HomeMy WebLinkAboutITEM NO 2 CITY STAFF RESPONSES TO MELLO QUESTIONS From: Eastman,Jay
To: Eastman.Jay
Cc: Barraaan. Raymond;Wong,Adam; Hurtado.Vera;Willkom.Justina
Subject: RE: PLEASE RESPOND: EMAIL FROM DAVE MELLO RE: "FEBRUARY 13 2024 PC PACKET"
Date: Tuesday, February 13,2024 12:01:09 PM
Importance: High
Good Morning Commissioner Mello,
Thank you for your questions regarding the telecommunication facility proposed for 7545 Irvine
Center Drive, which is on tonight's Planning Commission agenda.
We have provided responses to your questions below, in red. Please let me know if you have any
additional questions, or if we can otherwise be of assistance.
Sincerely,
Jay Eastman, AICP
Assistant Director
ifisM,i� Community Development
-- - ------ -- --. 300 Centennial Way,Tustin, CA 92780
P: 714-573-3101 1 F: 714-573-3113
JEastman(@TustinCA.ora I TustinCA.ora
bc: Planning Commission Members
From: Mello, Dave<DMello(d)tustinca.org>
Sent: Monday, February 12, 2024 4:28 PM
To: Hurtado, Vera <VHurtadolcDtustinca.org>
Cc: Willkom,Justina <JWillkom(d)tustinca.org>
Subject: Re: "FEBRUARY 13 2024 PC PACKET"
1). Co-location - it appears the applicant is requesting capacity for 2 plus carriers. What is the total
number of carriers the facility can accommodate as proposed?
Short answer is that the proposal adds one carrier (Dish) to the building. The building has
one existing carrier (Verizon). There will be a total of two carriers.
Dish Wireless, represented by Brian De La Ree, is proposing to construct a cupola structure
on the roof of the existing building. The cupola will contain Dish Wireless antennas, and the
associated switch equipment will be placed on the roof adjacent to the cupola (below the
existing parapet wall).
Verizon Wireless is an existing carrier on the building. Verizon's antennas are located within
a raised parapet wall on the southeast side of the building, and within a faux "third story'
enclosure on the southwest side of the building.
Staff will verify with the applicant, but it is our understanding that the cupola proposed by
Dish Wireless is not "co-locatable". Staff's reference to collocation in the staff report is in
reference to the building itself, as the existing structure will integrate two carriers. In the
future, additional carriers wishing to locate on the building will need to submit plans and
obtain city approval.
2). COA# 1.3 -discusses the CUP and DR validity tied to the term of the lease. What is the term of
the lease, including any and all applicable extension? How are amendments that extend time and
additional carrier leases treated in conjunction with the term of the entitlement documents?
The lease is a private agreement between the property owner and the carrier (Dish
Wireless). The City is not a party to the lease; and the City has not requested the lease from the
applicant.
Condition of Approval #1.3 is a standard condition that is intended to ensure the antenna
equipment and associated improvements are "tied" to the property. This is to ensure, for
instance, that if a tenant walks away from a lease they don't leave equipment and
improvements that could become unsafe or an eye-sore due to a lack of maintenance; and it
gives the City authority to ensure that a property owner takes appropriate action to clean up
unsafe or unsightly conditions.
3). COA#5.1 - references a fee for filing appropriate environmental documents. Section V of the
Resolution states the project is categorically exempt. Why would there be any fees due for filing
environmental documents?
The City is required to file a Notice of Exemption (NOE) with the County Clerk immediately
after approval. The County Clerk charges a small filing fee for the NOE.
4). 1 would like to better understand the rooflines in the Line of Site Elevation. I am trying to
determine if the aesthetics of the cupola are in proportion to the building architecture.
This question is better answered by the applicant, and therefore we have let the applicant
know that they should be prepared to respond to concerns related to the line-of-sight and
architectural design.
As a note, the drawings presented to the Commission are not the first submittals received.
The initial submittal included a cupola with a more pronounced height, which was clearly not
proportional with the existing building. Staff worked with the applicant to bring the project
into better alignment with the existing conditions.
Thank you and see you tomorrow night!
Planning Commissioner
David J. Mello,Jr.
On Feb 9, 2024, at 2:16 PM, Hurtado, Vera <VHurtadolcDtustinca.org>wrote:
Good afternoon Commissioners,
Attached is the PC packet for next Tuesday. February 131h- at 7pm.
Please let staff know if you have any questions.
Thank you.
Vera Hurtado
Executive Assistant
Community Development Department
300 Centennial Way,Tustin, CA 92780
P: 714-573-3106 1 F: 714-573-3113
vhurtadoa-tustinca.ora I tustinca.ora
STAY CONNECTED WITH US:
•Download our app—Apple Store •Google Play
•Follow us—Facebook•Twitter
•Join our newsletter