Loading...
CC SR 20180206 04 - WTF ASG No. 48RANCHO PALOS VERDES CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: 02/06/2018 AGENDA REPORT AGENDA HEADING: Public Hearing AGENDA DESCRIPTION: Consideration and possible action to grant an appeal and overturn the Planning Commission's denial of Major Wireless Telecommunication Facility ASG No. 48 to install a Wireless Telecommunication Facility on an existing utility pole at the terminus of Mossbank Drive west of Basswood Avenue. Quasi -Judicial Decision This item is a quasi-judicial decision in which the City Council is being asked to affirm whether specific findings of fact can be made in order to overturn the denial of the Planning Commission's decision. The specific findings of fact are listed in the Resolution per Chapter 12.18 of the Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code (RPVMC). RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION: (1) At the Applicant's request, maintain jurisdiction over the appeal and refer the application back to the Planning Commission for review of proposed revisions at a future duly -noticed public hearing, and direct the Planning Commission to forward its recommendation to the City Council for consideration at a future duly - noticed public hearing. FISCAL IMPACT: The Applicant has paid the applicable appeal fees. If the Applicant is successful in its appeal, and the City Council overturns the Planning Commission's decision, the Applicant will receive a full refund. Therefore, all in-house Staff costs associated with processing the appeal will be borne by the General Fund. Costs for work conducted by the City's consultants are borne by the Applicant. Amount Budgeted: N/A Additional Appropriation: N/A Account Number(s): N/A ORIGINATED BY: Art Bashmakian, AICP, Contract Planner Ag REVIEWED BY: Ara Mihranian, AICP, Director of Community Development? APPROVED BY: Doug Willmore, City Managers/.,,,J ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: A. Applicant's request to refer the project back to the Planning Commission B. Appeal Letter to City Council (page A-1) C. P.C. Resolution No. 2017-39 (page C-1) 1 D. Tolling Agreement (page D-1) BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION: Crown Castle, the Applicant/Appellant (Applicant), is a tower company hired by wireless companies for the purposes of acquiring sites for the construction and deployment of wireless telecommunications antennas throughout local jurisdictions. Pursuant to Chapter 12.18 of the Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code (RPVMC), Crown Castle is proposing to install approximately 26 new antennas in the City's public rights-of-way (PROW), including the subject application, to provide services to AT&T customers throughout the City. On October 24, 2017, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing to consider the Applicant's request. At this meeting, after considering evidence introduced in the record including public testimony from the Applicant, neighbors, Staff, and the City's radio frequency (RF) consultant, the Planning Commission moved to deny the project, without prejudice, on a 6-0 vote (Commissioner Bradley was absent). The basis of the Commission's denial can be found in P.C. Resolution No. 2017-39 (Attachment C). On November 8, 2017, the applicant filed a timely appeal (Attachment B) of the Planning Commission's denial, contending that the denial and the reasons for the denial effectively prohibit or has the effect of prohibiting the provision of personal wireless services. In summary, the Applicant believes that the Planning Commission's decision was not based on substantial evidence, and that the denial violates the Applicant's right to deploy its facilities in the PROW, in violation of Public Utilities Code Section 7901, in that the Planning Commission's action exceeds the local control over the "time place and manner" of access to the PROW. In response to the Planning Commission's denial and after filing the appeal, the Applicant explored relocating the wireless facility possibly to three other locations along Basswood Avenue, and possibly to a location approximately 100' north of Littlebow Road on the east side of Basswood Avenue, for the City Council's consideration as part of the appeal. Furthermore, the Applicant introduced to the City Council at its November 30, 2017, meeting revised, slimmer canister designs and various pole designs that were not originally considered by the Planning Commission. Because the Planning Commission has not considered the new locations, and has not reviewed the revised, slimmer canister design and three different pole designs, based on the City Council's decision on November 30, 2017, the Applicant requests (Attachment A)—and Staff supports—the referral of the project back to the Planning Commission for its review and recommendation to the City Council, provided that the City Council maintains jurisdiction over the appeal. If the City Council refers the project back to the Planning Commission, the Applicant will be required to install a new mock-up at least 30 days before the Planning Commission 2 meeting, and a new public notice announcing the public hearing will be issued to property owners within a 500' radius of the revised project location and any identified alternative locations to ensure all potentially -affected property owners are notified. Tolling of the Shot Clock In response to the possibility of the City Council's decision to refer the appeal back to the Planning Commission, the Applicant agreed to toll the shot clock to April 30, 2018, to allow time for the Planning Commission and the City Council to review the revised project (Attachment D). CONCLUSION: Based on the forgoing discussion, Staff recommends that the City Council maintain jurisdiction over the appeal and refer the application back to the Planning Commission to review the project revisions and forward a recommendation to the City Council for consideration at a future, duly -noticed public hearing. ALTERNATIVES: In addition to Staff's recommendation, the following alternative is available for consideration by the City Council: Continue the public hearing to a date certain, and direct Staff to come back with the appeal analysis for the City Council's consideration. 9 Ara Mihranian From: Snyder, Aaron <Aaron.Snyder@crowncastle.com> Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2017 3:56 PM To: Ara Mihranian; Cowell, Jon (Vendor); 'Michael W. Shonafelt'; 'Paul O'Boyle' Cc: 'Christy Lopez'; Lona N. Laymon; WirelessTF Subject: RE: ASG No. 36 and 48 Hi Ara, I am formally requesting that staff recommend that ASG36 and ASG48 be remanded back to the planning commission for review at the Feb 271n Both locations are in design review with alternates being looked at. Any questions, please let me know. Thank you, AARON SNYDER Government Relations Project Manager Small Cell & Fiber Solutions (SCFS) 0: (949) 344-7834 1 M: (909) 568-4519 CCCROWN CASTLE 200 Spectrum Center Drive, Suite #1800, Irvine, Ca. 92618 CrownCastle.com A-1 CCROWN C CASTLE November 29, 2017 Emily Colborn, City Clerk City Clerk's Office 30940 Hawthorne Boulevard Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275 Crown Castle 200 Spectrum Center Drive Suite 1800 Irvine, CA 92618 Re: Crown Castle NG West LLC: Notice of Appeal of ASG -48 — 26399 Mossbank Dr Dear Ms. Colborn, Crown Castle NG West LLC ("Crown Castle") hereby appeals the Planning Commission's November 14, 2017, adoption of a resolution of denial of the above -referenced Major Wireless Telecommunications Facilities Permit application ("Denial"), pursuant to City of Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code ("RPVMC") section 12.18.060. D and 17.80.030.A ("Appeal"). This appeal is timely under RPVMC section 17.80.030. The Appeal rests on the following grounds, among others: (1) The Denial prohibits, or has the effect of prohibiting, the provision of personal wireless services in violation of 47 U.S.C. section 332 (c)(7)(B)(i)(II). (2) The Denial is not supported by substantial evidence contained in a written record in violation of 47 U.S.C. section 332 (c)(7)(B)(iii). (3) The Denial is based, in part, on the perceived environmental effects of radio frequency emissions in violation of 47 U.S.C. section 332 (c)(7)(B)(iv). (4) The Denial is unlawful, since it violates Crown Castle's vested right to deploy its facilities in the public rights-of-way, in violation of Public Utilities Code section 7901. The Denial exceeds the limited time, place and manner controls set forth by Public Utilities Code section 7901.1. Crown Castle reserves the right to supplement its reasons for the Appeal, and otherwise supplement the administrative record with its own evidence and points of law up to the date of the City Council herring on this Appeal. Very truly yours, MWS:mws 7104273.1 The Foundation for a Wireless World. CrownCastle.com Check No 2276760 Check Date 11/28/17 Stub 1 of 1 CKRQ CITY APPEAL FEES 11/28/17 Invoice Summ 2,275.00 2,275.00 2,275.00 2,275.00 City of Rancho Palos Verdes 30940 Hawthorne Blvd. Fees Associated With Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275 Case #: ZON2017-00553 OWN CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERGES 30940 HAWTHORNE BLVD RANCHO PALOS VERDES, CA 90275 WN CASTLE USA, INC CORPORATE DRIVE ONSBURG, PA 15317 Fee Start, End Trans Revenue Create Tye Date Date Dept Description Code Account Number By APL 11/8/2010 12/31/2020 Appeal Fee 132210 AS I I APL 11/8/2010 12/31/2020 Appeal Fee 132210 SK I I Subtotal for Revenue Acct. 12 For Office Use Only Receipt No. Check No. Total Due: 1 $2,275.001 *Fees are based upon the City's most current Master Fee Schedule, available Page I of I t \:-orrns\CaseFeesV2.rpt for review at November 15, 2017 CITY OF I A� RANCHO PALOS VERDES COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT NOTICE OF DECISION NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes has adopted P.C. Resolution No. 2017-39, denying, without prejudice, Major Wireless Telecommunications Facility Permit ASG No. 48 to allow the installation of two 21.4" panel antennas encased in a 2' tall canister shroud on an existing 40.5' tall wood utility pole with related vaulted mechanical equipment at: LOCATION: Terminus of Mossbank Drive west of Basswood Avenue APPLICANT: Crown Castle PROPERTY OWNER: City of Rancho Palos Verdes Said decision is subject to P.C. Resolution No. 2017-39 (available on the City's website at http://www.rpvca.gov/916/Wireless-Telecommunications-Facilities). This decision may be appealed, in writing, to the City Council. The appeal shall set forth the grounds for appeal and any specific action being requested by the appellant. Any appeal letter must be filed within fifteen (15) calendar days of the approval date, or by 4:30 p.m. on Friday, December 1, 2017 (extended due to the Thanksgiving holiday). A $2,275.00 appeal fee (or a $1,275.00 appeal fee for residents) must accompany any appeal letter. If no appeal is filed in a timely manner, the Planning Commission's decision will be final at 4:30 p.m. on Friday, December 1, 2017. If you have any questions, or would like to discuss the project further in detail, please contact Art Bashmakian at (310) 544-5227 or via email at wirelessTFCc7rpvca.aov. Ara M ICF Director of Commu Enclosure cc: Crown Castle Project File Development 30940 HAWTHORNE BOULEVARD / RANCHO PALOS VERDES, CA 90275-5391 / (310) 544-5228 / FAX (310) 544-5293 WWW.R&AtOV `ted PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER P.C. RESOLUTION NO. 2017-39 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES DENYING, WITHOUT PREJUDICE, WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITY ASG NO. 48 FOR THE INSTALLATION OF TWO 21.4" PANEL ANTENNAS ENCASED IN A 2' TALL CANISTER SHROUD ON AN EXISTING 40.5' TALL WOOD UTILITY POLE WITH RELATED VAULTED MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT AT THE TERMINUS OF MOSSBANK DRIVE WEST OF BASSWOOD AVENUE. WHEREAS, Chapter 12.18 of the Rancho Palo Verde Municipal Code (RPVMC or Municipal Code) governs the permitting, development, siting, installation, design, operation and maintenance of wireless telecommunications facilities ("WTFs") in the City's public right-of-way ("PROW") (RPVMC § 12.18.010); WHEREAS, beginning in May of 2016, Crown Castle (the "Applicant") applied to the City for an Wireless Telecommunications Facility Permit ("WTFP"), pursuant to Section 12.18.040(A) of the Municipal Code, to install 26 antennas in the public right-of- way (PROW) to service AT&T customers throughout the City including ASG No. 48 (the "Project") located at the terminus of (lower) Mossbank Drive west of Basswood Avenue; WHEREAS, the original proposal called for the installation of two 24" panel antennas mounted on a 26' tall replacement street light pole at the corner of Basswood Avenue and Mossbank Drive. The radio equipment and power meter were to be placed on the ground adjacent to the street light pole, consisting of 9.7 cubic feet of equipment boxes in the PROW; WHEREAS, the revised proposal called for the installation of two 23.1" panel antennas mounted on a cross extension arm, placed at a height of 27' from the ground, on the existing 40.5' tall wood utility pole with pole mounted mechanical equipment; WHEREAS, the Project was further revised for the installation of two 21.4" panel antennas, encased in a 2' tall canister shroud on the existing 40.5' tall utility pole; WHEREAS, the Project was also revised to include vaulted mechanical equipment including the radio and auxiliary equipment, as well as the SCE meter box in a secondary vault. The Project consists of a total of three vaults measuring approximately 43 square feet; WHEREAS, because the Project's location is within a residential zone and within the PROW of local streets as identified in the General Plan, approval of a WTFP also requires an Exception under Section 12.18.190 of the Municipal Code; 55478 00001 \30287609 1 P.C. Resolution No. 2017-39 Page 1 of 6 C-2 WHEREAS, the Project is exempt from review under the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") because the Project constitutes a small scale installation of a new facility (14 CCR § 15303(d)); WHEREAS, on September 26, 2017, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing, at which time all interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard and present evidence, and, at the request of the Applicant, continued the public hearing to October 24, 2017; WHEREAS, on October 24, 2017, the Planning Commission held the duly noticed continued public hearing, at which time all interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard and present evidence; and WHEREAS, on October 24, 2017, the Planning Commission considered testimony and evidence presented at the public hearings, the information and findings included in the Staff Report and related attachments. NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES DOES HEREBY FIND, DETERMINE AND RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1: The proposed Project is a request to: A. Install a WTF at the terminus of (lower) Mossbank Drive west of Basswood Avenue; B. Install two 21.4" panel antennas, encased in a 2' tall canister shroud measuring 2' in diameter that will be mounted on a 4' mast arm, extending from an existing 40.5' tall wood utility pole approximately 25' from the ground level; and, C. Install vaulted underground mechanical equipment, including the radio and auxiliary equipment, measuring approximately 43 square feet in surface area in the street. Section 2: The findings required to be made by the Planning Commission for the approval of a WTF permit, as set forth in Chapter 12.18 of the RPVMC, have not been made as follows: A. The Planning Commission was unable to make the Findings required by Section 12.18.090, Subsection B, of the Municipal Code that "[t]he proposed facility has been designed and located in compliance with all applicable provisions of this chapter," as follows: 12.18.080(A)(1)(a): The applicant shall employ screening, undergrounding and camouflage design techniques in the design and placement of wireless telecommunications facilities in order to ensure that the facility is as visually screened as possible, to prevent the facility from dominating the surrounding area 55478.00001\30287609.1 P.C. Resolution No. 2017-39 Page 2 of 6 C-3 and to minimize significant view impacts from surrounding properties all in a manner that achieves compatibility with the community and in compliance with Section 17.02.040 (View Preservation and Restoration) of this code. The proposed installation of panel antennas encased in a 2' tall canister shroud, at a height of 25' from the ground level, that would be affixed to a 40.5' tall wood utility pole, does not blend with the surrounding environment and would visually impact the character of the neighborhood, as well as visually impact the adjacent open space area known as the Malaga Canyon Reserve, a sub -area of the Palos Verdes Nature Preserve. The proposed installation and support equipment does not meet the "non- dominant design" standard requiring a facility to be compatible with the surrounding environment. The overall size of the proposed antenna and canister shroud that is attached to a 4' arm of a wood utility pole, in its proposed location, is a feature that is out -of -character in the surrounding neighborhood as there are no other structures or natural features in the immediate area that would lend themselves to screening or blending the facility into the built and natural environment. The area immediately to the west is an open space preserve, known as the Malaga Canyon Reserve, with hiking trails. The installation of the WTF would significantly impacts views from the nearby residents and the Preserve. A more compliant design would present equipment that is seamlessly integrated into the utility pole or a "slim -line" design that does not present the antenna nodes as the dominate feature on this wood utility pole. 12.18.080(A) 1t )(b): Screening shall be designed to be architecturally compatible with surrounding structures using appropriate techniques to camouflage, disguise, and/or blend into the environment, including landscaping, color, and other techniques to minimize the facility's visual impact as well as be compatible with the architectural character of the surrounding buildings or structures in terms of color, size, proportion, style, and quality. The area in which this Project is proposed consists of a large open space preserve and non -dense, upscale residential structures with well-maintained manicured landscaping and parkways. The proposed panel antennas encased in a canister shroud that would be affixed by a 4' arm to a wood utility pole exacerbates the visual clutter in the surrounding environment and would be visually intrusive as there are no similar vertical elements with similar facilities in the neighborhood. The City of Rancho Palos Verdes' streets, parkway- and median- landscaping, and public utilities within the rights-of-way have been planned and constructed to achieve an attractive appearance which includes minimizing the number and appearance of utilities and related equipment, particularly in residential areas. 55478 00001\30287609 1 P.C. Resolution No. 2017-39 Page 3 of 6 C-4 Consequently, the proposed facility is not sufficiently compatible with matters of urban design and the adjacent open space preserve and the long-term maturation of this residential neighborhood—especially in light of the fact that the Applicant did not establish the presence of a significant gap in coverage that would necessitate the proposed facility. 12.18.080(A)(5): Equipment. The applicant shall use the least visible equipment possible. Antenna elements shall be flush mounted, to the extent feasible. All antenna mounts shall be designed so as not to preclude possible future collocation by the same or other operators or carriers. Unless otherwise provided in this section, antennas shall be situated as close to the ground as possible. The Applicant presented no evidence of the proposed antennas being situated as close to the ground as possible. The proposed panel antennas encased in a canister shroud measuring approximately 2' tall has not been designed to be flush mounted that blends with the verticality of the pole, and is not the least intrusive design based on industry standards found for other antenna poles. 12.18.080(A)(7): Space. Each facility shall be designed to occupy the least amount of space in the right-of-way that is technically feasible. The proposed WTF would be mounted to the 4' arm of an existing wood utility pole and would take up more right-of-way space compared to the existing utility pole and does not use other feasible "slim -line" or pole -integrated designs found in the industry. B. The Planning Commission was unable to make the Findings required by Section 12.18.190, Subsection 13.2, of the Municipal Code, that "[t]he applicant has provided the city with a clearly defined technical service objective and a clearly defined potential site search area," as follows: The "technical service objective" identified by the Applicant in all application documents is the coverage of a "significant gap" in coverage. The evidence in the written record and at the public hearing did not support a finding of a significant gap. Rather, the evidence established that the target area in general has good coverage for 3G and most 4G networks. The Applicant is not entitled to seamless or perfect coverage for 4G and LTE in every area it serves, and the existence of a small "dead spot" in coverage is hereby found to be an insignificant deficiency in Applicant's existing coverage in the area and inconsistent with the Applicant's alleged technical service objective. The installation of ASG No. 21 and its impact to the Applicant's technical service objective along Basswood Drive, remain unclear as ASG No. 21 is not currently "on-line" and therefore its impact could not be evaluated or tested until such time as ASG No. 21 is "on-line." 55478 00001\30287609.1 P.C. Resolution No. 2017-39 Page 4 of 6 C-5 C. The Planning Commission was unable to make the Findings required by Section 12.18.090, Subsection E, of the Municipal Code, that "[t]he applicant has provided the city with a meaningful comparative analysis that includes the factual reasons why the proposed location and design is the least noncompliant location and design necessary to reasonably achieve the applicant's reasonable technical service objectives," as follows: The Applicant has not provided a meaningful alternative comparative analysis and the proposed project is not found to be the preferred design. See above discussions in regards to RPVMC §12.18.080 for further detail, which discussions are incorporated here. The Applicant failed to sufficiently demonstrate the coverage of the proposed installation in light of a recently approved WTF (ASG No. 21) on Silver Spur Road which could preclude the necessity of ASG 48 at the subject location and/or in the manner as designed. Section 3: Pursuant to Section 12.18.060 of the Municipal Code (referencing Chapter 17.80 of the Municipal Code), any interested person aggrieved by this decision or any portion of this decision may appeal to the City Council. The appeal shall set forth the grounds for appeal and any specific action being requested by the appellant. Any appeal letter must be filed within fifteen (15) calendar days of the date of this decision, or by 5:30 p.m. on Wednesday, November 29, 2017. The Council -approved appeal fee must accompany any appeal letter. If no appeal is filed timely, the Planning Commission's decision will be final at 5:30 p.m. on Wednesday, November 29, 2017. Section 4: For the foregoing reasons and based on testimony and evidence presented at the public hearings, the information and findings included in the Staff Report, Minutes and other records of proceedings, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes hereby denies, without prejudice, ASG No. 48 for the proposed wireless telecommunication facility installation at the terminus of Mossbank Drive, west of Basswood Avenue. 55478 00001\30287609 1 P.C. Resolution No. 2017-39 Page 5 of 6 C-6 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 14th day of NOVEMBER 2017, by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners Leon, Emenhiser, Nelson, Tomblin, and Vice Chair James NOES: None ABSTENTIONS: None RECUSALS: None ABSENT: Commissioner Bradley C_ :)�� Ara Mi rani , ICP Community Development Director; and, Secretary of the Planning Commission 55478.00001\30287609.1 l� William J. Jdmes>f Vice -Chairman P.C. Resolution No. 2017-39 Page 6 of 6 C-7 C i�CROWN v CASTLE January 25, 2018 VIA E-MAIL: ARAM@RPVCA.GOV Ara Mihranian Director, Community Development Department City of Rancho Palos Verdes 30940 Hawthorne Blvd. Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275 Crown Castle 200 Spectrum Center Drive Suite 1700 Irvine, CA 92618 Re: Shot Clock Extension Agreement and Notice of Shot Clock Expiration [RVP Municipal Code section 12.18.060( C)(3 )I Dear Ara, This letter memorializes an agreement between Crown Castle NG West LLC ("Crown Castle") and the City of Rancho Palos Verdes ("City") to extend the Shot Clock for ASG48 from November 30, 2017 to April 30, 2018, pursuant to paragraph 49 of the Federal Communications Commission's "Shot Clock Rule" (Petition for Declaratory Ruling, 24 F.C.C. Red. 13994, ¶ 49 (2009)). Accordingly, the Shot Clock for ASG48 shall expire on April 30, 2018, and any and all applicable statutes of limitations under either federal or state law shall be deemed to commence from that extended date. This agreement shall also serve to satisfy Crown Castle's requirement to provide notice to the City of the Shot Clock expiration under City of Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code section 12,18.060 (C)(3). This agreement has been reviewed and approved by legal counsel for Crown Castle and the City. If this accurately memorializes our agreement, please provide your signature in the designated block below. al4ow Aaron Snyder CROWN CASTLE NG WEST LLC Ara CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES The Foundation for a Wireless World. CrownCastle.com D-1