The document provides background and recommendations regarding proposed regulations for wireless communication facilities in Albany, California. It summarizes 3 alternative courses of action for the City Council to consider: 1) proceed with reviewing proposed zoning regulations and suggested revisions, 2) defer consideration until other zoning matters are complete, or 3) adopt a temporary moratorium on permits while regulations are established. It also summarizes the current draft proposals, additional proposals from residents, and potential fiscal impacts.

1. CITY OF ALBANY
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
STAFF REPORT
Prepared Date: 10/13/04
Agenda Date: 10/18/04
Reviewed By: ______
SUBJECT: Zoning Ordinance and General Plan Amendments:
Wireless Communication Facilities
FROM: Ann Chaney, Community Development Director
Ed Phillips, Zoning Consultant
_____________________________________________________________________________
RECOMMENDATION
Consider and select one the following alternative courses of action:
1. Proceed at this time with Council review of the proposed draft of zoning
subsection 20.20.090, Wireless Communication Facilities, with modifications
recommended by the City Attorney and by Nan Wishner and Cindy Soloman in
their letter of October 1, 2004.
2. Defer consideration of subsection 20.20.090 until a date certain, after completion
of review and approval of the balance of the draft zoning ordinance.
3. Adopt Ordinance #04-07, an interim urgency ordinance to establish a forty-five
day moratorium restricting permits for, or installation of, wireless communication
facilities.
BACKGROUND
The Planning and Zoning Commission has recommended adoption of Subsection
20.20.090 as presented in the July 31, 2004 zoning draft. These proposed regulations
were originally formulated in 2002. Since the issues of wireless facilities have recently
become a matter of public concern in Albany, staff and the City Attorney have reviewed
the draft proposal and have devised additional material to insert in the proposed text.
The additional material is underlined in the attached version of Subsection 20.20.090.
In attached letters to the City Council, Nan Wishner and Cindy Solomon have 1)
suggested that the City place a moratorium on proposals for wireless facilities
(September 26, 2004), and 2) offered specific recommendations for additional changes
to the draft ordinance subsection.

2. CITY COUNCIL MEETING Page 2
STAFF REPORT
OCTOBER 18, 2004
DISCUSSION:
A. Alternative Courses of Action:
1. Proceed with review: The Council might choose to proceed, either at the current
meeting or a subsequent one, with detailed review of the proposed zoning draft on
Wireless Communication Facilities, including the modifications recommended by the
City Attorney and by Nan Wishner and Cindy Soloman. Both the basic draft and the
suggested additions are highly complex and technical, and can be expected to require
considerable time for Council review, discussion and public commentary. The extended
time may prevent the Council from meeting concerns about the immediacy of a pending
appeal of P&Z approval of an installation on Solano Avenue, and the pending
completion of an application for a facility at Albany High School. In addition,
concentration on the wireless section at this time could divert council’s attention from
the completion of its review and approval of the balance of the proposed zoning
ordinance.
2. Defer consideration: The Council could defer consideration of the wireless section
to a time after the completion of review and approval of the balance of the draft zoning
ordinance. However, this could mean foregoing the opportunity to put new wireless
regulations in place prior to City actions on the currently pending wireless projects.
3. Adopt a moratorium: The City Attorney has drafted an urgency ordinance to
establish a forty-five day moratorium on City approvals of wireless communication
facilities including cellular antennas, monopoles, base stations and related facilities.
The ordinance anticipates adoption of a revised zoning ordinance, including wireless
regulations, within 45 days. The ordinance may be extended, with public notice, a public
hearing and a four-fifths vote of the Council, for an additional 10 months and fifteen
days, and thereafter, through the same process, for an additional year if needed.
B. Summaries of Draft Proposals:
1. Draft subsection 20.20.090, as modified: The following discussion (repeated from
the staff report for October 4, 2004) is a summary of the proposed regulations on
wireless communications facilities, including the revisions suggested by the City
Attorney:
• The proposed regulations have been adapted from ordinances of various California
cities and counties, including several which were recommended by ABAG as models.
• Wireless communication facilities are proposed to be prohibited in all residential
districts and the waterfront district, and conditionally permitted in all commercial and
public facilities (PF) districts. PF districts include most schools and parks, City Hall, the
Gill Tract, the U.C. Little League fields, the USDA and the State Orientation School.
(See Subsection 20.12.040, Table 1, page 24 of 7-31-04 zoning draft.)

3. CITY COUNCIL MEETING Page 3
STAFF REPORT
OCTOBER 18, 2004
• Subsection 20.20.090 includes the following parts:
A. Purpose and intent: Generally to establish standards for placement of antennas,
and to encourage locations on public sites and to encourage joint use of facilities
by multiple companies. Added language preventing facilities in residential districts,
and requiring compliance with all other codes and regulations.
B. Definitions: Section 20.08 (page 15) includes definitions of several terms
relevant to wireless communications.
C. Exempt Facilities: A list of facilities, such as TV antennas and satellite dishes,
and various radio antennas that are not covered by the proposed regulations.
D. Prohibited facilities: Prohibition of transmit/receive facilities in residential zones.
E. Development Standards: Lists of standards to be generally applicable, and
specific standards for building- mounted antennas and monopoles.
F. Application procedures: Use permits and design review are required. Added
specifications for required submittal information. Additional findings for approval.
G. Operation and Maintenance Standards. Additional provisions suggested by the
City Attorney to control ongoing compliance.
H. Certification of Facilities. Additional provisions suggested by the City Attorney to
assure compliance with FCC limits.
I. Duration, revocation and Discontinuance: Provisions for time limits, extensions,
removal after discontinuance, and legal nonconforming status of pre-existing
facilities.
Additional language to assure compliance.
2. Additional proposals by residents: The Wishner-Solomon proposals include the
following points:
• Restrict facility sites from schools and parks, as well as C-1 and C-2 zones where
residences exist;
• Add provisions to protect the City against potential liability;
• Add provisions to give the City more latitude in assessing the need for additional
facilities;

4. CITY COUNCIL MEETING Page 4
STAFF REPORT
OCTOBER 18, 2004
• Minimize the number of facilities by encouraging low power “repeaters’, and other
means.
• Expand the forms of notice provided for facility proposals.
• Added provision to give the City more control over facility operations and to
maximize revenue to the City.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Adoption of regulations on wireless communication facilities could result in costs to the
City for monitoring and enforcement of regulations. Provisions should be included to
assure that such costs are recouped from facility operators, to the maximum extent
feasible. Additional city revenue might be gained from periodic renewal fees, and from
potential location of facilities on City-owned properties.
ATTACHMENTS:
A. Section 20.20.090, Wireless Communication Facilities, including revisions suggested
by City Attorney.
B. Letter from Nan Wishner and Cindy Solomon, 9-26-04, with enclosure
C. Letter from Nan Wishner and Cindy Solomon, 10-1-04
D. Additional informational material provided by Wishner and Solomon
E. Draft Ordinance #04-07
EdPCCreports SR10-18-04 wls.doc