Incompleteness Letter 2 (2020-02-21)
CITY OF CAMPBELL
Community Development Department
via electronic mail and USPS
February 21, 2020
Attn: Carl Jones
AT&T Mobility
605 Coolidge Drive, Suite 100
Folsom, CA 95630
carl.jones@epicwireless.net
Re: File No: PLN2019-231
Address: 1770 W. Campbell Avenue
Application: Wireless Facility Request (Conditional Use Permit) // AT&T Mobility
Status: Incomplete #2
Dear Mr. Jones,
Thank you for your February 12, 2020 application resubmittal for a request for a new concealed
wireless facility (PLN2019-231) at 1770 W. Campbell Avenue, in the C-1 (Neighborhood
Commercial) Zoning District. Based on a review of the application materials and the Campbell
Municipal Code (CMC) your application remains incomplete. The following additional
information and revisions to the plans are needed in order to continue processing of this
application.
GLOBAL COMMENTS
1. Missing Materials: The response provided noted that a plan check correction letter dated
2/11/2020 provided by Borges Architectural Group was submitted. While no such letter
was received; the responses from the letter appear to have been captured in the Sheet A-
4.1. notes. Review of these comments are generally satisfactory, except as captured in the
plan revision comments.
2. Consultant Deposit: Please be advised that based on the responses provided to the
discussion on Alternative Sites Assessment; City staff may be required to retain the
services of a third-party reviewer – which may require a cash deposit by the applicant to
cover the costs of the service plus a 20% administrative overhead fee.
3. Alternative Site Assessment / Significant Gap in Coverage: For ease of reference the
section of code which provides for a limited exemption from standards is codified as
follows (three parts are underlined in red for expanded discussion):
21.34.160 - Limited exemption from standards.
PLN2019-231 ~ 1770 W. Campbell Avenue Page 2 of 5
The applicant always bears the burden to demonstrate why an exemption should be
granted. An applicant may request an exemption from one or more requirements of this
chapter on the basis that a permit denial would effectively prohibit personal wireless
services in the City. For the City to approve such an exemption, the applicant must
demonstrate with clear and convincing evidence all of the following:
A. A significant gap in the applicant's service coverage exists; and
B. All alternative sites identified in the application review process are either technically
infeasible or not potentially available.
Further, the City of Campbell defines a ‘Significant gap’ as follows:
"Significant gap" is a gap in the service provider's own wireless communications facilities,
as defined in federal case law interpretations of the Federal Telecommunications Act of
1996.
These sections of code are intended to provide a limited exemption to standards (i.e. to
the minimal extent necessary) to ensure that personal wireless services can be provided in
the City. For such consideration, the applicant is required to provide clear and convincing
evidence that a significant gap in coverage exists (as defined) and all alternative sites
identified in the application review process are either technically infeasible or not
potentially available.
In review of the Alternative Sites Assessment provided, clear and convincing evidence
has not been provided – to such an extent it constitutes a completeness issue. To aide in
the development of a clearer and more compelling assessment it is recommended to
provide direct responses in support of the two criteria – discussion points have been
added under each as expanded area for discussion and analysis:
A) A significant gap in the applicant's service coverage exists; and
• The RF propagation map provided illustrates the existing vs. proposed LTE 700
coverage for AT&T.
o It is unclear how unreliable LTE 700 coverage amounts to a significant
gap in service as defined. If reliable phone service of any kind (i.e. voice
or text) is available – please clarify why, based on federal case law, such
coverage that is not adequate to satisfy the definition. If service is being
dropped due to congestion – please provide data/information of some kind
to support that conclusion.
o As you are requesting an exemption from standards (i.e. height), please
explain how the mounting height of the equipment reflects an exemption
to the minimal extent necessary to ensure wireless services can be
provided (once defined). This should not only cover the height of the
equipment, but the spacing requirements between antennas (as this
proposed a collocation) and explained in simple terms1.
1 The City may require a third-party review of this information once provided depending on how clear, concise, and
straightforward the information provided. As such, every effort to make it easily understood is recommended.
PLN2019-231 ~ 1770 W. Campbell Avenue Page 3 of 5
• The proposed facility is a collocation facility which includes Sprint. No RF
propagation map was provided for the second carrier.
o See prior comments regarding LTE 700 coverage; it is unclear (without
mapping/explanation) what coverage is lacking by Sprint that the
proposed facility would solve.
o If you are requesting an exemption from standards for the second carrier
(i.e. height), please explain how the mounting height of the equipment
reflects an exemption to the minimal extent necessary to ensure wireless
services can be provided (once defined). Please explain why switching the
location of either carrier’s equipment (reversing positions on the pole)
would not remedy and/or reduce the required height of the facility.
B) All alternative sites identified in the application review process are either
technically infeasible or not potentially available.
• Three sites were identified as alternatives and dismissed without providing
information to support the conclusions (who was contacted, copy of the written
response provided etc.). Staff attempted to contact representatives of each site,
reaching opposing conclusions on at least two:
o Alternative 1 (Kirkwood Plaza Rooftop):
▪ Several rooftop locations were not available including the roof of
Walgreens & Nob Hill Foods; however, 1630 W. Campbell
Avenue previously served another carrier (believed to be Verizon)
and would be available for lease.
▪ Contact: Stephen Greane2 // 408-379-4547
▪ Conclusion: Yes; alternatives may be considered.
o Alternative 2 (Goodwill Store):
▪ Contact: Margie Thompson // 408-869-9275
▪ Conclusion: Unknown.
o Alternative 3 (San Tomas Plaza Shopping Center):
▪ Expressed interest and noted that several buildings onsite have tall
elements which could incorporate details. Expressed an interest
and willingness to add new towers/architectural features to existing
buildings if required.
2 Spelling may not be exact.
PLN2019-231 ~ 1770 W. Campbell Avenue Page 4 of 5
▪ Contact: Pete Beritzhoff // 408-869-9275 (owner rep.) & Nicole
Lyon (lead broker) – 925-627-2485
▪ Conclusion: Yes; alternatives may be considered; no contact had
been made.
PLAN REVISIONS
1. Sheet A-4.1: Please revise and simplify the notes on this sheet as follows (this is intended
to resolve prior completeness comments pertaining to a maximum expansion exhibit; and
clarify requirements). This text is meant to replace two separate points provided – please
call if it is not obvious which points are meant to be replaced:
• ALL ELEMENTS OF THE PROPOSED FACILITY ARE CONSIDERED ELEMENTS OF
CONCEALMENT INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE DIMENSIONS, BULK AND
SCALE, COLOR, MATERIALS AND TEXTURE. ACCORDINGLY, NO FUTURE EXPANSION
OF THE FACILITY SHALL BE PERMITTED UNDER AN ELIGIBLE FACILITIES REQUEST
(SECTION 6409(a)) WHICH RESULTS IN CHANGES TO CONCEALMENT ELEMENTS OF
THE FACILITY AS SUCH CHANGES WOULD BE CONSIDERED TO DEFEAT THE
CONCEALMENT METHOD. MINOR CHANGES TO ANTENNA SIZES OR PLACEMENT
WITHIN THE APPROVED TREE CANOPY MAY BE PERMITTED PROVIDED THAT ALL
OTHER REQUIREMENTS ARE SATISFIED (18-INCH MINIMUM CANOPY COVERAGE,
LEAF SOCKS ETC.). FURTHER, CHANGES TO GROUND MOUNTED EQUIPMENT MAY
ALSO BE PERMITTED PROVIDED THAT THEY OCCUR FULLY WITHIN THE SCREENED
ENCLOSURE.
• THE PROPOSED CANOPY SHALL COMPLETELY ENVELOPE ALL TOWER-MOUNTED
EQUIPMENT AND EXTEND BEYOND THE OUTER EDGE OF ANY TOWER-MOUNTED
EQUIPMENT (E.G. ANTENNAS) BY AT LEAST 18 INCHES.
2. Sheet A-4.1 (cont.): Please increase the height of the wall or reduce the height of the
proposed GPS unit, to ensure that the GPS unit will be fully screened by the enclosure.
Please add a note that no equipment may extend beyond the top (or protrude from the
sides of) of the CMU enclosure. Separately, please underground the 200A Gen
Plug/power service from within the enclosure.
3. Tree Removal: The new tower would result in the removal of one or more tree(s) that
were required as part of an approved landscaping plan. Please submit an application
(paying all applicable fees and providing all required paperwork) as required by CMC
PLN2019-231 ~ 1770 W. Campbell Avenue Page 5 of 5
21.34.060.N – Other Permits. You may find a link to the City’s Tree Removal Permit as
follows (the form also provides instructions as to how to submit online):
• http://bit.ly/treeremovalchecklist; or
• https://www.ci.campbell.ca.us/DocumentCenter/View/15191/Tree-Removal-
Permits-Application-Checklist
DEPARTMENTAL REVIEW
This application was also reviewed by the Public Works Department, Fire District, and Building
Division. Preliminary comments and anticipated conditions (where applicable) from their review
have been provided for your reference.
When resubmitting please be sure to provide three (3) 24x36 sets of plans, three (3) 11x17 sets,
and a digital copy of all resubmittal materials (usb).
PERMIT EXPIRATION
Please be advised that applications that are deemed incomplete must be resubmitted within one
hundred eighty calendar days after notification of incompleteness, or the application shall be
deemed withdrawn without refund of application fees in accordance with CMC Sec.
21.38.040.C. (Expiration of application).
If you should have any questions regarding these comments, I may be contacted at (408) 866-
2142 or by email at stephenr@campbellca.gov.
Sincerely,
Stephen Rose
Associate Planner
enc: Department Review Comments
cc: Paul Kermoyan, Community Development Director