HomeMy WebLinkAbout06 APPEAL OF DESIGN REVIEW 09-033Agenda Item 6
Reviewed:
AGEl`1DA F,.EPORT City Manager
Finance Director N/A
MEETING DATE: NOVEMBER 1, 2011
TO: WILLIAM A. HUSTON, INTERIM CITY MANAGER
FROM: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
SUBJECT: APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DECISION APPROVING
DESIGN REVIEW 09-033
On October 18, 2011, the City Council held a public hearing for the appeal of the
Planning Commission's decision to approve Design Review 09-033 for the design of a
wireless telecommunications facility within the parking lot of Cedar Grove Park (11385
Pioneer Road). After a public hearing on the matter, the City Council voted 3-2 to
reverse the decision of the Planning Commission and directed staff to return with a
resolution with findings to deny Design Review 09-033. Attached is updated Resolution
No. 11-47 which includes the associated findings for consideration by the City Council.
ACTION IF APPROVED: Adopt Resolution No. 11-47.
Elizabeth A. Binsack
Community Development Director
Attachment: City Council Resolution No. 11-47
RESOLUTION NO. 11-47
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TUSTIN, REVERSING THE PLANNING COMMISSION’S
DECISION AND DENYING DESIGN REVIEW 09-033 TO
INSTALL AND OPERATE A WIRELESS TELE-
COMMUNICATIONS FACILITY CONSISTING OF: TWO (2)
FLAGPOLES WITH A HEIGHT OF FORTY (40) FEET; ONE
(1) FLAGPOLE WITH A HEIGHT OF FORTY-THREE (43)
FEET; AND, UNDERGROUND EQUIPMENT LOCATED
WITHIN A LANDSCAPED CIRCLE IN THE PARKING LOT OF
CEDAR GROVE PARK LOCATED AT 11385 PIONEER
ROAD.
I. The City Council of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as follows:
A. That an application for Design Review 09-033 was filed by T-Mobile West
Corporation requesting to install and operate a wireless
telecommunications facility consisting of: two (2) flagpoles with a height of
forty (40) feet; one (1) flagpole with a height of forty-three (43) feet; and,
underground equipment located within the landscaped circle in the parking
lot of Cedar Grove Park located at 11385 Pioneer Road.
B. That the site is zoned as Planned Community Residential, designated as
Community Park by the East Tustin Specific Plan Land Use Plan; and
designated as Planned Community Residential by the General Plan.
C. That the Community Development Director forwarded the Design Review
application to the City Zoning Administrator to allow for a public meeting to
accept comments from the public regarding the proposed project.
D. That a public meeting was duly called, noticed, and held for Design Review
09-033 on October 20, 2010, by the Zoning Administrator. The Zoning
Administrator adopted Zoning Administrator Acton 10-010 approving
Design Review 09-033.
E. That on October 27, 2010, the Zoning Administrator vacated the decision
on the subject project and deferred the matter to the Planning Commission
in accordance with Section 9299b of the Tustin City Code.
F. That a public meeting was duly called, noticed, and held on said
application on December 14, 2010, before the Planning Commission, and
continued to the January 25, 2011, Planning Commission meeting. At the
January 25, 2011, meeting before the Planning Commission, the applicant
requested a continuance to a date uncertain to redesign the proposed
facility. The Planning Commission granted the continuance to a date
uncertain.
City Council Resolution No. 11-47
DR 09-033
Page 2
G. That on January 6, 2011, that applicant held a public outreach meeting at
the Tustin Public Library.
H. That a public meeting was duly called, noticed, and held on said
application on April 26, 2011, before the Planning Commission. The
Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 4163, approving Design
Review 09-033.
I. That on May 6, 2011, an appeal of the Planning Commission’s decision to
approve Design Review 09-033 was filed by the Mayor Pro Tem John
Nielsen.
J. That public hearings were duly called, noticed, and held for said appeal on
July 19, 2011, and October 18, 2011, before the City Council.
K. That after the October 18, 2011, public hearing on Design Review 09-033,
the City Council voted 3-2 to reverse the Planning Commission’s decision
and directed staff to return with a resolution with findings to deny the
project.
L. That as to the Design Review application for the proposed wireless facility,
the City Council determined that the location, size, architectural features
and general appearance of the proposed wireless facility will impair the
orderly and harmonious development of the area, the present or future
development therein, the occupancy thereof, or the community as a
whole. The decision to deny this request is supported by the following
findings:
1. Cedar Grove Park is a unique, pristine, visually prominent and
passive oriented park with Cedar/Redwood grove surrounded by
residential uses which is not compatible with wireless facilities.
2. Due to the odd shape of Cedar Grove Park, park users would come
into close contact with any freestanding wireless facility within the
park which would disrupt the tranquility and natural beauty of the
park.
3. The location, size and general appearance of the proposed project is
not compatible with the surrounding area in that the design of the
proposed wireless facility is clearly recognizable as something
other than a flagpole and is not stealth at the close range in which it
would be viewed. The proposed forty (40) to forty-three (43) foot
high poles and fourteen (14) inch diameter of each pole would
appear out of scale and out of context with the project site and
park.
City Council Resolution No. 11-47
DR 09-033
Page 3
4. The proposed flagpole designs do not offer the ability for additional
carriers to co-locate at the facility and are inconsistent with the City
Council adopted Resolution No. 01-95: Design Guidelines for
Aboveground Utility Facilities and their Accessory Equipment on
Public Property and in the Public Right-of-Way.
5. The area in the vicinity of the project area currently has in-vehicle
and outdoor coverage as referenced in coverage map provided by
the applicant, and there is no significant gap in coverage.
6. There are other project sites available which can adequately
address the minor coverage issues within the vicinity of the project
site as referenced in coverage and drive test data provided by the
applicant.
7. There are feasible alternative project sites to the proposed facility
which are less intrusive than the proposed facility.
8. That alternative sites are feasible is clear because there are other
wireless providers in the vicinity of the project site which provide
cellular coverage from a facility that is less intrusive than the
proposed facility.
M. That pursuant to Section 15270(a) of the California Code of Regulations
(Guidelines for the California Environmental Quality Act) CEQA does not
apply to projects which a public agency rejects or disapproves.
II. The City Council hereby reverses the decision of the Planning Commission and
denies Design Review 09-033 to install and operate a wireless
telecommunications facility consisting of: two (2) flagpoles with a height of forty
(40) feet; one (1) flagpole with a height of forty-three (43) feet; and, underground
equipment located within the landscaped circle in the parking lot of Cedar Grove
Park located at 11385 Pioneer Road.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Tustin at a regular meeting
st
held on the 1 day of November, 2011.
JERRY AMANTE
MAYOR
ATTEST:
PAMELA STOKER
CITY CLERK
City Council Resolution No. 11-47
DR 09-033
Page 4
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE )
CITY OF TUSTIN )
I, Pamela Stoker, City Clerk and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of the City of Tustin,
California, do hereby certify that the whole number of the members of the City Council of
the City of Tustin is five; that the above and foregoing Resolution No. 11-47 was duly
st
passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin City Council, held on the 1 day of
November, 2011 by the following vote:
COUNCILMEMBER AYES: Nielsen, Gomez, Gavello
COUNCILMEMBER NOES: Amante, Murray
COUNCILMEMBER ABSTAINED:
COUNCILMEMBER ABSENT:
____________________________
PAMELA STOKER
CITY CLERK