HomeMy WebLinkAbout20200528_ZA_MinutesMINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE
NEWPORT BEACH ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 05/28/2020
Page 2 of 5
property is provided below the building and access is maintained around the building via the patio and on-grade
walk path to the rear of the building.
The Zoning Administrator closed the public hearing. He explained that there is adequate access maintained
for the commercial property without mandating an easement for a walkway on the subject property. Further, he
confirmed that the public sewer easement is to the benefit of the City for repair, maintenance, and replacement
of sewer line and not to the adjacent commercial property. The duplex has been permitted and found in
compliance with City’s Municipal Code and drainage requirements. The application presented is for the
tentative parcel map for condominiums only and the redevelopment of the subject site has received all
appropriate permits through the City for the new duplex which is currently under construction. He concluded
with encouraging both property owners to work together on any private land issues.
Action: Approved
ITEM NO. 3 AT&T Small Cell SLC0902 Minor Use Permit No. UP2019-032 (PA2019-113)
Site Location: Public right-of-way, City streetlight number SLC0902, at the
northwestern corner of 38th Street and Lake Avenue Council District 1
Benjamin Zdeba, Senior Planner, provided some background on small cell technology and the City’s purview
stressing that the City’s review is narrowed by Federal Law to focus primarily on land use compatibility,
aesthetics, and environmental impacts. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) exclusively sets
standards for radio frequency or “RF” emissions. Because of this, the City is not able to base any
recommendation on potential health and safety impacts.
Senior Planner Zdeba also noted that on February 12, 2019, the Newport Beach City Council authorized the
execution of a Master License Agreement with AT&T, authorizing non-exclusive use of City-owned streetlights
to install wireless telecommunications facilities and included approved designs, fee and rent assessments.
Mr. Zdeba then provided a brief project description stating that AT&T is requesting to remove and replace City
Streetlight No. SLC0902, which is located within the public right-of-way adjacent to the northwestern corner of
the 38th Street and Lake Avenue intersection near the Newport Island bridge. All surrounding land uses are
residential and vary in density. This location is unique in that there is a vacant parcel of land that is owned by
the City between it and the adjacent residence to the west. This intervening parcel is triangular and
approximately 60 feet wide at its base.
Senior Planner Zdeba continued that staff analyzed the project for consistency with the Coastal Act and
determined it does not negatively impact any designated public view corridors nor does it negatively impact
coastal access and resources. In consultation with Coastal Commission staff, it was determined the proposed
replacement streetlight pole and small cell installation does not require the issuance of a coastal development
permit and is further considered repair and maintenance pursuant to NBMC Section 21.52.035(c)(4). He
emphasized that although the streetlight pole is located between the first public road paralleling the sea and
the sea, it is being located on an existing structure and is, therefore, allowable. The project is consistent with
the City’s Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan, which aims to protect and enhance scenic resources.
Mr. Zdeba explained that the replacement streetlight pole will be purposed with maintaining the intent of the
City’s streetlight inventory. It will keep the same exact luminaire height as the current streetlight pole; however,
the new equipment will extend up to an overall height of 27 feet, 6 inches from grade. All equipment and
supporting equipment will either be contained within the pole itself, behind a shroud/screen, or underground in
a vaulted area.
Senior Planner Zdeba continued that from a Municipal Code perspective, this type of facility is considered a
Class 3 (Public Right-of-Way) installation and falls lower on the preferential list of installation types. The first
two classes are stealth facilities, which are often housed on top of existing commercial and multi-family
residential structures, and visible facilities, which are exposed antennas on existing commercial and multi-
family residential structures. Given the lack of any taller commercial buildings in the area, these more-preferred
classes were determined to be unviable.
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE
NEWPORT BEACH ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 05/28/2020
Page 3 of 5
Mr. Zdeba stated that although it does fall lower on the priority list, this facility is designed to blend into the
streetscape without visually dominating the area. Maintaining the same luminaire height as the current pole will
help to maintain consistency with the surrounding streetlights in the area. Furthermore, the Code discusses
development standards including blending and screening. The proposed facility is located adjacent to a vacant
parcel that serves as one of the largest buffers to residential properties in the area. The streetlight pole is also
located within a landscaped parkway that is planted with taller palm trees, which will serve as a softening buffer
between the residential structures beyond and will help to blend the facility into the surroundings. With respect
to heights in the area, the maximum allowable height for the abutting residential zoning districts is 29 feet to
the ridge of a sloping roof. The current streetlight pole sits below the maximum allowed height of residential
structures by 1 foot, 6 inches.
Senior Planner Zdeba added that another component of staff’s review is alternative sites in the area that may
be better suited for the proposed facility. The applicant provided analysis for three other sites in the vicinity.
Attachment No. ZA 3 to the staff report explains each alternative site in more detail and provides photographs
as well. Each of the three alternative sites was determined to be unviable due to limited accessibility around a
slightly wider pole and proximity to residential structures and living areas.
Mr. Zdeba concluded that staff believes all required findings can be made and recommends that the Zoning
Administrator find the project exempt from CEQA under Classes 2 and 3, and recommends approval of this
project, as submitted.
Lastly, Senior Planner Zdeba mentioned that three pieces of written correspondence were received on this
matter. The first expressing concern that the project proposed to replace one of the two decorative “acorn-style”
streetlamps, which Mr. Zdeba confirmed it did not. The second posing questions about the project to which
staff responded by providing the staff report. And a third primarily expressing concern about the validity of
exempting the project from a Coastal Development Permit.
Applicant Franklin Orozco of M-Squared Wireless, on behalf of the AT&T, provided some additional detail on
small cell technology, as well as the coverage improvements that would result from this project being
implemented. He also stated that he had reviewed the draft resolution and agrees with all of the required
conditions.
The Zoning Administrator opened the public hearing.
One member of the public, Jim Mosher, spoke regarding his written correspondence and reiterated the concern
that this project, as well as the others that have come before the Zoning Administrator, should not be exempt
from the Coastal Development Permit requirement. He asserted that there are set exceptions to allowing a
wireless telecommunications facility within an area that is between the first public road paralleling the sea and
the sea. This project does not involve an existing building and an existing structure does not qualify.
The Zoning Administrator closed the public hearing and clarified that the issue of whether these small cell
projects require a coastal development permit was discussed at length at a previous hearing. He reiterated that
City staff had worked with the Coastal Commission’s staff to come to the conclusion that the replacement
streetlights with small cell facilities included could be considered repair and maintenance and would, therefore,
be exempt from the requirement for a coastal development permit. He also added that the replacement
streetlight pole and small cell equipment meets the intent of not allowing new facilities within the area between
the first public road paralleling the sea and the sea. This is largely due to the fact that no new structure would
be introduced, as the streetlight pole is being replaced in the same exact location. Senior Planner Zdeba
confirmed that the Zoning Administrator’s understanding and statement were correct.
Action: Approved