MEMORANDUM
TO: Fredericksburg Planning Commission
FROM: Kathleen Dooley, City Attorney
DATE: July 31, 2017
RE: Text amendment for wireless communications infrastructure
Issue:
Shall the Planning Commission recommend approval of changes to zoning regulations for wireless communications infrastructure? The amendments have been developed in response to three events: new legislation from the 2017 General Assembly, City Council’s Broadband Priority, and a franchise application from Mobilitie, a provider of wireless communications infrastructure. The zoning regulation amendments are part of a larger package of City Code amendments that are intended to provide the legal infrastructure for granting franchises to wireless communication infrastructure providers. The other ordinances address the role of City and Public Utility Review Committee (CPURC) and the Department of Public Works in administering these franchises. The draft ordinance package is posted on the City’s website with the City Council agenda packet for July 7, 2017. The legal landscape for broadband deployment is in flux. The Federal Communications Commission is considering changes to the classification of broadband as a “telecommunications service,” and the General Assembly is expected to consider additional changes in 2018. The current legislative proposals will not be the last time we visit this topic.
2017 07 31 Memo to Planning Commission Wireless Communications Infrastructure Page 2
Recommendation:
The following amendments are required for compliance with the new state law: • Exempt micro-wireless facilities from zoning regulation (lines 44-46), • Establish a 60 day deadline for review of small cell facility collocation applications (lines 68-70), • Establish criteria for review of small cell facility collocation applications (lines 100- 113), and • Amend definitions (lines 133 – 180).
The following amendments are recommended to the Planning Commission in light of the new developments: • Move regulation of facilities in the rights of way to the Public Works Department (lines 42-43), • Permit collocation of small cell facilities in all zoning districts (lines 84-89), • Permit the development of wireless support structures on private property, in compliance with the maximum height standards of the zoning district (lines 91-96, and 122-126).
Background:
Changes in the deployment of wireless communications services:
The new wireless support infrastructure addressed in this amendment is the “next generation” model of wireless communication service –providers supplement the service currently delivered through antennas on “macro” towers. Under the new model, multiple smaller monopoles, micro-wireless facilities, or small cell facilities attached to existing structures – including buildings (inside or outside), utility poles, traffic lights, street lights, etc.
– provide faster service within a smaller area. The combination of macro towers, smaller monopoles, small cell facilities, and micro-wireless facilities is referred to as a “distributed 2017 07 31 Memo to Planning Commission Wireless Communications Infrastructure Page 3
antenna system.”1 The new model also focuses on placing these facilities in the public rights
of way, as opposed to the traditional use of private property for the taller telecommunication
(macro) towers.
The challenge for the City is to support the continued deployment of a modern wireless
support infrastructure, protect the historic district and commercial and residential
neighborhoods, preserve the safety and function of the public rights of way, and make clear assignments of responsibility for management of the public rights of way.
City Council Broadband Priority #29:
City Council met for a biennial planning offsite on October 14-15, 2016, to develop a new
20-year community Vision Statement, including eight desired future states and 35 implementing projects. Council adopted the final version of the Vision Statement and
Priorities Plan by Resolution 17-28 on April 11, 2017. Priority #29 is to “Create more focus on broadband to be the fastest City in Virginia for broadband.” In adopting this priority, City
Council recognized the importance of modern communication capacity to community welfare, including economic development and education.
2017 Virginia Acts of Assembly – Chapter 835:
This new legislation, which becomes effective July 1, 2017, advances federal, state, and local goals to advance the roll-out of wireless broadband services. The bill is divided into two major topics – (1) local zoning authority and (2) local authority to regulate the rights of way.
With respect to zoning, the new Virginia law applies to “small cell facilities” and “micro-
1 A network of spatially separated antenna nodes connected to a common source via a transport medium (the “backhaul”), that provides wireless service within a geographic area or structure. Wikipedia. 2017 07 31 Memo to Planning Commission Wireless Communications Infrastructure Page 4
wireless facilities” only.2 Localities’ traditional zoning authority with respect to wireless support structures and traditional (macro) telecommunications towers is not affected by the
new law.
Proposed zoning regulation amendments:
It is helpful to organize the proposed UDO zoning amendments by the type of facility
they will affect. Each of the following discussions will define the type of facility, and then
discuss the proposed zoning amendments, and whether the proposal is required by the new
state law, or not required but recommended.
• “Micro-wireless facilities”
A “micro-wireless facility” is a small antenna, not larger than 24 inches in length, 15 inches
in width, and 12 inches in height. It has an exterior antenna, if any, not longer than 11 inches.3
Under the new law, the installation, placement, maintenance or replacement of “micro-
wireless facilities” that are suspended on cables or lines that are strung between existing utility poles in compliance with national safety codes shall be exempt from local zoning permitting requirements and fees.4 Thus, the ordinance includes an amendment to UDO Article 1, §72-
13.1, “General Applicability,” to exempt these facilities from zoning, and an amendment to
§72-84.0 to incorporate the state code definition of “micro-wireless facilities.”
Even under the new law, the Department of Public Works retains authority to regulate the
installation of these facilities, if the activity involves work within a travel lane or requires
2 The new zoning statutes are codified in Code of Virginia Title 15.2,Chapter 22, Article 7.2, “Zoning for Wireless Communications Infrastructure,” §§15.2-2316.3 et seq. 3 Code of Virginia §15.2-2316.3. 4 Code of Virginia §15.2-2316.4(C). 2017 07 31 Memo to Planning Commission Wireless Communications Infrastructure Page 5
closure of a travel lane, if it disturbs pavement, or if it includes placement on a limited access
right of way.5 This regulatory authority concerns the safety of the rights of way, not zoning.
This amendment is required by the new Code of Virginia, effective July 1, 2017.
• Small cell facilities:
A “small cell facility” is an antenna and cabinet that are “collocated” on an “existing structure,” typically, a utility pole. Under the new law, a small cell facility includes an antenna of up to six cubic feet in volume with an associated cabinet. The new legislation also defines
“antenna,” “collocation” and “existing structure” – terms that all relate to small cell facilities.6
Small cell facilities are often collocated on existing utility poles. Public utilities are required to negotiate attachment agreements with cable and telecommunications providers by federal law, so long as the attachment may be accomplished in compliance with applicable safety and
engineering codes.7 (This federal requirement does not apply to poles owned by local
governments. However, under the new state law, if a local government does choose to make
its poles that support aerial cables used for video, communications, or electric service available,
then it shall comply with the attachment process established by the Federal Communications
Commission.8)
Fredericksburg has experience with small cell facilities collocated on private utility poles.
In March and August, 2016, City Council granted a license for the installation of small cell
facilities to a company called Extenet. The March license authorized the installation of 12 small
5 Code of Virginia §56-484.29(C). 6 Code of Virginia §15.2-2316.3. 7 47 USC §224, also known as the Federal Pole Attachment Act. Note, the FCC’s Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, discussed in the conclusion to this memo, would eliminate broadband providers from the protections in the Pole Attachment Act. 8 Code of Virginia §56-474.31. 2017 07 31 Memo to Planning Commission Wireless Communications Infrastructure Page 6
cell facilities on existing utility poles around the UMW campus. The August license authorized
two additional collocations on existing utility poles. These installations were all in the public
rights of way; they were handled through the license process, and administered by Public
Works. After study and consideration, City staff deemed this was the most logical route for
approval and regulation of these facilities.
Our current experience with the Extenet facilities is positive. They boost wireless service
to a targeted area through a relatively unobtrusive attachment to an existing utility pole.9
Under the new state law, a locality shall not require a special exception or special use permit
for the collocation of small cell facilities on existing structures. Localities may require
administrative review for the issuance of required zoning permits for the collocation of small
cell facilities. An applicant may submit up to 35 permit requests on a single application. The
locality shall approve or disapprove the application in 60 days (with an optional extension of
time of an additional 30 days.) The application is deemed approved if the locality fails to act in this time frame.10
Under the new law, the locality may disapprove the application only for the following
reasons:
1. Material potential interference with existing or future communications facilities (that
are already designed and planned for a specific location or that have been reserved for future
public safety communications facilities);
2. Public safety or other critical public service needs;
9 A photo of the Extenet facility on Sunken Road is included in your packet. 10 Code of Virginia §15.2-2316.4. 2017 07 31 Memo to Planning Commission Wireless Communications Infrastructure Page 7
3. On publicly owned or controlled property, the aesthetic impact or the absence of all required approvals;
4. Conflict with the local historic preservation or corridor overlay ordinances, but only for collocation on properties that are not under Virginia State Department of Historic
Resources jurisdiction (National Register).
Based on the foregoing, the ordinance proposes the following amendments:
• Exempt small cell collocations in the public rights of way from the zoning regulations. This will consolidate regulation of these facilities in the Public Works Department. Collocations in the rights of way in the Historic Fredericksburg District will be reviewed by the City and Public Utility Review Committee (CPURC) using design guidelines developed with the input of the Historic Preservation Planner.
• Permit the collocation of small cell facilities in all zoning districts. Based on our experience with these facilities, they have minimal impacts on surrounding properties, and are therefore appropriate even in residential districts. Collocation of small cell facilities is preferable to the installation of a new wireless support monopole. The new Code of Virginia does not require that this use be permitted in all zoning districts. Instead, the basis of this recommendation, developed with the input of Mr. Craig, is (1) the City’s preference for collocation over a proliferation of monopoles, (2) the positive experience with Extenet in the R4 zoning districts, (3) the minimal visual impact of these facilities appears to be appropriate in any zoning district.
• Provide for the administrative review of applications for small cell facilities when they are installed on private property, incorporating the deadlines and criteria prescribed by the new state law.
• Adopt the definitions related to small cell facilities provided by state law.
• Amend the City’s current definition of “Telecommunications facility, collocation,” to conform to the new state law. 2017 07 31 Memo to Planning Commission Wireless Communications Infrastructure Page 8
o Small cell facility collocation in the Historic Fredericksburg District:
Small cell facilities are licensed by the Federal Communications Commission, and thus, their placement triggers §106 review of an activity that constitutes a federal “undertaking,” when the activity has the potential to cause adverse effects on “historic properties.” “Historic properties,” under the National Historic Preservation Act, include historic districts, buildings, and structures that either are listed on the National Register of Historic Places, or are eligible for listing. The new state law preserved local zoning regulation of new construction in historic districts; however, local authority is exercised in the context of Virginia Department of Historic Resources review of small cell facility collocation under §106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. In August, 2016, the FCC, the National Conference of State Historic Preservation Officers, and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation executed a Nationwide Programmatic Agreement for the Collocation of Wireless Antennas. The Nationwide Programmatic Agreement applies to historic districts in the National Register, to antennas that are visible from the ground level of the historic district, to buildings and structures within 250 feet of the boundary of the historic district, and to National Historic Landmarks. Under the Nationwide Programmatic Agreement, state historic preservation offices, such as the Virginia Department of Historic Resources, will review small cell collocations under agreed criteria. These criteria stipulate that collocations of small or minimally visible wireless antennas do not have an adverse impact on historic properties. In Fredericksburg, the core downtown area is listed as an historic district in the National Register, but the downtown HFD also extends beyond the National Register historic district boundaries. The HFD overlays in the Mill District and at the Original Walker Grant school are also outside the boundaries of the National Register historic district.11 The National Historic Landmarks in Fredericksburg are the James Monroe Law Office, the Kenmore Plantation, and the Rising Sun Tavern. The purpose of the state law provision, then, is to provide a single level of review for small cell collocations that may have an adverse effect on historic properties. The City would
11 The City’s GIS system permits viewers to activate a map of the “VDHR National Register Historic District,” under the “Administrative” map layer. Viewers can activate the map of the HFD by choosing “Old and Historic Fredericksburg,” under the Planning/Overlay Zoning Districts map layer. The resulting map then shows viewers the extent of overlap between these two layers. 2017 07 31 Memo to Planning Commission Wireless Communications Infrastructure Page 9 exercise review through the ARB or CPURC, as appropriate, for small cell collocations that are not reviewed by the Virginia Department of Historic Resources. In addition, the Nationwide Programmatic Agreement removes the stipulated exemption from review if the VDHR receives a written complaint that a collocation will have an adverse effect on one or more historic properties, supported by substantial evidence to support the complaint. Thus, for those small cell collocations that are subject to the review of VDHR, the City continues to have an opportunity to comment. No UDO amendments addressing the HFD are proposed at this time. Any ARB (private property) or CPURC review (public rights of way) of a small cell facility is proposed to run concurrently with the administrative 60 day deadline.
Antennas that are larger than small cell facilities: The 2017 legislation did not affect wireless telecommunication antennas that are larger than “small cell facilities.” The antenna array approved for the General Washington Executive Center12, for example, is larger than a “small cell facility.” Likewise, the AT&T antennas collocated on the Executive Plaza roof are larger than a “small cell facility.” No changes to the UDO to address these facilities are proposed at this time. However, the Virginia Wireless Communications Infrastructure Work Group, discussed in the conclusion to this memo, is reviewing draft legislation for the 2018 General Assembly, which does address the zoning for these structures.13 City staff will continue to follow, and participate if needed, in the work of this group.
New wireless support infrastructure: The definitions that are related to these facilities include “telecommunications facility, tower,” and “wireless support structure.” In particular, a “wireless support structure” is defined by state law as “a freestanding structure, such as a monopole, tower, either guyed or self-supporting, or suitable existing structure or alternative structure designed to support or capable of supporting wireless facilities. The term does not include a telephone or electrical utility pole.”14 The new state legislation does not affect local zoning authority for telecommunications monopoles. However, in light of City Council’s Broadband Priority and the Mobilitie franchise application, it is time to consider the zoning regulations for these
12 City Council Res. 16-03, approved January 12, 2016. 13 2017 05 01 Wireless infrastructure bill draft – zoning. Accessed at the Division of Legislative Services website. 14 Code of Virginia §15.2-2316.3. 2017 07 31 Memo to Planning Commission Wireless Communications Infrastructure Page 10
structures. New structures in the public rights of way will be governed through the franchise process and new rights of way regulations. A “wireless support structure” is included in the UDO’s “Telecommunications Facility, Tower” definition. The proposals for zoning regulation amendments are as follows: • Exempt wireless support structures in the public rights of way from zoning regulation: The new deployment model is to move from the macro-facilities on private property to smaller monopoles and distributed antenna systems that depend, in large part, on access to the public rights of way. The City staff recommends that the authority to regulate new uses and structures in the public rights of way should be consolidated in the Department of Public Works. Their traditional role is to manage this public real estate, to track the location of existing facilities, to plan and coordinate the location of new facilities, to require and oversee their relocation when needed, and to oversee utility work in the public rights of way for the protection of the workers and the travelling public. Mobilitie proposes to locate new wireless support structures in the public rights of way. It makes sense to consolidate review authority in the Department of Public Works. Therefore, the ordinance proposes amendments to Article 1, §72-13.1 to exempt these facilities from zoning review when they are located in the public rights of way.
Each new provider will need a franchise from City Council as a precondition to placing facilities in the public rights of way. The Department of Public Works, working with the Historic Preservation Planner, has developed design review guidelines for use in reviewing these applications. These guidelines would be used in administering the wireless support structure franchises, and applied to other franchises that permit above-ground, vertical infrastructure, such as the telephone and electric franchises. 2017 07 31 Memo to Planning Commission Wireless Communications Infrastructure Page 11
• Permit the placement of wireless support structures by right on private property in all zoning districts, subject to compliance with maximum height and other regulations. This amendment is not required by law, but has been developed with the input of Mr. Craig. The rationale for this proposed change is that zoning regulations govern the maximum height of structures on a district-by-district basis. New wireless support structures do not generate traffic, noise, or parking impacts. For your reference, the maximum structure height regulations are shown in the following table:
Zoning District Maximum structure height R-2 40 R-4 30 R-8 30 R-12 50 R-16 50 R-30 75 R-MH 50 CT 40 C-D 50 CSC 40 CH 40 I-1 50 I-2 50 PD-R 60 PD-C 90 PD-MU Not addressed PD-MC Not addressed
For comparison purposes, the older utility poles in the public rights of way are between 35 and 45 feet tall. Modern poles tend to be taller, in the 45 – 50 foot range, due to the collocation of multiple uses on the poles and safety code separation requirements. 2017 07 31 Memo to Planning Commission Wireless Communications Infrastructure Page 12
A new telecommunications tower that exceeds the maximum height standards for the district would still require a special use permit. The Vertical Bridge telecommunications tower, for example, at a proposed 150 feet in the I-2 zoning district, would require a special use permit under the regulations as revised. As a point of comparison, the height of new monopoles in the public rights of way is proposed to be regulated through draft Design Guidelines. Under these guidelines, the height of new facilities, measured from grade to the highest reach of equipment or antenna, shall not exceed the average height of utility poles within a 500-foot radius of the proposed location, unless additional height is granted by the Director of Public Works.
Conclusions and looking to the future: The UDO text amendments are part of a broader package of legislation that City Council will consider to encourage the deployment of modern wireless communication infrastructure. The Planning Commission’s public hearing is scheduled for August 9, 2017. The regulatory framework for broadband and distributed antenna systems continues to change. On the state level, the 2018 General Assembly is likely to consider additional amendments requested by the broadband industry. The “Virginia Wireless Communications Infrastructure Work Group,” a subcommittee of the House Committee on Commerce and Labor, is working over the summer to develop proposed legislation for consideration next year. At the federal level, the FCC is reviewing the legal classification of broadband services as either “information services” or “telecommunication services” for purposes of the federal Telecommunications Act.15 Therefore, the City will need to continue to stay up-to-date on these changes, and to make Code amendments as necessary to continue to conform to applicable state and federal laws.
15 Federal Communications Commission May 23, 2017 “Restoring Internet Freedom Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.” MOTION: [date] Regular Meeting SECOND: Ordinance No. 17 -
RE: Amending the Unified Development Ordinance to exempt wireless communication infrastructure, placed in the public rights of way, from zoning regulation; and to amend the regulations governing wireless communication infrastructure on private property.
ACTION: APPROVED; Ayes: 0; Nays: 0
First read: ______Second read: ______
It is hereby ordained by the Fredericksburg City Council that City Code Chapter 72, the Unified
Development Ordinance, is amended as follows.
I. Introduction.
The purpose of this amendment is to conform the City’s zoning regulations to new legislation
adopted by the Virginia General Assembly in 2017, Virginia Acts of Assembly Chapter 835. The new
legislation furthers the national, state, and local interest in promoting the deployment of wireless
infrastructure, the physical foundation that supports all wireless communications. In particular, the
state legislation and this ordinance respond to new technological developments in the deployment of
wireless infrastructure, including distributed antenna systems and small cell facility collocations.
This amendment will permit the collocation of small cell facilities on existing structures in all
zoning districts. New wireless support structures in the public rights of way will be exempt from
zoning, but regulated through the City’s franchising and rights-of-way regulations. New wireless
support structures on private property will continue to be reviewed through the zoning process. They
will be permitted by right if they conform to the maximum height standards of structures in the district; Draft 2017 06 20 Ordinance 17-__ Page 2
but they will require a special use permit if they are higher than the maximum structure height
otherwise permitted in the district.
The City Council adopted a resolution to initiate this text amendment at its meeting on July 11,
2017. The Planning Commission held its public hearing on the amendment on August 9, 2017, after
which it voted to recommend the amendment to the City Council. The City Council held its public
hearing on this amendment on September 12, 2017.
In making these amendments, the City Council has considered the factors in Code of Virginia
15.2-2284. The City Council has determined that public necessity, convenience, general welfare and
good zoning practice favor the amendment.
II. City Code Amendment.
1. City Code section 72-13.1, “General Applicability,” is amended as follows:
Sec. 72-13.1 General Applicability.
[Subsections A and B are not amended.]
C. Unless otherwise provided for in this Chapter, the following structures and uses, when located
in the public rights of way, shall be exempt from the regulations of this Chapter: street lights; traffic
signalization equipment and traffic signs; fire hydrants; utility poles, antennas, small cell facilities, wireless
support structures, wires, cables, conduits, vaults, for the distribution to customers of communications,
cable television, or electricity; the installation, placement, maintenance, or replacement of micro-wireless facilities
that are suspended on cables or lines that are strung between existing utility poles in compliance with national safety codes; laterals, pipes, mains, valves or any other similar structures or equipment for the distribution to customers of water, sanitary sewer, or stormwater services. Such structures and uses may be subject
Draft 2017 06 20 Ordinance 17-__ Page 3
to other chapters of the City Code, and certain of these structures may further be subject to review
under Code of Virginia §15.2-2232 regarding their conformity with the Comprehensive Plan.
D. The following structures shall be exempt from the minimum yard requirements set forth in
this Chapter: telephone booths and pedestals, underground utility equipment, mailboxes, bus shelters,
streetlights, public bus shelters or any similar structures or devices which are determined by the zoning
administrator to similarly support normal public commerce, provided that the location of such
structures does not present a safety risk, does not interfere with the normal flow of pedestrian and
motor vehicle traffic and does not obscure the visibility of buildings, signs and other lawfully erected
structures which are subject to the yard requirements of this Chapter.
2. Section 72-24.1, “Zoning permits,” is amended as follows:
Sec. 72-24.1 Zoning permits.
[Subsection A is not amended.]
B. Process.
(1) Upon the official submission of an application for a permit the Zoning Administrator shall approve, approve subject to conditions, or disapprove the application, based on its compliance with the requirements of this chapter. (2) The Zoning Administrator shall act on a zoning permit application without public notice, except as set forth within Code of Virginia §15.2-2204(H). (3) The Zoning Administrator shall respond within 90 days of a request for a decision or determination on zoning matters within the scope of his authority unless the requester has agreed to a longer period. But the Zoning Administrator shall respond within 60 days of an application for the collocation of one or more small cell facilities. The Zoning Administrator may extend the 60-day period in writing for a period not to exceed an additional 30 days. (4) Every decision of the Zoning Administrator approving, approving with conditions, or denying an accepted application for a zoning permit shall be in writing. A denial shall state the reasons therefor.
Draft 2017 06 20 Ordinance 17-__ Page 4
(5) The Zoning Administrator shall deliver to the applicant, by first class mail or other means acceptable to the applicant, every written decision. A copy of the written decision shall also be provided to any persons who received notice of the application. (6) Unless a different provision applies, the written decision shall include a statement informing the recipient that he or she may have a right to appeal the decision within 30 days in accordance with Code of Virginia §15.2-2311, and that the decision shall be final and unappealable if not appealed within 30 days. The decision shall state the applicable appeal fee and a reference to where additional information may be obtained regarding the filing of an appeal.
3. Table 72-40.2, “Use Table,” is amended to allow the collocation of small cell facilities on
existing structures in all zoning districts, as follows:
Use Category: Utilities Use Type: Small Cell Facility, Collocation Permitted: Change to “P” (permitted) in all zoning districts Additional requirements: §72-41.§66-141, et seq.
4. Table 72-40.2, “Use Table,” is amended to allow the development of wireless support
structures on private property as follows:
Use Category: Utilities Use Type: Telecommunication Facility, Tower Permitted: Show as P/S in C-H, I-2, PD-C, and PD-MC zoning districts Additional regulations: §72-41.2.G
5. Chapter 72, Article IV, is amended by adding a new §72-41.5, “Utility uses,” and subsection
A, “Small cell facility, collocation,” as follows:
Draft 2017 06 20 Ordinance 17-__ Page 5
Sec. 72-41.5 Utility uses.
A. Small cell facility, collocation. The collocation of a small cell facility shall be approved administratively unless
it is disapproved for one or more of the following reasons.
(1) Material potential interference with other pre-existing communications facilities, or future communications
facilities that have already been designed and planned for a specific location or that have been reserved for
future public safety communications facilities;
(2) The public safety or other critical public service needs;
(3) Only in the case of an installation on or in City-owned property, aesthetic impact, or the absence of all
necessary approvals from all necessary departments, authorities, and agencies with jurisdiction of such
property;
(4) Conflict with the HFD district regulations on a historic property that does not qualify for the review process
established under 16 U.S.C. §470(w)(5).
(5) Any permitted telecommunications facility shall be disassembled and removed within 12 months after it
ceases operation.
6. City Code §72-41.2.G, Use Standards for “Telecommunications Facility, Tower,” is repealed,
amended, and re-adopted as subsection B of new §72-41.5, “Utility Uses,” as follows:
Sec. 72-41.5 Utility uses.
B. Telecommunications facility, tower.
(1) Permitted locations; permit required.
a. No new telecommunications tower shall be constructed, erected, or relocated within
the City except in those zoning districts where permitted, by special use permit or on
City-owned property where specifically authorized by the City Council.
Draft 2017 06 20 Ordinance 17-__ Page 6
b. A new telecommunications tower that conforms to the maximum height standards of the zoning district
in which it is to be placed is permitted as a by-right use if it conforms to the remaining use standards
of this subsection. It does not require Comprehensive Plan review. A new telecommunications tower
that exceeds the maximum height standards of the zoning district in which it is to be placed is permitted
only by special use permit.
c. For purposes of this subsection, the term “altered” shall not include the placement or
alteration of antennas.
[Subsections (2) and (3) and (4) are not amended.]
7. City Code §72-41.2(H), “Utility, major,” is repealed and re-adopted as a subsection (C) of new
§72-41.5, “Utility Uses,” with no amendment.
8. City Code §72-84.0, “Definitions,” is amended as follows:
ANTENNA – Any structure or device used to collet or radiate electromagnetic waves Communications equipment that transmits or receives electromagnetic signals used in the provision of any type of wireless communications service, including both directional antennas such as panels and microwave dishes, and omnidirectional antennas such as whips, but excluding satellite dish antennas.
BASE STATION – A station that includes a structure that currently supports or houses an antenna, transreceiver, coaxial cables, power cables, or other associated equipment at a specific site that is authorized to communicate with mobile stations, generally consisting of radio transceivers, antennas, coaxial cables, power supplies, and other associated electronics.
EXISTING STRUCTURE – In the context of a small cell facility, any structure that is installed or approved for installation at the time a wireless services provider or wireless infrastructure provider provides notice to a locality of an agreement with the owner of the structure to co-locate equipment on that structure. “Existing structure” includes any
Draft 2017 06 20 Ordinance 17-__ Page 7
structure that is currently supporting, designed to support, or capable of supporting the attachment of wireless facilities,
including towers, buildings, utility poles, light poles, flag poles, signs, and water towers.
MICRO-WIRELESS FACILITIES – A small cell facility that is not larger in dimension than 24 inches in length,
15 inches in width, and 12 inches in height and that has an exterior antenna, if any, not longer than 11 inches.
SMALL CELL FACILITY – A wireless facility that meets both of the following qualifications: (i) each antenna is located inside an enclosure of no more than six cubic feet in volume, or in the case of an antenna that has exposed elements, the antenna and all of its exposed elements could fit within an imaginary enclosure of no more than six cubic feet; and (ii) all other wireless equipment associated with the facility cumulatively is no greater than 28 cubic feet in volume, or such higher limit as established by the Federal Communication Commission. The following types of associated equipment are not included in the calculation of equipment volume: electric meter, concealment, telecommunications demarcation boxes, ground-based enclosures, back-up power systems, grounding equipment, power transfer switches, cut- off switches, and vertical cable runs for the connection of power and other services.
TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITY, COLLOCATION – Collocation is a situation in which
two or more different wireless communication service providers place wireless communication
antenna(s) and/or other wireless communications equipment on a common antenna-supporting
structure (tower, or other stationary device) or building. To install, mount, maintain, modify, operate, or
replace a wireless facility on, under, within or on the surface adjacent to a base station, building, existing structure, utility
pole, or wireless support structure.
TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITY, TOWER – A structure erected on the ground and used
primarily for the support of antennas for wireless telephone, and similar communication purposes and
utilized by commercial, governmental, or other public or quasi-public users. The term includes
microwave towers, common-carrier towers, cellular telephone towers, alternative tower structures,
Draft 2017 06 20 Ordinance 17-__ Page 8
and the like. The term does not include private home use of satellite dishes and television antennas, or amateur radio operator as licensed by the FCC. The term includes a wireless support structure.
WIRELESS FACILITY – Equipment at a fixed location that enables wireless communications between user equipment and a communications network, including but not limited to: (a) equipment associated with wireless services such as private, broadcast and public safety services, as well as unlicensed wireless services and fixed wireless services such as microwave backhaul; and (b) radio transceivers, antennas, coaxial or fiber-optic cable, regular and backup power supplies, and comparable equipment, regardless of technological configuration.
WIRELESS SERVICES – “Personal wireless services”; “personal wireless service facilities” as defined in 47
U.S.C. §332(c)(7)(C), including commercial mobile services as defined in 47 U.S.C. §332(d), provided to personal mobile communication devices through wireless facilities; and any other fixed or mobile wireless service provided using wireless facilities.
WIRELESS SUPPORT STRUCTURE - A freestanding structure, such as a monopole, tower, either guyed or self-supporting, or suitable existing structure or alternative structure designed to support or capable of supporting wireless facilities. “Wireless support structure” does not include any telephone or electrical utility pole or any tower used for the distribution or transmission of electrical service.
SEC. III. Effective Date.
This ordinance is effective immediately.
Votes: Ayes: Nays: Absent from Vote: Absent from Meeting:
Draft 2017 06 20 Ordinance 17-__ Page 9
Approved as to form:
______Kathleen Dooley, City Attorney ***************
Clerk’s Certificate
I, the undersigned, certify that I am Clerk of Council of the City of Fredericksburg, Virginia, and that the foregoing is a true copy of Ordinance No. 17- duly adopted at a meeting of the City Council meeting held Date, 2017 at which a
quorum was present and voted.
______
Tonya B. Lacey, CMC
Clerk of Council
May 10, 2016
PICTURES OF DAS AND SMALL CELL DEPLOYMENTS
Table of Contents:
DAS and Small Cell Deployments 2
Deployments in Historic District or on Historic Properties 15
Stealthed Deployments – Dallas Arboretum and Rose Bowl 24
1
May 10, 2016
DAS and Small Cell Deployments:
2
May 10, 2016
Figure 1. AT&T small cell deployment on a utility pole.1
1 Comments of PCIA - Attachment, WT Docket No. 15-180, at 21 (filed September 28, 2015). UMTS Radio and antenna enclosure volume is approximately 0.15 cubic feet, and the power cabinet volume is approximately 2.12 cubic feet, for a total associated equipment volume of 2.27 cubic feet.
3
May 10, 2016
Figure 2. Crown Castle small facility deployment on a utility pole in Princeton, NJ.2
2 Comments of PCIA - Attachment, WT Docket No. 15-180, at 22 (filed September 28, 2015). Antenna size is 24”H x 16”D, which is approximately 2.8 cubic feet in volume, and the associated equipment cabinet size is 47.3”H x 21.5”W x 13.7”D, which is approximately 8.1 cubic feet in volume.
4
May 10, 2016
Figure 3. Crown Castle pole-based small facility deployment in Broward County, Florida.3
3 Comments of Crown Castle - Attachment, WT Docket No. 13-238, at 7 (filed September 10, 2014). Antenna volume is 2.8 cubic feet, and the volume of the associated equipment shroud is 16.5 cubic feet.
5
May 10, 2016
Figure 4. Crown Castle ground-based small facility deployment in Broward County, Florida.4
4 Comments of Crown Castle - Attachment, WT Docket No. 13-238, at 5 (filed September 10, 2014). Antenna volume is 2.8 cubic feet, and the volume of the associated equipment shroud is 18.2 cubic feet.
6
May 10, 2016
Figure 5. Verizon small facility associated equipment cabinets.5
5 Comments of PCIA, WT Docket No. 15-180, at 3 (filed December 18, 2015).
7
May 10, 2016
Figure 6. Rooftop platform-mounted Verizon small cell deployment.6
6 PCIA Letter to WTB, FCC, WT Docket No. 15-180, at 24 (filed December 18, 2015). Total volume of the associated equipment is approximately 20.53 cubic feet.
8
May 10, 2016
Figure 7. Verizon small cell associated equipment cabinets installed on rooftop or building side.7
7 PCIA Letter to WTB, FCC, WT Docket No. 15-180, at 4 (filed December 18, 2015). Total associated equipment volume is 9.01 cubic feet.
9
May 10, 2016
Figure 8. Wall-mounted Verizon small facility deployment.8
8 PCIA Letter to WTB, FCC, WT Docket No. 15-180, at 23 (filed December 18, 2015).
10
May 10, 2016
Figure 9. Wall-mounted Verizon small facility deployment.9
9 PCIA Letter to WTB, FCC, WT Docket No. 15-180, at 23 (filed December 18, 2015).
11
May 10, 2016
Figure 10. Sprint small cell deployments in Detroit10
10 Comments of PCIA - Attachment, WT Docket No. 15-180, at 20 (filed September 28, 2015).
12
May 10, 2016
Figure 11. Typical Crown Castle small facility deployments on utility poles11
11 Comments of PCIA - Attachment, WT Docket No. 15-180, at 23 (filed September 28, 2015).
13
May 10, 2016
Figure 12. Crown Castle multi-carrier pole-mounted small facility deployment12
12 Comments of PCIA - Attachment, WT Docket No. 15-180, at 22 (filed September 28, 2015).
14
May 10, 2016
Deployments in Historic District or on Historic Properties
15
May 10, 2016
Figure 13. AT&T outdoor DAS deployment in Palo Alto, California.13
13 Comments of PCIA - Attachment, WT Docket No. 15-180 at 7 (filed September 28, 2015). Outdoor DAS node deployment along Waverly Street, Professorville, Palo Alto, CA (Historic District). Antenna (not shown) volume is approximately 2.8 cubic feet, and total associated equipment volume is approximately 11.36 cubic feet, which includes Battery Cabinet of approximately 6.2 cubic feet in volume, Radio Amplifier (Prism) of approximately 3.6 cubic feet in volume, Power Switch (Power Quick Disconnect) of approximately 0.16 cubic feet in volume, and Fiber Demark (Fiber NID) box of approximately 1.4 cubic feet in volume.
16
May 10, 2016
Figure 14. Crown Castle small facility deployment in a Historic District in Franklin Village, Michigan.14
14 Comments of PCIA - Attachment, WT Docket No. 15-180, at 30 (filed September 28, 2015). Antenna volume is approximately 2.86 cubic feet; associated equipment volume is unknown.
17
May 10, 2016
c Figure 15. Crown Castle small facility deployment at the Williamsburg Inn in Colonial Williamsburg.15
15 Comments of Crown Castle - Attachment, WT Docket No. 13-238, at 11 (filed September 10, 2014).
18
May 10, 2016
Figure 16. Crown Castle small facility deployed in historic district on Benjamin Parkway, Philadelphia, PA16
16 Comments of Crown Castle, WT Docket No. 15-180, at 11 (filed September 28, 2015).
19
May 10, 2016
Figure 17. Crown Castle small facility deployed in historic French Quarter in New Orleans, LA17
17 Comments of Crown Castle, WT Docket No. 15-180, at 12 (filed September 28, 2015).
20
May 10, 2016
Figure 18. Crown Castle small facility deployed in historic Pittsburgh, PA18
18 Comments of Crown Castle, WT Docket No. 15-180, at 15 (filed September 28, 2015).
21
May 10, 2016
Figure 19. Crown Castle small facility deployed on Central Park West, just outside of the historic Central Park in New York City, NY19
19 Comments of Crown Castle, WT Docket No. 15-180, at 14 (filed September 28, 2015).
22
May 10, 2016
Figure 20. Crown Castle light pole-mounted small facility deployment in historic Central Park, New York.20
20 Comments of PCIA - Attachment, WT Docket No. 15-180, at 25 (filed September 28, 2015).
23
May 10, 2016
Stealthed Deployments – Dallas Arboretum and Rose Bowl
24
May 10, 2016
Figure 21. AT&T stealthed small facility deployment at the Dallas Arboretum.21
21 AT&T Letter to Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, FCC, WT Docket No. 15-180, at 3 (filed January 13, 2016).
25
May 10, 2016
Figure 22. AT&T stealthed small facility deployment at Dallas Arboretum.22
22 AT&T Letter to Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, FCC, WT Docket No. 15-180, at 3 (filed January 13, 2016).
26
May 10, 2016
Figure 23. AT&T stealthed small facility deployment at Dallas Arboretum.23
23 AT&T Letter to Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, FCC, WT Docket No. 15-180, at 3 (filed January 13, 2016).
27
May 10, 2016
Figure 24. AT&T stealthed small facility deployment at Rose Bowl.24
24 AT&T Letter to Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, FCC, WT Docket No. 15-180, at 5 (filed January 13, 2016).
28