►
Description
San Bruno Planning Commission Meeting September 17, 2013
5c. 1900 Skyline Blvd.
A
B
C
You
and
good
evening
the
application
is
for
a
wireless
facility
at
the
PG&E
substation,
which
is
located
on
skyline
Boulevard,
just
south
of
sneaks
lane
and
that
self
in
adjacent
to
the
Church
of
the
Highlands.
The
project
includes
a
mono
pine
design,
which
you
know
what
resembles
a
pine
tree.
There
are
photo
simulations
of
the
proposed
mono
pine
included
in
your
staff
report.
The
project
also
includes
seven
prefabricated
equipment
cabinets.
Those
are
proposed
to
be
five
feet,
six
inches
tall
and
there
are
some
also
some
minor
associated
equipment.
C
All
of
this
would
be
located
within
a
leasable
area
that
would
be
surrounded
by
an
8-foot
chain
link
fence
that
would
have
colored
slats
that
would
be
selected
to
blend
into
the
area
so
sort
of
a
green
or
brown,
something
that
would
blend
into
that
environment.
Up
there,
you're,
probably
familiar
with
the
substation
location.
C
The
majority
of
the
site
is
gravel,
it's
minimally
developed
just
for
the
substation
and
then
there's
some
landscaping
that
buffers
the
site
from
skyline
Boulevard
access
to
the
site
is
through
an
easement
off
of
skyline,
and
so
that's
where
vehicles
currently
access
the
substation
location.
So
we
would
not
expect
any
impact
on
residential
properties
to
the
side
of
the
site.
C
So
this
particular
facility
is
calculated
at
9.9,
so
about
ten
percent
of
the
public
exposure
limit
and
then
the
cumulative
analysis,
so
the
sites
that
are
all
there
added
together
would
be
thirty
one
percent
of
the
public
exposure
limit
at
the
ground
level.
Okay,
so
this
is
50
feet
in
the
air
is
what
the
poll
is
the
maximum
height
of
the
mono
pine,
and
then
the
antennas
are
about
5
feet
down
from
that,
so
down
at
the
ground
level
about
45
feet
below
it
would
be
thirty.
C
One
percent
of
the
public
exposure
limit
so
well
below
the
maximum
threshold
and
the
project
would
not
require
any
additional
mitigation
measures
in
order
to
meet
the
federal
FCC
requirements.
The
project
was
reviewed
at
the
june
thirteenth
architectural
review
committee
meeting.
At
that
time,
the
committee
supported
the
mono
pine
design
to
meet
the
stealth
design
requirement
and
forwarded
the
project
with
some
recommendations.
Well,
the
applicant
has
addressed
those
comments,
and
so
those
things
are
integrated
into
the
plans
that
are
before
you
tonight.
C
The
first
one
is
to
ensure
that
the
mono
pinewood
meet
the
height
limit,
and
so
they
did
adjust
the
height
of
the
tree,
and
so
there
would
be
sort
of
those
kind
of
branches
at
the
top
of
the
tree
that
we've
discussed
before.
So
it
would
not
be
just
the
antennas
at
the
very
top
of
the
tree,
so
there
would
be
some
pho
branches
at
the
top
and
then
the
antennas
would
start
a
few
feet
down,
and
the
total
height
of
the
entire
structure
would
not
exceed
50
feet.
C
The
other
minor
recommendation
was
to
include
the
colored
slats
for
the
fence
around
the
leasable
area
and,
as
I
mentioned,
that
has
been
implemented.
So
in
regards
to
public
comments,
staffs
at
a
courtesy
notice
in
May
of
2013
and
a
legal
notice
on
September
6,
we
received
one
email
in
opposition
to
the
project
that
email
has
been
distributed
tonight
on
paper
to
the
Planning
Commission
and
is
available
here
for
members
of
the
public.
C
I'm
staff
did
communicate
back
and
forth
with
this
resident
and
to
summarize
some
of
her
concerns,
they
were
related
to
potential
health
and
safety
impacts
and
potential
interference
with
PG&E
communications
and
equipment,
and,
as
I
mentioned,
the
RF
emissions
for
a
cumulative
basis
are
expected
to
be
thirty
one
percent
of
the
exposure
limit.
So,
as
we
know
under
the
FCC
regulations
that
is
well
below
the
threshold
and
considered
safe
by
those
FCC
regulations,
and
so
we
do
not
anticipate
any
additional
concerns
related
to
that
I'm.
C
Also,
we've
learned
over
the
many
years
of
wireless
communications,
locating
at
PG&E
facilities
and
on
PG
any
equipment
throughout
the
community.
Pg&Amp;E
has
a
very
strict
guidelines
to
ensure
that
wireless
facilities
don't
interfere
with
their
operations,
and
so
the
applicant
has
gone
through
those
appropriate
procedures
and
insured
with
PG&E
that
there
are
not
any
issues
and,
as
I
understand,
that
PG&E
has
also
reviewed
the
project
and
the
conditions
of
approval
for
tonight.
C
Staff
also
received
one
phone
call
in
support
of
the
project,
so
staff
would
recommend
approval
of
a
project
subject
to
findings,
one
through
seven
and
subject
to
conditions
of
approval
1
through
15.
The
conditions
that
staff
has
placed
on
the
project
this
evening
are
the
standard
conditions
of
approval
for
wireless
facilities.
It
does
include
the
condition
that
came
up
some
years
back
in
regards
to
maintenance
of
these
facilities.
C
We
do
expect
that
the
facility
be
maintained
in
like
new
condition
to
the
satisfaction
of
the
community
development
director
and
as
I
understand
that
the
applicant
might
be
able
to
provide
additional
detail
for
you
on
that
topic
tonight,
because
it
has
one
been
one
that
has
been
an
issue
in
the
community
some
years
back,
but
not
so
much
recently.
So
I'm
sure
she
can
speak
to
that.
If
you
would
like
to
hear
any
additional
detail,
so
we
would
recommend
approval
of
the
project
and
I
would
be
happy
to
answer
any
questions
that
you
have
good.
D
The
gin
Commissioner
on
the
litter
that
we
received
by
this
particular
person
that
lives
in
San
Francisco
and
trying
to
understand
typically
as
to
the
thinking
behind
it
as
too
just
trying
to
understand
living
in
San,
Francisco,
music,
something
that
they
drive
by
or
not
quite
sure,
I
think
there's
some
health
issues,
but
there's
also
something
related
to
some
financial
gain
to
PG&E.
So
I'm
wondering
interested
to
know
this
to
you.
D
What
motivated
the
thinking
behind
a
letter
there's
just
more
than
just
really
I
think
helping
zhan
here
and
then
the
other
thing
I
wanted
to
ask.
I
lived
up
there
in
a
drive-by
that
at
least
twice
they
gave
not
more
and
the
location
where
it
is.
She
had
to
drive
up
this
little
driveway
to
be
able
to
get
to
the
back,
and
it's
not
truly
a
public
road
at
all,
and
is
it
really
visible?
Is
it
true
that
visible
from
skyline
from
other
areas
and.
D
When
I
receive
a
complaint
from
someone,
I
really
feel
it's
important
to
address
those
issues
and
took
a
look
at
all
the
areas,
but
I
also
think
it's
important
to
look
at.
What's
the
thinking
behind
all,
if
you
no
way
out
all
the
components
and
to
say
okay,
how
what
warrant
the
decision
on
my
decision
part
to
accept
a
project
or
deny
a
project
and
in
this
case
I
kind
of
interested,
because
someone
from
San
Francisco
coming
to
make
this
issue.
D
We
certainly
know
from
the
research
we've
done
not
only
as
commissioners,
but
mostly
through
our
staff,
relying
on
the
research
about
the
health
issues
and
is
there
any
new
development
on
health
issues
of
it.
Come
up
a
new
comic
to
some
of
that.
But
it's
only
thing
you
that
we
should
be
aware-
and
those
are
my
coma
question.
C
To
the
church,
my
understanding
of
this
comment
is
that
it
is
from
a
san
bruno
resident,
and
this
is
her
professional
address.
So
this
is
from
her
professional
email
address,
so
I
believe
that
she
is
a
resident
of
the
community.
There
is
some
sort
of
a
concern
in
the
letter
in
regards
to
pge
getting
a
financial
gain
from
this
project.
C
Our
understanding
that
is
standard
for
telecommunications,
on
facilities
to
pay
a
lease
fee
to
have
these
kinds
of
facilities
PG
need,
has
to
have
a
number
of
them
on
many
of
their
different
facilities,
pretty
much
throughout
this
area
when
they
were
considering
locations.
There
is
some
information
in
your
staff
report
in
regards
to
their
site
analysis
looking
for
appropriate
locations
for
this.
Typically,
what
happens
is
the
applicant
will
identify
a
gap
in
coverage?
It's
something
we've
talked
about
in
the
past,
but
we
haven't
had
on
the
agenda
for
some
time.
C
C
They
considered
the
sky
pressed
location
to
the
south
and
then
some
locations
that
potentially
could
have
more
impact
on
the
residential
uses,
and
so
those
considerations
go
into
their
application
when
they
apply
to
us
and
we
would
review
that
site
analysis,
but
we
would
not
normally
concern
ourselves
with
the
financial
gain
or
loss
of
the
person
that
they
eventually
lease
with.
So
that's
the
kind
of
analysis
that
staff
would
normally
do
in
regards
to
its
visibility
from
skyline
the
equipment
at
the
ground.
We
would
not
expect
to
be
visible.
C
It's
quite
small
equipment,
five
feet,
six
inches
cabinets,
eight-foot
tall
fence.
There
is
a
lot
of
planted
material
at
that
location.
The
mono
pine
itself,
of
course,
is
visible
and
that's
what's
shown
in
your
photo
simulations
that
are
included
in
your
packet
and
so
it's
from
a
couple
of
different
angles.
So
we
can
anticipate
what
appearance
that's
going
to
have,
so
that
would
be
staffs
analysis
of
the
visibility
of
the
site
in
regards
to
safety
concerns.
C
A
C
Have
updated
our
conditions
and
in
recent
years
to
try
to
address
this
fact,
and
so
we
have
some
language
in
condition:
number
nine.
If
the
facility
is
abandoned
or
not
operational,
it
shall
be
removed
at
the
full
cost
of
the
applicant
within
60
days.
So
that's
if
the
applicant
is
still
doing
I
mean
present.
C
There's
been
changes
in
cell
phone
companies
over
the
years,
and
so
sometimes
this
can
be
a
challenge
to
implement,
and
so
what
we've
added
is
a
condition
number
13,
and
so
we
require
additional
contact
persons
for
the
facility
at
the
time
of
building
permit
issuance,
and
we
try
to
reflect
that
in
the
record.
This
has
made
it
easier
for
us
to
implement
conditions
of
approval
and
see
projects
through
over
recent
years,
and
so
what
happens
is
if
the
facility
operator
is
non-responsive
to
City
communications,
then
the
property
owner
has
to
then
take
responsibility.
A
I
read
number
9
inches
applicant.
Can
we
add
and/or
all
owner,
because
I
mean
on
this
one
here,
I'm
I
think
Verizon's
going
to
go
out
of
business,
but
yeah
I
mean
it
should
be
kind
of
blanket
that
African
or
inertia
be
responsible
for
removal.
Well,
the
owner
of
the
property
I
mean
because
it's
app
I
mean
applicants
always
like
run
this
one
here.
Adapt
can
this
PG
or
verizon
so
they
go
out
of
business.
I
mean
the
condition
just
says
applicant
responsible.
A
D
D
Who
maintains
that
piece
of
it?
Because
that
mean
it
does
happen
and
maybe
there's
new
materials
and
things
would
that
happen?
And
maybe
it's
in
that
question
for
the
applicant,
but
I
am
happy
to
address
it
with
the
applicant,
but
it
not
it
I.
Guess
it's
better
than
another
metal
tower
looking
at
it,
because
there's
plenty
of
metal
towers
as
you
drive
by
and
see
those,
however
I
think
that
a
blue
hazy
tree
becomes
sometimes
more
of
an
obstacle
than
another
metal
plane.
I'll
reserve
my
comments
actually
applicant.
Thank
you.
E
Good
evening
planning
commissioners
staff
and
members
of
the
public,
my
name
is
Lily
Lynn
and
I'm
with
core
development
services,
and
we
represent
verizon
wireless
for
this
project
located
at
1900
skyline
Boulevard
Verizon
Wireless
is
proposing
to
install
a
50-foot
faux
mono
pine
on
an
existing
in
an
existing
pge
substation
verizon's
first
proposal
was
to
install
a
55-foot
film
on
opine.
However,
during
the
Architectural
Review
Committee
meeting,
the
committee
had
concerns
with
the
height
of
the
site
and
suggested
that
we
lower
it
to
50
feet
to
meet
the
city's
height
limit
further.
E
Also
during
the
committee
meeting,
there
was
also
concerns
about
the
maintenance
and
the
color
and
who
would
maintain
the
the
site
and
typically,
once
they
go
out,
technicians
go
out
there
every
four
to
six
weeks
and
they
take
care
of
the
equipment
and
make
sure
that
everything's
still
looking
good
and
so
I
was
told
that
once
maintenance
is
needed
on
tree
branches.
Sometimes
you
know
if
the
cheer
branches,
if
leaves
fall
or
things
like
that,
they'll
go
and
replace
the
branch.
E
E
The
other
thing
is
initially:
we
sip
did
this
design.
We
submitted
the
tree
design
as
well
as
a
metal
pole.
My
initial
thoughts
were
that,
because
it's
a
PG&E
substation
the
metal
Bullock
blend
in
better,
but
after
we
got
photo
Sims
done.
We
realize
that
the
tree
actually
fit
in
better,
and
so
we
changed
our
design
to
move
forward
with
the
tree
due
to
the
landscaping,
that's
between
the
site
and
highway
35.
E
The
other
thing
is
the
exposure
limit
for
the
EMF
reports.
That's
that's
based
on
a
worst-case
scenario.
If
everyone
the
entire
capacities
at
its
full
max,
that's
what
the
exposure
limit
would
be
and
I
mean
someone
driving
by
highway.
35
wouldn't
be
sitting
there
for
good
eight
hours,
so
hopefully
skyline
would
never
be
that
bad
in
traffic.
But
basically
the
exposure
limit
is
based
off
of
the
worst-case
scenario.
E
B
All
right,
thank
you
very
much.
Is
there
someone
from
public
I'd
like
to
comment?
No
okay,
so
we'll
bring
it
back
to
the
commission
for
conversation.
Motion
vote
to
the
chair,
commissioner,
there's
no
discussion
I'll
make
a
motion
that
we
approve
use,
permit
12,
dash,
2015,
based
on
time
out.
We
get
the
right
Burbage
based
on
findings
of
fact,
one
through
seven
in
conditions
of
approval
1
through
15.
Sorry
about
that.
Okay
cover
motion
do
have
a
second
second
motion
in
a
second
all,
those
in
favor
all
right,
any
opposed
any
abstentions.