SR 08-14-2018 7F
City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: August 14, 2018
Agenda Item: 7.F
1 of 9
To: Mayor and City Council
From: David Martin, Director, City Planning
Subject: Introduction and First Reading of an Ordinance to Repeal and Replace Santa
Monica Municipal Code Chapter 9.32 Telecommunications Facilities
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council introduce for first reading an ordinance to repeal
and replace Santa Monica Municipal Code Chapter 9.32 - Telecommunications
Facilities.
Executive Summary
The City’s regulations governing telecommunications facilities, codified in the Municipal
Code as Chapter 9.32, are now outdated. Since 1994 when these regulations were last
holistically updated (as Ordinance 1757 CCS), most of the regulated equipment has
become obsolete, and use of cellular technology has proliferated. In addition, new laws
and regulations have been promulgated by the State and Federal governments
requiring the City to amend its local laws to be in compliance with these directives.
This report recommends adoption of an ordinance (Attachment A) that would modernize
the City’s regulatory framework and development standards for telecommunications
facilities on property other than the public right-of-way. The ordinance would maintain
any current regulations pertaining to older equipment types that remain relevant
including the location and height of noncommercial, non-parabolic antennas such as
ham radio and standard television antennas. It would also introduce more stringent
regulations and review processes relevant to cellular technology including the
establishment of a new administrative review process for modifications to existing
facilities and co-locations that comply with certain standards, and would reestablish a
discretionary review process (Minor Use Permit) and relevant findings for those that do
not comply with the administrative parameters.
2 of 9
Background
As the popularity of smartphones, tablets, and similar devices increases, wireless
carriers continue to upgrade their equipment and networks, increasing their service
areas and capability to provide quality service. Since the adoption of Ordinance 1757 in
1994, the City of Santa Monica has consistently utilized its zoning police powers to
regulate any potential aesthetic impacts in balance with the desire of various service
providers to improve telecommunications service reliability. However, the City’s
regulatory powers over wireless communications facilities were subsequently
preempted with the passage of two federal mandates - the Telecommunications Act of
1996 and Section 6409(a) of the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012.
Telecommunications Act of 1996
The Telecommunications Act of 1996 (“TCA”) maintained a local jurisdiction’s
authority to regulate wireless communication facilities but limited the scope of
such regulation including express prohibitions to preventing these facilities. The
TCA also stipulated that local jurisdictions were required to act on applications for
these facilities within a reasonable timeframe.
Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012
In February 2012 when Congress passed the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job
Creation Act, it included provisions, codified in Section 6409(a) of the Act,
establishing expedited administrative procedures for the review of wireless
facilities. Section 6409(a) generally states that minor changes to existing sites
that co-locate, remove, or replace transmission equipment at an existing wireless
tower or base station may not be denied and shall be approved by the local
jurisdiction. These standards were later interpreted to include essentially any
communications facility.
As the authorizing federal agency, the Federal Communications Commission (“FCC”)
interpreted these statutes and created procedural rules to guide local jurisdictions. In
3 of 9
addition to limiting permit application content requirements, rules regarding reasonable
timeframes were developed. In 2009, the FCC issued a ruling clarifying the “reasonable
timeframe” or “shot clock” standards clause by adopting a 90-day period to review and
decide on complete collocation applications and a 150-day period to review and decide
on all other siting applications. In 2014, the FCC further ruled that a local government
shall approve a qualifying request under Section 6409(a) within a 60-day period. Failure
to adhere to these timeframes results in a potential “deemed granted” remedy to the
applicant.
The 2015 Zoning Ordinance Update did not include any changes to the City’s existing
telecommunications ordinance, as there was a pending decision by the FCC on rules
and regulations for distributed antenna systems, small cell installations, and wireless
communications facilities.
Discussion
This Ordinance would establish standards and procedures for the deployment,
installation, and operation of personal wireless service within the City in accordance
with Federal law. The standards and procedures would protect and promote the public’s
health and safety and respect the City’s unique aesthetic character in balance with the
comprehensive wireless services.
It is anticipated that the vast majority of applications for personal wireless service
facilities would be subject to administrative review and approval through the Section
6409(a) exemption process. This would apply to any request for modification of an
existing wireless tower or base station that does not result in a “substantial change” to
the physical dimensions of such tower or base station involving collocation of new
transmission equipment, the removal of transmission equipment, or the replacement of
transmission equipment. (See Attachment B for descriptions of specific thresholds for
determining when “substantial changes” occur.) The review and subsequent action on
any 6409(a) administrative application must occur within 60 days of receipt of a
complete application. Otherwise the application is deemed approved.
4 of 9
Any new telecommunications installations at new sites requires review and approval of
a Minor Use Permit (“MUP”). In addition, any request for modification of an existing
wireless tower or base station that fails to meet any one or more of the applicable
thresholds described in Attachment B are indicative of “substantial change”, thus also
requiring an MUP. An MUP is a discretionary permit subject to a public hearing by the
Zoning Administrator who may approve or deny the MUP and whose decision is
appealable to the Planning Commission. Since Minor Use Permits are required for a
number of other use classifications in the Zoning Ordinance and have a standard set of
findings in SMMC Section 9.41.060 that do not necessarily apply to wireless facilities,
specific findings are proposed that would establish a standard of review that is more
pertinent to wireless service facilities. These proposed findings are presented in
Attachment A in Section 9.32.060(b).
A proposed wireless facility, not subject to the Section 6409(a) exemption, could not be
located on any residentially-zoned property with the exception of those properties that
are improved with non-residential uses and/or not occupied by any residents. General
design standards are suggested as a means of minimizing impacts to the greater
community including the following:
Concealment;
Height;
Setbacks;
Noise;
Landscaping;
Security Measures;
Lights/Lighting;
Signage/Advertisements;
Future Collocations; and
Utilities.
Specific standards would also be established for freestanding facilities (i.e.
towers/tower-mounted equipment, ground-mounted equipment and shelters, and
5 of 9
building-mounted facilities (i.e. façade-mounted equipment and rooftop-mounted
equipment).
A full description of each of the recommended design standards is presented in
Attachment A in Section 9.32.080.
Planning Commission Action
On June 6, 2018, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing for
consideration of the draft ordinance updating the City’s Telecommunications Facilities
regulations. The Planning Commission voted 6-0 to recommend that the City Council
update Chapter 9.32 Telecommunications Facilities of the Zoning Ordinance. During the
hearing, the Commission received oral and written staff reports (Attachments C and D)
and heard expert testimony from the City’s telecommunications consultant, Dr.
Jonathan Kramer. Correspondence was also received from representatives for AT&T
and Verizon Wireless raising concerns related to the following:
Prohibitions within residential zones;
Height restrictions;
Location of emergency generators;
Application, noticing, and appeal procedures;
Analysis of alternatives considered in conjunction with an MUP application;
Undergrounding requirements;
Landscaping requirements and maintenance; and
Indemnification.
Staff reviewed the correspondence in consultation with the City Attorney’s Office, and
the City’s telecommunications consultant and found that most of the issues raised by
AT&T and Verizon Wireless would substantially weaken the ordinance and were not
necessary to be consistent with State and Federal law.
During its deliberation, the Commission identified minor clerical errors in the draft
ordinance and provided clarification that the Planning Director would be the appropriate
6 of 9
reference as the approval authority throughout the ordinance. In addition, the
Commission suggested the following substantive changes be incorporated into the final
draft for Council consideration:
An additional Required Finding for Approval be added to SMMC Section
9.32.060(b) to address compatibility within the surrounding neighborhood.
The draft ordinance initially included a blanket prohibition from locating wireless
service facilities on residentially zoned properties. At the suggestion of some
wireless service providers to expand the opportunity for locations in residential
areas but still provide safeguards to local residents, an exception was suggested
to limited locations in residential zones. This was acceptable to the Commission
and was suggested to be codified as Section 9.32.070 (b), reading “Personal
wireless service facilities may be located on parcels not in residential use that
exist on residentially zoned properties as of June 2018.”
In response to the Planning Commission’s comments, staff has made the following
changes to the proposed ordinance:
Added the following Finding to Section 9.32.060 to address the neighborhood
compatibility concern:
(2) the physical location or placement of the use on the site is compatible with
and relates harmoniously to the surrounding neighborhood.
Revised Section 9.32.070 to better expand the residential safeguards. It
should be noted that the intent is that if in the future the use changes or
includes a residential use, new facilities would be prohibited. Staff’s
suggested amendment reads as follows:
(b) Exception to Prohibited Locations. Personal wireless service facilities may
be located in residential zones only on parcels without any residential uses as
of June 6, 2018.
7 of 9
The June 6, 2018 date in Section 9.32.070 was selected as the cut-off day as it was the
date on which the Planning Commission conducted its public hearing and made its
recommendation on the proposed ordinance.
Alternatives
In addition to the recommended action, the City Council could consider the following
with respect to the project if supported by the evidentiary record and consistent with
applicable legal requirements:
Revise the proposed ordinance to address issues of concern.
Deny the proposed ordinance.
Environmental Analysis
The proposed amendments to Chapter 9.32 of the zoning ordinance are categorically
exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
pursuant to 15061(b)(3) of the State Implementation Guidelines (common sense
exemption). Based on the evidence in the record, there is no possibility that the
proposed changes may have a significant effect on the environment. The
recommended amendments represent updates to City regulations regarding personal
wireless service facilities that are required in order to be consistent with current State
and Federal requirements. These amendments do not substantively affect policy
decisions made with the City Council’s adoption of the Zoning Ordinance. Therefore, no
further environmental review under CEQA is required.
Public Outreach
Representatives of personal wireless service carriers and members of the public were
invited to a community meeting that was held on August 18, 2016 at Ken Edwards
Center. Nine persons representing service carriers attended. In addition, staff has met
individually with representatives of certain carriers to review the draft ordinance and
discuss any relevant issues.
8 of 9
Text Amendment Findings
1. The Ordinance amendments are consistent in principle with the General Plan, in
that the amendments do not substantively affect policy decisions made with the
City Council’s adoption of the Zoning Ordinance and represent changes to the
Zoning Ordinance to ensure that City regulations are consistent with current
State and Federal requirements with respect to the processing of personal
wireless service facilities.
2. The Ordinance amendments are consistent with the purpose of this Ordinance to
promote the growth of the City in an orderly manner and to promote and protect
the public health, safety, and general welfare, in that the amendments will allow
for the proper regulation of personal wireless services facilities to promote and
protect the public health, safety, and general welfare. Specifically, the
amendments establish updated regulations including a process for the review of
personal wireless service facilities, location and design requirements, and
conditions of approval.
Financial Impacts and Budget Actions
There is no immediate financial impact or budget action necessary as a result of the
recommended action.
Prepared By: Scott Albright, Senior Planner
Approved
Forwarded to Council
Attachments:
A. Ordinance - Telecommunications - 08142018
B. Section 6409(a) Administrative Review - Substantial Change Thresholds
9 of 9
C. Planning Commission Staff Report - June 6, 2018
D. Planning Commission Supplemental Staff Report - June 6, 2018
E. Written Comments
Page 1
City Council Meeting: August 14, 2018 Santa Monica, California
ORDINANCE NUMBER _________ (CCS)
(City Council Series)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SANTA MONICA REPEALING AND REPLACING IN ITS ENTIRETY THE TEXT OF
SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 9.32 PERTAINING TO PERSONAL
WIRELESS SERVICES FACILITIES
WHEREAS, the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (TCA) recognized that cities
have authority to regulate personal wireless service facilities, but limited the scope of
such regulation; and
WHEREAS, the TCA prevents cities from prohibiting or effectively prohibiting
these facilities and requires cities to act on applications for these facilities within a
reasonable timeframe; and
WHEREAS, in 2009, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC)
established a reasonable timeframe as ninety (90) days for applications for co -locations
(more than one wireless carrier at one site) and one hund red twenty (120) days for all
other applications; and
WHEREAS, Congress passed Section 6409(a) of the Middle Class Tax Relief
and Job Creation Act of 2012 on February 22, 2012, which established an expedited
administrative process for the review of wireless facilities; and
WHEREAS, Section 6409(a) applies to all “wireless” facilities licensed or
authorized by the FCC (e.g., cellular, Wi-Fi, satellite, microwave backhaul, etc.); and
Page 2
WHEREAS, Section 6409(a) generally requires that a state and local government
“may not deny, and shall approve” certain applications for minor changes to existing
sites that co-locate, remove or replace transmission equipment at an existing wireless
tower or base station; and
WHEREAS, FCC regulations contain procedural rules for local review that
generally preempt subjective land-use regulations, limit permit application content
requirements, and modify the reasonable timeframe to provide applicants with a
potential “deemed granted” remedy when the State or local governm ent fails to approve
or deny the request within ninety (90) days after submittal (accounting for any tolling
periods); and
WHEREAS, the City’s existing telecommunications ordinance is obsolete and
must be updated to comply with current state and federal laws; and
WHEREAS, on June 2016, the City’s Planning Commission adopted a resolution,
recommending repeal and replacement of Chapter 9.32 of the Santa Monica Municipal
Code to ensure that City regulations are consistent with current state and federal laws;
and
WHEREAS, the City Council desires to protect and promote public health, safety
and welfare, and also balance the benefits that flow from robust, advanced wireless
services with the City’s local values, which include without limitation the aesthetic
character of the City, its various neighborhoods and community without (1) prohibiting or
effectively prohibiting any personal wireless service provider’s ability to provide personal
wireless services; (2) prohibiting or effectively prohibiting any personal wireless service
provider’s ability to provide any interstate or intrastate telecommunications service,
Page 3
subject to any competitively neutral and nondiscriminatory rules or regulations; (3)
unreasonably discriminating among providers of functionally equivale nt services; (4)
denying any request for authorization to place, construct or modify personal wireless
service facilities on the basis of environmental effects of radio frequency emissions to
the extent that such facilities comply with the Federal Communication Commission’s
regulations concerning such emissions; (5) prohibiting any collocation or modification
that the City may not deny under federal or state law; or (6) otherwise authorizing the
City to preempt any applicable federal or state law or regulat ion.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA
DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Findings:
The City Council, having conducted a duly noticed public hearing on August 14,
2018 and, after considering oral and written testimony, makes the following findings with
respect to adopting this new wireless communications ordinance (“the Wireless
Communications Ordinance”):
1. The Wireless Communications Ordinance is consistent in principle with
the General Plan, in that the Ordinance does not substantively affect policy decisions
made with the City Council’s adoption of the Zoning Ordinance and represent changes
to the Zoning Ordinance to ensure that City regulations are consistent with current State
and Federal requirements with respect to the processing of personal wireless service
facilities.
Page 4
2. The Wireless Communications Ordinance is consistent with the purpose of
the Zoning Ordinance to promote the growth of the City in an orderly manner and to
promote and protect the public health, safety, and general welfare, in that the Wireless
Communications Ordinance will allow for the proper regulation of personal wireless
services facilities to promote and protect the public health, safety, and general welfare.
Specifically, the Wireless Communications Ordinance will establish updated regulations
including a process for the review of personal wireless service facilities, location and
design requirements, and conditions of approval.
SECTION 2. Santa Monica Municipal Code Chapter 9.32 is hereby repealed in
its entirety and fully restated as follows:
CHAPTER 9.32 PERSONAL WIRELESS SERVICE FACILITIES
9.32.010 Purpose
The purpose of this Chapter is to establish reasonable and uniform standards
and procedures for personal wireless service facilities deployment, construction,
installation, collocation, modification, operation, relocation and removal on all property
other than the public right-of-way within the City’s territorial boundaries, consistent with
and to the extent permitted under f ederal and state law. The standards and procedures
contained in this chapter are intended to, and should be applied to, protect and promote
public health, safety and welfare, and balance the benefits that flow from robust,
advanced wireless services with the City’s local values, which include without limitation
the aesthetic character of the City, its various neighborhoods and community.
Page 5
This chapter is not intended to, nor shall it be interpreted or applied to:
A. prohibit or effectively prohibit any personal wireless service provider’s
ability to provide personal wireless services;
B. prohibit or effectively prohibit any personal wireless service provider’s
ability to provide any interstate or intrastate telecommunications service,
subject to any competitively neutral and nondiscriminatory rules or
regulations;
C. unreasonably discriminate among providers of functionally equivalent
services;
D. deny any request for authorization to place, construct or modify pe rsonal
wireless service facilities based on environmental effects of radio
frequency emissions to the extent that such facilities comply with the
Federal Communication Commission’s regulations concerning such
emissions;
E. prohibit any collocation or modification that the City may not deny under
federal or state law; or
F. otherwise authorize the City to preempt any applicable federal or state law
or regulation.
9.32.020 Definitions
The abbreviations, phrases, terms and words shall have the meanings assigned
to them in this Section 9.32.020 or, as may be appropriate, in Chapter 9.52 (Terms and
Definitions), as may be amended from time to time, unless context indicates otherwise.
Page 6
Undefined phrases, terms or words in this section shall have the meanings assigned to
them in 47 U.S.C. § 702, as may be amended from time to time, and, if not defined
therein, shall have their ordinary meanings. If any definition assigned to any phrase,
term or word in this section conflicts with any federal or state-mandated definition, the
federal or state-mandated definition shall control.
A. “Approval Authority” means the Planning Director, or Planning
Commission on appeal.
B. “Base Station” has the same definition as provided by the FCC in 47
C.F.R. § 1.40001(b)(1), as may be amended, which defines that term as a
structure or equipment at a fixed location that enables [FCC]-licensed or
authorized wireless communications between user equipment and a
communications network. The term does not encompass a tower as
defined in [47 C.F.R. § 1.40001(b)(9)] or any equipment associated with a
tower. The term includes, but is not limited to, equipment associated with
wireless communications services such as private, broadcast, and public
safety services, as well as unlicensed wireless services and fixed wireless
services such as microwave backhaul. The term includes, but is not
limited to, radio transceivers, antennas, coaxial or fiber-optic cable, regular
and backup power supplies, and comparable equipment, regardless of
technological configuration (including distributed antenna systems and
small-cell networks). The term includes any structure other than a tower
that, at the time the relevant application is filed with the state or local
government under this section, supports or houses equipment described
Page 7
in subsections (1)-(2), codified as 47 C.F.R. § 1.40001(b)(1)(i)-(ii) that has
been reviewed and approved under the applicable zoning or siting
process, or under another state or local regulatory review process, even if
the structure was not built for the sole or primary purpose of providing
such support. The term does not include any structure that, at the time the
relevant application is filed with the State or local government under this
section, does not support or house equipment described in subsections
(1)-(2), codified as 47 C.F.R. § 1.40001(b)(1)(i)-(ii).
C. “Collocation” has the same definition as provided by the FCC in 47
C.F.R. § 1.40001(b)(2), as may be amended, which defines that term as
the mounting or installation of transmission equipment on an eligible
support structure for the purpose of transmitting and/or receiving radio
frequency signals for communications purposes. As an illustration and not
a limitation, the FCC’s definition effectively means “to add” and does not
necessarily refer to more than one personal wireless service facility
installed at a single site.
D. “CPCN” means a “Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity”
granted by the CPUC or its duly appointed successor agency pursuant to
California Public Utilities Code §§ 1001 et seq., as may be amended.
E. “CPUC” means the California Public Utilities Commission established in
the California Constitution, Article XII, § 5, or its duly appointed successor
agency or agencies.
Page 8
F. “FAA” means the Federal Aviation Administration or its duly appointed
successor agency.
G. “FCC” means the Federal Communications Commission or its duly
appointed successor agency.
H. “OTARD” means an over-the-air reception device subject to 47 C.F.R. §§
1.4000 et seq., as may be amended, and which includes without limitation
satellite television dishes not greater than one meter in diameter.
I. “Personal Wireless Services” means the same as defined in 47 U.S.C.
§ 332(c)(7)(C)(i), as may be amended, which defines the term as
commercial mobile services, unlicensed wireless services and common
carrier wireless exchange access services.
J. “Personal Wireless Service Facilities” means the same as defined in
47 U.S.C. § 332(c)(7)(C)(i), as may be amended, which defines the term
as facilities that provide personal wireless services.
K. “Public Right-Of-Way” means any public street, alley, sidewalk, or
parkway that is owned or granted by easement, operated, or controlled by
the City.
L. “RF” means radio frequency or electromagnetic waves between 30 kHz
and 300 GHz in the electromagnetic spectrum range.
M. “Section 6409(a)” means Section 6409(a) of the Middle Class Tax Relief
and Job Creation Act, Pub. L. No. 112-96, 126 Stat. 156 (Feb. 22, 2012),
codified as 47 U.S.C. § 1455(a), as may be amended or superseded.
Page 9
N. “Temporary Personal Wireless Service Facilities” means portable
wireless communication facilities intended or used to provide personal
wireless services on a temporary or emergency basis, such as a large-
scale special event in which more users than usual gather in a confined
location or when a disaster disables permanent personal wireless service
facilities. Temporary personal wireless service facilities include, without
limitation, cells-on-wheels (“COWs”), sites-on-wheels (“SOWs”), cells-on-
light-trucks (“COLTs”) or other similarly portable wireless communication
facilities not permanently affixed to the site or land upon which it is
located.
O. “Tower” has the same definition as provided by the FCC in 47 C.F.R. §
1.40001(b)(9), as may be amended, which defines that term as any
structure built for the sole or primary purpose of supporting any [FCC]-
licensed or authorized antennas and their associated facilities, including
structures that are constructed for wireless communications services
including, but not limited to, private, broadcast, and public safety services,
as well as unlicensed wireless services and fixed wireless services such
as microwave backhaul, and the associated site. Examples include, but
are not limited to, monopoles, mono-trees and lattice towers.
P. “Transmission Equipment” has the same definition as provided by the
FCC in 47 C.F.R. § 1.40001(b)(8), as may be amended, which defines
that term as equipment that facilitates transmission for any [FCC]-licensed
or authorized wireless communication service, including, but not limited to,
Page 10
radio transceivers, antennas, coaxial or fiber-optic cable, and regular and
backup power supply. The term includes equipment associated with
wireless communications services including, but not limited to, private,
broadcast, and public safety services, as well as unlicensed wireless
services and fixed wireless services such as microwave backhaul.
Q. “Wireless” means any FCC-licensed or authorized wireless
communication service transmitted over frequencies in the
electromagnetic spectrum.
9.32.030 Applicability
A. Applicable Facilities. This chapter applies to all personal wireless service
facilities within the City and all applications and requests for approval to
construct, install, modify, collocate, relocate or otherwise deploy personal
wireless service facilities in the City, unless exempted pursuant to Section
9.32.030(b).
B. Exempt Facilities. Notwithstanding Section 9.32.030(a), the provisions in
this chapter shall not be applicable to:
1. facilities installed on City property in the public right-of-way
governed by Chapter 7.70 (Public Right-Of-Way Wireless
Communication Facilities) of this Code;
2. amateur radio facilities;
3. OTARD antennas;
Page 11
4. personal wireless service facilities installed completely indoors and
not visible to the public intended to extend signals for personal
wireless services in a personal residence or a business (such as a
femtocell or indoor distributed antenna system); and
5. personal wireless service facilities or equipment owned and
operated by CPUC-regulated electric companies for use in
connection with electrical power generation, transmission and
distribution facilities subject to CPUC General Order 131-D.
C. Requests for Approval Pursuant to Section 6409(a). Any request to
collocate, replace or remove transmission equipment at an existing tower
or base station submitted with a written request for approval under Section
6409(a) shall be processed administratively pursuant to the standards and
procedures established by the Director, in accordance with federal law.
9.32.040 Permits Required
A. Minor Use Permit. A minor use permit, subject to the Planning Director’s
prior review and approval in accordance with Chapter 9.41 (Minor Use
Permits and Conditional Use Permits), is required for all personal wireless
services facilities except for those that are exempt under Section
9.32.030(b) or that are governed by Section 9.32.030(c).
B. Other Permits and Regulatory Approvals. In addition to any minor use
permit or other permit required under this Chapter, the applicant must
obtain all other required permits and other regulatory approvals from the
Page 12
City, and state and federal agencies. Any minor use permit or other permit
granted under this chapter shall be subject to the conditions and/or other
requirements in any other required permits or other regulatory approvals.
C. Proprietary Approvals. Nothing in this Chapter shall be deemed to waive
any required proprietary approvals for siting of personal wireless service
facilities on privately or publicly owned property or improvements.
9.32.050 Permit Applications
A. Application Requirement. The City shall not accept, approve, or deny
any personal wireless service facility subject to this Chapter except upon a
duly filed application pursuant to Section 9.37.020 and any other written
rules the Director may publish in any publicly-stated format.
B. Minimum Application Content. The materials required under this section
are minimum requirements for any application for any personal wireless
service facility:
1. Application Form. The Director shall prepare and issue application
forms and lists that specify the information that will be required from
applicants for projects subject to the provisions of this Ordinance,
laws, and applicable court decisions.
2. Application Fee. The City Council may approve by resolution a
Municipal Fee Schedule that establishes cost-based fees for
permits, appeals, amendments, information materials, penalties,
Page 13
copying, and other such items. These fees may be amended by
the City Council.
C. Procedures for a Duly Filed Application. The City shall accept
applications filed in accordance with the provisions in this Section.
1. Submittal Appointment. All applications must be filed with the City
at a pre-scheduled appointment. Applicants may generally submit
one application per appointment but may schedule successive
appointments for multiple applications whenever feasible and not
prejudicial to other applicants. Any application received without an
appointment, whether delivered in-person or through any other
means, will not be deemed as filed.
2. Appointment Scheduling Procedures. A pre-scheduled
appointment may be scheduled by contacting the City Planning
Division. No application shall be tendered to or accepted by the City
during any of the following periods: (i) any time the City Hall is
closed to the public; (ii) any legal holiday observed by the City; (iii)
the week of Thanksgiving; and (iv) three business days prior to July
4, December 25, and January 1.
D. Applications Deemed Withdrawn. To promote efficient review and timely
decisions by the City, an application will be automatically deemed
withdrawn without prejudice by the applicant when the applicant fails to
tender a substantive response to the City within ninety (90) calendar days
after the City deems the application incomplete in a written notice to the
Page 14
applicant. The Planning Director may, in the Planning Director’s discretion,
grant a written extension for up to an additional thirty (30) calendar days
when the applicant delivers to the City a written request prior to the 90th
day that shows good cause to grant the extension. Delays due to
circumstances outside the applicant’s reasonable control shall be
considered good cause to grant the extension.
E. Departmental Forms, Rules and Other Regulations. The City Council
authorizes the Planning Director to develop and publish permit application
forms, checklists, informational handouts and other related materials for
this chapter. Without further authorization from the City Council, the
Planning Director may from time-to-time update and alter the permit
application forms, checklists, informational handouts and other related
materials as the Planning Director deems necessary or appropriate to
respond to regulatory, technological or other changes relate d to this
chapter. The City Council further authorizes the Planning Director to
establish other reasonable rules and regulations, which may include
without limitation regular hours for appointments with applicants, as the
Planning Director deems necessary or appropriate to organize, document
and manage the application intake process. All such rules and regulations
must be in written form and publicly stated to provide applicants with prior
notice.
Page 15
9.32.060 Decisions
A. Notice
1. General Notice Required for the Application. Public notice as
provided in Chapter 9.41 will be required for any minor use permit.
The approval authority shall not act on any application for a
personal wireless service facility unless the public notice required
by law has occurred.
2. Deemed-Approval Notice Procedures. Not more than thirty (30)
days before the applicable FCC timeframe for review expires, and
in addition to the public notice required in Section 9.32.60(a)(1),
above, an applicant for a minor use permit must provide a posted
notice at the project site that states the project shall be
automatically deemed approved pursuant to California Government
Code § 65964.1 unless the City approves or denies the application
or the applicant tolls the timeframe for review within the next thirty
(30) days. The posted notice must be compliant with the provisions
in this chapter. The public notice required under this Section
9.32.060(a)(2) shall be deemed given when the applicant delivers
written notice to the Planning Director that shows the appropriate
notice has been posted at the project site.
3. Decision Notices. In accordance with Section 9.37.070(d), within
two (2) working days after the approval authority approves,
conditionally approves or denies an application for a personal
Page 16
wireless service facility or before the FCC timeframe for review
expires (whichever occurs first), the approval authority shall send a
written determination to the applicant and all other parties entitled
to receive notice. For any denial notice, the approval authority shall
include the reasons for the denial either in the notice or as a
separate written document.
B. Required Findings for Approval. The approval authority shall only
approve or conditionally approve a duly filed application for a minor use
permit if the approval authority determines that the project, as submitted or
modified, conforms to all the following criteria. The inability to make one
or more of the findings is grounds for denial of an application.
1. The proposed use is consistent with the General Plan and any
applicable specific plan;
2. the physical location or placement of the use on the site is
compatible with and relates harmoniously to the surrounding
neighborhood or other built and natural environment;
3. the proposed personal wireless service facility complies with all
applicable development standards described in Section 9.32.080;
4. the applicant has demonstrated that its proposed facility shall be in
compliance with all applicable FCC rules and regulations for human
exposure to RF emissions;
Page 17
5. the applicant has demonstrated a good-faith effort to identify and
evaluate more-preferred locations and potentially less-intrusive
designs; and
6. the applicant has provided the approval authority with a meaningful
comparative analysis that shows all less-intrusive alternative
locations and designs identified in the administrative record are
either technically infeasible or not potentially available .
C. Conditional Approvals. The approval authority may impose any
reasonable conditions on any minor use permit, related and proportionate
to the subject matter in the application, as the approval authority deems
necessary or appropriate to promote and ensure conformance with the
General Plan, any applicable specific plan and all applicable provisions in
the Santa Monica Municipal Code.
D. Limited Exception for Personal Wireless Service Facilities. The
Planning Director shall not grant any limited exceptions to the
requirements of this Chapter unless all of the following findings can be
made:
1. The proposed facility qualifies as a “personal wireless service
facility” as defined in 47 U.S.C. § 332(c)(7)(C)(ii), as may be
amended or superseded;
2. The applicant has provided the Planning Director with a reasonable
and clearly defined technical service objective to be achieved by
the proposed facility;
Page 18
3. The applicant has provided the Planning Director with a written
statement that contains a detailed and fact-specific explanation as
to why the proposed facility cannot be deployed in compliance with
the applicable provisions in this Chapter, the Santa Monica
Municipal Code, the general plan and/or any specific plan;
4. The applicant has provided the Planning Director with a meaningful
comparative analysis with the factual reasons why all alternative
locations and/or designs identified in the administrative record
(whether suggested by the applicant, the City, public comments or
any other source) are not technically feasible or potentially
available to reasonably achieve the applicant’s reasonable and
clearly defined technical service objective to be achieved by the
proposed facility; and
5. The applicant has demonstrated that the proposed location and
design is the least non-compliant configuration that shall
reasonably achieve the applicant’s reasonable and clearly defined
technical service objective to be achieved by the proposed facility,
which includes without limitation a meaningful comparative analysis
into multiple smaller or less intrusive facilities dispersed throughout
the intended service area.
E. Appeals. Any person or entity may appeal a decision by the Planning
Director in accordance with the standards and procedures set forth in
Page 19
Section 9.37.130. Environmental effects from RF emissions that comply
with all applicable FCC regulations shall not be grounds for an appeal.
9.32.070 Site Location Guidelines
A. Prohibited Locations. No personal wireless service facilities shall be
located in any residential zone.
B. Exception to Prohibited Locations. Personal wireless service facilities
may be located in residential zones only on parcels without any residential
uses as of June 6, 2018.
9.32.080 Design Standards
A. Generally Applicable Development Standards. All new personal
wireless service facilities and all collocations or modifications to existing
personal wireless service facilities not subject to Section 6409(a) must
conform to the generally applicable development standards in this Section
9.32.080(a) in order to mitigate impacts on adjacent properties.
1. Concealment. Personal wireless service facilities must incorporate
concealment elements, measures and technique s that blend the
equipment and other improvements into the natural and/or built
environment in a manner consistent and/or compatible with the
uses germane to the underlying zoning district and existing in the
immediate vicinity.
Page 20
2. Overall Height. Ground-mounted towers may not exceed the
applicable height limit for structures in the applicable zoning district.
Rooftop personal wireless service facilities may not extend beyond
15 feet above the roofline.
3. Setbacks. Personal wireless service facilities may not encroach
into any applicable setback for structures in the subject zoning
district.
4. Noise. Personal wireless service facilities and all accessory
equipment and transmission equipment must comply with all noise
regulations, which includes without limitation Chapter 4.12 (Noise),
and shall not exceed, either individually or cumulatively, the
applicable ambient noise limit in the subject zoning district. The
approval authority may require the applicant to incorporate
appropriate noise-baffling materials and/or strategies whenever
necessary to avoid any ambient noise from equipment reasonably
likely to exceed the applicable limit.
5. Landscaping. Personal wireless service facilities must include
landscape features when proposed in a landscaped area. The
approval authority may require additional landscape features to
screen the facility from public view, avoid or mitigate potential
adverse impacts on adjacent properties or otherwise enhance the
concealment required under this chapter. The permittee shall be
responsible for maintenance of and replacement of all landscaping.
Page 21
6. Security Measures. Personal wireless service facilities may
incorporate reasonable and appropriate security measures, such as
fences, walls and anti-climbing devices, to prevent unauthorized
access, theft and vandalism. Security measures must be designed
to enhance concealment to the maximum extent possible. The
approval authority may require additional concealment elements as
the approval authority finds necessary to blend the security
measures and other improvements into the natural and/or built
environment. The approval authority shall not approve barbed wire,
razor ribbon, electrified fences or any similar security measures that
may cause serious injury or death.
7. Backup Power Sources. The approval authority may approve
permanent backup power sources and/or generators on a case-by-
case basis. The City strongly favors non- and low-polluting backup
power sources such as fuel cells and natural gas generators, and
strongly disfavors backup power sources that pollute such as diesel
and gasoline generators. The approval authority shall not approve
any diesel or gasoline generators or other similarly noisy or noxious
generators in or within 1,000 feet from any residence, park, or
beach; provided, however, the approval authority may approve
sockets or other connections used for temporary backup
generators.
Page 22
8. Lights. Personal wireless service facilities may not include exterior
lights other than (i) as may be required under FAA, FCC or other
applicable governmental regulations; and (ii) timed or motion -
sensitive lights for security and/or worker safety. All exterior lights
permitted or required to be installed must be installed in locations
and within enclosures that avoids illumination impacts on other
properties to the maximum extent feasible. FAA or FCC required
aircraft warning lighting shall to the maximum extent feasible use
lighting shielded from view from any human-occupied structure
within the City.
9. Signage; Advertisements. All personal wireless service facilities
must include signage that continuously and accurately identifies the
equipment owner/operator, the owner/operator’s site name or
identification number, as well as a local or toll-free number to the
owner/operator’s network operations center. Personal wireless
service facilities must not bear any other signage or advertisements
unless expressly approved by the City, required by law or
recommended by the FCC, CPUC, or other United States or State
governmental agencies.
10. Future Collocations. All personal wireless service facilities must
be designed and sited in a manner that contemplates future
collocations and shall facilitate additional equipment to be
integrated into the proposed facility or associated structures with no
Page 23
or negligible visual changes to its outward appearance to the
greatest extent feasible.
11. Utilities. All cables and connectors for telephone, primary electric
and other similar utility services must be routed underground to the
extent feasible in conduits large enough to accommodate future
collocated facilities. The approval authority shall not approve new
overhead utility lines or service drops merely because compliance
with the undergrounding requirements would increase the project
cost.
12. Compliance with Laws. All personal wireless service facilities
must be designed and sited in compliance with all applicable
federal, state and local laws, regulations, rules, restrictions and
conditions, which includes without limitation the California Building
Standards Code, General Plan and any specific plan, the Santa
Monica Municipal Code and any conditions or restrictions in any
permit or other governmental approval issued by any public agency
with jurisdiction over the project.
B. Freestanding Facilities.
1. Uncamouflaged Towers Prohibited. No new monopole or similar
uncamouflaged or minimally-camouflaged tower shall be permitted.
All freestanding towers must be designed to maximally blend in to
its surroundings and camouflage the personal wireless service
facilities attached thereto.
Page 24
2. Tower-Mounted Equipment. All tower-mounted equipment must
be mounted as close to the vertical support structure as possible to
reduce its visual profile. Applicants must mount non-antenna,
tower-mounted equipment (including, but not limited to, remote
radio units/heads, surge suppressors and utility demarcation boxes)
directly behind the antennas to the maximum extent feasible. All
tower-mounted equipment, cables and hardware must be painted
with flat colors and enclosed in camouflage elements subject to the
approval authority’s prior approval.
3. Ground-Mounted Equipment and Shelters. All ground-mounted
equipment must be concealed within an existing or new structure,
opaque fences or other enclosures. The approval authority may
require additional concealment elements as the approval authority
finds necessary to blend the ground-mounted equipment and other
improvements into the natural and/or built environment.
C. Building-Mounted Facilities.
1. Preferred Concealment Techniques. All applicants should, to the
maximum extent feasible, propose new non-tower facilities that are
completely concealed and architecturally integrated into the existing
facade or rooftop features with no visible impacts from any publicly
accessible areas at ground level (examples include, but are not
limited to, antennas behind existing parapet walls or facades
replaced with RF-transparent material and finished to match the
Page 25
replaced materials). Alternatively, when integration with existing
building features is not feasible, the applicant should propose
completely concealed new structures or appurtenances designed to
be compatible with the support structure’s original architecture and
proportions (examples include, but are not limited to, cupolas,
steeples, chimneys and water tanks).
2. Façade-Mounted Equipment. All façade-mounted equipment must
be concealed behind screen walls and mounted as flush to the
facade as practicable and painted to match the facade. The
approval authority may not approve “pop-out” screen boxes or
cable trays unless the design is architecturally consistent with the
original building or support structure.
3. Rooftop-Mounted Equipment. All rooftop-mounted equipment
must be screened from public view with concealment measures
that match the underlying structure in proportion, quality,
architectural style and finish. The approval authority may approve
unscreened rooftop equipment only when it expressly finds that
such equipment is effectively concealed from public view from any
ground level location and from any other structure due to its low
height and/or setback from the roofline.
4. Associated Ground-Mounted Equipment. Outdoor round-
mounted equipment associated with building-mounted facilities
must be avoided whenever feasible. In publicly visible or accessible
Page 26
locations, applicants must conceal outdoor ground-mounted
equipment with opaque fences or landscape features that mimic the
adjacent structure(s) such as dumpster corrals and other accessory
structures.
9.32.090 Standard Conditions of Approval
In addition to all other conditions adopted by the approval authority, all minor use
permits, whether approved by the approval authority or deemed approved by the
operation of law, shall be automatically subject to the conditions set forth below:
A. Approved Plans. Before the permittee submits any applications to the
Building and Safety Division, the permittee must incorporate the permit, all
conditions associated with the permit and the approved photo simulations
into the project plans (the “Approved Plans”). The permittee must
construct, install and operate the facility in strict compliance with the
Approved Plans. Any alterations, modifications or other changes to the
Approved Plans, whether requested by the permittee or required by other
departments or public agencies with jurisdiction over the facility, must be
submitted in a written request subject to the Planning Director’s prior
review and approval, who may refer the request to the original approval
authority if the Planning Director finds that the requested alteration,
modification or other change implicates a significant or substantial land -
use concern.
Page 27
B. Build-out Period. In accordance with Section 9.37.090 Expiration and
Extension, the permit shall automatically expire two years from the
issuance date unless the permittee obtains all other permits and approvals
required to install, construct and/or operate the approved f acility, which
includes without limitation any permits or approvals required by the any
federal, state or local public agencies with jurisdiction over the subject
property, the facility or its use. The Planning Director may grant one
written extension to a date certain when the permittee shows good cause
to extend the limitations period in a written request for an extension
submitted at least thirty (30) days prior to the automatic expiration date in
this condition.
C. Maintenance Obligations; Vandalism. The permittee shall at all times
keep the site, which includes without limitation any and all improvements,
equipment, structures, access routes, fences and landscape features, in a
neat, clean and safe condition in accordance with the Approved Plans and
all conditions in the permit. The permittee shall keep the site area free
from all litter and debris at all times. The permittee, at no cost to the City,
shall remove and remediate any graffiti or other vandalism at the site
within 48 hours after the permittee receives notice or otherwise becomes
aware through its own staff including contractors that such graffiti or other
vandalism occurred.
D. Compliance with Laws. The permittee shall maintain compliance at all
times with all federal, state and local statutes, regulations, orders or other
Page 28
rules that carry the force of law (“Laws”) applicable to the permittee, the
subject property, the facility or any use or activities in connection with the
use authorized in the permit. The permittee expressly acknowledges and
agrees that this obligation is intended to be broadly construed and that no
other specific requirements in these conditions are intended to reduce,
relieve or otherwise lessen the permittee’s obligations to maintain
compliance with all Laws.
E. Inspections; Emergencies. The permittee expressly acknowledges and
agrees that the City or its designee may enter onto the site and inspect the
improvements and equipment upon reasonable prior notice to the
permittee; provided, however, that the City or its designee may, but shall
not be obligated to, enter onto the site area without prior notice to support,
repair, disable or remove any improvements or equipment in emergencies
or when such improvements or equipment threatens actual, imminent
harm to property or persons. The permittee shall be permitted to supervise
the City or its designee while such inspection or emergency access
occurs.
F. Contact Information. The permittee shall furnish the City Planning
Division with accurate and up-to-date contact information for a person
responsible for the facility, which includes without limitation such person’s
full name, title, direct telephone number, facsimile number, mailing
address and email address. The permittee shall keep such contact
information up-to-date at all times.
Page 29
G. Indemnification. The permittee and, if applicable, the property owner
upon which the facility is installed shall defend, indemnify and hold
harmless the City, its agents, officers, officials, employees and volunteers
from any and all (1) damages, liabilities, injuries, losses, costs and
expenses and from any and all claims, demands, law suits, writs and other
actions or proceedings (“Claims”) brought against the City or its agents,
officers, officials, employees or volunteers to challenge, attack, seek to
modify, set aside, void or annul the City’s approval of any permit or
regulatory approval authorized by City under this Chapter 9.32, and (2)
other Claims any kind or form, whether for personal injury, death or
property damage, that arise from or in connection with the permittee’s or
its agents’, directors’, officers’, employees’, contractors’, subcontractors’,
licensees’, or customers’ acts or omissions in connection with the permit
or the facility; provided, however, the permittee and, if applicable, the
property owner upon which the facility is installed, shall not defend,
indemnify, or hold harmless the City, agents, officers, officials, employees
and volunteers due to the negligence, gross negligence, or willful
misconduct of the City, agents, officers, officials, employees, and
volunteers. In the event the City becomes aware any Claims, the City shall
use best efforts to promptly notify the permittee and the private property
owner and shall reasonably cooperate in the defense. The permittee
expressly acknowledges and agrees that the City shall have the right to
approve, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld, the legal
Page 30
counsel providing the City’s defense, and the property owner and/or
permittee (as applicable) shall promptly reimburse City for any costs and
expenses directly and necessarily incurred by the City in the course of the
defense. The permittee expressly acknowledges and agrees that the
permittee’s indemnification obligations under this condition are a material
consideration that motivates the City to approve the permit, and that such
indemnification obligations shall survive the expiration or revocation of the
permit.
H. Revocation/Modification of Permit. The original approval authority may
revoke or modify the permit at any time based upon noncompliance with
the Santa Monica Municipal Code or any approval conditions. In
accordance with Section 9.37.120 Revocation/Modification of Permits, the
approval authority may revoke the permit or amend these conditions as
the approval authority deems necessary or appropriate to correct any such
noncompliance.
I. Duty to Retain Records. The permittee must maintain complete and
accurate copies of all permits and other regulatory approvals (the records)
issued in connection with the personal wireless service facility, which
includes without limitation this approval, the approved plans and photo
simulations incorporated into this approval, all conditions associated with
this approval and any ministerial permits or approvals issued in connection
with this approval. In the event that the permittee does not maintain such
records as required in this condition or fails to produce true and complete
Page 31
copies of such records within a reasonable time after a written request
from the City, any ambiguities or uncertainties that would be resolved
through an inspection of the missing records shall be construed against
the permittee.
9.32.100 Temporary Personal Wireless Service Facilities
A. Temporary Personal Wireless Service Facilities - Non-Emergencies.
The Planning Director may approve or conditionally approve a temporary
use permit for a temporary personal wireless service facility for a period
between four (4) days and forty-five (45) days, inclusive, in accordance
with Chapter 9.44 only when the Planning Director finds all the following:
1. The proposed temporary personal wireless service facility shall not
exceed 50 feet in overall height above ground level;
2. the proposed temporary personal wireless service facility complies
with all setback requirements applicable to the proposed location;
3. the proposed temporary personal wireless service facility shall not
involve any excavation or ground disturbance;
4. the proposed temporary personal wireless service facility shall be
compliant with all generally applicable public health and safety laws
and regulations, which includes without limitation maximum
permissible exposure limits for human exposure to RF emissions
established by the FCC;
Page 32
5. the proposed temporary personal wireless service facility shall not
create any nuisance or violate any noise limits applicable to the
proposed location;
6. the proposed temporary personal wireless service facility shall be
identified with a sign that clearly identifies the site operator and
contains a working telephone number to a live person who can
exert power-down control over the antennas;
7. the proposed wireless temporary personal wireless service facility
shall be removed within five (5) days after the expiration of the
temporary use permit;
8. the applicant has not received any other temporary use permit for
substantially the same location within the previous 90 calendar
days; and
9. the applicant has not sought approval for any permanent personal
wireless service facility in substantially the same location within the
previous 365 days.
B. Temporary Personal Wireless Service Facilities - Emergencies.
1. Temporary personal wireless service facilities may be placed and
operated within the City for more than three (3) days without a
temporary use permit only when a duly-authorized federal, state,
county or City official declares an emergency within the City, or a
region that includes the City in whole or in part at the location of the
temporary personal wireless service facility.
Page 33
2. By placing the temporary personal wireless service facility pursuant
to this Section 9.32.100(b), the entity or person placing the
temporary personal wireless service facility agrees to and shall
defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City, its agents, officers,
officials, employees and volunteers from any and all (1) damages,
liabilities, injuries, losses, costs and expenses and from any and all
claims, demands, law suits, writs and other actions or proceedings
(“Claims”) brought against the City or its agents, officers, officials,
employees or volunteers for any and all Claims of any nature
related to the installation, use, non-use, occupancy, removal, and
disposal of the temporary personal wireless service facility;
provided, however, the permittee and, if applicable, the property
owner upon which the facility is installed, shall not defend,
indemnify, or hold harmless the City, agents, officers, officials,
employees and volunteers due to the negligence, gross negligence,
or willful misconduct of the City, agents, officers, officials,
employees, and volunteers.
3. The temporary personal wireless service facility shall prominently
display upon it a legible notice identifying the entity responsible for
the placement and operation of the temporary personal wireless
service facility.
4. Any temporary personal wireless service facilities placed pursuant
to this Section 9.32.100(b) must be removed within (a) five (5) days
Page 34
after the date the emergency is lifted or (b) upon three (3) days
written notice from the Planning Director or City Manager or (c)
within one (1) hour if required for public safety reasons by City
police or fire officials (whichever occurs first). In the event that the
temporary facility is not removed as required in this Section
9.32.100(b), the City may at its sole election may remove and store
or remove and dispose of the temporary facility at the sole cost and
risk of the person or entity placing the temporary facility.
C. The Planning Director’s decision pursuant to Subsection A, above, shall
be final and not subject to further administrative appeal.
9.32.110 Compliance Obligations
An applicant or permittee shall not be relieved of its obligation to comply with
every applicable provision in the Santa Monica Municipal Code, any permit, any permit
condition or any applicable law or regulation by reason of any failure by the City to
timely notice, prompt or enforce compliance by the applicant or permittee.
Chapter 9.32 TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES
9.32.010 Nonparabolic Antenna Definitions
The following words or phrases shall have the following meanings when used in this
Chapter:
A. Antenna Array. A group of antenna elements on the same geometric plane.
Page 35
B. Antenna, Commercial. An antenna in any Zoning District used in conjunction with a
business, commercial enterprise, trade, calling, vocation, profession, occupation or
means of livelihood, whether or not carried on for gain or profit, including, but n ot limited
to, public utilities, cellular telephone communications or privately owned or publicly
supported AM or FM radio stations not otherwise exempt from the provisions of this
Ordinance, cable television operations or television broadcast stations, but excluding
Federal Communications Commission (FCC) licensed amateur radio stations and
standard television receive only nonparabolic antennas.
C. Antenna Element. Individual components of an individual antenna.
D. Antenna Height. The distance from the grade of the property at the base of the
antenna or, in the case of a roof mounted antenna, from the grade at the exterior base
of the building, to the highest point of the antenna and its associated support structure
when fully extended.
E. Antenna, Noncommercial. An antenna in any Zoning District not used in
conjunction with a business, commercial enterprise, trade, calling, vocation, profession,
occupation, or means of livelihood, including, but not limited to, FCC licensed amateur
radio stations and standard television receive only parabolic antennas.
F. Antenna, Nonparabolic. An individual array or group of arrays used to transmit
and/or receive electromagnetic signals, including, but not limited to, radio waves related
to amateur radio stations licensed by the FCC and microwaves related to cellular
telephone communications.
G. Antenna Structure. An antenna array and its associated support structure, such as
a mast or tower, but not to include a suspended simple wire antenna, that is used fo r
Page 36
the purpose of transmitting and/or receiving electromagnetic signals, including but not
limited to radio waves and microwaves.
H. Antenna Structure, Freestanding. An antenna structure that is not attached to a
building, fence or other such structure.
I. Antenna, TVRO Nonparabolic. A television receive-only nonparabolic antenna. A
standard roof mounted antenna array and its associated support structure, that is used
solely to receive broadcast television signals.
J. Antenna, Vertical Whip. A pole or single element vertical antenna no more than 3
inches in diameter, and its associated support structure. (Added by Ord. No. 2486CCS
§§ 1, 2, adopted June 23, 2015)
9.32.020 Nonparabolic Antennas—Applicability
A. A nonparabolic antenna that is in existence as of the effective date of the
Ordinance, as amended, may continue in existence at the current height and location
and need not comply with the design standards unless the following occurs:
1. In the case of a roof mounted antenna, if the antenna is replaced with one that is
larger in any of its dimensions, the antenna structure shall then comply with the
applicable regulations and design standards.
2. In the case of a noncommercial freestanding antenna structure, if an existing
antenna is replaced with one that is larger in any of its dimensions, the antenna
structure shall then comply with the regulations and design standards contained in
Section 9.32.040.
Page 37
B. No additional or structural alterations may be made to a nonconforming antenn a
structure that would increase its nonconformity with the applicable regulations and
design standards. (Added by Ord. No. 2486CCS §§ 1, 2, adopted June 23, 2015)
9.32.030 Nonparabolic Noncommercial Antennas—Purpose
A. The City desires to allow nonparabolic noncommercial antennas in all areas of the
City, subject only to limited and reasonable regulations which are permitted by Federal
law in order to prevent such antennas from adversely affecting the public health, safety,
welfare or aesthetic interests.
B. The City Council finds that amateur radio operators provide an important public
service by participating in local, regional and statewide emergency and disaster
preparedness programs, in facilitating international disaster relief programs, and in
fostering international goodwill and understanding. The City Council finds, however, that
antennas and antenna structures related to FCC licensed amateur radio
communications may be aesthetically unsightly and visually obtrusive.
C. The City Council recognizes that because of the important public service provided
by amateur radio operators, the FCC has partially preempted local regulation of
amateur radio antennas. Federal regulations specify that local regulations concerning
the placement, screening or height of antennas for amateur radio communications must
reasonably accommodate amateur communications and constitute the minimum
practicable regulation necessary to accomplish the local agency’s legitimate purpose.
D. The City Council finds that the regulations and design standards set forth in this
Chapter reasonably accommodates FCC licensed amateur radio communications and
Page 38
constitute the minimum practicable regulation necessary to protect the public health,
safety and aesthetic interests. (Added by Ord. No. 2486CCS §§ 1, 2, adopted June 23,
2015)
9.32.040 Nonparabolic Noncommercial Antennas—Regulations and Design Standards
A. A noncommercial nonparabolic antenna shall be installed, modified, and
maintained in accordance with the following standards:
1. One roof mounted TVRO nonparabolic antenna per residential unit and up to 4 roof
mounted nonparabolic antennas related to a FCC licensed amateur radio station shall
be permitted for each parcel. One of the roof mounted TVRO nonparabolic antennas
per parcel may extend up to 25 feet above the roofline, but all other additional TVRO
nonparabolic antennas shall extend no more than 15 feet above the roofline. One roof
mounted vertical whip antenna related to a FCC licensed amateur radio statio n may
extend up to 25 feet above the roofline; however, all other roof mounted antennas
related to a FCC licensed amateur radio station shall extend no more than 15 feet
above the roofline.
2. One freestanding antenna structure related to a FCC licensed amateur radio
station measuring up to 66 feet in height or 15 feet above the height limit of the District
in which it is located, whichever height is greater, shall be permitted per parcel. For
purposes of this Section, antenna structures shall be measured to the highest horizontal
antenna element. A freestanding antenna structure exceeding 50 feet in height shall be
Page 39
retractable to 35 feet. A single vertical element may extend 15 feet beyond these height
limits.
3. No portion of an antenna, including the array in any position, or of an antenna
structure shall be located between the face of the main building and any public street or
in any required front or side setback.
4. The support structure shall be located a minimum of 10 feet from the rear property
line. Neither an antenna nor an antenna structure shall extend beyond the property line
of the parcel on which it is located.
5. Roof mounted antennas or antenna structures shall be located at or to the rear of
the centerline of a building.
6. An antenna structure shall be finished in a color to blend in with its immediate
surroundings, to reduce glare, and to minimize its visual intrusiveness and negative
aesthetic impact.
7. The display of any sign or any other graphics on an antenna or antenna structure
is prohibited, except for public safety warnings, which warnings must be placed no
higher than 8 feet above the base of the antenna structure.
8. A building permit shall be obtained prior to the installation of an antenna structure,
pursuant to the requirements of the Building Code.
B. Unless a finding is made that a proposed antenna poses an actual threat to the
public health or safety, the Director, or the Planning Commission on appeal, shall have
the authority to grant a Minor Use Permit to modify the regulations and design
standards of subsection (A) paragraphs (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) of this Section, if
topographical conditions, nearby tall structures or other factors unreasonably obstruct or
Page 40
otherwise unreasonably interfere with effective transmission or reception of the type
desired and the cause of such obstruction or interference was not created by the
applicant. An application for a Minor Use Permit may be reviewed upon payment of a
nominal fee, the amount of which may be established from time to time by the City
Council by ordinance or resolution. As a condition of approval of a Minor Use Permit to
modify the design standard of subsection (A) paragraph (2) of this Section, an antenna
structure shall be required to be retractable to 35 feet. In cases where topographical
conditions surrounding the antenna structure or the presence of nearby tall structures
physically impede retracting an antenna to 35 feet, the Director, or the Planning
Commission on appeal, may allow an antenna structure to be retracted to a height
greater than 35 feet. (Added by Ord. No. 2486CCS §§ 1, 2, adopted June 23, 2015;
amended by Ord. No. 2520CCS § 44, adopted June 14, 2016)
9.32.050 Nonparabolic Commercial Antennas—Purpose
A. The City desires to allow nonparabolic commercial antennas, including those
associated with cellular telephone communications, in appropriate areas of the City,
subject only to limited and reasonable regulations which are permitted by State law in
order to prevent such antennas from adversely affecting the public health, safety,
welfare, or aesthetic interests.
B. The City recognizes that the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) has
delegated its authority to regulate the location and design of cellular telephone facilities
to local governments, except in those instances when there is a clear conflict with the
State interest in having a reliable and widespread cellular telephone service. Moreover,
Page 41
the CPUC has retained jurisdiction to preempt local authority to regulate cellular
telephone service in those instances of clear conflict with the State interest.
C. The City Council finds, however, that commercial antennas and antenna structures,
including those antennas related to cellular telephone communications, may be
aesthetically unsightly and be visually obtrusive. The City Council finds that the
regulations and design standards set forth in this Chapter allow nonparabolic
commercial antennas, including those associated with cellular telephone
communications, in appropriate areas of the City, and that they are necessary to protect
the public health, safety, welfare, and aesthetic interests. Further, the City Council finds
that these regulations and design standards promote, and are not in conflict with, the
State interest in having a reliable and widespread cellular telephone service. (Added by
Ord. No. 2486CCS §§ 1, 2, adopted June 23, 2015)
9.32.060 Nonparabolic Commercial Antennas—Regulations and Design Standards
A. Commercial antennas shall be installed, modified and maintained in accordance
with the following standards:
1. No commercial antenna shall be located in a Residential District.
2. Commercial antennas may be located in all other Districts, except that the
installation of freestanding antenna structures which allow the attachment of antennas
shall be prohibited in the Neighborhood Commercial Districts along Montana Avenue
and Main Street and in Oceanfront Districts.
3. One roof mounted TVRO nonparabolic antenna structure and one freest anding
antenna structure for each 7,500 square feet of parcel area, and in the case of mixed
Page 42
use or residential development, one TVRO nonparabolic antenna per residential
dwelling unit, shall be permitted per parcel. The number of antennas attached to a
single support structure shall be determined by the structural integrity of the support
structure.
4. No freestanding antenna structure shall extend beyond 15 feet above the height
limit of the District.
5. A freestanding antenna structure shall not be located between the face of the main
building and any public street or in any required front or side setback.
6. One roof mounted TVRO nonparabolic antenna and one vertical whip antenna of
up to 25 feet above the roofline shall be permitted per parcel. Additional TVRO
nonparabolic antennas or other nonparabolic antennas shall not extend beyond 15 feet
above the roofline. All roofmounted antennas shall be located or screened so as to
minimize pedestrian level view from public streets or from any neighboring residential
uses.
7. The display of any sign or any other graphics on an antenna, antenna structure or
screening is prohibited, except for public safety warnings, which warnings must be
placed no higher than 8 feet above the base of the antenna structure or screening.
8. An antenna structure shall be finished in a color to blend in with its immediate
surroundings, to reduce glare, and to minimize its visual intrusiveness and negative
aesthetic impact.
9. A building permit shall be obtained prior to the installation of an antenna structure,
pursuant to the requirements of the Building Code.
Page 43
B. Unless a finding is made that a proposed antenna poses an actual threat to the
public health or safety, the Director, or the Planning Commission on appeal, may
approve a Minor Use Permit to modify the regulations and design standards of
subsection (A)(1) through (6) of this Section, if topographical conditions, nearby tall
structures or other factors unreasonably obstruct or otherwise unreasonably i nterfere
with effective transmission or reception of the type desired and the cause of such
obstruction or interference was not created by the applicant. (Added by Ord. No.
2486CCS §§ 1, 2, adopted June 23, 2015)
9.32.070 Parabolic Antennas—Purpose
A. The City desires to allow television receive only (TVRO) parabolic antennas in all
districts of the City and to allow other parabolic antennas in appropriate districts of the
City, subject only to limited and reasonable regulations which are permitted by Federal
and State law in order to prevent such antennas from adversely affecting the public
health, safety, welfare or aesthetic interests.
B. The City Council finds that, typically, parabolic antennas are larger in size, surface
area and weight than nonparabolic antennas. Therefore, parabolic antennas pose a
unique threat to the structural safety of buildings to which they are mounted or braced
and to the public safety because of wind loadings and seismic activity. These threats
necessitate careful attention to the location, height, and installation of parabolic
antennas in order to avoid injury to persons and property from fallen or windblown
antennas. Moreover, parabolic antennas, because of their larger size and surface area,
are aesthetically unsightly and have a greater negative visual impact than nonparabolic
Page 44
antennas; parabolic antennas may be visually obtrusive and block views from
neighboring properties.
C. The City Council recognizes, however, that the FCC has partially preempted local
regulation of TVRO parabolic antennas. Local regulations concerning the location,
screening, size or height of TVRO parabolic antennas must have reasonable and clearly
defined health, safety and aesthetic objectives, may not unreasonably limit or prevent
satellite television signal reception, and may not impose costs on the users of such
antennas that are excessive in light of the purchase and installation cost of the antenna.
D. The City Council recognizes, further, that the California Public Utilities Comm ission
(CPUC) has delegated to local governments its authority to regulate the location and
design of cellular telephone facilities, including parabolic microwave antennas, except in
those instances when a clear conflict exists with the State interest in h aving a reliable
and widespread cellular telephone service. Moreover, the CPUC has retained
jurisdiction to preempt local authority to regulate cellular telephone service in those
instances of clear conflict with the State interest.
E. The City Council finds that the regulations and design standards set forth in this
Chapter are necessary to protect the public health, safety, welfare and aesthetic
interests and that they neither unreasonably limit or prevent satellite television signal
reception, nor conflict with the State interest in having a reliable and widespread cellular
telephone service. The City Council finds, further, that these regulations and design
standards do not impose costs on the users of television receiving only parabolic
antennas that are excessive in light of the purchase and installation costs of such
equipment. (Added by Ord. No. 2486CCS §§ 1, 2, adopted June 23, 2015)
Page 45
9.32.080 Parabolic Antennas—Applicability
This Section shall apply to any parabolic antenna installed or modified on or after the
effective date of the Ordinance codified in this Section, as amended, and to any
parabolic antenna previously installed without undergoing review and approval by the
Director or previously installed without a building permit. Any such parabolic antenna
shall immediately be made conforming to the regulations and design standards. Any
other parabolic antenna installed prior to the effective date of said Ordinance, as
amended, which does not conform to the regulations and design standards state d
herein shall be made conforming within 6 months after the effective date of said
Ordinance. (Added by Ord. No. 2486CCS §§ 1, 2, adopted June 23, 2015)
9.32.090 Parabolic Antenna Definitions
The following words or phrases shall have the following meanings when used in this
Chapter:
A. Antenna, Commercial. An antenna in any zoning district used in conjunction with
any business, commercial enterprise, trade, calling, vocation, profession, occupation, or
means of livelihood, whether or not carried on for gain or profit, including but not limited
to public utilities, cellular telephone communications or privately owned or publicly
supported AM or FM radio stations, unless otherwise exempt from the provisions of this
Ordinance, cable television operations or television broadcast stations, but excluding
TVRO parabolic antennas.
Page 46
B. Antenna, Ground Mounted Parabolic. A parabolic antenna, the weight of which is
fully or partially supported by an approved platform, framework, pole, or other structural
system, which system is affixed or placed directly on or in the ground.
C. Antenna Height. The vertical distance between the highest point of a parabolic
antenna when actuated to its most vertical position and the grade below, for a ground
mounted parabolic antenna, and to the roof below for a rooftop parabolic antenna.
D. Antenna, Microwave Relay Parabolic. A transmitting and receiving antenna,
typically parabolic, disc or double convex shaped with an active element external to the
disc, that communicates by line of sight with another similar antenna or a
geosynchronous orbiting satellite.
E. Antenna, Noncommercial. A television receive only parabolic antenna in any
District.
F. Antenna, Parabolic. A parabolic, semi-parabolic, disc, convex or double-convex
shaped accessory structure, including, but not limited to, a main dish and covering,
feedhorn, receiving element, structural supports and all other components thereof,
which transmits and/or receives television signals or electromagnetic waves b y line of
sight with another similar antenna or a geosynchronous or orbiting satellite.
G. Antenna, Rooftop Parabolic. A parabolic antenna which extends above the roofline
of a building and which is affixed through the use of an approved framework or ot her
structural system to one or more structural members of a building or to the roof of a
building.
H. Antenna, Satellite Uplink. A commercial parabolic antenna which receives and
transmits electromagnetic waves by line of sight with geosynchronous orbiting satellites.
Page 47
I. Antenna, TVRO Parabolic. Television receive only parabolic antenna.
J. Screening. The effect of locating a parabolic antenna behind a building, wall, fence,
landscaping, berm, and/or other specially designed device so that view of the antenna
from adjoining and nearby public street rights-of-way and private properties is precluded
or minimized. (Added by Ord. No. 2486CCS §§ 1, 2, adopted June 23, 2015)
9.32.100 TVRO Parabolic Antennas Located in Residential Districts
A. Regulations and Design Standards. Only TVRO parabolic antennas shall be
permitted in Residential Districts; no commercial parabolic antenna shall be permitted in
any Residential District. TVRO parabolic antennas located in residential districts shall
be installed, modified, and maintained in accordance with the following standards:
1. One antenna shall be permitted per parcel, except that parcels in excess of 7,500
square feet shall be permitted an additional antenna for each additional 7,500 square
feet of parcel area.
2. The diameter of a TVRO antenna shall not exceed 12 feet.
3. The antenna shall not be located in the front half of the parcel.
4. The antenna height shall not exceed 15 feet for ground mounted antennas, nor, in
the case of rooftop antennas, extend beyond 15 feet above the roofline.
5. Ground mounted antennas shall comply with all setback requirements specified
within the district for one story accessory buildings. The permitted height of such
antennas shall not exceed that height as provided in paragraph (4) of this subsection.
Page 48
6. If located in the R1, OP1, OPD, or Oceanfront Districts the antenna shall be
ground mounted; rooftop antennas may be permitted in other Residential Districts;
however, antennas shall not be closer than 10 feet to the property line.
7. The antenna shall be finished in a color to blend in with the immediate
surroundings, to reduce glare, and to minimize its visual intrusiveness and negative
aesthetic impact.
8. The antenna shall be screened in a manner consistent with Section 9.32.090(J);
however, any screening required by the City shall not unreasonably obstruct or
otherwise unreasonably interfere with reception.
9. The antenna shall be located so as to prevent obstruction of the antenna’s
reception window from potential permitted development on adjoining parcels.
10. A building permit shall be obtained prior to installation of an antenna pursuant to
the requirements of the Building Code.
11. The display of any sign or any other graphics on an antenna is prohibited except
for public safety warnings, which warnings must be placed no higher than eight feet
above the base of the antenna.
B. Notwithstanding subsection (A) of this Section, one rooftop TVRO parabolic
antenna of less than 24 inches in diameter and extending no more than 5 feet above the
roofline may be permitted per parcel, or in the case of Residential Multi -Unit
developments, one such antenna shall be permitted per residential dwelling unit. In the
alternative, one such antenna per parcel, or in the case of multi-Residential Multi-Unit
developments, one such antenna per residential dwelling unit, may be located in any
rear setback provided the height above grade does not exceed 6 feet. Antennas
Page 49
permitted per this subsection must comply with the regulations and design standards of
paragraphs (3), (7), (8), (9), (10) and (11) of subsection (A) above; however, public
safety warning signs must be placed no higher than 4 feet above the base of the
antenna. (Added by Ord. No. 2486CCS §§ 1, 2, adopted June 23, 2015)
9.32.110 Modification of Regulations and Design Standards in Residential Districts
A. Unless a finding is made that a proposed parabolic antenna poses an actual threat
to the public health or safety, the Director, or the Planning Commission on appeal, shall
have the authority as set forth in subsection (B) of this Section to grant a Minor Use
Permit to modify the regulations and design standards of Section 9.32.100.
B. An application for a Minor Use Permit may be approved in whole or in part to
modify the regulations and design standards of subsection (A) paragraphs (1), (2), (3),
(4), (5), (6) or (8) and of subsection (B) of Section 9.32.100:
1. In cases where locating the antenna in conformance with the provisions of this
Section would unreasonably obstruct or otherwise unreasonably interfere with reception
and the cause of such obstruction or interference was not created by the applicant;
2. In cases where compliance with the design standards would impose costs that are
excessive in light of the purchase and installation costs of the antenna. (Added by Ord.
No. 2486CCS §§ 1, 2, adopted June 23, 2015)
9.32.120 Parabolic Antennas Located in Nonresidential Districts
Page 50
A. Regulations and Design Standards. Any parabolic antenna located in any
Nonresidential District shall be installed, modified, and maintained in accordance with
the following standards:
1. Only one TVRO and 2 microwave antennas shall be permitted per parcel, except
that parcels in excess of 7,500 hundred square feet shall be permitted an additional
antenna of each type for each additional 7,500 square feet of parcel area.
2. The diameter of a TVRO parabolic antenna sha ll not exceed 12 feet and the
diameter of a microwave relay parabolic antenna shall not exceed 4 ½ feet.
3. Ground mounted antennas shall comply with all setback requirements specified
within the district for one story accessory buildings. The permitted height of such
antennas shall not exceed that height specified in subsection (A) paragraph (4) of this
Section.
4. The antenna height shall not exceed 15 feet for ground mounted antennas, nor, in
the case of rooftop antennas, extend beyond 15 feet above the roofline.
5. The antenna shall be screened in a manner consistent with Section 9.32.090(J);
however, any screening required by the City shall not unreasonably obstruct or
otherwise unreasonably interfere with reception.
6. The antenna shall be finished in a color to blend in with the immediate
surroundings, to reduce glare, and to minimize its visual intrusiveness and negative
aesthetic impact.
7. The antenna shall be located so as to prevent obstruction of the antenna’s
reception window from potential permitted development on adjoining parcels.
Page 51
8. A building permit shall be obtained prior to installation of an antenna pursuant to
the requirements of the Building Code.
9. The display of any sign or any other graphics on an antenna is prohibited except
for public safety warnings, which warnings must be placed no higher than eight feet
above the base of the antenna.
B. Notwithstanding subsection (A) of this Section, one rooftop TVRO parabolic
antenna of less than 24 inches in diameter and extending no more than 5 feet above the
roofline shall be permitted per parcel, or in the case of residential or mixed use
developments, one such antenna shall be permitted per residential dwelling unit. In the
alternative, one such antenna per parcel, or in the case of residential or mixed use
developments, one such antenna per residential dwelling unit may be located in any
rear setback, provided the height above grade does not exceed 6 feet. Antennas
permitted per this subsection must comply wit h the regulations and design standards of
subsection (A) paragraphs (3), (5), (6), (7), (8) and (9) of this Section; however, public
safety warning signs must be placed no higher than 4 feet above the base of the
antenna. (Added by Ord. No. 2486CCS §§ 1, 2, adopted June 23, 2015)
9.32.130 Modification of Regulations and Design Standards in Nonresidential Districts
A. Unless a finding is made that a proposed antenna poses an actual threat to the
public health or safety, the Director, or the Planning Commission on appeal, shall have
the authority as set forth in subsection (B) of this Section to grant a Minor Use Permit to
modify the regulations and design standards of Section 9.32.120.
Page 52
B. An application for a Minor Use Permit may be approved in whole or in part to
modify the design standards of subsection (A) paragraphs (1) through (5) and (7) and of
subsection (B) of Section 9.32.120:
1. In cases where locating the antenna in conformance with the provisions of this
Section would unreasonably obstruct or otherwise unreasonably interfere with reception
and the cause of such obstruction or interference was not created by the applicant;
2. In cases where compliance with the design standards impose unreasonably
excessive costs in relation to the purchase and installation costs of the antenna;
3. In cases where the technical needs of cable television or telecommunications
operators are demonstrated to require modification of the regulations and design
standards. (Added by Ord. No. 2486CCS §§ 1, 2, adopted June 23, 2015)
9.32.140 Satellite Uplink Antennas
The installation of any satellite uplink antenna shall be subject to review and approval of
a Minor Use Permit as set forth in Section 9.32.130.
SECTION 3. Any provision of the Santa Monica Municipal Code or appendices
thereto inconsistent with the provisions of this Ordinance, to the extent of such
inconsistencies and no further, is hereby repealed or modified to that extent necessary
to effect the provisions of this Ordinance.
SECTION 4. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase of this
Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of any
Page 53
court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the
remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would
have passed this Ordinance and each and every section, subsection, sentence, clause,
or phrase not declared invalid or unconstitutional without regard to whether any portion
of the ordinance would be subsequently declared invalid or unconstitutional.
SECTION 5. The Mayor shall sign, and the City Clerk shall attest to the passage
of this Ordinance. The City Clerk shall cause the same to be published once in the official
newspaper within fifteen (15) days after its adoption. This Ordinance shall become
effective thirty (30) days from its adoption.
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_________________________
LANE DILG
City Attorney
Section 6409(a) Administrative Review – Substantial Change Thresholds
Section 6409(a) applies to any request for modification of an existing wireless tower or
base station that does not substantially change the physical dimensions of such tower or
base station, involving: (i) collocation of new transmission equipment; (ii) removal of
transmission equipment; or (iii) replacement of transmission equipment. In practice,
Section 6409(a) applies to the vast majority of applications for personal wireless servi ce
facilities so it is anticipated that the majority of applications will be process administratively
through this new streamlined process. A key component of the Section 6409(a) review
is that evidence of the proper permitting of the existing facility be provided as part of the
application.
(a) For towers on private property, a substantial change occurs when:
(1) the proposed collocation or modification increases the overall height more
than ten percent (10%) or the height of one additional antenna array not to
exceed 20 feet (whichever is greater); or
(2) the proposed collocation or modification increases the width more than 20
feet from the edge of the wireless tower or the width of the wireless tower
at the level of the appurtenance (whichever is greater); or
(3) the proposed collocation or modification involves the installation of more
than the standard number of equipment cabinets for the technology
involved, not to exceed four; or
(4) the proposed collocation or modification involves excavation outside the
current boundaries of the leased or owned property surrounding the
wireless tower, including any access or utility easements currently related
to the site.
(b) For base stations, a substantial change occurs when:
(1) the proposed collocation or modification increases the overa ll height more
than ten percent (10%) or 10 feet (whichever is greater); or
(2) the proposed collocation or modification increases the width more than 6
feet from the edge of the base station; or
(3) the proposed collocation or modification involves the installation of any new
equipment cabinets on the ground when there are no existing ground -
mounted equipment cabinets; or
(4) the proposed collocation or modification involves the installation of any new
ground-mounted equipment cabinets that are ten percent (10%) large r in
height or volume than any existing ground-mounted equipment cabinets; or
(5) the proposed collocation or modification involves excavation outside the
area in proximity to the structure and other transmission equipment already
deployed on the ground.
(c) In addition, for all towers and base stations wherever located, a substantial change
occurs when:
(1) the proposed collocation or modification would defeat the existing
concealment elements of the support structure as determined by the
Director; or
(2) the proposed collocation or modification violates a prior condition of
approval, provided however that the collocation need not comply with any
prior condition of approval related to height, width, equipment cabinets or
excavation that is inconsistent with the thresholds for a substantial change
described in this section.
The thresholds for height increases are cumulative limits. For base stations, the
cumulative limit is measured from the originally-permitted support structures without
regard to any increases in size due to wireless equipment not included in the original
design. For sites with towers, the cumulative limit is measured from the permitted site
dimensions as they existed on February 22, 2012 - the date that Congress passed Section
6409(a).
Section 6409(a) also requires that municipalities review and act on a personal wireless
service facilities applications within ninety (90) days of receipt of the application,
otherwise the application is deemed approved.
1
Planning Commission Report
Planning Commission Meeting: June 6, 2018
Agenda Item: x-x
To: Planning Commission
From: Jing Yeo, City Planning Division Manager
Subject: Proposed comprehensive update to Santa Monica Municipal Code
Chapter 9.32 Telecommunications Facilities
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt a resolution, recommending to
the City Council that the Council adopt amendments to Chapter 9.32
Telecommunications Facilities.
Background
The Telecommunications Act of 1996 (TCA) recognized that cities have authority to
regulate personal wireless service facilities, but limited the scope of such regulation.
The TCA prevented cities from prohibiting or effectively prohibiting these facilities. Cities
were also required to act on applications for these facilities within a reasonable
timeframe.
In 2009, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) established a reasonable
timeframe as ninety (90) days for applications for co -locations (more than one wireless
carrier at one site) and one hundred twenty (120) days for all other applications.
Congress passed Section 6409(a) of the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act
of 2012 on February 22, 2012, which established an expedited administrative process
for the review of wireless facilities. Section 6409(a) applies to all “wireless” facilities
licensed or authorized by the FCC (e.g., cellular, Wi-Fi, satellite, microwave backhaul,
etc.). As further detailed in the summary below, Section 6409(a) gene rally requires that
a State and local government “may not deny, and shall approve” certain applications for
minor changes to existing sites that co-locate, remove or replace transmission
equipment at an existing wireless tower or base station (see definiti ons in the draft
ordinance). FCC regulations interpret this statute, create procedural rules for local
review that generally preempt subjective land -use regulations, limit permit application
content requirements, and modify the reasonable timeframe to provide applicants with a
potential “deemed granted” remedy when the State or local government fails to approve
2
or deny the request within ninety (90) days after submittal (accounting for any tolling
periods).
The 2015 Zoning Ordinance Update did not include any changes to the City’s existing
telecommunications ordinance as there was a pending decision by the FCC on rules
and regulations for distributed antenna systems, small cell installations, and wireless
communications facilities. The provision of Chapter 9.32 are now outdated. The City’s
regulations that govern telecommunications facilities date back to 1988 and include
standards for all types of antennas, including TV antennas and ham radio antennas.
Technology has evolved since then and most of the antennas regulated by current
Code are obsolete, except for those associated with wireless telecommunications. In
addition, as noted previously, new regulations have been promulgated, requiring the
City to amend Chapter 9.32 to comply with current laws.
The proposed regulations will establish a new administrative review process for
modifications to existing facilities and co-locations that comply with certain standards. In
addition, the proposed regulations will re-establish a discretionary process (Minor Use
Permit) with amended findings for new facilities and modifications and co -locations at
existing facilities that do not comply with the administrative parameters.
On May 16, 2018, the Commission adopted a Resolution of Intention to consider
changes to Chapter 9.32 Telecommunication Facilities to ensure that City regulations
are consistent with current State and Federal requirements.
Discussion
In the 2015 Zoning Ordinance, all wireless telecommunications facilities (now called
personal wireless service facilities) are required to obtain a Minor Use Permit. Current
Code does not include an administrative process for minor cell site modifications
brought about by changes in federal telecommunications law; therefore an update of the
Zoning Ordinance such facilities is necessary. The Planning Director has established
interim guidelines to ensure compliance with changes in federal law pending this
comprehensive update.
Administrative Process – Section 6409(a) Summary
Section 6409(a) applies to any request for modification of an existing wireless tower or
base station that does not substantially change the physical dimensions of such tower
or base station, involving: (i) collocation of new transmission equipment; (ii) removal of
transmission equipment; or (iii) replacement of transmission equipment. In practice,
Section 6409(a) applies to the vast majority of applications for personal wireless service
facilities so it is anticipated that the majority of applications will be process
administratively through this new streamlined process. A key component of the Section
6409(a) review is that evidence of the proper permitting of the existing facility be
provided as part of the application.
3
(a) For towers on private property, a substantial change occurs when:
(1) the proposed collocation or modification increases the overall height more
than ten percent (10%) or the height of one additional antenna array not to
exceed 20 feet (whichever is greater); or
(2) the proposed collocation or modification increases the width more than 20
feet from the edge of the wireless tower or the width of the wireless tower
at the level of the appurtenance (whichever is greater); or
(3) the proposed collocation or modification involves the installation of more
than the standard number of equipment cabinets for the technology
involved, not to exceed four; or
(4) the proposed collocation or modification involves excavation outside the
current boundaries of the leased or owned property surrounding the
wireless tower, including any access or utility easements currently related
to the site.
(b) For base stations, a substantial change occurs when:
(1) the proposed collocation or modification increases the overall h eight more
than ten percent (10%) or 10 feet (whichever is greater); or
(2) the proposed collocation or modification increases the width more than 6
feet from the edge of the base station; or
(3) the proposed collocation or modification involves the installation o f any
new equipment cabinets on the ground when there are no existing ground -
mounted equipment cabinets; or
(4) the proposed collocation or modification involves the installation of any
new ground-mounted equipment cabinets that are ten percent (10%)
larger in height or volume than any existing ground-mounted equipment
cabinets; or
(5) the proposed collocation or modification involves excavation outside the
area in proximity to the structure and other transmission equipment
already deployed on the ground.
(c) In addition, for all towers and base stations wherever located, a substantial
change occurs when:
(1) the proposed collocation or modification would defeat the existing
concealment elements of the support structure as determined by the
Director; or
(2) the proposed collocation or modification violates a prior condition of
approval, provided however that the collocation need not comply with any
prior condition of approval related to height, width, equipment cabinets or
excavation that is inconsistent with the thresholds for a substantial change
described in this section.
The thresholds for height increases are cumulative limits. For base stations, the
cumulative limit is measured from the originally-permitted support structures without
regard to any increases in size due to wireless equipment not included in the original
design. For sites with towers, the cumulative limit is measured from the permitted site
dimensions as they existed on February 22, 2012 - the date that Congress passed
Section 6409(a).
4
Section 6409(a) also requires that municipalities review and act on a personal wireless
service facilities applications within ninety (90) days of receipt of the application,
otherwise the application is deemed approved.
The failure to provide to meet any one or more of the ap plicable thresholds listed above
means that a substantial change would occur and a Minor Use Permit is required.
Minor Use Permit
As noted above, any proposed modifications to existing sites that do not comply with the
Section 6409(a) standards or any new installations at new sites require a Minor Use
Permit. A Minor Use Permit is a discretionary permit subject to a public hearing by the
Zoning Administrator who may approve or deny the MUP and whose decision is
appealable to the Planning Commission.
Since Minor Use Permits are required for a number of other use classifications in the
zoning ordinance and have a standard set of findings in SMMC Section 9.41.060 that do
not necessarily apply to wireless facilities, staff is proposing the following new findings
that establish a standard of review that is more pertinent to personal wireless service
facilities:
(1) the proposed use is consistent with the General Plan and any applicable specific
plan;
(2) the proposed personal wireless service facility complies with all applicable
development standards described in Section 9.32.080;
(3) the applicant has demonstrated that its proposed facility shall be in compliance
with all applicable FCC rules and regulations for human exposure to RF
emissions;
(4) the applicant has demonstrated a good-faith effort to identify and evaluate more -
preferred locations and potentially less-intrusive designs; and
(5) the applicant has provided the approval authority with a meaningful comparative
analysis that shows all less-intrusive alternative locations and designs identified
in the administrative record are either technically infeasible or not potentially
available.
Further, due to the availability of locations for personal wireless service facilities in the
public right-of-way, the proposed amendments include a prohibition on locating personal
wireless service facilities on any residentially zoned property.
The proposed amendments also state that environmental effects from radio frequency
(RF) emissions that comply with all applicable FCC regulatio ns shall not be grounds for
an appeal.
5
Environmental Analysis
The proposed amendments to Chapter 9.32 of the zoning ordinance are categorically
exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
pursuant to 15061(b)(3) of the State Implementation Guidelines (common sense
exemption). Based on the evidence in the record, it can be seen with certainty that
there is not possibility that the proposed changes may have a significant effect on the
environment. The recommended amendments represent updates to City regulations
regarding personal wireless service facilities that are required in order to be consistent
with current State and Federal requirements. These amendments do not substantively
affect policy decisions made with the City Council’s adoption of the Zoning Ordinance.
Therefore, no further environmental review under CEQA is required.
Community Meeting and Public Input
Representatives of the personal wireless service carriers and members of the public
were invited to a community meeting that was held on August 18, 2016 at Ken Edwards
Center. Nine persons representing the service carriers attended.
Alternative Actions:
In addition to the recommended action, the Planning Commission could consider the
following with respect to the project if supported by the evidentiary record and
consistent with applicable legal requirements:
A1. Revise the proposed ordinance and recommend adoption to City Council.
A2. Recommend that the City Council not adopt the proposed ordinance.
Text Amendment Findings
1. The Ordinance amendments are consistent in principle with the General Plan, in
that the amendments do not substantively affect policy decisions made with the
City Council’s adoption of the Zoning Ordinance and represent changes to the
Zoning Ordinance to ensure that City regulations are consistent with current
State and Federal requirements with respect to the processing of personal
wireless service facilities.
2. The Ordinance amendments are consistent with the purpose of this Ordinance to
promote the growth of the City in an orderly manner and to promote and protect
the public health, safety, and general welfare, in that the amendments will allow
for the proper regulation of personal wireless services facilities to promote and
protect the public health, safety, and general welfare. Specifically, the
amendments establish updated regulations including a process for the review of
personal wireless service facilities, location and design requirements, and
conditions of approval.
Prepared by: Paul Foley, Principal Planner
6
Attachments
A. Resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Santa Monica
Recommending that the City Council Delete the Text of Chapter 9.32 of the
Santa Monica Municipal Code (Telecommunications Facilities) and Rep lace the
Deleted Text with A New Wiereless Communications Ordinance.
F:\CityPlanning\Share\TelecommunicationsAntenna Ordinance\Telecomm PC Staff Report 6.6.18 - JY(SYC)PF
7
1
Planning Commission Report
Planning Commission Meeting: June 6, 2018
Agenda Item: 8-A
To: Planning Commission
From: Jing Yeo, City Planning Division Manager
Subject: Supplemental staff report for the p roposed comprehensive update to
Santa Monica Municipal Code Chapter 9.32 Telecommunications Facilities
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission consider proposed modifications to
the draft ordinance that amends Chapter 9.32 Telecommunications Facilities.
Background
On June 4, 2018, the Commission and staff received comments from the legal counsel
for Verizon Wireless on the proposed draft ordinance referenced above. The comments
focused on three issues:
1. The City should not prohibit wireless facilities in residential zone (Section
9.32.070(a);
2. The City should allow modest increases in height for roof -mounted facilities
Section 9.32.080(a)(2); and
3. The Zoning Administrator should have discretion to allow generators in any area
on a case-by-case basis (Section 9.32.080(a)(7).
Staff made modifications to Sections 9.32.070(a) and 9.32.080(a)(2) in response to
Verizon’s comments.
On June 5, 2018, the Commission and staff received comments from the legal counsel
for AT&T wireless. AT&T raised a variety of issues, including process, design,
conditions of approval, required findings and Federal Communications Commission
timelines. Staff made modifications to Sections 9.32.080(a)(9) and 9.32.090(g) in
response to AT&T’s comments.
In response to these comments, staff has made modifications to the draft ordinance as
shown in Attachment A to this report.
Prepared by: Paul Foley, Principal Planner
Attachment A: Annotated Amended Draft Ordinance
Attachment C
Draft Statement of Official Action
2
T-Mobile USA, Inc.
12920 SE 38th Street, Bellevue, WA 98006
1
August 14, 2018
City Clerk
1685 Main Street,
Santa Monica, CA 90401
councilmtgitems@smgov.net
Re: Supplemental Comments on Proposed Amendments to the City of San Monica, CA’s Code,
Chapter 9.32, Concerning Telecommunications Facilities
Dear Mayor Winterer and Honorable Councilmember:
I write on behalf of T-Mobile USA, Inc. (“T-Mobile”) regarding the proposal to repeal and replace the
City of Santa Monica’s (“City’s”) Municipal Code Chapter 9.32 concerning Telecommunications
Facilities that is currently pending before the Council. T-Mobile appreciates the opportunity to have
reviewed and commented on prior drafts. However, based on our review of the draft currently before
the Council we continue to have significant concerns, and therefore respectfully request that it be
tabled so that additional revisions can be made prior to finalization as outlined below.
As noted in the Staff Report accompanying the proposal, the “popularity of smartphones, tablets,
and similar devices has continued to increase.” Now over half of all households use only wireless
service. This increased popularity has significantly increased the demands and expectations placed
on wireless networks. To meet the growing demands of our customers and your constituents (both
now and in the future), carriers must install wireless facilities more densely and in all areas across the
City. To ensure this development can occur, it is critically important that sound deployment policies
be put in place. As outlined below, we are concerned that the proposed ordinance will make those
deployments more difficult. Specifically, we have concerns with the following:
Overly Subjective Design Standards (9.32.080): While we understand the City’s concerns
regarding the deployment of wireless facilities, the design standards proposed in Section
9.32.080 go beyond what is reasonably necessary to achieve those objectives. First and
foremost, the design standards are inherently subjective. For example, the standards require
freestanding towers to “maximally blend in to its surroundings” and roof top facilities to the
“maximum extent feasible… [to be] completely concealed and architecturally integrated into the
existing facade or rooftop features with no visible impacts.” Standards like these are
Item 7-F
08/14/18
1 of 3 Item 7-F
08/14/18
T-Mobile USA, Inc.
12920 SE 38th Street, Bellevue, WA 98006
2
problematic because they have the potential to be arbitrarily applied. As we explained in our
June 18, 2018, comment letter (the “Letter”) we are willing to work with the City to develop
objective design standards but cannot support purely subjective requirements that have the
potential for variable application. Second, the design standards are also problematic because
they attempt to dictate the configuration of a provider’s installation. For example, they specify
the location of various tower mounted equipment. Such limitations dictate a provider’s
technological choices in violation of federal law and longer-term may impede the deployment of
new technologies. At the end of the day, the design standards need to be flexible to allow
providers to deploy a range of technological solutions (both those that are currently available
and those that might be in the future) in response to the demands placed on their networks by
consumers. We encourage the City to develop more objective and flexible standards.
Prohibition on Deployments in Residential Zones (9.32.050(C)(1)-(2)): While we appreciate the
additional flexibility provided in the current draft for deployments on a certain subset of parcels
in such zones, we continue to have concerns about this broad prohibition. Deployments of next
generation wireless technologies are going to require infrastructure to be closer to the end user
where they recreate, work, and live. A broad prohibition on deployments in residential zones,
even with a carveout may not be sufficient to achieve those objectives.
Presubmittal Requirements & Application Blackout Dates (9.32.050(C)(1)-(2)): We continue to
have concerns that pre-submittal appointment requirement represents an unlawful attempt to
lengthen and circumvent the review timeframes in the FCC shot clocks and Cal. Gov. Code §
65964.1. As stated in our Letter, application requirements should be clear enough to enable an
applicant to comply without requiring a prescheduled submittal appointment. Moreover, under
federal law the City cannot refuse to accept an application when it is ready to be filed, nor can it
specify which days it can be submitted if City offices are otherwise open.
The No Feasible Alternative Standard (9.32.070): The standard for decision on limited exceptions
found has been rejected by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and should be removed as
suggested in our Letter.
Regulation of RF Emissions Section (9.32.060(B)(4)): As explained in our prior comments, the
regulation of RF emissions by local jurisdictions is expressly pre-empted. As result, the City may
require a certification that the application requirements of the Federal Communications
Commission are met, but it cannot require other demonstrations of compliance.
Small Cell and Right-of-Way Deployments: The current proposal does not address small cell or
right-of-way deployments. Is the City contemplating a similar update to the Code governing
Item 7-F
08/14/18
2 of 3 Item 7-F
08/14/18
T-Mobile USA, Inc.
12920 SE 38th Street, Bellevue, WA 98006
3
such deployments? If so, what is the contemplated timeline. T-Mobile would be interested in
participating in such discussions/revisions.
T-Mobile appreciates your consideration of these comments and our request to table the draft for
additional revisions. We would be happy to discuss these concerns in more detail. If you have any
questions, please feel free to contact me, at (425) 383-6295 or dylan.fuge1@T-Mobile.com, Hollie
Maldonado, Site Development Manager or, at (805) 584-5735 or Hollie.Maldonado8@T-Mobile.com.
Sincerely,
Dylan M. Fuge
Senior Corporate Counsel – Land Use
T-Mobile USA, Inc.
cc: Rod De La Rosa, Site Advocacy Manager – West Region
Hollie Maldonado, Site Development Manager
Amiee Weeks, Site Development Manager
Item 7-F
08/14/18
3 of 3 Item 7-F
08/14/18