8A Public Hearings - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

1467 Mountain Meadow Drv., Oceanside CA 92056 4 All the antennas shown on the plans have a range of 2 Degrees to 12 Degrees down tilt. So that line can be electronically, remotely tilted down 2 to 12 Degrees on each antenna on all three sectors. That tilt would significantly increase the amount of RF exposure on the adjacent property. On page 14 of the Waterford Report, you are looking at a vertical view of the RF: the left side of the proposed tower in the Blue overlay (RF Blue overlay 100% -500%) is Mr. Russo’s property, 523 San Leandro Blvd., where he plans to build a new residential building. On page 16 I believe you are shown Mr. Russo’s proposed residential building location in the foreground. The Antenna Inventory shows AT&T intends to operate or lease space for operation of antennas at heights ranging from 71 feet 37 feet centerline elevation. The report does not detail how many feet into Mr. Russo’s property RF in excess of FCC limits intrudes or exactly the exceedance percentages at various heights, only the very broad exceedance ranges (e.g., 100-500% etc.) and then projected levels for individual rooftops or unspecified distances from the tower. In my opinion, the proposed new residential property will be continuously radiated with RF signals in excess of FCC limits from the proposed new wireless facility. This scenario has the potential to cause serious financial harm to the developer of a residential property. Additional Horizontal views from the East to West and West to East would show a better potential view of the proposed site and the proposed structure on Mr. Russo property with regards to the potential RF Signals. Unfortunately, the Waterford Report does not include such views. It appears that the ALPHA Sector (65 Degrees) of the proposed site is pointing directly at the proposed new residential building. The Presentation to the City Council states: If a future EME report identifies that the project violates the FCC standards within any adjacent or neighboring residential building, the applicant shall adjust the facility until the emissions in the residential building do not exceed FCC standards. However, if a residential/mixed-use building is constructed on the 523 San Leandro Blvd. site at the wide property line abutting 440 Peralta Ave., accomplishing this will not be simple. Given the very close proximity, it would require that all antennae facing North are reorientated so that they are not pointing at the proposed building at all. Proposed future antenna tenants in the tiers of antenna banks shown on the tower plans (ATTACHMENT C-ATTACHMENT 1, Exh. C, p.7) would also would need to be turned off. Macro towers of this large size are a long- term investment and intended to offer co-location for numerous tenants. The construction of a building by Mr. Russo to the north would dramatically reduce the utility of the tower for co- location potential and diminish the service AT&T seeks to provide to roughly one-third to half the target area identified on the map on page 6 of the Alternative Site Analysis. Mr. Russo has expressed willingness to host this tower on the far northern end of property, which is nearly 500’ north of the proposed site and far from where residential construction is proposed to occur. This location would enable more flexibility in future mixed- use development of the proposes site as well. Att B - Page 43 of 46