The Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors recently made a significant decision to amend the commercial telecommunication ordinance. This amendment introduces a more streamlined approval process for small wireless facilities, addressing both regulatory requirements and public concerns. Despite the unanimous vote in favor of the amendment, the decision has ignited a multifaceted debate surrounding fire safety, property values, and health effects associated with the installation of these facilities. The core of the amendment is designed to reconcile the rapid development of telecommunication infrastructure with the well-being and safety of the local community, setting the stage for an ongoing dialogue between regulatory authorities and residents.
Streamlined Approval Process for Small Wireless Facilities
The updated ordinance mandates that construction sites for small wireless facilities, including hub sites and antennas, must display posted notices. Although this requirement ensures some level of public awareness, it also eliminates the opportunity for public appeals against these facilities. This shift aims to expedite the deployment process for small wireless facilities, which often involves complex regulatory and logistical challenges. Larger structures, categorized as Tier 3 and Tier 4 towers, will continue to necessitate conditional use permits, thereby subjecting them to a more thorough review process. This tiered approach reflects the county’s attempt to balance rapid technological advancement with methodical regulatory scrutiny.
Steve Lavagnino, the 5th District Supervisor, acknowledged the substantial concerns voiced by the public but emphasized the necessity of conducting county business efficiently. He elaborated on the often contentious nature of discussions surrounding wireless facilities, noting that such debates can frequently escalate into intense public disputes without productive resolution. Lavagnino’s remarks highlight the inherent difficulty in harmonizing public safety concerns with the imperatives of regulatory and technological progression. His comments encapsulate the broader challenge faced by local governments in navigating the complexities of telecom infrastructure while being mindful of community well-being.
Federal Mandates and Local Regulations
County Planner Corina Venegas-Martin elucidated that the amendment is driven by the Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC) 2018 Small Cell Order. This federal directive permits local jurisdictions to regulate certain aspects of small wireless facility deployment, including aesthetics, undergrounding, and spacing requirements, provided these regulations are reasonable and technologically feasible. The amendment aligns Santa Barbara County’s regulatory framework with federal mandates, thereby streamlining the process for deploying small wireless facilities. This alignment ensures that local regulations are consistent with the standards applied to other infrastructure deployments, facilitating a more unified approach to telecom development.
One notable restriction imposed by federal law is the prohibition of local regulation based on radio frequency emissions, as long as the facilities comply with FCC standards. Additionally, the FCC mandates expedited processing timeframes for local permits: 60 days for co-located wireless facilities and 90 days for new structures. These timeframes underscore the federal push towards rapid deployment of wireless infrastructure, reflecting a national priority to enhance connectivity and technological access. The amendment, in essence, seeks to balance the county’s limited regulatory discretion with the need to comply with federally mandated processes.
Design Standards and Concealment Requirements
The revised ordinance introduces updated standards for the location and installation of wireless facilities, with a particular emphasis on concealment. Antennae and related structures are now required to use concealment elements to ensure they are as discreet as technologically possible. These elements should aesthetically blend with the underlying support structure and the surrounding environment. This requirement directly addresses public concerns about the potential visibility and aesthetic impact of these installations, aiming to make them less obtrusive to the community. The balancing act here lies in meeting technological needs while maintaining the visual integrity of public spaces.
Existing county standards dictate that wireless facilities should be mounted on current or replacement utility poles or similar structures. Alternatively, these facilities can be situated on non-pole concealment structures, rooftops of existing buildings, or underground vaults. Public Works staff have collaborated with the Board of Architectural Review to develop comprehensive design standards that consider a variety of factors, including siting and clearance, stealth and concealment, finishes, shrouding, horizontal extensions, and accessory equipment. These collaborative efforts reflect a concerted attempt to assimilate wireless installations into their environments seamlessly.
Public Concerns and Opposition
During the public comment period, several opponents of the amendment voiced their concerns, highlighting a range of issues from fire safety to property values and health effects. Kristi Harter, a resident of Santa Barbara, was particularly vocal, emphasizing the need for continued public comment opportunities. She opposed the idea of making the facilities too discreet or stealthy, arguing that such measures might lead to inadequate protection for renters and property owners. Harter, along with other speakers, urged the board to delay the amendment to explore better protection measures, drawing parallels with protocols implemented in Malibu.
Lonnie Gordon, executive director of MalibuForSafeTech, pointed to Malibu’s robust fire and safety protocols as a benchmark for effective regulation. He noted that these protocols have been adopted by other cities and counties, illustrating a precedent for stricter safety measures. Gordon’s reference underscores the fact that different communities adopt varied approaches to wireless facility regulation based on their specific needs and standards. This diversity in regulatory practices reflects the ongoing challenge of tailoring telecom infrastructure policies to fit local contexts while adhering to broader mandates.
Location and Installation Provisions
The Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors recently decided to amend the commercial telecommunication ordinance, aiming to simplify the approval process for small wireless facilities. This amendment addresses regulatory criteria and public concerns, aiming for a balanced approach. While the supervisors unanimously voted for the amendment, it has sparked a complex debate focusing on fire safety, property values, and the health impacts linked to these facilities’ installations. The amendment’s central intention is to merge the swift growth of telecommunication infrastructure with the local community’s well-being and safety. This sets the stage for continuous discussions between regulatory bodies and residents, considering both technological advancements and community concerns. By doing so, the Board hopes to foster a climate where public safety, health, and infrastructure development can coexist harmoniously.
