City Council Meeting April 1, 2014

0:00:00okay good evening and welcome to the El Cerrito city council meeting we'll start out with the Pledge of Allegiance led by council member Jan Bridges to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands one nation under God an indivisible with liberty and justice for

0:00:25all are there any Council reports yes yeah thank you mayor I'll just make one announcement and that is the city of El Cerrito now has applications out for vacancies on our commissions boards and committees and I'll just mention the ones that have vacancies currently arts

0:00:49and culture committee on Aging crime prevention committee Economic Development Committee Environmental Quality committee tree committee and the West Contra Costa Unified School District bond oversight committee the application forms can be downloaded online or you can call the city clerk at

0:01:09510-215-4305 I hope we get a lot of folks to apply to serve on these very important volunteer boards commissions and committees thank you not the other side I have one um the uh at the arts and culture committee commission is uh co-hosting a chamber orchestra so it's free music uh

0:01:31Sunday afternoon on April 13th at 3 P.M at the El Cerrito Community Center so it's the Lucas Valley chamber orchestra and they will be doing three different pieces 3 P.M Sunday April 13th El Cerrito Community Center free how much does it cost Greg even even we can afford it

0:02:00mark okay well I have several things I went to an interesting meeting on March 21st where the mayors of Contra Costa County were invited and a number of them showed up along with their city managers and even a couple of Mayors from Alameda County and the topic was PG

0:02:21E I don't know if you've heard about it the PG e issue with the trees and then wanting to clear cut in the area of their gas lines through our city streets of our various towns and um so um after that a letter was written by a number of the Mayors including myself

0:02:47um to PG e uh at which point PG e looks like it's taking a second look at the project um and uh in fact they were scheduled to speak the Thursday after the Friday meeting to the league of California cities East Bay Division and they withdrew their um agreeance they're agreeing to speak

0:03:16until quote a later time based on what was going on so I guess we got their attention but in some cities the number of trees being removed are in the hundreds and hundreds uh in El Cerrito I don't know the quantity but it would primarily be on Carlson I believe and

0:03:37um so people are quite concerned about this issue and um right now we're waiting to see I think what PG e will respond with um anyway it was pretty interesting I also attended the um Contra Costa County commission for women dinner honoring a number of women including a a one I know

0:04:00from West Contra Costa County Rita Xavier from the city of San Pablo and they were honored for their contributions to our community uh then let's see here I also attended the opening of a new unit at El Cerrito Royale in Alzheimer's memory care unit and what they they did

0:04:30is the best I understand it is they uh I don't know if the attic actually added space but they certainly remodeled space creating a special facility for people who need uh that type of living Arrangement and it's really quite nice look quite nice and there was a very large group there and

0:04:52um it was a very interesting session and so if if you uh have need for their services that is now available and um those are my announcements okay are there any staff announcements then okay we'll move on on the agenda the next item on the agenda is oral Communications from the public and this

0:05:19is for items that are not on the agenda if you'd like to speak on autonom that is on the agenda you can do so when we're discussing that item do we have any speaker slips on this yes we have four speakers your honor okay you want to call them please sure the first

0:05:33speaker is Al Miller good evening mayor Abelson city council and staff I'm here to speak in favor of item 5G on the consent calendar and thank you for your support of Senate Bill 1014 the safe and convenient medication disposal as a director of the state Sanitary District I want to be

0:05:57sure people realize the importance of your support unlike El Cerrito that we can take our pills and drugs Etc up to our recycling center and safely and properly dispose of them there but most of the people in the state don't have that uh to have each City have to fight a

0:06:21control of this is far less efficient that if we have a Statewide policy if they can have a Statewide policy of franchising cable certainly they can have a Statewide policy to control these drugs the reason it's so important whether it's a over-the-counter uh medicine for headaches for coughs or

0:06:44whatever prescription drugs for us or even the medications we get for our pets the normal way too often use method of disposal is down the toilet that makes a problem for sanitary districts for East Bay mud and for our enjoyment of the bay because these products end up in the bay

0:07:05or they change the sex of a fish and other Aquatic animals makes them not too desirable to eat so it's a much bigger problem than people think about so having a safe way to get rid of them conveniently hopefully at the expense of the people that create these materials is a good

0:07:29way to go so thank you Tom panis good evening mayor Robinson members of the council and City staff my name is Tom panason I live at [address removed] in El Cerrito the elsewhere Historical Society invites the community to join us as we celebrate our Town's Pioneers those who were born

0:08:04in are very near El Cerrito before 1925 our Pioneers grew up here and their families were part of the early days of El Cerrito Society will be hosting a special reception at City Hall on Wednesday April 23rd to honor these pioneers the reception will run from 4 30 to 6 at

0:08:23about 5 PM we plan to introduce all the Pioneers who are present family members and others will have the opportunity to make a brief comment at that time as well if you know someone who qualifies for this group of pioneers please contact me Tom panis phone number

0:08:39510-526-7507 or via email at tmpanus that's Tango Mike Papa Alpha November Alpha Sierra yahoo.com I'd also like to note that I recently attended one of the city's budget workshops I've spoken to several people about their experience at these sessions and everyone agrees the staff did a

0:08:59great job as a result we have at least a few more people in town to understand the challenges that we face this year it was obvious a lot of time and effort went into this effort and like to thank the city for its commitment to openness and transparency in the budget process

0:09:12thank you for your time this evening thank you Dave Weinstein hi I'm here as representing the Environmental Quality committee which voted to move to you people the idea of supporting AP 1504 which is actually a lot like the the bill that Al Miller was talking about because here we have

0:09:37cigarette butts which right now are just a tremendous Menace and as a member of the eqc I am in charge of the green teams we do a lot of cleaning up and I really have to say that cigarette butts are just one of the one of the worst things to clean up I hate doing this I go out there with a

0:09:52broom pressure no matter what you do you can't get rid of them it's such a brilliant idea this assemblyman Mark Stone had the idea of actually getting rid of them by simply Banning them I can't think of any other way that'll work short of people just simply stopping smoking so I think it's a great

0:10:07uh idea and uh thank you for putting it on the consent calendar and I really hope it eventually passes and becomes a law in the state thank you thank you Chris O'Day hi um hi my name is uh Chris O'Day I live at [address removed] around the corner from here and um I just wanted to speak

0:10:36and ask uh certain things that were part of the social community that I'm uh responding to we use a a an application called Nextdoor which is becoming more and more popular uh in this area and such and we actually I'm actually in a smaller group of it so there's actually

0:10:53a much larger one that involves Kensington and other areas as well so it you know we're only dealing with the most immediate ones but it was disturbing to read most recently and I made some dates and associations I uh work at UC Berkeley and I take the Illinois Greenway I ride my bike to and

0:11:08from work probably three to four times a week and I also have a young family here in El Cerrito which I think mirrors a lot of the community here and the growing Community that's probably leaving San Francisco and other places to to live here uh considering the two

0:11:22BART stations in town and the heavy use of bicycles in this community the reopening of the Ilona Greenway of the BART structure I'm tracking several different dates March 25th this year of an armed robbery on Alona Greenway March 10th at 12 noon on Alona Greenway March 6th of an actual

0:11:41Rob robbery which involved a beating on a lonely Greenway and Eureka last year in October of a robbed at knife point of a 14 year old in October of 2013 and last year also I know that the high school was closed due to a some sort of a gun incident that I think ended on the

0:12:00Alona Greenway as well and since this is such a heavily traveled area especially for children and young children my son is three and I have a two month old and my wife comes to meet me on the Alona Greenway with with my son often I kind of feel like I haven't heard of the

0:12:19police response to this I haven't heard of the solving or the uh the response to the whether or not these people have been caught and whether or not there is better security on the Illinois Greenway I wanted to ask what the El Cerrito Police Department census security is for

0:12:34the Illinois Greenway what is their future plans for this in light of some of the some of these recent occurrences uh I also wanted to ask whether or not there would be a bicycle police put onto lonely Greenway for at least for the city of El Cerrito if not the extension

0:12:52but definitely in El Cerrito and then just a general overall better security system especially around the two BART stations in El Cerrito which is probably bringing a lot of people in I spoke to one of the officers and they had mentioned that a lot of the people come

0:13:06in to commit crime in El Cerrito are coming from outside of the community places like Stockton Merced long distances because they've heard that El Cerrito is uh easy so thank you very much for your time today thank you weather speakers okay are there any other speakers that haven't filled out

0:13:25slips yet are you not seeing any we will move on to the next item and uh the next item is a presentation by Keenan Associates by Stephen maybe I'm sorry if I mispronounce you don't look like a Steve I'll let you introduce yourself how's that okay good evening mayor Abelson council

0:13:51members and staff of Sakari shears human resources manager for the city of El Cerrito I am pleased to report to the council that the city has signed a contract agreement with Keenan and associates they are now our broker insurance broker on record and also want

0:14:10to mention that they are well known for their special specialized and Innovative strategies in terms of providing solutions for public sector employers uh this evening I have Steve Getz dad and Brianna Overgaard who are going to be presenting um to you and they're going to provide

0:14:30an overview of Keenan as well as one of and some insight on one of the major challenges that we're facing today which is the Affordable Care Act and then how Keenan is going to assist the city going forward with our insurance issues uh it's just to provide a little

0:14:48background on Steve he is the municipal municipality practice leader he has over 40 years of experience and employee benefits including the last 30 years he his experience has been with Keenan he is a member of many professional organizations such as the league of

0:15:07California cities he was the past president of the league partners program and he's also also a board member of the California city managers Foundation Brianna Overgaard is our account manager and she works out of the kenan's Oakland office her key function in her position

0:15:26will be to process all new cases serve as existing accounts help with open enrollment and she will be our main point of contact in terms of benefit information assisting us with any billing and or account issues that we will have Brianna has over a number of years of experience with in the health

0:15:48industry she has over 12 years of experience customer service experience Rihanna has a lot of great energy that she brings to us and I'm really looking forward to working with them she's very resourceful and with that I'll go ahead and turn it over to Steve and Brianna

0:16:04thank you thank you good evening thank you mayor Abelson and the council for having me tonight um and uh we'll do a brief overview of Keenan and Accountable Care Act and I I've said in the past for Accountable Care Act that I've done anywhere from 10 minutes to two hours so I think you get

0:16:27the 10 minutes tonight so um so brief overview of of Keenan and first off we really look forward to uh to working with you and and staff going forward and and all your employee benefit needs uh Keenan has been in business for over 40 years all we do is work with public agencies in California

0:16:48we do have some clients in the health care sector we work with about 100 hospitals in in California as well through all uh the years we've collected we have about 650 employees now one of the things we pride ourselves in is that we're privately held so we don't have to

0:17:08worry about the nonsense with Wall Street and and all that so the the firms owned by about about half the firms owned by employees so we get a really good alignment in terms of employees working uh the hardest for the best interests of our clients as a result of that we've now risen to about

0:17:26the 17th largest brokerage room in the country so a little overview of Kenan with that there's a number of resources we have to uh that are behind me and and Brianna there will be another gentleman Howell southmate who's been working with Sakari and Karen also be a lady named

0:17:48Stacy who's account manager and then one person I wanted to mention is we have a department headed by Robin Reger who's a PhD in in wellness and we've been working a lot with the different agencies on developing uh different Wellness programs and that is anywhere

0:18:05from sending out Communications to promote Wellness to other incentives to and sent employees to do of certain healthy activities that can help not only the claim experience of the the medical program but they're also benefits from a workers comp absenteeism standpoint simply morale of the

0:18:29organization when when we Implement effective Wellness programs so that's a resource that we have that that is a growing resource we have about six people in that department today then the other others even beyond that are excuse me I didn't introduce Brianna the most

0:18:47important person here so um and then to behind that is our corporate staff in in Torrance who's made up of technical people uh all kinds of legislative to provide legislative support uh training uh technology and marketing um we work with a number of local uh cities uh including Berkeley uh

0:19:10Pittsburgh Danville uh Bart is one of our clients I personally work on that one uh East Bay mud Transportation Commission so a large footprint uh based out of our Oakland office here in the Bay Area um through all those clients we have work a lot with the insurance companies

0:19:32um I think we're probably the slide may be a little bit older I think we're up to about a billion and a half now of Premium with the various carriers um we're the largest consultant with Kaiser and and Anthem and you can see large blocks of business with Health Net

0:19:47and others now big fact that it's lower for Health Net your carrier and some of the others is not reflective of what how we like them it's reflective frankly of their presence in the public sector and so uh you can see Kaiser obviously is is a very large player in public agencies as

0:20:06well as Anthem Blue Shield is a significant player but they work with pers and have a few clients outside purrs [Music] um so that's a quick overview of uh of Keenan uh an overview of the Affordable Care Act and there's I know lots of discussion on TV newspaper there's something every day

0:20:31and it continues to change as it gets uh it gets implemented um we have a lot of resources that actually have read every single page and then provide some information training to not only uh Brianna and myself and Keenan but to all our clients but I'll I'll touch them there's I think five main

0:20:52points and then there's lots of stuff that go under this one is the individual mandate uh the other next is is offering a minimum essential coverage the city offering an affordable plan there's now a new definition of a full-time employee and then uh the Cadillac tax and so I'll review each one

0:21:14of them briefly now you've heard more and more I think in the last week about this individual mandate basically ACA says everybody has to have insurance if you're not enrolled in Insurance then there'll be a tax and so the tax is equal to the greater of ninety six dollars or one percent of

0:21:34your income so that'll be part of when you file your uh your taxes so that's why there's a lot of activity for those are not employed or have insurance through employer that they're going to Covered California and and getting enrolled so the first issue on on the Accountable Care Act is an

0:21:55individual mandate to have everybody insured now from there that there should be a minimum essential coverage which just simply means that the the coverage that someone is purchasing or has is 60 what's termed 60 of an the Actuarial value of the plan and so that's been

0:22:15deter there is um obviously uh that plan of benefits has been designed and we value each plan now this frankly in the public sector is not a big deal Kaiser's plans are valued at about 95 percent all their hmos are about 995 percent and ppos are valued at about 80

0:22:36to 95 percent I have not found in all the agencies that we work with a public agency offering something that is not a minimum essential coverage so frankly this is a non-issue for public agencies the next issue is is the plan affordable and so the definition of of

0:22:58affordability is that the contribution that the employee is paying does not exceed nine and a half percent of the employee only premium of the lowest price plan so to expand upon that we offer several plans here and if we looked at the lowest price single coverage which is

0:23:21Kaiser's plan is the employee paying more than nine and a half percent of their household income uh to buy that plan uh again what I have found first off here you meet this test at the city and frankly almost every public agency that I know of and work with meet this test

0:23:42as well so this is not this is not an issue for uh public agencies and frankly a lot of employers when you run through the the math the employee has to make a fairly significant employee contribution to not beat this test so this is a non-issue for the city uh the next issue and this is where

0:24:04there's a lot of activity and evaluation going forward and that is is that there's now a new definition of what a full-time employee is and it's uh now 30 hours or 130 in a month and this is where a number of uh public agencies now are looking at the number of employees

0:24:25this now affects and then what do we do with these newly insured or eligible employees so a great example is the park and rec have a number of part-time employees and so the question is is that when we look at them over a year's time or or over a period of time are they

0:24:46considered full-time employees so as an example when the the law was first written it said that um if you were if you were full-time in a given month then you needed to be insured the next month well that got kind of complicated and so when the rules started being written they

0:25:07said well let's um uh make it so we're looking over a period of time so that we are making sure that this is really a full-time employee and not just based on how we have someone working in a given month so as an example what's been created is what's called these measurement periods

0:25:26administrative periods instability periods to make that simple all it means is that will determine anywhere from for and it's our choice looking back 90 90 days to a year and let's just take a year a year because that's what most cities are looking at in terms of looking back and

0:25:46so if we look at one year going backwards and we kind of look at it as say a probationary period And in that period of time if they worked an average of 30 hours then they would be eligible for insurance for the next year that would be the stability period And so

0:26:01this is the evaluation that all agencies are going through is do we have employees that are newly eligible and if they're newly eligible then are we going to be offering them the existing plan of benefits oh are we going to offer them at the same contribution level or are we

0:26:19going to do something different but the point is that they are eligible and so we need to work through how we're going to cover them um and uh and what's the cost to the city associated with that so this is really where a lot of the uh energy is in implementing evaluating and

0:26:37implementing this now we have fortunately 2014 is uh is we have extra time now in 2014 to Work our way through this and decide what we're going to do it got deferred so this doesn't become official where there might be some penalties if we didn't do things right not till 2015. so we have

0:26:582014 to Work our way through this issue 2015 will then implement it the next issue is the Cadillac tax lots of discussion about the Cadillac tax and this doesn't come into play until 2018.

0:27:17but fundamentally what the Cadillac tax says is that if we are offering an insurance plan that is over 10 200 in a given month for employee coverage or 27 500 for family coverage then anything over that will be taxed at 40 percent so this this is something that we're

0:27:40going to need to work our way through in the next several years because our Health Net PPO plan is over the is over the threshold now and I think the the HMO HealthNet HMO plan certainly could be there in 2018 as well so the evaluation then will be do we want to continue those plans at the same

0:28:01level of benefits or do we want to change those uh to have a change the plan design that have it under the thresholds and so that's some of the valuation that will work with the city and staff uh to go through but as an example let's just go through the math if we had a a an individual rate of nine

0:28:22hundred dollars so on an annual basis that's ten thousand eight hundred so that's six hundred dollars over the current threshold and it will go up by a cola in future years or if we had then a family rate of 2500 a year a month or 30 000 annually uh what would happen so on the

0:28:39individual at 600 over the threshold so it would be a tax of forty percent of 600 or 240 dollars so that will get added to the premium that essentially gets added to the premium the law doesn't say the employer has to pay it or the employee has to pay it it simply is added to the premium and

0:29:01then part of the collective bargaining process determine how that gets paid so similarly on the family is in this example it's twenty five hundred dollars over the threshold forty percent of that is a thousand dollars so again a thousand dollars gets added to the rate

0:29:16okay so you can see how it leverages up very quickly uh once we meet the threshold and so that'll be part of the I think the interest to see what changes we need to make if we want to avoid that tax okay um so the next piece of uh of Accountable Care Act is uh these exchanges and and I

0:29:43think we all know now that the cover California is our Exchange and frankly our exchange has been worked probably one of the uh I'll say best of all the exchanges now sometimes that's not a good measurement because I know there's been a challenge on the federal

0:29:59plan uh but there has the Covered California and some of the things we've been doing in California had a leg up in terms of some of the r d and the development to bring it forward but the stats are that there's about a million people insured uh I don't have the stats

0:30:17of the last week but clearly there's a lot of activity in the last week and this is more than what they thought they were going to roll in the beginning about 53 percent are females about 87 percent of those enrolled are eligible for a subsidy 29 are in the 55 to 64

0:30:36category and 63 percent of the silver plan 23 in the bronze so what does that all mean a couple things one is there's four plans being offered if we call them the metal plans uh bronze silver gold and platinum um the the reason you see a lot in the silver plan is that's where the subsidy

0:30:56gets applied and you probably get the most out of your subsidy the flip is is that it becomes the most affordable for a person enrolling and so you see a lot of silver plans um the one of the the thoughts is we want to get in in insurance we want to get a spread of the risk a lot of younger and

0:31:17older in the plan and and this has been part of the issue is enrolling the younger population um have not enrolled as many younger people as they would like but um there has been a a spread of risk it's not um there has been some spread of risk clearly there is a high percentage of

0:31:39people in the 55 to 64 category and the reason is is what the law said is there cannot be a difference in rate between the youngest rate and the highest rate of more than three times uh actually the difference actually is six times between the cheapest rate and

0:32:00the most expensive so by narrowing the Gap there clearly are some subsidies going on and Covered California has been very transparent as the other exchanges frankly and saying we're going to be subsidizing more of the 55 to 64. so when you they you look at those rates

0:32:16those are very competitive rates compared to what they could have gotten before the exchanges went into play and so that's part of the challenge going forward is is drawing some of the younger population in so we get a spread of the risk the insurance issues still

0:32:32apply whether we have a group of a hundred a thousand a million or ten million we still need a spread of the risk to create affordable rates and that's the the global objective of uh Covered California and the other exchanges um one last note is is that I know there's been lots of activity people

0:32:52calling Covered California we actually have created a department that at Kenan that can be an intermediary to call a Kenan and enroll in Covered California as well and be able to talk to a live body so we've created Department we've got about 10 people in that department now that are

0:33:11intermediaries that can call and and enroll in Covered California so I think that's an overview okay thank you can you flash that number again please excuse me last slide please yeah there you go uh thank you but so anybody can call that number anybody can call

0:33:34fantastic friends whatever are there any uh comments or questions from the council actually the one common question I had was is Keenan an authorized Covered California agent and I think your last slide does present that that you are obviously at least able to help get

0:33:54people in touch with Covered California we are a licensed agents yes we've gone through all that training absolutely I had a question um how many what percentage of um your clients actually are enrolled in the wellness um what percentage Yeah um it's a small percentage now uh but it is

0:34:16a very growing percentage and that's why we've been adding staff in our Wellness Department um you know I've been in the business a long time and wellness has all in the traditionally has been let's send out a a flyer to the employees and and hope they do something and that was a

0:34:35definition of Wellness Wellness is taking on a much greater importance in the development of employee benefit plans understanding that 50 of the of uh the uh medical claims are based on the lifestyle choices that we all make um so there's lies the opportunity I

0:34:56don't want to suggest if we do everything right from Wellness standpoint premiums go down 50 no that's not going to happen but point is is that there's lots of changes from a wellness standpoint that if we can change behaviors and change the the the dial in terms of

0:35:12um of health risk then we can improve improve our plans in a number of different areas so it's a it's a very much of a growing area for us and you said something about the the minimum essential Choice was 95 or something like that minimum essential coverage right it was about 95

0:35:33. I know you who your clients are but how do you think that compares to private sector uh well I have some I have some idea Mo most employers are meeting that when you to to not have a minimum essential coverage you have something like very very high deductibles like three or four

0:35:57thousand dollars you might be eliminating um or having almost no prescription drug coverage um so you you have a very very Bare Bones plans which is uh rare to see in in an employer now I understand some Employers in terms of trying to meet their overhead and so forth may be

0:36:18offering it but um most employers and through normal employee benefit plans that are being offered meet the minimum essential test yeah thank you thank you we look forward to working with you and staff good presentation do we have any speaking thank you I appreciate the

0:36:40presentation uh the next item on the agenda is the adoption of the consent calendar I move adoption of consent calendar items 5A through five I and I will second that as long as I get an opportunity to speak about item 5H you want to do that now I would love to

0:37:01um I would actually encourage everyone uh to go on and look at this Senate bill for safe neighborhood parks rivers and Coastal protection Bond Act of 2014 and I encourage individuals um we're right we are authorizing uh mayor Abelson to send a letter off to Senator uh pavli but I would encourage

0:37:21all individuals to send letters off to your electeds um you know Senator Hancock assembly member uh Skinner to encourage this this this is something that will come back and benefit our community and so I would certainly like to encourage all of you to help us pass this act

0:37:41thank you I'll add another comment just because the consent calendar is so lengthy and substantive or not substantive tonight but it has a lot of really important items on it in terms of other new items we want to highlight is that we would be authorizing a new stop sign on Everett

0:37:55Street at Portola drive and we've had speakers who spoke about assembly or assembly bills and Senate bills that are aiming to eliminate toxic cigarette waste by banning plastic filters in cigarettes we also had a speaker who spoke about having a Statewide method

0:38:11for collecting medications these are other bills that were if we pass this would be authorizing the mayor to send letters of support on okay um so there's a motion on the floor and the second um all in favor please say aye aye aye in the opposition any abstentions motion

0:38:31passes unanimously with that we will move on to item number six on the agenda which is a public hearing and it's on an appeal to the city council the planning commissions action regarding the design review of a wireless communication facility on a utility poll near 7 800 Eureka Avenue

0:38:55which happens to be within 500 feet of my house so I have to recuse myself and leave so okay thank you okay thank you for being here okay um is there a um let's see here I realize I yeah you have it right it is um tonight the city council will hear an appeal to the city council by John

0:39:29sprigs of the planning commission's design review decision for the application submitted by new Singular Wireless or at T for a Wireless Communications facility on an existing utility poll near 7 800 Eureka Avenue first I would like to disclose any Community I'd like the

0:39:51council to disclose any Communications related to this appeal that took place outside of the meeting are there any no no okay so there are none and I would like to take an opportunity to outline the process for this evening's public hearing after opening the public hearing

0:40:10I will request a presentation from the staff following the staff presentation the council will provide an opportunity for the Appellate and the applicant to make presentations of 10 minutes each and at the conclusion of the presentations we will hear from anyone

0:40:28who has signed up with the city clerk actually it won't be the city clerk tonight it will be the assistant city manager filling in for the city clerk and so if you would like to do so you can get a speaker slip from her uh just come on over and she will help you fill that speaker slip out in the

0:40:49interest of ensuring that everyone who wants to speak has an opportunity remarks are limited to three minutes per person and after the public has spoken I will then provide the applicant and the appellant five minutes each to respond to comments after everyone has had an

0:41:06opportunity to speak of the public hearing I will seek a motion to close the public hearing and I'd like to mention one other thing we do have a lighting system here um and you want to show us how it works Karen so as you can see now there is a green light and first it will turn

0:41:24yellow can you do that um no but at one minute left to speak the light will turn yellow and then when your time is concluded the light will turn red and at that point please wrap up um quite quickly please to give everyone a chance to speak yes um when when will the council have an

0:41:47opportunity to ask questions of the appellant and the applicant [Music] um isn't that the clothes I mean let's ask our City attorney but isn't it at the close of the public hearing you may ask them questions during their presentations also yes our questions intended to be part of the public

0:42:12hearing is that I guess that's that would be procedurally the question yes okay thank you okay um so with that um Mr so the public hearing is now open and um Mr Moss would you like to begin thank you thank you mayor Abelson council members Sean Moss senior planner

0:42:39in December I'm sorry in January of uh 2013 the applicant new Singular Wireless PCS LLC doing business as ATT Mobility submitted applications for conditional use permits and design review for six Wireless telecommunications facilities which are these types of Wireless

0:43:01telecommunications facilities are also known as Das nodes which stands for distributed antenna system uh on existing utility poles in El Cerrito uh the design review board conducted preliminary conceptual design review of those six applications in May of 2013 and their comments at that time

0:43:21generally centered around the Aesthetics of the existing polls and whether those polls could be replaced with uh diff pulls of a different material such as concrete one of the applications was later withdrawn by the applicant and the Planning Commission approved

0:43:38conditional use permits for the remaining five applications on June 19 2013.

0:43:45planning commission's decision of one of those nodes near 851 Seaview Drive was appealed to the city council and the city council heard that Appeal on August 20th of last year the council denied the appeal while adopting additional conditions of approval for the use permit

0:44:07and due to this appeal that particular application is now on a different schedule for processing than the remaining applications while staff works with the applicant to to determine how best to satisfy those conditions of approval um the those particular conditions of

0:44:25approval apply only to that um that application at 851c View so for the remaining four applications those were not appealed and the use permits for those four sites are in enforced now on August 7th um the drb considered the applications formally as part of their formal uh part

0:44:48of their final design review and the drb denied the five applications I'm sorry the four applications um with a quorum of three members present the drb generally felt that the polls were already cluttered and that these and the uh the proposed projects would move the city in the wrong direction as

0:45:10far as attractiveness the applicant appealed the drb's denials and on February 19 2014 the Planning Commission heard the appeal of the design review board's denials of those four sites of the design review for those four sites the Planning Commission after much

0:45:34deliberation determined that some of the required design review criteria were not applicable to projects such as small Wireless Communications facilities such as these and the Planning Commission determined that the remaining design review criteria were satisfied by the project

0:45:52and the Planning Commission granted the appeal and approved the design review for the projects with a quorum of five members present it's worth noting also that the Planning Commission at that time added a condition of approval that the design review approvals would expire after a

0:46:13period of 10 years so for those four sites the use permits are in effect as long as the the sites continue to operate but the design review approvals would expire after a period of 10 years at which time the um the approvals would either the approvals for the existing design would

0:46:35either need to be renewed or a new design would need to be proposed for consideration by the design review board the um the that condition of approval was included in the in the planning commissions design review approval of of all of these sites um and so the council can choose tonight

0:46:58whether um whether it would like to include that condition of approval as well or any other any additional conditions of approval the conditions of approval of the Planning Commission we're actually not included in the um in the draft resolution that's before you

0:47:15tonight so staff requests that um if the council does adopt a similar resolution that you would either restate the Planning Commission conditions of approval or incorporate them by reference from the the Planning Commission resolution um John Spriggs filed an appeal of the

0:47:36planning commission's design review approval for the site near 7800 Eureka Avenue um and as I said the the um remaining three sites um those design review approvals were not appealed um and they are now in force so as far as the procedure for appeals um appeals of the Planning Commission

0:48:01are heard by the city council pursuant to the municipal code and they are de novo which means that the the city council can consider new information new facts new evidence that was not presented at either the Planning Commission hearing or the design review board hearing

0:48:20however the um pursuant also pursuant to the municipal code the city council must use the standards of review for the original decision which were the the design review findings and the design review criteria found in the zoning ordinance which are also included in the agenda

0:48:37bill also some background on on relevant Federal legislation the federal Telecommunications Act prevents cities from prohibiting or having the effective prohibiting prohibiting the provision of wireless service in the city and also the city cannot discriminate among Wireless providers

0:49:00the Telecommunications Act also prohibits cities from regulating Wireless facilities based on concerns of health effects of RF transmission under the under the act the council may not consider health effects of the facility and its decision um Karen can you do my turning on the

0:49:22projector sure sorry about that so now I'll give a brief project description and the plans I think in order to see that we need you know dimming thank you so those are the project plans up on the screen um and I will give a brief project description uh the project proposes two uh Das

0:49:44antennas on top of a seven foot extension of an existing utility pole the antennas are about two feet tall themselves and the mount that they are on is it takes up about one foot so in total the installation adds about 10 feet to the existing utility pole all of the associated equipment would be

0:50:07mounted on the pole you can see that in the in the elevation on the the far left of the screen and the all of the the antennas and the extension and the equipment would all be painted to match the pole there are also examples photo examples and some discussion of other similar Das

0:50:31nodes which was included in the agenda bill so I'll now go through each of the points in the appellants letter of appeal and and respond to those um the first point is um this the El Cerrito Planning Commission made procedural errors at the February 19 2014 meeting I believe most

0:50:54of this has been retracted in the appellants addendum to their appeal letter but I'll just address it real briefly um the planning the Planning Commission correctly uh passed a resolution that stated that the facility would be added to an existing utility poll that is in

0:51:15fact true you can see that on the on the drawings um and the the resolution correctly stated that the second point is that the proposed Das is not necessary for El Cerrito residents but is designed to relay signals to Kensington the applicant has stated that each of these Das nodes would function

0:51:35independently and would serve the areas immediately around them and then they don't function as a way of of relaying signals if you'd like more information on that I'm sure that the applicant can also address that tonight the third point is there's no independent evidence that the

0:51:57proposed Das is necessary to fill existing coverage gaps and no independent evidence that the proposed deaths will be beneficial to the city of El Cerrito the applicant has submitted coverage maps which are propagation Maps which do which do show gaps in service

0:52:15um they can also provide you more information regarding these Maps tonight if you so wish I think uh more importantly I think the point here is that these um this discussion of the Gap in service and the necessity of a gap in service in order to to permit the facility

0:52:40um is more germane to the use permit discussion and was discussed by the Planning Commission um at that time and also the the council did discuss that themselves at the um the one appeal of the use permit that the council heard tonight the what is being appealed is the design review

0:53:01approval the planning commission's design review approval based on the design review criteria and so the the discussion of a gap and those um sort of more technical issues are really more suited to to the use permit and tonight what's before the commission is really

0:53:24um the aesthetic the Aesthetics of the site um as um as described in the design review criteria and um as would be affected you know by the application of those design of the design review criteria the fourth point is the project is not exempt from the California Environmental

0:53:43Quality Act uh there's existing case law a case from San Francisco that um came that addressed a project that was very very similar to this project um and in that case the the court determined that um the What's called the class III exemption of SQL which is for uh new

0:54:07construction and conversion of small structures uh was applicable to that facility and the City attorney has advised planning staff that that is the appropriate um that's is the relevant case here um and that that the class 3 exemption would similarly be applicable in this instance

0:54:26um the fifth point is the proposed Das is located on a utility pole in a dangerous zone less than half a mile from the Hayward fault and in a known Landslide Zone there are utility poles currently existing throughout the both the aqueous priolo zone for the Hayward fault and

0:54:44the city's lap map Landslide area those polls are currently necessary to provide utilities to those areas the the regulation of um as far as safety is concerned and the structure structural components of the poll those would be regulated by the California Public Utilities Commission

0:55:06um which does regulate public utilities and utility polls um especially specifically through the cpuc's general order 95 which does address which does address specifically um locations of utilities on utility poles and and things like that um the applicant um the polls are are owned by PG e and are

0:55:31managed for PG e by uh the Northern California joint poll Association and the applicant will also be required to submit materials to the Joint poll Association before installing um this facility which will also address the these structural issues as and they will also be able to

0:55:53um they will also be required to seek an encroachment permit through the the El Cerrito Public Works Department the Das at 7 800 so the sixth point is the Das at 7 800 Eureka will have a negative impact on property values in the area um there's also relevant case law on

0:56:14this pursuant to a federal lawsuit out of from the city of Carlsbad the concerns about property about a reduction in property values cannot be a proxy for concerns about health effects so in as much as the decree any decreased property values would be a result of concerns about health effects

0:56:40that's not something that the that the council can consider in their decision um in addition the um the council's decision should be focused on the design review findings and the design review criteria none of those criteria specifically uh specifically center around property

0:57:01values Point number seven is there is a precedent for ATT singular relocating Das to a more appropriate to more appropriate alternative locations um as I said the use permits for the use permit for this facility is approved um so the use permit is really what approved the location

0:57:26um so at this point at T has has an approved use permit for this site of this utility pole at near 7800 Eureka Avenue and that use permit gives them the ability to install a wireless facility on it and the appeal that's before you tonight is really an appeal of the design review approval so it's

0:57:45really um and it's really an approval of what the facility looks like um so discussion of Alternatives would really have would have been more germane at the um during the use permit process and then there are a couple of other points that the um appellant added in

0:58:06their addendum that'll just go through real quickly um and that is the planning commissions resolution granting an appeal of the ATT Das applications for 7800 Eureka included an additional amendment that the approval have a time limit of 10 years of 10 year from the date of the

0:58:30approval at which point ATT could apply for a new design permit the same amendment was applied to the resolutions for the other three polls under appeal the exact wording of the approved amendment is stated by staff um however this amendment conflicts with the use permit so I I believe I

0:58:50addressed that before the the use permits uh the use permit will really use permits for all these facilities but tonight for 7 800 Eureka would be in effect as long as the as long as the facility operates in that location but after 10 years the design review approval would expire so at that

0:59:08point the design with the design of the facility only would need to be reevaluated so at that time the applicant could submit a new application for the existing facility and the design review board could consider that and reapprove the design for the existing facility or the

0:59:23applicant could determine um that for whatever reason that they want to propose a different design and the design review board could consider that design as well um the second the second point in this addendum is the Planning Commission failed to adequately apply the design

0:59:41review criteria um of the design and review criteria three were excluded um so I'll just address this really briefly the um the Planning Commission did determine that several of the design review criteria were not applicable to these types of projects um the one that I think you will

1:00:00probably hear the most about um tonight is the first is design review criteria number one um which corresponds I believe to finding number four on the um on the res on the resolution and that deals with um that that finding specifically the text of that finding

1:00:21specifically refers to a lot of components which are associated with building structures such as roof lines and building facades um and I think building articulation and because those elements were included in the finding the the Planning Commission determined that that finding was really

1:00:41more applicable to buildings and not to to small structures you know small non-habitable structures such as this and so they determined that that finding was not applicable um the third point is the Planning Commission exceeded the scope of the meeting um which was an appeal of the design review

1:01:00board findings by allowing ATT representatives to present their views on wireless Gap coverage the need for expanded telecommunications services and Geo 95 compliance so I have addressed that previously it's true that those that those concepts are really more suited for the

1:01:20discussion of the use permit and it's also true that the applicant did present some of that information at the appeal of the design review um design rewards denial to the Planning Commission the Planning Commission however didn't take that consideration into account in making their decision

1:01:38their their deliberation and their discussion really did focus on the design review criteria and they went through each of those very carefully um and made findings very carefully based on the design review criteria so regardless of what information was presented at the at the hearing it

1:01:53wasn't part of the the planning commissions approval so um just one last item and that is there are some additional materials before you on the dice which were not included in the agenda bill and I'll put those up on the screen very quickly but what that is is um it's a photo simulation of what the

1:02:19proposed site would look like so that should have been included with the plans but it was it was omitted so um we've passed that out to you tonight and I will put it up on the screen real quick for everyone to see but otherwise that concludes my presentation and I can

1:02:33answer any questions you might have okay do you want to put first or so you said several so these this is the two right here this this what this is is a photo on the left of the existing pole um and the photo on the right is a simulation of what the pole would look

1:03:02like with the proposed project thank you looking downhill um looking well we're looking um this should be looking up the hill yes okay um so um at this let's see here we have some questions so uh this would just be Council asking questions at this point question mark

1:03:31okay yes so this would just be Council questions I have no more thank you thank you Mr Moss just a couple questions um can you talk about or you mentioned during the conceptual design review that the the board member is the design review board members mentioned that they

1:03:45were interested in potentially a concrete poll was that what was the resolution of that suggestion um yeah so the drb was um they did inquire about a concrete Poll for aesthetic reasons some of the board members felt that it that would be aesthetically preferable to the existing

1:04:02polls um the applicant looked into that and they did submit a letter from PG e stating that PG e doesn't use concrete levels for safety concerns and thank you um with regard to the planning commission's condition about the renewal process after 10 years can you discuss

1:04:19what the process would be yeah it would it would be similar so it's similar to um you know a use permit that would expire so um the the design review approval would expire it's in the resolution so we would make a note of that in the file um and after after a period of 10 years

1:04:41the applicant would have to submit a new application um that either you know they either have to submit the you know basically the same drawings again to have the the existing site reapproved or submit another design that the design review board could then consider so if the

1:04:58design review board rejected and then the applicant appealed to the city council and the city council rejected then what happens given that there's already this facility that that's in place yeah the City attorney might want to address this a little bit but um basically there yeah there would be a

1:05:13use permit in place so at some point the the city has to allow the applicant a means by you know to which to fill that to fulfill that use permit so there has to be some some design that is approved um you know there has to be um you know the the the decision-making

1:05:33body um you know would probably be served best if if they were going to deny a design to provide enough guidance to the applicant so that they could return um with a design which was more likely to be approved which addressed you know their concerns yeah I don't have much to add I mean the

1:05:53city council has the ability to approve approve with conditions or deny the design review that's been applied for the council's decision should be based on the evidence that's presented which includes the written materials as well as the oral testimony tonight um and based on that testimony that the

1:06:09council believes that it can't make the findings necessary for this design it can deny it or attend or craft conditions that would result in a design that the that the council would approve of finding that the that the conditions had that the findings could be made but

1:06:27but as Mr Moss pointed out I mean the the use here has already been approved ultimately you know not approving a design would frustrate that existing approval um so somewhere in the middle there there's there's um while it's not a necessity that the council approve a design you know not

1:06:46approving one would would ultimately frustrate the applicant's ability to implement the approval that's already been granted so the council retains discretion to decide what to do in terms of the design but ultimately some designs should be should be feasible for

1:07:02this site um thank you and with regard to the planning commission's determination that some of the criteria were not applicable I assume that that's the Dr the the design review board does that in some cases is that right that's true um the the design review findings

1:07:19specifically State um I don't have the language exactly in front of me but they state that the something like the applicable um there's a finding that um the the project meets the applicable design review criterias so either decision making body needs to go through

1:07:41those criterias and and determine if they're all applicable or which ones are and which ones are not and as far as you know design review board did that but their interpretation was that they were all applicable to the project well the design review board denied the design

1:07:55review so that was a little bit different because they went through they determined that two of those design review criteria were specifically not met not that they were applicable but not met right whereas they denied it based on the fact that it didn't meet those two criteria where the Planning

1:08:13Commission went through the criteria determined that some of them were not applicable and that the and then the project met the remaining criteria thank you another question I just sort of Had A peculiar question and that is because some of the um the criteria from the the drb was it

1:08:34really suitable to a project of like like this more or less because they deal with building facades and different elements that really didn't pertain if if they were if the drb uh made some changes in criteria what happens in 10 years are they looking at the new criteria for a

1:08:57project like this or is that what they go by in 10 years yeah that that's true so if if the municipal code was was amended um you know in if the zoning ordinance was amended during or you know a new zoning ordinance was adopted during that 10-year period um whatever whatever the standard was

1:09:16when the new application is submitted would be the standard that that application was evaluated under council member Lyman yeah um we can use any one of the design review criteria tonight so even though the Planning Commission uh felt that only one of them may have some relevance

1:09:35we have the the capability of using all of those design criteria tonight is that correct that's true the the council um would does need to go through all of the design review criteria and determine that the criteria is either not applicable it's satisfied or it's not

1:09:53satisfied is one of the goals of the 10-year limit on the design review board in case there's changes in technology that allows the antenna to get smaller or or less or more aesthetic that was largely the planning commission's concern so they they wanted the um the design of

1:10:13the facilities to be re-evaluated as technology changes in the future and and that could include uh you know differences in materials composite materials that might be used for the antenna or for the extension is that correct that's true it would yeah the the design review approval

1:10:30um encompasses the the entire project so that's the extension the antennas the equipment and all of it the same challenges exist tonight as do in the expired the 10 years from now scenario where um you know if the design is is deemed to be an aesthetic um they potentially are going to have to

1:10:53go back to the design board but they are uh design not necessarily the design review board the literal uh drawing board um the but the issue Still Remains that they have the right to put something on this at this facility at this location that's true these permit was approved

1:11:15and was not appealed and is in Force is is a antenna considered like the antenna that we put in next door or a utility pole is that considered a structure the antenna um I'm sorry the oh the um is a telephone pole or antenna pole is it considered a structure yes I believe under the zoning ordinance

1:11:39um a structure is is something which occupies location on the ground and there's there's a few other criteria but I believe it would be great thank you then we're ready to proceed and um the next stage of this process is for the representatives um or Mr Sprint excuse me is for Mr

1:12:02Spriggs representing the appellant uh to speak and you have 10 to 15 minutes thank you thank you hello mayor ableston city council members uh thanks for hearing my appeal my name is John Spriggs excuse me I live at [address removed] approximately 100 feet away from the proposed ass node

1:12:39being discussed this evening on the second generation resident of El Cerrito my parents built their first home here in 1949 and I'm a graduate of El Cerrito High School um I'm going to address each of the planning commission's findings from the February 2014 meeting and why they're

1:12:58not supported by evidence or in an error I also want to remind everyone this is a de Noble hearing the city can consider new findings I would like to point out that the city has the power to deny the application without being in violation of federal law requiring local

1:13:15governments not to interfere with the provision of Wireless if in fact an existence of a gap is shown to not exist at this location in August 2013 the design review board denied att's application for the Das noted 70 100 Eureka they found that the area was already

1:13:37cluttered with wires and poles and then a 10 foot and 10 amount equipment would be incompatible with design review criteria numbers one and four which are up here right now in February 2014 the Planning Commission granted an appeal to the ATT citing 15 findings I believe that the following

1:13:56findings of the Planning Commission are not supported by fact and or an error Planning Commission finding number four which correlates to design review criteria number one uh the Planning Commission found that the design is appropriate for a wireless facility and

1:14:13consistent with the Aesthetics of the poll the Planning Commission aired by only considering the Aesthetics of the poll they failed to consider the design review criteria number one that the project contributes to an attractive and comfortable environment for occupants

1:14:28visitors in the general community that is they only considered the Aesthetics of the poll but not the environment immediately around the poll to so as you can see there's a tremendous amount of clutter around the pole both in terms of ground and aerial wires um

1:14:50the um in addition to to the the polls and the Clutter above overhead there's also um two ground mounted equipment boxes uh near the pole at the base of the pole one is a four by six by three and the other is three by five by about two feet this just adds to the entire clutter and

1:15:13the and the overall sort of sort of unattractiveness of the particular corner where this antenna is being proposed the Planning Commission also aired from the they fail to consider uh design review criteria number four which calls for the creation of an attractive and

1:15:34visually interesting billing environment the addition of a 10-foot pole on top of an existing structure is completely out of scale with the single-family residences in the neighborhood it's significantly taller than any of the surrounding structures and is located on

1:15:48a rise over Seaview drive that enhances the pole height which you can see in the previous slide Planning Commission finding number six which can support corresponds to design review criteria three states that the proposed project minimizes the size of the antenna required to provide wireless

1:16:08service to El Cerrito and minimizes the need for large facilities this finding is based on on the assumption that the Planning Commission made that no coverage Gap exists in the area around 7 800 El Cerrito um however at T has provided no data to show the existence of this Gap uh what

1:16:29they have only provided is a statement from an employee of their company who says the coverage Gap exists but provides no data to back up this claim um ATT provides a general map of the area with no details or data and describes the improvements using the subjective term

1:16:46acceptable service coverage rather than any specific numerical figure as to what sort of coverage will be provided I believe the question of the Gap is relevant to the design review because the the city's General plan calls for improving the Aesthetics of the city of

1:17:03El Cerrito if there is no Gap there's no need for a poll they're looking for an antenna and the Improvement and we know everyone agrees that the including the Planning Commission that the the Das node is not an attractive addition to the city so if there is no Gap there's

1:17:18no need for a gas node and there's no need to proceed with the application um compared to the lack of that of a gap the residents have done their own study and found that there is a solid signal in this area around this pole and the signal numbers here are very similar to the signal numbers at

1:17:48the near across the street from the tower that 18t has on Stockton Avenue [Music] um so that to move on um Planning Commission fighting number nine the commission errored by failing to consider the design review criteria number six which states that the proposed project is compatible with the

1:18:15historical or visual character of the area or recognized by the cities having such character the area around 7800 El Cerrito is is defined by the city as a low density residential neighborhood consisting almost entirely of houses from the 1950s the addition of the Das

1:18:31node is completely outside the visual character of this neighborhood it's it's much larger than the surrounding structures and existing poles and and stands out prominently from the visual character of other structures in the neighborhood uh Planning Commission finding number 14

1:18:44is the proposed facility is consistent with the conditional use permit is an error the design of this project conflicts with the use permit findings number one number two and number nine um concerning use permit finding number one the design of the ten foot pole

1:19:02um including a Das node at the top of the bowl adversely affects property values by increasing visual clutter and creating the perception of danger for potential buyers um a California licensed Realtors have stated that you might have found in my opinion my own experience that there was a very

1:19:26real stigma and cellular facilities near homes who perceived as undesirable this so this isn't directly addressing the question of whether or not this is a health effect it's addressing the question of whether what the perception is of having a poll in the area

1:19:39concerning design compatibility with use permit findings two and nine as previously described there's no evidence of a gap existing and so therefore two and nine which um say that the design that the dash node will provide 4G LTE and Signal improvements is is is not factual it's

1:19:59not based by facts it's not based in facts um I believe the city can upload the design review findings under the IV application um in addition to the level of findings that I just presented I would like to point out that the city has the power to uphold the design review board findings

1:20:17and deny the application in the response letter to this appeal ATT claims that the city could not deny an application that would quote prohibit or have the effect of prohibiting provision of Wireless Services they further state that effective prohibition um sorry the the state that effective

1:20:40prohibition exists when a wireless carrier demonstrates that a significant Gap in wireless coverage exists and the proposed facility would provide the least intrusive means to cover the the service the service Gap ATT has completely failed to demonstrate that a

1:20:55significant Gap exists and the designs that are proposing won't necessarily fill a gap if there is none therefore denial of this application will not be in violation of this statute um in fact much of 18 T's rebuttal is is to my appeal is based on the premise that a significant coverage Gap exists

1:21:15and and none such has been proven um ATT has stated that they are willing to work with the city and the residents of El Cerrito at the Planning Commission meeting um on February 19th uh att's representative Ken Mintz stated quote what do you believe we could do to fill

1:21:40the Gap in a better way we are willing to work with you I believe Mr the city should take Mr Mintz up on this offer and work with Bell Street or residents and come up with a cellular coverage plan that represents everyone's interests I asked the city to Grant my

1:21:53appeal and support the findings of the design review board um at the least until a competent independent consultant has been able to determine if a gap exists coverage Gap exists in this location and I would ask the the city council to deny the appeal until such time thank you thank you

1:22:14um next we will have a representative for appellants make the appellant presentation and if you could identify yourselves or yourself as you begin sure good evening did you want to shut down you know we don't need them and um let's see I see that it it's Ken men's

1:22:36and Judy Roland um for atnt and you also have 10 to 15 minutes hey thank you very much mayor Edelson and members of the council uh thank you for the opportunity to have us speak this evening my name is Ken Mintz I'm the area manager of external Affairs for ATT here in Contra Costa

1:22:57County my office is in San Ramon um our objective here is clear it's to address a significant gap of in-building 3G and 4G LTE wireless coverage through the least intrusive means possible in this specific neighborhood you know think back we had a moratorium on wireless facility development or

1:23:22deployment here in El Cerrito for two years and then following that we submitted this application in January of last year so this application has been outstanding for well over a year now during that period of time our Telecom needs for these upgrades have increased

1:23:40that much more in addition to our extensive engineering analysis of the need we've heard from many El Cerrito residents our customers who come by our store to let us know that they would like to see improved wireless service here within the city you know and it's

1:24:04let me just jump down to make a couple of quick points and I'll have Judy come up you know we take the city's concerns for its Aesthetics very seriously when we want to do everything that we can to minimize the impact of our equipment in a neighborhood when you look back over the process that

1:24:22we've gone through conceptual design first with design review board the Planning Commission approval of our land use our second of appearance before the design review board for the final design after that particular meeting we did go back and we relooked at what we had

1:24:41brought forward and we made changes we re-analyzed alternative possible alternative locations other polls in the area to make sure that in fact it at least our sense this was the least intrusive site are we considered ground mounted equipment as an alternative to the

1:25:02ancillary equipment that sits below the lamp on that pole we considered putting the antennas on what's known as the side arm which is instead of an extended pole putting the antennas at a lower level and we also reconfigured the ancillary equipment on the pole by switching the

1:25:23radio box and the prism we've created a more streamlined top view of the of the pole from what the original design was um we believe as did the city staff in its recommendations and the Planning Commission its findings the design we put forward is appropriate for wireless

1:25:45telecommunications facility at this site and it's consistent with the existing Aesthetics of the utility poll and we ask that you approve our request to move this design forward thank you and I'll ask Judy now come up and talk specifically about this good evening mayor Abelson members of

1:26:10the council and staff my name is Judy Roland and I'm a project manager at at T I can specifically address questions that you have about the design of the facility but I'd like to just Begin by quickly describing the nature of a Das a Das is a distributed antenna system

1:26:26it's a system of small low powered antenna facilities connected back to a hub or a base station by fiber optic cable it's typically utilized in areas of varied topography with trees or foliage that are difficult to cover with a macro site Das is also ideal for residential areas

1:26:45with fewer no opportunities for placement of a macro El Cerrito has all of these conditions these state-of-the-art low-powered facilities provide consistent reliable in-building coverage to a specific area with minimal visual impact at T has a significant coverage has a

1:27:04significant coverage Gap in El Cerrito and contrary to what the appellant stated we have demonstrated that by providing existing and proposed coverage maps of UMTS and LTE coverage I have those maps with me tonight but I believe they're also part of the record and

1:27:19should be part of your packets as well the choice for this specific location began when our implementation team first went out into the neighborhood to look at the best opportunity to get this coverage when we look to cite any new facility Das or otherwise we look first

1:27:34at using existing structures rather than introducing new ones use of existing structures is generally preferred by most communities and encouraged under most telecommunications ordinances Das equipment is designed to take advantage of utility poles in the public

1:27:50right-of-way and there are three factors that have to be considered in choosing the available polls the first question is if an antenna on a specific pole will provide the suitable coverage there are several elements that go into that the ground elevation at the

1:28:04pole the pole height and surrounding buildings trees and foliage that would block the signal we then look to see if we can mount the equipment on the pole in such a way that we comply with the requirements of general order 95. this is somewhat restrictive we can't just put the

1:28:19equipment anywhere at any height that we have to look at available climbing space the number and location of cross arms pole loading and clearance from primary and secondary electrical transmission lines and then if there is a choice between poles they meet RF and general 95

1:28:37general order 95 requirements we look for polls with the least amount of clutter that did not block specific views and if possible are partially screened or backed by trees We Believe very strongly that we have thoroughly looked at all of the available design Alternatives and that

1:28:53the poll Chosen and the equipment design we're proposing is the least obtrusive way to provide reliable in-building service in this area of El Cerrito the configuration consists of two small antennas placed at the top of the pole and two equipment enclosures the pole at 7 800 Eureka Drive will be

1:29:15extended by 10 feet to accommodate the antennas now I understand there were some questions about the jpa process The Joint pole Association process the structural analysis and the safety of the poles I'm prepared to address how that works if you have questions about

1:29:30that but I will say that it's it's a very carefully regulated we do submit an application PG e reviews it runs a loading analysis on the information that's provided provides us back with a what's called a form 2 that shows that they've reviewed it run the calculations

1:29:48on it and approved it and we have the form two for this specific poll approved after the August 7th drb hearing last year as Ken stated we reconfigured the equipment placement on the poles reversing the two cabinets with the goal of better streamlines streamlining the

1:30:06design in response to the drb's concerns Geo 95 limits how high we can go on the pole of the equipment and we have to meet specific clearances the equipment itself is the best available to provide att's voice and data services we looked at Ground mounting the enclosure and we

1:30:22would be willing to discuss that more to the extent there is space on the ground but we found that residents tend to prefer the equipment on the pole rather than additional cabinets on the ground as stated in the resolution approved by the Planning Commission last June

1:30:37approval and installation of the Das in El Cerrito will enhance the convenience of the living and working environment and placing the facilities on existing utility poles limits the visual impact of the facilities also as stated in the staff report prepared for the August drb hearing and

1:30:55affirm by the Planning Commission in February the proposed facilities will be consistent with the existing Aesthetics of the polls I urge you tonight to vote to enhance the Telecommunications infrastructure in El Cerrito and uphold the planning commission's approval of the design

1:31:12review thank you um and at this point in time we will hear well before you do that I do have questions that that I would like to ask of that of the applicant or both applicants or no just the applicant I'm sorry just the applicant okay and I don't know if you want to take them

1:31:33after the public hearing or or the rest of the public hearing why don't we do the whole thing before we do that okay so at this point we'll hear comments from the public and as I said before each member of the public has three minutes and there is this a light system

1:31:49that tells you how much time you have left starts out green goes to yellow and that means you have one minute left and when you see red it's time to wrap up very quickly so I will ask our acting city clerk to please call the speakers certainly and for those of you who would

1:32:10like to speak and you haven't filled out a speaker slip left yet they're up here we have pens right here and you can do that um moving forward and I also want to say that if I pronounce your name wrong I apologize in advance so far we have nine speakers your honor

1:32:26um I'd like to call Chong Jin Lee good evening of [address removed] excuse me um you know just check elsewhere has 23 000 people uh we are ranked 277 out of 500 municipality in California so we're right in the medium we're not a big city we're not a small City but we're big

1:32:54enough that we residents feel that no one came and visit us when we talk about the polls and no one looked throughout Windows no one come to a front yard no one came to a backyard no one came up looking to our living room's windows and seeing that we can look straight into

1:33:10the antenna and no one looked through our kids Windows as well and but we're small enough that we don't have telecommunication expert within the city that's granted that's understandable but you know people like John should not have to go out and do the research

1:33:28finding whether there's a gap or not because by federal law if there is a gap we have the duty to fill the Gap we have to like to carry to it but if their Gap doesn't necessary condition now John had proved that it's -71 minus 80 something decibel milliwatts and that

1:33:48is four bars and that's the applicant has stated they've been they have this application sitting on the desk with one year now and we're doing just fine Eureka neighborhood for doing just fine for one year so there is no Gap and you know came to think of this if

1:34:07you have McDonald coming here and say that they want to have a grease and fat disposal facility in El Cerrito what would we do we'll send an inspector we'll have them Father all the necessary information and if we don't have the expertise we'll coin independent

1:34:22consultant and we will build McDonald's same thing here we need to Independent verifiable Gap someone has to verify independently the Lots of city have done very good job in verifying the gap for example they have to have the applicant subject not just a propagation

1:34:42map every single time they pull up propagation map we have to we wish that we have bionic eyes look at them we can't even see it the bound the propagation map has to be detailed to the street label to the house level and there has to be side hopping fell hands off

1:35:00signal D grade and the Pilot's channel has to be all studied and written up and been signed by a t whoever is going to be held responsible accountable and that has to be independently verified by independent consultants and that will be accepted and that is the police duty of the local

1:35:23municipality you know when I walk around for the past 10 months I don't a lot of talking to people I feel I have done a very good survey I wish ATT have done the same survey most of the time is very very negative people discuss it the dismayed and they said why here how can they do something

1:35:43else this is 21st century if you could wrap up please okay so you know I just have to tell you that because when you walk down San Francisco you don't see the antenna you will give Plaza you don't see the antenna all these are hidden I mean there's so many new technology light radio Cube

1:36:01Alex and Dot even ATT is proud of the Metro cells which are all very small and light radio keep is just the size of a cubic a Rubik Cube and everything is consumed that it's so small it's used to sell little energy and we can really just be the test case for that okay thank you

1:36:21okay I wish you can grind it appeal and deny in good fair to ATT and bring NT to the table thank you thank you okay next week next speaker is Adam Lehman hi I live at [address removed] corner of leviston and Terrace there's not a tower going up in front of my house or within a block but I'm here

1:36:56to support my neighbors we're where parents were teachers we're neighbors we're coaches and this has been going on for damn near a year and a half now and we keep coming up and saying that we don't want the towers in our neighborhood I know we cannot discuss the health issues but as

1:37:16was pointed out there's a public perception that we don't really believe the government what they're telling us we don't want these in our neighborhoods and you know for a year and a half we've been saying if you go on the ATT website if you want to sign up for a program you

1:37:33go on the website and you look at their map and it has excellent coverage throughout El Cerrito throughout Kensington they tell us another story here but these guys they're working right now right they're on the job their job is to sell these towers we're tired

1:37:47we're doing our thing all day long and we drag our butts out here night in and night out for a year and a half now and it's the same thing we don't need it the community doesn't want it and and they keep appealing and we keep coming back out and fighting the same fight and I

1:38:04just want to say that you know it if it were any other type of harassment we could get a restraining order right but it doesn't work that way but it is it's the same old hat over and over and it's their job to sell the towers to you to us and we keep fighting the same

1:38:21fight and you know I don't know what more to say but we don't need them we don't want them all right thank you thank you Austin Ruda okay thank you all right thank you Austin Road at [address removed] so first of all I applaud the design review boards decision to deny

1:38:45the approvals or the the projects based on the aesthetic um the Aesthetics of the of the city and protecting our views and protecting what we really value in the city which is our view which is our views um so these projects aren't needed the project that's being proposed is

1:39:04absolutely not a creative solution this is not the latest technology there's better technology available and if it's not available right now it's imminent as long as it's imminent and there's no evidence of a significant Gap then um then let's wait let's think about waiting because a 10-year

1:39:26decision that means we're going to be faced with this old technology for 10 years technology that we don't even need so people are scratching their head about the relevance of the criteria on which you base the decision well there is a whole guidance there are many

1:39:43documents there's a whole guidance on responsible deployment of Wireless technology in neighborhoods and it states explicitly that wireless technology should not be deployed within 300 feet of any residential household household it also states that wireless technology should not be placed in a way

1:40:02that blocks significant views or even interrupts our view of the Horizon if these violate all those conditions but those conditions were taken off the table a long time ago but in the spirit of what we like in our city and what we value in our city you need to consider

1:40:18those criteria in the context of all these other things not a significant Gap that there's better technology that's imminent on the horizon need to consider all those things when you make your decision okay that's all I need to say thank you thank you Mary Kay Johansen

1:40:43hello my name is Mary Catherine Johansen I live at [address removed] um I've been in this room several times um listening to these same arguments and I'm sad to spend this time away from my family but I'm extremely happy to get to know my neighbors and I um admire my neighbors so much for all

1:41:07of the effort and work that they have done to educate us and to um to find out about this project and I'm I'm just feel confused why my neighbors have had to do this on their own time and and appeal with their own money um instead of the um City uh working for us because it's

1:41:32very clear that most of us don't want this project um and I would ask the city council who have been so Progressive in many ways with um um trying to make the city Greener to try and make it more attractive to be future thinking and and make it a more pleasant place to live to to really try

1:41:54and think outside the box and um to maybe hire an in a consultant who can look at new technologies because at T does not seem to be they just keep repeating the same stories and they're um and only upon questioning um do they amend those stories and and so I think

1:42:14we really need another viewpoint I was really um confused at the Planning Commission hearing because I went to the design review board and they said that the polls were already cluttered and um therefore more stuff should not be added because it added to the visual clutter

1:42:31and then in the February Planning Commission meeting they said well there's already a lot of equipment on the polls more equipment doesn't really matter and that's kind of like arguing well it's already ugly why not make it uglier they already listened to Bart the

1:42:46fans on the polls well you there's already so much Visual and audio noise and I I don't like that that view of my neighborhood that it's already this Wasteland why not make it worse I don't think it's that way at all and I would also um ask you to please consider the safety

1:43:07if there's an earthquake all this heavy stuff falling down and um it won't help us so thank you very much thank you Paulina Lee good evening my name is Paulina and I live at [address removed] I'm gonna read it off my iPhone with a t coverage I like to First address one point given

1:43:39by Mr Ming's he repeatedly over and over again and I'm gonna address it one more time he stated that many residents from the city of El Cerrito has stopped by the ATT store requesting for improvement of wireless coverage at T provided a very thick binder with lots of coverage coverage maps that do

1:44:01not have any specific on the back of the and on that do not have any specific on the so-called Gap in addition at the very back of this binder that were pages and pages of these feedback cards from public asking for improvement income coverage at that particular city council meeting

1:44:27I use my iPhone with atnt 4G LTE coverage to check every single card and none not even one of these requests were from residents of El Cerrito obviously that binder was not shown after at any drb Planning Commission or today's meeting so now I have a few questions for the

1:44:52council please excuse my ignorance I really I'm very very confused what is considered a small structure a 10 foot pole on top of a utility pole that is maybe 30 feet one fourth of the length is considered small Mr Moss also said that the pole was built with consideration of safety and

1:45:16potential of earthquake risk in mind I'm sure that was the case and I'm fairly certain how a 10 foot extension on top of the pole was not part of the criteria for consideration has anyone asked a PG e if they would be okay with that whose responsibility is it to maintain

1:45:38the safety of the pole once these 10-foot poles these stand for small additions were added has anyone talked to PG e about the safety of their workers when they have to go up to the poll to do maintenance work on the PG E Equipment last question I have how more misleading the pictures could

1:46:00be presented by atnt why doesn't the applicant present pictures of the proposed site from the inside of a nearby resident instead of from the ground up where you can only see the sky but nothing else thank you thank you Marie Apple good evening my name is Maria Pell I

1:46:29live at [address removed] and it's approximately 100 feet from the proposed Das Tower and I just wanted to remind the city council that it does have the power to reject ATT design application in its response brief at T cites the federal Telecommunications Act of 1996

1:46:48for the proposition that the city cannot deny its application where the denial would prohibit or have the effect of prohibiting the provision of personal Wireless services at T relies on this proposition to limit the City's power to deny its application the example of a Prohibition in

1:47:05violation of the statute cited by a t and relevant here is where the carrier demonstrates a significant Gap in wireless service coverage and that the proposed facility is the least intrusive means to fill that Gap here there is no evidence of a gap much less a significant Gap without a gap

1:47:23demonstrated by ATT the city can deny att's application without violating the federal statute the city council has the power to deny att's application and should do so the city council should affirm the design review board findings that the design adds clutter to the neighborhood it is

1:47:41unattractive and inconsistent with the character and quality of the neighborhood the Pro's design is not consistent with El Cerrito's General plan which is to in part to develop quality residential areas as the proposed design adds clutter detracts from the visual Aesthetics of El Cerrito

1:47:58and creates a less attractive environment and City I respectfully request that the city council deny att's application thanks thank you are there more speakers yes Michael guest hello I live at [address removed] and I don't really have any new points to add I just want to express my support for my

1:48:26neighbors and encourage you to reject the requests for what seems to be a completely unnecessary eyesore in our neighborhoods in the absence of any objective information that it really is that really is necessary so thank you thank you Patrick Devine uh good evening I live at [address removed]

1:48:53Avenue The Ground Zero for this Das uh issue um I think everyone all of the speakers have really addressed the necessity and the relevance of this particular Das and I would rather or I would like to really point out the sort of lack of information that I think is is

1:49:15is we still need to find out I think and really if there's one number that I want you to remember it's 24 feet 24 feet is the distance from the base of the pole to the closest point of my house now the average telephone pole is 30 feet tall six feet of that is buried in

1:49:36the ground you do the math that's 24 feet so the existing pole if it fell would perhaps graze the side of my house now you add on top of that pole 10 feet and now you have the weight of two washing machines crashing down right into the middle of my children's bedroom

1:49:55now is this an overly dramatic interpretation perhaps but I think the point is we don't know there has been no seismic investigation that has been public to us we don't know there's been no independent investigation of the so-called Gap that people have brought

1:50:12up and so I think we would be remiss myself as a physician and a research scientist I always use data to make a decision and if I don't that's neglect and I think that we need more information at this point to really determine is this seismically okay is it needed

1:50:34and so I think with those points in mind I think we we need to put off or deny this Das until we have more information so that we can be sure that we are making the right decision thanks thank you Heidi Bart yes madame mayor members of the city council thank you for giving me your

1:51:08time um I love it [address removed] so right across the street um when we moved in about 11 years ago it was mostly elderly people who were about ready to sell their house or move on to a different phase of their life now the um happily the neighborhood is filled with children I have two of my

1:51:27own I'm glad I think my objections are sort of threefold tonight um first the visual clutter that people have keep bringing up um and I'm glad that somebody already said that all the pictures shown by ATT are looking up the hill but one of the pictures shown showed the ATT box that sits right in

1:51:48front of my house so um when you're sitting right there in the corner if you add a tower to that it becomes much more cluttered than if you're looking up the street already when we are backing out of our driveway our visibility is blocked from seeing who's coming up

1:52:09around Seaview up to up Eureka and we did not know that box was going in we were never informed um and so add a tower across the street and you're adding to that visual clutter and um the safety issues I'll talk about that too I am concerned about the safety safety issues the city of El Cerrito did

1:52:30not let us build and a certain kind of structure on a certain part of our property because we are on the slide area so if it's not okay for us to build an addition on a certain part of our property right across the street from where this poll is going to be then I

1:52:49would really like the council the design board to reconsider um really looking at the research and then informing the neighborhood about what's going to happen with this Tower and the seismic safety that could be um um debilitated I also wanted to talk about that coverage Gap my husband and I

1:53:10often joke that we're a dual Faith household and the past we've been both an ATT and Verizon customers so um there's no problems there we have no issues with cell phones or a t service so the whole thing about some sort of coverage Gap just seems nonsense to me

1:53:32um and the third thing I kind of want to talk about um I heard a lot of language um the city has to consider this the city has to consider that a lot of legalese from documents that the community has not been privy to we have not been contacted by a t we have not

1:53:50been contacted by the design board I'm very happy that they decided not to approve this in the beginning and I hope that they decide to um reduce more research and inform the community about what's what's happening what's possible with the technology and everything else so please reconsider

1:54:08this as a resident um from right across the street I really really really like to see more research and more communication about what's going to happen thank you there are no additional speaker slips you're on okay is there anyone who hasn't spoken that would like to spoke

1:54:25but had didn't fill out a speaker slip hey I don't see any so with that we will move on um okay the applicant and the appellant will now have an opportunity for rebuttal so um I believe that Judy Rollins will represent the applicant this time mayor as they're coming up can

1:54:50I just read some of the other Communications we've received just as part of the public record okay at the diocese we did receive two emails from other residents in El Cerrito one George ferric and one Chris Gilmore who both noted that they were in support of the

1:55:05cell phone towers and they're both residents of el Cerritos I just wanted to read those to the public record that these are other emails that were sent to the city clerk okay thank you so you're not Judy Rollins yeah 10 minutes 10 minutes and just make a couple of quick okay and if you have

1:55:22five minutes thank you and how excuse me how will that show up on this light system or will it there you go okay five minutes yeah I just want to make a couple of quick points uh just a reminder to the council that we are talking about the design here that we have a a use permit

1:55:41that is an enforcement at this point uh any questions of the significant Gap in coverage were discussed with Planning Commission approved back in June of last year with that being said however I would point out what we are trying to do here and I started my first comment in

1:55:59building coverage is our objective you know if you're out on the street you can get a wireless connection in most of the city what we're striving for is being able to get a reliable signal inside of a building inside your home inside all of those homes where forty percent of

1:56:19the population has now removed landline phones from service they're relying on a good third of the population is relying upon cell phones at T and others to provide reliable consistent service within their homes not just for phone calls but for all of the services data connections that

1:56:40people have come to rely upon in their lives we're trying to fill that particular Gap the other thing I've mention just very briefly in terms of design when we were at the design review board as mentioned earlier only three of the members were present as as discussions were going on

1:56:58it it appeared that they were going to deny and we asked for a continuance so that we can work with them to come up with designs that they could agree with they either ignored it or didn't understand or something but they did not allow us to continue at that point

1:57:16instead put in a denial which then forced us to appeal to the Planning Commission rather than sitting down and trying to come up with some reasonable Alternatives and that's why we went back out to the street we looked at alternative polls we looked at the design of the poll itself we looked at

1:57:34the different Alternatives in terms of where the antennas could be placed we looked at the possibility of ground equipment we looked at all of those things after the design review board did not have an intention of working with us to see if there were other design

1:57:49Alternatives it was those designs that we then brought forward to the Planning Commission which were then approved through approval of our appeal we asked that you do the same approve our design so we can move forward and provide the kind of coverage that this community

1:58:04deserves thank you very much and we're available to answer any questions okay um now we will move on to here from the appellant MR Spriggs and you also have five minutes which will be represented by the like like there we go thank you I'll keep my points very brief as well so um I would

1:58:30also like to point out that at least two and perhaps more residents of the neighborhood are unable to attend tonight and send me emails to that effect uh one is lives across the street of the pole it is out of town the other person had Child Care issues and weren't

1:58:44able to attend tonight um so Mr Mintz once again is just brought up that there there really is no evidence of a gap I mean he mentioned people coming into the store talking about poor cell phone coverage well I mean a lot of people walk into stores talking about poor cell phone coverage

1:59:01there's no proof that these are from El Cerrito there's no proof of any of these claims it just underscores the fact that ATT has never provided any evidence of an existing Gap they describe in-house coverage I mean I welcome ATT to come into my my house as well as an

1:59:20independent auditor to to view cell phone coverage and see what the coverage is if a gap exists within my house and I have a feeling that many people in the neighborhood would be willing to do the same thing unfortunately ATT has consistently failed to to contact or in

1:59:38any way have any interaction with the residents where they're proposing building these towers they keep saying we've done this we've done this we've done this but at no point have they said we asked the citizens of El Cerrito who will have to live with these towers for

1:59:53at least 10 years what they want never once I have never had an ATT person ask me how I feel about the presence of this Tower because I know the answer um the other thing I'd like to point out is that in describing att's coverage maps or proposed coverage maps for the

2:00:11area the the the the uh description of the coverage Improvement is always defined and you'll find this in their their statement from their engineer the the phrase is acceptable in building service coverage now I have no idea what acceptable in building service coverage means I mean my coverage in my

2:00:32house is perfectly acceptable to me I mean I that's completely subjective if I was to go I mean I work in Renewable Energy Engineering if I was to go into a meeting and say oh I think this is an acceptable idea I would be laughed out of that meeting I would have to present

2:00:48firm data to show what I was intending to do and what benefit it was going to provide uh okay well thank you very much for your time thank you thank you okay at this point um okay we're right now we're closing the public hearing though well I thought we can't close it until after the all

2:01:06the testimony please include the questions okay we don't because it on here it says oh wait a minute something's fun anyways I'm hoping that here I'm hoping that the testimony that responds to my questions will be relevant and useful for our decision so I'm hoping that part of the

2:01:26hearing I have questions too is that a question no I'm hope I'm waiting for you to allow us to start asking questions what oh you're already talking I'm can we can we start asking questions I believe that you were just told that I'm a little confused about what you're

2:01:43saying going to do it yeah I can if I've been given permission I'm waiting for permission it's your it's your meeting um if if Mr Roland could come forward I believe that you would probably be the best person to answer some of the questions that engineered engineer that

2:02:01we're asking um and Mr Moss I know that you have the engineering drawings on your uh presentation so I was wondering if you could bring those up so that the audience could see uh the questions that I'm asking um and I'm going to start with A2 and I don't know if you have a set of drawings

2:02:16Miss Roland or not I can yeah I can grab one okay foreign A2 there's three cross sections on the right hand side the power space plan view of uh communication space plan View and the equipment space plan View and uh in those plan views there are dark uh u-shaped or dark areas and those

2:02:44represent the PG e Riser and the new proposed three-inch U guard that you're proposing to run up the length of the pole um in the uh I believe that's detail 4 which is the power space view possibly I'm not sure exactly how the numbering goes um it shows that this u-guard is at this

2:03:08seven o'clock uh there's a little dial of of the face and on the next one it shows it at uh eight o'clock and I'm just curious how this uh you guard Wiggles as it goes between these two spaces and what that's going to look like because certainly all the representations have been that it's

2:03:28a straight line going up and down the side of the pole you know unfortunately I'm not the engineer I didn't I didn't actually do these drawings I'm not sure how it takes a jog to uh to accomplish that but yeah I see I definitely see what you're referring to and and so if uh Mr Marsh

2:03:45if you could go to the the left side of this image um there's a depiction of this uh and I again it shows the the new uh conduit going down to the boxes that I appreciate that you've streamlined them um but it doesn't show any of this this wiggle or or change in the orientation

2:04:07so I'm just curious how that goes because you know that wiggle would be potentially distracting to a driver that's coming down Eureka I mean it's it's something that isn't uh normal because when you look at a telephone pole you're used to seeing straight lines straight vertical lines so just if

2:04:24you're unable to answer that that's fine this uh proposed three inch schedule 80 U guard on the next sheet D1 in the upper left hand corner um it's uh PVC if it's schedule 80 I'm assuming that that's a polyvinyl chloride substance again done by Engineers I'm not an

2:04:46engineer what I will say about your your first statement though is that the the conduits um and the u-guard that you're referring to are all up above the the highest piece of equipment so this is all um we're talking about like 23 feet and above on the pole um the specific design of what the

2:05:02materials are is is governed by um is governed by PG e and and Geo 95 so what's been used is in compliance with the standards and I unfortunately can't tell you what the standards are will it be painted that's yeah and actually that's in the plans that that was in the

2:05:18um I believe in the original conditions of approval was that everything has to be painted brown to match the pull and the antennas the equipment and the conduit can be painted brown okay well and then so my next set of questions has to do with the configure the the next

2:05:32slide over this one that shows uh the proposed extension actually where you were if if you could zoom in on that a pole Top Antenna detail you are calling for a square dimensional piece of lumber on top of a round pole do you know the dimensions of that of that square Lumber I don't have the

2:05:54specific dimensions of it actually there's a pull top extension detail that shows that the outer limits of that metal uh portion is five and three quarters right so is that intended to be the top I believe the top section unfortunately I have a tiny that that top square right above that looks like

2:06:12it shows the dimension of the of the bracket of the wood piece itself um but this particular bracket is a is is a PG e approved there's there it's it's one that was actually provided to us by PG e as an improved design for the top of the poll so you're saying the the

2:06:29bayonet and the square poll is a PG e approved design but is it the most I mean is there other designs that they have approved or is this the only way to extend this poll I can't say that there aren't any other ones approved um but this is this is the one that that PG e

2:06:44provided to us as the the approved extension so so if there's a round poll such as this poll here um a round pole and this bayonet is being added to this it would foreign ly look something like this where you have a square substance and oh by the way I've got a little detail here

2:07:08I have the uh the the u-channel attached to the side here I'm not sure if the camera can pick that detail up but you're you're talking about putting something that's that's Square on top of around uh structure and and it's four inches and you haven't provided us the

2:07:24diameter of the top of the pole uh it appears to be a 4x4 to go inside of the pull top extension and so it's going to be significantly smaller in size than the than the telephone pole so it as opposed to something say that is round that would go on top of the pole

2:07:48and potentially look more aesthetically pleasing because it's a continuation of the same lines and and aspects so I'm just trying to figure out if this may be what they approve but is it the most aesthetically possible within the realm of safety no there's one other more

2:08:03aesthetically pleasing option we could replace the pull with a brand new pole that wouldn't require the extension on the top of the pole thank you thank you for that testimony um because this is something hopefully you were um saw watch the testimony we had back in

2:08:18August where I asked about the bayonet Edition at that time uh because it certainly was not something I would have considered to be aesthetically pleasing and I think I made that point uh in August and I'm just trying to make that point again this time with a model

2:08:33that might actually be worth more than a thousand words so there does need to be a sleeve in order to support it that sleeve has to go down pretty far on the pole in order to support it and that's the purpose of this leave um what we do is we submit the design to

2:08:45PG e and we um tell them what the equipment is how much it weighs the height that we need and and the clearances that are required they provide us back with an approval saying that um that it works and that it's structurally sound and they will also let us know if the pool needs to be

2:09:01replaced in order to meet structural requirements and that was form two that you talked about earlier is that correct yeah so you have submitted to them uh the weight and all those things and you have gotten back a calculation that would answer some of the questions

2:09:14tonight about the structural Integrity of this poll they do the calculation they do it in a software called pull calc they input the heights the the loading from the existing wires the equipment that we're proposing as well as How deep the pole is in the ground

2:09:31the overall length of the pull how deep it's all of that is those are components of it they give us back an approval in the form of a form too and that's that's something PG e that is that is their realm right and and PG e is known to keep good records of their historic

2:09:45installations um regardless of the technology it I'm assuming that to satisfy I think it's u95 or whatever there would need to be a seven foot extension is that correct there does to provide clearance from the electrical right because of workers working on the communications

2:10:02antennas would have to be physically removed from the wires that are have the electricity in them so even if this technology was this Rubik's Cube there would need to be a seven foot extension between the wires and the Rubix Cube is that correct I'm not positive is for

2:10:17worker safety but definitely antennas from the from the high voltage wires at the top of the pole there's a there's a clearance requirement that's what we're meeting there okay can I ask a follow-up on the bayonet um let's see if are you finished I have uh well it's another question I think

2:10:34that you've you've I've asked and answered in different ways but since the denial Mr mints you testified that you guys did quite a bit of um poll considerations but I but all the poll considerations were within the same ban at uh design that was presented to the design review board I didn't hear

2:10:56anything about as Miss Roland just suggested uh potentially getting in more aesthetic installation by replacing the pole I believe we did offer that as an alternative to the Planning Commission and they chose to leave it with the extension that did come up during the Planning

2:11:14Commission meeting yes and and and and and indeed they um considered this not to like the visual sight lines and and I don't not I see you didn't bring your your um presentation tonight that you provided us back in August but I did look through your uh site analysis and

2:11:33uh one of the pictures in your site analysis I think it's the picture for um no which one was it I think it was site B so uh you sightsee and I took I put notes on it now they've evaded me I mean it's for site C which was at 7820 Eureka and this is a photograph of of this uh poll looking uh

2:12:02West which is the way a council member Bridges was asking if the photo was was east or west and uh the photograph of of uh this particular one looking West has the pole in the the poll under consideration in the background and the point I'm trying to make is if you're a

2:12:23driver going down this road which I do on with some regularity this poll extension will be very obvious to every driver going down to that stop sign as they Crest the hill as one of the speakers spoke about as as you go over that Hill you're going to be not quite

2:12:42sightlined but maybe near sight line with the top of this poll so for me this bayonet and this square and this jog in the PVC all of those things do add up to being a visual blight um a distraction because it's not the typical utility pole that is straight going through all of the arms and up

2:13:03through antennas and and whether it's got a uh some of these do Transformer box on them so I'm not saying that the that the attributes that you're adding are dissimilar to attributes that are on utility poles as a result of cable or electricity or what other other form of

2:13:20uh utility we get it's just that the extension as I testified in August as I've tried to demonstrate tonight the extension is unesthetic I don't I don't see how it can be considered uh pleasing to the eye of the motorist that's going down this hill no disregard to all the residents in the

2:13:38area but um there's a larger number the larger population I can get involved which includes the motorists that go through your neighborhood the more weight that opinion carries so thank you yes I'm done and and I just again suggest that if if a pull swap to have a

2:13:57single pole uh replacing this with an extension uh is desirable by the council we're okay with that as an alternative okay thank you um Rebecca thank you um to follow up on that uh maybe Mr Moss you can talk about the planning commission's discussion about the two polls and whether or not

2:14:18they re they they gave due consideration to the idea of a single poll or if that was not really a focus of their discussions in uh coming up with their decision sure um yeah I actually don't remember the the planning commissions discussion um focusing very much on

2:14:35um the idea that that a a new poll you know that there could be a bayonet versus a new poll um I I think I'm correct in saying that of the four um sites for which they considered design review at the February meeting one of them I think it was the one on two two Seaview Drive was proposed as a

2:14:58new poll um ATT evaluated each of the sites to determine whether it was necessary to provide a new poll and I believe of the five applications that are still moving forward um I believe there were two sites the A51 Seaview and the 202 Sea View where they were proposing to replace the poll

2:15:19and in other instances they were proposing the bayonets thank you and to follow up on a couple of items that have been touched on so far so Mr Mintz just to confirm when you spoke in your rebuttal that ATT had a willingness to work with designer View Board to come up

2:15:34with Alternatives what alternatives were you thinking of were you thinking about the alternative locations that were evaluated and the single poll option were there any other options they looked at the Alternatives we looked at the possibility of a sidearm Mount as

2:15:49opposed to an extension on the pole and we found that first off that this particular location made more sense than the other Alternatives that were reviewed on this particular one a side arm which would have to be about 20 feet high rather than 50 feet was just too

2:16:06low to meet the other objectives in terms of the coverage for that neighborhood so it was rolled out as infusible great thank you and with regard to the Das can we talk a little bit about its technical capabilities so specifically can it there's been discussion I think

2:16:23on the part of many in the community that there's a feeling that these um these new pieces of equipment are intended by at T to actually relay up the hill can the Das relay signals up the hill technically even I guess I want to know you've said that that's not what

2:16:38they're intended to do but can they technically do that you know the Jazz handles a very small area you know the macro site uh you know which is on a tower larger four to six to eight foot antennas you know is meant to cover a large area these are two foot antennas

2:16:56meant to cover more of a small neighborhood and could you give us an idea of what the geography is that is covered um you know only from is it hundreds of feet or propagation map gives you some indication that's in that's in our handouts um you look at you give us a minute I'll

2:17:21make sure that we're looking at that uh handout I believe it's it's right after page three uh in the in the letter that's attached there was uh that's attachment what's the attachment number attachment seven it's about halfway through I believe that's the maps you're about to show us

2:17:39is that correct for you UMTS 850 and LTE 700 is that the two yeah there's there's two different actual technologies that would appear on this poll one is the UMTS which is the The Filling of the Gap and the LTE is providing the deployment of the LTE service so when you look at those four

2:18:04there's actually four Maps the first one is the existing UMTS 850 coverage Mr muscle could you hold up your your color version so that we can get a better sense of the colors yeah there's those two [Applause] and these two all right correct right okay thank you

2:18:34so when you look at the UMTS you can see that um this particular site is the um the Black Diamond um with the zero six that's the poll there and and this is the Outdoor surfaces this color which the blue is the Outdoor service if you go then to the proposed UMTS you can see

2:18:57where that whole area has turned green which is the in-building service and you can see the basic outline of the neighborhood that would be covered by this service of this particular antenna [Applause] thank you same thing with the LTE map the same basic coverage thank you for

2:19:16reminding me of that map and another question there's been a lot of discussion about the safety of of the poll and I think Miss Roland started to allude to this with regard to the approvals that have been um that have been provided to you by PG e can you just talk more about sort of

2:19:32the calculations that they had to do I guess specifically this was an entirely new analysis it's not as though they're they're looking specifically at this poll it's not as though they're taking I guess I want to confirm besides though they're taking General calculations of

2:19:47any poll within their ownership and applying these these weight calculations to that to any poll they're actually looking at this particular poll in a slide Zone you know right exactly there are Geo 95 specifications and it has to meet those specifications but each poll

2:20:04would be analyzed for what's happening on that particular poll they do and they specifically take into account the age of the poll and again the overall height of the poll into the ground around and then they look into let's see it's the span between the poles the height

2:20:18the weight of each piece of equipment the lines uh the weight of the lines and I guess one other very important thing that I didn't mention is that they also build a margin of safety into it the requirement is that that the structural loading uh it has to meet 125 percent of

2:20:35the proposed load so they've got an extra 25 margin of safety that they build in if that is not if if we can't if that doesn't pass then they would propose replacing the pole um you know potentially a larger poll or whatever needs to happen so that you get that margin of safety build in they

2:20:51don't just say okay yeah you're just squeaking in there you're good to go it has to exceed it okay and another question maybe for staff maybe for at T I'm not sure if we were to explore the option of the single the new poll option um the council member Lyman has

2:21:07discussed then then would it be the case that we would have these other data locations looking like the previous design the bayonet design and then this location looking like a single pole design um and I guess that's that's what would occur if we approve that so my question

2:21:23is would at T consider uniformity among all the Das locations even though these other locations have been improved with the use permit and they have drb approval design design review um I guess I'm trying to figure out what would be the way to explore how we'd be

2:21:40introducing this idea of one pole in one location and a different design in other locations I'm a little puzzled about what the right way would be to evaluate these given that they've already gone through the process for these other locations foreign I can I can speak from a staff

2:21:59perspective so um the there's not really a way to um reevaluate the design review approvals um because the the Planning Commission did make a decision and it wasn't appealed um so those design the design review approvals for the sites which are not before you tonight

2:22:17um are in effect and just interrupt they actually could not put in a single poll option because they've already had approvals for these bayonet options for the other sites is that correct if um if that were to be proposed um we would either need to staff the the

2:22:33zoning administrator would either need to decide that um that proposed installation was consistent with what was approved um or if not it would require additional design review okay did you want to add anything Mr mints uh just that one of the approved designs uh

2:22:50that's already gone through the process is for a pulse swamp do you know which one it is offhand two so we already have a combination of at least one was going to be a swap out uh the other one there were two of the five that originally one of my note was a 51c

2:23:08view I think the other one was the other one on Sea View uh both of those were going to be pole swaps the reason for us to do a swap is because of the quality of the pole itself okay so that's the original reason why but like I say in this case we'd offered a swap if in fact

2:23:24you believe as a council that it would make sense from a design perspective at this particular location just as you were asking about the specifications for the pole for this particular location we'd be willing to um you know agree with that as a condition thank you those are all my

2:23:39questions thank you okay um so yeah I had a couple um questions for ATT and that was about the poll uh calculation so the poll calculation was that already done on this particular poll or is that something that's yet to be done I'm a little unclear because we have the sign

2:23:56form too but back from PG e that they've looked at it and approved it then they have done the calculation on the poll as designed so if we were to propose swapping out the poll and that makes that it would go back through the jpa process again and we can't do the work

2:24:12without the approval I was glad that part of the poll calc was that you actually tell them how much the equipment weighs so how much does the equipment weigh I know the antennas weigh 16 pounds a piece I don't actually have in front of me the specs on the boxes they're lower

2:24:28on the pole but yes we give them the spec sheet on on the equipment so they've got the dimensions and so it's 32 for the two and what do you think it is for the I don't know I wouldn't want to guess and be wrong you might be able to find that if you can give us a minute because we have the

2:24:44spec we've got the spec sheet all right well there's a few of you there so you probably can come up with that um so I had a question about um I was sort of curious about the um that they would that you asked you were thinking about asking to design for continuance

2:25:01um because I didn't know that that was part of what had happened at the drb so um to come up with other Alternatives but this is this is to allow you to have more 4G and LTE coverage how far away is 5G and how does this equipment interact with that technology 4G LTE is the latest available coverage

2:25:36out there 5G is you know it's being tested who knows what that looks like or when and this this would not be um this could not deal with the 5G you'd need more different do you need different equipment for that I think as as the tech no I'm not him I'm not the engineer as the technology changes

2:25:56there's different ways that we account for those changes sometimes it's as minor as a card swap you know like a computer card type swap to add different kinds of capabilities other times it may be a replacement of an antenna that then allows for multiple functionality

2:26:15one of the speakers talked about better technology what is that better technology uh I'm not quite sure what he's referring to I I will say however there there is other technologies that uh are either you know being deployed in different ways in different places but those

2:26:34Technologies do not meet or need right here so one is for instance small cells well small cells right now do not provide for the multi-channel capability that we're talking about in this case um the ordinance our ordinance says that there's there's noise studies that have

2:26:52to be done and this isn't a generator type piece of equipment that's going to be mounted in the lower part of the pole it's it's um not that but I don't think when noise is so much a consideration in this from what I understand of the technology correct the uh auxiliary equipment lower

2:27:12on the pole one of those boxes does include a small fan it's the type of fan right as I understand uh as explained to me by our engineer or outside engineer the fan we're talking about is the type of fan the size the sound of like a laptop computer right and as part of the

2:27:31conditions approval we would be meeting any noise ordinance requirements of the city okay um and I guess this could be a question for you or Steph I'm not sure the boxes that were pointed out in the picture across the street they belong to who whose boxes are those

2:27:52the boxes that were mounted on the the sidewalk we we have those are those PG E's whose boxes are those I I don't know the answer to that question okay I I can answer I was waiting for the staff to answer I'm sorry the box right directly across the street is an ATT uh U-verse

2:28:10box okay electronics that provides video services to the community okay um and could you explain a little bit of the technology and why a half-master sidearm really doesn't work here um I got the impression that if there was a lot of um uh structures in the way or buildings or

2:28:32something like that it wouldn't work but there's not really a lot of trees in that area um so why would that work the reason why we're using uh the Dows in this particular area across the Oakland Hills is because of topography so yes trees and and other structures could create some kind of

2:28:55blockage however a lot of it has to do with with that topography so as you go up and then you drop down a little bit you're trying to cover a particular area you have to have a certain height to do that because this is line of sight type technology it has to be able to see the

2:29:11signal at 50 feet at this particular location we're able to cover the coverage area that we're having question at 20 feet which is the height that a sidearm would have to be on this particular pole it doesn't reach out as far across this coverage area as we would need and so that would mean a at

2:29:32least one other if not more additional dads antennas would have to be put up in neighborhood someplace else to cover that additional Gap and so was a sidearm and a half-mast um consented for Kensington or was it not June we looked at in Kensington as well as across El Cerrito we looked at

2:29:55the potential of using sidearms at each of the various locations in fact the application we have pending with the city right now is an alternative to Sea View has a sidearm which we felt at the particular location we're looking at is is a remote possibility for for that one

2:30:12even with a side arm for us to be able if we were to consider a sidearm at this location what we'd actually have to do to be able to create the safety zones that have been talked about on the pole away from the electrical lines we would have to actually increase the poll

2:30:29move the wires up to be able to put the side arm with the antenna at a lower height so it's not just a question of putting an arm onto this existing pole we would probably have to either put an extension in that case probably swap out the pole have PG e move its wires up

2:30:46which in most cases doesn't mean just this pole but poles on either side whatever is reaching to it would also need to go up a certain amount in order to raise the entire structure of the wires in order to create that zone underneath for the antenna but like I say in this case that lower height

2:31:02doesn't provide for our coverage needs so that's why it's infeasible in this particular case right um and then just a comment about um earthquakes slides I mean we had a presentation in October and November where you know there's almost 200 Acres of land in El Cerrito that are subject

2:31:25to slide it kind of goes from all the way to Arlington to San Pablo um so it's not I mean one of the speakers said that you know she had a hermaid issue um about building because the slide area but there's many areas in this city that have potential to slide in

2:31:44um one of the issues for us about that is that all the utility poles whether there's an antenna or not are pretty much at risk I mean I would say you know we're talking about something that's under the purview of the California Utilities Commission through its Geo 95 specification of what is

2:32:08allowed to be on polls when you do travel around you'll see a number of polls that have large transistor boxes other things that are covering the electrical needs so this poll was one that had fewer of those type of encumbrances that allowed us to look at this as an alternative

2:32:27um well and I suppose you could say PG e has Transformers on their polls as it is I mean there's one very nearby the next the next one they're they're quite large and then I have a a question for um Mr Woodruff and that is this this process this uh has already the use permit has already been

2:32:50passed so um again we can deal with the Aesthetics but the use permit there's not much we can do about that right now that that is water under the bridge is it not because that has already gone to planning and that it has been cited and it has been approved yeah

2:33:12so if you want to elaborate or make any comments about that sure um that's generally correct the the use permit has been approved it hasn't yet been implemented since um this design review is approval is required before they're actually able to move forward with implementing the use

2:33:29but the permit has been approved there really isn't a process for unapproving a use permit there is a uh there's a process for revocation but it has to do with non-compliance with the conditions of approval or or the otherwise applicable requirements for the use so

2:33:49at this point um the the applicant has a permit from the city that's that's valid and exercisable to implement a Das facility at this site and the design review approval is the only remaining procedural requirement before they're able to implement that I believe I might

2:34:08I don't think there's anything else that's necessary at this point at least from the city thank you okay I would like to just sort of um go through what I see is what sort of the perspective I'm looking at Sean Moss and perhaps the City attorney and I would just sort of like

2:34:26to do that and then I can see that um Greg Lyman has some sort of comment but I would like to do that if I could first and see if I have a correct understanding um and my understanding of this actually starts when I was up in Sacramento testifying about um various telecommunications things and

2:34:48learned that um in fact we have almost no control over it because um that control was given to the primarily I think the federal government but also the state government the hearings that I went to and testified at on behalf of the city in local control we lost

2:35:13I think that's true right I mean that's what I was told um along the way so we don't have control over whether or not there can be a telecommunications system whether or not those U-verse boxes can be there I remember that was actually a specific wasn't called U-verse but that

2:35:35was a specific thing at the hearings and um we lost and so that is not what we're talking about at the council level today in terms of what we have uh responsibility for today likewise at tonight's hearing what we can decide about is not the um the things that are the purview of the

2:36:01Planning Commission what we're here to talk about is the things that are the purview of the design review board right so I mean we can I suppose mention and people have mentioned including council members various things because I think we want to make sure we have a

2:36:19correct understanding of everything but the um the things that we can actually make a decision about tonight have to do with things that are a purview of the Planning Commission such as Aesthetics correct correct um so if I can answer your questions sort of linearly

2:36:42um the um the first question about or the first statement about utilities there's a couple of different things going on with utilities so traditionally utilities and utility poles are regulated by the Public Utilities Commission um and you're correct in that municipalities don't have a lot of

2:37:03jurisdiction over those utilities wireless coverage and wireless antennas and providers are regulated a little bit differently so there's also the the federal Telecommunications Act that they're regulated under um and that does allow cities you know some um within certain respects to to regulate

2:37:27those facilities um ATT in this instance has agreed to um follow the city's Wireless the wireless telecommunications chapter of the zoning ordinance and follow the procedures set forth in that in that chapter for the approval of Wireless telecommunications facilities so in that

2:37:49respect um the that is why the the Planning Commission considered the use permit for for these facilities and the design review board started out considering the design review and now the design review of this of this one site is before the city council but but our our zoning and

2:38:07our everything that we have at a in our city ordinances that relates to this topic um is all within what's we are legally allowed to do by the both the state and the federal government that's correct right yeah so having said all of that um so that I just wanted to sort of reset the

2:38:28background about what we can do tonight um I find that councilmember lyman's poll uh demonstration uh to be pretty interesting and except I think he didn't do a very good job of building the second one because it wouldn't have been in two pieces it would have been in one

2:38:47well I do have a one I do have one oh you do have the one oh please show us because foreign it would be solid it wouldn't wobble um but um anyway uh thank you I'm glad I was able to give you that opportunity the um so it it kind of interests me because um aesthetically which is the thing

2:39:12we're supposed to be talking about at the moment um the thing he just put up is more aesthetically pleasing than something that has you know you don't quite it's just all over the map because it's not um I don't know I'm not an artist either but you know it just doesn't it it does

2:39:32not please my eye let's just put it that way whereas just having the clean lines is is a more aesthetically pleasing uh item having said that I have a questions about um can we just say do that and is that within the guidelines of what we should be talking about tonight

2:39:54yeah so um just to backtrack a little bit so you're correct in saying that the the purview of the council tonight is is the design review of this application so it's not um it's not traditionally what the Planning Commission sees when they approve a use permit and those and that

2:40:10set of findings um it's it's the design review board's typical purview and the design review findings um the the applicant as you've heard them testify is they are willing to replace the poll if that is the desire of the council um so the council could definitely

2:40:30include a condition of approval um to that effect if I could just supplement that um the the council's exercise tonight in part is to determine which of the design review criteria are applicable to this application and then to determine whether or not it can make those

2:40:49findings based on the evidence in the record if the city council finds that um because it has the ability to approve approve with conditions or deny the application if it finds that as a condition of approval it's able and that condition is the the requirement that

2:41:06there be a new poll and that it can make the findings with that condition then it then it can impose that condition I also just want to clarify one thing regarding the the role of the design review board and the Planning Commission and the council it is not the council's

2:41:21exercise tonight to review either the decision of the design review board or the Planning Commission for whether or not they committed errors or whether or not their decisions are correct it's the nature of the Lenovo hearing that the city council is supposed to make an

2:41:32independent determination based on the evidence presented to you about whether or not you can make the the required findings after after deciding which of the required which of the findings are applicable to this application to to that to that end I would love to

2:41:48start talking about attachment one okay and I am finished so please do which is which is the resolution um and I understand we have to make reference or I'll even restate if you'll tell me which ones from the February meeting that need to be restated if necessary now you're on can you just

2:42:04tell me attachment one is is uh is our resolution I do have a quick question and this is as much for the applicant it is for staff um there was a 10-year finding in the planning commissions overturning of the design review board's denial there was a 10-year action that was

2:42:28tacked on for the design review is there any reason why 10 was selected could we pick a smaller number um I believe the I believe the applicant suggested 10 and agreed to 10 because they stated at the time that it the period of their FCC permit is also 10 years so that they felt it was prudent

2:42:54for those to coincide so in our resolution attachment one items four five and seven I I would suggest that we have a potentially slightly different text for those uh may I make a suggestion I just remember oh yeah we can I will move to close the hearing thank you second the motion okay

2:43:14okay all in favor please say aye aye aye any opposition in the abstinian motion carries unanimously uh by those present but uh remembering that council member Friedman has recused himself and is not present so I I will um go on record as saying I'm not very popular I'm not very pleased with with

2:43:37the bayonet extension at all um and to me uh the applicants uh suggestion that they would do a poll swap on this uh does begin to address the Aesthetics that that I have and have had and continue to have with the bayonet um proposals um so council members uh benicini's

2:44:00question about other projects that still have bayonet in them this testimony is still relevant to those to those other projects that we can't decide on tonight um for item four the design is appropriate for a wireless telecommunications facility um I would I'm not sure that

2:44:21because we're only looking at one specific design that design is appropriate but it's not necessarily the one I would like us to to potentially uh or the applicant has proposed as of tonight the project will increase the height of the existing utility pole that's true

2:44:38um what I would like to do is track strike the last sentence the extension of the proposed facility will be consistent with the existing Aesthetics I actually don't believe that's a true statement and I would like to strike that and potentially at this location we

2:44:53could specify that the design as we understand it this evening as a result of the testimony is that it would be replaced with a single pole and not include an extension for item five the facility and all Associated equipment will be painted to match the existing pole I would like to

2:45:10make sure that not only is the color uh important but that the Aesthetics of the lines as council members mayor Abelson was just talking the Aesthetics of the poll need to be taken into consideration the vertical lines have to be taken into consideration so not just

2:45:28the paint color but for example as I testified something as simple as the alignment of these U channels u-guards can be aesthetically displeasing and and then finally on seven the project does not propose any buildings and therefore will not have building facades that's

2:45:51true and and I do applaud the the Planning Commission for that particular interpretation but I would say the project contributes to a creation of an attractive and visually interesting built environment that includes well-articulated structures and as testified earlier a telephone pole is a

2:46:09structure so again I would say that we need an attractive telephone pole as utility poles can go and therefore I again that I would like number seven to be revised to include a this concept of a poll swap or a pole replacement so those I believe those three could be

2:46:30revised to incorporate the concept of a single pole and deal with the Aesthetics of the pole and I understand that we need to read into this motion if this motion goes forward from attachment five and you've left Mr Moss left which ones do we need to read into from number five

2:46:53that's right there yeah do we have to read everything from the now therefore resolved in from attachment five um let's see are you ready to make a motion it's um this is discussion if I get if I get you can make a motion and then we can it could die for a lack of a second yeah

2:47:10and we could change it and various things but if while you're thinking well you're fresh and thinking about the wording um it would help I think for recording I think I think I could get to that if Mr muscle told me which on pages two of three and three of three of the

2:47:26um so it's I need to repeat it's yes all of the conditions of approval which follow the now they're forbid resolved Clause so I I believe that the council could do it by reference by by reference of this resolution um if we're looking at the City attorney he's not nodding or shaking his head

2:47:48council member Lyman there is also conditions of approval in attachment one that match what you said were you proposing to change the council resolution or the Planning Commission like right now I've only been I've been only looking at the resolution are you looking at the whereas Clauses or which

2:48:04enacting clause on attachment when yes the now therefore be resolved there's uh 15 of them there that's correct but none of those 50 and I was talking about modifying four five and seven of those 15 but none of those 15 include uh the nine that are in the Planning Commission and and just to be

2:48:24clear though those are actually findings and not not conditions of approval which ones the the 15 uh in the attachment one the draft resolution correct those are findings correct correct so um staff is just requesting that the that the council would reiterate the conditions of approval

2:48:49that they wish to include in in the resolution you want a 16th finding that that points to the planning commissions February findings that would that would suffice I believe are you I'm sorry just to clarify you're talking about incorporating the planning commission's findings or the or the

2:49:07planning commissions conditions or both the planning commission's conditions of approval so I think you could simply you could include a be it further resolved in the city council's resolution that you are adopting the conditions of approval and and Planning Commission

2:49:22resolution I'm sorry I'm just pulling it up now so I don't have the number but and I and then either you know all of them PL 13-0009 but then all you know but that's sorry PC 1403 either all of them or all of them excluding whichever ones you don't want to include

2:49:41um I think I think that the the all the conditions were there was nothing wrong with the conditions uh because they don't talk about the extension or the specific design so I had no problem with the conditions I just wanted to make sure procedurally we had them properly cited

2:50:01okay um so now we're now we're writing rewriting resolutions uh the so the fourth uh finding under the now therefore be it resolved on page two of our attachment one the design is appropriate for the design is appropriate for a wireless telecommunications facility

2:50:28the project will increase the height of the existing utility pole by replacing it or by replacement I guess is the proper and do you want to add with a single poll and no with a with a continuous poll I was a continuous poll will potentially be on the next on the next

2:50:51one as well the facility and all Associated equipment equipment will be painted to match the the new pole the replacement Pole and Facilities will be brown maybe just they will be painted brown to match because if they I know they've said that a concrete pole was not legal

2:51:13but if it turns out that the poll is not necessarily Brown I would like it to match the whatever color the pole is so so it's to match it's likely to be Brown given that the poll will likely be wood right fairly sorry you're fairly confident that a brown a new poll will match

2:51:32itself yes but the equipment is attached to it won't okay just wanted to make sure that we were yes no it's the equipment the equipment will be painted to match the replacement Pole Oh you mean you're not wanting to address the color I think the cut that is dressing the

2:51:51color the color will will match the new I know what color the color is it will match the new pole whatever it is whatever color it is because it could be gray it could be green we don't want to say brown if it's not Brown that's right um okay I haven't seen a green one but okay

2:52:11um and the project does not propose any buildings and therefore we'll not have building facades roof lines or building Heights um I I would like that to say that the project um basically let's see what what are we comparing this to let me go the project continues to contribute to a

2:52:34creation of our attractive and visually interesting built environment and that's gonna be hard to find a finding that supports that and presents the varied building facades and fruit roof lines um the project uh the project as proposed with a single poll reduces

2:52:53uh reduces the building facade and roof lines something to that effect I'm looking for Mr Moss essentially helped me with language on this one because in essence by getting rid of the bayonet and get rid of the Artic the changes from round to square and back to round we have simplified the

2:53:14roof line or simplified the visual line so I'm looking for something that does support that finding um because as as revised tonight with a single poll we now have a a better roof line as opposed to a multivariable uh roof line or visual line maybe a streamlined structure are you number

2:53:36seven that language number seven so number seven um which corresponds to uh design criteria four basically the revised project creates a simplified uh building roofline if the count if that is the you know if that is the sentiment of the council I think that that finding would be

2:54:05appropriate um I I might just suggest that um we could leave that one as it as it as the Planning Commission stated it because but it is a structure it is a structure I'm not sure that I would say that it has a roof line um because I'm not sure that I would say

2:54:22it's a structure that has a roof um you know you could maybe you could maybe address that and refer to the aesthetic lines of it or something like that um and and address you know the existence of a roof line or not so the proposed project does um simplify uh the profile of the structure

2:54:47I think that would be appropriate in number seven yes do you have that Karen the project is proposed with a single poll creates a simplified profile of the structure correct thank you and then uh now we need a now there for be it further resolved that the conditions of Planning

2:55:14Commission resolution PC 14-03 are to be upheld to be included to be incorporated Incorporated to be incorporated are hereby Incorporated that's the language not before it's not a risk not fever it's not a resolution exactly that's already in here that that language says it would just be a now

2:55:43therefore have it be further resolved that the Planning Commission resolution PC 14-03 are hereby Incorporated um council member Lyman how about condition eight of um pc1403 condition eight construction shall meet all current building codes yeah it's it pro number eight reads the

2:56:09project will be located on top of an existing poll well if the project is the antenna the antenna oh it could be of a new utility pole correct thank you change that in the city council resolution yes please is the word existing in here somewhere else change to new

2:56:31no we've title of the city council resolution has existing but that would be changed to new yes please um four number four extension proposals who consistent with existing yeah well it says existing Aesthetics so that's not really existing poll no it says existing poll in the first sentence

2:56:55of that the project will increase the height of the existing utility pole it and it will the new the new poll would do that by replacing by replacement by replacement so by replacing that poll the project will increase the height of the existing utility pole because there will be a new taller pole

2:57:12there will be higher then this would be a better way to say that that's that's fine the project will increase the height of the existing utility result in or something I mean it doesn't create it's not the existing pole it's doing it too right the replacement the

2:57:40the we could change that around that's correct the project by replacing the pole will increase the height of the existing utility pole will be higher than the existing poll will be gone yes I I understand what you're saying um so the project by replacing the existing

2:58:16utility pole will result in a taller project taller utility pole the uh so the second sentence would read the project by replacing the existing utility pole will result in a taller utility pole and also say We'll increase the height of well I didn't increase the height

2:58:43taller they're the same um I can make that a motion um so it's a a resolution of the El Cerrito city council denying an appeal of the planning commission's design review approval of a wireless telecommunications facility on an existing utility poll near 7 800 but it would be on a new poll

2:59:14now it's now I'm not sure I know what the right but it was so I'm proposing a resolution the El Cerrito city council denying an appeal of the planning commission's design review approval of a wireless telecommunications facility on existing pole near 7 800 Eureka Avenue by

2:59:32approving a project that replaces the existing utility pole near 7 800 Eureka Avenue I second the motion and would like and like make a few comments if we get to the point of voting um I'm sorry could we also just clarify and I don't need to amend the motion and

2:59:52and have the second accept it that you also need to clarify that the resolution is going to include an additional condition of approval that actually requires the the poll be replaced just like I think that was very it's implied I just want to make sure that the

3:00:06resolution actually includes you know an additional be it further resolved that the that the council's approval is conditioned upon the replacement of the existing poll with a new poll ah hold on since 17. can you repeat that no it wouldn't it wouldn't be 17. that's those

3:00:21are findings okay so we need another uh whereas oh okay um so now therefore be it further resolved that the proposed project includes replacing the existing utility pole that's fine and that could be before or after the the Planning Commission conditions correct

3:00:45yeah I just wanted to repeat the title if you don't mind yes resolution of the El Cerrito city council denying an appeal of planning commissions design review approval of a wireless telecommunications facility on an existing utility poll near 7800 Eureka Avenue by approving a project that

3:01:01replaces the existing utility pool correct thank you and then we've we've modified uh findings four five and seven yes we've added two new whereas Clauses or be it further resolved Clauses right certainly if you want to read back what you know of four five and seven that'd be great

3:01:21all right for number four I have um the design is appropriate for a wireless telecommunications facility the project by replacing the existing utility pole will result in a taller utility pole number five the facility and all Associated equipment will be painted to

3:01:40match the replacement Pole to number seven the project as proposed with a single pole creates a simplified profile of the structure oh number eight we've modified also and number eight the project will be located on top of a new utility pool great thank you I have now that uh be it further

3:02:01resolved that the conditions of approval outlined in resolution PC 14-03 are hereby Incorporated and be it further resolve that the proposed project includes replacing the utility pole so moved I second the amended motion now we can uh have comments from the council you

3:02:24want to start Rebecca sure I'd be happy to start um so thank you everyone for coming out tonight and sitting through the hearing um I know that we have a lot of procedures to go through here that take a lot of time so I know that you're you're waiting to hear sort of um

3:02:37substance and I hope that you you've heard some substance I wanted to speak to you just about my considerations in my vote on this matter um that while we focus on the Aesthetics in in reviewing these projects previously through this through the use permit process I just want to reiterate

3:02:52what I was considering during that vote as well first the safety concerns um were you know I think just discussed at length at our last hearing back in August and they were reiterated and responded to by at T I think satisfactorily that there are various bodies that are very concerned with

3:03:09their polls falling down and um we are relying on those regulatory bodies to oversee PG E's work and making sure that their polls are are as safe as they possibly can be another Point that's been brought up many times is the need for the Das facility um and while we are relying on at T's

3:03:26propagation Maps um what they have stated tonight and other hearings is that the only other reason in my mind that they would be installing these facilities that has any validity is that they're actually using these facilities to um to increase the signal in other areas of the city and

3:03:43not in our area given that these facilities cannot do that technically as Mr mint stated that they're really serving the area around the Das facility I think we have to or it seems to make sense to me that they're going through this whole process they have many staff

3:03:57members who've been at many meetings here for the last year or year and a half to me that indicates that the company actually wants this Das facility in this location um that they're that they're going through this motion that they're going through all these procedures and all

3:04:12this work to get this facility in that location and the only reason that makes sense from a business perspective is that they actually think that they do have a need there um so that's something that I was considering throughout throughout all of these hearings the

3:04:24third thing I was thinking of was the location and um I was happy to see all the different locations that were considered by ATT it would be wonderful if there were a location like the cemetery that would be interested in accepting a facility like this because that would really diminish

3:04:37the impact on the neighborhood unfortunately and the staff noted that the cemetery was not interested in considering this and that left really the thing that we focused on tonight is the design and what's the best design given that cities have a need for infrastructure like this utility polls

3:04:54are not very attractive there's a lot of the boxes for for ATT U-verse and other types of cable are really don't contribute to an aesthetically pleasing street we have to just minimize how much how disruptive they are so I think that I'm happy that we focus tonight on what

3:05:08are the Aesthetics of the poll and how can we approve a project that meets the need the infrastructure need um the ATT has has demonstrated that they say that they have and all their Maps indicate that they do have this need and the fact that they've gone through this whole process indicates to

3:05:25me that they really believe they have a need for this increased service I'm glad that we're focusing on the design of how can we just fill this need in the most minimally disruptive way possible and I think that we've done that so I appreciate everybody coming tonight and

3:05:40I hope that you've you've at least heard responses to some of the questions that you've been asking do you have any comments Jan uh no other than the fact that um of all the things that we deal with up here this to me is one of the most painful um and I hope we answer some of your

3:06:06questions what you have to understand is that a lot of the comments that get made um about your health concerns and placement you know we can't really rule on a lot of that thing uh that's it's bigger than us the mayor talked about state level Federal level our city

3:06:27attorneys brought it up and you know they're very painful decisions for us so that's all and I too want to thank everyone for coming out this evening on both sides of this argument but mostly I want to thank the El Cerrito residents for coming because uh you are you know who we

3:06:46represent you are the people that uh live in this neighborhood and and will be there and uh I hope that your concerns are our concerns as councilmember Bridges just said your concerns are our concerns and within the limits of what we are constrained to do tonight I hope I did

3:07:08my best to represent you and that we ended up with a solution that hopefully uh will end up with a a better Poll for you a stronger poll one that will not um will be last longer and be stronger than what uh was proposed originally so thank you again for coming this evening

3:07:29and uh thank you thank you and I would also like to associate myself for the comments that were just made and especially to the residents because I know it's not easy it's almost 10 30 right now and I know this is not where people would want to be at this hour they'd probably

3:07:52rather be with their family and so I appreciate your coming and I appreciate the frustration of um not being able to um the rules not really being the ones that we ourselves have set up um and um so um I hope that you will understand um that um we're we're trying to do what we can to

3:08:23do the best for you and I I think within the limited capacity that we are allowed to have at this point that I hope that the um I mean we're supposed to be looking at Aesthetics right now and I think that um our model maker over here has um especially with his third model that he

3:08:45didn't even reveal at first shown the real difference between you know just something that looks really clunky and something that looks kind of pure and simple and it's still not perfect and still be better if it wasn't uh aesthetically I know that the best thing would of course

3:09:03be nothing at all um however then we wouldn't have cell phones either I guess but the um so it's a very difficult situation and um I I think that the main thing to be noted for the record is that um is that we concur with the findings that are listed in the resolution that

3:09:28we're passing and um with that I'd like to see if there are any more comments okay then all in favor please say aye aye aye in the opposition and the abstentions Let It Be noted in the record that the motion passed unanimously by all present and that council member Friedman is recused

3:09:50himself and is absent thank you okay with that we'll move on on our agenda we're almost done um the next item on our agenda is Paul number seven policy matters and we're going to be talking first about the selection of the El Cerrito Wall of Fame Council subcommittee which will be two

3:10:14people is there anyone who's dying to be on this committee okay Jan Bridges is that a yes yes Rebecca I was thinking Mark Friedman well he's not here I don't want to do that I'd be happy to be on it okay thank you okay um so then we have um we'll see uh Jan Bridges and Rebecca

3:10:35benacini as the members of the um wall of fame selection committee subcommittee with that we'll move on to item number eight the council local and Regional liaison assignments um let's see anyone have any no no yes okay please um I went to the arts and culture commission last week and uh they are

3:11:04um let's see they hadn't met in quite some time so I caught them up on uh many items of our city business and they did uh talk about a couple events that I already discussed they are also looking at um starting to implement the work that we've asked them to do so they've

3:11:33started to look at getting an annual plant work plan put together and they'll be taking that up on their next item they did talk a little bit about adopting the arts and culture master plan so they will actually be picking that work up here shortly and moving the

3:11:50master plan forward and then they did uh had some discussion it was on their agenda to talk about an Artistry in Residency program which which is a a program where potentially the city might offer um you know invite people to come make art in our city and leave some of that

3:12:18art behind for us in exchange for providing them a residence and uh it was discussed as a potentially occurring at a future Park property that's under consideration and I can tell you that they were incredibly enthusiastic used something to the effect of this would

3:12:39put El Cerrito on the map I think they meant the art map by by taking up a program like this where we could invite you know up and coming and famous artists from around the nation to the Bay Area where they could practice their art and leave us some sculpture sculptures behind for a few this for

3:13:02this Future Park location so that was something that they discussed and and I will tell you that their enthusiasm was infectious so I felt compelled to to let you guys know that that's something those are the two things that they're working on right now the master plan and artist in residency

3:13:21thank you I have a couple of things to report on one was the WIC attack meeting um the main thing that we talked about that I think you'd be interested in was a proposal for What's called the mobility management plan and there was a lot of um contention I guess is the right word and

3:13:49this plan has been submitted in other areas of the county and I understand it was also that way there but I think it was from what I can tell at least more contentious in West County and this is a plan to improve Paratransit services at a county-wide level by using using a thing that's called

3:14:12Mobility manager which would be a county-wide program I have a sort of a list from the um executive director of woodtac of some of the concerns that were expressed one is that for example there's no City or consumer representation on the proposed oversight committee

3:14:34um and they're proposing to create a new um entity oversight committee and then that would require a budget that's not insignificant and um so it was a proposed by some people that the Paratransit coordinating Council which is an existing committee at CCTA made up then that does include

3:15:00consumers and operators and social service agencies that that be the committee this is by with tech I'm talking about um and um the other one of the other problems with it was that the money that would be allocated which is 325 million excuse me 325 thousand dollars would all

3:15:23be for administrative costs not it wouldn't increase the level of Paratransit service at all with that money so and um what a lot of people say is we need more Paratransit service for the Riders and um let's see what else that's [Music] um there's also a suggestion that the

3:15:45mobility management function be handled by CCTA with existing resources I believe and um I think those are some of the more significant comments with the plan what happened at the meeting was that a decision was made to um to not to not make a decision and come

3:16:11back and do that at the next meeting and there's time to do that to give it time for a little more review and so that's what what was voted on I also went to the East Bay division meeting of the league of California cities and as you heard we did not have a speaker from PG e and we did have a

3:16:35replacement speaker and who spoke about um I'm forgetting what the word is uh technology and I'll just say technology and community on Communications um and um but I think the most noteworthy thing is that we were stood up because they were concerned about us so PG e that is

3:17:00um I also went to a CCTA meeting the Contra Costa Transportation Authority and um one of the things that we just definitely definitively decided is that there will be no ballot measure this year from CCTA the um looking at the polling results it was kind of within a margin of it would need

3:17:26two-thirds to pass it would be a sales tax extension or increase either way and it was polling around 68 maybe 66 depending on you know fact the factors you looked at and um and so that just really wasn't and even and if you looking at changes that you might make

3:17:50based on the polling questions it didn't really change anything so it wasn't really clear it would you know it was kind of touch and go whether or not it could pass so uh this probably really wasn't the right time for that particular thing uh very different than the polling results

3:18:08that we saw recently in our city so um I think that shows the value of doing polling you know you can find out these things without spending a lot of money and um um and losing so anyway that is what I have to report on and with that we will move on to the adjournment to the next meeting

3:18:38and um unfortunately um a dear member of our community has passed away and so we're adjourning the meeting in the memory of that man John umamoto and it's with great sadness that we learned of his passing he was a long time member of the crime prevention committee for many many years and he was

3:19:01a dedicated volunteer for Earth Day he um was amazing he was I think the he worked longer on Earth Day than anyone else in this whole city as far as I can tell now maybe there's somebody else out there but I just don't know who it is and he would uh work in the

3:19:20morning he always worked at the project that's across from the community center and he said he would work in the morning then maybe he'd come over and get a sandwich or maybe somebody'd have to take it to him because he wouldn't even stop to come over and then he'd work all

3:19:34afternoon and um he um he was really just great and he would lead a team of about 10 different people working on making the Contra Costa Civic Theater look really nice and um he worked pretty much every summer at the Fourth of July booth for the crime prevention committee and I

3:19:59believe he also worked for the Tri-City safety day and um he was one of his one of the first people in our city to ride his bike on National Night Out with and he went around with the police department bike Patrol unit and I used to see him um frequently because he would ride his

3:20:25bike home from Berkeley I think where he worked he would ride along Ashbury Avenue and he was also um a uh contributing parent in Boy Scout Troop 104.

3:20:41but the other thing I'd like to say about him because he was also a somebody I knew really well is that he had a great smile and way about him that always made people feel encouraged and very comfortable talking to him and he was committed to making El Cerrito a safe place and he really

3:21:01really loved this city and and so it was really an honor personally for me to know John and to work with him over the years and we will all miss him and offer our deepest uh sympathies to his wife Sally Ann and his family so with that if we could have a moment of

3:21:21silence please thank you the meeting is adjourned until Tuesday April the 22nd at 7 00 PM in this room thank you all for coming