Morrisville Wireless Telecommunication Facilities Master Plan - 2013

Town of Morrisville Wireless Telecommunication Facilities Master Plan ADOPTED: July 23, 2013

Table of Contents

Master Plan Purpose .………………………………………………………….…………………………..…... 2 Introduction ……………………………………………………………………….…………………………..…... 3 Public Participation Process ……………………………….………………………………………………... 4 Master Plan Goals ………………………………………………………………..……………….……………... 6 2009 Land Use and Transportation Plan – Goal & Action Item .……………….……………... 6 Community Issues …………………………………………………………………………….…….…………... 7 Existing Conditions ...………………...……………………………………………………………..………..... 8 Hierarchy of Preferred Locations ....……………………………………………………………..………..... 10 Policies & Recommendations ...….……………………………………………………………..………..... 16 Design Guidelines …………………..….……………………………………………………………..………..... 20 Implementation ……….……………..….……………………………………………………………..………..... 22 Resolution of Adoption for the Master Plan (2013‐054) ……………………………………….… 23 Appendix A – The Telecommunications Industry Appendix B – Engineering Analysis Appendix C – Federal Telecommunications Act ‐ Rulings and Policies Appendix D – North Carolina General Statutes (SB 831) Appendix E – Morrisville Wireless Telecommunication Facilities Inventory Appendix F – Telecommunications Tower Master Plan Online Survey ‐ Results October 2011 Appendix G – Telecommunications Tower Types Online Survey ‐ Results October 2012

1 

Master Plan Purpose The purpose of the Town of Morrisville Wireless Telecommunication Facilities Master Plan (“Master Plan”) is to balance the goals of providing good cell phone service with minimizing impacts from telecommunication facilities on neighborhoods and the community. This plan works to achieve this balance by planning for well‐sited, well‐designed, and inconspicuous telecommunication facilities that fit within the community. The Master Plan combines local land‐use planning strategies with industry‐accepted radio frequency engineering standards to identify low‐impact sites for new telecommunication facilities to meet the growing demand for service. This plan creates an illustrative planning tool to aid decision makers and staff in this work. This analysis then helps to establish a policy framework and design standards to guide decisions regarding the siting of telecommunication facilities. Effective planning may also minimize the number of telecommunication facilities by increasing potential collocation opportunities. The Master Plan includes the following:  A tutorial on the history of the wireless industry and explanations of how the equipment works, along with projections of future industry trends;  An inventory of existing telecommunication facilities in Morrisville upon which antennas are currently mounted;  An analysis of existing telecommunication facility locations, approximate coverage areas, and an analysis of current network deployment patterns in the Morrisville area to identify areas with less than desirable coverage;  An engineering analysis of potential coverage areas in Morrisville based on the existing antenna locations, assumptions regarding height, along with other network and planning design criteria;  An analysis of reasonably projected telecommunication facility growth in Morrisville over the next ten (10) years, and recommendations for managing the development of infrastructure with an emphasis on minimizing the total number of telecommunication facilities;  Identification of publicly owned property as potential sites for future telecommunication facilities;  Recommendations for requirements and guidelines for location and design, and managing telecommunication facility development through an Ordinance revision;  Implementation measures to address aspects of the plan.

2 

Introduction Over the past twenty years, cell phone usage has increased dramatically and cell phones have evolved into a basic communications device for our society. Many consumers no longer maintain a traditional landline service, but instead use cell phones exclusively. In addition to the growing number of people using cell phones and with the introduction of the smart phone, cell service providers have expanded beyond traditional voice service to offer text messaging, e‐mail, web browsing, and video entertainment. These additional services have led to a spectrum demand that is quickly outpacing the existing capacity of telecommunication facilities. Morrisville has experienced rapid population growth, which has increased the population by nearly 280% since the 2000 U.S. Census. According to the 2010 U.S. Census, Morrisville had a 2010 population of 18,576 and presently the Planning Department estimates the population at just over 20,000. Currently, Morrisville’s estimated build‐out population is 25,000. As the initial Morrisville Community Preference Survey (CPS) from October 2011indicates (see Appendix F ), 51% of the respondents owned two or more hand‐held mobile devices. Additionally, from that same CPS, 90% of the respondents’ households owned two (2) or more hand‐held mobile devices, with 10% of those households owning six (6) or more hand‐held devices. Moreover, the expectation is that those numbers will only increase, which will lead to an increasing demand on the telecommunication facility capacity within Morrisville.

5,208 11,915 13,501 14,956 18,576 19,406 Morrisville Population

251 1,022

2010 Census July 1, 2011 (Certified Est.)

July 1, 2008 (Certified Est.)

July 1, 2006 (Certified Est.)

1980 Census 1990 Census 2000 Census March 2004 Special Census

3 

Public Participation Process Public participation is a critical element of the master planning process. The goal of the public participation process was to obtain input from citizens, elected and appointed officials, and other interested parties to understand the diverse interests, concerns, and needs. This helped the Town and its consultants to build consensus on how to provide good cell phone service, while minimizing impacts from telecommunication facilities on neighborhoods and maintaining community character and public safety in Morrisville. To be as inclusive as possible, staff devised a public participation process that included a kickoff meeting, two open house events with presentations, interactive keypad polling, and online polling. At the kickoff meeting, participants had an opportunity to interact with planners and the technical consultant. Additionally, using keypad‐polling devices for real‐time responses, staff conducted an interactive Community Preference Survey (CPS) with the participants to receive input on preferred telecommunication facility type(s), preferred height, potential locations, interest in using public properties, etc. Finally, in an effort to reach a larger audience, staff prepared and posted online the same CPS conducted at the kickoff meeting, which generated a very large response. Utilization of the online process provided a direct participation link for those interested parties unable to attend the events. The online CPS remained open for approximately one month. Between the two survey methods staff received over 150 responses to the first CPS.

4 

Next, at the first open house, participants had an opportunity to view maps and interact with planners and the technical consultant. Staff presented the findings from the first CPS. Again, using keypad‐polling devices for real‐time responses, staff conducted another interactive CPS with the participants to prioritize the preferred telecommunication facility type(s) on specific publicly owned properties. Moreover, like the previous CPS, staff prepared and posted online the same CPS conducted at the first open house. The online CPS remained open for approximately one month. Subsequently, between the keypad polling activity and the online CPS staff received over 120 responses to the second survey. At the second open house, participants again had an opportunity to view more maps and interact with planners and the technical consultant. Staff recapped the findings from the first CPS and presented the findings from the second CPS. The technical consultant then presented two potential telecommunication facility location hierarchy options. Applicants for new telecommunication facilities will be required to follow the preferred hierarchy. Using keypad‐polling devices for real‐time responses, staff conducted the final interactive CPS with the open house participants to determine the preferred hierarchy. As part of the planning process, the presentations, and information gathered at these events and the online surveys was converted to portable document format (PDF) and shared on the Morrisville website. For those choosing to stay involved via the internet, the town website provided a good tool for information dissemination. Staff then used the information gathered from the kickoff meeting, open house events and the online surveys to develop this Master Plan.

5 

Master Plan Goals The following goals are a result of the comprehensive Public Participation Process and were derived by using the information received from the keypad polling exercises and the two CPS opportunities:  G al 1: Prot ct community aesthetics by planning for well‐sited, well‐designed, and inconspicuous telecommunication facilities that fit into the community. Visibility will be the primary focus in the review of telecommunication facilities.  Goal 2: Manage the number and placement of all antennas, facilities, and associated equipment (including buildings and compound areas) to promote efficient service delivery and avoid an unnecessary number of telecommunication facilities.  Goal 3: Ensure the safety of telecommunication facilities and avoid potential damage to people and property.  Goal 4: Guide decision‐makers and staff by providing a policy framework and design guidance in decisions regarding telecommunication facilities. 2009 Land Use and Transportation Plan – Goal & Action Item The Town of Morrisville 2009 Land Use and Transportation Plan included Goal 4 , which states:  “Provide community services and public infrastructure to maintain and enhance the quality of life for Town citizens of today; the elderly that have enriched our past, and the future generations.” Additionally, the 2009 Land Use and Transportation Plan included related Action Item 4.1 , which states:  Update Telecommunications Tower Ordinance that revises language in zoning ordinance regarding cell towers and other telecommunications facilities to allow for this infrastructure while ensuring community safety, appearance, and appropriate location. Therefore, this Master Plan is the first step toward fulfilling the Land Use and Transportation Plan action item and establishing the policy framework to guide the Morrisville Telecommunication Facilities Ordinance update.

6 

Community Issues This section lists specific issues generated during the Public Participation Process. 1. Height: A determining factor in the location and design of a telecommunication facility is the facility height and height of the ancillary antennas. From a service standpoint, ancillary antenna height is important since signal transmission between facilities relies on line of sight. Buildings and trees can block or weaken that signal transmission; therefore, companies often seek approval for facilities that allow antenna heights to be above any obstructions. From a community appearance standpoint, height is important because it can affect facility visibility. 2. Number of Facilities: Based on an analysis and assuming the use of current technology, the consultants anticipate the need for thirty‐six (36) antenna locations to cover those areas with less desirable coverage (see Appendix B ). With data demand expected to continue increasing dramatically, the wireless industry may want to see the number of facilities increase further to better serve specific areas. To keep up with demand, technological advances may create opportunities for companies to provide facilities in less conspicuous ways. 3. Visibility & Aesthetics: Many people find the typical non‐concealed telecommunication facility to be unattractive. Based on responses received from the May 2012 CPS, 84% of respondents agree that the appearance of cell towers is important ; however, 60% of respondents agreed that a cell tower visibl from their neighborhood was okay if they had good service . To accommodate these additional telecommunication facilities, 82% of respondents supported the use of more/taller towers in non‐residential areas in order to have fewer/shorter towers elsewhere . Short‐term, this method may reduce the total number of facilities by increasing the allowable number of antenna collocations on a single facility. Additionally, placing many antennas on a single taller telecommunication facility may reduce the overall quantity; however, many antennas may also create undesirable visual impacts and draw more attention than many shorter facilities. Taller facilities may not be a long‐ term solution, however, because future demand from consumers may prescribe telecommunication facility locations closer to the user, leading to more facilities within neighborhoods. 4. Noise: Some telecommunication facility compound areas include generators to provide power or backup power in the event of a power outage. On occasion, this type of equipment may generate substantial noise and shall comply with the Town Noise Ordinance. 5. Falling Hazards: Tall telecommunication facilities with antennas mounted high on the facility may be subject to wind, ice or other natural occurrences, which could lead to structural failure or potential breaks. Ordinances typically address hazards such as these through setback requirements based on the facility height, requiring the use of breakpoint technology in facility design (design that causes the tower to break at a predetermined point to minimize its impact when under stress), and through a structural analysis.

7 

Existing Conditions The Town and its consultants, CityScape, compiled an inventory of all telecommunication facilities within the Town and surrounding area. The study area included all areas within the Town and a one‐mile perimeter boundary around the jurisdictional boundary and identified twenty‐two (22) total facilities ( Figure 1 ). Seven (7) of those facilities were within Morrisville, with the additional fifteen (15) facilities located within a one‐mile periphery (see Appendix E for additional detail). Figure 1

8 

Using the inventory of telecommunication facilities, CityScape then prepared a ten‐year propagation map ( Figure 2 ) to identify areas with less desirable coverage. Propagation maps show the existing telecommunication facility locations, predicted coverage areas, and Radio Frequency (RF) signal strength (see Appendix B for additional detail). Figure 2

9 

Hierarchy of Preferred Locations As determined through the Public Participation Process, one of the overall goals is to site and design facilities so they are as inconspicuous as possible. In general, non‐residential locations are better than residential locations because such facilities are less noticeable and more accepted by the public. In addition, antennas mounted on existing facilities are generally preferred to new antennas mounted on new facilities. Town staff and the consultants used stakeholder input to develop a Hierarchy of Preferred Locations for telecommunication facilities. The following proposed hierarchy emphasizes the use of concealed facilities, publicly owned property, and limits telecommunication facilities in residential areas. The most preferred option is listed first with the least preferred option last. Staff will also incorporate this hierarchy into the Ordinance revision. Example telecommunication facility types can be found below. 1. Concealed attached antenna 2. Collocation of antenna on existing telecommunication facility 3. Non‐concealed attached antenna in private utility easement (on an existing utility pylon structure) 4. Telecommunication facility on publicly owned property in non‐residential area/district a. Concealed (e.g. faux tree, flagpole, banner pole, etc.) b. Other 5. Dual function telecommunication facility in private utility easement in non‐ residential area/district (within an existing utility pylon structure) 6. New telecommunication facility on private property in non‐residential area/district a. Concealed (e.g. faux tree, flagpole, banner pole, etc.) b. Monopole c. Other 7. Concealed telecommunication facility in residential area/district a. On publicly owned property b. On private property 8. Dual function telecommunication facility in private utility easement in residential area/district (within an existing utility pylon structure)

10 

Painted Pole

Slick Stick

Flag Pole

Dual Function Facility w/in Private Utility Easement

Concealed Antenna

Monopole

11 

Banner Pole

Light Stanchion

Faux Tree

Attached Antenna w/in Private Utility Easement (on existing structure)

12 

Private Property Non‐Residential Locations (with existing structures) There are a number of taller buildings on private non‐residential property, particularly along Airport Boulevard, Paramount Parkway, and Carrington Mill Boulevard, that could potentially be a location for a telecommunication facility. Those taller buildings include hotels and office buildings. Another consideration is utilizing the existing structures within private utility easements, such as utility pylons. Private Property Non‐Residential Locations (no tructures/vacant) Many private non‐residential properties are vacant. In those instances, applicants may propose a new facility. In these instances, the telecommunication facility should be as tall as permitted and blend with the surroundings. To be as inconspicuous as possible, the telecommunication facility should also utilize the most appropriate concealment technique available. Publicly Owned Property Locations ( Figure 3 ) Throughout the community, the Town owns a number of properties, some with existing structures and some without. Several of these properties potentially could be used to site a telecommunication facility. These properties include parks, town buildings, and open space (see Appendix E for additional detail). Also see Figure 4 , showing the locations of Existing, Proposed and Fill‐In Sites. Residential Locations Because of the population growth in Morrisville, the primary goal when locating facilities in residential areas is to preserve the visual integrity of the neighborhood. Per the Public Participation Process, telecommunication facilities in residential areas shall be fewer and shorter. Therefore, telecommunication facility placement will be critical to ensure adequate service to certain neighborhoods that may be further from non‐ residential areas with more telecommunication facility placement options. Possibly the most inconspicuous way to incorporate facilities into neighborhoods would be mounting them on existing streetlights and traffic signals, if in the vicinity. There also may be telecommunication facility installation opportunities at both elementary schools within Morrisville that are located near residential neighborhoods.

13 

Figure 3

14 

Figure 4

15 

Policies & Recommendations The following policies and recommendations are proposed to promote and address the goals, location, and preferred hierarchy provided above. Policy 1: Provide guidance and ssistance to telecommunication facility applicants in the siting and design of proposed facilities, consistent with the hierarchy of preferred locations listed in this plan. Recommendations 1.1 Require pre‐application discussions and/or meetings to review, comment on, and guide the siting and design of proposed facilities. 1.2 Require minimum submittal standards. 1.3 Assist applicants in identifying potential locations by maintaining and making available a current inventory of existing telecommunication facilities. 1.4 Identify publicly owned properties most suitable for siting telecommunication facilities and create incentives for their use. 1.5 Identify other potential locations for siting telecommunication facilities consistent with the Hierarchy of Preferred Locations and telecommunication facility types. 1.6 Provide a streamlined process for facilities that meet siting and design standards. Establish a tiered approval process that incentivizes applicants to propose telecommunication facilities in preferred locations using a preferred design with administrative approval, while requiring other proposals to secure Town Council approval. 1.7 Require shorter and concealed facilities in residential areas. 1.8 Encourage more, taller facilities in non‐residential areas. The increased visual impact of taller facilities with more antenna arrays should be a consideration with this approach. 1.9 Telecommunication facilities should be sited to minimize visual impacts from road rights‐of‐way and neighborhoods. 1.10 As technology evolves, there may be other opportunities not currently considered. The maps included in this report are not all‐inclusive and the Ordinance should contain provisions allowing other opportunities to be reviewed on a case‐by‐case basis. Policy 2: Require techniques to minimize the visual impacts of telecommunication facilities. Recommendations 2.1 Require concealed telecommunication facility installations. 2.2 Require applicants to submit a visual analysis, such as a balloon test, and if visible to the public propose measures to mitigate the visual impact. 2.3 Require that telecommunication facilities blend with the surroundings in shape, color, material, and texture. 2.4 Require security fencing and landscape screening material around the compound area to match that found in the vicinity.

16 

2.5 On buildings, encourage installations that are appropriately scaled and hidden within existing architectural features. 2.6 Other than signage specifically required by law prohibit any unnecessary markings, advertising or promotional signage on telecommunication facilities. 2.7 Require applicants for new telecommunication facilities to evaluate the feasibility of collocating new antennas and equipment on an existing structure or structures. Policy 3: Telecommunication facilities should be of an appropriate mass and scale with the surrounding property, neighborhood, and community. Recommendations 3.1 Limit the height of new telecommunication facilities. 3.2 Prohibit the use of guyed facilities. 3.3 Prohibit the use of new lattice telecommunication facilities. 3.4 Prohibit the use of new telecommunication facilities installations on wooden poles. 3.5 Establish limits on the size of above ground equipment buildings, generators, and other equipment within the compound area based on zoning and adjoining land use. 3.6 The Town should only consider inconspicuous telecommunication facilities in residential neighborhoods. Policy 4: Maintain training and relevant materials for staff, decision‐makers and the public in an effort to enhance the review process. Recommendations 4.1 Provide staff and officials opportunities for training through workshops, conferences, webinars, etc. As appropriate, coordinate training opportunities with Morrisville Chamber of Commerce in an effort to involve the business community. 4.2 Staff should have available examples of preferred screening and concealment techniques, and preferred telecommunication facility types. 4.3 Support public involvement by making this Master Plan available through the Town website, and preparing an informational document summarizing the telecommunication facility requirements, including information on preferred locations, design and maintenance, and opportunities for public review. 4.4 Emphasize items that the Town can regulate, such as, requiring new facilities to incorporate breakpoint technology, facility height, facility type, location preferences, setbacks, and landscaping. 4.5 Note items that the Town cannot regulate, such as, requirements for tower lighting and markings exclusively regulated by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)/Federal Communications Commission (FCC), and Radio Frequency (RF) Emissions exclusively regulated by federal standards and the FCC.

17 

Policy 5: Telecommunication facilities shall be designed to ensure public safety from hazards and noise. Recommendations 5.1 Require that the design of new telecommunication facilities, antenna modifications and collocations comply with current building requirements. 5.2 Protect people and property near telecommunication facilities from structural failure by maintaining minimum setback requirements based on the height of the telecommunication facility and adjoining land use. 5.3 Telecommunication facilities shall be designed to incorporate breakpoint technology. 5.4 Applicants shall demonstrate compliance with Federal Communications Commission (FCC) radio frequency requirements. 5.5 When power generators or other noise sources are proposed at telecommunication facilities, applicants shall demonstrate compliance with Town noise ordinance requirements. Policy 6: Require monitoring of all telecommunication facilities to ensure they are being properly maintained. Recommendations 6.1 Telecommunication facility owners should be responsible for monitoring sites on a regular basis. 6.2 Provide for annual inspections to ensure that antenna, support facility, landscaping and other camouflage, etc. are being properly maintained. A private consulting group on behalf of the Town may conduct site visits and monitoring. 6.3 Require telecommunication facility owners to bear the cost for monitoring sites. Policy 7: Require the removal of abandoned telecommunication facilities. Recommendations 7.1 Require telecommunication facility owners to notify the Town when operations cease at a site. Telecommunication facilities that have not been used by any carrier for a six (6) month period should comply with abandonment provisions that provide for dismantling and removal of a facility. 7.2 Require telecommunication facility owners to bear the cost for removal of abandoned telecommunication facilities. Policy 8: Fees established and collected for the permitting, monitoring and inspection of telecommunication facilities should ensure full cost recovery for the Town. Recommendations 8.1 The Town should continue the current application review fee structure, which in addition to the fee for staff review; applicants bear the cost of a technical review of the

18 

telecommunication facility, site upgrade, etc. by an outside consultant working on behalf of the Town. 8.2 The Town should coordinate with Wake County to update its property assessment records to ensure that telecommunication facilities are fully valued as site improvements, with the town receiving appropriate tax revenue from them. 8.3 The Town should research the potential to generate compensation from companies attaching telecommunication equipment to Duke Energy streetlight poles within the Town’s publicly maintained road rights‐of‐way. Policy 9: Telecommunication facilities can be a potential source of revenue for the Town. Recommendations 9.1 Where appropriate, the Town should pursue lease agreements with telecommunication companies on designated publicly owned properties that meet coverage needs. 9.2 The Town may want to consider limiting the number of facilities on publicly owned properties to one per property, but with that one telecommunication facility get the best lease agreement possible and preserve the aesthetics of the property.

19 

Design Guidelines The Town is primarily concerned with the appearance of the telecommunication facility and whether it blends with the surroundings; therefore, suggested design guidelines follow. These guidelines are not all‐inclusive and applicants are encouraged to propose creative solutions that meet the intent of the Master Plan. Town Center Telecommunication Facilities 1. Telecommunication facilities located on or within an historic structure shall not alter or damage the features, distinctive construction methods, or original historic materials of the building. 2. Any alteration made to an historic structure to accommodate a telecommunication facility shall be fully reversible. 3. Facilities attached to streetlight poles, parking lot light poles, etc. shall be fully concealed. Concealed Telecommunication Facilities 1. Concealed facilities are preferred. 2. New concealed facilities should blend with the surroundings and avoid being conspicuous, such as a faux tree should not tower over neighboring trees and a flagpole type should reasonably resemble a typical flagpole. 3. The faux tree type should be designed to resemble the predominant tree in the area and should be constructed of materials that will retain a natural appearance. 4. The surrounding environment (e.g. topography, trees, or buildings) should be used to the maximum extent possible to conceal the telecommunication facility and compound area. 5. Concealed telecommunication facility types should vary in the Town to avoid too many of any one particular type. Non‐Concealed Telecommunication Facilities (Monopoles) 1. New lattice towers are not permitted within the Town. 2. A monopole should be sited among other elements to reduce its visibility, such as, among a stand of trees or within a power substation. 3. As appropriate, monopoles should be colored to match their foreground or background elements. 4. A monopole to be located on publicly owned property shall be concealed as a faux tree type and should be placed next to real trees. The applicant may be required to plant large trees if real trees are not located nearby. Antennas 1. Antennas may be screened with materials that are transparent to the RF signal, but mitigate the visual impact. 2. Flush mounting on a building wall is the least conspicuous placement. Flush‐ mounted antennas shall be concealed to blend with the building wall. 3. Rooftop antennas shall be placed in the center. A secondary location is a central place on the roof where the roofline can cut off angles of view, making the antennas

20 

less visible. The least desirable roof mount is a vertical protrusion at or near the parapet where the antennas are likely to be the most visible. 4. Antennas may be mounted on top of a pole structure (e.g. light pole, traffic signal pole, etc.) if the pole is thirty feet (30’) or less in height. The antennas should align vertically with the pole structure and shall not exceed twenty percent (20%) of the height of the pole. 5. To verify that other structures, such as parking lot light poles, telephone poles, streetlight poles, athletic field light poles, etc., can accommodate antennas, a structural analysis will be required before antenna installation will be permitted. 6. Antenna installation on utility pylons in private utility easements may only require review and approval from Duke Energy Progress. Cables & Feed Lines 1. Cable runs along the ground should be placed underground. 2. If the cable runs are located above ground, they should be hidden from public view. 3. Cables and feed lines shall not be mounted to the exterior of a building or structure. 4. In monopole type facilities (e.g. slick stick, faux tree, painted pole, etc.) cables and feed lines shall be installed inside the pole. Equipment Cabinets & Compound Areas 1. Interiors of existing adjacent buildings are the best location for equipment cabinets. 2. Access to equipment cabinets and compound areas shall be limited to authorized personal only and remain gated and locked at all times. 3. Building rooftop compound area screening shall not exceed a height of ten feet (10’) and shall be set back from the building parapet to minimize public visibility. 4. Building rooftop compound area screening should be architecturally compatible with the building. 5. Ground level equipment must be screened with security fencing and landscaping. The landscape material should match or compliment the surrounding material. 6. Ground level compound areas should be of sufficient height to screen the equipment and, if applicable, match the material(s) and color(s) of the adjoining building. 7. Ground level compound areas shall not remove any required parking spaces, required buffer areas, or encroach into any easements. 8. Pole‐mounted equipment shall be small, low profile and flush mounted. Additionally, the equipment shall be mounted high enough off the ground to not interfere with pedestrian, bicycle, and vehicle traffic. 9. Telecommunication facility setbacks shall be measured from the property line and/or road rights‐of‐way line to the limits of the compound area.

21 

Implementation The following table outlines items necessary to realize the contents of this Master Plan. Item Completed By Timeframe Cost 1. Prepare Telecommunication Tower Ordinance Revision Morrisville Staff/CityScape Consultants FY2013 Staff Time 2. Attend Training Opportunities Related to Telecommunication Facilities Morrisville Officials/Staff/Residents/ Business Community Ongoing Unknown 3. Research Leasing Options for Publicly Owned Property Morrisville Staff Ongoing $0

22 

policy framework to guide the Ordinance update and

WHEREAS the intent of the Master Plan is to balance the goals of providing good cell phone service with minimizing impacts from telecommunication facilities on neighborhoods and the community and

WHEREAS effective planning can potentially minimize the number of facilities by increasing collocation opportunities and

WHEREAS the Master Plan works to achieve the balance by planning for wellsited well designed and inconspicuous telecommunication facilities that fit within the community and

WHEREAS the development of the Master Plan involved technical analysis on existing coverage and reasonable projections for facility expansion creating inventories of existing facilities public meetings with interactive keypad polling and online preference surveys and WHEREAS the Master Plan combines local land use planning strategies with industryaccepted radio frequency engineering standards to identify lowimpact sites for new telecommunication facilities to meet the growing demand for service and

WHEREAS the Master Plan establishes policies recommendations and design standards to guide decisions regarding facility siting and implementation measures and

WHEREAS the Planning and Zoning Board held a public comment session on April 11 2013 and May 9 2013 to receive input on the proposed Master Plan and

WHEREAS the Planning and Zoning Board forwarded a recommendation of approval to the Town Council and

WHEREAS the Town Council received the Planning and Zoning Board recommendation at its Briefing Meeting on June 11 2013 and

WHEREAS the Town Council provided an opportunity for public input on the proposed Master Plan on June 25 2013

Page 1of

23

Diana R Davis Town Clerk

1

185

Page 2 of 2

24

Wireless Telecommunication Facilities Master Plan - Town of Morrisville, NC – Adopted July 23, 2013

Appendix A The Telecommunications Industry

Wireless Telecommunication Facilities Master Plan - Town of Morrisville, NC – Adopted July 23, 2013

The Telecommunications Industry

Introduction Telecommunications is the transmission, emission and/or reception of radio signals, whether it is in the form of voice communications, digital images, sound bytes or other information, via wires and cables; or via space, through radio frequencies, satellites, microwaves, or other electromagnetic systems. Telecommunications includes the transmission of voice, video, data, broadband, wireless and satellite technologies and others. Traditional landline telephone service utilizes an extensive network of copper interconnecting lines to transmit and receive a phone call between parties. Fiber optic and T-1 data lines increase the capabilities by delivering not only traditional telephone, but also high-speed internet and, in some situations cable television, and are capable of substantially more. This technology involves an extensive network of fiber optic lines situated either above or below ground locations. Wireless telephony, also known as wireless communications, includes mobile phones, pagers, and two-way enhanced radio systems and relies on the combination of landlines, cable and an extensive network of elevated antennas most typically found on communication towers to transmit voice and data information. The evolution of this technology is known as first, second, third, fourth and fifth generation (1G through 5G) of wireless deployment. Wireless handsets

During the early 1980’s, the first generation (1G) of 800 megahertz (MHz) band cellular systems was launched nationwide. The 1G portable cell phones were boxy in shape and operated much like an AM and FM radio station. The 800 MHz frequency allows the radio signal from the base station to travel between three and five miles depending on topography and line of site between the base stations. Customers using a cell phone knew when they traveled outside of the service area because a static sound on the phone similar to the sound of a weak AM or FM radio station was heard through the handset. The signal either faded or remained crackling until the subscriber was within range of a transmitting base

1G 1984 Mobria Cell Phone (Image: J. Bundy)

station. Originally, the 800 MHz band only supported an analog radio signal. Later technological advancements allowed 800 MHz systems to also support digital customers which allows for an increased number of subscriber transmissions per base station.

A-1

Wireless Telecommunication Facilities Master Plan - Town of Morrisville, NC – Adopted July 23, 2013

The 1990’s marked the deployment of the 1900 MHz band Personal Communication Systems (PCS). This second generation (2G) of wireless technology primarily supported a digital signal, which audibly was clearer than the analog signal. The handsets were a fraction of the size of the 1G cell phones and the first handsets provided expanded services such as paging and the ability to send text messaging through the handheld unit. However 2G had some network functionality trade-offs. The technology of 2G included a static free signal but with a higher rate of disconnects or dropped calls thus the deployment of 2G required significantly more base stations for several reasons. First, the propagation signal in 1900 MHz is limited to a 2-4 mile range so the number of required base stations almost tripled just to provide basic 2G coverage in the same geographic area as a 1G service area. Second, the industry was reluctant to share tower space with a competitor and many service providers resisted collocating on the same tower. Third, subscriber base and usage grew rapidly and the industry needed more sites to improve network coverage demands by their customers.

2G Motorola Phone (Image: amazon.com)

2G Nokia Phone (Image: htcevoforum.net)

2G Motorola Phone (Image: superstock.com)

Third and fourth generation (3G and 4G) wireless handsets offer a wide variety of tools and services including access to e-mail, news, music and videos; built in cameras and videos; global positioning services (GPS); internet commerce; and thousands of applications from games to flashlights for downloading onto the handset. These applications require large amounts of bandwidth and service providers continue to

upgrade existing base stations and add additional base stations to improve and increase network capacity. To improve network functionality service providers purchased licenses to operate in the 1700-1800, and 2100-2400 MHz frequencies. The operating footprint is similar to the 1900 MHz footprint and helped to increase bandwidth in smaller geographic areas. With the advances of 4G the service providers are purchasing licenses in the 700 MHz frequencies. The 700 MHz platform has a service area similar to 800 MHz and will allow the service providers to broadcast a larger propagation footprint. The need for additional infrastructure for 3G and 4G is significant nationwide and continuous deployment of new base stations will be necessary as the industry transitions to fifth and sixth

2G Phone (left) 4G Phone (right) (Image: answers.com)

A-2

Wireless Telecommunication Facilities Master Plan - Town of Morrisville, NC – Adopted July 23, 2013

generation (5G and 6G) utilizing the 700, 800, 1700-1900, and 2100-2400 MHz frequencies. LTE is used as a marketing name and is not reflective of the actual download speed as defined as 3G and 4G. Unlike 1G and 2G (initial launch of cellular and PCS wireless service with the goal and objective of providing initial wireless coverage); 3G through 5G deployments will be focused on compressing more data in existing and future bandwidths. Fourth generation network technology (the platform for smartphones) emphasizes improving network capacity and maximizing the use of bandwidth for faster and more efficient transfers of data. Fifth generation wireless will bring faster data transfers and additional wireless services such as using your phone for credit card transactions and other similar functions. Like all previous generations of wireless deployment, 5G will require more sites. Satellite technologies Satellite growth has surpassed the highest expectations of only a few years ago. The reason is simple - cost. Previously, relaying information, data, and other related materials were cumbersome and required many relay stations in very specific locations and relatively close together. Initially satellite use was expensive because of the rarity and limited amount of available airtime needed. Satellite airtime has become more affordable with the deployment of additional satellites and advanced technologies that allow more usage of the same amount of bandwidth. Competition always holds down cost, and that is what has occurred. In addition, satellite services are in the early stages of designing more localized networks; contributing to the already rapid growth.

Satellite technology has its limitations, which are all based on the Laws of Physics. Some licensees of satellite services such as SiriusXM Radio and satellite telephone services petitioned the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and have been allowed additional deployment of land-based supplemental transmission relay stations for the ability to compete more aggressively with existing ground base services, and overcome obstacles typical to satellite technology. Subscribers found the delay in talk times unacceptable along with fade and signal dropout. The FCC is looking favorably upon this request, even though the existing land-based services are strongly objecting for various reasons. Sirius XM Radio was

Iridium Satellite Routing System (Image: wcclp.com)

successful in obtaining ground base supplemental transmitters, and is rapidly becoming one of the largest users of ground base transmitters. This will place more demands on governmental agencies as another service begins to construct a land-based infrastructure.

A-3

Wireless Telecommunication Facilities Master Plan - Town of Morrisville, NC – Adopted July 23, 2013

Wireless facilities Wireless communication facilities are comprised of four main apparatuses: 1) an electronic base station; 2) feed lines; 3) antenna or antenna array; and 4) an antenna support facility. Base station and feed lines Base stations are the wireless service provider's specific electronic equipment used to transmit and receive radio signals, and is usually mounted within a facility including, but not limited to: cabinets, shelters, pedestals or other similar enclosures generally used to contain electronic equipment for said purpose. Feed lines are the coaxial copper cables used as the interconnecting media between the transmission/receiving base station and the antenna. The base station and feed lines shown in Figure 1 is a typical model for providers operating in the 1900 MHz frequencies and ground space for this equipment cabinet is around eight (8) square feet.

Tower

Feed lines

Base Station

Meter Box

Figure 1: Example of 1900 MHz Wireless Infrastructure Ground Equipment

The electronics operating the 800 MHz wireless systems within the base station can generate substantial heat, therefore the base stations for providers operating in the 800 MHz frequencies are much larger and generally need an equipment cabinet a minimum of four hundred (400) square feet to house the equipment. The only noise that might be produced from the vicinity of any base station would be from an air conditioner or a backup generator that might be necessary in instances of no power or power failure. Figure 2 is a picture of an 800 MHz base station.

A-4

Wireless Telecommunication Facilities Master Plan - Town of Morrisville, NC – Adopted July 23, 2013

Figure 2: Example of 800 MHz Base Station

Antennas and antenna arrays for wireless telecommunications Antennas can be a receiving and/or transmitting facility. Examples and purposes of antennas include: a single omni-directional (whip) antenna or grouped sectorized (also known as panel antennas). These antennas are used to transmit and/or receive two-way radio, Enhanced Specialized Mobile Radio (ESMR), cellular, Personal Communications Service (PCS), or Specialized Mobile Radio (SMR) signals. The single sectionalized or sectionalized panel antenna array is also used for transmitting and receiving cellular, PCS or ESMR wireless telecommunication signals.

Omni-Directional Whip Type Antenna

Sectorized (panel) Antenna Array

Figure 3: Examples of Directional and Panel Antennas

A-5

Wireless Telecommunication Facilities Master Plan - Town of Morrisville, NC – Adopted July 23, 2013

Support facilities for the antenna A variety of structures can be used for mounting the antenna(s) such as towers, buildings, water tanks, existing 911 tower facilities, tall signage and light poles; provided that, 1) the structure is structurally capable of supporting the antenna and the feed lines; and, 2) there is sufficient ground space to accommodate the base station and accessory equipment used in operating the network. Antenna support structures can also be concealed in some circumstances to visually blend-in with the surrounding area.

Self Support Monopole Tower Self Support Lattice Tower Guy Tower Figure 4: Examples of Non Concealed Antenna Support Facilities

A-6

Wireless Telecommunication Facilities Master Plan - Town of Morrisville, NC – Adopted July 23, 2013

Antenna and Support Facility Concealment Options The antenna and support structures can also be concealed. Antenna concealment techniques include: faux dormers; faux chimneys or elevator shafts encasing the antenna feed lines and/or equipment cabinet; and painted antenna and feed lines to match the color of a building or structure. A concealed tower is not readily identifiable as a wireless facility. In slick sticks, banner and flag poles and three legged poles the antenna are covered by fiberglass shields; and on faux trees the monopole and antenna are painted and surrounded by faux branches. Partially concealed towers included modified braces and brackets on the lattice towers and painted monopoles. Dual-purpose towers include light stanchions and poles added within an existing utility tower.

Figure 5: Examples of Antenna Concealment Techniques

A-7

Wireless Telecommunication Facilities Master Plan - Town of Morrisville, NC – Adopted July 23, 2013

Slick Stick

Flag Pole

Three Legged Pole

Faux Tree

Banner & Light Pole Modified Lattice Tower

Light Stanchion Painted Monopole Figure 6: Examples of Concealed, Partially Concealed and Dual Purpose Towers Dual Function Utility

A-8

Wireless Telecommunication Facilities Master Plan - Town of Morrisville, NC – Adopted July 23, 2013

Hexagonal Grid with Circular Coverage from Base Stations (Image: 5freshminutes.IT) theoretical “perfect location” for a base station (antenna support facility). Next, coverage predictions are shown from the base station within the hexagon. The propagation pattern is generally circular and the size of the coverage area is affected by many variables such as antenna mounting elevation, topography, land cover, and size of the immediate subscriber base. The illustration to the left shows a smaller coverage area in green and the largest coverage area in pink. The difference in coverage areas could be relative to the antenna mounting elevations (a lower antenna mounting elevation on the tower in the green circle and a higher antenna mounting elevation on the tower in the pink shaded circle); or differences in network capacity or topography. The grid systems are unique to each service provider and maintained by each individual wireless provider’s engineering department. Antenna network capacity The number of base station sites in a grid network not only determines the limits of geographic coverage, but the number of subscribers (customers) the system can support at any given time. Each provider is different but a single carrier can only process or turn over a certain number of calls per minute, and at any particular time only a certain number of calls can occur simultaneously. This process is referred to as network capacity. As population, tourists and local wireless customers increase, excessive demand is put on the existing system's network capacity. When the network capacity reaches its limit, a customer will frequently hear a rapid busy signal, or get a message indicating all circuits are busy, or commonly a call goes directly to voicemail without the phone ring on the receiving end of the call. As the wireless network reaches design network capacity, it causes the service area to shrink, further complicating coverage objectives. Network capacity can be increased several ways. The service provider can shift channels from an adjacent site, or the provider can add additional base stations with additional infrastructure. A capacity base station has provisions for additional calling resources that enhance the network’s ability to serve more wireless phone customers within a specific geographic area as its primary objective. An assumption behind the capacity base station concept is that an area already has plenty of radio signals from existing coverage base stations, and the signals are clear. But there are too many calls being sent through the existing base stations resulting in capacity blockages at the base stations and leading to no service indications for subscribers when attempting to place a call. To design the wireless networks, radio frequency (RF) engineers overlay hexagonal cells representing circles on a map creating a grid system. These hexagons represent an area equal to the proposed base station coverage area. The center of the hexagon pinpoints the

A-9