8A Public Hearings - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

File Number: 25-020 Under the federal Telecommunications Act of 1996, cities have some ability to regulate where wireless telecommunications facilities are permitted. However, cities may not adopt a regulation that has the effect of prohibiting the provision of personal wireless services. (47 USC §332(c)(7) (B)(i)(II).) A regulation has the effect of prohibiting the provision of personal wireless services if, among other things, it prevents a wireless services provider from closing a “significant gap” in the provider’s own coverage. (See e.g. Metro PCS, Inc. v City & County of San Francisco (9th Cir 2005) 400 F3d 715.) There is no strict test for determining when a coverage gap is “significant”. If a wireless services provider claims a proposed facility is necessary to close a significant coverage gap, it must provide data and documentation showing how the proposed facility would close the coverage gap, as well as documentation showing why other potential locations for the facility would not close the coverage gap. If the City determines that the documentation and data provided by the wireless services provider do not show that the proposed facility would close a significant coverage gap, the provider is permitted an opportunity to respond. If the provider’s documentation shows that the proposed facility would close a significant coverage gap, the City must allow the facility if the provider demonstrates that it made a good faith effort to identify and evaluate feasible alternative locations. For example, the provider might provide information showing that other locations would not close the coverage gap, or that owners of potential alternative sites would not enter into lease agreements with the provider. These federal regulations preempt contrary local regulations, which means that a city could be required to approve a proposed facility even if its zoning code prohibits wireless telecommunications facilities in that location. Even if a city is required to allow a wireless facility in a specific location, it can still apply adopted aesthetic regulations, as long as the application of such regulations would not have the effect of preventing the closure of the coverage gap. Federal law also completely preempts the ability of cities to regulate wireless facilities based on radio frequency (“RF”) emissions (47 USC § 332(c)(7)(B)(iv).) The Federal Communications Commission (“FCC”) establishes RF emissions regulations, which differ depending on whether the area is accessible to the public. Cities are prohibited from establishing standards different from those set by the FCC, or denying a project due to RF emissions concerns if the project complies with the FCC’s standards. A city’s only authority is to require a wireless provider to submit reports demonstrating compliance with the FCC’s RF emissions regulations. PROJECT PROPOSAL The applicant, Tower Engineering Professionals, proposes to build a new Wireless Telecommunications Facility that will support cellular service in San Leandro and AT&T’s FirstNet broadband network for use by emergency responders. See Attachment C - Attachment 1 - Exhibit A - Project Statement. The proposed Wireless Telecommunications Facility would be located at the rear of the subject property, within an existing parking area near the north property line. The Wireless Telecommunications Facility would include an 80-foot high monopine with four levels of antennas and an equipment shelter (approx. 1,100 square feet) at the base of the tower . Two antenna levels would be reserved for co-locations by other carriers. Page 2 City of San Leandro Printed on 9/4/2025