Council To Review Antenna Ordinance

Hannah Heineman
Mirror staff writer
  
   Next Tuesday Santa Monica’s City Council will hear the first reading of an antenna ordinance that, if approved, would permit wireless phone companies to install antennas in the public right-of-way.
   The new ordinance stems from the City’s effort to improve the management of utility facilities in the public right-of-way, including public streets, sidewalks and alleys, in light of the development of new technologies.
   The last time the City addressed a similar measure was in the late 1970s.
   City staff presented a draft of the ordinance to utility industry representatives at a meeting last Wednesday to solicit their reactions.
   Key provisions of the ordinance establish parameters that wireless carriers must adhere to, if they wish to obtain and maintain permits. Among other things, they require that antennas and other necessary infrastructure be as unobtrusive as possible.
   Under the ordinance, wireless facility Minor Permits would be granted when “the proposed wireless facility will be installed in such a way that it does not result in a material change to the aesthetic character of the immediate vicinity of the facility and relates harmoniously with the surrounding neighborhood. Examples of installations qualifying for a Minor permit include underground facilities and micro-cell antennas that are incorporated into existing utility poles and street lights in a manner not readily detectable by the general public.”
   Major Permits will be required when an installation will have some impact on the surrounding neighborhood, such as “facilities that extend above the height of the existing poles in the immediate neighborhood, facilities which are installed on new poles and facilities which include aboveground cabinet equipment.”
   The ordinance also regulates excavations in the right-of-way.
   Some wireless industry representatives expressed reservations about the proposed ordinance. Robert Delsman, a Senior Director of Government Regulations for NextG Networks Inc., asked City officials if they “have considered the budget City Council wants to allocate for litigation.”
   Deputy City Attorney Cara Silver replied, “The wireless industry law is evolving very rapidly. This is our best attempt to predict what that law will be and what it currently is. We believe the City ordinance will pass constitutional muster.”
   Delsman also said some of the ordinance requirements for the wireless carriers were too vague. For example, a carrier has to “prove there isn’t adequate coverage,” in order to place an antenna in the right-of-way, but there’s no “definition of adequate coverage…What’s harmonious with the surrounding neighborhood?”
   Dave Britton, a Senior City Engineer, said the City “wants to make sure there’s a need for the installation particularly at the site that’s being proposed because the ideal location for the utility company may not be ideal for the community. We want to look at alternative solutions in some cases even when its clear capacity and coverage are affected in that vicinity.”
   Other utility representatives were concerned about the ordinance’s requirement that they provide detailed network maps of their facilities. Southern California Edison representative Tony Wilson said the release of such material was “under provision of the federal government since 9/11 for security and safety reasons.”
   Echoing Wilson was The Gas Company’s spokesperson Sharon O’Rourke who said, “I can appreciate the interest you have in wanting to have these maps but on the other side of the coin we have millions of customers so we need to protect our systems.”
   City Administrative Analyst Don Patterson explained that requiring the maps is a “legitimate information need for the City who is legally responsible for what happens in the public right-of way.”
   Britton did concede that “confidentiality and 9/11 issues are something separate we need to work on.”
   A number of industry representatives complained that they had been given too little time to comment on the proposed ordinance, noting that written comments had to be submitted before next Tuesday’s Council meeting when the ordinance is to be heard, and further comments will have to be made during the hearing on the proposed new rules.
   Kate Vernez who is an Assistant to the City Manager agreed that “It’s a tight time frame. Part of the industry is pushing to get this done immediately. Another part of the industry is saying there’s not enough time to comment. We’re caught in the middle. It’s going to happen in public. Not our preferred way of doing business.”
   According to the City staff, if the Council doesn’t approve the ordinance next Tuesday, it will declare a six-month moratorium while it is refined.