Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Hermosa Beach commissioners continue Verizon rooftop wireless permit, direct staff to study alternate locations
Loading...
Summary
After neighbors urged denial over lack of independent coverage verification and proximity to homes, the Planning Commission voted to continue Verizon’s CUP 25-04 to May 19 and directed staff and the applicant to explore alternate placements on the same property.
The Hermosa Beach Planning Commission voted unanimously on March 17 to continue consideration of Verizon’s conditional use permit (CUP 25-04) for a rooftop unmanned wireless facility at 725 5th Street to May 19, directing city staff and Verizon to analyze alternative placements and configurations to reduce impacts on adjacent residences.
Assistant Planner Didi Tran told the commission the proposal calls for a screened rooftop enclosure of approximately 588.5 square feet and a maximum building height of 35 feet, with three sectors of panel antennas, six radios and a requirement that the project comply with Hermosa Beach Municipal Code provisions for wireless telecommunications. Staff recommended a CEQA Class 3 categorical exemption and noted Condition 9 of the proposed resolution would require a signed RF‑engineer report if there is reason to suspect the facility is not operating within FCC limits.
Neighbors were the loudest voices against the project. "The applicant has failed to demonstrate a verified coverage gap," said Liz Brubaker, an adjacent property owner, who told the commission the packet relies entirely on Verizon’s reports and lacks independent drive testing, drop‑call data or third‑party RF analysis. Other neighbors raised concerns about the scale of the installation, the accuracy of height measurements given sloping site conditions, long‑term conflicts with future second‑story additions and the adequacy of alternative‑site analysis.
Tom Johnson, representing Verizon, said the company had identified a coverage gap "between 1st and 14th and along PCH," argued that macro rooftop equipment is necessary to handle traffic on Pacific Coast Highway and said Verizon had evaluated four other potential properties but found those site owners unwilling to lease required space. Johnson also told commissioners the carrier’s RF analyses indicate compliance with FCC exposure standards.
Commissioners pressed Verizon and staff on alternatives: whether antennas could be clustered toward the building’s northeast/front, whether a pole in the parking area could achieve clearance, whether smaller small‑cell solutions were feasible, and how future development on adjacent lots could affect the facility’s operation. Several commissioners said the applicant’s willingness to revisit the site layout opened a path forward.
Chair Eisen moved that the hearing be continued to a date‑certain of May 19 with direction for Verizon and staff to work on alternative placements on the east/northeast portion of the CrossFit building; the motion passed on a unanimous roll call.
Next step: staff and Verizon will return with analysis of the alternative configurations requested by the commission on May 19, when the hearing resumes.
