CORRESPONDENCE
~f, Michael
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Rumpf, Michael
Tuesday, June 07,20054:54 PM
'ckwireless@nextel.blackberry.net'
RE: Renaissance cell tower
Carl, In response to your letter requesting direction on the tower issue, I understand
there to be two issues. One is the movement of a tower that is currently non-conforming,
and the other is the construction of the stealth tower in advance of conditional use
approval.
If you would agree to provide a letter acknowledging the risk of moving the non-conforming
tower in advance of the approvals, you can move it from the existing location if you are
prepared to move dirt under it for the corresponding site plan work. If it is left
portable, but on the premises, the non-conformity is not worsened. But without the
conditional use approval for the new site, you would not be able to obtain a permit for
the clock tower and stealth unit.
I hope that helps. I know it makes sense to move it once and start the clock tower
project. However, the code amendment is required to allow such a conditional use approval
and permit.
Reply with any further questions, Mike
-----Original Message-----
From: Rumpf, Michael
Sent: Friday, June 03, 2005 6:07 PM
To: 'ckwireless@nextel.blackberry.net'
Subject: Re: Any word on my Letter?
Carl. Not an easy fix. Still thinking. MR
Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld
-----Original Message-----
From: Carl Klepper's Blackberry <ckwireless@nextel.blackberry.net>
To: Michael Rumpf <rumpfm@ci.boynton-beach.fl.us>
Sent: Fri Jun 03 18:03:45 2005
Subject: Any word on my Letter?
Compson Associates, Inc.
Carl Klepper Jr
Vice President
Ph 561 391 6570
Fax 561 391 2423
1
ENGINEERED
bNVIRONMENTS
INC.
W. David Poist
Director of Development
Compson Associates, Inc.
980 North Federal Highway
Suite 200
Boca Raton, Florida 33432
RE: New Boynton Beach Clock Tower
Old Existing Tower @ 26 32 33 N, 80 0518 W
Dear Mr. Poist
Engineered Environments is pleased to provide the below information, which you requested, in
answer to the City of Boynton Beach Request on Zoning Approval for the new Clock Tower.
1. The existing Tower (26 32 33 N, 80 05 18 W) is 80' in height and will provide space for
one Telecommunications Provider in its present state.
2. The new Clock Tower will have space for a minimum of four - to five Telecommunication
Providers.
3. The Telecommunications Provider currently on the "old" monopole is Nextel. They will
relocate to the new Clock Tower. Additionally, Cingular, and T-Mobile have expressed
interest and designs for the interior space for them is proceeding. Other carriers which
are available are Sprint, Metro PCS, and Verision.
As you are aware this Clock Tower is replacing an existing monopole which is in use today and
Nextel wanted to add additional antenna's to this site for capacity. Further, with the anticipated
increase in population growth in this area, capacity issues with all Providers will not ease.
Sincerely,
Paul A. Scott
President
7341 Westport Place, Unit A
West Palm Beach, FL 33413
Phone: 561-282-4111
Fax: 561-282-4112
".~,
,. ",
COMPSON ASSOCIATES OF BOYNTON II, LLC
COMPSON
VIA E-MAIL
May 26, 2005
Michael Rumpf, Director of Planning & Zoning
City of Boynton Beach
100 E, Boynton Beach Blvd.
Boynton Beach, FL 33425
RE: COUS 04-008/NWSP 04-015
Phase VI Clock Tower/Spa Approval- December 7.2004
Dear Mike:
On December 7,2004 we received site plan approval for Phase VI at Renaissance Commons. In that approval we
had a clock tower which was designated not only as an architectural feature but as a stealth telecommunications
tower.
I realize now, as we are going through the land use amendment that stealth towers were not allowed for use in the
SMU zoning district. If I understand our timeline correctly, we currently have P&D approval as of May 24, 2005
and the ordinance is scheduled for adoption at the second meeting in June. Directly following approval of the land
use amendment we will file for a conditional use for the stealth tower.
In the normal sequence of events, we would submit our rectified site plan and pull building permits for each element
on the approved site plan. However, in this case we would like to build the tower immediately in order to relocate
our existing, non-conforming eye-sore. Is there a mechanism to do so under our existing approval, directly
following the adoption of the land use?
In discussion with the telecommunications representatives, they can provide us with a portable antenna; however I
think the permanent solution is a much more viable option. Since the clock tower does not require parking or
access from the public, what is the best way to handle the situation at this point? Kindly contact me at your earliest
convenience to discuss the matter.
Sincerely yours,
CC: J. Comparato
\ ~ \ ~ f' ~ ~ U ,;: ~ ill
\ L-
\ i 'i>',\HTMENT OF DEVELOPMENl
MIXED liSE, MULTI-RESIDENTIAL. RETAIL AND OFFICE PROPERTIES
COMPSON ASSOCIATES OF BOYNTON II, LLC
(~A'-t' ~ /~~,(_ ~.
Orrl E. Kleppe', k CJ(V~ )
Manager :/
Florida Officc:
9XO North Federal Highway
Hoca Ralon. Florida 33432
50 j,-391.6570
Fax 561,3lJ 1.2423
Washington Officc:
1320 Old Chain Hridge Road
McLcan. Virginia 2210!
703.X47,0700
Fax R93.R47.576,\
Ncw York OtTil'C:
3255 Hrighton Henrietta Townline Road
Rochester. Ne\\ Yor}... 14023
5X5.272.0040
Fax 5X5.272.46XlJ
WWW.col11pson.coll1
~pf. Michael
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Carl Klepper [cklepper@compson.com]
Wednesday, May 18, 2005 5:44 PM
Kim Glas-Castro
Michael Rumpf
FWD: Fw: Tower
~
Zoning Ltr(l).doc
Letter As promised
Compson Associates, Inc.
Carl E. Klepper Jr.
Vice President
980 North Federal Hwy
Suite 200
Boca Raton, Fl. 33432
Ph:
Fax:
Mobile:
561 391-6570
561 391-2423
561 441-9111
---------- Forwarded Message
FROM: "Carl Klepper's Blackberry" <ckwireless@nextel.blackberry.net>
TO: Klepp@bellsouth.net
DATE: Wed, 18 May 2005 21:30:31 +0000 GMT
RE: Fw: Tower
-----Original Message-----
From: "David poist" <wpoist@compson.com>
Date: Tue, 17 May 2005 18:54:45
To:<cklepper@compson.com>
Subject: FW: Tower
From: Paul Scott [mailto:pscott@eeigc.net]
Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2005 6:28 PM
To: wpoist@compson.com
Subject: Tower
Attached is a short write up that might help on short notice.
1
~f. Michael
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Carl Klepper's Blackberry [ckwireless@nextel.blackberry.net]
Wednesday, May 18, 2005 5:52 PM
Michael Rumpf
Re: Fw: Tower
I will check
-----Original Message-----
From: "Rumpf, Michael" <RumpfM@ci.boynton-beach.fl.us>
Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 17:50:09
To:"'Carl Klepper'" <cklepper@compson.com>
Subject: RE: Fw: Tower
Carl, do you know if RF data (service ring graphics) have been prepared for
any of those carriers, or at least the primary carrier, or the one with the
least service in the area? Mike
-----Original Message-----
From: Carl Klepper [mailto:cklepper@compson.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2005 5:44 PM
To: Kim Glas-Castro
Cc: Michael Rumpf
Subject: FWD: Fw: Tower
Letter As promised
Compson Associates, Inc.
Carl E. Klepper Jr.
Vice President
980 North Federal Hwy
Suite 200
Boca Raton, Fl. 33432
Ph:
Fax:
Mobile:
561 391-6570
561 391-2423
561 441-9111
---------- Forwarded Message ----------
FROM: "Carl Klepper's Blackberry" <ckwireless@nextel.blackberry.net>
TO: Klepp@bellsouth.net
DATE: Wed, 18 May 2005 21:30:31 +0000 GMT
RE: Fw: Tower
-----Original Message-----
From: "David poist" <wpoist@compson.com>
Date: Tue, 17 May 2005 18:54:45
To:<cklepper@compson.com>
Subject: FW: Tower
From: Paul Scott [mailto:pscott@eeigc.net]
1
Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2005 6:28 PM
To: wpoist@compson.com
Subject: Tower
Attached is a short write up that might help on short notice.
Paul
Compson Associates, Inc.
Carl Klepper Jr
Vice President
Ph 561 391 6570
Fax 561 391 2423
Compson Associates, Inc.
Carl Klepper Jr
Vice President
Ph 561 391 6570
Fax 561 391 2423
2
Rumpf. Michael
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Glas-Castro, Kimberly [Kimberly.Glas-Castro@ruden.com]
Tuesday, May 17, 20051 :17 PM
Rumpf, Michael
RE: Tele Tower Code Amendment Application
We'll be delivering the letters and as much info (RF data, etc) as we
can this afternoon
-----Original Message-----
From: Rumpf, Michael [mailto:RumpfM@ci.boynton-beach.fl.us]
Sent: Monday, May 16, 2005 3:26 PM
To: Glas-Castro, Kimberly
Subject: Re: Tele Tower Code Amendment Application
Understood. So except for consent from a minimum of 51% property owners,
we are good to go. Of course keep in mind that the only substantiated
justification for the request is the simple existance of the current
tower on site. No other proven evidence. As long as they comfortable
with.
Mike
Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld
-----Original Message-----
From: Glas-Castro, Kimberly <Kimberly.Glas-Castro@ruden.com>
To: Rumpf, Michael <RumpfM@ci.boynton-beach.fl.us>
Sent: Mon May 16 15:16:59 2005
Subject: RE: Tele Tower Code Amendment Application
I don't think the information will be compiled by tomorrow --- but
Compson has not submitted their site-specific proposali just the request
for the text change that would facilitate such a proposal at Renaissance
-----Original Message-----
From: Rumpf, Michael [mailto:RumpfM@ci.boynton-beach.fl.us]
Sent: Monday, May 16, 2005 2:43 PM
To: Glas-Castro, Kimberly
Subject: Tele Tower Code Amendment Application
Just checking on requested items. Tomorrow night is the Commission
review of this item and was hopeful we'd have it by then. Mike
Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld
-----Original Message-----
From: Glas-Castro, Kimberly <Kimberly.Glas-Castro@ruden.com>
To: Richard Foreman <Richard.Foreman@sembler.com>i John Corbett
<johncorb@bellsouth.net>i Andrea Troutman
<atroutman@pindertroutman.com>i Miskel, Bonnie
<Bonnie.Miskel@ruden.com>i hugo@unruhconsulting.com
<hugo@unruhconsulting.com>i rnhlaw@bellsouth.net <rnhlaw@bellsouth.net>i
Matras, Hanna <MatrasH@ci.boynton-beach.fl.uS>i Hudson, Dick (Orran)
<HudsonD@ci.boynton-beach.fl.uS>i Rumpf, Michael
<RumpfM@ci.boynton-beach.fl.uS>i greeneq@ci.boynton-beach.fl.us
<greeneq@ci.boynton-beach.fl.uS>i livergoodj@ci.boynton-beach.fl.us
<livergoodj@ci.boynton-beach.fl.us>
CC: hcduffy@sembler.com <hcduffy@sembler.com>i jfilippelli@sembler.com
1
<jfilippelli@sembler.com>i jcomparato@compson.com
<jcomparato@compson.com>
Sent: Fri May 06 17:28:04 2005
Subject: Working DRAFT LPA Staff Report
For your weekend reading pleasure
<<CRALLS LPA Report.DOC>> <<Exhibit 3>>
you'll see blanks, notes and commentary please review, provide
additional or corrective information, etc.
Kim Glas-Castro, AICP
Certified Land Planner
Ruden McClosky
222 Lakeview Avenue #800
West Palm Beach, FL 33401
telephone: (561) 838-4542
in Broward: (954) 761-2926
fax: (561) 514-3442
kim.glascastro@ruden.com
NOTICE: This e-mail message and any attachment to this e-mail message
contains confidential information that may be legally privileged. If you
are not the intended recipient, you must not review, retransmit, convert
to hard copy, copy, use or disseminate this e-mail or any attachments to
it. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us
immediately by return e-mail or by telephone at 954-764-6660 and delete
this message. Please note that if this e-mail message contains a
forwarded message or is a reply to a prior message, some or all of the
contents of this message or any attachments may not have been produced
by the sender.
NOTICE: This e-mail message and any attachment to this e-mail message
contains confidential information that may be legally privileged. If you
are not the intended recipient, you must not review, retransmit, convert
to hard copy, copy, use or disseminate this e-mail or any attachments to
it. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us
immediately by return e-mail or by telephone at 954-764-6660 and delete
this message. Please note that if this e-mail message contains a
forwarded message or is a reply to a prior message, some or all of the
contents of this message or any attachments may not have been produced
by the sender.
NOTICE: This e-mail message and any attachment to this e-mail message contains
confidential information that may be legally privileged. If you are not the intended
recipient, you must not review, retransmit, convert to hard copy, copy, use or disseminate
this e-mail or any attachments to it. If you have received this e-mail in error, please
notify us immediately by return e-mail or by telephone at 954-764-6660 and delete this
message. Please note that if this e-mail message contains a forwarded message or is a
reply to a prior message, some or all of the contents of this message or any attachments
may not have been produced by the sender.
2
May 17,2005
Mike Rumpf, AICP
City of Boynton Beach
100 E Boynton Beach Boulevard
Boynton Beach, FL 33435
~
TOWN &
COUNTRY
HOMES
a K. Hovnanian' Company
'"
RE: Proposed Modifications to Telecommunication Regulations
Dear Mr. Rumpf:
Town and Country Homes has no objections to the proposed modifications to Chapter 10
of the Land Development Regulations regarding SMU district regulations.
GlfJU
Stephen B. Liller
Vice President
Town and Country Homes
\ ill' ~ (g ~ n w ~ rnI
\ .'005 111~ !
I I
l
DEPARTMfNT (',F [,
1275 Gateway Boulevard, Suite 10 I. Boynton Beach, Florida 33426 P 561.364.3300 F 561.364.3301 . www.townandcountryhomesfl.com
...s M J
---
{ G c.J <C- c-
'"
.p(~
~f, Michael
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Mike Pawelczyk [mpawelczyk@cityatty.com]
Thursday, May 05,200510:19 AM
RumpfM@ci.boynton-beach.fl.us
Jim Cheraf; Livergood, Jeffrey; Swanson, Lynn; HawkinsW@cLboynton-beach.fl.us
RE: Tower Siting Review - Code amendment requested
Mike:
I will be happy to meet, if anyone thinks it is necessary. In the
meantime, mark up an existing code section with the proposed new
language and we will prepare an ordinance. Should you wish to discuss,
please do not hesitate to contact me.
Michael J. Pawelczyk
Assistant City Attorney
-----Original Message-----
From: Swanson, Lynn [mailto:SwansonL@ci.boynton-beach.fl.us]
Sent: Thursday, May 05, 2005 10:12 AM
To: Mike Pawelczyk
Cc: Jim Cherof
Subject: FW: Tower Siting Review - Code amendment requested
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Pawelczyk, Mike
> Sent: Thursday, May 05, 2005 10:09 AM
> To: Swanson, Lynn
> Subject: FW: Tower Siting Review - Code amendment requested
>
>
>
> ----------
> From: Rumpf, Michael
> Sent: Thursday, May 05, 2005 10:09:26 AM
> To: Pawelczyk, Mike; Livergood, Jeffrey; Hawkins, Wilfred
> Subject: Tower Siting Review - Code amendment requested
> Auto forwarded by a Rule
>
> Please be informed that we have an application for an amendment to
> chapters 2 (zoning) and 10 (Telecommunications Towers) of the LOR to
allow
> cell towers as stealth towers incorporated into the architecture of an
SMU
> master plan. Since another planner has been reviewing this item, I did
not
> think to present it to you all for review.
>
> You may recall that Motorola had an ancillary tower on site under the
M-1
> zoning district. As you also know the property has been rezoned and
> approved for the Renaissance Commons SMU. Motorola sold the tower appx
2
> years ago and it continues to provide cellular service to the area.
The
> tower must be moved or removed from the site to accommodate the
approved
> site plans. They would like to relocate it to phase 6 near Gateway
Blvd,
> hidden within an approved clock tower.
>
1
> The code amendment would make them permitted within the SMU project,
if
> stealth within project architecture. You will see that Chapter 10
> currently requires that "stealth" towers are "architecturally
compatible" .
> The modification would also reduce, for SMU towers, the distance
> seperations between adjacent residences, and adds a distance
seperation
> for SMU residences.
>
> The code amendment is required. To stay on schedule, I'm proposing it
go
> to the Commission for preliminary consideration on May 17th and then
if
> supported, to the P&D Board on May 24th. I have requested additional
> information from the applicant such as RF data, locations of other
towers,
> and additional consent from property owners.
>
> Would you like to meet to discuss? Do you have any questions at this
> point? Please let me know to what degree you would like to review this
> request, and if you would like a copy of the application (cover letter
and
> proposed code text) .
>
> Mike
2
~pf, Michael
,\,..: (\ ,-, ~' "11
t... ....., ,r,. ~) \,
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Rumpf, Michael
Thursday, May OS, 2005 10:09 AM
Pawelczyk, Mike; Livergood, Jeffrey; Hawkins, Wilfred
Tower Siting Review - Code amendment requested
Please be informed that we have an application for an amendment to chapters 2 (zoning) and 10 (Telecommunications
Towers) of the LOR to allow cell towers as stealth towers incorporated into the architecture of an SMU master plan. Since
another planner has been reviewing this item, I did not think to present it to you all for review.
You may recall that Motorola had an ancillary tower on site under the M-1 zoning district. As you also know the property
has been rezoned and approved for the Renaissance Commons SMU. Motorola sold the tower appx 2 years ago and it
continues to provide cellular service to the area. The tower must be moved or removed from the site to accommodate the
approved site plans. They would like to relocate it to phase 6 near Gateway Blvd, hidden within an approved clock tower.
The code amendment would make them permitted within the SMU project, if stealth within project architecture. You will
see that Chapter 10 currently requires that "stealth" towers are "architecturally compatible". The modification would also
reduce, for SMU towers, the distance seperations between adjacent residences, and adds a distance seperation for SMU
residences.
The code amendment is required. To stay on schedule, I'm proposing it go to the Commission for preliminary
consideration on May 17th and then if supported, to the P&D Board on May 24th. I have requested additional information
from the applicant such as RF data, locations of other towers, and additional consent from property owners.
Would you like to meet to discuss? Do you have any questions at this point? Please let me know to what degree you would
like to review this request, and if you would like a copy of the application (cover letter and proposed code text).
Mike
1
~f, Michael
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Rumpf, Michael
Thursday, May 05, 2005 10:45 AM
Bressner, Kurt; Greene, Quintus
cell tower code review - preliminary Commission review
I realized that we have another code review item in process and scheduled for P&O review on May 24th. We have the
decision of keeping it on track and not subjecting it to the new "preliminary Commission" review process due to it being
pre-existing, or switch gears quickly and get it to them. I have prepared the agenda request form, and Janet has the item
wording for consent.
The request is to amend chapters 2 (zoning) and 10 (Telecommunications Towers) of the LOR to allow cell towers as
stealth towers incorporated into the architecture of an SMU master plan.
This would allow for the continuation of a tower where the Motorola tower pre-existed prior to being rezoned and becoming
non-conforming. Motorola sold the tower appx 2 years ago and it continues to provide cellular service to the area. The
tower must be moved or removed from the site to accommodate the approved site plans. They would like to relocate it to
phase 6 near Gateway Blvd, hidden within an approved clock tower.
The code amendment would make them permitted within the SMU project, if stealth within project architecture. You will
see that Chapter 10 currently requires that "stealth" towers are "architecturally compatible". The modification would also
reduce, for SMU towers, the distance seperations between adjacent residences, and adds a distance seperation for SMU
residences.
To stay on schedule, it should go to the Commission for preliminary consideration on May 17th and then if supported, to
the P&O Board on May 24th. I have requested additional information from the applicant such as RF data, locations of other
towers, and additional consent from property owners as applicants. I hope to have the additional information from the
applicant soon.
Mike
1
~f, Michael
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Livergood, Jeffrey
Thursday, May 05, 2005 10:51 AM
Rumpf, Michael; Pawelczyk, Mike; Hawkins, Wilfred
RE: Tower Siting Review - Code amendment requested
Mike,
Your approach makes good sense to me. I would support the stealth tower concept in the referenced SMU.
Jeff
Jeffrey R. Livergood, P.E.
Director of Public Works
City of Boynton Beach
-----Original Message-----
From: Rumpf, Michael
Sent: Thursday, May 05, 2005 10:09 AM
To: Pawelczyk, Mike; Livergood, Jeffrey; Hawkins, Wilfred
Subject: Tower Siting Review - Code amendment requested
Please be informed that we have an application for an amendment to chapters 2 (zoning) and 10
(Telecommunications Towers) of the LDR to allow cell towers as stealth towers incorporated into the architecture of an
SMU master plan. Since another planner has been reviewing this item, I did not think to present it to you all for review.
You may recall that Motorola had an ancillary tower on site under the M-1 zoning district. As you also know the
property has been rezoned and approved for the Renaissance Commons SMU. Motorola sold the tower appx 2 years
ago and it continues to provide cellular service to the area. The tower must be moved or removed from the site to
accommodate the approved site plans. They would like to relocate it to phase 6 near Gateway Blvd, hidden within an
approved clock tower.
The code amendment would make them permitted within the SMU project, if stealth within project architecture. You
will see that Chapter 10 currently requires that "stealth" towers are "architecturally compatible". The modification would
also reduce, for SMU towers, the distance seperations between adjacent residences, and adds a distance seperation
for SMU residences.
The code amendment is required. To stay on schedule, I'm proposing it go to the Commission for preliminary
consideration on May 17th and then if supported, to the P&D Board on May 24th. I have requested additional
information from the applicant such as RF data, locations of other towers, and additional consent from property
owners.
Would you like to meet to discuss? Do you have any questions at this point? Please let me know to what degree you
would like to review this request, and if you would like a copy of the application (cover letter and proposed code text).
Mike
1
Federal Communications Commission
Office of Engineering & Technology
Questions and Answers about
Biological Effects and Potential
Hazards of Radiofrequency
Electromagnetic Fields
OET BULLETIN 56
Fourth Edition
August 1999
Measurements have shown that
ground-level power densities due to microwave directional antennas are normally a
thousand
times or more below recommended safety limits. (e.g., see Reference 38) Moreover, as an
added margin of safety, microwave tower sites are normally inaccessible to the general
public.
Significant exposures from these antennas could only occur in the unlikely event that an
individual were to stand directly in front of and very close to an antenna for a period of
time.
Typical heights for free-standing base station towers or
structures are 50-200 feet. A cellular base station may utilize several "omni-directional"
antennas that look like poles, 10 to 15 feet in length, although these types of antennas are
becoming less common in urban areas.
Typical heights for free-standing base station towers or
structures are 50-200 feet. A cellular base station may utilize several "omni-directional"
antennas that look like poles, 10 to 15 feet in length, although these types of antennas are
becoming less common in urban areas.
Measurements made near typical cellular and PCS installations, especially those with
tower-mounted antennas, have shown that ground-level power densities are well below
limits
recommended by RF/microwave safety standards (References 32, 37, and 45). For
example,
for a base-station transmitting frequency of 869 MHz the FCC's RF exposure guidelines
..
recommend a Maximum Permissible Exposure level for the public ("general
population/uncontrolled" exposure) of about 580 microwatts per square centimeter
(I!W/cm2).
This limit is many times greater than RF levels found near the base of typical cellular
towers
or in the vicinity of lower-powered cellular base station transmitters, such as might be
mounted on rooftops or sides of buildings.
Calculations
corresponding to a "worst-case" situation (all transmitters operating simultaneously and
continuously at the maximum licensed power) show that in order to be exposed to levels
near
the FCC's limits for cellular frequencies, an individual would essentially have to remain
III
21
the main transmitting beam (at the height of the antenna) and within a few feet from the
antenna.
When cellular and PCS antennas are mounted at rooftop locations it is possible that
ambient RF levels greater than 1 I! W/cm2 could be present on the rooftop itself. However,
exposures approaching or exceeding the safety guidelines are only likely to be
encountered
very close to or directly in front of the antennas.
In addition, the significant signal attenuation of a
building's roof minimizes any chance for persons living or working within the building
itself
to be exposed to RF levels that could approach or exceed applicable safety limits.