HomeMy WebLinkAbout12/1/2010 - STAFF REPORTS - 1.A. Mr. Mayor and City Council Members
Good evening
My name is Robert Wilson. I am a practitioner, youth coordinator, and core
council member at the Center for Spiritual Living Palm Springs and a residence of
Palm Springs for the past thirty years. I am a retired teacher and a 10 year cancer
survivor.
In the few minutes I have, I would like to familiarize you with the Center for
Spiritual Living Palm Springs through a brief description of what the Center is and
how the Center serves the community.
The Center for Spiritual Living Palm Springs is a member of the United Religious
Science worldwide organization. As a new thought organization, Religious Science
can be approached as a science, a philosophy and a spiritual movement. We are a
straightforward approach to the Universal Truths found in many of the world's
religions. As a science, we use the scientific principles that scientist are now
proving. As a philosophy, it is a simple, practical, down to earth way of
understanding the full nature of the Universe and our relationship to it. As a
spiritual movement it provides positive affirmative methods of obtaining the good
life.
The Center for Spiritual Living Palm Springs has been in existence for 53 years in
Palm Springs. The Center for spiritual Living Palm Springs has been in community
service at its present location on Racquet Club Road for the past 26 years. In
those 26 years it has provide the local community with a facility for programs
such as Alcoholics Anonymous, rummage sales, community dinners, parking lot
and garage sales, Ti Chi, various youth programs, the community polling site,
countless educational programs, charity fund raising, weddings, commitment
ceremonies, memorial services, graduation exercises, among others and the
Center regularly tithes back to other community organizations.
The congregation of the Center for Spiritual Living Palm Springs is composed
largely of maturing individuals who find themselves on fixed and limited incomes.
We number just over 100 members but have been friends to thousands. In any
given week among the spiritual services, classes, numerous programs and
activities, more than 300 individuals are served.
By its very nature, the Center for Spiritual Living Palm Springs attracts many local
people on a temporarily basis who find themselves with health related problems,
career and work problems and relationship problems all seeking help to
overcome their daily concerns.
We do as much as we can to be good neighbors. We have tried to keep the
facility attractive looking with programs and services available to all. However,
due to the recent financial downturn in the country, the Center for Spiritual Living
Palm Springs has had to downsize. During the past year, we have had to eliminate
the position of assistant minister and reduce the hours of the office personnel.
The inability to provide financing to weatherize the facility has necessitated the
curtailing of some of the programs. The crumbling pavement of the parking lot is
in need of resurfacing, the fading and cracking exterior of the building needs
maintenance and painting, and the dying and inappropriate landscape needs to
be replaced with desert landscaping.
We currently find ourselves unable to maintain our facility in order that we may
continue to serve the local community as we would like. The renting of a small
area on the grounds of the Center for Spiritual Living Palm Springs to T-Mobile will
provide us with some funding to do necessary repairs to the facility, to provide
adequate staff, and to continue serving the community. The Center has always
worked in full cooperation with the local community. The objections by a limited
number of people many with personal issues and some who have based their
objections on false information to the T-Mobil cell tower to be located on the
grounds of the Center for Spiritual Living Palm Springs do not outweigh the
positive attributes to the local community that will be provided by the funds
obtained.
Thank you.
Good Evening,
Mayor Pougnet, Councilwoman Foat, Councilman Hutchinson,
Councilman Mills and Councilman Wiegle
My name is Paul Hietter. I am a resident of Palm Springs, a member of
the Center for Spiritual Living Palm Springs and also serve as the
Chairman of our Core Council.
As Core Council Chairman one of my responsibilities is to review all
aspects of agreements and other business transactions in which the
Center is involved.
While we did not seek out the T-Mobile Cell Tower, we have sought
ways to improve our cash flow and attend to the many financial needs of
the center.
The Center has always had the desire to install a feature that would serve
as an emblem for our congregation. That the desired structure comes as
a wireless facility was how the opportunity presented itself.
The Center had intended to adorn the structure with words of peace in
different languages and appropriate symbols. However, the architectural
committee asked that the structure remain concrete to avoid violating the
sign ordinance. We concur with the committee and will place a plaque at
the foot of the structure designating it as our symbol for peace.
When the proposal from. T-Mobil was initially presented to our Core
Council in early Fall, we, like the members of the surrounding
community, had many concerns.
One major concern dealt with the health issue. We had all heard the
same scenarios regarding frequency waves. We have, however, done our
due diligence regarding the health concerns and radiofrequency (RF)
waves.
In no way would we subject our neighbors or our members to any ill
harm. Once armed with the facts and the empirical scientific data we
felt confident that this was a project on which to move forward.
The matter this evening is simply a debate as to whether or not you
accept the scientific fact that there is no health impact associated with
these types of facilities.
To decide this matter on claims other than those based on the scientific
data that indicates that there is no health related concern with this T-
Mobil cell tower would undermine the spirit of the fact finding portion
of the land-use application process.
The Center for Spiritual. Living Palm Springs has reviewed the issues
raised during the Planning Commission hearing as well. We don't
believe the claims are supported by the facts detailed in T-Mobile's
submittals. For example: Proponents to the cell tower maintain that the
sculpture would create a negative visual impact.
This implies that everyone in the community has the same view. Also
that everyone enjoys the current view of power lines that encircle the
neighborhood.
When I attended the planning commission meeting a few months ago, it
was apparent that we had not communicated to the community what the
cell tower would mean for the community. We have since held two
public meetings and mailed over 650 letters out to the immediate
surrounding neighbors. From 650 letters and open forum meetings, 5
people showed up.
This would suggest that there isn't any interest in knowing the truth and
how this could positively impact this part of the community.
These are just a few points to consider. Our recommendation is to
approve the variance and allow this cell tower to be built with its present
design. It will allow the center to maintain and handle deferred
maintenance of our property and continue to serve our community as we
have done for 56 years.
Thank you for your consideration.
Cancer in Vista del Monte Elementary School in Palm Springs with a Cell
Tower on Campus
In February 2010, 1 received an E-mail from Kim McClinton, a
science teacher at Vista del Monte elementary school in Palm Springs,
California. She had heard about the La Quinta study and thought her
school had the same problem. The school had a reputation for being a
"cancer school' in the school district. Since 2005, there has been a cell
phone tower located within a few feet of a classroom wing in the school
courtyard. During a visit to the school, I showed Kim how to use the G/S
meter, and she produced a color-coded analysis of G/S readings by
classroom. The entire school had very high dirty electricity readings.
Their dirty electricity levels were higher than those at the La Quinta
school. The Vista del Monte G/S readings averaged 1,300 compared
to 750 at La Quinta. The cancers (twelve cancers, including six female
breast cancers among seventy-five personnel employed at the school
since 1990) were over-represented in the wing of the school closest to
the cell tower, and the G/S readings were highest in the classrooms
closest to the cell tower base. At the same stage of the investigation, La
Qunita school had eleven cancers in 137 teachers.
Cell tower transmitters, like most modern electrical equipment,
operate on direct current. The electrical current brought to the tower
is alternating current which needs to be changed to direct current. This
is done by a switching power supplies or an inverter. These devices
interrupt the AC current and are the likely source of the dirty electricity
in the wing of the school closest to the tower.
From: Dirty.Electricity Available from Amazon.com
See: Http:Hsammilham.com for links to recent papers
�7N %-
"YA Alt vE u t L-PA4
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF INDUSTRIAL MEDICINE(2008)
A New Electromagnetic Exposure Metric: High
Frequency Voltage Transients Associated With
Increased Cancer Incidence in Teachers in a
California School
Samuel Milham, MD,MPH" t and L. Lloyd Morgan, ast
Background In 2003 the teachers at La Quinta, California middle school complained
that they had more cancers than would be expected. A consultant for the school district
denied that there was a problem.
Objectives P)investigate the cancer incidence in the teachers, and its cause.
Method We conducted a retrospective study gfcancer incidence in the teachers'cohort in
relationship to the school's electrical environment.
Results Sixteen school teachers in a cohort of 137 teachers hired in 1988 through 2005
were diagnosed with 18 cancers. The observed to expected(0/E)risk ratio for all cancers
was 2.78 (P=0.000098), while the O/L risk ratio for malignant melanoma was 9.8
(P=0.0008).Thyroid cancer had a risk ratio of 13.3(P=0.0098),and uterine cancer had
a risk ratio crf 9.2 (P.=0.019). Sixty Hertz magnetic fields showed no association with
cancer incidence. A new exposure metric, high frequency voltage transients, did show a
positive correlation to cancer incidence.A cohort cancer incidence analysis of'the teacher
population showed a positive trend (P=7.1 x 10-10) of increasing cancer risk with
increasing cumulative exposure to high frequency voltage transients on the classmom's
electrical wiring measured with a Graham/Stetzer(G/S) meter. The attributable risk of
cancer associated with this exposure was 64%.A single yearal'employment at this school
increased a teacher's cancer risk by 21%.
Conclusion The cancer incidence in the teachers at this school is unusually high and is
stanzgly associated with high ,frequency voltage transients, which may be a universal
carcinogen, similar to ionizing radiation. Am.J.Ind.Med.2008. ®2008 Wiley-Liss,Inc.
KEY WORDS: high frequency voltage transients; electricity; dirty power; cancer;
school teachers; carcinogen
Abbreviations:EMP,,electromagnetic fields;0,observed cases;E.expected cases;O/E, BACKGROUND
risk ratio;p,probability;Hz,Hertz or cycles per second;OSHA,Occupational Safety and
Health Administration,OCMAP,occupational mortality analysis program;AM,amplitude Since the 1979 Wertheimer—Leeper study (Wertheimer
modulation;GS units,Graham/Stetzer units;G/S meter,Graham/Stetzer meter;MS II,Micro-
surge II meter;mG,milligauss;EKG,electrocardiogram;LAMS,La Quinta Middle School. and Leeper, 1.9791 there has been concern that exposure to
Washington State Departmentof HealthJumwater,washington power frequency (50/60 Hz) EMFs, especially magnetic
"Retired. fields, may contribute to adverse health effects including
Retired Electronic Engineer,
'Correspondence to:Samuel Milham,2318 Gravelly Beach Loop NW,,Olympia,WA98502. cancer.Until now,the most commonly used exposure metric
E-mail,smilharn2 Ucomcast.net has been the time-weighted average of the power-frequency
Accepted 29 April 2008 magnetic field. However,the low risk ratios in most studies
DOI10.1002/ajim20598.Published online in WileylnterScience suggest that magnetic fields might be a surrogate for a more
(www.interscience.wileycom) important metric. In this paper we present evidence that a
2008 Wiley-Liss,Inc.
2 Milham and Morgan
new exposure metric, high frequency voltage transients conductive plumbing,while within buildings,it is usually the
existing on electrical power wiring,is an important predictor result of interrupted current generated by electrical appli-
of cancer incidence in an exposed population. ances and equipment.
The new metric, GS units, used in this investigation is Each interruption of current flow results in a voltage
measured with a Graham/Stetzer meter (G/S meter) also spike described by the equation V=L x di/dt,where V is the
known as a Microsurge 11 meter (MS 11 meter), which is voltage, L is the inductance of the electrical wiring circuit
plugged into electric outlets [Graham, 20051. This meter and di/dt is the rate of change of the interrupted current.The
displays the average rate of change of these high frequency voltage spike decays in an oscillatory manner.The oscillation
voltage transients that exist everywhere on electric power frequency is the resonant frequency of the electrical circuit.
wiring.High frequency voltage transients found on electrical The G/S meter measures the average magnitude of the rate of
wiring both inside and outside of buildings are caused by an change of voltage as a function of time (dV/dT). This
interruption of electrical current flow. The electrical utility preferentially measures the higher frequency transients.The
industry has referred to these transients as "dirty power." measurements of dV/dT read by the meter are defined as GS
There are many sources of "dirty power" in today's (Graham/Stetzer)units.
electrical equipment. Examples of electrical equipment The bandwidth of the G/S meter is in the frequency range
designed to operate with interrupted current flow are light of these decaying oscillations.Figure 1 shows a two-channel
dimmer switches that interrupt the current twice per cycle oscilloscope display.One channel displays the 60 Hz voltage
(120 times/s), power saving compact fluorescent lights that on an electrical outlet while the other channel with a 10 kHz
interrupt the current at least 20,000 times/s,halogen lamps, hi-pass filter between the oscilloscope and the electrical
electronic transfonners and most electronic equipment outlet,displays the high frequency voltage transients on the
manufactured since the mid-1.98Os that use switching power same electrical outlet[Havas and Stetzer,2004,reproduced
supplies.Dirty power generated by electrical equipment in a with permission].
building is distributed throughout the building on the electric Although no other published studies have measured high
wiring.Dirty power generated outside the building enters the frequency voltage transients and risk of cancer,one study of
building on electric wiring and through ground rods and electric utility workers exposed to transients from pulsed
Name .'"ll.,A J
Data -7/2/03 7/M3
L T ine W 5.45.50 PM 5:45:50 PM
YSGale w 50 V/piv 50 mV/Div
Y AI 50k.. •32-M V 32.00 mV
XScale 2 ms/0rr 2 mmss
/piv
XAA 0% •3 20 ms -3.20
Y ..::---- X Size -1009110991 1007(1 Wn
A Maa�m 171.29V Overload
[
72v u..lcrlaaa
1 sz msXL L m
% 59
dx - ms
Y1: t76,17 6,17mV
Y2' 1IR33mV I
i
3.2(1 ms 2 /Div
-- -- - -- --- ---- --------------------------------------------------------------
THE WAVEFy ORM WAS COLLECTED IN ROOM 114 AT THE ELGIN/MILLVILLE MN HIGH
SCHOOL. CHANNEL 1 WAS CONNECTED TO THE 120 VAC UTILITY SUPPLIED POWER
RECEPTACLE. CHANNEL 2 WAS CONNECTED TO THE SAME POTENTIAL, EXCEPT
THROUGH THE GRAHAM UBIQUITOUS FILTER. (REMOVES THE 60 HERTZ) THE AREA,
BETWEEN THE CURSORS REPRESENTS A FREQUENCY OF 25 KILO HERTZ. A TEACHER
WHO PREVIOUSLY OCCUPIED THE ROOM DIED OF BRAIN TUMORS AND THE TEACHER IN
THE ADJOINING ROOM DIED OF LUEKEMIA.
FIGURE I. O5eilloscope display of dirty power:60Hz electrical power(channell)with concurrent high frequency voltage transients
(channel2).A10 kHz hi-passfilter wasused on channell in ordertofilteroutthe 60 Hzvottageand its harmonics.[Colorligurecan beviewed
in the online issue.which is available at www.interacienee-wileycom.l
High Frequency Voltage Transients and Cancer 3
electromagnetic fields found an increased incidence of lung with prosecution for "unlawful.. trespass," and the teacher
cancer among exposed workers [Armstrong et al., 19941. who had invited us into the school received a letter of
reprimand. The teachers then filed a California OSHA
INTRODUCTION complaint which ultimately lead to a thorough measurement
of magnetic fields and dirty power levels at the school by the
in February 2004,a Palm Springs,California newspaper, California Department of Health Services which provided
The Desert Sun, printed an article titled, "Specialist the exposure data for this study. They also provided
discounts cancer cluster at school," in which a local tumor comparison dirty power data from residences and an office
registry epidemiologist claimed that there was no cancer building, and expedited tumor registry confirmation of
cluster or increased cancer incidence at the school [Perrault, cancer cases.
20041. An Internet search revealed that the teacher Classrooms were measured at different times using
population at La Quinta Middle School (LAMS) was too 3 meters: an FW Bell model 4080 tri-axial Gaussmeter, a
small to generate the 11 teachers with cancer who were Dexsil 310 Gaussmeter, and a Graham-Stetzer(G/S)meter.
reported in the article.The school was opened in 1988 with The Bell meter measures magnetic fields between 25 and
20 teachers hired that year. For the first 2 years, the school 1,000 Hz. The Dexsil meter measures magnetic fields
operated in three temporary buildings,one of which remains. between 30 and 300 Hz. The G/S meter measures the
In 1990, a newly constructed school opened. In 2003, the average rate of change of the high frequency voltage
teachers complained to school district management that they transients between 4 and 150 KHz.
believed that they had too many cancers.Repeated requests All measurements of high frequency voltage transients
to the school administration for physical access to the school were made with the G/S meter.This meter was plugged into
and for teachers' information were denied.We contacted the outlets, and a liquid crystal display was read. All measure-
teachers,and with their help,the cancers in the group were ments reported were in GS units. The average value was
characterized. One teacher suggested using yearbooks to reported where more than one measurement was made in a
develop population-at-risk counts for calculating expected classroom.
cancers. We were anxious to assess the electrical environ- We measured seven classrooms in February 2005 using
ment at the school,since elevated power frequency magnetic the Bell meter and the G/S meter.Later in 2005,the teachers
field exposure with a positive correlation between duration of measured 37 rooms using the same meters.On June 8,2006,
exposure and cancer incidence had been reported in first floor electrical consultants for the school district and the
office workers who worked in strong magnetic fields above California Department of Health Services (Dr. Raymond
three basement-mounted 12,000 V transformers [Milham, Neutra)repeated the survey using the G/S meter and a Dexsil
19961.We also wanted to use a new electrical measurement 320 Gaussmeter,measuring 51 rooms.We used results of this
tool, the Graham/Stetzer meter, which measures high June 8,2006 sampling in our exposure calculations,since all
frequency voltage transients. classrooms were sampled, multiple outlets per room were
The Graham/Stetzer Microsurge II meter measures the sampled, and an experienced team did the sampling.
average rate of change of the transients in Graham/Stetzer Additionally,GS readings were taken at Griffin Elementary
units (GS units). Anecdotal reports had linked dirty power school near Olympia,Washington,and Dr.Raymond Neutra
exposure with a number of illnesses [Navas and Stetzer, provided GS readings for his Richmond California office
20041. We decided to investigate whether power frequency building and 125 private California residences measured in
magnetic field exposure or dirty power exposure could another Northern California study.
explain the cancer increase in the school teachers. All the cancer case information was developed by
personal,telephone,and E-mail contact with the teachers or
METHODS their families without any assistance from the school district.
The local tumor registry verified all the cancer cases with the
After the school administration (Desert Sands Unified exception of one case diagnosed out of state and the two cases
School District)had refused a number of requests to assist in reported in 2007. The out-of state case was verified by
helping us evaluate the cancers reported by the teachers,we pathologic information provided by the treating hospital.The
were invited by a teacher to visit the school after hours to teachers gathered population-at-risk information (age at
make magnetic field and dirty power measurements.During hire,year of hire,vital status,date of diagnosis,date of death,
that visit,we noted that,with the exception of one classroom and termination year) from yearbooks and from personal
nearthe electrical service room,the classroom magnetic field contact. The teachers also provided a history of classroom
levels were uniformly low, but the dirty power levels were assignments for all teachers from annual classroom assign-
very high,giving many overload readings.When we reported ment rosters (academic years 1990-1991 to 2006-2007)
this to Dr.Doris Wilson,then the superintendent of schools generated by the school administration. The school admin-
(retired December, 2007), one of us (SM) was threatened istration provided a listing of school employees, including
4 Milham and Morgan
the teachers,to the regional tumor registry after the teachers information was limited to the two authors, No patient-
involved the state health agency by submitting an OSHA specific information was obtained from the tumor registry.
complaint. The information we obtained anecdotally from With the individual's permission we provided the registry
the teachers, yearbooks, and classroom assignment rosters with case information for a teacher with malignant
was nearly identical to that given to the tumor registry.None melanoma diagnosed out of state.The exposure information
of the cancer cases were ascertained initially through the was provided by the California Department of Health
cancer registry search. Services. The basic findings of the study were presented to
Published cancer incidence rates by age, sex, and race the Desert Sands Unified School District School Board and at
for all cancers,as well as for malignant melanoma,thyroid, a public meeting arranged by the teachers.
uterine, breast, colon, ovarian cancers, and non-Hodgkin's
lymphoma (NHL) were obtained from a California Cancer RESULTS
Registry publication[Kwong et al„20011.We estimated the
expected cancer rate for each teacher by applying year,age, Electrical Measurements
sex, and race-specific cancer incidence rates from hire date
until June 2007, or until death. We then summed each In our seven-room survey of the school in 2005,
teacher's expected cancer rate for the total cohort. magnetic field readings were as high as 177 mG in a.
Using the California cancer incidence data, the school classroom adjacent to the electrical service room. A number
teacher data,and the GS exposure data,we calculated cancer of outlets had overload readings with the G/S meter.
incidence and risks.A replicate data set was sent to Dr.Gary Magnetic fields were not elevated(>3.0 mG)in the interior
Marsh and to Mike Cunningham at the University of space of any of the classrooms except in the classroom.
Pittsburgh School of Public Health for independent analysis adjacent to the electrical service room, and near classroom
using OCMAP software.We calculated cancer risk ratios by electrical appliances such as overhead transparency projec-
duration of employment and by cumulative GS unit-years of tors.There was no association between the risk of cancer and
exposure.We calculated an attributable risk percent using the 60 Hz magnetic field exposures in this cohort, since the
frequencies of total observed and expected cancers, and classroom magnetic field exposures were the same for
performed trend tests rBreslow and Day,19871 for cancer risk teachers with and without cancer(results not shown).
versus duration of employment and cumulative GS unit- This scbcx5l had very high GS readings and an
years of exposure.Poisson P values were calculated using the association between high frequency voltage transient.
Stat Trek website (Stat Trek, 2007). We also performed a exposure in the teachers and risk of cancer. The G/S meter
linear regression of cancer risk by duration of employment gives readings in the range from 0 to 1,999 GS units.The case
in years and by time-weighted exposure in GS unit-years. school had 13 of 51 measured roo3ns with at least one
Since neither author had a current institutional affili- electrical outlet measuring "overload" (>2,000 GS units).
ation, institutional review board approval was not possible. These readings were high compared to another school near
The teachers requested the study, and their participation in Olympia Washington, a Richmond California office build-
the Study was both voluntary and complete. All the active ing,and private residences in Northern California(Table 1).
teachers at the school signed the Cal OSHA request. The Altogether, 631 rooms were surveyed for this study. Only
authors fully explained the nature of the study to study 17(2.69%n)of the 631 rooms had an"overload"(maximum,
participants and offered no remuneration to the teachers for ?2,000 GS units) reading. Applying this percentage to the
participation in the study. The authors maintained strict 51 rooms surveyed at the case school, we would expect
confidentiality of all medical and personal information 1.4 rooms at the school to have overload GS readings
provided to us by the teachers, and removed personal (0.0269 x 51 = 1.37).However,thirteen rooms(25%)meas-
identifiers from the data set which was analyzed by the ured at the case school had "overload"measurements above
University of Pittsburgh. Possession of personal medical the highest value (1,999 GS units) that the G/S meter can
TABLE L Graham/Stetzer Meter Readings:Median Values in Schools,Homes and an Office Building
Place Homes Office Will OlymplaWASchool LAMS Total
No.of rooms surveyed 500 39 41 51 531
Median GS units 159 210 160 750 <2702
Rooms with overload GS 4 0 0 13' 17
units(�2,000)
'Excludes homes as specific room data was not available.
"P=3.14 x 10-9.
High Frequency Voltage Transients and Cancer 5
TABLE 11. Risk of Cancer byType Among Teachers at La Quinta Middle School
Cancer Observed Expected Risk ratio(O/E) Rvaloe
All cancers 18 6.51 2.78* 0.000098
Malignant melanoma 4 0.41 9.76* 0.0008
Thyroid cancer 2 0-15 13.3* 0.011
Uterus cancer 2 0.22 9.19* 0.019
Female breast cancer 2 1.5 1.34 0.24
All cancers less melanoma 14 6.10 2.30* 0.0025
'P<0.05.
measure.This is a highly statistically significant excess over The teachers' cohort accumulated 1,576 teacher-years
expectation(Poisson P=3.14 x 10-9). of risk between September 1988 and June 2007 based on a
We noticed AM radio interference in the vicinity of the 12-month academic year.Average age at hire was 36 years.In
school.A teacher also reported similar radio interference in his 2007,the average age of the cohort was 47.5 years.
classroom and in the field near his ground floor classroom.In When we applied total cancer and specific cancer
May 2007,he repotted that I I of 15 outlets in his classroom incidence rates by year, age, sex, race, and adjusted for
overloaded the G/S meter.An AM radio tuned off station is a cohort ageing,we found an estimate of 6.5 expected cancers,
sensitive detector of dirty power,giving a loud buzzing noise in 0.41 melanomas,0.15 thyroid cancers,0.22 uterine cancers,
the presence of dirty power sources even though the AM band is and 1.5 female breast cancers(Table II).For all cancers,the
beyond the bandwidth of the G/S meter. risk ratio (Observed/Expected= 18/6.5) was 2.78 (P=
0.000098,Poisson test); for melanoma, (O/E=4/0.41) was
Cancer Incidence 9.8 (P=0.0008,Poisson test); for thyroid cancer(O/E 2/
0.15)was 13.3(P=0.0011,Poisson test);for uterine cancer
Three more teachers were diagnosed with cancer in 2005 (O/E=2/0,22),was 9.19(P=0.019,Poisson test).
after the first 11 cancer diagnoses were reported,and another Table III shows the cancer risk among the teachers by
former teacher(diagnosed out-of-state in 2000)was reported duration of employment.Half the teachers worked at the school
by a family member employed in the school system. One for less than 3 years (average 1.52 years). The cancer risk
cancer was diagnosed in 2006 and two more in 2007. in increases with duration of employment, as is expected when
the years 1988-2005, 137 teachers were employed at the there.is exposure to an occupational carcinogen.The cancer risk
school.The 18 cancers in the 16 teachers were: 4 malignant ratio rose from 7.7 for less than 3 years,to 2.9 for 3-14 years,to
melanomas,2 female breast cancers,2 cancers of the thyroid, 4.2 for 15+years of employment.There was a positive trend of
2 uterine cancers and one each of Burkitt's lymphoma(a type increasing cancer incidence with increasing duration of
of non-Hodgkins lymphoma), polycythemia vera, multiple employment(P=4.6 x 10-ty. A single year of employment
myeloma, leiomyosarcoma and cancer of the colon, at this school increases a teacher's risk of cancer by 21%.
pancreas, ovary and larynx. Two teachers had two primary Using the June 8,2006 survey data(Table iV),the cancer
cancers each: malignant melanoma and multiple myeloma, risk of a teacher having ever worked in a room with at least
and colon and pancreatic cancer. Four teachers had died of one outlet with an overload GS reading(>2000 GS units)and
cancer through August 2007.There have been no non-cancer employed for 10 years or more, was 7.1 (P=0.00007,
deaths to date. Poisson test).In this group,there were six teachers diagnosed
TABLE 111E Cancer Risk by Duration of Employment
Cancer Cancer
Time at school Average time Teachers %of teachers observed expected Rlsk ratio(O/E) Poisson p
C3 years 1.52 years 68 49.6 4 2.34 1.72 0-12
3-•14years 7.48years 56 40-9 9 3-14 2.87* 0.0037
15-1-years 16.77 years 12 8.8 5 1.02 4.89* 0.0034
Total 137 100 18 6.51 2.78* 0-000098
Positive trend test(Chi square with one degree of freedom=38.8,P-4.61 x 10
*P<0,05.
6 Milham and Morgan
TABLE IV. Cancer in Teachers Who EverTaught in Classrooms With at Least One Overload GS Reading(>2000 GS Units)by Duration of Employment
Ever in a room Employed
7 2,000 OS units 10+years Total teachers Canters observed Cancers expected Risk ratio IO/E) Poisson p
Yes Yes 10 70 0.988 7.1" 0.00007
Yes No 30 3a 0.939 3.2 0.054
Total 40 10 1.93 5.1 0.00003
No Yes 19 2 1.28 1.6 0.23
No No 78 6 3.25 1.8 0.063
Total 97 8 4.56 1.8' 0.047
Grand total 137 18 6,49 2.8" 0.000098
'One teacher had two primary cancers.
"P C 0.05.
with a total of seven cancers, and four teachers without a incidence with increasing cumulative GS unit-years of
cancer diagnosis, who were employed for 1.0 or more years exposure(P=7.1 x 10-1o). An exposure of 1,000 GS unit-
and who ever worked in one of these rooms.Five teachers had years increased a teacher's cancer risk by 13%,Working in a
one primary cancer and one teacher had two primary cancers, room with a GS overload (>2,000 GS units) for I year
These teachers made up 7.3%of the teachers'population(10/ increased cancer risk by 26%
137)but had 7 cancers or 39%(7/18)of the total cancers.The An attributable risk percentage was calculated:
10 teachers who worked in an overload classroom for (observed cancers-expected cancers)/observed cancers=
10 years or more had 7 cancers when 0.99 would have been (18-6.51)/18=63.8%.
expected(P=6.8 x 10--5 Poisson test).The risk ratio for the The fact that these cancer incidence findings were
8 teachers with cancer and 32 teachers without cancer,who generated by a single day of G/S meter readings made on June
ever worked in a room with an overload GS reading, 8, 2006 suggests that the readings were fairly constant
regardless of the time at the school, was 5.1 (P=0.00003, over time since the school was built in 1990,For example,if
Poisson test).The risk ratio for 8 teachers with cancer and 89 the 13 classrooms which overloaded the meter on June 8,
teachers without cancer who never worked in a room with an 2006 were not the same since the start of the study and
overload G-S reading was 1.8 (P=0.047, Poisson test). constant throughout, the cancer risk of teachers who ever
Teachers who never worked in an overload classroom also worked in the overload rooms would have been the same as
had a statistically significantly increased risk of cancer. the teachers who never worked in an overload room.
A positive dose-response was seen between the risk of Although teachers witb melanoma and cancers of the
cancer and the cumulative GS exposure (Table V). Three thyroid, and uterus, had very high, statistically significant
categories of cumulative GS unit-years of exposure were risk ratios,there was nothing exceptional about their age at
selected: C5,000, 5,000 to 10,000, and more than 10,000 hire, duration of employment, or cumulative GS exposure.
cumulative GS unit-years. We found elevated risk ratios of However,thyroid cancer and melanoma had relatively short
2.0,5.0,and 4.2,respectively,all statistically significant,for latency times compared to the average latency time for all
each category.There was a positive trend ofincreasing cancer 18 cancers. The average latency time between start of
TABLE V. Observed and Expected Cancers by Cumulative GS Exposure(GS Unit-Years)
Exposuregroup C5,00003unit-years 5,000 to 10,000 >10,0006Sunit-years Total
Average GS unit-years 914 7,007 15,483
Cancers obs_ 9 4 5 18
Cancers exp. 4.507 0.799 1.20 6.49
Risk ratio(0/E) 2,01' 5.00" 4.17" 2.78"
Poisson p 0.0229 0.0076 0,0062 0.000098
Positive trend test(Chi square with one degree of freedom=38.0.P._.7.1 x 10
"P r 0.05.
High Frequency Voltage Transients and Cancer 7
employment at the school and diagnosis for all cancers was cancer. They made up 7.3%q of the cohort but experienced
9.7 years. The average latency time for thyroid cancer was 39%of all cancers.
3.0 years and for melanoma it was 7.3 years(with three of the The relatively short latency time of melanoma and
four cases diagnosed at 2,5,and 5 years). thyroid cancers suggests that these cancers may be more
An independent analysis of this data set by the sensitive to the effects of high frequency voltage transients
1Jniversity of Pittsburgh School of Public Health using than the other cancers seen in this population.
OCMAP software supported our findings. In occupational cohort studies,it is very unusual to have
a number of different cancers with an increased risk. An
DISCUSSION exception to this is that cohorts exposed to ionizing radiation
show an increased incidence of a number of different cancers.
Because of access dental,we have no information about The three cancers in this cohort with significantly elevated
the source,or characterization of the high frequency voltage incidence, malignant melanoma, thyroid cancer and uterine
transients. We can assume, because the school uses metal cancer,also have significantly elevated incidence in the large
conduit to contain the electrical wiring, that any resultant California school employees cohort[Reynolds et al., 19991,
radiated electric fields from these high frequency voltage These cancer risk estimates are probably low because 23
transients would radiate mainly from the power cords and of the 137 members of the cohort remain untraced. Since
from electrical equipment using the power cords within a exposure was calculated based on 7 days a week for a year,
classroom. this will overstate the actual teachers' exposure of 5 days
The school's GS readings of high frequency voltage a week for 9 months a year.
transients are much higher than in other tested places We could not study field exposures in the classrooms
(Table I). Also, teachers in the case school who were since we were denied access to the school.We postulate that
employed for over 10 years and who had ever worked in a the dirty power in the classroom wiring exerted its effect by
room with an overload GS reading had a much higher rate of capacitive coupling which induced electrical currents in the
166 • Dalablock
Name «Irp/A
Date +W 2004
11.6 Tenn «7.55.55AM
YScak 5 (WIDiv
-.. .... ---. .. .. ... ..... .:
6.6 X Scale - 5 mt1D v
9 XAl0% +•looms
Ma Mawrrs «250 t5121
�u �n. 9-2mV
1.6 M.rrwe.•106 mV
g Cosa Values
•31mV (� X1: 17.�ms
V X2: 7.8ms
dX: 4 ms
fl� Yi: 90MV
J. . . .. .. . . Y2: 446V
... ..
dY: •104MV
•13.4
•23 4
.loom
5m/Div
-Th-e----wa-v-e-fo--rm...w--a-s-----r-e-c-o- -r d-e--d_bet we-e-n-.2...ERG,
RG----p at-c h-e s----p-l--a-c-e--d- ..-.....t_h.e. .a n•-k-l--e--s----o-f------
XXXXXX XXXXXXXXX standing in front of his kitchen sink at his home near
Bright Ontario. It shows a distorted 60 cycle sine wave containing high
frequencies applied to each foot, allowing high frequency current to
freely oscillate up one leg and down the other. XXXXXX has been
diagnosed with prostrate cancer since moving to the house in less than a
year. He was standing with feet shoulder width apart, wearing shoes, at
the time of the readings. The amplitude increased as the feet were
placed farther apart.
FIGURE 2. 0scilliscope display of 60 Hz current distorted with high frequencies taken between EKG patches applied to the ankles
of a man standing with shoes on at a kitchen sink.[Color figure can be viewed in the online issue.which is available atwww.interscience-
wiley.com.]
8 Mitham and Morgan
teachers' bodies.The energy that is capacitively coupled to ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
the teachers' bodies is proportional to the frequency.It is this
characteristic that highlights the usefulness of the G/S meter, The authors would like to thank The La Quinta,
High frequency dirty power travels along the electrical California middle school teachers,especially Gayle Cohen.
distribution system in and between buildings and through the Thanks also to Eric Ossiander, Dr. Raymond Neutra, Dr.
ground. Humans and conducting objects in contact with the Gary Marsh and Mike Cunningham and Dr.Louis Slesin.LM
ground become part of the circuit. Figure 2 (Navas and thanks Diana Bilovsky for editorial assistance,
Stetzer, 2004, reproduced with permission} shows an
oscilloscope tracing taken between EKG patches on the REFERENCES
ankles of a man wearing shoes,standing at a kitchen sink.The
60 Hz sine wave is distorted by high frequencies, which Armstrong B,Theriault G,Guenel P,Deadman J,Goldberg M,Heroux
allows high frequency currents to oscillate up one leg and P.1994-Association between exposure to pulsed electromagnetic fields
down the other between the EKG patches. and cancer in electric utility workers in Quebec,Canada,and France.
p Am J Epidemiol 1.40(9):805 820.
Although not demonstrated in this data set,dirty power
levels are usuallyhigher in environments with high levels of Breslow he Day NE- d An Statistical Methods in Cancer Research,
g �' Vol.lI—The Design and Analysis of Cohort Studies.IA12C Scientific
60 Hz magnetic fields.Many of the electronic devices which Publication No.82,International Agency for Research on Cancer,Lyon
generate magnetic fields also inject dirty power into the France, 198796(equation 3-12),
utility wiring.Magnetic fields may,therefore,be a surrogate Graham MH.2005.Circuit for Measurement of Electrical Pollution on
for dirty power exposures. In future studies of the EMF- Power Line.United States Patent 6,914,435 82,
cancer association, dirty power levels should be studied Havas M, Stetzer D. 2004. Dirty electricity and electrical hyper-
along with magnetic fields. sensitivity:Five case studies.World Health Organization Workshop on
The question of cancer incidence in students who Electrical Hypersensitivity. 25-26 October,Prague,Czech Republic,
q available online at: http://www.stetzerelectric.conVfilters/research/
attended La Quinta Middle School for 3 years has not been havas_stetzer-_wbo(14.pdf.
addressed. Kwong SL, Perkins Cl, Morris CR,Cohen R, Allen M, Wright WE-
2001. Cancer in California 1988-1999. Sacramento CA: California
CONCLUSION Department of Health Services,Cancer Surveillance Section-
Milham S. 1996. increased incidence of cancer in a cohort of office
The cancer incidence in the teachers at this school is workers exposed to strong magnetic fields.Am J Ind Med 30(6):702-704.
unusually high and is strongly associated with exposure to Perrault M.2004.Specialist Discounts Cancer Cluster at School.The
high frequency voltage transients. in the 28 years since Desert Sun(Palm Springs,CA),22 February,Al.
electromagnetic fields (EMFs) were first associated with Reynolds P,Elkin EP,Layefsky ME,Lee JM.1999.Cancerin California
cancer,a number of exposure metrics have been suggested.if school employees.Am J Ind Med 36:271-278.
our findings are substantiated, high frequency voltage tran- Stat Trek http://stat"k-com/tables/Poisson.aspx(accessed August 2007)-
sients are a new and important exposure metric and a possible Wertheimer N, Leeper E. 1979. Electrical wiring configurations and
universal human carcinogen similar to ionizing radiation. childhood cancer.Am J iipidemic] 109(3):273-284.
i
a Sr�S�3l, 4Wi,h r
T, y
pk
A
.5a i.
p i
,r
Y a
17t
II
9
r
6
,r
a
�rxy�a
Y
wo"',
ot
SZ
7Trr
Ir
d
Cindy Berardi
From: George Melton [grmelton@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2010 3:18 PM J it.a
To: Cindy Berardi
Subject: T-Mobile Cell Tower
Dear Cindy,
I would like to express my support for the cell tower at the Center for Spiritual Living on Racquet Club. The income from
the tower will allow us to catch up on our deferred maintenance and maintain the grounds in a way that will enhance our
property and the neighborhood. After surveying the sight and walking the neighborhood, it is my opinion that the tower
impacts a relatively few number of homes. I hope we can count on your support.
George Melton
226 N. Burton Way
Palm Springs, CA 92262
�G�i�T i U'✓�.w` �Te��'`�
lZl I + 10
Cindy Berardi
From: Syd Smith [sydsmithl@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2010 4:06 PM
To: Cindy Berardi
Subject: cell tower.
)ear Cindy,
I would like to express my support for the cell tower at the Center for Spiritual Living on Racquet Club. The income from the tower will
allow us to catch up on our deferred maintenance and maintain the grounds in a way that will enhance our property and the neighborhood.
lfter surveying the sight and walking the neighborhood, it is my opinion that the tower impacts a relatively few number of homes. I hope we
;an count on your support.
Syd Smith
26 N.Burton Way
'alm Springs, CA 92262
i1)ni11nin
DATE: November 30, 2010
TO: Members of the Palm Springs City Council
Palm Springs City Hall
3200 E Tahquitz Canyon Way Palm Springs, CA 92264
cityclerkApalmspri ncs-.4.gov
Fax (760) 323-8207
FROM: Deen Warren, 970 N. Cerritos Dr. Palm Springs,CA
92262
SUBJECT: T-MOBILE INSTALLATION AT CENTER FOR SPIRIUTAL LIVING PALM
SPRINGS
I would like to voice my support for the T-Mobile cell tower Variance to be installed on
the property of the Center for Spiritual Living Palm Springs at 2100 E. Racquet Club
Road, Palm Springs, CA for the following reasons:
Project Description:
T-Mobile requests a Conditional Use Permit(CUP)and Variance to install a 47 1/2 foot wireless facility
inside a sculptural monopole on the property located at 2100 East Racquet Club Road.The Zoning Code
allows a thirty-nine(39')foot antenna structure on the Center for Spiritual Living property without a
height Variance. Thus the height variance to 471/2 feet is necessary to provide adequate wireless
coverage to the Palm Springs residential neighborhoods.
The revenue generated from the rental of the area on the property to T- Mobil will
allow the Center to do needed repair and maintenance on the property.
1. Property maintenance and upgrade leads to the increase value of the
property and the property of the surrounding community/residences.
2. The tower will provide for additional access for the surrounding
community to technological communications that currently exist and
future communication devices enhancing service to individual residents of
the community.
3. Better telecommunication services provide community residents
with quicker access to emergency services.
4. The unobtrusive architectural design of the tower will provide an
additional interesting design element to the community.
5. The Center, in cooperation with T-Mobile has followed within the laws of
the City Ordinances, respective commissions and has made available
pertinent information to those in the community who desired to learn
about the structure.
........... ....
X�' �. �..
The Center for Spiritual Living, Palm Springs. :
T-Mobile West Corporation ,a
We, the undersigned, request that the City of Palm Springs review and approve the .
installation of anew T-Mobile wireless facility at the Center for Spiritual Living, Palm Springs,
located at 21oo E. Racquet Club Road. We support the proposed 'T,-Moblle_pl=oject as it is
Currently designed and sited. We further believe that the proposed T-Mobile wireless facility
will provide needed voice and data services, including enhanced 3G, internet and high-speed
data, and enhanced 911 services, to the surrounding community and Palm Springs residents.
As residents of the City of Palm Springs,we, the unde lgned, support TRMobile's efforts to
design and construct a City-wide wireless network whit will service and benefit aflxesiden-ts,
of the City of Palm Springs. .
N Address
3 l l St :
w
5
6
14�1 � 2- -?.r 74'
10
12
13
14 fI t
1C rdF1 ; I �,, h d!' /f �T J,� f`fF `'^ �B [ d
16 Li
17 fit}r ems- ,�a-� ��.. �*"°«»3 "�'�.s�P.. ,. ..�•. ��w c �..2..J
f
1s
1� a (�`Jf.�rLC4eSlr ` t � C? 6 �, ' ^ • rh� (1ti`sy�v�ctl
20 ® '
The Center for Spiritual Living, Palm Springs
T-Mobile West Corporation
We, the undersigned, request that the City of Pahn Springs review and approve the
installation of a new'T'-Mobile wireless facility at the Center for Spiritual Living, Palm Springs,
located at 21oo E. Racquet Club Road. We support the proposed T-Mobile project as it is
currently designed and sited.We further believe that the proposed T-Mobile wireless facility
will provide needed voice and data services, including Enhanced A internet and high-speed
data, and enhanced gtl services,to the surrounding community and Palm Springs residents.
As residents of the City of Palm Springs, we, the undersigned, support T-Mobile's efforts to
design and construct ai City-wide wireless network which will service and benefit at rtAder_rts
of the City of Palm Springs.
acre Address
5
1 ` " call F Y. ..
"y l ate" ( � ad cc. 3 :
n p 17
. 0 g,,a af �-.�_ iw,1, bri. '¢,¢ ,;..F 4 a iN•tT �a.,r.C..
10
14 -7 .,,
15 71�7 PS') c:12 ,;�V
16 17
19
40
The Center for,Spiritual Living, Palm Springs
T-Mobile West Corporation
We, the undersigned, request that the City of Palm Springs review and approve the
installation of a new T-Mobile wireless facility at the Center for Spiritual Living, Palm Springs,
located at 21oo E. Racquet Club Road. We support th proposed T-Mobile project as it is
currently,designed and sited. We further believe that the proposed T-Mobile wireless facility
will provide needed voice and data services,including e 1hanced 3C;internet and high-speed
data, and enhanced 911 services,to the surrounding community and Palm Springs residents.
As residents of the City of Palm Springs,we, the undersigned, support T-Mobile's efforts to
design and construct a City-wide wireless network which will service and benefit all residents
of the City of Palm Springs.
Name Address
1 Y
! !
2 � '' ..
2_1
z
cr
f " P
9
' :. ram, s
10
:s'1 dr �'.AI V�d`)�{ .: �d'"'""/jJ,;t�['P , Web'.��,� Q+'C,r° °.-, � 1.:'� ��., 9 ^" Y:JG:.G"? �•
12
Y2 +�,�• . �
1,36 � 1 �...._.-Alm✓t �� -%��',9�_� �....,
44
✓
1 �F " •may,..,. '1 QY+. s"7 ti,?4/ �/� lr)A'�,y.��/ ✓�-��-Y. �� 7/t J 4,+ '?2; t6
r'
"d
17 "� f E
w. 207
c �1w
19 .• -
20
3 v � a
__... _..
The Center for Spiritual Livi , Palm Springs
T-Mobile West Corp ration
We, the undersigned, request that the City of PaIrn Springs review and approve the
installation of a new T-Mobile wireless facility at the Center ter for Spiritual Living, Palm Springs,
located at 21oo E. Racquet Club Road. We support the proposed T-Mobile project as it is
currently designed and sited.We further believe that the proposed T-Mobile wireless facility.
will provide needed voice and data services, including nhanced 3G, internet and high-speed
data, and enhanced 911 services,to the surrounding cc mmunity and Palm Springs residents.
As residents of the City of Palm Springs, we, the unde signed, support T-Mobile's efforts to
design and construct a City-wide wireless network whi(h will service and benefit all.re�idet�
of the City of Palm Springs.
Nome Oz. M Address
x ?c
_
� LCAI /'FLA) 11
3
9'. z2
10 r
12
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
.................................................... ....................... __ . .......
The Center for Spiritual Livin , Palm Springs
T-Mobile West Corp ration
We, the undersigned, request that the City of Palm Springs review and approve the
installation of a new T-Mobile wireless facility at the Ce ter for Spiritual riving, Palm Springs,
located at 21oo E. Racquet Club Road. We support the proposed T-Mobile project as it is
currently designed and sited.We further believe that the proposed T-Mobile wireless facility
will provide needed voice and data services, including enhanced 3G, internet and high-speed
data, and enhanced 911 services, to the surrounding community and Palm Springs residents.
As residents of the City of Palm Springs, we, the undersigned, support T-Mobile's efforts to
design and construct a city-wide wireless network which will service and benefit.Wt eSL
of the City of Palen Springs;
Name Address
5 2 4, q
4
JA17 Alzv X, 14-7,14wf-k- Z'md �'!gx &AWS �2
1t � 4 _.
9
10
11
12 I
13
14
16
17
1�
19
20
December 1, 2010
James Thompson, City Clerk
On behalf of Palm Springs City Council
3200 E. Tahquitz Canyon Way
Palm Springs, CA 92262
Re: Appeal of case No. 5-1246 Conditional Use Permit
& 6.523 Variance
Dear Mr. Thompson:
I live across the street from the church requesting to build a cell phone tower in its
parking lot. My address is 2245 E Racquet Club. I want to express my opposition to this
request. This is first and foremost a residential neighborhood. This church had to apply
for a zone variance in order to even build here. It is not an appropriate place for the
intrusion of a cell phone tower.
When a homeowner buys a house, the zoning in effect is the city's guarantee that their
investment in the neighborhood is protected. An unsightly cell tower would significantly
degrade the area's property values. If the members of this congregation feel that a
residential neighborhood is an appropriate location, they might like to volunteer to have
the tower in their residential neighborhood.
I strongly urge the City Council to affirm the Planning Commission's denial of this
conditional use permit and variance and preserve our neighborhood.
Very truly yours,
Jackie Morgan
jmorgan@dc.rr.com
Kathie Hart
From: David Newell
Sent: November 29, 2010 12:55 PM
To: Kathie Hart
Cc: Jay Thompson; Craig Ewing
Subject: FW: IE24205E Center of Spiritual Living (Case#5.1246CUP &6,523 VAR) - FAA
Determination
Attachments: IE24205E CSL- FAA Determination of No Hazard 11.16.10.pdf
Kathie,
City Council 12/1, Item 1.A--Additional information is provided by the applicant below and in the attachment.
David A. Newell
Associate 131atataer
City- of 11"Arn Springs
:3200 E.'l aliquit:z Canyor,W11tY
P.0..I3OX 27"43
Pala) Springs,C.A 92263...27,43
Officc: 1,760.1 .323...8243 (r()(.}) _3:22...8360
From: Jim Rogers [mailto:jim.rogers@jamesrogersconsulting.com]
Sent: Monday, November 29, 2010 12:16 PM
To: David Newell
Cc: Paul, Linda (Ontario CA); George Cardenas; Richard Laird
Subject: IE24205E Center of Spiritual Living (Case # 5.1246CUP &6.523 VAR) - FAA Determination
Hi David,
I just received the attached FAA Determination of No Hazard for the proposed T-Mobile facility at 2100 E. Racquet
Club Road, the Center for Spiritual Living. As stated in the determination, the proposed facility will not pose a
hazard to aviation safety, and therefore, lighting is not required.
Since aviation safety& lighting are a stated concern to the neighbors, could you see that this information is added
to the staff report to the City Council prior to the hearing on Wednesday.
Thank you.
Jim Rogers
JAMES ROGERS CONSULTING
31097 Via Sonora
San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675
Office : 949,388.3973
Mobile : 949.295.9031
Fax : 949.388.3973
E-mail : Jim_._Rogers@jamesro9ersgonsuIting corn
www.jamesrogerscansulting.com
Federal Aviation Administration Aeronautical Study No.
Air Traffic Airspace Branch, ASW-520 2010-AWP-6951-OE
2601 Meacham Blvd.
Fort Worth, TX 76137-0520
Issued Date: 11/16/2010
Valerie Poole
T-Mobile
3257 E. Guasti Road Ste. 200
Ontario, CA 91761
** DETERMINATION OF NO HAZARD TO AIR NAVIGATION **
The Federal Aviation Administration has conducted an aeronautical study under the provisions of 49 U.S.C.,
Section 44718 and if applicable Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations, part 77, concerning:
Structure: Antenna Tower IE24205E SPIRITURAL LIVING
Location: Palm Springs, CA
Latitude: 33-51-09.02N NAD 83
Longitude: 116-31-22.96W
Heights: 48 feet above ground level(AGL)
565 feet above mean sea level(AMSL)
This aeronautical study revealed that the structure does not exceed obstruction standards and would not be a
hazard to air navigation provided the following condition(s), if any, is(are) met:
It is required that FAA Form 7460-2, Notice of Actual Construction or Alteration, be completed and returned to
this office any time the project is abandoned or:
At least 10 days prior to start of construction(7460-2, Part I)
X Within 5 days after the construction reaches its greatest height(7460-2, Part II)
See attachment for additional condition(s) or information.
To coordinate frequency activation and verify that no interference is caused to FAA facilities, prior to beginning
any transmission from the site you must contact SEE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION PAGE.
Based on this evaluation, marking and lighting are not necessary for aviation safety. However, if marking
and/or lighting are accomplished on a voluntary basis, we recommend it be installed and maintained in
accordance with FAA Advisory circular 70/7460-1 K Change 2.
This determination expires on 05/16/201.2 unless:
(a) extended, revised or terminated by the issuing office.
(b) the construction is subject to the licensing authority of the Federal Communications Commission
(FCC) and an application for a construction permit has been filed, as required by the FCC, within
6 months of the date of this determination. In such case, the determination expires on the date
prescribed by the FCC for completion of construction, or the date the FCC denies the application.
Page I of 6
NOTE: REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF THE EFFECTIVE PERIOD OF THIS DETERMINATION MUST
BE E-FILED AT LEAST 15 DAYS PRIOR TO THE EXPIRATION DATE. AFTER RE-EVALUATION
OF CURRENT OPERATIONS IN THE AREA OF THE STRUCTURE TO DETERMINE THAT NO
SIGNIFICANT AERONAUTICAL CHANGES HAVE OCCURRED, YOUR DETERMINATION MAY BE
ELIGIBLE FOR ONE. EXTENSION OF THE EFFECTIVE PERIOD.
This determination is based, in part, on the foregoing description which includes specific coordinates , heights,
frequency(ies) and power. Any changes in coordinates , heights, and frequencies or use of greater power will
void this determination. Any future construction or alteration, including increase to heights, power, or the
addition of other transmitters, requires separate notice to the FAA.
This determination does include temporary construction equipment such as cranes, derricks, etc., which may be
used during actual construction of the structure. However, this equipment shall not exceed the overall heights as
indicated above. Equipment which has a height greater than the studied structure requires separate notice to the
FAA.
This determination concerns the effect of this structure on the safe and efficient use of navigable airspace
by aircraft and does not relieve the sponsor of compliance responsibilities relating to any law, ordinance, or
regulation of any Federal, State, or local government body.
A copy of this detennination will be forwarded to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) because the
structure is subject to their licensing authority.
If we can be of further assistance, please contact our office at(310) 725-6557. On any future correspondence
concerning this matter, please refer to Aeronautical Study Number 2010-AWP-6951-OE.
Signature Control No: 132600187-133219355 ( DNE )
Karen McDonald
Specialist
Attachment(s)
Additional Information
Case Description
Frequency Data
Map(s)
cc: FCC
Page 2 of 6
Additional information for ASN 2010-AWP-6951-OE
The proposed transmitter must provide at least 89 dB of spurious emissions attenuation (9 dB greater than the
FCC required 80 dB) in the 108-137, 225-400 MHz frequency bands.
Page 3 of 6
Case Description for ASN 2010-AWP-6951-OE
T-Mobile to construct antenna tower unipole/micropole
Page 4 of 6
Frequency Data for ASN 2010-AWP-6951-OE
LOW HIGH FREQUENCY ERP
FREQUENCY FREQUENCY UNIT ERP UNIT
698 806 MHz 1000 W
806 824 MHz 500 W
824 849 MHz 500 W
851 866 MHz 500 W
969 894 MHz 500 W
896 901 MHz 500 W
901 902 MHz 7 W
930 931 MHz 3500 W
931 932 MHz 3500 W
932 932.5 MHz 17 dBW
935 940 MHz 1000 W
940 941 MHz 3500 W
1850 1910 MHz 1640 W
1930 1990 MHz 1640 W
2305 2310 MHz 2000 W
2345 2360 MHz 2000 W
Page 5 of 6
x�
§ i
i • >♦
•
fit
AN
80
w
- # ♦ ! -- £_
3 y
or•
O -
rn `-
w
o.
IF
cu
• t IF
LA
K-
9y„
DATE: November 23, 2010
TO: Members of the Palm Springs City Council
Palm Springs City Hall
3200 E Tahquitz Canyon Way Palm Springs, CA 92264
cit clerk alms rin s-ca. ov
Fax (760) 323-8207
FROM: Kelly Laurich
PO Box 1172
Palm Springs, CA 92263-1172
SUBJECT: T-MOBILE INSTALLATION AT CENTER FOR SPIRIUTAL LIVING PALM SPRINGS
1 would like to voice m su ort for the T-Mobile cell tower Variance to be installed on the
roe Center for S iritual Living Palm Springs at 2100 E. Racquet Club Ro2�d, Palm
Springs, CA for the following reasons:
Project Description:
T-Mobile requests a Conditional Use Permit(CUP)and Variance to install a 471/2 foot wireless facility inside a
sculptural monopole on the property located at 2100 East Racquet Club Road.The Zoning Code allows a
thirty-nine(39')foot antenna structure on the Center for Spiritual Living property without a height
Variance. Thus the height variance to 47112 feet is necessary to provide adequate wireless coverage to the
Palm Springs residential neighborhoods.
The revenue generated from the rental of the area on the property to T- Mobil will
allow the Center to do needed repair and maintenance on the property.
1. Property maintenance and upgrade leads to the increase value of the
property and the property of the surrounding community/residences.
2. The tower will provide for additional access for the surrounding
community to technological communications that currently exist and future
communication devices enhancing service to individual residents of the
community.
3. Better telecommunication services provide community residents
with quicker access to emergency services.
4. The unobtrusive architectural design of the tower will provide an
additional interesting design element to the community.
S. The Center, in cooperation with T-Mobile has followed within the laws of
the City Ordinances, respective commissions and has made available pertinent
information to those in the community who desired to learn about the
structure.
Cindy Berardi
From: Doctor Tigger[revtigger@centerforspirituallivingpalmsprings.org]
Sent: Saturday, November 27, 2010 4:37 PM
To: CityClerk
Subject: T-Mobile Installation
]ATE: November 27, 2010
r0: Members of the Palm Springs City Council
Palm Springs City Hall
3200 E Tahquitz Canyon Way Palm Springs, CA 92264
cityclerk(.palmsprings-ca.gov
Fax (760) 323-8207
=ROM: Rev., Dr. Michael J. Kearney
SUBJECT: T-MOBILE INSTALLATION AT CENTER FOR SPIRIUTAL LIVING PALM SPRINGS
would like to voice my support for the T-Mobile cell tower Variance to be installed on the property of the
enter for Spiritual Living Palm Springs at 2100 E. Racquet Club Road, Palm Springs, CA for the following
'easons:
)roject Description:
--Mobile requests a Conditional Use Permit(CUP) and Variance to install a 47 1/2 foot wireless facility inside a sculptural
nonopole on the property located at 2100 East Racquet Club Road.The Zoning Code allows a thirty-nine(399 foot antenna
structure on the Center for Spiritual Living property without a height Variance. Thus the height variance to 471/2 feet is
iecessary to provide adequate wireless coverage to the Palm Springs residential neighborhoods.
understand that T-Mobile and the Center have meet all the City Ordinances and regulations. I understand the denial
it the Planning Commission was based on neighbors concerns, not any legal issues. In fact several members of the
:ommission noted their approval of the design. I understand that several neighbors have been forced to move or
lave lost their home due to economic conditions. The Center is also feeling the economic pressure and is seeking to
'ind resources to sustain our programs.
believe we are an asset to the community and have been for over 55 years, with 25 years in this location. We offer
)ur space for the County of Riverside Polling for at least two districts. We donate to other social services in the
:oachella Valley, as a tithing community. Our spiritual home provides a welcoming and healing service to all who
inter our sanctuary, without judgment. We have provided outreach services, spiritual counseling and educational
activities for all ages to hundreds of individuals. With the additional resources provided by this lease agreement with
--Mobile we will be better able to continue these services and offer additional programs. In addition we will be better
able to maintain our property and the aesthetics of the neighborhood.
--Mobile has addressed all of the concerns brought forth by the neighbors, not all are in opposition. We have
)rovided two opportunities for dialogue with the neighbors. We are now left with a simple difference of opinion. I
rust the City Council will consider ordinances established, the laws which regulate property rights and determine that
hese have been adequately meet by T-Mobile in their request for approval of the requested variance.
sincerely,
)r. Michael J Kearney
AL
Dr Michael Kearney
Dr. Michael Kearney
C:ormrnunity Spiritual Leader err
21_00_E_._R,acq uet_CIu_b_Rgad
Palm 5L>_ring1 CA 92262-
2625
tel: (760) 323-5447
fax: (760) 323-3363
revtlggeri centerforsr.)iritCialliuingr)alrristarinus.card mobile: 7( 6i0) 285=528,1
Please consider the environment before you print this email.
Cindy Berardi
From: Kelley Hazen [kelhazen@live.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 25, 2010 11:15 AM
To: CityClerk
Subject: T-Mobile Installation at Center for Spiritual Lving Palm Springs
DATE: November 23, 2010
TO: Members of the Palm Springs City Council
Palm Springs City Hall
3200 E Tahquitz Canyon Way Palm Springs, CA 92264
city_cl_erk@palmsprings-ca.Rov -
Fax(760) 323-8207
FROM: Kelley and Charles Hazen (kelhazen@dc.rr.com)
SUBJECT: T-MOBILE INSTALLATION AT CENTER FOR SPIRITUAL LIVING PALM SPRINGS
I would like to voice my support for the T-Mobile cell tower Variance to be installed on the property of the Center
for Spiritual Living Palm Springs at 2100 E. Racquet Club Road, Palm Springs, CA for the following reasons:
Project Description:
T-Mobile requests a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) and Variance to install a 47 1/2 foot wireless facility inside a
sculptural monopole on the property located at 2100 East Racquet Club Road. The Zoning Code allows a thirty-
nine (399 foot antenna structure on the Center for Spiritual Living property without a height Variance.Thus
the height variance to 471/2 feet is necessary to provide adequate wireless coverage to the Palm Springs
residential neighborhoods.
The revenue generated from the rental of the area on the property to T- Mobil will allow the Center to do
needed repair and maintenance on the property.
Property maintenance and upgrade leads to the increase value of the
property and the property of the surrounding community/residences.
The tower will provide for additional access for the surrounding
community to technological communications that currently exist and future communication devices
enhancing service to individual residents of the community.
u
Better telecommunication services provide community residents
with quicker access to emergency services.
The unobtrusive architectural design of the tower will provide an
additional interesting design element to the community.
The Center, in cooperation with T-Mobile has followed within the laws of
the City Ordinances, respective commissions and has made available pertinent information to those
in the community who desired to learn about the structure.
ii omin
Cindy Berardi
From: Steffani Smith [whisperingpines.design@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 25, 2010 11:12 AM
To: CityClerk
Subject: T-Mobile Installation at Center for Spiritual Living Palm Springs
DATE: November 23, 2010
TO: Members of the Palm Springs City Council
Palm Springs City Hall
3200 E Tahquitz Canyon Way Palm Springs, CA 92264
dty_clerkftalmsprings-ca.eov Fax (760) 323-8207
FROM: Steffan Anderson- Smith(whispel7ngpiies. esign.�u).gmail.com)
SUBJECT: T-MOBILE INSTALLATION AT CENTER, FOR SPIR.I.UTA.I.,.LINING PALM SPRINGS
[would like to voice my support for the T-Mobile cell tower Variance to be installed on the property of the Center for
Spiritual Living Palm Springs at 2100 E. Racquet Club Road, Palm Springs, CA for the following reasons:
7roject Description:
T-Mobile requests a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) and Variance to install a 47 1/2 foot wireless facility inside a
sculptural monopole on the property located at 2100 .East Racquet Club Road.
fhe Zoning Code allows a thirty-nine (399 foot antenna structure on the Center for Spiritual Living property
Nithout a height Variance. Thus the height variance to 471/2 feet is necessary to provide adequate wireless
:overage to the Palm Springs residential neighborhoods.
the revenue generated from the rental of the area on the property to T- Mobil will allow the Center to do
ieeded repair and maintenance on the property.
Property maintenance and upgrade leads to the increase value of the
property and the property of the surrounding community/residences.
The tower will provide for additional access for the surrounding
community to technological communications that currently exist and future communication devices
enhancing service to individual residents of the community.
Better telecommunication services provide community residents
with quicker access to emergency services.
The unobtrusive architectural design of the tower will provide an
additional interesting design element to the community.
The Center, in cooperation with T-Mobile has followed within the laws of
the City Ordinances, respective commissions and has made available pertinent information to those
in the community who desired to learn about the structure.
hank you,
sincerely,
;teffam Anderson-Smith
✓lember
.enter for Spiritual Living Palm Springs
vhisperingpines.design@gmail.com
Ali You Need is Love
UI You Need is Lave
klI You Need is Love
.,ove is All You Need
Cindy Berardi
From: rickynoll@roadrunner.com
Sent: Thursday, November 25, 2010 9:42 AM
To: CityClerk
Subject: T-MOBILE INSTALLATION AT CENTER FOR SPIRIUTAL LIVING PALM SPRINGS
DATE: November 23, 2010
TO: Members of the Palm Springs City Council
Palm Springs City Hall
3200 E Tahquitz Canyon Way Palm Springs, CA 92264
cityclerk@palmsprings-ca.gov "
FROM: Richard H. Noll
rickynoll@roadrunner.com
SUBJECT: T-MOBILE INSTALLATION AT CENTER FOR SPIRIUTAL LIVING PALM SPRINGS
would like to voice my support for the T-Mobile cell tower Variance to be installed on the property of the Center for
Spiritual Living Palm Springs at 2100 E. Racquet Club Road, Palm Springs, CA for the following reasons:
Project Description:
T-Mobile requests a Conditional Use Permit (CUP)and Variance to install a 47 1/2 foot wireless facility inside a sculptural
monopole on the property located at 2100 East Racquet Club Road. The Zoning Code allows a thirty - nine (39')foot
antenna structure on the Center for Spiritual Living property without a height Variance. Thus the height variance to 471/2
feet is necessary to provide adequate wireless coverage to the Palm Springs residential neighborhoods.
The revenue generated from the rental of the area on the property to T- Mobile will allow the Center to do needed repair
and maintenance on the property.
1. Property maintenance and upgrade leads to the increase value of the
property and the property of the surrounding community/residences.
2. The tower will provide for additional access for the surrounding
community to technological communications that currently exist and future communication devices enhancing service to
individual residents of the community.
3. Better telecommunication services provide community residents
with quicker access to emergency services.
4. The unobtrusive architectural design of the tower will provide an
additional interesting design element to the community.
5. The Center, in cooperation with T-Mobile has followed within the laws of
the City Ordinances, respective commissions and has made available pertinent information to those in the community who
desired to learn about the structure.
i
Cindy Berardi
From: Paul Hietter [paul@loveatfirstbite.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 25, 2010 6:54 AM
To: CityClerk
Cc: Deen Warren; Doctor Tigger; George Melton; Kelly Laurich; Paul Hietter; Robert Wilson
Subject: T-Mobile Variance Support for Center for Spiritual Living Palm Springs Site
Attachments: letter T Mobile Paul Hietter Support.docx
)ATE: November 23, 2010
FO: Members of the Palm Springs City Council
Palm Springs City Hall '
3200 E Tahquitz Canyon Way Palm Springs, CA 92264
citycle_rk.at7 pa l msp r..n.gs-ca.gov
Fax (760) 323-8207
-ROM: Paul Hietter, 498 Paseo Soleado, Palm Springs, CA 92264
SUBJECT: T-MOBILE INSTALLATION AT CENTER FOR SPIRITUAL LIVING PALM SPRINGS
would like to voice my support for the T-Mobile cell tower Variance to be installed on the property of the
enter for Spiritual Living Palm Springs at 2100 E. Racquet Club Road, Palm Springs, CA for the following
•easons:
)roject Description:
"-Mobile requests a Conditional Use Permit(CUP) and Variance to install a 47 112 foot wireless facility inside a sculptural
nonopole on the property located at 2100 East Racquet Club Road.The Zoning Code allows a thirty-nine (39')foot antenna
structure on the Center for Spiritual Living property without a height Variance. Thus the height variance to 47112 feet is
iecessary to provide adequate wireless coverage to the Palm Springs residential neighborhoods.
the revenue generated from the rental of the area on the property to T- Mobil will allow the Center to
Jo needed repair and maintenance on the property.
1. Property maintenance and upgrade leads to the increase value of the
property and the property of the surrounding community/residences.
2. The tower will provide for additional access for the surrounding
community to technological communications that currently exist and future communication
devices enhancing service to individual residents of the community.
3. Better telecommunication services provide community residents
with quicker access to emergency services.
4. The unobtrusive architectural design of the tower will provide an
additional interesting design element to the community.
5. The Center, in cooperation with T-Mobile has followed within the laws of
the City Ordinances, respective commissions and has made available pertinent information
to those in the community who desired to learn about the structure.
sincerely,
>aul Hietter
760)406-5655 Fax
760) 567-5820 Cell
APlease consider the environment before you print this email.
Cindy Berardi
From: roblwilson@aol.com
Sent: Wednesday, November 24, 2010 7:35 PM
To: CityClerk
Subject: T-Mobil proposal Dec 1 city council meeting
)ATE: November 23, 2010
"O: Members of the Palm Springs City Council
Palm Springs City Hall
3200 E Tahquitz Canyon Way Palm Springs, CA 92264
'ROM: Robert Wilson
216 Stone Terrace
Palm Springs, CS 92264
>UBJECT: T-MOBILE INSTALLATION AT CENTER FOR SPIRITUAL LIVING PALM SPRINGS
would like to voice my support for the T-Mobile cell tower Variance to be installed on the property of the
;enter for Spiritual Living Palm Springs at 2100 E. Racquet Club Road, Palm Springs, CA for the following
easons:
'roject Description:
Mobile requests a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) and Variance to install a 47 1/2 foot wireless facility inside a
culptural monopole on the property located at 2100 East Racquet Club Road. The Zoning Code allows a thirty-nine
391 foot antenna structure on the Center for Spiritual Living property without a height Variance. Thus the height
ariance to 471/2 feet is necessary to provide adequate wireless coverage to the Palm Springs residential
ieighborhoods.
'he revenue generated from the rental of the area on the property to T- Mobil will allow the Center to
to needed repair and maintenance on the property.
1. Property maintenance and upgrade leads to the increase value of the property and the
property of the surrounding community/residences.
2. The tower will provide for additional access for the surrounding
community to technological communications that currently exist and future communication
devices enhancing service to individual residents of the community.
3. Better telecommunication services provide community residents
with quicker access to emergency services.
4. The unobtrusive architectural design of the tower will provide an
additional interesting design element to the community.
5. The Center, in cooperation with T-Mobile has followed within the laws of the City Ordinances,
respective commissions and has made available pertinent information to those in the
community who desired to learn about the structure.
i i�oi�n7 n
NA.NCY CAW
27700 i andaLl Blvd, 4197 .'
Cafliesdral City,Ca 92234 .
I'hone(760)327-1329
neaswn(rr)cle,rr.coln
Novelnbor 27,7010
Palm Springs City Council
Palm Springs City Hall
3200 E Tahquitz Carryon Way Palm Springs, CA 92264
SUBJECT 'l'-MOBILE iNS•1'ALLATION AT CENTER ER I OR SPIRIU'['AI_, LIVING PALM
SPRINC;S
i would like to voice lily support for the T-Mobile cell tower Variance:to be installed.oil
the property oi'the Center for Spiritual Living Pa11.n Springs at.2100 E. Racquet Club
Road, Palen Springs, CA for the foltowing reasons:
Protect.Description:
T-Mobile requests a. Conditional Use Permit (CUP) and Variance to install a 47 1/2 f of
wireless facility inside a sculptural monopole on the property located at 2100 Fast
Racquet Club .12.omi. The Zoning Code allows a.thirly'1 Inine. (39 ) lbol ail tell nza structure:
can the Center :for Spiritual Living property without a height Variance. Thus the height
variance to 471/2 feet is necessary to provide: adequate wireless coverage to time Palm
Springs residential neighbothoods.
The revenue generated from the rental of the area,on the property to T•- Mobil will
allow the Center to do needed repair and maintenance on the property.
1. Property maintenance and upgrade leads to the.. increase valve of the
property amid the property of the surrounding community/residences.
2. The tower will provide for additional access for the surrounding
community to technological cdnimnunications that currently exist and future
communication devices enhancing service to individual residents of the community.
3. Better telecommunication services provide commamrnunity residents
with quicker access to emergency services.
4. The unobtrusive architectural design of the tower will provide an
additional interesting design element to the community.
5.The Center, in cooperation with T-Mobile has followed within the laws Of
the City Ordinances, respective commissions and has made available pertinent
information to those in time community who desired to learn about the structure.
Sincerely,
0 . P= F F November 18,2010
■■w ow wr ■ r
Honorable Mayor Steve Pougnet
City Council Members
City of Palm Springs
32oo E.Tahquitz Canyon Way
IPalm Springs,CA 92262
RE: Proposed T-Mobile Commercial Communication Antenna
�C Structure,21oo E.Racquet Club Road,
Center for Spiritual Living
ARCHI'1'EMENG0111111M P.C. (Case No.5.1246 CUP and 6.523 VAR)
Seattle Office Dear Mr.Mayor and Members of the City Council:
4720 200 St.SW,
Suite 200 bil M Toration C W bil M T- oe West or oe as requested the City
Lynnwood,WA p ( - )h q y
98036 Council of the City of Palm Springs to review and reverse the
425-670-8651 Planning Commission denial of Case No. 5.1246 CUP and 6.523 VAR
Fax 425-712-0846 on September 8,2010.
Denver At the public hearing several Planning Commission members
Corporate/Main commented positively on the design of the proposed antenna
Office structure,but raised questions regarding its location within a
7442 S.Tucson Way, primarily residential area.Additionally,there seemed to be some
Suite 180,
Englewood,Colorado concern about the height of the proposed wireless structure.
80112
303-750-6999 In response to these two issues,T-Mobile would like to clarify the
Fax 303-750-0236 process utilized in selecting the location for the proposed wireless
Corona Officefacility and determining the appropriate structure height.
411 Jenks Circle
Suite 101 Proposed-Location
Corona,CA 92880
951-273-9237 The development of T-Mobile's wireless network is driven by
Fax 951-273-1816 customer demands for more and better services,including the use
Santa Rosa Office of their cell phones for voice,texting,video,internet and more.This
1220 N Dutton Ave customer demand creates the need for increased coverage..and
Suite 107 capacity.To address this demand,radio engineers analyze the
Santa Rosa,CA 95401 existing network and individual cell sites for wireless traffic,
707-541-2344 dropped and blocked calls,and customer feedback,and forecast
Fax 707-541-2301 areas of future need.As customers increasingly use their wireless
phones at home,often in place of their old landline phones,it
KDC Asia Ltd becomes necessary to locate wireless facilities near or in residential
472 Expand Building Level 5 neighborhoods.
Rajohadapisek Road,Samsen
Noak,
Huaykwang, As shown on the attached Exhibit A—Predicto,Cpverage without
Bangkok 10320 the Proposed.Site..(IE24z—o5Q,a large portion of the northern
+66(0)2938 9083 residential neighborhoods of Palm Springs currently have only
Fax+66(0)20190ST
1�
Page 1 of 3
Letter to Palm Springs City Council
5.1246 CUP and 6.523 VAR
Page z of 3
outdoor or in-vehicle cell phone coverage(yellow)but not indoor(green)services.Having indoor
services is becoming increasingly important as more and more people rely on their wireless phone
for voice,data,internet and video services,particularly in home-based businesses.Additionally,
always being able to contact all family members,including teen and pre-teen members,is becoming
increasingly a necessity to customers.
Once the Palm Springs area in need of improved T-Mobile services and requiring a new wireless
facility was determined,potential sites were identified and evaluated for feasibility.As described in
the previously submitted Project Information and Justification(part of the CUP and Variance
application),alternate Commercial and Professional zoned properties were examined. These
alternate locations would require antenna structures considerably higher than the proposed site in
order to broadcast the radio signal from outside to inside the customer neighborhoods.The property
owner(County of Riverside)of one alternate site was not interested in leasing ground space for an
antenna structure.The other potential sites could not provide adequate coverage of the needed
neighborhood,even with the taller antenna structures,and were not selected.
In driving the residential areas most in need of improved coverage,three(3)non-residential
IL en rties were identified near the desired location for a future T-Mobile cell site. The largest and
most appropriate of these non-residential properties is the Center for Spiritual Living,a church
property located on a major thoroughfare(Racquet Club Road). In further review of the Palm
Springs Zoning Code,it was noted that the Zoning Code allows
Residential Zones,pursuant to Section 93.08.03.A(B).2.c(Height and Placement Limitations),if the
antennas are screened from view.Thus,it was determined that a fully camouflaged structure,such
as the proposed Ericsson Capsule/Sculpture would be appropriate to the site location.
Exhibit B-Predicted h the Proposed Site OE24205g)demonstrates how T-Mobile wireless
services will be improved to indoor(green)levels in the surrounding neighborhoods with the
proposed Center for Spiritual Living location. No other alternative location identified to-date is
predicted to cover the surrounding neighborhoods as well as the proposed location.
Structure Heigh
The proposed T-Mobile antenna structure(Ericsson Capsule and sculpture)is at the lowest height
which is technically necessary to cover most of the radio service gap identified by T-Mobile's radio
engineers.The Zoning Code allows a thirty-nine(390 foot antenna structure on the Center for
Spiritual Living property without a height Variance. Exhibit C-Predicted Coverage with the Proposed
Site Q 39 feet Height indicates the indoor service area(green)covered by an allowed 39 feet antenna
structure height at the proposed Center for Spiritual Living location.The"hatched"area shows how
much of the desired coverage area is left uncovered/unserviced.The proposed antenna structure at
39 feet covers 67 percent of the targeted coverage area. The coverage provided by the proposed
antenna structure at 471/2 feet is shown by Exhibit D-Predicted Coverage with the Proposed Site
47 feet_11eig6t.At the requested height,the proposed antenna structure covers approximately 87
percent of the targeted coverage area.As shown on Table i,Coverage Improvement Comparison,
the reduction in height by eight(8)feet reduces the coverage by over twenty(20%)percent.
Page 2 of 3
Letter to Palm Springs City Council
5.1246 CUP and 6.523 VAR
Page 3 of 3
Thus,the height variance to 4734 feet is necessary to provide adequate wireless coverage to the
northern Palm Springs residential neighborhoods.
Mr.Mayor and Members of the City Council,we strongly believe that the proposed antenna
structure location at the Center for Spiritual Living and the proposed structure height are necessary
to provide the best modem wireless services to T Mobile's Palm Springs customers,and it is in the
best interest of the City of Palm Springs to approve this project
Respectfully,
VW
n behalf of KDC Archite ngineers,PC
Authorized Agent for T Mobile
Pate 3 of 3
b
� i � . .fit 5�.,•,�.
` gggJ
Ago
Ar
;- �...:-fir: r==��l� =t
��r�;r MANIA ,�.
OFF
mAn
I
( -_h
_ E
]� Film
l` rim r J "_ `] `
SIIlr 1 r.r � � 4%11 l
. � k _
J
Pull
In vehicle(-84 dBm)
r
■
Outdoors
i s ■Q �Fj '
Existing Site
Proposed Site
.r
-a��
• - -
M . F T■
o �
c .
• � � rp
Mi
may" ..Romw
LEW
La ►-
_ - I k
. s �s ;%�
7
: ` Ai
AN jimanww-
ii. Legend
Jill
�r
,.
favim W11
In vehicle(-84 dBm)
_
!`
19 o�
Existing Site
� � -i
�
-h
ll
. ,-• + Via°
= —
Predicted Coverage with the Proposed Site @ 39' Top of
Capsule T-Mobile Site IE24205E
f ref rhos�6 '` a
ve
� a
a
• CYO Aha€, � - . 7 �,' •� r 1 •ti•'V1
n ZR�
6
•zti• _- r �io Rosa "
f is.
_y• - _ r
�.. •tip
'e f
•} L
Z y
oYc�R O 5 y Y �
IaCn 'i 1
z011 i►634'
' I F Legend
cF ,e t « F t Indoors(-76 dBm)
e o k In vehicle(-84 dBm)
� San ate
JO F P���$
6
Aven�';.iy hern6tond s n Outdoors(.91dBm)
Existing Site
E ahqk t yor Way -
L v
c `� rs , • Proposed Site
s
Coverage Gap
4 � c
T M -Mobile stick together Confidential and Proprietary Information of T-Mobile USA 4
Predicted Coverage with the Proposed Site @ 47' Top of
Capsule T-Mobile Site IE24205E
nfe�
I � r
1 <
� �Ogiy
_ a n ~=
�1 Ar '
r :'1 e
,z4. Slo Rasa
1
rarl i
R
C
z 1• i
1
urn i
Legend
L A ,�• -im.
— � i �d•Rd
Cr , t t s°"` Indoors(-76 dBm)
� e
f L U H _ n In vehicle(-84 dBm)
Sir, iC
-j r palm ® Outdoors(-91 dBm)
a 1� eL fi�iatrtn '•R ►tGnld�Ofld -is c-
■1 cis ei
. Existing Site
E ah i qor Way
L - a I r • Proposed Site
cn R
c
Coverage Gap
'°ob1 i
ile stick together Confidential and Proprietary Information of T-Mobile USA 3
Coverage Improvement Comparison Table
Overall Coverage Improvement comparison
Coverage Gap F 1.35 Tsq miles
% improvement on
Coverage Gap Improvement from Area (sq miles) the Coverage Gap
(Overall)
Primary Site @ 47' 1.18 87'%
PriA& 0.91 6
*Losing approxirnately 20%of coverage improverent if the'height
is reduced by V
T - -Mobile• stick togeilher Confidential and Proprietary Information of T-Mobile USA 6
M.,
p7 J °�` rf u
a 4 &:'fin `,J N,
rsr t 1aa F4 Y; r '�4 KN+h �"r°k�} ""F i Jh 1 I{�i �t t v 3b;"k'4�1o°b )'`'"��i1k" �p 'f Ftk �c�i# ?•IL d���,��/1 r �J, 4�.r'
East View from Cerritos Road
E911 Calls
From the
T-Mobile Network
3 0 days
City of Palm Springs
Eight Sites — 341
ZIP Code of 92262
Five Sites - 244
0 mMoblle°m
� d
T s -Mobile• stick togethee E911 Web Report-
User Guide Suggestions Logout
Legend Print9�
t I Select Le e
Maps Reports Graphs � Se
! + _ y,c, - c, x Criteria
ISite .ANbe►
Days Ago: i 30
l ll' State: CA
PSAP: F +r,
3
County: Riverside
City: Palm Spring: v
County:
IIV Palm�Springs E
f International AirportSelection
[ 1 CA>Riverside>Palm Spring
339 }
Total Sites: 8
I— 1 Total Calls: 341
13
-qqSPPPI Clear Select I Apply
Petition summary and Case No. 5.1246 Conditional Use Permit/6.523 Variance T-Mobile West Corporation 2100 E. Racquet Club Rd. Conditional
background use permit to install a forty-seven and one-half tall commercial communication antenna within a sculptural monopole. Also
includes a variance application to exceed the maximum antenna height permitted from thirty-nine fee to forty-seven and
one-half feet at the aforementioned address.
Action petitioned for We, the undersigned, are concerned citizens who urge our leaders to act to deny the approval of any T-Mobfle antenna at
1 2100 E. Racquet Club Road.
Printed Name Signature Address Comment Date
'Ll '6 q1
F4, I
44i5b<VI-40 I/P Q
Ii 7, 1A
-
j
23�
4' Ca�JA, )2
4"1
rated Name Sig ature Address Comment Date
Laau ZX6
/ S
1pO ke(1-�0&-yZ4- �"�4E&AL q 3 5- fv, i el Ac wep
L+new 5-95- Few"k
tics { �S L G
V �
Lr,�
7Lt- F f �
Signature Printed Name Address Comment Date
t 3 E- L C 43 cx !j►t MJ, l f Vf 2��+��nl.A L Are = [6 o
�?�►sE ►� out , � AP5 C. i w�c�. Okckrf"Lf- Uft-33�
ck
w
A _
s G ! �� >] c G G f if
24.L 7 N c-C Y4, c`P IZ b N oTv ✓ C �Z 4,.
t"W
,� ! i
t ,
Printed Name SignagM Address Comment Date
4t et
4cqvir
-
Ll (quo
rbo�2 cl tj 0-
b�%ov
`� C -ri- 5 wf
OLV[5 Q/ le i`�' yyty aleG-�
f
�Ka Ivy
�� ,',' 7 /o
Printed Name Signature Address Comment Date
alb Z� "� �••-� I-�-lo
ss- �c� .•, d/ N ��r tTa s �CCi It 7 A
Ali I 00 � + C} r LI to
2%7 L-,, n +Qu Ct 7�zo
2 �7" ( I l T 1a
AV
VI
zo
eL v
;Ukc,l"
S A— c2 l I l is
Printed Name Signature Address fitment - Date
vj
lV - IQ
PelLiffion to (Action Petitioned Fc-�--I
Petition summary and Case o. 5.1246 Cord itionaI Use Permit,i 6.523 Variance T-€�1ol ile West Corporation 21�J0 , Racquet Crl,li) Rd. Conditional
background use permit to install a arty-seven and one-half tali cornmerrial communication antenna within a sculptural monopole. Also
includes a variance application to exceed the maximum antenna freight permitted from thirty-nine fee to forty-seven and
_ orie-half feet at the aforementioned address.
Actin petitioned for Tx We, the undersigned, are concerned citizens who urge GLIr leaders to act to deny the approval of any 1-Mobile antenna at
2100 E. Racquet Club Road.
Printed Name Signature --_- Address i Comment Date
CC� ----- -
1 0 2-+ C V t A (°U +�1 A
4{ ke o k'4N r i S C A g 2 24f Z"
-- - - — —�
u2� C>� q?_2A�,L
_ --
PALM SA
0 It
� c r
u n
RPORA7k
V, CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
DATE: December 1, 2010 PUBLIC HEARING
SUBJECT: T-MOBILE WEST CORPORATION — AN APPEAL OF THE DECISION BY
THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO DENY A TYPE II CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT AND VARIANCE APPLICATION FOR THE
CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A FORTY-SEVEN AND ONE-
HALF FOOT HIGH WIRELESS COMMUNICATION MONOPOLE
PROPOSED AT 2100 EAST RACQUET CLUB ROAD (APN 501-272-025,
ZONE PD-160).
FROM: David H. Ready, City Manager
BY: Department of Planning Services
SUMMARY
T-Mobile West Corporation is requesting that the City Council overturn the Planning
Commission's decision of September 9, 2010, to deny a Conditional Use Permit and
Variance application for the construction and operation of a forty-seven and one-half
foot tall sculptural monopole containing wireless antennas at 2100 East Racquet Club
Road. The application included a Variance to Section 93.08.03(A)(2)(c)(iii) of the
Zoning Code to vary the maximum antenna height permitted from thirty-nine feet to
forty-seven and one-half feet.
RECOMMENDATION:
1. Open the public hearing and receive public testimony.
2. Adopt Resolution No. "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, DENYING THE APPEAL BY T-
MOBILE WEST CORPORATION AND UPHOLDING THE DECISION OF
PLANNING COMMISSION TO DENY A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND
VARIANCE APPLICATION FOR THE CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF
A FORTY-SEVEN AND ONE-HALF FOOT HIGH WIRELESS
COMMUNICATION MONOPOLE LOCATED AT 2100 EAST RACQUET CLUB
ROAD, CASE NO. 5.1246 CUP & 6.523 VAR."
ITEM NO.
City Council Staff Report
December 1,2010--Page 2
5.1246 CUP&6.523 VAR—T-Mobile Appeal
PRIOR ACTIONS:
On July 26, 2010, the Architectural Advisory Committee (AAC) reviewed the proposed
project and by a vote of 4-3 (Sahlin absent) recommended approval with the following
revisions:
1. Relocate monopole structure on site as follows:
a. Preference 1: Expand the planter in the center of parking lot by removing
two adjacent nose-to-nose parking spaces, and install monopole structure
in middle of planter; or
b. Preference 2: Install monopole structure in planter area adjacent to the
existing building;
2. Monopole concrete should not be painted;
3. Structure should use natural concrete color, preferably white;
4. Match fiberglass element at top of structure to concrete color; and
5. Use low-level lighting to illuminate structure at night.
The applicant has revised the project to be consistent with the above revisions,
including preference 1.a.
On September 8, 2010, the Planning Commission reviewed the revised project and by a
vote of 6-0 denied the proposed monopole.
On September 30, 2010, the applicant filed an appeal of the Planning Commission's
decision. The appeal letter is attached to this staff report.
BACKGROUND AND SETTING:
The project site is approximately 59,241 square feet in size and located on the
northeast corner of East Racquet Club Road and Cerritos Road. In 1984, the City
Council approved a preliminary planned development (PD 160) to allow the construction
of a two-phase project which included a multi-purpose room, kitchen area and
administration offices in Phase I and a main sanctuary in Phase II. Phase I of the
project was constructed in 1987 and exists today on the northwesterly portion of the
property. Phase II has not been constructed.
The sculptural monopole is proposed at the center of the property in an expanded
planter adjacent to a drive aisle and the parking lot. The proposed monopole is
constructed of primarily concrete and has fiberglass at the top to contain the antenna
array. The antennas and associated equipment will be located entirely within the
monopole structure. Low-level up-lighting is proposed to be installed to illuminate the
monopole at night.
City Council Staff Report
December 1,2010--Page 3
5.1246 CUP&6.523 VAR--T-Mobile Appeal
Table 1: Adjacent General Plan Designations, Zones and Land Uses:
General Plan Zoning Existing Land Uses
North VLDRVer Low Density
Residential (Single Famill Residential Single Family Residential
South (Very Low Den DR sity Residential Sin le Family Residential) Single Family Residential
East (Very Low Density Residential (Single Family Residential) Single Family Residential
West Very Low Den DR Residential (Single Family Residential Single Family Residential
Proposed
Site Monopole
Location
yd !
a
k'.
ir.
su
STAFF ANALYSIS:
On September 8, 2010, the Planning Commission reviewed and denied the proposed
sculptural monopole at the church site located at 2100 East Racquet Club Road. Staff
has summarized some of the Commissioner's comments on the project below:
1. Commissioner Donenfeld expressed concern of a monopole being located in a
residential community.
City Council Staff Report
December 1,2010--Page 4
5.1246 CUP&6.523 VAR—T-Mobile Appeal
2. Chair Caffery was encouraged by the design but concluded that the structure
was too tall and should not be located in a residential neighborhood. He stated
that the buffer between the commercial and residential should be greater.
3. Vice Chair Scott concurred with Chair Caffery.
The applicant has submitted an appeal and requested that the City Council overturn the
Planning Commission's decision to deny the project (see attached letter). The appeal
letter provides a response to the concerns of the public, but there is no response to the
Commission's comments for denying the project.
Based on the above, staff is recommending that the City Council reject the appeal and
uphold the Planning Commission's decision to deny the Conditional Use Permit and
Variance application for a forty-seven and one-half foot high wireless communication
monopole at 2100 East Racquet Club Road.
FISCAL IMPACT:
No Fiscal Impact.
Ina, AI Thomas WKZn, Assistant City Manager
Direr or of Planni g ervices
David H. Ready, City g e r
Attachments:
1. Vicinity Map
2. Draft Resolution
3. Letter of Appeal
4. Planning Commission Minutes, September 8, 2010 (excerpt)
5. Planning Commission Staff Report (w/ exhibits), September 8, 2010
A
eF v��r spo
N
V N Department of Planning Services W E
Vicinity Map
S
E
POWELL RD
........ ... ..
w........
vLLI
WE fY ......... ......E I A
RQ
x
.................E ............. . ........ ......... ...�.... ..............
CAE LAGO R[
... ....µ
E
I ,
E ,
....
RACQUET CLUB RIB
......... ......... ..... ....
.y
r
� i f
1
... .......
fl
....... .........
r E ;
f� E
,
I
ROCHELLE RfJ
__. _ .
I
0
r
Legend .. ,
0
400ftBuffer Ix
Q ....
mi
site
Parcels d
j
CITY OF PALM SPRINGS
CASE: 5.1246 CUP & 6.523 VAR DESCRIPTION: To consider an appeal of the
Planning Commission's September S, 2010, denial of a
APPLICANT: T-Mobile West Corp. Conditional Use Permit and Variance application for
the construction and operation of a forty-seven and
one-half foot tall commercial communication antenna
contained within a sculptural monopole located at 2100
East Racquet Club Road, Zone PD 160, Section 1. -
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, DENYING THE APPEAL
BY T-MOBILE WEST CORPORATION AND UPHOLDING
THE DECISION OF PLANNING COMMISSION TO DENY A
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND VARIANCE
APPLICATION FOR THE CONSTRUCTION AND
OPERATION OF A FORTY-SEVEN AND ONE-HALF FOOT
HIGH WIRELESS COMMUNICATION MONOPOLE
LOCATED AT 2100 EAST RACQUET CLUB ROAD, CASE
NO. 5.1246 CUP & 6.523 VAR.
WHEREAS, the T-Mobile West Corporation ("Applicant") filed an application with
the City pursuant to Section 94.02.00 and 94.06.00 of the Zoning Code for a forty-
seven and one-half foot high wireless communication monopole for the property located
at 2100 East Racquet Club Road (APN: 501-272-025), Zone PD-160, Section 1; and
WHEREAS, on September 8, 2010, a noticed public hearing was conducted by
the Planning Commission in accordance with applicable law; and
WHEREAS at said public hearing, the Planning Commission carefully reviewed
and considered all the evidence presented in connection with the hearing on the
project, including but not limited to the staff report, all written and oral testimony
presented, and voted 6-0 to deny the subject project; and
WHEREAS, on September 30, 2010, T-Mobile West Corporation ("Appellant")
filed an appeal with the City Clerk, pursuant to Chapter 2.05 of the Municipal Code, of
the Planning Commission's decision to deny the proposed monopole at 2100 East
Racquet Club Road; and
WHEREAS, on December 1, 2010, a public hearing on the appeal was held by
the City Council in accordance with applicable law; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has carefully reviewed and considered all of the
evidence presented in connection with the appeal hearing on the project, including, but
not limited to the staff report and all written and oral testimony presented.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS DOES HEREBY
RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Pursuant to Sections 94,02.00 and 94.02.00 of the Palm Springs
Zoning Code, the Planning Commission is required to make certain findings when
approving a Conditional Use Permit and Variance application. The Planning
Commission was unable to make these findings for the following reasons:
City Council Resolution
Page 2
1. The commercial communication monopole is located on a parcel that is
entirely surrounded by residential, and the buffer between the monopole
and residential should be greater.
2. The height of the structure is too tall and does not fit within the
neighborhood and its surroundings.
SECTION 2. Pursuant to Municipal Code Section 2.05.030, the appellant
submitted a written notice of appeal but did not state any grounds for the appeal.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that, based upon the foregoing, the City
Council hereby denies the appeal and upholds the Planning Commission's decision to
deny a conditional use permit and variance application for a forty-seven and one-half
foot high wireless communication monopole located at 2100 East Racquet Club Road.
ADOPTED this 1 st day of December, 2010.
David H. Ready, City Manager
ATTEST:
James Thompson, City Clerk
City Council Resolution
Page 3
CERTIFICATION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss.
CITY OF PALM SPRINGS )
I, JAMES THOMPSON, City Clerk of the City of Palm Springs, hereby certify that
Resolution No. is a full, true and correct copy, and was duly adopted at a regular
meeting of the City Council of the City of Palm Springs on ,
by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
James Thompson, City Clerk
City of Palm Springs, California
4,
September 29, 2010
42 30
wpm N I I Mr.James Thompson
City Clerk
MIN City of Palm Springs
32oo E.Tahquitz Canyon Way
Palm Springs,CA 92262
WC RE: Request for Appeal of Planning Commission
ARCHffECTSINGINEEK P.C. Action(Case NO.5.1246 CUP and 6.523 VAR)-
Seattle Office Proposed T-Mobile Commercial Communication
4720 200"St.SW, Antenna Structure,21oo E.Racquet Club Road
Suite!Go
Lynnwood,WA Dear Mr.Thompson:
98036
425-670-9651
Fait 425-7U-0846 KDC Architects, Engineers, P.C.,on behalf of T-Mobile
W est Corporation,respectfully requests an appeal to the
Denver City
ty Council of the City of Palm Springs of Planning
Corporate/Main Commission actions on September 8,2ol o pertaining to
Office
Case No. 5.12-46 CUP and 6.523 VAR.This appeal is
7442 S.Tucson Way,
Suite 180, submitted in accordance with Section 2.05.040 of the
Enj'emod,'Colorado Palm Springs Municipal Code for the City Council's review,
8,0112, consideration and action.As required,please find a check
=45H999
Fax 303-750-0236 attached to cover the cost of the appeal filing fees.
Corona Office At this public hearing,the Planning Commission did not
411 Jenks Circle. make the required findings and denied the application for
Suite 101
Comna,CA92880 the proposed project.We hereby request an appeal of this
9511473-9237 action,and for the City Council to overturn the Planning
Fax 951-273-1816
Commission's denial and to approve the requested
Santa Rosa Office: Conditional Use Permit and Variance.
1220 N.Dutton Ave
Suite 107 Thank you for your time and consideration in the
Santa Rosa,CA 95401 processing of this appeal request. Please contact me at
7.07-541-2344
Fax 701-541-2301 949-295-9031 to discuss and coordinate the scheduling of
this appeal before the City Council.
KDC Asia Ltd.
472 Expand Building LeVel 5 Res tfully su itte
Rajohadapisek Road,Samsen Re 6te
Nock,
HuaykMng,
Bangkok'10320 1 R e
+66(0)2938 9083 rc it
n behalf of KDC Archit s,Engineers, PC
Fax+66(0). 2938 9087 /Authorized Agent for T-Mobile
T Holu lucc
MWzT wtj to
November 16, 2010
y„�y
Honorable Mayor Steve Pougnet
City Council Members
City of Palm Springs
3200 E.Tahquitz Canyon Waymill I
Palm Springs, CA 92262
RE: Proposed T-Mobile Commercial Communication Antenna
KDC Structure,21oo E. Racquet Club Road,
Center for Spiritual Living
ARCHITECTS.ENGINEERS, P.C. (Case No.5.1246 CUP and 6.523 VAR)
Seattle Office Dear Mr. Mayor and Members of the City Council:
4720 200 St.SW,
Suite 200
Lynnwood,WA T-Mobile West Corporation(T-Mobile)has requested the City
98036 Council of the City of Palm Springs to review and reverse the
425-670-8651 Planning Commission denial of Case No. 5.1246 CUP and 6.523 VAR
Fax 425-712-0846 on September 8,2010.
Denver At the Planning Commission public hearing,several members of the
Corporate/Main public offered letters and spoke in opposition to the proposed T-
CfFce Mobile wireless facility to be located at the Center for Spiritual
7442 S.Tucson Way, Living(CSL)on Racquet Club Road. Briefly,the reasons given for
Suite 180,
Englewood,Colorado opposition included;1)increase in lightning strikes, z)increase in
80112 aviation safety,3)adverse impact on home-based businesses,4)
303-750-6999 increase in health risks, 5)visual aesthetics,and 6)decrease in
Fax 303-750-0236 property values.
Corolla Office In response to these items,T-Mobile would like to offer the
411 ,Jenks Circle
Suite 101 following statements and attached information:
Corona,CA 92880
951-273-9237 1) Lightning strikes—the proposed wireless sculpture will be
Fax 951-273-1816 properly grounded, meeting all necessary building&safety
codes.Additionally,there are existing trees and power
1220 N Rosa Office codes.
in the area which are 35-50 ft. in height, so this one
Suite
Suite 107 Dutton Ave structure will not.significantly increase the number of
Santa Rosa, CA 95401 lightning strikes in the area.
707-541-2344 z) Increased risk in aviation safety—the proposed wireless
Fax 707-541-2301 facility will meet all Federal Aviation Administration(FAA)
safety regulations,including, if necessary,registration and
KDC Asia.Ltd. lighting.
Raphap<nc! ?i..iii Road,
hevelats ,i 3) Adverse impact on home-based businesses—the proposed
{�;:�jciaadapir�-�N:�a%�1,:��ar'��N�i
Nock wireless facility will meet all Federal Communication
Hu ay,Ikmjng, Commission(FCC)regulations regarding radio frequency to
Bangkok 10320 ensure that there is no interference with existing electronic
+66(0)2?M 9i 88" equipment,including cell phone reception.
Fax+fib(0)2938 9087
i
;�i
3) Increase in hea th risks- the FCC has established regulations regarding the amount of radio
frequency(RF)emissions that may be emitted by wireless sites and posse no health risk to the
public.The emissions generated by T-Mobiles'wireless facilities is typically less than 1%of
that allowed by FCC regulations.Attached is a T-Mobile Fact Sheet addressing Health Issues.
4) Visual aesthetics-a property owner has stated that his"unobstructed"view of the
mountains will be blocked by the proposed wireless sculpture.This statement disregards the
numerous existing features,including both trees and power poles,in the area which are the
same height and which may block his view.Additionally,the view photos submitted by the
property owner grossly misrepresent the location,height and mass of the proposed wireless
facility.T-Mobile has reviewed the design discussions by the City Council and Planning
Commission in an attempt to create an aesthetically pleasing stealth wireless facility.We
believe,and the Planning Commission agreed,that the proposed wireless sculpture
accomplishes this objective.
5) Decrease in property values-the newspaper article referenced was discussing a visible
antenna array being placed on a wooden pole at the front of a residential property, not a
stealth wireless sculpture.The percent decreases stated in the article came from a local real
estate agent and an attorney,not a licensed appraiser familiar with wireless facilities.
Attached is a T-Mobile Fact Sheet addressing Property Values,which concludes that
properties chase and far from wireless facilities,increase and decrease in value at the same
rates.
To address and respond to the statements and incorrect information circulating regarding the
proposed T-Mobile facility,an invitation to a neighborhood Meeting was mailed to all property
owners within 400 feet of the CSL property can October 18"',On October 27"',the Neighborhood
Meeting was held at the CSL Fellowship Hall. Two residents of the surrounding neighborhood
attended,limiting T-Mobile's attempt to have an open dialogue with local neighbors.
Thank you for your time and consideration in reviewing this appeal.We strongly believe that it is in
the best interest of the City of Palm Springs to approve this project.
Respectfully,
pbehalf
g rs
of KDC A chitects, Engineers,PC
Authorized Agent for T-Mobile
..........
................................... .......................
J reates thw. need to �,,�,Aki
R EAL ",,T1 APPRAISALS (3rewing for wireir,s,,; sei,vic(7
S I t th
i-is,"M 1 �'� .��,FNCC- OF NEARBY facilifie,,�, in, resident',ii r,,eighborl i,,)od& Whil,-, ere has
CEIA- 0C)ES NOT been pui:A,k,; concern about the impact these sites may have �)j) property
ADVERSELY AFf,'1 :'1 v e.rs e
to date tM,-.,re is no Corwin in ovii'l,,mce that P-iere is any ,, J�
PROPERTY VALUES' effect T N4obifereca�viizosthat mointaining1)�'()Pryvalu( inth v;cinity
of a site is of critir.,fl Concern to horneov)n uz refulfy cc,P ,-rider
I elect4V n(,� ,, , -,, 'o, .
v,��Oucs,' 'he needs of incal communi�lies when L elf Or ,ions as
-,ie service.
we strive to rneet your ne ocjs for
Importance of reliable wireless coverage to customers
Vie, i�
.. 1A
ho
Q,
GO. 0 r7..,
'0,
i
Dependable wireless service is critical to personal and public safety
V
-arekgxaSs,a's
MM r.
"Tr rt Nvd,`o 1,1cN cv Nk, -
Questions about Wireless and home values
�onl,� uL
Y
and
�hp
flh"v exPo", sionai,;C
n ly Yv i
nrd
SellSites r Progerty -
New wireless availability can enhance neighborhoods
(°.� £'� " L' €:,i.•¢,a°�' :a t .lI, .eJ� €js fhm: 4 .� :;S;.. .,`.?.�a ,.,: i�'6 r�" e !A t,�� ..•'.i.
q kCm y 9 ,�.��3 9 3n,}^a
.:.
t,e'(t; fa h, tI. 2„ Pm.
Its the 1
Ott" ,:f arded , y
'€ a> e cel)d '€.,hE( € '�� e .€"th":''jt"h, r3 3•.,F�§i, ."
and
I
Increased wireless usage drives need for expanded wireless network
s,:..: � ; 11<lsi. „ , 31t.R,., (i. €? {?€ .'"yt"r ( r•,,.,,.'::..,
',it r.€f; ,..,. .(f..a. ,, "•�" x E ,w�r 3rt11 €'.:a3.w s.a ...E ,.y t1 j�, r'1
W t1,€ 7 .,£: w ;, ,1' C,'€<>1t f; O"i'l4 hay
LEARN
d ' f:. t.
t",,:XPERT OPINION ON SAFE FY i Sciemfists have studied radio frequencies (W), the, kind of energy
OF WIRELESS FACUTES enAtted by cell sitos, arid other conTnon household iterns, for decades.
idundreds of studJes have been corAICUU1 aromW the world with
results published iri highly-,respected jour(' als, Thesc,
consistpntly carick-ide that there is no that ex;x.)st.iro to low
level of FIF signWs enKed by cel] skew poses a Quith r1k.
How cell sites work
logo! &W - "Wo IP qc"Jr "YW, a ""IT ' A 11
t'WTIC: (V wyeysz k nn AY f 1. V Q4
* "Tho�'hancp o"NeWO prJ.
low-powered radio equipment rexjuved to send m d omwe cMg Rmn Kum ve*ws,
In ',I ha ixoGess of sending and rocelviT'ag signal,-. i,utw€gks ,,'im k levelT, �f RIF
msTy Pnmn rf this ennqv a�ernrlod hv thP wkAws Amw on, rq Me cmhxe TWI>
donment ;YhVnLncS W";n w soumd.. : isiir
* TON Photo mvew VS x twv.am expo,,,e�d to iiorn
. fۥ.r ' FCC regulates RF emissions to ensure public safety
lb ensue twa rmsho exponae to ceK sun e uum Cc nwouson
I regul atos the levol of r,adio a M�;,Y O Nolo mit. iha't the lavol C,,
;'b,7 io'm ii, " W 1 0 Yam (d wynn 04 ng )OW OtTwrl
Ti'EC; ,,;ill Sim and 1ho 001()uni of traffic at aM given tinle,
H a Fcc v Rr NPOWC Q kRUMS CK0 busad m rocorn(nemw io�),i from two
o Nom"d 00mad or QY too, (N"'YP) and
Me hmYuW al Sans al vul Dentronics Ehgne. i "iG„i: n Vanety i'J's,
e.�w! mci»iding the Apeocy Federal
Dug Adumarown QTMk CMmT~W SMMy nnd V=4 AWKWOnn (OS'-AI and
Na :'VA h4A i pin to Qx't"paooj ial Safety aa,J I
undw scumrw, a0� QK n- om,nan cwkmu, m wah a OW woerawo
at 100 pama k Lqmdty 100 pannm cq to Ray &Y, nr cwnw 's WkeN to 0CMV,AyMfWe
i,,)fov1d,nq a wide margin of&-,.fp�vv
r
lllrll� ' .-Mobile.,
RF IS RADN")
Typically, actual RF emissions are well under safety limits
r {S;TT use WO in Pracum the n Koo, Ypirure v ov i von com siles is, FCG,* "
�sOrg o on and
ON 3�1 d 0 UM iCrM Qfradm
ewWr,d`,gp3h*or'radio
This js Me same m
to even con�o,cicso to rea,;I,,ing ow Iowa drowed by un orc,
T,at has ars
Om men saraw {-,stanuling approximately :,""0,ouF away,the W an&a% 1 only 1 M paTPI of
MM WaYmon LxMaWo iv-d Rwould tuk�,,'marr""han a,,Q in to R..h thav,,linifs
WC I M MCI!aS WMISS MMIMS,COIJIUSC At 1 Low sdllly, "fa dirocteo, iro,,T) lhel ihc, not.,..on. ;.t < ;-,"F
Wi',oMrms,and baby 'Y"', I of c h-,a 1 WE Warm, So Ih�� ell Oe ontem%�,n e
icd coy ww power lemy conwin-, to as-vur,e
What experts say
j
.M I ,,)f enEg g Cino weak Io rnolef, ,J.,,�v that l in
Independent organizations concur with FCC guidelines
i of Y u P
Oqac,iza�6,,)n� ou'l �nt� 1100A, o� ,
Hyn n Malud and NO n
,J I
LOAM N h P, Q KV& KTO V"��
h,,�vg dmm wAva a. I w
V W�J j?�torflu��mn
and Nim to If
lie CONTAcyr US
September 29,2010
INIMM 100 F f Ra
Mr.James Thompsons .
M I I I City Clerk
City of Palm Springs
32oo E.Tahquitz Canyon Way
Palm Springs,CA 92262
KDC RE: Request for Appeal of Planning Commission
ARCH=ISINGINEERS,P.C. Action(Case NO.5-1246 CUP and 6.523 VAR)—
Seattle Offied Proposed T-Mobile Commercial Communication
47,20 200"St.SW Antenna Structure,21oo E.Racquet Club Road
Suite 200
Lynnwood,WA Dear Mr.Thompson:
98036
425-670-9651
Fox 42W1 M846 KDC Architects, Engineers, P.C.,on behalf of T-Mobile
West Corporation,respectfully requests an appeal to the
Denver
Corporate/.Main City Council of the City of Palm Springs of Planning
Commission actions on September 8,2olo pertaining to
Office Case No.5.1246 CUP and 6.523 VAR.This appeal is
740 S.Tucson Way.
Me 180. submitted in accordance with Section 2.05.040 of the
Englmood.Colorado Palm Springs Municipal Code for the City Council's review,
.8,0112 consideration and action.As required,please find a check
n�750-6999
Fax 303-75H236 attached to cover the cost of the appeal filing fees.
Corona Office
At this public hearing,the Planning Commission did not
411 Janks Circle make the required findings and denied the application for
Suite 101
Corona,CA 92 880 the proposed project.We hereby request an appeal of this
051-273,-9237 action,and for the City Council to overturn the Planning
-Fax 951-273-1816
Commission's denial and to approve the requested
Santa Rosa Office Conditional Use Permit and Variance.
1220 N Dutton. Ave
Suite 107 Thank you for your time and consideration in the
Santa Rosa,.CA 95401 processing of this appeal request. Please contact me at
707-541-044
Fax 707-541-2301 949-295-9031 to discuss and coordinate the scheduling of
KDC Asia Ltd. this appeal before the City Council.
472 Expand Building Level 5 Resp, ctfully su itte
Rajohadapisek Road,Sarnsen Re
No*
Huayloyang,
Bangkok 10320 J R e s
+66(0)2938 9083 n b.ehalf of KDC rchit s,Engineers,PC
Fax 466(0)2938 9087 /Authorized Agent for T-Mobile
12 I-V �'I ILI IT
Planning Commission Minutes
September 8, 2010
2. PUBLIC HEARINGS;
2A. 16.523 VAR - A request by T-Mobile West Corporation for a
Conditional Use Permit to construct a 47.5-foot tall commercial
communication antenna within a sculptural monopole and a Variance
application to exceed the maximum antenna structure height•permitted at
2100 East Racquet Club Ro f piritual Living), Zone PD-160,
Section 1. (Project Planne ssociate Planner)
David A. Newell, Associate Planner, provided background information as outlined in the
staff report dated September 8, 2010.
Chair Caffery opened the public hearing:
-James Rogers, representing T Mobile West, provided details on proposed wireless site,
non-coverage areas and the design and fabrication of the capsule structure.
-Mike Tucci, spoke in opposition to the proposed antenna structure because of health
and safety risks to the nearby pre-school, decreased property values and the
obstructive view.
-Tom Huff, spoke in opposition to the antenna structure, expressed concern with the
public hearing held during the summer months, decrease in property values
and requested more time for input from neighbors.
-Vicky Starke, spoke in opposition to the antenna structure, commented on the view
obstruction to her property, decreased property values and existing cell towers in the
vicinity.
-Andrew Starke, spoke in opposition to the antenna structure, expressed concern with
the obstruction of his view, the insufficient open space at this site and existing
cell towers in the neighborhood.
-James Rogers, applicant rebuttal, responded to the public testimony pertaining to the
health and safety risks, property values and adjacent cell towers.
There being no further appearances the public hearing was closed.
Commission Hudson questioned if the possibility of co-locations were considered for
this site. Mr. Rogers explained that since the structure is prefabricated with the radio
equipment inside the issue of co-location would need to be worked on.
Chair Caffery spoke in favor of the cell tower design, however, noted that this structure
is not appropriate in a residential zone.
Vice Chair Scott concurred with Chair Caffery and stated that the cell tower is a great
design but is in the wrong location.
4
Planning Commission Minutes
September 8, 2010
M/S/C (Vice Chair Scott/Doug Donenfeld, 6-0, 1 absent/Leslie Munger) To deny Case
5.1245 CUP /6.523 VAR.
Director Ewing reported that the Planning Commission's decision may be appealed to
the City Council within 10 working days.
Case 6.1224 Zone Text Amendment - A zone text amendment consolidating
conditions for Specific Uses into a single code section. (Planner: Ken
on, Associate Planner)
Ken Lyon, sociate Planner, provided background information as outlined in the staff
report dated ptember 8, 2010.
Chair Caffery op d the public hearing and no appearances coming forward the public
hearing was closed.
M/S/C (Doug Donenfe racy Conrad, 6-0, 1 absent/Leslie Munger) To recommend
approval of the Zone Text endment to the City Council.
A. Annual Schedule for tanning Commission Representation to the
Architectural Advisory Co iittee meetings.
Director Ewing provided an update on a upcoming planning items scheduled for the
City Council meeting and reminded the mmission to submit their questions and/or
concerns pertaining to the Desert Palisades oject.
Director Ewing reported that the October 6th Pla ing Commission study session would
consist of a joint meeting with the AAC.
ADJOURNMENT:
There being no further comments the Planning Commission adj rued at 3.36 p.m. to
Wednesday, September 22, 2010, at City Hall Council Chamber, 00 East Tahquitz
Canyon Way.
A. wing P
Di r of Pla nin Services
5
,off
0
V cn
'p``",� k PlanningCommission Staff Re orf
Date: September 8, 2010
Case No.: 5.1246—CUP / 6.523—VAR
Type: Conditional Use Permit and Variance
Location: 2100 East Racquet Club Road
APN: 501-272-025
Applicant: T-Mobile West Corporation
General Plan: VLDR (Very Low Density Residential)
Zone: PD 160 (Planned Development District 160)
From: Craig A. Ewing, AICP, Director of Planning Services
Project Planner: David A. Newell, Associate Planner
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
The application is a request by T-Mobile West Corporation for a Type II Conditional Use
Permit to install commercial communication antennas within a new forty-seven and one-
half foot high sculptural monopole for the property located at 2100 East Racquet Club
Road. The applicant is also requesting approval of a Variance application to exceed the
maximum antenna height permitted from thirty-nine feet to forty-seven and one-half feet.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Planning Commission recommends approval of the Conditional Use Permit
and Variance to the City Council for the installation of a forty-seven and one-half foot tall
monopole structure for the housing of commercial communication antennas located at
2100 East Racquet Club Road.
1 ;.:.
Planning Commission Staff i-_;iort September 8, 2010
Case 5.1246—CUP/6.523—VAR Page 2 of 8
PRIOR ACTIONS:
On July 26, 2010, the Architectural Advisory Committee (AAC) reviewed the proposed
project and by a vote of 4-3 (Sahlin absent) recommended approval with the following
revisions:
1. Relocate monopole structure on site as follows:
a. Preference 1: Expand the planter in the center of parking lot by removing
two adjacent nose-to-nose parking spaces, and install monopole structure
in middle of planter; or
b. Preference 2: Install monopole structure in planter area adjacent to the
existing building;
2. Monopole concrete should not be painted;
3. Structure should use natural concrete color, preferably white;
4. Match fiberglass element at top of structure to concrete color; and
5. Use low-level lighting to illuminate structure at night.
The applicant has revised the project to be consistent with the above revisions,
including preference 1.a..
BACKGROUND AND SETTING:
T-Mobile West Corporation has submitted an application for a Type II Conditional Use
Permit and Variance. The applicant has secured a Letter of Authorization with the
property owner to proceed with these applications.
The project site is approximately 59,241 square feet in size and located on the
northeast corner of East Racquet Club Road and Cerritos Road. In 1984, the City
Council approved a preliminary planned development (PD 160) to allow the construction
of a two-phase project which included a multi-purpose room, kitchen area and
administration offices in Phase I and a main sanctuary in Phase II. Phase I of the
project was constructed in 1987 and exists today on the northwesterly portion of the
property. Phase II has not been constructed.
The sculptural monopole is proposed at the center of the property in an expanded
planter adjacent to a drive aisle and the parking lot. The monopole is constructed of
primarily concrete and has fiberglass at the top to contain the antenna array. The
antennas and associated equipment will be located entirely within the monopole
structure. Low-level up-lighting is proposed to be installed to illuminate the monopole at
night.
Table 1 below shows the surrounding land uses, Zoning and General Plan designations.
2 �'
Planning Commission Staff i- Jort September 8, 2010 '
Case 5.1246--CUP/6.523--VAR Page 3 of 8
Table 1: Adjacent General Plan Designations, Zones and Land Uses:
General Plan Zoning Existing Land Uses
North VLDR yVer Low Density Residential (Single FamilyResidential Single Family Residential
South VLDR y-
(VeryLow Density Residential (Single Family Residential Single Family Residential
East VLDR yr
(Very
Low Density Residential Sin le Family Residential)
Single Family Residential
West R-
(Very Low Density Residential (Single Family Residential) Single Family Residential
Proposed
Site Monopole
Location
� 4
r!
W
ANALYSIS:
The General Plan designation of the subject site is VLDR (Very Low Density
Residential). The General Plan does not specifically regulate the installation and
operation of wireless communication facilities; however, staff has determined that the
use as proposed is compatible with this designation as it supports cellular needs of the
surrounding residential uses.
The zoning designation is PD 160, and the use is permitted with the approval of a Type
II Conditional Use Permit, pursuant to Section 93.08.00 and 94.02.00(A)(2)(f) of the
1
Planning Commission Staff v.,�ort
September 8, 2010
Case 5.1246—CUP/6.523—VAR Page 4 of 8
Palm Springs Zoning Code (PSZC). Table 2 below displays the PSZC's and proposed
project's development standards:
Table 2: Antenna Development Standards and Proposed Project
93.08.03(A)(2)(c)(iii) Proposed Project
Requirements (approximate
Height (feet) 39 feet (25 feet above the 47.5 feet
highest roof of the
rinci al buildin
Front West Yard Setback 25 feet 180 feet
Side North Yard Setback 10 feet 65 feet
Street Side South Yard Setback 25 feet 76 feet
Rear East Yard Setback 1 15 feet 218 feet
Monopole Height:
Pursuant to Section 93.08.03(A)(2)(c)(iii) of the PSZC, "No part of the antenna structure
shall extend to a height of more than twenty-five (25) feet above the highest point of the
roof of the principal building on the property." The height of the existing church building
is approximately fourteen feet, which would allow an antenna height of thirty-nine feet.
The monopole is proposed at forty-seven and one-half feet in height. The applicant has
submitted a variance application to allow the antenna at its proposed height and
provided a justification letter to support it. Findings in support are found below in the
Required Findings portion of the staff report and in the draft resolution.
Text on Monopole
Since the project was reviewed by the AAC, the applicant has stated that the church
would like to utilize the sculpture as a "Peace Pole". As they describe it, "a `Peace Pole'
has a philosophical phrase or quote written on the sides of the pole in 3-4 different
languages." The elevation plan shows the areas on the monopole where the text would
be located.
Staff notes that this is signage and not permitted under the sign ordinance. Therefore,
staff has included a condition of approval in the draft resolution that prohibits any
signage on the monopole.
Landscape Changes:
The proposal will require the removal of one large tree that is about eighteen feet in
height to accommodate the new monopole in the parking lot planter. Staff believes a
replacement shade tree should be planted in a different area of the parking lot and has
included this requirement as a Condition of Approval in the draft resolution.
2 '
Planning Commission Staff f.Jort C September 8, 2010
Case 5.1246--CUP/6.523--VAR Page 5 of 8
Parking Analysis:
Two parking spaces will be removed adjacent to the proposed monopole to meet the
AAC's recommendation for a larger planter area. There are currently eighty-four
parking spaces existing onsite. A two-phase planned development was approved for
the church facility in 1984. Phase One consisted of a multi-purpose room, kitchen and
administrative office and Phase Two consisted of a sanctuary with seating for 255
people. It was determined in 1984 that 85 parking spaces would adequately serve both
phases. Since Phase Two was never constructed, the loss of two parking spaces will
be insignificant. Should Phase Two be proposed in the future, a new parking analysis
will be necessary.
REQUIRED FINDINGS:
Variance
State law requires four (4) findings be made for the granting of a variance. Staff has
analyzed the findings in order below:
1) Because of the special circumstances applicable to the subject property, including
size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, the strict application of the
Zoning Code would deprive subject property of privileges enjoyed by other
properties in the vicinity and under identical zone classification.
The subject property has properties in the vicinity that contain buildings and
landscaping which inhibit cellular frequency at a height of thirty-nine feet. The
applicant has provided radio frequency maps that display coverage of an antenna
at thirty-nine feet and forty-seven and one-half feet in height. These maps show
that a thirty-nine foot high antenna will not satisfy the necessary coverage due to
inhibiting factors such as terrain variations, foliage and man-made structures
enjoyed by other properties, or in this case cellular providers, in the vicinity.
2) Any variance granted shall be subject to such conditions as will assure that the
adjustment thereby authorized shall not constitute a grant of special privilege
inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and zone in
which subject property is situated.
The subject property will be conditioned similar to other properties that have
received height variances for antennas. These conditions include removal of the
structure upon abandonment of the use, compliance with Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) requirements and restriction to limit the antenna structure to
no more than forty-seven and one-half feet in height. Therefore, the approval of
this Variance would not constitute a grant of special privilege that is inconsistent
with the limitations placed upon other providers in the vicinity and zoning
designation.
Planning Commission Staff f,Jort ' September 8, 2010
Case 5.1246—CUP/6.523—VAR Page 6 of 8
3) The granting of the variance will not be materially detrimental to the pubic health,
safety, convenience, or welfare or injurious to property and improvements in the
same vicinity and zone in which subject property is situated.
The monopole will be structurally engineered in accordance with all applicable
codes for the proposed height and location. Therefore, the project is unlikely to be
materially detrimental to the public health, safety, convenience, or welfare or
injurious to property and improvements in the area.
4) The granting of such variance will not adversely affect the general plan of the city.
The proposed project has been analyzed against the policies of the General Plan
and no inconsistencies have been found.
Pursuant to Section 93.08.03(B) of the PSZC, in cases involving applications for height
limit variances, no such variance shall be granted unless the Commission makes the
following finding in addition to those required above:
5) That in the area involved, transmission or reception is adversely affected by
obstructions and, as verified by at least one (1) person holding a valid radio-
telephone first-class operator's license issued by the Federal Communications
Commission, it is not feasible to achieve and maintain satisfactory communications
within the specified height limitations.
The applicant provided a study which shows that the height limit of thirty-nine feet
will not provide the coverage necessary to serve the needs of wireless users in the
area. Diagrams have been provided that show the top of the antenna at a height
of thirty-nine feet compared to forty-seven and one-half feet, and the height of
thirty-nine feet does not appear to achieve and .maintain satisfactory coverage
within the specified height limitations.
Conditional Use Permit
The request is subject to the required findings of a Conditions Use Permit as contained
in Section 94.02.00 of the PSZC. Staff has analyzed the request in light of the findings
as follows:
a. The use applied for at the location set forth in the application is properly one for
which a conditional use permit is authorized by the City Zoning Ordinance.
Pursuant to Section 94.02.00(A)(2)(f) of the Palm Springs Zoning Code, a
commercial communications antenna is authorized within a planned development
(PD-160) zone with the approval of a Type II Conditional Use Permit.
b. The use applied for is necessary or desirable for the development of the
community, is in harmony with the various elements or objectives of the General
2 '.
Planning Commission Staff i __�ort p September 8, 2010
Case 5.1246—CUP/6.523--VAR Page 7 of 8
Plan, and is not detrimental to existing uses or to future uses specifically permitted
in the zone in which the proposed use is to be located.
The General Plan designation of the subject site is VLDR (Very Low Density
Residential). The General Plan does not specifically regulate the installation and
operation of wireless communication facilities; however, the use as proposed is
compatible with this designation as it supports cellular needs of the surrounding
commercial and residential uses and the development of adequate cellular phone
levels of services serves the ultimate benefit of the community.
All of the antennas will be contained within the monopole structure which will be
located at the center of the site. Therefore, the proposal is unlikely to be
detrimental to existing or future uses permitted in the zone.
C. The site for the intended use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate said
use, including yards, setbacks, walls or fences, landscaping and other features
required in order to adjust said use to those existing or permitted future uses of the
land in the neighborhood.
The proposal includes a variance to the antenna height requirement; the equipment
will be contained within the monopole. Parking at the site will be adequate for the
existing development. The use will occupy only a small portion of the site.
Therefore, the site for the intended use will easily accommodate the proposed
facility.
d. The site for the proposed use related to streets and highways is properly designed
and improved to carry the type and quantity of traffic to be generated by the
proposed use.
The only traffic generated from the said use to and from the site will be for
maintenance, and the existing infrastructure is anticipated to accommodate the
traffic necessary for the maintenance of the facility.
e. The conditions to be imposed and shown on the approved site plan are deemed
necessary to protect the public health, safety and general welfare, including any
minor modifications of the zone's property development standards.
The project is unlikely to have a significant impact on the proposed project site or
its immediate surroundings. Conditions to ensure the protection of public health,
safety and general welfare are required to be fulfilled by the applicant for approval
and include, but are not limited to, removal of antenna upon use-change or
abandonment of the subject property and compliance with all Federal Airport
Administration requirements among others.
R-a s,
Planning Commission Staff i..._�ort t September 8, 2010
Case 5.1246—CUP/6.523—VAR Page 8 of 8
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:
This project is categorically exempt from environmental review pursuant to Section
15332 (Class 32 — In-Fill Development) of the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA).
NOTIFICATION:
A notice was published in the Desert Sun and mailed to all property owners within a four
hundred (400) foot radius in accordance with state law. As of the writing of this report,
no correspondence from the public has been received by staff.
CONCLUSION:
The proposed project was reviewed by Staff and the AAC. Staff is able to make the
required findings for both the Variance and Conditional Use Permit requests. Therefore,
staff is recommending approval of the proposed sculptural monopole at a height of no
more than forty-seven and one-half feet, subject to the conditions attached to the draft
resolution.
David A. Vewell *Diror
in I P
Associate Planner anni g Services
ATTACHMENTS:
- 400' Radius Map
- Draft Resolution with Conditions of Approval
- Site Plans
- Elevations
- Slim-line Monopole Design
- Height Study Maps
OF PALM SA4
c N
Department of Planning Services W E
•c'�4FORH�*• Vicinity Map
S
( ........ ...............
,
i
i
POWELL RD.
.........
d
d i �
W A , t .......QL
IL
.................
..........
.
RD
I� 3
I
i � E
I ,
i i I I.
,
.... i. ....... 1 ;
DE LAGO RD
j I
.. ,... •!
t
RACQUET CLUB W7 .t
......... .............. .............
C] ;..EM
�1
ROCHELLE RD
... .........
E aLe9end i Q 400 tBuffer
Site
!....... Parcels
} ............. 4.. .
3
3
CITY OF PALM SPRINGS
CASE: 5.1246 CUP & 6.523 VAR DESCRIPTION: A request by T-Mobile West
Corporation for a Conditional Use Permit and Variance
APPLICANT: T-Mobile West Corp. application to construct a forty-seven and one-half foot
high monopole at the property located at 2100 East
Racquet Club Road, Zone PD 160, Section 1. ,
2
c
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA,
RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL
CASE NO. 5.1246, A TYPE II CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
FOR THE INSTALLATION OF A FORTY-SEVEN AND ONE-
HALF FOOT HIGH COMMERCIAL COMMUNICATIONS
ANTENNA WITHIN A MONOPOLE AND CASE NO. 6.523,
A VARIANCE TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM ANTENNA
HEIGHT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2100 EAST
RACQUET CLUB ROAD.
WHEREAS, T-Mobile West Corporation ("Applicant") has filed an application with the
City pursuant to Sections 94.02.00, 93.08.00 and 94.06.00 of the Palm Springs Zoning
Code (PSZC) for the installation of a commercial communications antenna on a forty-
seven and one-half foot tall monopole, which exceeds the maximum antenna height of
thirty-nine feet, located at 2100 East Racquet Club Road, APN: 501-272-025, PD-160
Zone, Section 1; and
WHEREAS, notice of public hearing of the Planning Commission of the City of Palm
Springs to consider the application for Conditional Use Permit, Case No. 5.1246, and
Variance, Case No. 6.523, was given in accordance with applicable law; and
WHEREAS, on September 8, 2010, a public hearing on the application for Conditional
Use Permit, Case No. 5.1246, and Variance, Case No. 6.523, was held by the Planning
Commission in accordance with applicable law; and
WHEREAS, the proposed Conditional Use Permit is categorically exempt from the
provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section
15332 (Class 32 -- In-Fill Development) of the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA).; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has carefully reviewed and considered all of the
evidence presented in connection with the hearing on the project, including, but not
limited to, the staff report, and all written and oral testimony presented.
THE PLANNING COMMISSION HEREBY FINDS AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1: The Planning Commission finds that this Conditional Use Permit is
Categorically Exempt from environmental review pursuant to Section 15332 (Class 32 —
In-Fill Development) of the California Environmental Quality Act.
Section 2: State law requires four (4) findings be made for the granting of a variance.
The Planning Commission finds as follows:
1. Because of the special circumstances applicable to the subject property,
including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, the strict application
2 l;
Planning Commission Draft-_. _,(solution September 8, 2010
Case 5.1246—CUP/6.523—VAR Page 2 of 4
of the Zoning Code would deprive subject property of privileges enjoyed by other
properties in the vicinity and under identical zone classification.
The subject property has properties in the vicinity that contain buildings and
landscaping which inhibit cellular frequency at a height of thirty-nine feet. The
applicant has provided radio frequency maps that display coverage of an
antenna at thirty-nine feet and forty-seven and one-half feet in height. These
maps show that a thirty-nine foot high antenna will not satisfy the necessary
coverage due to inhibiting factors such as terrain variations, foliage and man-
made structures enjoyed by other properties, or in this case cellular providers, in
the vicinity.
2. Any variance granted shall be subject to such conditions as will assure that the
adjustment thereby authorized shall not constitute a grant of special privilege
inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and zone in
which subject property is situated.
The subject property will be conditioned similar to other properties that have
received height variances for antennas. These conditions include removal of the
structure upon abandonment of the use, compliance with Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) requirements and restriction to limit the antenna structure to
no more than forty-seven and one-half feet in height. Therefore, the approval of
this Variance would not constitute a grant of special privilege that is inconsistent
with the limitations placed upon other providers in the vicinity and zoning
designation.
3. The granting of the variance will not be materially detrimental to the pubic health,
safety, convenience, or welfare or injurious to property and improvements in the
same vicinity and zone in which subject property is situated.
The monopole will be structurally engineered in accordance with all applicable
codes for the proposed height and location. Therefore, the project is unlikely to
be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, convenience, or welfare or
injurious to property and improvements in the area.
4. The granting of such variance will not adversely affect the general plan of the
city.
The proposed project has been analyzed against the policies of the General Plan
and no inconsistencies have been found.
Pursuant to Section 93.08.03(B) of the PSZC, in cases involving applications for
height limit variances, no such variance shall be granted unless the Commission
makes make the following finding in addition to those required above. The Planning
Commission finds as follows:
y 4,
Planning Commission Draft Solution } September 8, 2010
Case 5.1246—CUP/6.523—VAR Page 3 of 4
5. That in the area involved, transmission or reception is adversely affected by
obstructions and, as verified by at least one (1) person holding a valid radio-
telephone first-class operator's license issued by the Federal Communications
Commission, it is not feasible to achieve and maintain satisfactory
communications within the specified height limitations.
The applicant provided a study which shows that the height limit of thirty-nine feet
will not provide the coverage necessary to serve the needs of wireless users in
the area. Diagrams have been provided that show the top of the antenna at a
height of thirty-nine feet compared to forty-seven and one-half feet, and the
height of thirty-nine feet does not appear to achieve and maintain satisfactory
coverage within the specified height limitations.
Section 3: Pursuant to Zoning Ordinance Section 94.02.00, the Planning
Commission finds that:
a. The use applied for at the location set forth in the application is properly one for
which a conditional use permit is authorized by the City Zoning Ordinance.
Pursuant to Section 94.02.00(A)(2)(f) of the Palm Springs Zoning Code, a
commercial communications antenna is authorized within a planned development
(PD-1 G0) zone with the approval of a Type II Conditional Use Permit.
b. The use applied for is necessary or desirable for the development of the
community, is in harmony with the various elements or objectives of the General
Plan, and is not detrimental to existing uses or to future uses specifically
permitted in the zone in which the proposed use is to be located.
The General Plan designation of the subject site is VLDR (Very Low Density
Residential). The General Plan does not specifically regulate the installation and
operation of wireless communication facilities; however, the use as proposed is
compatible with this designation as it supports cellular needs of the surrounding
commercial and residential uses and the development of adequate cellular phone
levels of services serves the ultimate benefit of the community.
All of the antennas will be contained within the monopole structure which will be
located at the center of the site. Therefore, the proposal is unlikely to be
detrimental to existing or future uses permitted in the zone.
c. The site for the intended use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate said
use, including yards, setbacks, walls or fences, landscaping and other features
required in order to adjust said use to those existing or permitted future uses of
the land in the neighborhood.
The proposal includes a variance to the antenna height requirement; the
equipment will be contained within the monopole. Parking at the site will be
adequate for the existing development. The use will occupy only a small portion
Planning Commission Draft solution September 8, 2010
Case 5.1246—CUP/6.523—VAR Page 4 of 4
of the site. Therefore, the site for the intended use will easily accommodate the
proposed facility.
d. The site for the proposed use related to streets and highways is properly
designed and improved to carry the type and quantity of traffic to be generated
by the proposed use.
The only traffic generated from the said use to and from the site will be for
maintenance, and the existing infrastructure is anticipated to accommodate the
traffic necessary for the maintenance of the facility.
e. The conditions to be imposed and shown on the approved site plan are deemed
necessary to protect the public health, safety and general welfare, including any
minor modifications of the zone's property development standards.
The project is unlikely to have a significant impact on the proposed project site or
its immediate surroundings. Conditions to ensure the protection of public health,
safety and general welfare are required to be fulfilled by the applicant for
approval and include, but are not limited to, removal of antenna upon use-change
or abandonment of the subject property and compliance with all Federal Airport
Administration requirements among others.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that, based upon the foregoing, the Planning
Commission hereby recommends approval of Conditional Use Permit Case No. 5.1246
and Variance Case No. 6.523 to the City Council, subject to those conditions set forth in
Exhibit A, which are to be satisfied unless otherwise specified.
ADOPTED this 8t" day of September, 2010.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST: CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA
Craig A. Ewing, AICP
Director of Planning Services
a
RESOLUTION NO.
EXHIBIT A
Case 5.1246 CUP and Case 6.523 VAR
T-Mobile West Corporation
2100 East Racquet Club Road
APN: 501-272-025
IE24205E
September 8, 2010
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Before final acceptance of the project, all conditions listed below shall be completed to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer, the Director of Planning Services, the Director of
Building and Safety, the Chief of Police, the Fire Chief or their designee, depending on
which department recommended the condition.
Any agreements, easements or covenants required to be entered into shall be in a form
approved by the City Attorney.
ADMINISTRATIVE CONDITIONS
ADM 1. Project Description. This approval is for the project described per Case
5.1246 CUP and Case 6.523 VAR, except as modified by the conditions
below.
ADM 2. Reference Documents. The site shall be developed and maintained in
accordance with the approved plans including site plans, architectural
elevations and colors on file in the Planning Division except as modified by
the approved by conditions below.
ADM 3. Conform to all Codes and Regulations. The project shall conform to the
conditions contained herein, all applicable regulations of the Palm Springs
Zoning Ordinance, Municipal Code, and any other City, County, State and
Federal Codes, ordinances, resolutions and laws that may apply.
ADM 4. Minor Deviations. The Director of Planning or designee may approve minor
deviations to the project description and approved plans in accordance with
the provisions of the Palm Springs Zoning Code.
ADM 5. Indemnification. The owner shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the
City of Palm Springs, its agents, officers, and employees from any claim,
action, or proceeding against the City of Palm Springs or its agents, officers
or employees to attach, set aside, void or annul, an approval of the City of
Resolution No.
Draft Conditions of Approval Page 2 of 4
Cases 5.1246 CUP&6.523 VAR September 8,2010
Palm Springs, its legislative body, advisory agencies, or administrative
officers concerning Case 5.1243 CUP and Case 6.523 VAR. The City of
Palm Springs will promptly notify the applicant of any such claim, action, or
proceeding against the City of Palm Springs and the applicant will either
undertake defense of the matter and pay the City's associated legal costs or
will advance funds to pay for defense of the matter by the City Attorney. If the
City of Palm Springs fails to promptly notify the applicant of any such claim,
action or proceeding or fails to cooperate fully in the defense, the applicant
shall not, thereafter, be responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless
the City of Palm Springs. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the City retains the
right to settle or abandon the matter without the applicant's consent but
should it do so, the City shall waive the indemnification herein, except, the
City's decision to settle or abandon a matter following an adverse judgment or
failure to appeal, shall not cause a waiver of the indemnification rights herein.
ADM 6. Maintenance and Repair. The property owner(s) and successors and
assignees in interest shall maintain and repair the improvements including
and without limitation all structures, sidewalks, bikeways, parking areas,
landscape, irrigation, lighting, signs, walls, and fences between the curb and
property line, including sidewalk or bikeway easement areas that extend onto
private property, in a first class condition, free from waste and debris, and in
accordance with all applicable law, rules, ordinances and regulations of all
federal, state, and local bodies and agencies having jurisdiction at the
property owner's sole expense. This condition shall be included in the
recorded covenant agreement for the property if required by the City.
ADM 7. Time Limit on Approval. Approval of this Conditional Use Permit shall be
valid for a period of two (2) years from the effective date of the approval.
Extensions of time may be granted by the Planning Commission upon
demonstration of good cause. Once constructed, the Conditional Use Permit,
provided the project has remained in compliance with all conditions of
approval, does not have a time limit.
ADM 8. Right to Appeal. Decisions of an administrative officer or agency of the City
of Palm Springs may be appealed in accordance with Municipal Code
Chapter 2.05.00. Permits will not be issued until the appeal period has
concluded.
ADM 9. Comply with City Noise Ordinance. This use shall comply with the provisions
of Section 11.74 Noise Ordinance of the Palm Springs Municipal Code.
Violations may result in revocation of this Conditional Use Permit,
ADM 10. Conditional Use Permit Availability. The applicant shall provide a copy of this
Conditional Use Permit to all buyers and potential buyers.
33
Resolution No. l
Draft Conditions of Approval Page 3 of 4
Cases 5.1246 CUP&6.523 VAR September 8, 2010
PLANNING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS
PLN 1. Signage. The applicant shall remove references to signage on the elevation
plan. Signage is prohibited on the exterior of the monopole.
PLN 2. Landscape. The applicant shall either (a) install a new thirty-six inch box tree
in the parking lot planter, or (b) re-locate the existing tree that will be removed
as a result of the monopole installation. Prior to doing either option, the
applicant shall submit their proposal to the Planning Department for approval.
PLN 3. Outdoor Lighting Conformance. Exterior lighting shall conform to Section
93.21.00, Outdoor Lighting Standards, of the Palm Springs Zoning Code.
Manufacturer's cut sheets of all exterior lighting shall be submitted to the
Planning Department for approval prior to the issuance of building permits.
No lighting of hillsides is permitted.
PLN 4. Outside Storage Prohibited. No outside storage of any kind shall be
permitted except as approved as a part of the proposed plan.
PLN 5. Modification or Addition. If the communication antenna(s), monopole or
equipment cabinets are ever proposed to be modified in any manner such as
the inclusion of other antennas, satellite dishes and / or other support
equipment, the proposed modifications shall be submitted to the Director of
Planning Services for review and approval prior to installation.
PLN 6. Obsolete Technoloo Y. If the technology regarding the communications
antenna(s) changes in where the antenna(s) and / or equipment cabinets as
approved become obsolete, then the antenna shall be removed.
PLN 7. Property Use and CUP. If the use of the subject property is ever changed,
the City reserves the right to modify or revoke this Conditional Use Permit
application pursuant to Section 94.02.00(1) of the Zoning Code.
PLN 8. Antenna Structure Height. The maximum height of the commercial
communications antenna structure shall be forty-seven and one-half feet, as
measured from finished grade to the highest point of the structure.
PLN 9. Valid Lease Agreement Required. If the lease agreement between the
property owner and the applicant expires and is not renewed, the CUP will
become null and void, and the applicant shall remove the antenna and
equipment to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning Services.
PLN 10. Use Abandonment. If the antenna(s) and/or monopole are ever abandoned
or if this Conditional Use Permit ever expires, the monopole and antenna(s)
shall be removed within 30 days.
Resolution No.
Draft Conditions of Approval Page 4 of 4-
Cases 5.1246 CUP&6.523 VAR September 8, 201 D
PLN 11. FAA & FCC Compliance. The applicant shall comply with the requirements of
the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and Federal Communications
Commission (FCC).
PLN 12. Antenna Visibility and Safety. The City reserves the right to require, at any
time in the future, one obstruction light on the tallest point of the structure
extending 12" - 24" above the highest point of the pole / fronds if deemed
necessary by the Director of Planning and Zoning.
PLN 13. Co-location. The applicant / operator of the facility shall agree to allow the co-
location of equipment of other wireless communications providers at this site
when applications are received by the City and it is considered feasible,
subject to an agreement between the applicant / operator, the other proposed
wireless communications provider and the property owner.
POLICE DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS
POL 1. Developer shall comply with Section II of Chapter 8.04 "Building Security
Codes" of the Palm Springs Municipal Code.
BUILDING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS
BLD 1. Prior to any construction on-site, all appropriate permits must be secured.
END OF CONDITIONS
J T . •Mobile e
Stick Together"
] 3 1 c_G,:A'i'RC+ll-9L:IT 20]
■ ■ ■ . . �-PP.0 FCi :N FORIIATICN T
jj IE2a2i5E s
III S 'RITU.AL LIVINGMobile I
[7 CD E. PACW.;E'. CLUE?ROAD
ow M SPRINGS. EA 52252
it R:JE?SIBt Co,_N":
IE24205E -CUP.RfT SS F AT
I.
SPIRITUAL LIVING 'In;�•,,L.,
ISSUED Fr.P.:
CAPSULE SCULPTURE REV. GhdIPtiG SUEIv11'- .
LR J'AT= E"RIP'ICN: �":
2100 E. RACQUET CLUB ROAD
'Is�ED Eon srn=_Eo
/L}\ j15/e•]IG I SOR I'.e1'- ..f£N '
PALM SPRINGS, CA 92262
L_ [I IES..ttD PJ4 RE41uEC
RIVERSIDE COUNTY , ]6;G5 LN
IOJECT INFORMATION[ SHEET INDEX APPROVALS BLOCK SYMBOLS LIST :CONFIDENTIAL AND PROPRIETARY A,9'N —H`,:
IRHU T CO�i F flF w_+Cf- ryE FOLLOWn6 FAFNES HEREBY APPROVE MD ACCEPT e!o[for di=_.los�rc o�[sitle t-AfLE:.E VIES I nRN E�C
ORN AND MATEPKLS SHA,L BE PEPF]RMEO MD INSALLED ARCHfTECTURAL' f'wHx�ugRE6 M - +i M1o_L pe-R-scion.
CR]4K E%1TH E CLRRENi E'TGKS]F'.HE TOLLOWING '-.ESE OCCDME4i6 AIt^RJTHOBIZE irs WHTF.9CTOR-0 Lp�NC�q;p}q-
5 dL PTEJ 9Y-HE.00AL-ERN AJiHOPi Ei. -1 TIT-SHEET PPOCEED W- THE CC TS Al DESCR3EO'ENNN.NA p��
G- THESE
'>S S TI BE ONSTFI CC TD PEP i CONSTPJ TI DC<JI+_XTS RE 5..9 ECT TG ES BY iXE 9?Fa Ny e
LS-1 TCPOGRRPHI� $'J RVE'" LOCAL BDLD G DEP+RTMEVi AND PhT LHINtGES+hn
NO C!FC_3 TO IL L TES E]E;1.5 OF.HE A Y u%6 ��
�C � A-1 OVERALL SfTE PLAN MLLIF LAlOHS h_: VY MPLSE /1 3.cre w[ DRIVING DIRECTIONS
r e•J-._c nG s G Gs OM..v STPA-•E CCD- °- 2 EXIS-.WC ENLARGED SITE PLAN DmL &—T „� C - n .n,.N F„n ,
]]cA�FrtRNIR EDIL-:G'opc•LBO A-2-1 PRC�OSEC ENLARGEC SITE PLAN — _ - REcrni.•tL ,p E'rN49 Ro[Na9.REl n
]r CAL FDRNIa'cLEC�I L CCOE SCE^' A-3 SD.:T`t& EPST ELEVATIC?: LaNC_ORC E ` I[
aL-E[RNL4 Eh,PC,'LC DE PF k?E]NAL'-E: � W- L CR'.1 0 E .E gs ir
.AE 7LANW MECHL�K L CODE(C•C) —E—E— �pµ� 6E_ON_
/FV.L2 2RNA.FF MB NEtt C JE COX cNFPa [ S GN4NRE —i T— Sz A xttM N P/w 1 SR- E
PLILOINL
Y/LOL YP'OPpC CI:Ph.,E _CCA%G ^iT ¢ un R G T1 A n E
11
PPIWE] S 8£1,]t, C SE
Cw6 Se '. .s _
IiHAZicc 11I [.'ss�a.E rv. ._2
E.RACOJE"C E R.CR- SIGNATURE: [N] [E] o rrc I' KDC I _
SPRINGS.CA 622'2 I pNEI.GR.VGR /4R[N�sTRut msG32l�f
ERtt OWNER: PP.IK�EO Nau_: L1NNN,bq wA
H DF RE,IGOLS SNEYLE G:=ALV S=RINGS _ VICINITY MAP iL
R4C:ET CLJB Rl+ f C'15JRE
iF'R;VGS.CA 92252 f ..iLRE. - .. f I_, I;
CT DR NLH.i'L KEARNEY CC Si.VGR EJO G2-0f 1
r-r60�323>_' - -RINTECE:
ANCY CLASSFGTION N L:_ITY M6L WNNaNNED) PROJECT DIRECTORY
SU'NATL4E - ��R04dI+Rd
X COHSTRJCTION' '.M - i-Y�ObB F�wFST IOIrrt+RG.:FFI[F,• ZJN VG VGR - _..... -. f
-R '-C/P0 SIKiLE F LY RES.- ONi1NLC Gi g]fL 1511E'E 2D] PR NTEC N.VAE: LD•.Y-RY+1V'Ri- Pmel� I--r•,.�
PANNE]CE'. CNERI-0-CHDRCP _ JI I- -I
REPRESEMtiN•E tE oH9AF Npy- _�--JR�-� J
LEASE PAE4 T_.t SC.F" SJXN4 NW9GER HaA P.U1L i3[ 292-5.95 „Y r-�
C WNIOER DENS OENWCO '9G9)915-3651 RF EN[.NEER Iz
SCRv PNlCEL-NLMBER '11-212-025 DEAE_OPUE NS V.wALEC ewNVER GWNEY �909)9i5 366] FR NTED NAME:
] E 9N V0.CA 1M5B1-39'3 _ g
I=N: CYFALM SPPNS NST N N£
P019! Ra
SGVAtJRE _- : .-
_ _
SHEET?I:LE:
E 33 51 012 CO4LN
11 22 a W ERd.
ON: T.
1
T.-L SANfX.t5TRl9O Ge s2E15 PF-NTEO NWAE —:I __. e,3 m m 4J U -
DN'M"- RC6ER5 P Z--li--.4ii "'� E_ts T."LE = EET
(9 9)R95 90]'
SCO eo0 SCNa�JP.E ---
5 SITE
,Ep 2JX wc.vEE1s P C. -
iDD-48T�CCO •rN 2.0'H A 9EEL 5� PP.:N'EO KAVE
c�:Kip C�1w6 H.FE fIu1S?E14: PFYI511i:Y.�
SS DESCRIPT DN .PrVNE 25 b -
RGPOSA' IS FCR TH STALA'ION OF(6)PRNEL 'F4C 14]5)+'O 09648 SI.^.NAil1ftE' —U /N5C1135ir I_
E:Rac tte Rtl_— £"k IE`QRI�17eL
AS f2 PER SECTOR C E_APM N MCJVTE]WITH K R A j N { - I 4E
EC b E I.-GI iE iH'J CFPS.:;E SLOV..'RE IN 4V -' �L CD 3
T=1
+ `
.2 'Er'Lamtlan�:.6
2C19��2
ReportGeographic Coordinates at Proposed A.qte nna s
T . .Mobile,
Stick Together'
Legal DescrilptJOR
Access Route
ZZ,
site
a., Basis of Bearings
Lease Area
IZI-1 17 i1Z. Bench Mark
EON I
-- Utility Route
I KDC
Vicinity Map nsesrr's Parcel No. Date of Survey
CQLVADA
SURVEYING,INC.!
------------
JJ i
T-1-T
RAP'L I I G
----------- I EW-
E24205E
SPIRITUAL LIVING 1
0
RWERS(DE
PACOVET CLUR ROA.D
TOPOGRAPHIC
SURVEY
!j
LS 1
-,,PAS PREPARED
/' T . .Mobile
I Stick Together'
Oi ExSrnG,�ra..s✓NnG fl'F ul• .251 EmauK•l E'e.
O6irvG.r 0 •T221C
(111 of T--E PoxYR/T¢N L'inRFcrnH+ -PROJECT iKFDF1,71APO.,
_ O n: [BtE U4.vCnE/ [V—E aoR0,.cr� C 3f I_24205L
-- _� O Ire �-_
1—i-YCHLE 5'-0'R]E—TT WE—' SF'R.I J LI'vIIJG
O CEO i aT SnE rWia�wrvrP-ruac uE�sErt�' 21P.ALM 5 RIYa-r CA 96 ROAZ-
62
kwERSIDE COI.N-Y
tZ�NERI+[L kV 1:EJ IIrCURR N U Ar
V E C'E — t rz•[
_ _ ORTH=1cE OF wE s x=..EE;.0.11 r GSUED FOR:
-E4-4--T.
t):ROSEC_.t'i u[nr EO.�.n,P. a .Ox.
LCr zr LOT 22 _
zz _OT 2a ti_ v- 70N11IG SUBVIT n"L J
.,.
-RN=-Ar Rla-I N
PROP/'OSEDT ; f,, PN x'
I PR -MI'S,RCi E➢ P.A'SE:
. I 2Jvl�t PflsEx' u[-
AREA , ,_, ; C
SSIEa FOR REVSE.t uG5
— � SEE Y, sR -tag ,• zGn»C iH�
I � �� E�/Cer.0 C.4
�DRA- BY.CHK.: AFV.:
/' y A1G5 ARFS D-
Y:
— —— R 6 S'Ta LE a OFOSEC'PF9.iEG SaJ(FSEFE
o t
LOT I? R ,I
�� KDC
�',—'T - - - _ xam sn�rar mErtE ma•P.0 -
sqj'-5't V C t.C£?ROPOSEC[IPSL•.E SC IAL E i 17 n
I I•aDoERn LwE nE451'N_M'.s'-xa,_}___L-- --__- -- -_ -- ;
S'.
3L
I H-=ET
RACQUET CLUB ROAD
-}-- - - --- - - --- --- - - --- - - -- C'vEF4LL SITE PLAN
f
I I:
rSHEEf N..N9ER- RE':-SIC N.—
C OVERALL SITE PLAN c 210 40'
.� c [A:.1 3
C'
CD 209052
— — F�E�IEi3�1(3TES
-Mobile s!
Stick Together'
O1 fx!Srn[ELu_r !n�T-1Euz1;1x,C1.,
C`O EY Sr.vL Nu[5•.!n.iC ff 4ENU.t:f,•TCirl I -vs .wir<4! l 3 •! �C I
[[S,vG c_rv. iPB m 9E REY4.Fil a E.CwS::rG+➢5�-
o .:,!... :�� : ,.
S,R R n._G E�42D5c
/ Tr � SPIK TUP LI I'.�
j [ O u -nG Es v a R2r.�Tfo 2130 P.t- RP C-.c
O -C R P"AD
- / REa�rvEc r-mH M SPPI--
Ecsrnr Jute I. --�E?-I- 011.'JTY
IXS tic r P rCC,ar(sT
r "D CDR-
a-EA- ES;RI�PiIDP:: .
r r - ; � !,�\ ;Is.zxo,•.I`z iownc pEVI�E] _
i. I ' ^ is_la:sNav:r-u s i
{+ ::InC
'I'I 1 Y' /
G'
: IS IFI
O p <' ®ull {{
ERR I .
KBC
AAcHrTEM ENGINEERSS, "r
I I Y 'I ��% ' w•Itp3WiH 51REE5W sWEE
I raz es.ru.aew
II 0
, r ,
'I �5:'EET il'LE:'
EXISTING ENLARGED
SITE PLAN
i
EXISTING ENLARGED SITE PLAN 2'
=; I RT 3
c 5' k
7 2 g052
ANTEi-A/Can%S EDULE ••,• •••^•V •y,.
u ERNA u@ER P F 5S G ° � ,T . .Mobile
SECiM Al1ENlH C!N>ERR ANTENNAS MCCFL nVu@W LOni RVHs lU,GTN O E%ISr , RRpN' [f1]
♦}'_p 1 i4'ei%-551E-R1u B NEW ',B" .5-0 L c1 o i lTTPI
•3 12G' ExIc1:NC yETl:l1 C.N.. lr"�*' Stich Together`
1 - - 8 YEw ],R- - Oj ExISTRG LaNC51PINL iG 69xen i,'1TI[Hl
�y RELCG,Eo PARING SERrvES 315E E-GL'YSn RN:.,SVi'E 2[O
cnTu c. 91,6
ELSIIN+:uR91
/ � A / � O E%5"IN:`Gr Llr[Exwil(YPCPLi 'L =OR?.IF.:IOI�—I
NG L< :E24205E t
ws HG'All-LET EIR-1._GLR-ER r-,,,S:lRtTUA'—
LIVING i
PAG.—T-SEE—1-1 s 11K
- _ — — O 21PA E ftR oGS. C 9 FUA^
- PR@PCSEp t-LC9,IE PNIEL M'rENNAS(6 iG'AL 3 PER SECOR] P.EEA� SPRINGS. G- 26_�
1Oi PRM' D CT--PEPUCEWENi CURE)
RIVERS']-CVIK-Ty
{RELOUTE TnS G P MW 51R PES a REa REc; FRE`•T:'S A r
1Q PW'�POSFl1 i-u➢@L£-PCMER/-C.ROUTE .i
FF/ t�Esw io s�E£i%/A t roc C_WUA Iw !n / n y
�I�6I 2�
Q PR@PGse*—E s'-o'noE umm uswEr^
Q` > I O woPoSE'J'-NYi�.E•.]'-s'.tx'-6'VASE ueFA 55I I rOR:
O PRGP p u�Rl�Q SG. PE1IRG�:,R'CUR LTwN �FEV. 70NNG S.JE.VITT, _
}6' tO6 P(^P"SEC T-upplLE S-p"WAE GPAIIE SCLPEVRE A'fE56 @O]R I c
PR�VPSEO i-NO@L£n-cRwn0.VP-EACII.0 uGH�Fl
(]i@fAL) 'ICS`R.EZ FOR
\ O tYi5R05E0 i-NO@lE. 0 p:C[GNC.RCCES x, n -•`W
:51 "SSTfp FEk°.11
•1 i�J�r- '� / / WNRWAY `}_ LJ R xG�EAEN N
V /////// .GENERAL NOT,ES � nc s @N
U c o
' ^ .GE° E . 6V+p
E fG.FSE., w.5
II,
PP PF-E'Nt2V� P U Ry�LE4EniRS L u lin cE5[i`
CL Pf '
9 6_0 V 0. �IIU III✓ aRE.
2Y 4K.:
13 J I, <I '—'
t' L
I
0 1 S I[ L
�\ < , A, WN
r I
KDt I
——
IG ARCFIifEOS.ENGIHEERS,�E.
I � —— 6REN6TRFfTSW aRExoo j
'3i -5•,EASE.+F.EA
° EGSO ROB s r Ir NSLIRr.
I U
<'
=I i`
i rSH_Ei TILE:
I ;
q-
PROPOSED ENLARGED
517E FLAN
e
PROPOSED ENLARGED SITE PLAN c• a s' I REZR .�: ,R,I -InN . Awlf
z
r�
1 2C9CCK
i
T . .Mobile•-
O EY_i3Y i.W[5JPnG� _lWN(TP.�i ••�
ORRDR M T_YD U EM56tE SOOIP:u JE - Stick TWe#her.
3 PRDRE6E➢i-YD&IE PallEL 1111EMIL.S d?OT.1.1 RER SEt�ORr
ORRDRDSED I—LE ELII—4IXIHiEl,WRH+r SCV'.PIi1RF III E.—1 RCN.SIME 2M
OVROP.^;gp T-RIC6H£CEN%0.CRrtE 1prHN SCLTPNRE 9NfARiD,G 9`]6+
fi PRCP09E°T-M E]' .-0 1ROE C.➢SLEE—E.DOOR
- Q FRO.: T IYFflR AT H�
rT- 30L[efti!IN BRLNLRLON[ 3E24205E
Q oRDrosm i-E,cecE RERILEYEIf cuRe SP"R!:U.AL L''v IN'�-
O IX6l`C C C.LIFR
RzCGUGT CLUB ROAD
f�`.e.a?ORD:�i-:^9iLE'3P5 sOUL ORr h T. PRO'+OSEO i-Mo9RE LAPS LE S:uE�uRE 1�0 EMOPostD 6tRRx i[In:TEl E—vHwl4 io aE Dr. PALM SPRINGS.CA 9 2i2
V •_ cR m swE a scw Rm x ivlf:nruu+¢s Rh'ERS'AE VDU NTY
(io ee scanua,[o er cEHIEa]
—CjRP,.NT SS1JF QATc-__
nr.T z nnn r:. nnpp/rn G
L'V 'J V,20 I V
OE RRcr�'sY--ucR.E.wT_?w� y III=1 h 4 x RRcvc i-uORiIF nrREksu `1 !I r
'3_5
-
N N 1 SSU=Q FQR-
uL]II14u {uEs
+ REV_ ZONING SUB'R<TT,�,L !
�R V.:=QATE=====CRI PTI
Y,' fI� - '� S �I :D2/2C�° 90R ZLf11W RENEW
• I {f'1 �� l' ,�. ' g�uEe FnR Rers° _
fi L]� $LNI�?ENEw
z5°ED9e
111E€awm .>Ms
ICI. a
III III
_ i 4-i ARIA EJC
- - - - PL N3 PREPARE Y:
KDC
RD.IXREMING€NEEDS.P.C.
Ll
yf} �� I� _ r f:cL
IC rwri
-
S�E`T TITLE:
/1,SOUTH ELEVATION o 2' EAST ELEVATION o 2 SC 1TH & EA..ST
_ C-N, i
4
Am i
PQ3
•
ERICSSON
r r� c c r� S � �'J r V JJ � C C
SUPERIOR SITE DESIGN, FOR FASTER
MOBILE BROADBAND ROLLOUT
CRICJSON l�.".APSULC SITE: - WHAT IS IT?
> A piece of art intended for
prime display
> An all-in-one radio base
station site
N
_s
c�.
0 Ericsson AB 2010 Ericsson Commercial in Confidence 28 RB52111,6000+Capsule,Stealth,Mar 2010 2010-03-08
THE: SUP 'FRIOR Drr-- SIGN
> Prime display and branding
Olh
> Customized with colors and lighting 0110
Io
lid `TV
-12
n
r «
! I
I
x u I
it
i
i
y§g
kv
0 Ericsson AB 2010 Ericsson Commercial in Confidence 29 RBS2111,6000+Capsule,Stealth,Mar 2010 2010-03-08
ALL - IN - ONr-
r r
> Encapsulated and pre-assembled
- no climbing personell during installation
> Footprint < 50% of standard site
- Faster and easier site placement and lower rental costs
> Up to 50 % faster installation than standard site
> HEX cooler door: Acoustic Noise 57 — 63 dBA
> Dimensions: 14m or 20 m tall, 2x2x2m triangle base
> Wind speed : 45 m/s (max 80 m/s)
RBS6201 w BBU6201
.r
•
0&&son AB 2010 Ericsson Commercial in Confidence 30 RBS2111,6000+Capsule,Stealth,Mar 2010 2010-03-08
,f.-"*,*APSU LC SITE: SUMMARY
Mobile broadband coverage now!
- Fast complement to inbuilding solutions
> Branding opportunities with colors and lighting
Integrated touchscreen and scrolling advertising panel
- Info central, wall-newspaper, time-table, promotions...
,p
i
- r. I lift.
.L. Wi
0 Ericsson AB 2010 Ericsson Commercial in Confidence 31 RBS2111,6000+Capsule,Stealth,Mar 2010 2010-03-08
Zoning RF Map Summary
E24205E
T —Mobile stidc TF er Confidential and Proprietary Information of T-Mobile USA 1
r.
1
�7T ii/ l
l
Las. •
L PJ
r -�[�1R�R1�7. �ram�■ i � � -.
N
' / f i • • • • • f i i i
Y`.
i
f �
� r
--- -_-_ - ----
. 21
■
AI
-400
�I ■
101 :1111A��� �
I f
mug,
11 LFL�� ■�i� i �F`�l'�
. •
t -
,
��IEy
.�/�,� ice,, •
O!
WIN . , _-
•�
.0104M
�, 4;I.
� l� Illfl�� ■
E3IEII �
� • i
a -
I
7�
r
I jr
s
-; p ill
I 7 IY # # # #
�CILSI
Coverage Improvement Comparison Table
Overall Coverage Improvement comparison
{ Coverage Gap 1.35 isq miles
% Improvement on
Coverage Gap Improvement from Area (sq miles) the Coverage Gap
(Overall)
*Losing approximately 20% of coverage improvement if the height
is reduced by$'
N
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF PALM SPRINGS
APPEAL OF CASE NO. 5.1246 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT & 6.523 VARIANCE
T-MOBILE WEST CORPORATION
2100 EAST RACQUET CLUB ROAD
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Palm Springs, California, will
hold a public hearing at its meeting of Wednesday, December 1, 2010. The City Council
meeting begins at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber at City Hall, 3200 East Tahquitz Canyon
Way, Palm Springs.
The purpose of the hearing is to consider an appeal of the Planning Commission's September 8,
2010, denial of a Conditional Use Permit and Variance application for the construction and
operation of a forty-seven and one-half foot tall commercial communication antenna contained
within a sculptural monopole. The application included a Variance application to exceed the
maximum antenna height permitted from thirty-nine feet to forty-seven and a one-half feet for
the property located at 2100 Racquet Club Road, Zoned PD 160.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: This project is categorically exempt from
environmental review pursuant to Section 15332 (Class 32 — In-Fill Development Projects) of
the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
REVIEW OF PROJECT INFORMATION: The proposed application, site plan and related
documents are available for public review at City Hall between the hours of 8.00 a.m. to 11:00
a.m. and 2:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday through Thursday. Please contact the Office of the
City Clerk at (760) 323-8204 if you would like to schedule an appointment to review these
documents.
COMMENT ON THIS APPLICATION: Response to this notice may be made verbally at the
Public Hearing and/or in writing before the hearing. Written comments may be made to the City
Council by letter (for mail or hand delivery) to:
James Thompson, City Clerk
3200 E. Tahquitz Canyon Way
Palm Springs, CA 92262
Any challenge of the proposed project in court may be limited to raising only those issues raised
at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City
Clerk at, or prior, to the public hearing. (Government Code Section 65009[b][2]).
An opportunity will be given at said hearing for all interested persons to be heard. Questions
regarding this case may be directed to David A. Newell, Planning Services Department at (760)
323-8245.
Si necesita ayuda con esta carta, porfavor (lame a la Ciudad de Palm Springs y puede hablar
con Nadine Fieger telefono (760) 323-8245.
mes Thompson, City Clerk
�.i cer
04 9ALM SA,P N
4 N Department of Planning Services `"
�....
•C'�4,FORN�'• Vicinity Map S
d.. .......... _ ._.... _..—...�.. ....
I ,
! POWELL RD
.......
o
cti 1....... l ........ .........
tXy tfS .
i
_.
RD
i ,
....... i ........ _.__.._ .....................
......... .. I......... . ........ ........ i. ...... ..,..
_.... _.. _ ----
DE LAGO RD ..........
F
i
� I
... . ... L... .........._..,....
RACQUET CLUB RD
...... , ....... ....... ....
f o
W ......I.......
, _ ._ _.._.
ROCHELLE RD
....
Legend _
400ftBufter j ! ( r'
® Site
..r i
Parcels 3 ............
� I
3
i
CITY OF PALM SPRINGS
CASE: 5.1246 CUP & 6.523 VAR DESCRIPTION: To consider an appeal of the
Planning Commission's September 8, 2010, denial of a
APPLICANT: T-Mobile West Corp. Conditional Use Permit and Variance application for
the construction and operation of a forty-seven and
one-half foot tall commercial communication antenna
contained within a sculptural monopole located at 2100
East Racquet Club Road, Zone PD 160, Section 1.
54
w�Pw PM w r
September 29, zolo
Mr.James Thompson
City Clerk
City of Palm Springs
320o E.Tahquitz Canyon Way
Palm Springs, CA 92262
KDC RE: Request for Appeal of Planning Commission
ARCHITKTS.ENGINEERS,P.C. Action(Case No.5.1246 CUP and 6.523 VAR)Y-
Seattle Office Proposed T-Mobile Commercial Communication
4720 200"St,SW, Antenna Structure,210o E. Racquet Club Road
Suite 200
Lynnwood,WA Dear Mr.Thompson:
98036
425-670-8651
Fax 425-712-0846 KDC Architects, Engineers, P.C.,on behalf of T-Mobile
West Corporation,respectfully requests an appeal to the
Denver City Council of the City of Palm Springs of Planning
Corporate/Main Commission actions on September 8, 2010 pertaining to
Office 7442 S.Tucson Way, Case No. 5.1246 CUP and 6.523 VAR.This appeal is
Suite 180, submitted in accordance with Section 2.05.040 of the
Englewood,Colorado Palm Springs Municipal Code for the City Council's review,
80112 consideration and action.As required, please find a check
303-750-6999
Fax 303-750-0236 attached to cover the cost of the appeal filing fees.
Corona Office At this public hearing,the Planning Commission did not
411 Jenks Circle make the required findings and denied the application for
Suite 101
Corona,CA 92880 the proposed project.We hereby request an appeal of this
951-273-9237 action,and for the City Council to overturn the Planning
Fax 951-273-1816 Commission's denial and to approve the requested
Santa Rosa Office Conditional Use Permit and Variance.
1220 N Dutton Ave
Suite 107 Thank you for your time and consideration in the
Santa Rosa, CA 95401 processing of this appeal request. Please contact me at
707-541-2344 P g PP q
Fax 707-541-2301 949-295-9031 to discuss and coordinate the scheduling of
KDC Asia Ltd. this appeal before the City Council.
472 Expand Building Level 5 Res ctfully su itte
Rajchadapisek Road,Samsen
Noak,
Huaykwang,
Bangkok 10320 � s . R es
+66(0)2938 9083 n behalf of KDC Archit s, Engineers, PC
Fax+fifi(0)2938 9087 Authorized Agent for T-Mobile
per - Cc(-� C s « --�,CA�Nte
�,ATE cc.-r���=, `it `�'(c�► �_ %'���.�,—
C7TY OF F�LM SPRIN8S
R�CVD BYx CR
01000037741
PAYDR: KDC ARC9I7EC?S ENG
TODAY`S DATE: O9/3O/1D
. RE�IgTER �ATE: 09/3O/�� 7IME: 1O�54
DEGCRIPTlDN AMOUNT
DTHER CHARGES SVCS
$546'0O
CUST ID: APPE�L FILE
----------------
TDTAL INE: $546.00
_ . CHECK PAID: $546.D0
CHECK NO: 59'�5
TENDERED: $546.00
^nAN6Ex
$.00
� ~
Kathie Hart
From: David Newell
Sent: October 11, 2010 8:16 AM
To: Jay Thompson; Kathie Hart
Subject: FW: T-Mobile Site at 2100 E. Racquet Club Road, Palm Springs- Planning Case 5.1246 CUP &
6.523 VAR
Jay/ Kathie,
r-Mobile has waived the 45-day appeal review requirement. Please see the email below.
David A. Newell
'\ssociatc Planticr
".;.its- of.balm.Spx.Ing's
5200 E.` anduitz Canyon.W;i.Y
:1.0.:13ox 2743
'<�isax 1y.G.irtl s,(.;.A 92263..2 7,1.3
:)ffi(:t: (760) 323-8245 Fax: (760).:32' 8360
From: Paul, Linda (Ontario CA) [mailto:Linda.Paul6@T-Mobile.com]
Sent: Friday, October 08, 2010 10:12 AM
ro: David Newell; Jim Rogers
Subject: RE: T-Mobile Site at 2100 E. Racquet Club Road, Palm Springs - Planning Case 5.1246 CUP &6.523 VAR
-Ii David,
r-Mobile is willing to waive the 45-day requirement. Please schedule us for the council hearing on November 17 if
)ossible. If you need a more formal letter from me, let me know.
3est regards,
_inda Paul
Linda Paul
honing and Government Relations Manager
T-Mobile West Corporation
nland Empire
;257 E.Guasti Rd., Suite 200
)ntario,CA 91761
)ffice 909-975-3698
vlobile 909-292-5095
?ax 909-975-3637
inda.paul6@t-mobile.com
the information provided in this email is proprietary and confidential.
-rom: David Newell [ma ilto:David.Newel l@palmsprings-ca.gov]
lent: Thursday, October 07, 2010 6:08 PM
ro: Jim Rogers
X: Paul, Linda (Ontario CA)
subject: T-Mobile Site at 2100 E. Racquet Club Road, Palm Springs - Planning Case 5.1246 CUP &6.523 VAR
1ni11i1n
James,
The City received your appeal and we are required to schedule your appeal for Council review within 45 days of the
appeal date. Unless you waive 45-day requirement, the appeal would be scheduled for November 3, 2010. The
next possible Council meeting date is November 17, 2010, Would you like the project to be reviewed on November
3, or would you like the 45-day requirement waived at this time so that the project can be reviewed by the Council
:)n November 17, 2010? Please advise.
Thank you,
David A. Newell
l�ssoci te Planner,
f: ity cA t''111n `pri:11.9s
3200 F-I'.aliquitz C.:atxc-on Way
Box `43
l'ahn Spri.ags, 92263..2 43
f icc:: (;6(.)' 323...s'45 Fax: (''60) 322-8360
Oft 7AtiMSp�
' City of Palma Springs
Department of Planning Services
* MCp4p�RAYp 9qe 3200 E.'ahqquitz Canyon Way • Palm Springs,California 92262
Tel:(760)323-8245 • Fax:(760)322-8360 • Web:wwwpalmspringsca.gov
94IFO9
September 16, 2010
Ms. Linda Paul
Zoning &Governmental Manager
T-Mobile West Corporation
3257 East Guasti Road, Suite 200
Ontario, California 91761
RE: Case No..5.1246 CUP &6.523 VAR-.Commercial Communication Antenna Structure at
2100 East Racquet Club Road
Ms. Paul,
On September 8, 2010 the Planning Commission held a public hearing for Case Nos. 5.1246
CUP & 6.523 VAR. The Planning Commission evaluated all the evidence presented including
but not limited to the staff report, and all written and oral testimony provided. The Planning
Commission was unable to make the required findings for -the project and DENIED the
applications. The Planning Commission's,minutes will be forthcoming once adopted by the
Commission.
In accordance with section 2.05.040 of the Palm Springs Municipal Code, you may appeal the
decision of the Planning Commission to the City Council within fifteen days of the date of
Commission's action. The appeal request must be in writing and presented to the. Clty Clerk
with a fee of$546.00 by 6:00 PM Monday, October 4, 2010. If you have any questions about .
this letter, please contact me at(760) 323-8245.
Sincerely,
David A. Newell
Associate Planner
cc: Mr. James Rogers
�Case'''t*fle
6 ity`'C1erk
Post Office Box 2743 • Palm Springs, California 92263-2743
2.05.040 Time of filing.
The notice required by Section 2.05.030 shall be filed no later than ten days following the
date of mailing to appellant of notice of the action from which the appeal is to cen or, if there is
no sucE-m--ai-ri-n-g-a-n-cr-or--n-o-nUTrfFequired, no later than fifteen days following the date of the
action which is the subject of the appeal. The city clerk shall furnish a copy of the appeal to the
respondent within five days after filing. (Ord. 1226 § 1 (part), 1984)
2.05.050 Time of hearing—Notice.
(a) The city clerk, upon receipt of the notice of appeal, shall set a time and place for
the hearing of such appeal by the council. The appeal shall be heard no more than forty-five days
following the filing of the notice of appeal unless the parties waive such time limits.
(b) Notice of the time and place of the hearing shall be mailed or otherwise delivered
by the city clerk to the appellant, respondent and all other persons, if any, to whom notice of the
initial application or action was required, not less than ten days prior to hearing. If publication of
the initial application or action being appealed was required, the notice of appeal shall be
published in like manner. (Ord. 1233 § 1, 1985: Ord. 1226 § 1 (part), 1984)
Kathie Hart
From: David Newell
Sent: November 02, 2010 5:58 PM
To: Jay Thompson; Kathie Hart
Cc: Craig Ewing; Edward Robertson
Subject: FW: IE24205E Center for Spiritual Living - Request for Extended CC Hearing Date
Jay & Kathie,
The applicant/appellant for the T-Mobile wireless facility (Planning Case 5.1246 CUP &6.523 VAR) has requested
that their project be rescheduled for review at a later date. Please see their email below, and let me know the next
possible date.
Thanks,
David
From: Paul, Linda (Ontario CA) [mailto:Linda,Paul6@T-Mobile.com]
Sent: Tuesday, November 02, 2010 4:56 PM
To: David Newell
Cc: Richard Laird; Les Cooley; Gonzales, Jarryd; Jim Rogers
Subject: RE: IE24205E Center for Spiritual Living - Request for Extended CC Hearing Date
Hi David,
Please reschedule our City Council appeal hearing for December 1 if possible. If the agenda for that day is full,
then the 15th will be OK.
Thanks for your help,
Linda
Linda Paul
Zoning and Government Relations Manager
:T-Mobile West.Corporation
Inland Empire
3257 E. Guasti Rd., Suite 200
Dntario,CA 91761
Office 909-975-3698
Mobile 909-292-5095
Fax 909-975-3637
Indapaul6@t-mobile.com
The information provided in this email is proprietary and confidential.
From: Jim Rogers [mailto:jim.ropers@jamesrogersconsulting.com]
Sent: Tuesday, November 02, 2010 4:52 PM
ro: Paul, Linda (Ontario CA)
Cc: Richard Laird; Les Cooley; Gonzales, Jarryd
Subject: IE24205E Center for Spiritual Living - Request for Extended CC Hearing Date
_inda,
Per our earlier discussion today, I spoke with David Newell, Palm Springs Planning Dept. about extending the City
Council hearing date beyond the planned November 17th.
David is okay with extending the City Council hearing to a later date. The two dates available in December are the
1st and 15th. He requested that you (since your okayed the original 45 day waiver) send him an email today or
tomorrow formally asking for the hearing to be re-scheduled for which ever date you prefer, 12/1 or 12/15.
Regards,
Jim Rogers
JAMES ROGERS CONSULTING
31097 Via Sonora
San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675
Office : 949.388.3973
Mobile : 949.295.9031
Fax : 949.388.3973
E-mail ; J.im_,_Rogers@jamesrogerscons_ulting.com.
www_.jamesrogersco_nsu_Iti ng.com
11/03/10
QpLM S
A.
Cityf PalmSprings
o
Department of Planning Services
* 'roC�kPokATONAA� * 3200 E.Tahquirz Canyon Way • Palm Springs, California 92262
C' �P Tel: (760).323-8245 • Fax: (760) 322-8360 • Web: www.palmspringsca.gov
q<r�oRN
September 16, 2010
Ms. Linda Paul
Zoning & Governmental Manager
T-Mobile West Corporation
3257 East Guasti Road, Suite 200
Ontario, California 91761
RE: Case No. 5.1246 CUP & 6.523 VAR-- Commercial Communication Antenna Structure at
2100 East Racquet Club Road
Ms. Paul,
On September 8, 2010 the Planning Commission held a public hearing for Case Nos. 5.1246
CUP & 6.523 VAR. The Planning Commission evaluated all the evidence presented including
but not limited to the staff report, and all written and oral testimony provided. The Planning
Commission was unable to make the required findings for the project and DENIED the
applications. The Planning Commission's minutes will be forthcoming once adopted by the
Commission.
In accordance with section 2.05.040 of the Palm Springs Municipal Code, you may appeal the
decision of the Planning Commission to the City Council within fifteen days of the date of
Commission's action. The appeal request must be in writing and presented to the City Clerk
with a fee of $546.00 by 6:00 PM Monday, October 4, 2010. If you have any questions about
this letter, please contact me at(760) 323-8245.
Sincerely,
lelp
David A. Newell
Associate Planner
cc: Mr. James Rogers
Case File
City Clerk
Post Office Box 2743 0 Palm Springs, California 92263-2743 3
CITY OF PALM SPRINGS
PUBLIC HEARING NOTIFICATION
a
F .
q<i10 APF
City Council
Meeting Date: December 1, 2010
Subject: T-Mobile Appeal - 2100 East Racquet Club Road
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION
I, Kathie Hart, Chief Deputy City Clerk, of the City of Palm Springs, California, do hereby
certify that a copy of the attached Notice of Public Hearing was published in the Desert Sun
on November 20, 2010.
declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
Kathie Hart, CMC
Chief Deputy City Clerk
AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING
I, Kathie Hart, Chief Deputy City Clerk, of the City of Palm Springs, California, do hereby
certify that a copy of the attached Notice of Public Hearing was posted at City Hall, 3200 E.
Tahquitz Canyon Drive, on the exterior legal notice posting board and in the Office of the
City Clerk on November 18, 2010.
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
Kathie Hart, CMC
Chief Deputy City Clerk
AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING
I, Kathie Hart, Chief Deputy City Clerk, of the City of Palm Springs, California, do hereby
certify that a copy of the attached Notice of Public Hearing was mailed to each and every
person on the attached list on November 18, 2010, in a sealed envelope, with postage
prepaid, and depositing same in the U.S. Mail at Palm Springs, California. (86 notices)
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
Kathie Hart, CMC
Chief Deputy City Clerk
64
The Desert Sun Certificate of Publication
750 N Gene Autry Trail
Palm Springs,CA 92262
760-7784578/Fax 760-778-4731
State Of California ss:
County of Riverside
Advertiser: s
CITY OF PALM SPRINGS/LEGALS tf'
PO BOX 2743 2, j
PALM SPRINGS CA 92263231V
b bold,
2CUaWprB�
§taw a tfldC�}undt
2000234913
'Tha M ,.ioe=b Is10 aoneMe[an
tlbn�'a
' 00eht4eA.: a
a,
I am over the age of 18 years old, a citizen of the United > '- m'
States and not a party to, or have interest in this matter. I to-
hereby certify that the attached advertisement appeared d 'ZO •
in said newspaper (set in type not smaller than non pariel)
in each and entire issue of said newspaper and not in any
supplement thereof on the following dates,to wit �-
Newspaper .The Desert Sun
11/20/2010
�rmegr U
r.
f ,
I acknowledge that I am a principal clerk of the printer of
The Desert Sun, printed and published weekly in the City
of Palm Springs, County of Riverside, State of California. f
r#eF�q P�lraWeM ta.,S4etloa 15ta2
The Desert Sun was adjudicated a newspaper of general 82-IrtFIY qym
circulation on March 24, 1988 by the Superior Court of the ' x
County of Riverside, State of California Case No. �- aAON' i
191236.
rml�ew.�4SY
Hal � raroE.$ s1a toYT,Oepa:rn.
" to
declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is truest laar
feY'I@a' dmCaa OM;
and correct. Executed on this 20th day of November, 2010 TX�
e�oapa,�q +rorbmyet$pia
in Palm Springs,California. it
T (Jak
j alnspHnOe,.Cn Way
My �C to POWWOW
11 tow
° tea tifted
Declarant ^— - e0, to nag d w4h� e
s C 40ft Clerk
aodew - , Cie brch@edrrg.(poreneterM
_ _ R.
N _ M7A �l5lreard reper Said heaft for�G
n��r i be,'plrec�d io.Dac9d lt.F"a
Da�bneat&(78p)925-824&-
1a' 1• V SI Ireeeeke aqe ,pgrJ(lvpr tame a
-> Iaea ,ve` mbreaaae
Jam"1 .
Th„, O'Phychilrk p
NEIGHBORHOOD COALITION REPS MR PETE MORUZZI
Case 5.1246 CUP 16.523 VAR MODCOM AND PALM SPRINGS MODERN COMMITTEE
T-Mobile West Corporation HISTORIC SITE REP
PHN for CC Meeting 12.01.10 P.O. BOX 4738
PALM SPRINGS, CA 92263-4738
CITY OF PALM SPRINGS CASE 5,1246 CUP
PLANNING SERVICES DEPARTMENT MRS.JOANNE BRUGGEMANS
ERIFICATION NOTICE-D-C,--0 ATTN SECRETARY-5.1224 ZTA 506 W. SANTA CATALINA ROAD
PO BOX 2743 PALM SPRINGS, CA 92262
PALM SPRINGS, CA 92263-2743
MS MARGARET PARK
GUA CALIENTE BAND OF CAHUILLA AGUA CALIENTE BAND OF CAHUILLA
IDIANS-o-)-o-o--o-o INDIANS
5401 DINAH SHORE DRIVE
PALM SPRINGS, CA 92264
MS LINDA PAUL MR JAMES A. ROGERS
PONSORS T-MOBIL E WEST CORPORATION PROJECT MANAGER
3257 E.GUASTI ROAD, SUITE 200 3257 E.GUASTI ROAD, SUITE 200
ONTARIO, CA 91761 ONTARIO, CA 91761
MR RICHARD LAIRD REV. DR. MICHAEL KEARNEY
KDC ARCHITECTS, ENGINEERS PC CENTER FOR SPIRITUAL LIVING
411 JENKS CIRCLE, SUITE 101 2100 E. RACQUET CLUB ROAD
CORONA, CA 92880 PALM SPRINGS,CA 92262
� i
APN: 501-231-007 2. APN:501-231-008 3. APN:501-231-009
IZABETH A RUHLE BRENDA LEE RODRIGUEZ JUDITH E&BARRY L WICKLUND
55 N CERRITOS RD 2627 N CERRITOS RD 2601 N CERRITOS RD
,LM SPRINGS CA 92262-2532 PALM SPRINGS CA 92262-2532 PALM SPRINGS CA 92262-2532
APN:501-231-010 5. APN: 501-231-011 6. APN: 501-231-012
TER R SCHE,NCK TERRY&DIANNA GIBBONS PEDRO&JAZMIN RAMIREZ,
040 CAREFREE DR 2626 N CYPRESS RD 2694 N CYPRESS RD
DIO CA 92201-8489 PALM SPRINGS CA 92262-2541 PALM SPRINGS CA 92262-2541
APN:501-232-008 8. APN: 501-232-009 9. APN: 501-234-002
NN LINDA DEW INOCENCTO&LOLTTA L GARCIA FEDERAL NATL MTG ASSN FNMA
;25 N CYPRESS RD 2605 N CYPRESS RD 10920 WILSHIRE BLVD
kLM SPRINGS CA 92262-2542 PALM SPRINGS CA 92262-2542 LOS ANGELES CA 90024
). APN: 501-234-003 IL APN:501-234-007 12. APN:501-234-008
AVID&CHRISTINE PASSALACQUA DEON C FOX 13ERNARD&MARY BE'TH PALADINO
3745 CRUISE CIRCLE DR 2020 E RACQUET CLUB RD 3740 MOSS RIDGE CT
ANYON LAKE CA 92587-7731 PALM SPRINGS CA 92262-2621 LAS VEGAS NV 89147-6811
3. APN: 501-234-010 14. APN: 501-234-011 15. APN:501-234-012
R&MADELEINE L SHIRLEY LORENE I IUTCI IINS A MICHAEL RIMM R.
501 E 29T"AVE 160 SHERRI LN 2525 N CERRITOS RD
1FNVER CO 80238 OCEANSIDE CA 92054-5327 PALM SPRINGS CA 92262
6. APN: 501-263-018 17. APN: 501-263-019 18. APN:501-263-020
)AVID G SIIELEP DAVID&TRISHA MAOZ SCOTT M NORTON
:222 E WAYNE RD 4125 INGLEWOOD BLVD#7 300 MONTEREY BLVD#102
'ALM SPRINGS CA 92262-2570 LOS ANGELES CA 90066-5270 SAN FRANCISCO CA 94131-3153
19. APN: 501-263-021 20. APN: 501-263-022 21. APN: 501-271-001
v1ERCEDEII M&ESFANDIAR NASR NORBERT ANDREW LEI IMAN FRANCISCO J&MARIA S JIMENEZ
1151 E VIA COLUSA 2100 E WAYNE RD 2111 E WAYNE RD
:'ALM SPRINGS CA 92262-6123 PALM SPRINGS CA 92262-2570 PALM SPRINGS CA 92262-2569
22. APN: 501-271-002 23. APN: 501-271-003 24. APN:501-271-004
1'ODD HAUSER SNIDER ANGELITA S CONCEPCION JOHN P&JANET COLOCCIA
2125 E WAYNE RD 2133 F:WAYNE RD 2195 E WAYNE RD
PALM SPRINGS CA 92262-2569 PALM SPRINGS CA 92262-2569 PALM SPRINGS CA 92262-2569
25. APN: 501-271-005 26. APN: 501-271-006 27. APN:501-271-007
DWAYNE LEE BROWN DAVID P MADLAND RACI IEL T&KENNETH D SIEVERS
2237 E WAYNE RD 2307 F'.WAYNE RD 1109 EADINGTON AVE,
PALM SPRINGS CA 92262-2569 PALM SPRINGS CA 92262-2571 FULLERTON CA 92833-3903
28. APN: 501-271-008 29. APN:501-271-015 30. APN:501-271-016
RAMIEN M SHALIZI SCOTT A KOI INERT JOYCE A DESFOSSES
3607 E CAMINO ROJOS 2384 F DEL LAGO RD 2330 E DEL LAGO RD
PALM SPRINGS CA 92262-5421 PALM SPRINGS CA 92262-2516 PALM SPRINGS CA 92262-2516
APN:501-271-017 32. APN:501-271-018 33. APN: 501-271-019
VIER&MARIANNE REYES MICHAEL J&SUSAN M HEIDENREICH THOMAS A HUFF
35 S CHARLOTTE AVE 2292 E DEL LAGO RD 2222 F.DEL LAGO RD
,N GABRIEL CA 91776 PALM SPRINGS CA 92262-2512 PALM SPRINGS CA 92262-2512
APN: 501-271-020 35. APN: 501-271-021 36. APN:501-271-022
ICHAEL BUCK NEAL FAMILY TRUST JUAN&PATRICIA GRACIANO
5 PLACERADO AVE 2120 E DEL LAGO RD 2108 E DEL,LAGO RD
JBURN CA 95603-5320 PALM SPRINGS CA 92262-2512 PALM SPRINGS CA 92262-2512
APN: 501-272-001 38, APN: 501-272-002 39. APN:501-272-003
ICHAEL&TI IF.RHSA GONSKA GAIL,GF;NF,GADDY PETER DEMOPOULOS
05 E DEL LAGO RD 2121 E DEL LAGO RD 1431 LORENA WAY
LLM SPRINGS CA 92262-2512 PALM SPRINGS CA 92262-2511 PALM SPRINGS CA 92262-3405
APN: 501-272-004 41. APN: 501-272-005 42. APN:501-272-006
ICHAEL A TUCCI BRIAN L MARION DEAN R ESTRADA
13 E DEL LAGO RD 2265 E DEL LAGO RD 301 W 64TH ST
LLM SPRINGS CA 92262-2511 PALM SPRINGS CA 92262-2511 INGLEWOOD CA 90302-1127
APN: 501-272-007 44. APN:501-272-008 45. APN:501-272-009
1RY B&K I M D GLLAND SCOTT&KARIN MELVARD GABRIEL IRA&CLARICE HANNA LUBEL
27 E DEL LAGO RD 2413 E DEL LAGO RD PO BOX 1388
tLM SPRINGS CA 92262-2515 PALM SPRINGS CA 92262-2515 PALM SPRINGS CA 92263-1388
APN:501-272-016 47. APN:501-272-018 48. APN: 501-272-025
IOMAS P&MARY M MULIIALL VIRGINIA A TYLER ClTURCH OF RELIGIOUS SCIENCE OF
817 KERSTEN RD 2280 E RACQUET CLUB RD 2100 E RACQUET CLUB RD
kNCIIO MIRAGE CA 92270-3626 PALM SPRINGS CA 92262-2625 PALM SPRINGS CA 92262-2625
APN:501-272-026 50, APN: 501-291-005 51. APN: 501-291-006
ARK J&DOROTHY M HASTINGS THOMAS&KATI IY REINHARD ROBERT J&13ARBARA A EVES
00 E RACQUET CLUB RD 2099 E RACQUET CLUB RD 2080 E ROCHELLE RD
ELM SPRINGS CA 92262-2629 PALM SPRINGS CA 92262-2620 PALM SPRINGS CA 92262-3432
APN: 501-291-007 53. APN: 501-291-008 54. APN:501-291-013
15 'PI I S&JULIA AN DELIA ANDRE AFFLECK JAMES A DAVIDSON
�60 E ROCHELLE RD 836 12TI I CT 8501 E 29T"AVE
ULM SPRINGS CA 92262-3432 MANHATTAN BEACH CA 90266-4908 DENVER CO 80238
APN: 501-291-014 56, APN: 501-292-019 58. APN: 501-321-004
1E ANN MCCLAIN KARLA ANDERSON JEFFRE Y L&JACQUELYN K MORGAN
105 E RACQUET,CLUB RD 2395 N CERRITOS DR 2245 E RACQUET CLUB RD
ELM SPRINGS CA 92262-2620 PALM SPRINGS CA 92262-3410 PALM SPRINGS CA 92262-2622
I. APN:501-321-005 60, APN: 501-321-006 61. APN: 501-321-007
kTRICK J R0131NSON CIPRIANO&MARGARITA GUTIERREZ EDWARD A&SARA NEAL
:52 F:ROCI IELLE RD 2242 E ROCHELLE RD 2222 F ROCHELLE RD
kI,M SPRINGS CA 92262-3656 PALM SPRINGS CA 92262-3656 PALM SPRINGS CA 92262-3656
v f
!. APN: 501-321-008 63. APN:501-321-009 64. APN:501-321-010
NDA FOCE VICTORIA STARKE JAMES R BASILE
!00 E ROCHELLE RD 2140 E ROCHELLE RD 2100 E ROCHELLE RD
4LM SPRINGS CA 92262-3656 PALM SPRINGS CA 92262-3657 PALM SPRINGS CA 92262-3657
>. APN: 501-321-012 66. APN:501-321-013 67. APN: 501-321-014
ARK WILLIAM PARRIS WILLIAM FRANKLIN CLEMENTS HSBC BANK USA NA SARM 2005-18
,75 E RACQUET CLUB RD 2101 E RACQUET CLUB RD 2127 F,RACQUET CLUB RD
kLM SPRINGS CA 92262-2622 PALM SPRINGS CA 92262-2622 PALM SPRINGS CA 92262-2622
APN: 501-323-001 69. APN:501-323-014 70. APN:501-324-018
RADY MCGUIRE LYDIA E RINGWALD J SCOT"T&LORAIN J HEWITT"
;75 N MAGNOLIA RD PO BOX 2364 2380 N CERRITOS DR
ALM SPRINGS CA 92262-3653 LACUNA HILLS CA 92654-2364 PALM SPRINGS CA 92262-3412
1. APN:501-324-019 72. APN:501-3 3 1-001 73. APN: 501-331-002
AURIH S LEVINSON GIRDNER JACK&V FAMILY TRUST HOUSING AUTHORITY COUNTY OF RI
W MOONSTONE DR 2279 E RACQUET CLUB RD 5555 ARLINGTON AVE
[GNAL BILL,CA 90755-5625 PALM SPRINGS CA 92262-2622 RIVERSIDE CA 92504-2506
1. APN: 501-331-014 75. APN: 501-331-015 76. APN:501-333-001
AURA&GREG AUCHTERLONIE ELIAHU SHALOM&HANA ORA EZRAN ROBERT J HUGHES
384 F.ROCHELLE RD 462 S WETHFRLY DR 2390 N MAGNOLIA RD
ALM SPRINGS CA 92262-3660 BEVF',RLY HILLS CA 90211-3520 PALM SPRINGS CA 92262-3654
EPRESENTATIVE
WES ROGERS CONSULTING GC MAPPING SERVICE INC NP
TTN:JIM ROGERS ATTN:GILBERT CASTRO
1097 VIA SONORA 3055 W VALLEY BLVD
AN JUAN CAPISTRANO CA 92675 ALHAM13RA CA 91803
Date: November 22, 2010
To: Palm Springs City Council
From: Victoria Starke Michael Tucci
2140 E. Rochelle Rd. 2213 E. Del Lago Rd.
Palm Springs, CA 92262 Palm Springs, CA 92262
Re: Case No. 5.1246 Conditional Use Permit/6.523 Variance
T-Mobile West Corporation
2100 East Racquet Club Road
On behalf of the 99'signatories of the attached petitionz,this document serves as our formal opposition
to:
1) T-Mobile's request for a 22%(8.5') height variance for their proposed installation of a 47.5'
tall commercial communication antenna contained within a sculptural monopole at 2100
East Racquet Club Road.
2) The installation of a 39'tall commercial communication antenna contained within a
sculptural monopole at 2100 East Racquet Club Road.
In obtaining the attached petitioner signatures, primary focus was given to the residences within the
500' buffer area identified by the Palm Springs Department of Planning Services. The results are:
85 Total residences within 500' buffer area
-17 No one home (after repeated visits)
- 4 Residences opposed to cell phone tower, but reluctant to sign petition
- 6 Residences that didn't want to get involved
- 1 Residence that wanted to do their own research
S7 Total responding residences within 500' buffer
96%(55 out of 57 responding residences) expressed their opposition to the cell phone tower by
signing the attached petition. This represents 71 of the 99 signatory petitioners.
4% (2 out of 57 responding residences) expressed their support for the cell phone tower
12 duplicate signatures have been excluded from the total count of 101. Actual number of unique signatories is
99.
z The original of the first 22 signatures was previously submitted to the Palm Springs Planning Commission on
September 8,2010.
We reserve the right in court to address any other issue or concern regarding this proposed project that
is identified via legal,technical, industry or other relevant expert/expertise not previously identified.
The most cited reasons for the petitioner's opposition are:
1. A residential area is an inappropriate location for a commercial cell phone tower. This
comment/concern was echoed by the City of Palm Springs Planning Commission's
unanimous 6-0 vote denying T-Mobile's request. The Planning Commission noted this
would be the closest co-located cell phone tower to a residential area in the City of Palm
Springs (literally within 75'of several adjacent residences).
2. Reduced property value and marketability.
3. An eyesore. Residents within viewing range of the tower(from all directions and from both
sides of Racquet Club Drive don't want to be forever stuck with the sight of this tower from
their respective front yards, back yards, and/or side yards (regardless of the cell phone
tower's architectural design).
4. Night time light"pollution"from the 4 upward flood lights and the probable accompanying
2.5' aviation light at the top of the cell phone tower. Given Palm Springs' continued
dedication and promotion of night time sky and star visibility, and it's aversion to night time
lighting pollution,this truly seems ironic.
5. Loss of unobstructed natural views.
6. Electronic interference (e.g. wireless networks,cell phone reception from non-T-Mobile
service providers, remote control devices,air wave radio/TV reception,etc. )
7. Increased susceptibility of►ightning strikes in the adjoining(within 75') residential area.
8. Aviation safety(as residents of this specific area,we have first-hand experience that aborted
take-offs and emergency landings occasionally cause planes to fly significantly lower than
usual, and, directly over the proposed location of the 47.5' cell phone tower).
9. Health concerns.
In addition to the above, 28 other people (mostly from nearby and/or adjacent residences outside the
500' buffer)also expressed their opposition to the cell phone tower by signing the attached petition.
Several residents within the affected area have placed "NO CELL TOWER" signs on their property(see
attached)to express their opposition to T-Mobile's request. And,two petitioners have included a
"before" and "after"view from their back yard (without and with the cell phone tower)to demonstrate
the adverse effect the cell phone tower will have on their backyard view.
Federal law allows local governments to disapprove a proposed cell phone tower location if the
placement adversely impacts the property value of nearby residences,or, if it adversely affects the
esthetics of the surrounding area.
Therefore,for all the reasons cited above,the 99 signatories of the attached petition respectfully
request and urge the Palm Springs City Council to affirm the Palm Springs Planning Commission's
unanimous 6-0 decision to den T-Mobile's request to install a cell phone tower at this
location.
We reserve the right in court to address any other issue or concern regarding this proposed project that
is identified via legal,technical, industry or other relevant expert/expertise not previously identified.
IS a t` �,t I C'L L --ro w L-of' t o rc
A
e� ..�M s C7�QaSEm �o LeLL i"-JfrtC� bv-r r_S (vcT4A-r
s Ta S\'w! Pt-r er\a w
Department of Planning Services W
Vicinity Map _ o
E = I�10 oAt, Hoftxt CAFTE9- g(-ffA'sad vli,Ts )
�� 1.............. i.._.......__._. I
RY
1—., 1 ...........F............
{ 1tUELRC I
-------------------------- ...... .................
................ ... ; P ._._......- .......... .._ ....._._.....' .
........................
.............
..........____ --- I
< ............
M
..................
I � I
_.....-
± -....-
.._.......... _..._,_.......UVA
I „p ALE i C. }l
......_....................
RACQUET CLUB RE)
..........._._.. - .................
L__... CHELLE
RO
I
E
Legend '
site
500'Buffer —
' .. .-.
Parcels ......-
I { �
..... ... ,
3
! 3 I
CITY OF PALM SPRINGS
CASE: 5.1246 CUP & 6.523 VAR DESCRIPTION: A request by T-Mobile West
Corporation for a Conditional Use Permit and Variance
APPLICANT: T-Mobile West Corp. application to construct a forty-seven and one-half foot
high monopole at the property located at 2100 East
Racquet Club Road, Zone PD 160, Section 1.
W Ci s s
m �
.W
e,
We reserve the right in court to address any other issue or concern regarding this proposed project that
is identified via legal,technical, industry or other relevant expert/expertise not previously identified.
aR
s
�¢a .�� d ���F «�� .&•', ICI
ry Y,iti�
We reserve the right in court to address any other issue or concern regarding this proposed project that
is identified via legal,technical, industry or other relevant expert/expertise not previously identified.
Petition on file in
THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK