1. Authorization. The Planning Director is explicitly authorized at his/her discretion to employ on behalf of the City an independent technical expert in connection with any permit authorized under this chapter to review any technical materials submitted including, but not limited to, those required under this section and in those cases where a technical demonstration of unavoidable need or unavailability of alternatives is required.

2. Scope. The Planning Director may request an independent consultant review on any issue that involves specialized or expert knowledge in connection with wireless facilities deployment or permit applications for wireless facilities, which include without limitation: (a) permit application completeness and/or accuracy; (b) pre-construction planned compliance with applicable regulations for human exposure to RF emissions; (c) post-construction actual compliance with applicable regulations for human exposure to RF emissions; (d) whether and to what extent a proposed project will address a gap in the applicant’s wireless services; (e) whether and to what extent any technically feasible and/or potentially available alternative sites or concealment techniques may exist; (f) the applicability, reliability and/or sufficiency of any information, analyses or methodologies used by the applicant to reach any conclusions about any issue with the City’s discretion to review; and (g) any other issue identified by the Planning Director that requires expert or specialized knowledge. The Planning Director may request that the independent consultant prepare written reports, testify at public meetings, hearings and/or appeals and attend meetings with City staff and/or the applicant.

3. Consultant Fees – Deposits. The applicant shall pay all the costs of said review, including any administrative costs incurred by the City. In the event that the Planning Director elects to retain an independent consultant in connection with any permit application, the applicant shall be responsible for the reasonable costs in connection with the services provided, which may include without limitation any costs incurred by the independent consultant to attend and participate in any meetings or hearings. Before the independent consultant may perform any services, the applicant shall tender to the City a deposit in an amount equal to the estimated cost for the services to be provided, as determined by the Planning Director. The Planning Director may request additional deposits as reasonably necessary to ensure sufficient funds are available to cover the reasonable costs in connection with the independent consultant’s services. In the event that the deposit exceeds the total costs for consultant’s services, the Planning Director shall promptly return any unused funds to the applicant after the wireless facility has been installed and passes a final inspection by the Building Official or his or her designee. In the event that the reasonable costs for the independent consultant’s services exceed the deposit, the Planning Director shall invoice the applicant for the balance. The City shall not issue any construction or grading permit to any applicant with any unpaid deposit requests or invoices.

4. Proprietary Information. Any proprietary information disclosed to the City or the expert hired shall remain confidential and shall not be disclosed to any third party.

1. Pre-Submittal Conference. Before application submittal, the applicant must schedule and attend a pre-submittal conference with the Planning Director for all proposed projects subject to a use permit. Pre-submittal conferences for all other proposed projects are strongly encouraged but not required. The pre-submittal conference is intended to streamline the review process through informal discussion that includes, without limitation, the appropriate project classification and review process, any latent issues in connection with the proposed or existing wireless tower or base station, including compliance with generally applicable rules for public health and safety; potential concealment issues or concerns (if applicable); coordination with other City departments responsible for application review; and application completeness issues. To mitigate unnecessary delays due to application incompleteness, applicants are encouraged (but not required) to bring any draft applications or other materials so that City staff may provide informal feedback and guidance about whether such applications or other materials may be incomplete or unacceptable. The Planning Director shall use reasonable efforts to provide the applicant with an appointment within five working days after the Director receives a written request and any applicable fee or deposit to reimburse the City for its reasonable costs to provide the services rendered in the pre-submittal conference.

2. Submittal Appointment. All applications must be submitted to the City at a pre-scheduled appointment with the Planning Director. Applicants may generally submit one application per appointment, but may schedule successive appointments for multiple applications whenever feasible and not prejudicial to other applicants. The Planning Director shall use reasonable efforts to provide the applicant with an appointment within five working days after the Planning Director receives a written request and, if applicable, confirms that the applicant complied with the pre-submittal conference requirement. Any application received without an appointment, whether delivered in person, by mail or through any other means, will not be considered duly filed unless the applicant received a written exemption from the Director at a pre-submittal conference.

1. If the hearing on the application is continued by the Planning Commission, the applicant is encouraged, but not required, to hold a further meeting with the persons entitled to notice pursuant to subparagraph (a) at least one week prior to the continued hearing.

2. If a meeting pursuant to subparagraph (b) results in any modifications to the project prior to the Planning Commission hearing on the project, the applicant shall (a) notify the director of the proposed modifications, and (b) explain to the Planning Commission at the hearing on the matter any discrepancy between the project as proposed in the notice sent pursuant to subparagraph (a) and the project as presented to the Planning Commission.