
EQUALLY SPACED INSIDE OF HOOPS.
GROUND ROD:
ANCHOR BOLTS:
CONDUIT:
HOLE.
BE RGS OR SCH 80 PVC, AS REQUIRED.
SERVICE AND FEED CONDUITS SHALL
GALVANIZED, INSIDE THE FOUNDATION,
CONDUIT SHALL BE RIGID STEEL.
CONNECTOR
BY THE MANUFACTURER.
BOLT PROJECTION AS RECOMMENDED
MINIMUM, BELOW STREET GRADE (63"
TWO PLACES BELOW THE NUT,
EMBEDDED IN FOUNDATION.
NUTS WITH THE THREADS STAKED AT
ANCHOR BOLTS SHALL HAVE HEADS, OR
BASEPLATE.
CLR
NOT TO SCALE
R2
GROUND LEVEL
24" ROUND
A2
C3 A1 A5
R1
R2
F3
F4 R3
A4 A3
C1
C2
NEW POLE FOUNDATION
POUR FOOTING
AGAINST
UNDISTURBED
MATERIAL
CONCRETE TO
BE32/50 MIX
ANCHOR BOLTS TO BE
SUPPLIED BY POLE
MANUFACTURER
5' DEPTHF3
2' DEPTHF4
CST TAPERED STEEL POLE
(CST SERIES)
Bottom
Dia.
Ancor
Bolts
(4)
5.0
S
SQUARE
"H"
12"
CAP
DRILL FOR SIDE
MTG - AS REQD
1/8"
1/4"
3/16"
4" x 6" Handhole
w/cover plate
w/GRD Lug @ 90°
1-1/2" R.
BC
Top
Dia.
'S' Base
Size
Dimensions
Bolt
Circle
Maximum Loading
Max.
Fix.
Weight
100 MPH
Proj.
Area
80 MPH
Proj.
Area
6.4
6.4
7.1
7.1
8.1
8.5
9.1
3.0
3.5
3.5
3.8
3.7
3.8
3.6
3.3
10-1/2
10-1/2
10-1/2
10-1/2
10-1/2
11-1/2
11-1/2
13"
11"
11"
11"
11"
11"
11"
11-1/2"
13"
3/4 x 24
3/4 x 36
3/4 x 36
3/4 x 36
1 x 36
1 x 36
1 x 36
1 x 36
300
450
450
450
450
450
450
450
8
8
8
8
6
6
4
4
12
12
12
12
12
8
8
8
CST-15
Design
Number
Mounting
Height
"H"
15'
CST-18
CST-20
CST-22
CST-25
CST-30
CST-35
CST-40
18'
20'
22'
25'
30'
35'
40'
TENON - AS REQD
MBK-03
F-21
SCALE
N.T.S.1110SCALE
N.T.S.
SCALE
N.T.S.12
D-4
DETAILS & NOTES
DATE
ASG33
ACROSS FROM
6480 CHARTERS DR
RANCHO PALOS VERDES, CA
SITE NAME & ADDRESS:
PHASE II
CLIENT:
ASG33
242727
CROWN CASTLE PROJECT NO.
TICKET #______________________
UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERT
1-800-227-2600
CALL AT
LEAST TWO
DAYS BEFORE
YOU DIG
PROPRIETARY INFORMATION
THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS
SET OF DRAWINGS IS PROPRIETARY AND
CONFIDENTIAL TO AT&T. ANY USE OR
DISCLOSURE OTHER THAN AS IT RELATES
TO AT&T IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
SHEET NO.
DRAWN BY: DRAFT DATE: APPROVED BY:
RG 10/26/16 TT
REVISION / ISSUE
PREPARED BY:
5841 EDISON PLACE, SUITE 200
CARLSBAD, CA 92008
PHONE: (760) 929-0910
FAX: (760) 929-0936
Communications
Telecommunications Engineering
Coastal
CROWN
CASTLE
300 SPECTRUM CENTER DR, STE. 1200
IRVINE, CA 92618
www.crowncastle.com
24"
6" TO 12"
ASPHALT TRENCH DETAIL
(PRIVATE)
(N.T.S.)
NEW ASPHALT CONCRETE
EXISTING A.C.
AND BASE
PROPOSED (1) 3" CONDUIT
NATIVE SOIL
ORIGINAL MATERIAL BACKFILL
6" MAX.
18" MIN.
INSTALLATION NOTES:
-CUT 6" MAX. WIDTH X 18" + DEPTH TRENCH
-BACKFILL WITH THE ORIGINAL MATERIAL FROM THE
TRENCH
-RESTORE THE SURFACE
(1) 3" PVC CONDUIT
IN DIRT - PRIVATE
TYPICAL SECTION
(N.T.S.)
EXISTING SCE VAULT
4" MIN.
TRENCH
24" MIN.
GREENBELT
(1) 3" DUCT
PUNCH THRU CROSS SECTION
TYPICAL SECTION: N.T.S.
R/WLC
PAVEMENT
18'
EX. CURB
& GUTTER
12" MIN.
12'
SIDEWALK
F-22
SCALE
N.T.S.13 D-5
DETAILS & NOTES
DATE
ASG33
ACROSS FROM
6480 CHARTERS DR
RANCHO PALOS VERDES, CA
SITE NAME & ADDRESS:
PHASE II
CLIENT:
ASG33
242727
CROWN CASTLE PROJECT NO.
TICKET #______________________
UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERT
1-800-227-2600
CALL AT
LEAST TWO
DAYS BEFORE
YOU DIG
PROPRIETARY INFORMATION
THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS
SET OF DRAWINGS IS PROPRIETARY AND
CONFIDENTIAL TO AT&T. ANY USE OR
DISCLOSURE OTHER THAN AS IT RELATES
TO AT&T IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
SHEET NO.
DRAWN BY: DRAFT DATE: APPROVED BY:
RG 10/26/16 TT
REVISION / ISSUE
PREPARED BY:
5841 EDISON PLACE, SUITE 200
CARLSBAD, CA 92008
PHONE: (760) 929-0910
FAX: (760) 929-0936
Communications
Telecommunications Engineering
Coastal
CROWN
CASTLE
300 SPECTRUM CENTER DR, STE. 1200
IRVINE, CA 92618
www.crowncastle.com
F-23
SITE PHOTOS
KEY MAPA 12 O'CLOCK VIEW- FROM THE SOUTHWESTB
3 O'CLOCK VIEW- FROM THE NORTHWESTC 9 O'CLOCK VIEW- FROM THE SOUTHEASTD S-1
DATE
ASG33
ACROSS FROM
6480 CHARTERS DR
RANCHO PALOS VERDES, CA
SITE NAME & ADDRESS:
PHASE II
CLIENT:
ASG33
242727
CROWN CASTLE PROJECT NO.
TICKET #______________________
UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERT
1-800-227-2600
CALL AT
LEAST TWO
DAYS BEFORE
YOU DIG
PROPRIETARY INFORMATION
THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS
SET OF DRAWINGS IS PROPRIETARY AND
CONFIDENTIAL TO AT&T. ANY USE OR
DISCLOSURE OTHER THAN AS IT RELATES
TO AT&T IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
SHEET NO.
DRAWN BY: DRAFT DATE: APPROVED BY:
RG 10/26/16 TT
REVISION / ISSUE
PREPARED BY:
5841 EDISON PLACE, SUITE 200
CARLSBAD, CA 92008
PHONE: (760) 929-0910
FAX: (760) 929-0936
Communications
Telecommunications Engineering
Coastal
CROWN
CASTLE
300 SPECTRUM CENTER DR, STE. 1200
IRVINE, CA 92618
www.crowncastle.com
SITE LOCATION
C
H
A
R
T
R
E
S
D
R
CARTI
E
R
D
R
F-24
PHOTOSIM
S-2
DATE
ASG33
ACROSS FROM
6480 CHARTERS DR
RANCHO PALOS VERDES, CA
SITE NAME & ADDRESS:
PHASE II
CLIENT:
ASG33
242727
CROWN CASTLE PROJECT NO.
TICKET #______________________
UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERT
1-800-227-2600
CALL AT
LEAST TWO
DAYS BEFORE
YOU DIG
PROPRIETARY INFORMATION
THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS
SET OF DRAWINGS IS PROPRIETARY AND
CONFIDENTIAL TO AT&T. ANY USE OR
DISCLOSURE OTHER THAN AS IT RELATES
TO AT&T IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
SHEET NO.
DRAWN BY: DRAFT DATE: APPROVED BY:
RG 10/26/16 TT
REVISION / ISSUE
PREPARED BY:
5841 EDISON PLACE, SUITE 200
CARLSBAD, CA 92008
PHONE: (760) 929-0910
FAX: (760) 929-0936
Communications
Telecommunications Engineering
Coastal
CROWN
CASTLE
300 SPECTRUM CENTER DR, STE. 1200
IRVINE, CA 92618
www.crowncastle.com
LOOKING NORTHEAST
ASG33
F-25
12'
D
R
I
V
E
W
A
Y
STA
.
1
0
0
+
8
1
C L
C
&
G
C
&
G
R
/
W
R
/
W
C&
G
R/W
C&G
C&G
R/W
99
101
101
60'
CHARTRES DR STA. 100 + 00
CARTIER DR STA. 100 + 00
CART
I
E
R
D
R
C
H
A
R
T
R
E
S
D
R
SITE LOCATION
INSTALL NEW 14' 0" HIGH CONCRETE POLE (POLE TO BE PAINTED DARK GREEN)
S/E CORNER OF CARTIER DR & CHARTRES DR
(2' B.O.C.) STA. 100 + 25
36'
12'
12'
POINT OF CONNECTION
EXISTING SCE VAULT (9' B.O.C.)
STA. 102 + 08
102
121' ASPHALT TRENCH
(SEE DETAIL 11 ON SHEET D-4)DRI
V
E
W
A
Y
STA
.
1
0
1
+
6
3
C L
2' PUNCH THRU
(SEE DETAIL 12 ON SHEET D-4
3'
15'
4' PUNCH THRU
(SEE DETAIL 12 ON SHEET D-4)
8' DIRT TRENCH
(SEE DETAIL 10 ON SHEET D-4)
12'
36'
12'
60'C&
G
C&
GC&
G
12'
36'
12'
60'CL
C L
C
L
6' DIRT TRENCH
(SEE DETAIL 10 ON SHEET D-4)
INSTALL CISH-51 PEDESTAL WITH SIDE MOUNT METER & (2) ML IONS INSIDE
(2' B.O.C.) STA. 100 + 19
(SEE DETAILS 1 & 3 ON D-2, DETAILS 6 & 7 ON D-3 & DETAIL 13 ON D-5)
P-1
DATE
ASG33
ACROSS FROM
6480 CHARTERS DR
RANCHO PALOS VERDES, CA
SITE NAME & ADDRESS:
PHASE II
CLIENT:
ASG33
242727
CROWN CASTLE PROJECT NO.
TICKET #______________________
UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERT
1-800-227-2600
CALL AT
LEAST TWO
DAYS BEFORE
YOU DIG
PROPRIETARY INFORMATION
THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS
SET OF DRAWINGS IS PROPRIETARY AND
CONFIDENTIAL TO AT&T. ANY USE OR
DISCLOSURE OTHER THAN AS IT RELATES
TO AT&T IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
SHEET NO.
DRAWN BY: DRAFT DATE: APPROVED BY:
RG 10/26/16 TT
REVISION / ISSUE
PREPARED BY:
5841 EDISON PLACE, SUITE 200
CARLSBAD, CA 92008
PHONE: (760) 929-0910
FAX: (760) 929-0936
Communications
Telecommunications Engineering
Coastal
CROWN
CASTLE
300 SPECTRUM CENTER DR, STE. 1200
IRVINE, CA 92618
www.crowncastle.com
·INSTALL NEW 14' 0" HIGH CONCRETE POLE (POLE TO BE PAINTED DARK GREEN).
·INSTALL CISH-51 CABINET WITH SIDE MOUNT METER & POWER DISCONNECT BOX WITH (2) ML IONS INSIDE.
·INSTALL (2) 21.4" ANTENNAS #HPA-65F-BUU-H2 WITH MOUNTING BRACKET #MBK-03.
·EQIPMENT AND ANTENNAS TO BE PAINTED TO MATCH POLE.
·142' TRENCH FOR POWER.
UNDERGROUND UTILITY NOTE:
THE LOCATIONS AND EXISTENCE OF ANY UNDERGROUND PIPES, STRUCTURES
OR CONDUITS SHOWN ON THIS PLAN WERE OBTAINED BY A SEARCH OF
AVAILABLE RECORDS. THERE MAY BE EXISTING UTILITIES OTHER THAN THOSE
SHOWN ON THE THIS PLAN. THE CONTRACTOR IS REQUIRED TO TAKE
PRECAUTIONARY MEASURES TO PROTECT THE UTILITY LINES SHOWN AND ANY
OTHER LINES NOT SHOWN ON THIS PLAN.
NORTH
SCALE: 1" = 50'
LATITUDE:
LONGITUDE:
33.7556
-118.393
NODE COORDINATE
NEW CONSTRUCTION
SITE PLAN
FOOTAGE TOTALS
ASPHALT TRENCH 121'
PUNCH THRU 6'
DIRT TRENCH 14'
BORE 0'
TOTAL 141'
R&R SIDEWALK TOTAL 0 SQ. FT.
3"
BILL OF MATERIALS
DESCRIPTION QTY
VAULTS
(PVT)
17" X 30"0
2' X 3'0
CONDUIT
(PVT)
1-1/4" PVC 0'
3" PVC 141'
APPROX. LENGTH
OF FOOTAGES
CONDUIT
COUNT
SIZE OF
CONDUIT
1
141'
F-26
INSTALL 14' CONCRETE POLE
(SEE DETAILS 7 & 8 ON SHEET D-2)
INSTALL (2) 21.4" ANTENNAS
#HPA-65F-BUU-H2 WITH MOUNTING
BRACKET #MBK-03
(SEE DETAILS 4 & 5 ON SHEET D-3)
RAD CENTER
13' 1-1/2"
TOP OF
ANTENNA &
POLE
14' 0"
INSTALL VGR
(SEE DETAIL 2 ON SHEET D-2)
Ø9"
INSTALL 14' CONCRETE POLE
(SEE DETAILS 7 & 8 ON SHEET D-2)
INSTALL (2) 21.4" ANTENNAS
#HPA-65F-BUU-H2 WITH MOUNTING
BRACKET #MBK-03
(SEE DETAILS 4 & 5 ON SHEET D-3)
RAD CENTER
13' 1-1/2"
TOP OF
ANTENNA &
POLE
14' 0"
ASPHALT
GROUND LINE
C&G
INSTALL VGR
(SEE DETAIL 2 ON SHEET D-2)
Ø9"
C
&
G
C
&
G
C
H
A
R
T
R
E
S
D
R
ANTENNA #HPA-65F-BUU-H2
AZIMUTH: 330°
INSTALL 14' CONCRETE POLE
ANTENNA #HPA-65F-BUU-H2
AZIMUTH: 130°
Ø9"
P-2
DATE
ASG33
ACROSS FROM
6480 CHARTERS DR
RANCHO PALOS VERDES, CA
SITE NAME & ADDRESS:
PHASE II
CLIENT:
ASG33
242727
CROWN CASTLE PROJECT NO.
TICKET #______________________
UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERT
1-800-227-2600
CALL AT
LEAST TWO
DAYS BEFORE
YOU DIG
PROPRIETARY INFORMATION
THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS
SET OF DRAWINGS IS PROPRIETARY AND
CONFIDENTIAL TO AT&T. ANY USE OR
DISCLOSURE OTHER THAN AS IT RELATES
TO AT&T IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
SHEET NO.
DRAWN BY: DRAFT DATE: APPROVED BY:
RG 10/26/16 TT
REVISION / ISSUE
PREPARED BY:
5841 EDISON PLACE, SUITE 200
CARLSBAD, CA 92008
PHONE: (760) 929-0910
FAX: (760) 929-0936
Communications
Telecommunications Engineering
Coastal
CROWN
CASTLE
300 SPECTRUM CENTER DR, STE. 1200
IRVINE, CA 92618
www.crowncastle.com
POLE #_N/T:
TOP OF POLE: 14' 0"
TOP OF ANTENNA: 14' 0"
RAD CENTER: 13' 1-1/2"
AZIMUTH: 130° & 330°
EQUIPMENT AND ANTENNAS TO BE PAINTED TO
MATCH POLE.
EQUIPMENT TO BE PAINTED TO MATCH POLE.
POLE PROFILE
B 12 O'CLOCK VIEWA ANTENNA DETAILS SCALE: 1:5
0°
90°
NO
R
T
H
B 9 O'CLOCK VIEWSCALE: 1:5 SCALE: 1:5
F-27
EXHIBIT B
F-28
F-29
F-30
EXHIBIT C
F-31
F-32
F-33
EXHIBIT D
F-34
ASG33
Coverage Analysis
11/08/2017
F-35
| 2
Proprietary &
Confidential
ASG33 Agenda
•Drive Test Data Collection Setup
•Existing RF Coverage
•Proposed Geographic Coverage Area for ASG33
•Proposed RF Coverage Area for ASG33
•Alternative sites
F-36
| 3
Proprietary &
Confidential
Drive Test Setup
•A continuous wave (CW) test is performed to simulate the coverage expected for the new node locations
PCTEL EX flex Receiver
696MHz-2120 MHz GPS
This is in the vehicle
BVS Dragon
850 / 1900
TX Power
Crossband
Coupler
Ground
Tripod
40 Feet LMR 400
Ultra Flex
Hotstick
Adjustable height
Comba Omni
AntennaOmni Antenna
•Scanner used to collect benchmark data for existing carrier.
F-37
| 4
Proprietary &
Confidential
Existing Benchmark Coverage
Drive route
LTE RSRP 1900 MHz
F-38
| 5
Proprietary &
Confidential
The objective of the node, ASG33, is to provide coverage on the intersection of Cartier Drive and Charities
Drive from Cartier and Rhone Dr., to handoff to the existing coverage just west of Charities and Martisse
Dr.
Graphic Service Area for Subject Installation(ASG33)
F-39
| 6
Proprietary &
Confidential
Proposed RF Coverage for ASG33-A (Primary)
LTE RSRP 1900 MHz
Drive route
F-40
| 7
Proprietary &
Confidential
Alternate Locations -ASG33
Map Legend:
•ASG33-A: Primary-
Meets Coverage
Objective.
•ASG33-B: Meets
coverage objective.
•ASG33-C: Meets
coverage objective.
•ASG33-D: Meets
coverage objective.
•ASG33-E: Does not
meet coverage
objective.
Node ID Average RSRP (dBm)Loss of RSRP signal (%)
ASG33-A -86 0%
ASG33-C -83 3%
ASG33-D -90 -5%
ASG33-E -101 -17%
F-41
| 8
Proprietary &
Confidential
Alternate Location -ASG33F Recently evaluated location although will
not reach intended coverage objective area.
F-42
| 9
Proprietary &
Confidential
Closest WCF from ASG33, does not
cover intended objective area due to
topography.
F-43
| 10
Proprietary &
Confidential
Alternative Analysis –(ASG33-C)
3% Coverage Improvement
LTE RSRP 1900 MHz
Drive route
F-44
| 11
Proprietary &
Confidential
Alternative Analysis –(ASG33-D)
5% Coverage Degradation
LTE RSRP 1900 MHz
Drive route
F-45
| 12
Proprietary &
Confidential
Alternative Analysis –(ASG33-E)
17% Coverage Degradation
LTE RSRP 1900 MHz
Drive route
F-46
| 13
Proprietary &
Confidential
Alternative Analysis –(ASG33-F)
LTE RSRP 1900 MHz
F-47
G
-
1
G
-
2
G
-
3
G
-
4
G
-
5
G
-
6
G
-
7
G
-
8
April 30, 2018
Mr. Ara Mihranian, Director of Community Development
Community Development Department
30940 Hawthorne Blvd.
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275
RE: Shot Clock Extension Agreement for Crown Castle Wireless Communication
Facility Site ASG 33 - New Shot Clock Expiration Date: July 30, 2018
Dear Mr. Mihranian:
Crown Castle NG West LLC (“Crown Castle”) has agreed to extend the Shot Clock expiration
date for the above-referenced wireless telecommunication application for ninety (90) days from the
date of this letter. Crown Castle is agreeing to this extension in order to allow ample opportunity to
more fully evaluate other RF viable alternatives as well as view impacts. Crown Castle, furthermore,
wants to incorporate “best practices” for the location and design of wireless facilities as identified by
the City’s Planning Commission and City Council in their current, ongoing evaluation of Crown
Castle’s previously submitted wireless applications.
This Shot Clock extension does not in any way abrogate the rights of either Crown Castle or the
City. The Shot Clock for the above-referenced wireless telecommunication application will expire on
July 30, 2018; unless mutually extended in a written agreement by the Parties. Any and all applicable
statutes of limitation will commence from the date of the Shot Clock’s expiration.
Stephen Garcia
Stephen Garcia Ara Mihranian
CROWN CASTLE NG WEST LLC CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES
H-1