Article 39 — WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATION FACILITIES

a) Purpose. The purpose of this Article is to provide for wireless telecommunication ("telecom") facilities on public and private property consistent with federal law while ensuring public safety, reducing the visual effects of telecom equipment on public streetscapes, protecting scenic views, and otherwise mitigating the impacts of such facilities. More specifically, the regulations contained herein are intended to:

• 1. Encourage the location of antennas in non-residential areas.
• 2. Strongly encourage co-location at new and existing antenna sites.
• 3. Encourage telecom facilities to be located in areas where adverse impacts on the community and on public views are minimized.

b) The provisions of this Article are not intended and shall not be interpreted to prohibit or to have the effect of prohibiting telecom services. This Article shall not be applied in such a manner as to unreasonably discriminate among providers of functionally equivalent telecom services.

(Amended by O-3840 and O-3841)

a) Applicability.

1. These regulations are applicable to telecom facilities providing voice and/or data transmission such as, but not limited to, mobile telephone services, fixed microwave services, and mobile data services.

• 2. These regulations do not apply to telecom facilities that are regulated by a City Council policy adopted by resolution.

b) Exempt Facilities. Amateur radio and receiving satellite dish antennas regulated by Section 92.2.8 are exempt from the provisions of this Article.

c) Permit Required. A permit shall be required for all telecom facilities regulated by this Article in accordance with Section 92.39.060.

d) Other Regulations. All telecom facilities within the City shall comply with the provisions of this Article and the following requirements:

• 1. Conditions in any permit or license issued by a local, state, or federal agency which has jurisdiction over the telecom facility.
• 2. Rules, regulations, and standards of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC).
• 3. Easements, covenants, conditions, or restrictions on the underlying real property.

4. The California Building Code, California Fire Code and portions of the Uniform Fire Code, California Mechanical Code, and California Electrical Code, as amended by state or local law or regulation.

e) Regulations Not in Conflict or Preempted. All telecom facilities within the City shall comply with the following requirements unless in conflict with or preempted by the provisions of this Article:

• 1. Design guidelines or standards in any applicable specific plan within the Torrance Zoning Code (Division 9).
• 2. Requirements established by any other provision of the Municipal Code or by any other ordinance or regulation of the City.

f) Setbacks. Setbacks shall be measured from the part of the telecom facility closest to the applicable lot line or structure.

g) Maintenance. The telecom operator shall maintain the telecom facility in a manner consistent with the original approval of the facility.

h) Non-Conformities. A proposed telecom facility shall not create any new or increased non-conformities as defined in the Zoning Code, such as, but not limited to, a reduction in, and/or elimination of, parking, landscaping, or loading zones.

For the purposes of this Article, certain terms shall have meanings as follows:

a) Antenna means a device used to transmit and/or receive radio or electromagnetic waves between earth- and/or satellite-based systems, such as reflecting discs, panels, microwave dishes, whip antennas, antennas, arrays, or other similar devices.

b) Antenna Array shall mean antennas having active elements extending in more than one direction, and directional antennas mounted upon and rotated through a vertical mast or tower interconnecting the beam and antenna support, all of which elements are deemed to be part of the antenna.

c) City means the City of Torrance.

d) City Council or Council means the City Council of the City of Torrance.

e) City Property means all real property and improvements owned, operated or controlled by City, other than public right of way, within the City’s jurisdiction. City Property includes, but is not limited to City Hall, Police and Fire facilities, and City-owned recreational facilities, parks, libraries, streetlights and traffic lights.

f) Co-location means an arrangement whereby multiple telecom facilities owned or operated by different telecom operators share the same structure or site.

g) Community Development Director means the Community Development Director of the City or his or her designee.

h) FCC means the Federal Communications Commission.

i) Feasible means capable of being accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of time, taking into account environmental, physical, legal, and technological factors.

j) Lattice Tower means an open framework structure used to support antennas, typically with three or four support legs.

k) Monopole means a single free-standing pole used to act as or support a telecom antenna or antenna arrays.

l) Operator or Telecom Operator means any person, firm, corporation, company, or other entity that directly or indirectly owns, leases, runs, manages, or otherwise controls a telecom facility or facilities within the City.

m) Public Right of Way or ("PROW") means any public way, or rights-of-way, now laid out or dedicated, and the space on, above or below it, and all extensions thereof and additions thereto, owned, operated and/or controlled by the City or subject to an easement owned by City. PROW includes public streets, roads, lanes, alleys, sidewalks, medians, parkways and landscaped lots.

n) Public Works Director means the Public Works Director of the City or his or her designee.

o) Residential District means the R-1, R-2, R-3, R-R-3, R-4, R-5, R-P, RTH, and R-H Zoning Districts.

p) Residential Lot means a lot containing, or zoned for, one or more dwelling units in the Residential Districts.

q) Reviewing Authority means the person or body authorized under the provisions of this Article to review and act upon a telecom application, i.e., the Community Development Director, the Telecommunications Committee, the Planning Commission, or the City Council.

r) Stealth or Stealth Facility means a telecom facility in which the antenna, and sometimes the support equipment, are hidden from view in a false tree, monument, cupola, or other concealing structure which either mimics, or which also serves as, a natural or architectural feature. Concealing structures which are obviously not such a natural or architectural feature to the average observer do not qualify within this definition.

s) Support Equipment means the physical, electrical and/or electronic equipment included within a telecom facility used to house, power, and/or process signals from or to the facility’s antenna or antennas.

t) Telecommunications Committee means the Torrance Telecommunications Committee, created by Article 19 of Division 1, Chapter 3.

u) Telecommunication(s) Facility, Telecom Facility, Wireless Telecommunications Facility, or simply Facility means an installation that sends and/or receives wireless radio frequency signals or electromagnetic waves, including but not limited to directional, omni-directional and parabolic antennas, structures or towers to support receiving and/or transmitting devices, supporting equipment and structures, and the land or structure on which they are all situated. The term does not include mobile transmitting devices, such as vehicle or hand held radios/telephones and their associated transmitting antennas.

v) Division 9 or Zoning Code means Division 9 of the Torrance Municipal Code.

w) Utility Tower shall mean an open framework structure or steel pole used to support electric transmission facilities.

x) Zoning District or District means an area of the City designated on the "City of Torrance - Official Land Use Plan" and subject to a uniform set of permitted land uses and development standards.

a) Height.

1. Maximum Height. No antenna or other telecom equipment or screening structure shall extend higher than the following maximum height limits:

A) Thirty five (35) feet for antennas on streetlights, traffic control standards, utility distribution poles, or other similar structures within the public right-of-way. Antennas may be placed on existing utility poles that exceed thirty five (35) feet, where the purpose of the existing utility pole is to carry electricity, provided that the

top of the antenna does not exceed the top of the pole.

B) For all other telecom facilities, the maximum height of antennas shall be the upper maximum building height allowed in the zoning district as specified in the Zoning Code.

2. Over-Height Antennas. The Telecommunications Committee may approve antennas up to fifteen (15) feet above the preceding maximum building height limitations under the special review provisions of Section 92.39.060 of this Article.

3. "Stealth" Telecommunication Installations within Structures. Stealth facilities may be installed within structures that are permitted to exceed the above stated height limits, either by right or by Conditional Use Permit.

b) Location.

• 1. Location Categories and Location Priorities. Locations for telecom facilities shall be selected according to the following priority order:

A) Wall, roof, or existing co-location structure or site;

B) Existing pole, light standard, or utility tower;

• C) Commercial sign or architectural feature;

• D) New or existing "stealth" structure other than a false tree;

E) New false tree;

F) New "Slim Jim" monopole (i.e. with no antenna elements other than the pole itself);

G) New standard monopole with attached antenna elements;

H) New lattice tower.

2. Special Requirements. Proposals for telecom facilities at location categories "e" through "h" in Section 92.39.040(B)(1) shall require special review by the Telecommunications Committee under the provisions of Section 92.39.060(H) of this Article. In such cases, the applicant shall be required to show to the satisfaction of the Telecommunications Committee that:

• A) Higher priority locations are either not available or are not feasible;

B) Establishment of a facility on a new false tree, new "slim jim" monopole, new standard monopole, or lattice tower is necessary to provide service; and

C) Lack of such a facility would result in a prohibition of service.

At its discretion, the City may engage an outside technical consultant to verify the information used to support the applicant’s showing pursuant to subparagraphs "a," "b," and "c" above. Fees for said outside consultant shall be paid by the applicant.

3. Other Locations Requiring Special Approval. Telecom facilities are prohibited in the following locations unless given special approval by the Telecommunications Committee under the provisions of Section 92.39.060(H), after a finding that the applicant has demonstrated that (i) other locations that do not require special approval under this Section 92.39.040(B) are either not available or not feasible, (ii) establishment of the facility at the requested location is necessary to provide service, and (iii) lack of such a facility would result in a prohibition of service:

A) On common area lots, other non-residential lots, and public right of way within residential districts.

B) Within any required setback established in the Zoning Code.

C) On multifamily structures on lots zoned MFR.

D) On public right of way where any portion of the proposed telecom facility lies adjacent to the property line of a residential structure on a lot zoned MFR.

4. Prohibited Locations. Telecom facilities are prohibited in the following locations:

A) On residential lots.

B) In the Open Area - Planting - Parking (P-1) Zoning District, unless facilities are co-located on an existing utility tower within a utility easement area.

c) Available Technology. All telecom facilities approved under this Article shall utilize the most efficient and diminutive available technology in order to minimize the number of facilities and reduce their visual impact.

d) Co-Location Requirements.

1. Co-Location Required. To limit the adverse visual effects of a proliferation of telecom sites in the City, a new telecom facility proposed within one thousand (1000) feet of an existing facility shall be required to co-locate on the same site as the existing facility unless the reviewing authority determines, based on evidence submitted by the applicant, that such co-location is not feasible.

2. Co-Location Limitations. No more than three telecom facilities may co-locate at a single site unless the reviewing authority finds that:

A) The net visual effect of locating an additional facility at a co-location site will be less than establishing a new location; or

B) Based on evidence submitted by the applicant, there is no available feasible alternate location for a proposed new facility.

3. Condition Requiring Future Co-Location. In approving a telecom facility, the reviewing authority may impose a condition of approval allowing future co-location of telecom facilities by other carriers at the same site.

a) General Criteria. In addition to the other design standards of this Section, the following criteria shall be considered by the reviewing authority in connection with its processing of any telecom permit.

1. Blending. The extent to which the proposed facility blends into the surrounding environment or is architecturally integrated into a structure.

2. Screening. The extent to which the proposed facility is concealed, screened or camouflaged by existing or proposed new topography, vegetation, buildings, or other structures.

3. Size. The total size of the proposed facility, particularly in relation to surrounding and supporting structures.

b) Free-Standing Antennas. Antennas and any poles or other structures erected to support antennas shall be visually compatible with surrounding buildings and vegetation. The reviewing authority may require that the antenna be colored to blend into the sky or other background.

c) Roof-Mounted Antennas. Roof-mounted antennas, except whip antennas, shall be blended or screened from public view in a manner consistent with the building’s architectural style, color and materials including, if determined necessary by the reviewing authority, screening to avoid adverse impacts to views from land or buildings at higher elevations.

d) Wall-Mounted Antennas. Wall-mounted antennas shall be painted to match the color of the wall on which they are mounted. Cables and mounting brackets shall be hidden. Shrouds may be required by the reviewing authority to screen wall-mounted antennas.

e) Support Equipment.

1. Building-Mounted Installations. For building-mounted installations, support equipment for the facility shall be placed within the building. If the reviewing authority determines that such in-building placement is not feasible, the equipment shall be roof-mounted in an enclosure or shall otherwise be screened from public view in a manner approved by the reviewing authority. Roof-mounted equipment shall comply with the height limits applicable to the building per the Zoning Code. All screening used in connection with a building-mounted facility shall be compatible with the architecture, color, texture and materials of the building to which it is mounted.

2. Ground-Mounted Installations. For ground-mounted installations, support equipment shall be screened in a security enclosure approved by the reviewing authority. Such screened security enclosures may utilize graffiti-resistant and climb-resistant vinyl-clad chain link with a "closed-mesh" design (i.e. one-inch gaps) or may consist of an alternate enclosure design approved by the reviewing authority. In general, the screening enclosure shall be made of non-reflective material and painted or camouflaged to blend with surrounding materials and colors. Buffer landscaping may also be required if the reviewing authority determines that additional screening is necessary due to the location of the site and that irrigation water is available.

nate enclosure design approved by the reviewing authority. In general, the screening enclosure shall be made of non-reflective material and painted or camouflaged to blend with surrounding materials and colors. Buffer landscaping may also be required if the reviewing authority determines that additional screening is necessary due to the location of the site and that irrigation water is available.

3. Installations in Public Right-of-Way. Telecom Facilities and or support equipment proposed to be located in the public right-of-way shall comply with the provisions of the Torrance Municipal Code. In addition, ground-mounted equipment in the public right-of-way shall comply with all requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).

f) Night Lighting. Telecom facilities shall not be lighted except (i) for security lighting at the lowest intensity necessary for that purpose (ii) as necessary for the illumination of the flag of the United States, the flag of the State of California, or other similar flags, when such flag(s) are attached to the telecom facility. Such lighting shall be shielded so that direct rays do not shine on nearby properties. The reviewing authority shall consult with the Police Department regarding proposed security lighting for telecom facilities on a case-by-case basis.

g) Signs and Advertising. No advertising signage or identifying logos shall be displayed on any telecom facility except for small identification, address, warning, and similar information plates. Such information plates shall be identified in the telecom application and shall be subject to approval by the reviewing authority.

a) Reviewing Authority. Except as provided in Section 92.39.040(B), and 92.39.060(H), all applicants for telecom facilities shall apply for a permit from the Community Development Director as follows:

1. Private Property, Public Rights of Way, or City-Owned Property. Facilities on private property, within the public right of way, or on City-owned property shall be reviewed by the Community Development Director as a "Telecom Permit".

2. Referral to Telecommunications Committee. The Community Development Director may refer any application to the Telecommunications Committee for special review under the procedures set out in Paragraph H of this Section.

b) Submission Requirements. Except as required by the Community Development Director, applications for telecom facilities shall be accompanied by the following documentation in a form and containing information acceptable to the reviewing authority:

1. Plans. Site Plans and Elevations drawn to scale.

• 2. Justification. A brief narrative, accompanied by written documentation where appropriate, which explains the purpose of the facility and validates the applicant’s efforts to comply with the design, location, and co-location standards of this Article.

3. Maps. A map or maps showing the geographic area to be served by the facility. In order to facilitate planning and gauge the need for future telecom facilities, the reviewing department director may also require the operator to submit a comprehensive plan of the operator’s existing and future facilities that are or may be placed within the city limits of Torrance.

• 4. Visual Simulations. Visual simulations showing "before" and "after" views of the proposed facility, unless the reviewing department director determines that such simulations are not necessary for the application in question. Consideration shall be given to views from both public areas and private residences.

5. Emission Standards and Non-Interference Data. Documentation showing the specific frequency range that the facility will use upon and throughout activation, certification that the facility will continuously comply with FCC emissions standards, and that use of the telecom facility will not interfere with other communication, radio, or television transmission or reception.

• 6. Property Ownership. Evidence of ownership of the real property on which the proposed telecom facility will be located, or if the applicant does not own the real property, the name and mailing address of the real property owner(s), and evidence of authorization from the real property owner to place the facility on the property.

7. Wind Load Calculations. For proposed antenna installations on new monopoles, utility poles, or other structures subject to wind loads, the applicant shall submit wind load calculations prepared or approved by an engineer registered in California. The wind load calculations shall show, to the satisfaction of the reviewing authority, that the resulting installation will be safe and secure under wind load conditions. The calculations shall take into account other existing attachments to the supporting structure and potential future antennas co-located on the structure by other operators. Alternately, the applicant may, with the consent of the Community Development Director, submit a certification and representation to the City that its facility has been designed and will be constructed in a manner consistent with General Order 95 of the California Public Utilities Commission. The applicant may elect to defer presentation of this Wind Load Calculation submission requirement until after it has obtained an approval to locate at a specific site, but must satisfy this Wind Load Calculation submission requirement prior to the commencement of construction of a proposed Facility.

8. Supporting Materials. Additional supporting materials as deemed necessary by the reviewing department director to complete review of the proposal. Supporting materials may include, but are not limited to, color and material sample boards, proposed informational signage, and landscaping plans.

9. Fee. Applications shall be accompanied by a fee established by resolution of the City Council to defray all estimated costs and expenses incidental to review and processing of the application, including any expense incurred by the Communications and Information Technology Department or for any outside technical or legal services to review the application. This fee shall be in addition to other fees required by the Municipal Code.

c) Review Process for Proposals on City Property. Review of telecom applications for facilities on City property shall be as follows:

1. Filing. Applications shall be submitted to the Community Development Director for facilities on City property and shall undergo initial staff review for compliance with the provisions of this Article. Within thirty (30) days of filing, the Community Development Director shall notify the applicant in writing whether the application is complete. If an application is determined to be not complete, the notification shall identify those parts of the application which are incomplete and shall indicate the manner in which they can be made complete. 2) City Communications Review. At the same time as the Applicant submits an application to the Community Development Director, the Applicant shall submit the Plans, Map, and Emission Standards and Non-Interference Data (parts 1, 3, and 5 of the Submission Requirements) to the Communications and Information Technology Department. The Communications and Information Technology Department or its designee shall review the plan’s potential conflict with City communications facilities (including, but not limited to, emergency communications facilities). The review may include a pre-installation test of the facility to determine if any interference exists. If the Communications and Information Technology Department determines that the proposal has a high probability that its facilities will interfere with City communications devices, the applicant shall be given the opportunity to modify the proposal, to avoid interference. If the proposal is not modified, the reviewing department director shall deny the proposal.

2. Community Development Director’s Action. Within thirty (30) days of the determination that the application is complete, the Community Development Director shall take action on the application based on the following criteria:

A) If the Community Development Director determines that the facility conforms to the technology height, location and design standards of Sections 92.39.040 and 92.39.050 of this Article, he or she shall approve the application with or without conditions of approval.

B) If the Community Development Director determines that the facility does not conform to one or more standards, he or she shall inform the applicant of the discrepancy and give the applicant the option of amending the application to eliminate the discrepancy. If the discrepancy is not eliminated, the Community Development Director shall deny the application. C) If the Community Development Director determines that conformity to standards are in doubt, he or she shall refer the application to the Telecommunications Committee for Special Review under the procedures set out in Paragraph G of this Section. 4) Applicant Notification. After action on the application, the Community Development Director shall cause the applicant to be notified in writing within five (5) business days of the decision. The applicant or any member of the public may appeal decisions by the Community Development Director in accordance with Paragraph E of this Section.

he procedures set out in Paragraph G of this Section. 4) Applicant Notification. After action on the application, the Community Development Director shall cause the applicant to be notified in writing within five (5) business days of the decision. The applicant or any member of the public may appeal decisions by the Community Development Director in accordance with Paragraph E of this Section.

5. City Manager Action. When a permit for a telecom facility on City-owned property or facilities is approved, the Community Development Director shall forward the permit to the City Manager, who shall prepare and execute an Agreement based upon a term and rental amount adopted under City Council policy. 6) City Council Action. Where applicable (including proposals to site facilities in Location Categories in Section 92.39.040(B)(1)(e-h), and 92.39.040(B)(3)), the City Manager shall forward the agreement and final telecom permit to the City Council for final approval. The City Council may approve, approve subject to modifications, or deny the agreement and telecom permit. The City Council retains the right to refuse approval of an agreement at any time and for any reason. Should the City Council deny the agreement, the agreement and permit shall not be executed.

6. Notification to Applicant. The City Clerk shall notify the applicant in writing within five business days of the City Council’s decision.

d) Review Process for Private Property and Public Right of Way. Review of telecom applications for facilities on private property and public right of way shall be as follows:

1. Filing. Applications shall be submitted to the Community Development Director and shall undergo initial staff review for compliance with the provisions of this Article. Within 30 days of filing, the Community Development Director shall cause the applicant to be notified in writing whether the application is complete. If an application is determined to be not complete, the notification shall identify those parts of the application which are incomplete and shall indicate the manner in which they can be made complete.

2. City Communications Review. At the same time as the Applicant submits an application to the Community Development Director, the Applicant shall submit the Plans, Map, and Emission Standards and Non-Interference Data (parts 1, 3, and 5 of the Submission Requirements) to the Communications and Information Technology Department. The Communications and Information Technology Department or its designee shall review the plan’s potential conflict with City communications facilities (including, but not limited to, emergency communications facilities). The review may include a pre-installation test of the facility to determine if any interference exists. If the Communications and Information Technology Department determines that the proposal has a high probability that its facilities will interfere with City communications devices, the applicant shall be given the opportunity to modify the proposal, to avoid interference. If the proposal is not modified, the reviewing department director shall deny the proposal.

ermine if any interference exists. If the Communications and Information Technology Department determines that the proposal has a high probability that its facilities will interfere with City communications devices, the applicant shall be given the opportunity to modify the proposal, to avoid interference. If the proposal is not modified, the reviewing department director shall deny the proposal.

3. Director’s Action. Within 30 days after the determination that the application is complete, the Community Development Director shall approve, approve subject to conditions, or deny the telecom permit under the same procedures and criteria as set out in Paragraph C of this Section. The Community Development Director shall then cause the applicant to be notified in writing within five business days of the decision. The applicant or any member of the public may appeal decisions by the Community Development Director in accordance with Paragraph E of this Section.

e) Appeals to Telecommunications Committee. Within 15 days of the date of written notification of action by the Community Development Director, the applicant or any member of the public may appeal the Community Development Director’s determination to the Telecommunications Committee. The Telecommunications Committee shall hear all appeals within 30 days of filing of the appeal. The Telecommunications Committee shall then cause the applicant to be notified in writing within five business days of the decision. If the Telecommunications Committee denies the application, it shall adopt a Resolution setting forth the reasons for denial. The applicant or any member of the public may appeal decisions of the Telecommunications Committee in accordance with Paragraph F of this Section.

f) Appeals to Planning Commission. Within 15 days of the date of written notification of action by the Telecommunications Committee, the applicant or any member of the public may appeal the Telecommunications Committee’s determination to the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission shall hear all appeals within 30 days of filing of the appeal. The Planning Commission shall then cause the applicant to be notified in writing within five business days of the decision. If the Planning Commission denies the application, it shall adopt a Resolution setting forth the reasons for denial. The applicant or any member of the public may appeal decisions of the Planning Commission in accordance with Paragraph G of this Section.

g) Appeals to City Council. Within fifteen (15) days of the date of written notification of action by the Planning Commission, the applicant may appeal the Planning Commission’s determination to the City Council. The City Council shall hear all appeals within thirty (30) days of filing of the appeal. The City Council’s action on

appeals shall be final. If the final action is denial, the City Council shall adopt a Resolution setting forth the reasons for the denial.

h) Special Review by Telecommunications Committee. Because of their potential for greater-than-usual visual or other impacts on nearby property owners, residents, and businesses, applications for the telecom facilities identified below shall require special review by the Telecommunications Committee.

1. Applicability. Proposals requiring special review include the following:

A) Telecom antennas up to 15 feet above the upper maximum height limit as provided in Section 92.39.040(A).

B) Telecom facilities at locations identified as requiring special review in Section 92.39.040(B).

C) Any telecom application which the Community Development Director determines requires special review in order to serve the public interest.

• 2. Special Review Procedures. Applications subject to special review shall be reviewed under the following procedures:

A) Notification describing the proposal and the date and time of Telecommunications Committee review shall be mailed at least 10 days in advance of the Telecommunications Committee review date to property owners of record within 300 feet of the proposed location of the telecom facility. However, such notification shall not constitute a public hearing notice and non-receipt of such notification shall in no way nullify any approval or denial of a telecom facility.

B) No formal public hearing shall be required in conjunction with review of a proposed telecom facility. However, the Telecommunications Committee shall hear and consider comments from the public during its review of the application.

3. Telecommunications Committee Action. The Telecommunications Committee shall take action on the telecom permit within 30 days after the determination that the application is complete. Applications subject to special review may be approved by the Telecommunications Committee if it makes the following findings:

A) The approval is necessary to allow the facility to function as intended and identified alternatives to the proposal are not feasible.

B) The approved facility will not result in conditions which are materially detrimental to nearby property owners, residents, and businesses, nor to public health or safety.

The Telecommunications Committee may approve, approve subject to conditions, or deny the telecom permit.

• 4. Notification to Applicant. The City Clerk shall notify the applicant in writing within five business days of the Telecommunications Committee decision.
• 5. Appeals. The determination of the Telecommunications Committee may be appealed by the applicant or any member of the public in accordance with the procedures set forth in Section 92.39.060 (F) and (G). Such appeals shall conform with the Special Review Procedures set forth in Section 92.39.060(H)(2).

Within thirty (30) days after installation of a telecom facility, a radio frequency (RF) compliance and radiation report prepared by a qualified RF engineer acceptable to the City shall be submitted in order to demonstrate that the facility is operating at the approved frequency and complies with FCC standards for radiation. If the report shows that the facility does not so comply, the reviewing director shall require that use of the facility be suspended until a new report has been submitted confirming such compliance.

a) Changed Circumstance. Any telecom permit approved pursuant to this Article shall be granted by the City with the reservation of the right and jurisdiction to review and modify the permit (including the conditions of approval) based on changed circumstances. Changed circumstances include, but are not limited to, the following in relation to the telecom facility and its specifications in the approved application and/or conditions of approval:

• 1. An increase in the height or size of any part of the facility;
• 2. Additional impairment of the views from surrounding properties;
• 3. Increase in size or change in the shape of the antenna or supporting structure;
• 4. A change in the facility’s color or materials;
• 5. A substantial change in location on the site;
• 6. An effective increase in signal output above the maximum permissible exposure (MPE) limits imposed by the radio frequency emissions guidelines of the FCC.

The operator shall notify the Community Development Director of any proposal to cause one or more o92.39.080f the changed circumstances shown in 1-6 above. Any changed circumstance shall require the operator to apply for a modification of the original telecom permit. Before implementing any changed circumstance, the operator must obtain a modified telecom permit and any related building or other permits required by the City.

b) Additional Right to Revoke or Modify Permit. The reservation of right to review any telecom permit granted by the City is in addition to, and not in lieu of, the right of the City to review and revoke or modify any permit granted or approved hereunder for any violations of the conditions imposed on such permit. After due notice to the telecom operator, the City Council may revoke any telecom permit upon finding that the facility or the operator has violated any law regulating the telecom facility or has failed to comply with the requirements of this Article, the telecom permit, any applicable agreement, or any condition of approval. Upon such revocation, the City Council may require removal of the facility.

a) Discontinued Use. Any operator who intends to abandon or discontinue use of a telecom facility must notify the Community Development Director by certified mail no less than 30 days prior to such action. The operator or owner of the affected real property shall have 90 days from the date of abandonment or discontinuance, or a reasonable time as may be approved by the Community Development Director, within which to complete one of the following actions:

• 1. Reactivate use of the telecom facility;
• 2. Transfer the rights to use the telecom facility to another operator and the operator immediately commences use;
• 3. Remove the telecom facility and restore the site.

b) Abandonment. Any telecom facility that is not operated for a continuous period of 180 days or whose operator did not remove the telecom facility in accordance with Subsection A shall be deemed abandoned. Upon a finding of abandonment, the City shall provide notice to the telecom carrier last known to use such facility and, if applicable, the owner of the affected real property, providing thirty days from the date of the notice within which to complete one of the following actions:

1. Reactivate use of the telecom facility;

2. Transfer the rights to use the telecom facility to another operator;

3. Remove the telecom facility and restore the site.

c) Removal by City.

1. The City may remove an abandoned facility, repair any and all damage to the premises caused by such removal, and otherwise restore the premises as is appropriate to be in compliance with applicable codes at any time after 30 days following the notice of abandonment.

2. If the City removes the telecom facility, the City may, but shall not be required to, store the removed facility or any part thereof. The owner of the premises upon which the abandoned facility was located and all prior operators of the facility shall be jointly liable for the entire cost of such removal, repair, restoration and storage, and shall remit payment to the City promptly after demand therefore is made. In addition, the City Council, at its option, may utilize any financial security required in conjunction with granting the telecom permit as reimbursement for such costs.

Also, in lieu of storing the removed facility, the City may convert it to the City’s use, sell it, or dispose of it in any manner deemed by the City to be appropriate.

d) City Lien on Property. Until the cost of removal, repair, restoration and storage is paid in full, a lien shall be placed on the abandoned personal property and any real property on which the facility was located for the full amount of the cost of removal, repair, restoration and storage. The City Clerk shall cause the lien to be recorded with the Los Angeles County Recorder.

Facilities installed or operated at the direction of the City or its contractor shall be exempt from this Article.

It is unlawful for any person to violate any provision or to fail to comply with any of the requirements of this Article. Any person, firm, partnership, or corporation violating any provision of this Article or failing to comply with any of its requirements will be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof will be punished by fine not exceeding one thousand dollars or by imprisonment not exceeding six months, or by both such fine and imprisonment. Each such person, firm partnership, or corporation will be deemed guilty of a separate offense for each and every day or any portion thereof during which any violation of any of the provisions of this Article is committed, continued or permitted by such person, firm, partnership, or corporation, and will be deemed punishable therefore as provided in this Article.