08 Crown Castle DAS - City Council - City of Davis

2. A revised project evaluation table that incorporates additional data including:
extent of community input, possible siting alternatives to be explored, and staff
recommendations.
3. Synopsys of what would be included in City Council findings for denial, should
the City Council provide this direction.
Items 1 and 2 above are attached to this report. Item 3 may be a deferred submittal and is
pending City Attorney evaluation. It will be posted as soon as it is available.
Merits of single-carrier vs. two-carrier vs. multi-carrier DAS system
Crown Castle has presented three primary antenna options for consideration on the street
light poles, and four options on the joint utility poles. Crown Castle has indicated that the
antenna options do not need to be homogenous throughout the proposed 25 node network
(e.g. the options can be mixed and matched).
The single (or “omni”) antenna option presents the smallest profile antenna (2 inches
wide by 48 inches tall), but would require either modification to a larger facility or
installation of more such sites when a second carrier shows interest. Approval of a single
carrier system would meet the immediate needs of Crown Castle (for Metro PCS).
However, the City would likely face application(s) from Crown Castle or other providers
to expand in the near future. Such expansion proposals would require a new CUP
application, review of the project merits and designs, and public hearing at the Planning
Commission, if consistent with the proposed telecommunications ordinance amendments.
Depending upon how tightly the ordinance amendments are crafted with respect to site
locations and allowable antenna dimensions, future applications for further amendments
may also be requested by applicants.
The two carrier (or tri-sector pipe) option presents a larger antenna profile, but may have
the advantage of accommodating two carriers without the need for additional entitlements
or ordinance amendments. This would only be realized if another carrier leases the
additional system capacity from Crown Castle. When placed atop standard streetlight
poles, the proposed antennas add approximately 84 inches to the height of poles and
increase the diameter of the pole at the top to 8 inches. As the standard streetlight poles
are a tapered design, the antenna canister is noticeable. However, an alternative is to
consider a uniform diameter (streamlined) streetlight pole so that the antenna protrusion
is not as obvious an addition. Staff has requested that the applicant respond with
additional information and design details and that they be provided for the April 3 rd City
Council meeting.
The original six carrier antenna design proposed by Crown Castle (and still stated as their
preference) has the benefit of having the capacity to accommodate up to six carriers in
one place, albeit with a design that is considerably more visually obtrusive than the
smaller antenna options and is harder to integrate aesthetically into neighborhoods. If
multiple carriers contract with Crown Castle to utilize such a system, the chances of
proliferation of more antennas beyond those proposed by Crown Castle may be reduced.
04-03-12 City Council Meeting 08 - 2