Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout20200827_ZA_MinutesMINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE NEWPORT BEACH ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 08/27/2020 Page 3 of 4 a landscaped parkway. He also discussed the Lake Street Park property and views from it. He clarified that views from Lake Street Park are generally towards the canal. Views from this park towards the proposed project site are obstructed by existing landscaping that borders the park to the west. The Zoning Administrator agreed that all findings are met for this project and approved the project with the addition of a condition relating to minimizing or preventing construction-related impacts. Action: Approved ITEM NO. 3 AT&T Small Cell SLC4653 Coastal Development Permit No. CD2020-118 (PA2019-115) Site Location: Public right-of-way, City streetlight number SLC4653, on the north side of Bayside Drive, approximately 900 feet northwest of El Paseo Drive Council District 5 Joselyn Perez, Assistant Planner, provided a brief project description stating that AT&T is requesting to remove and replace City Streetlight No. SLC4653, which is located within the public right-of-way on the north side of Bayside Drive, approximately 900 feet northwest of El Paseo Drive. The project site abuts a steep, vegetated slope, and there is no sidewalk on the project side of Bayside Drive. The surrounding land uses are residential and vary in density. The existing single-family residence adjacent to the project site is separated from the streetlight and proposed telecom facility by a significant grade differential. The existing streetlight measures 19 feet, 6 inches in height with a luminaire height of 21 feet, inch. The replacement streetlight will maintain the existing luminaire height of 21 feet, 1 inch and have an overall facility height of 27 feet, 5 inches which is below the City’s 35-foot height limit for telecom facilities. Staff considered the project’s consistency with the Public View Protection regulations of Section 21.49.050(B) (Public View Protection) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. The project site is not located between the sea and the first public roadway paralleling the sea, is not on a coastal bluff or canyon, is not adjacent to or within the viewshed of a public view point, coastal view road, public park or beach, or public accessway, as identified on Coastal Land Use Plan Map 4-3 (Coastal Views), and does not contain significant natural landforms or vegetation. In accordance with NBMC Sections 20.30.100 (Public View Protection), 21.30.100 (Scenic and Visual Quality Protection), and General Plan Natural Resources Policy NR 20.3 (Public Views), the location is not located within a protected public view corridor. The visual impact analysis conducted by staff of the proposed project site found there to be no impact to public views. AT&T considered four alternative locations also along Bayside Drive. Three of the four sites were determined to be infeasible due to construction constraints. Alternative Site No. 4, while found to be a feasible location from a constructability perspective, is located at a bend in Bayside Drive. This location is much more visually intrusive to approaching motorists whereas the proposed site blends in with the existing streetscape and as such Alternative Site No. 4 was eliminated as a viable alternative location. Ms. Perez added that telecom facilities require approval of a Minor Use Permit and that this project had been heard on April 16, 2020 by the Zoning Administrator and approved for minor use permit number UP2019-034. Ms. Perez concluded that staff believes all required findings can be made for the CDP and recommends approval of this project, as submitted. Zoning Administrator Murillo commented that there is a storm drain inlet and added a condition of approval that the inlet will be protected from debris. Franklin Orozco of M-Squared Wireless, on behalf of the applicant, AT&T, then spoke and added that Alternative Site No. 4 has additional issues beyond the increased visibility. There are trees in the vicinity of the streetlight that would cause conflict with a Public Works requirement to maintain 10 feet of separation from trees. He then stated that he agrees with all of the required conditions. The Zoning Administrator opened the public hearing. One member of the public, Jim Mosher, spoke. Mr. Mosher expressed concern that the adjacent hillside is a coastal bluff, which is a natural resource as defined in the Coastal Land Use Plan, and this project would MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE NEWPORT BEACH ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 08/27/2020 Page 4 of 4 impact views of coastal bluffs. He reiterated his belief that Alternative Site No. 4 is a superior option as its hillside is already disturbed with a solar panel structure and then noted that the coverage map provided by AT&T suggests coverage from the new facility will reach the residences above which seemed contrary to previous project justifications from AT&T. Mr. Mosher inquired as to why AT&T could not place their antennas like a nearby telecom facility, which utilizes stealth technology, on the roof of a yacht club. The Zoning Administrator closed the public hearing. Senior Planner Zdeba responded to Mr. Mosher’s inquiry regarding the yacht club. He explained that while an entitlement was obtained by the carrier T-Mobile to install a faux chimney on the yacht club, the applicant ultimately had not yet built the facility due to technical issues. Zoning Administrator Murillo considered the alternative sites for the project. He acknowledged that alternative sites number 1 and number 2 were located closer to the bluffs and would ultimately have greater impacts to views of the natural bluff. Zoning Administrator Murillo continued that he had driven along Bayside Drive and alternative site number 4 is both at a bend in the road and is backdropped by a solar panel structure which makes the facility much more visible to approaching motorists. He then discussed the landscaping installed by the homeowner above on the slope adjacent to the proposed project site. The landscaping, while providing a visual distraction and screening of the telecom, obscures the view of the natural coastal bluff. He concluded that the proposed location is the most appropriate location for the project. Action: Approved as amended V. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS None. VI. ADJOURNMENT The hearing was adjourned at 10:46 a.m. The agenda for the Zoning Administrator Hearing was posted on August 21, 2020, at 3:20 p.m. on the digital display board located inside the vestibule of the Council Chambers at 100 Civic Center Drive and on the City’s website on August 21, 2020, at 3:15 p.m.