The applicant has paid the initial application deposit and is obligated to pay supplemental fees to cover any and all additional staff time and materials costs associated with the application processing.
This is a continued public hearing item on the appeal of Kevin and Michelle Ferguson, and Laura Owen, Kellin Cooper, Krista Bessinger, Jon Sarlin and David Kwett of the County Planning Commission's decision to approve a proposal by New Cingular Wireless (AT&T) to attach a wireless telecommunications facility to an existing utility pole in the Ardmore Road public right-of-way in Kensington. At the December 17, 2013, Board of Supervisor's hearing, one appellant (Ferguson) provided testimony on six AT&T applications in the Kensington area that had been appealed, including the current 110 Ardmore Road application. The applicant and general public also testified. Upon conclusion of the public testimony and deliberation by the Board, five of the applications were approved and the hearing on this application was continued as an open public hearing to January 14, 2014, in order for the applicant to prepare an alternative site analysis for the project. The Board indicated that visual intrusiveness was a concern and gave the applicant specific direction to explore alternative locations within the commercial area along Arlington Avenue.
The applicant has indicated that an alternative site analysis was initiated following the December hearing; however, due to the limited time, the applicant was unable to provide a comprehensive report in time for the January hearing. Thus, the Board continued the January hearing to February 4, 2014, to allow the applicant an opportunity to complete their alternative site analysis. AT&T submitted an alternative site analysis dated January 23, 2014, which is attached. At the February 4, 2014, Board of Supervisor's public hearing, the Board received staff's presentation which included a summary of AT&T's alternative site analysis, and continued the matter as an open hearing to February 25, 2014, in order to conduct additional public outreach.
REVIEW OF AT&T'S JANUARY 23, 2014, ALTERNATIVE SITE ANALYSIS
AT&T evaluated 12 alternative utility poles along Ardmore and Coventry Roads. All but one alternative utility pole (located in the Ardmore Road right-of-way adjacent to the property addressed as 801 Coventry Road) was rejected due to potential view impacts, insufficient climbing space along the pole and/or lack of signal propagation. Locating a facility along Arlington Avenue was dismissed altogether due to the lack of utility poles and the fact that the planned decorative light standards "are inadequate in height or structure to support an AT&T DAS node." However, from the information provided it does not appear as though AT&T explored the feasibility of locating a DAS node or other type of technology on one of the commercial properties along Arlington Avenue. The utility pole located adjacent to 801 Coventry does qualify as a potential alternative per the applicant; however, it would require a pole-top extension similar to the 110 Ardmore Road proposal. The extension is required due to large trees directly east of that pole that would otherwise interfere with the signal. It is unclear at this point whether or not the required pole-top extension and antennas would block any views from up-hill residences, as no story poles have been installed at this location. A photosimulation of the potential 801 Coventry facility is included as part of the alternative site analysis package.
If the Board of Supervisors determines there is merit in the 801 Coventry Road alternative or any other, AT&T would be required to submit a new Land Use Permit application for the specific location. The new application would be routed to various agencies for comment, including the Kensington Municipal Advisory Council, and a noticed public hearing would be required.
As part of the alternative site analysis, AT&T also re-evaluated the current 110 Ardmore Road proposal, which involves extending the existing 44-foot 2-inch tall utility pole to 54 feet 1 inch above-ground-level (antennas included). As an alternative, AT&T is amenable to lowering the height of the antennas. The revised proposal includes locating the two antennas on a side arm at a height of 30 feet above-ground-level and relocating the lower utility line cross-arm to a higher position to accommodate the antenna side arm support. This alternative would not require extension of the pole – the current pole height of 44 feet 2 inches would remain the same. According to AT&T's radio frequency engineer, lowering the location of the antennas will reduce the intended coverage by 50 percent. Notwithstanding that fact, AT&T has indicated that the revised 110 Ardmore Road proposal remains the preferred alternative as they consider that location to be the least intrusive means of providing service to the area.
A photosimulation of the reduced-height alternative is provided as part of the alternate site analysis package. By comparing the new photosimulation with the interior photos taken from 110 Ardmore, which are also attached, it is clear that the revised proposal would not extend vertically beyond the canopy of the tree across the street at 113 Ardmore when viewed from 110 Ardmore. However, at the revised location the antennas may extend into the gap between the tree canopy and the residence below. While the antennas would still be visible, they would be less visually intrusive than originally proposed.
MODIFIED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
On December 17, 2013, the Board approved Land Use Permit applications for five similar projects in the Kensington area. The Board modified the conditions of approval for each of these applications. While some of the modifications were site-specific, three particular conditions were added to all five applications. Staff has added these three conditions in the attached "Modified Conditions of Approval" document - they are identified by underlined text.
CONCLUSION
AT&T's alternative site analysis identified one potential alternative utility pole located in the Ardmore Road right-of-way adjacent to 801 Coventry Road. If the Board of Supervisors determines there is merit in this alternative or any other, then the applicant would be required to submit a new Land Use Permit application so that the proposal could be evaluated pursuant to the required public process. AT&T has indicated that revising the current Ardmore Road proposal to lower the antennas from the proposed 54-foot 1-inch height to 30 feet is an option, albeit with reduced coverage. Given that the revised location would be less visually intrusive, staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors deny the appeals of Kevin and Michelle Ferguson, and Laura Owen, Kellin Cooper, Kim Bessinger, Jon Sarlin, and David Kwett, and approve County File #LP13-2020 based on the revised proposal.
Alternatively, the Board may deny this application or continue the item indefinitely to allow the applicant to pursue a Land Use Permit application at an alternative location (the applicant has indicated a preference to keep the current application open even if another location is pursued).
If the Board of Supervisors grants the appeal, the County Planning Commission's approval will be overturned and AT&T will not have the authority to construct their proposed project.
Consideration of this application had been continued to allow AT&T to identify alternative sites. A possible site has been found located at 801 Coventry Road. AT&T will pursue approval for this location. The estimated time to complete the application process is four months.
CONTINUED the hearing to June 3, 2014 at 10:00 a.m