Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/23/2015 - Planning Commission CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Council Chambers—100 Civic Center Drive Thursday, July 23, 2015 REGULAR MEETING 6:30 p.m. I. CALL TO ORDER-The meeting was called to order at 6:30 p.m. II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE—Vice Chair Kramer III. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Brown, Hillgren, Koetting, Kramer,Lawler,Weigand, Zak Staff Present: Kimberly Brandt, Community Development Director; Brenda Wisneski, Deputy Community Development Director; Aaron Harp, City Attorney; Tony Brine, City Traffic Engineer; Jim Campbell, Principal Planner;Jennifer Biddle,Administrative Support Specialist IV. RECOGNITION OF JAY MYERS FOR HIS DEDICATION AND YEARS OF SERVICE ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION Deputy Community Development Director Brenda Wisneski stated that former Commission Myers was not able to attend the meeting however she spoke to him on the telephone and he expressed his gratitude to the City and fellow Commissioners for the opportunity to serve. He stated that he will continue to be active in the community and Deputy Community Development Director Wisneski reported that he will receive a plaque in recognition of his service as a member and Secretary of the Commission. Vice Chair Kramer thanked former Commissioner Myers for his hard work and service to the City. Vice Chair Kramer introduced new Commissioners, Erik Weigand and Peter Zak. Each provided a brief background of his experience and qualifications and expressed their gratitude for the opportunity to serve. V. ELECTION OF OFFICERS ITEM NO. 1 Vice Chair Kramer announced the election process, declared the positions of Chair, Vice Chair and Secretary vacant and opened nominations. Commissioner Hillgren nominated the slate of Vice Chair Kramer for the position of Chair, Commissioner Brown for the position of Vice Chair and Commissioner Koetting for the position of Secretary. There being no other nominations,Vice Chair Kramer closed nominations. Vice Chair Kramer opened public comments. There being no response, Vice Chair Kramer closed public comments. The slate of Chair Kramer, Vice Chair Brown and Secretary Koetting was approved, unanimously, and each took his place on the dais. Chair Kramer reported that currently, he and Commissioner Hillgren are on the General Plan/Local Coastal Implementation Plan Committee and noted the need to appoint an additional member. Chair Kramer appointed Commissioner Koetting as the additional member of the General Plan/Local Coastal Implementation Plan Committee. Page 1 of 6 NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 7/23/15 VI. PUBLIC COMMENTS Chair Kramer invited those interested in addressing the Planning Commission on items not on the agenda, to do so at this time. Jim Mosher stated that City Council and the Planning Commission make decisions on behalf of and affecting all of Newport Beach, including a number of diverse areas in which residents and business owners may have different sensibilities and visions as to what the City should be and what role the Commission should play in achieving that vision. He referenced the City Charter in terms of Council representation and encouraging geographic diversity in terms of the Planning Commission (one from each Council District). He noted that the previous and present Planning Commission has no member who lives in the Peninsula,West Newport, Newport Heights or the Newport Coast Annexation areas. He encouraged Commissioners to keep that in mind when making decisions. He addressed Council appointments to the Planning Commission, noting that the vast majority of appointees have a background in either building or development and hoped that the Commission will keep in mind that residents have other backgrounds and interests in making its decisions. Seeing no further comments, Chair Kramer closed public comments. VII. REQUEST FOR CONTINUANCES-None VIII. CONSENT ITEMS ITEM NO.2 MINUTES OF JUNE 18,2015 Vice Chair Brown and Commissioner Hillgren reported listening to the meeting tape so that they are qualified to vote on the minutes Motion made by Commissioner Lawler and seconded by Commissioner Hillgren to approve and file the Planning Commission meeting minutes of June 18, 2015, incorporating Chair Kramer's and former Commissioner Tucker's comments as well as Mr. Jim Mosher's comments. AYES: Brown, Hillgren, Kramer, and Lawler ABSTENTIONS: Koetting,Weigand, and Zak ABSENT: None ITEM NO. 3 MINUTES OF JULY 9,2015 Motion made by Vice Chair Brown and seconded by Secretary Koetting to approve and file the Planning Commission meeting minutes of July 9, 2015, as corrected. AYES: Brown, Hillgren, Koetting, Kramer, and Lawler ABSTENTIONS: Weigand, and Zak ABSENT: None IX. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS ITEM NO.4 VERIZON WIRELESS FACILITY(PA2014-125) Site Location: 1501 Superior Avenue Principal Planner Jim Campbell provided a PowerPoint presentation describing the proposed project, existing conditions, support equipment, adding a screen wall atop the existing office building, location, surrounding land uses, elevations, visual simulations, environmental determination, findings of consistency with the Municipal Code and staff recommendation. He reported that the proposed screen wall is requested to be twelve feet high but that staff recommends a ten-foot high wall as that would be sufficient to screen the proposed antennas and support equipment that would only extend 10 feet above the roof. He also noted that it was staff's opinion that the lower screen wall is in better architectural scale with the design of the existing building. Page 2 of 6 NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 7/23/15 Secretary Koetting asked regarding the need for a twelve-foot high screen wall and a non-exclusive parking stall. Principal Planner Campbell reported that the building meets its parking requirements and that the non- exclusive parking stall would provide parking for maintenance workers to service the facility, as necessary. Secretary Koetting asked regarding solar panels and Principal Planner Campbell reported that all of the equipment will be on the roof, including an emergency, back-up generator. There will be no equipment on the ground or inside the building. Secretary Koetting asked if the property owner has agreed to the conditions. Principal Planner Campbell reported that the property owner has submitted a letter, authorizing Jacobs Engineering, on behalf of Verizon, to process the application. The applicant can speak on their behalf later in the meeting, when the public hearing is opened. Commissioner Weigand asked regarding future second carriers and Principal Planner Campbell reported there is a lot of open space behind the proposed facility and that there is sufficient space for a second carrier, depending on their unique needs. A second carrier is not being authorized at this time. Commissioner Zak asked regarding whether the applicant would be agreeable to lowering the height of the screen wall and whether noticing for this project included tenants in the building. Principal Planner Campbell stated that noticing requirements include property owners within a specified radius of the subject property and not tenants of the building. Commissioner Zak commented on potential interference with medical equipment. Chair Kramer asked if staff checked with the tenants to see if there would be any interference with medical equipment. Principal Planner Campbell restated that staff did not interface with any of the building tenants and that staff presumed that since the property owner authorized the application, they do not believe the facility would interfere with their existing tenants and that it is the responsibility of the property owner to keep their tenants informed and that it is a private issue. Chair Kramer opened the public hearing. Chair Kramer invited the applicant to address the Planning Commission. Amy Weeks, Jacobs Engineering, representing Verizon, confirmed acceptance of all Conditions of Approval except for Condition No. 8 relative to reducing the height of the screen wall. She provided details and diagrams explaining the reason for the proposed twelve-foot high wall, including installing the antennas as close to the edge of the building, as possible. She addressed discussions with staff, changes made and eliminating signal interference. She added that, because the antennas are being set back, fifteen feet from the roof edge, the additional two-feet in height will be necessary to minimize signal blockage by the existing 2-foot tall parapet wall and to allow better signal propagation. Ms. Weeks further explained that the antennas cannot propagate through the standard material of the parapet wall and that the signals propagate in a cone shape. If the screen wall is installed at ten feet, the signal would propagate into the wall. By increasing the height of the wall, the amount propagating into the parapet wall would be less than if the screen wall were installed at ten feet. Discussion followed regarding some visibility of the antennas with a lower height of the screen wall and obtaining the optimal solution with a twelve-foot screen wall. Ms. Weeks stated that with a ten-foot high screen wall, the system will still operate, but not at its optimal level. Principal Planner Campbell stated that findings for project approval can be made for a twelve-foot high screen wall but that the architectural balance of the building would be better with a ten-foot high screen wall. Page 3of6 NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 7/23/15 Ms. Weeks explained that the height of the antennas has not changed and that they are still proposed at eight feet high. The height of the antenna would be four feet above the roof. Principal Planner Campbell reported that staff recommendations were based on an understanding of the project plans and discussions with the applicant with the 8 foot antennas being installed 2 feet above the roof, but that apparently, staff did not understand the plan or the project description has changed. He stated that the Commission could consider the project, as proposed, but reiterated the recommendation to lower the screen wall by two feet as it provides better architectural balance. In response to Vice Chair Brown's question, Ms. Weeks reported that the antennas would not be visible with a ten-foot high screen wall. The need for the extended height is for the optimal propagation of the signal and would reduce the amount of the signal's interference. In reply to City Attorney Aaron Harp's inquiry, Ms. Weeks stated that the current design, showing a twelve- foot high screen, the antennas would be six inches below the top of the screen. The antennas, themselves, are eight feet high and two feet are allowed for the ports and cables. She reiterated that a ten-foot screen would cover the antennas but the lower the antenna, the higher the signal inference. Therefore, they are requesting that the screen wall be twelve feet so that there is limited interference with the signal, propagating out. Chair Kramer suggested continuing this matter to a future Planning Commission meeting, noting that the application has not been fully vetted and recommending that the applicant work with staff to find a mutually- accepted solution. Brief discussion followed regarding antenna mounts and clarification of the diagrams on sheet A-5 of the project plans. Chair Kramer invited public comments. Jim Mosher opined this is an example of fairly good planning, commented on the possibility of co-locations of telecommunications providers, the screen wall and suggested a condition ensuring acknowledgement by the applicant that there may be additional providers in the future and that this is in no way an exclusionary arrangement. He addressed tenants concerns and agreed with the recommendation of continuing the matter for further vetting. Additionally, he wondered regarding the height of the proposed antennas. Chair Kramer closed the public hearing. Commissioner Hillgren stated he was not aware of a requirement to allow for colocation of other providers in the code when a private facility is constructed and if so, this should be part of the next staff report. Additionally, it would be beneficial to understand if there will be any impact from the cell towers on existing medical tenants in the building. He addressed that the aesthetics related to height should be fairly simple to resolve pending and understanding of the functionality impact of lowering the antenna and so it will be helpful to understand who will be served by the new facility. Commissioner Lawler stated challenges in understanding the height of the antennas and whether the parapet or screen wall helps or hinders the signal remittance. Secretary Koetting suggested that staff provide a "simpler"diagram of the roof cross-section. Commissioner Weigand added that he would like to understand the antenna platform configuration. Commissioner Zak offered a correction to Condition No. 30 relative to "final issuance of building permit". Motion made by Chair Kramer and seconded by Commissioner Zak to continue this matter to the Planning Commission meeting of August 20, 2015, to allow the applicant to resolve the issues as discussed above. AYES: Brown, Hillgren, Koetting, Kramer, Lawler,Weigand, and Zak Page 4 of 6 NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 7/23/15 ABSTENTIONS: None ABSENT: None X. STAFF AND COMMISSIONER ITEMS ITEM NO. 7 MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION -None ITEM NO. 8 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR'S REPORT Deputy Community Development Director Wisneski provided an update on the Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan noting that staff continues to work with Coastal Commission staff and anticipates producing -- a revised, public draft of the documents after its meeting with Coastal Commission staff, in early August. The draft will be distributed and the matter will be considered at a Planning Commission Study Session on August 20, 2015. More than one Study Session may be scheduled, as needed. Deputy Community Development Director Wisneski provided a detailed summary of the Tentative Agenda for upcoming meetings. At Chair Kramer's request, Deputy Community Development Director Wisneski reviewed the role of the City's Zoning Administrator, appeals, and the discretionary review process. Deputy Community Development Director Wisneski provided a PowerPoint presentation regarding the City's Residential Building Reports (RBR). She addressed elements of the RBR, background, waivers, verification of compliance, the process, related costs, and information included in the disclosure process. Discussion followed regarding waivers by buyers versus sellers. Deputy Community Development Director Wisneski reported that the City does not follow up as to whether or not the RBR is made part of the escrow. City Attorney Harp added there are penalty provisions provided in the Code,for violation of it. Deputy Community Development Director Wisneski listed items that are checked if an inspection is requested, other cities' processes and the City's iPermit process. Commissioner Zak commented on the buyer being able to waive the process, but not the seller. Chair Kramer opened public comments. Dave Girling, President of the Newport Beach Association of Realtors, explained the way the RBR application process works. He referenced a letter sent to the City and stated that he would love the opportunity to work with City staff regarding the matter. Mr. Girling commented on a Buyer's Inspection Advisory form and reported that the buyer has to know and be advised by his agent, that he has the right to do any inspection, whatsoever, and that as part of the inspections, bootlegged units will be uncovered. Vice Chair Brown confirmed that the responsibility of this falls on the individual agents and in response to his question regarding ensuring that buyers are protected, Mr. Girling referenced a Code of Ethics, by which agents must abide. He added there are various degrees in terms of agent expertise and stated the Association would not support making the RBR mandatory. Discussion followed regarding the turnaround time for the City to do its inspection. Chair Kramer announced that it is the consensus of the Planning Commission that there be no change in policy at this time. Page 5 of 6 NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 7/23/15 Chair Kramer opened public comments. There was no response and Chair Kramer closed public comment. Deputy Community Development Director Wisneski commented on the Commission's prior consideration of staff better disclosing the status of General Plan amendments or changes to the process. She attempted to provide an example of a new feature on the City's website, but it was down. She will bring the matter back to the Commission at its next meeting. ITEM NO. 9 ANNOUNCEMENTS ON MATTERS THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS WOULD LIKE PLACED ON A FUTURE AGENDA FOR DISCUSSION, ACTION, OR REPORT Chair Kramer asked for an update of Mariner's Mile at the next Planning Commission meeting. ITEM NO. 10 REQUESTS FOR EXCUSED ABSENCES Commissioner Lawler requested an excused absence for the Planning Commission meeting of August 6, 2015. Commissioner Hillgren requested an excused absence for the Planning Commission meeting of August 20, 2015. XI. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Planning Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 7:54 p.m. to the Planning Commission meeting of August 6, 2015. The agenda for the Planning Commission meeting was posted on Friday, July 17, 2015 at 2:40 p.m. in the Chambers binder, 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 Friday, July 17, 2015, at 2:54 p.m. hair Se retar Page 6 of 6