A special two-hour public hearing is scheduled for April 16, starting at 5:30 p.m. in the council chambers.

Suggestion of a telecommunications ordinance first arose two years ago when MetroPCS wanted to install three antennas on top of an existing PG&E tower on Lester Lane in the Live Oak Manor Park neighborhood. Residents had concerns about the possible exposure to radio frequency electromagnetic fields, increased noise, a decrease in property value and the visual blight they felt the antennas would cause.

The town council at the time called a moratorium on all proposed telecommunications facilities to allow time to draft an ordinance by which the town would base future decisions on such telecommunications applications. The moratorium, due to expire in July, may be extended up to one year.

Part of the reason for the ordinance is to make it difficult for telecommunications providers to set up a facility in residential neighborhoods. At the same time, the town must adhere to the 1996 Federal Telecommunications Act, which prohibits local governments from discriminating or placing a cap on the number of providers in the area. The act also bars a municipality from denying an applicant if radio frequency emissions comply with federal standards.

Tom Williams, assistant community development director for Los Gatos, said the town must balance three critical issues: the desire to protect residents, the need to adhere to the Federal Telecommunications Act and the need to offer complete wireless telecommunications coverage.

"We're addressing residents' needs to the greatest extent possible under the law," he said. "We really have listened. We understand their concerns."

"We've got some real good checks and balances," he said of the draft ordinance, admitting, however, that the document is not yet perfect.

Lucille Weidman of Carlester Drive said residents in her neighborhood "found the draft to be extremely wishy-washy."

Residents are asking for a restrictive ordinance and not one that altogether prohibits telecommunications facilities from being established—a "prescriptive ordinance that protects the character of the neighborhood and that allows for the development of the cellular industry," she said.

The draft ordinance, as prepared for the April 16 meeting, states the intent of the ordinance, which includes protecting the visual character of the town through careful design, siting, landscaping and innovative camouflaging techniques for wireless telecommunications facilities. Another goal is to limit construction of new towers by requiring collocation of facilities between the various telecommunications providers as much as possible.

Weidman, who spearheaded a movement in the Live Oak Manor Park neighborhood to review the draft ordinance, incorporated input from residents in a revised draft of the ordinance that she submitted to town staff last week.

The proposed revisions respond to the first objective listed in the draft that the goal of the ordinance is to ensure competitive and quality wireless communications service while considering the health and general welfare of the community.

Residents feel the order of the two clauses should be reversed, so that the ordinance reads that the goal is first to ensure the welfare of the community, then to enable wireless communications service in town.

"This is not only an issue of semantics but also one of underlying philosophy: If the authors of the ordinance do not believe that THE primary goal of the document is to protect the community and its citizens, then no number of changes to the minutiae of the ordinance will successfully and truly meet with our satisfaction" reads the revised document from residents.

The draft ordinance also states that wireless telecommunications facilities are "encouraged to collocate" with other providers.

"Collocation is great for everyone except those people who live right under the tower where 50 carriers have collocated. To make a blanket statement that collocation is preferred is unfair and asks certain neighborhoods ... to bear most of the burden," residents respond in their own document.

Residents proposed stronger language and additional specificity to the ordinance. They are demanding that antenna and associated equipment have a minimum setback of 50 feet from any adjacent residential property and that equipment not be mounted to any tower in such a way that a possible antenna fall would potentially hurt pedestrians.

They also want the ordinance to state that any artificial techniques to try to fit the facility into the neighborhood, such as artificial trees and rocks, is strictly prohibited, that maintenance work be limited to between 8 a.m. and 5 p.m. on weekdays and that a licensed engineer with expert knowledge in the electromagnetic field and radio frequency emissions certify every two years that the facilities are operating within federal standards.

The ordinance the town will review this week is the third of such drafts. Earlier discussions were handled in other community meetings and study sessions.

"Every meeting is important. Each meeting was a progressive meeting where you learned something new," Weidman said. She and other town residents have expressed disappointment over what they felt was inadequate publicity for the meetings, which were often attended by a handful of residents.

"It's never too late to have community involvement," said Weidman, who has followed the issue closely since the beginning. However, she noted that it would take time for individuals who have not followed the issue closely to apprise themselves of the situation.

Revisions to the draft ordinance can still take place at the planning commission and town council level. The draft ordinance is tentatively scheduled to go to the planning commission on May 14.