Lake County planning commission approves 80-foot monopine wireless tower at 3275 Hill Road

The Lake County Planning Commission on Jan. 23, 2025, approved a mitigated negative declaration (IS 23-14) and a major use permit (UP 23-07) allowing an 80-foot monopine wireless communication tower to be built at 3275 Hill Road in Lakeport (APN 005-015-41).

The project applicant, Public Safety Towers LLC (referred to in the hearing as PSTC), proposes a monopine (tree-shaped) facility sited roughly 487 feet west of California State Highway 29, about 125 feet north of a PG&E substation and about 615 feet from Burger Lake. The compound would include a 35-by-35-foot lease area, 15 antennas, 15 radios, three surge suppressors, three antenna mounts, a 30-kilowatt diesel generator, a 150-gallon diesel fuel storage tank and a battery backup system. County staff recommended adoption of a mitigated negative declaration, concluding that identified impacts to aesthetics, air quality, biological and cultural resources, geology and soils, tribal cultural resources and wildfire could be reduced to less-than-significant levels with mitigation measures outlined in the staff report.

A county planner presented the project and the draft environmental findings, saying the project was evaluated under the Lake County General Plan, the Lakeport Area Plan and the Lake County Zoning Ordinance. The planner told commissioners the site is zoned Agricultural with several combining districts including Scenic, Floodway Fringe and Waterway, and staff will incorporate Lakeport Fire Protection District requirements into the permit conditions (including reflective addresses, driveway standards tied to Public Resources Code Section 4290 and rules for fuel storage and access to the tower).

Neighbors submitted two written letters; one asked about lighting. The applicant’s representative, Mike Moon P. Puck of TEP, which spoke on behalf of PSTC, said the company would not install top-of-tower lighting because the structure’s height does not trigger Federal Aviation Administration requirements, and any on-site lighting would be manual and used only for night maintenance. "We're not gonna provide any lighting," Moon P. Puck said, adding that the equipment will meet applicable federal standards. "Our project and all the equipment that's going to be installed will be compliant with all FCC regulations."

A member of the public, Maria Khan (resident), asked what recourse neighbors would have if they later experienced health problems they believed were caused by the tower. The county’s legal advisor told commissioners the county has limited authority on health-based challenges to radio-frequency emissions because federal law and agency thresholds preempt most local regulation. "The county itself is not an authority that has control over those issues," the staff legal advisor said, and noted that federal agencies set emission thresholds the county must follow. The legal advisor also explained lapse-in-use rules: unless the permit specifies otherwise, a use that ceases for two years can become void, though a county staff member noted a permit condition for this project might prescribe a different (shorter) dismantling timeline.

After public comment and discussion of the conditions and mitigation measures, a commissioner moved to adopt the mitigated negative declaration IS 23-14 and approve use permit UP 23-07 subject to the staff report findings and conditions. Commissioners voted in favor; the chair announced the motions passed. The planning commission reminded interested parties that the zoning ordinance allows a seven-calendar-day appeal period to the Board of Supervisors; appeal forms and applicable fees must be filed by 5 p.m. on or before the seventh calendar day after the commission’s final determination.

The planning commission’s decision approves the site-specific permit and environmental determination but includes multiple standard and site-specific conditions of approval described in staff attachments. Those conditions include the Lakeport Fire Protection District requirements, lighting limited to manually operated maintenance lighting, and mitigation measures listed in the draft initial study. If the tower is unused for the period specified in the permit it may be required to be removed under lapse-in-use rules.

The commission’s vote closes the item for the planning commission; any administrative enforcement or alleged violations of permit conditions would be handled under the county’s permit and code enforcement processes, and claims about federal standards or health effects would be subject to federal regulatory channels, not local land-use review.