12.05.080 Approval or disapproval of an application.
A. The city manager may approve or conditionally approve an application only after:
1. The application is deemed complete; and
2. Fifteen days have elapsed from the postmark date of appropriate notice required under Section 12.05.060(B) or (C) (if applicable); and
3. Any required public meeting has been held.
B. The city manager may disapprove an application in any of the following instances:
1. The applicant has not shown that the application conforms to the requirements of this chapter; or
2. The applicant has failed to submit any additional information requested by the city manager by the due date specified by the city manager; or
3. The applicant has not provided to the town all of the required information required by this chapter to permit the city manager to approve, approve with conditions, or deny the application taking into account legal deadlines affecting the town’s consideration of the application; or
4. The applicant has not paid any required fees to the town.
C. It is the applicant’s burden to show that a permit should be granted. In reviewing an application, the city manager may consider the WTF as proposed, and as it may be modified as a matter of right should the application be granted. In determining whether to grant, deny or condition an application, the city manager may consider the following and such other matters as the city manager may be entitled or required to consider as a matter of law:
1. Whether the WTF and support structure additions and modifications proposed are consistent with the general plan and will not adversely affect the policies and goals set forth therein or alter the rural character of the community;
2. Except as to minor modifications, or where the town is prohibited from considering it by law, whether the applicant has shown that the proposed WTF is necessary to close a significant gap in coverage and has further shown that its proposal is the least intrusive means of closing a significant gap;
3. Whether the WTF and support structure modifications and additions proposed comply with the design standards herein, and other applicable provisions of the code;
4. Whether the WTF and support structure modifications and additions proposed comply with applicable safety codes and laws (including without limitation the ADA), interfere with the public’s use of rights-of-way, or create undue risks to persons or property;
5. Whether the applicant has made the required affirmation regarding compliance with the FCC’s RF regulations, as the same may be amended;
6. Whether the applicant is authorized to file the application;
7. Whether the applicant has or will have necessary local, state or federal regulatory approvals required in connection with the WTF, including but not limited to necessary CEQA approvals, if any; and approvals for utility box design under this code, or for structures on private property; and
8. Whether alternative designs or locations would be more consistent with the general plan and otherwise minimize the impact of the WTF and support structure modifications and additions required.
Nothing herein permits the city manager to impose conditions or conduct a review inconsistent with any pre-approval or with Cal. Gov. Code Section 65850.6, where applicable in connection with a particular application.
D. If the city manager determines that an application should be approved, denied, or should be conditionally approved, he or she shall make written findings referencing substantial evidence in the town’s written administrative record in support of the action. The applicant and each person submitting comments on the application shall receive a copy of the town’s written decision and findings with respect to the decision. Such copy shall also plainly state the process and deadline for filing an appeal to the city council. Unless timely appealed, the decision will be final except as provided in Sections 12.05.040(C) and subsection E of this section.
E. Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter to the contrary, the city manager may recommend to the city council that, notwithstanding the evidence supporting denial, an application be approved if he or she makes a finding that the applicant has demonstrated that the refusal to grant such an exception and approve the application would prohibit or have the effect of prohibiting the provision of personal wireless services within the meaning of 47 U.S.C. Section 332(c)(7), or finds that the town authority to deny the application is otherwise preempted or prohibited by state or federal law. If a recommendation is made under this provision, the recommendation will be promptly submitted to the city council for final determination. (Ord. 613 (part), 2015; Ord. 612 (part), 2015)