Planning Commission Postpones Vote on New Cell Tower Regulations

The Calabasas Planning Commission discussed a final list of recommended revisions to the current wireless telecommunications ordinance, which governs the placement of cell phone towers, at a meeting Thursday.

Though the commission was expected to finalize the list and forward it to the City Council for consideration, that step will be taken at the next meeting in April, because some commissioners expressed the need for more time to go through the recommendations more thoroughly. 

The discussion over revising ordinance has been a local hot button issue, with several members of the community expressing their concerns over the past year about health and safety issues and environmental damage that could be caused by radio waves emitted by cell phone towers.

At Thursday’s meeting, the commission discussed its 22-point recommendations for the wireless telecommunication update. Planning Commission Chair, Martha Fritz, said one of the biggest concerns was defining what comprised “adequate cell phone coverage.”

“It’s up to each individual community to establish what adequate coverage is for the community and for what purpose,” she said. “As a community, are we allowed to say we like cell phones and we want to encourage cell phone coverage, but we don’t like 3D images on our BlackBerry phones and we don’t want it?”

Jonathan Kramer, a telecom consultant with the city said the only way to determine adequate coverage was to refer to court decisions that “give us guidance in terms of the things we should consider in determining where significant gap in coverage exists, but unfortunately, don’t determine in concrete language, what adequate coverage means.”

The new recommendations made by the public and Planning Commission members included requesting the Calabasas Technology Commission to hire a specialist or radio frequency consultant who could assist in drafting the revised telecom ordinance.

Calabasas resident Liat Samouhi said since Kramer was a consultant with the city, there was a need for a dispassionate third party.

“A telecom attorney, as well as a technical consulting firm should be hired to help draft the ordinance to take the best interests of residents into account,” she said.

Planning commissioners suggested putting in a new clause that gave the City Council, instead of the city attorney, the power to hire a specialist to help draft the ordinance, if needed.

The second recommendation included sending written notifications to people within 500 feet of a proposed cell phone tower, and sending telephone messages to those located within 1,500 feet of a proposed tower. 

Commissioners also recommended that antennas be located preferably on street lights, or existing utility poles, and that they be located on mono-poles only as a third option. 

Mary Hubbard, a Calabasas resident objected to the recommendation that the City Council consider allowing the possibility of constructing wireless facilities in residential and privately owned open space zones as an option of closing a significant gap using the least intrusive means. 

“This has a lot of potential for abuse,” she said. “Open spaces exist because they mitigate the effects of development and urbanization. They are there to let the land and people breathe, and to let wildlife propagate. There are studies that show cell towers have negative effects on wildlife, especially birds and bees.”

Community Development Director, Maureen Tamuri, said such cases should be considered on an individual basis.

“Some open spaces already have utility features, power lines, etc. These places are not pristine,” she explained.

At its April 7 meeting, the Planning Commission will review the new comments of the public and commissioners, and pass the revised recommendations to the City Council for approval.