Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2020-08-18 PC Regular Meeting Minutes1 CITY OF PALM DESERT PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES TUESDAY, AUGUST 18, 2020 — 6:00 P.M. ZOOM VIRTUAL MEETING I. CALL TO ORDER Chair Lindsay Holt called the meeting to order at 6:04 p.m. II. ROLL CALL Present: Absent: Commissioner Nancy DeLuna Commissioner Ron Gregory Vice -Chair John Greenwood Commissioner Joseph Pradetto Chair Lindsay Holt Also Present: Craig Hayes, Assistant City Attorney Ryan Stendell, Director of Community Development Eric Ceja, Principal Planner Nick Melloni, Assistant Planner Monica O'Reilly, Management Specialist II III. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Commissioner Nancy DeLuna led the Pledge of Allegiance. IV. SUMMARY OF COUNCIL ACTIONS None V. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None VI. CONSENT CALENDAR A. MINUTES of the Regular Planning Commission meeting of August 4, 2020. Rec: Approve as presented. MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 18, 2020 B. REQUEST FOR CONSIDERATION to approve a one-year time extension for Tentative Tract Map 37339 and Precise Plan 17-035 for the subdivision of a 7.74-acre parcel into 80 condominium units, common area amenities, and a future 1.3-acre commercial parcel located at the northwest corner of Frank Sinatra Drive and Cook Street. Case Nos. TTM 37339/PP 17-035 (Wes Lind, Arcadia, California, Applicant). Rec: By Minute Motion, approve a one-year time extension for Case Nos. TTM 37339/PP 17-035, until September 19, 2021. Upon a motion by Commissioner DeLuna, seconded by Vice -Chair Greenwood, and a 3-0 vote of the Planning Commission, the Consent Calendar was approved as presented (AYES: DeLuna, Greenwood, and Holt; NOES: None; ABSENT: Gregory and Pradetto). VII. CONSENT ITEMS HELD OVER None VIII. NEW BUSINESS None IX. CONTINUED BUSINESS None X. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. REQUEST FOR CONSIDERATION for approval of Conditional Use Permit (CUP) 19- 0002 to allow the construction of a 65-foot-tall wireless telecommunication facility, and a 288-square-foot equipment enclosure at 78005 Country Club Drive; and adoption of a Notice of Exemption in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Case No. CUP 19-0002 (Smartlink, LLC. for AT&T, Cardiff, California, Applicant). Assistant Planner Nick Melloni reported that this item has come before the Planning Commission for the third time. The applicant has submitted updated plans with the primary changes on Sheet L-1, which are the landscape plans. The applicant also provided updated coverage maps, additional photo renderings, and letters regarding the lack of agreement with SBA for the existing tower. The applicant has stated it is not feasible to collocate on the SBA tower. Additionally, the applicant has requested another continuance to the September 18 meeting to gather additional information and to have a member of the public speak in favor of the tower, who was not available for this meeting. He noted that City staff received two letters from SBA, which were emailed to the Planning Commission. Staff's recommendation is not to grant a continuance on the basis that the applicant has submitted sufficient information. Staff recommended two options: 1) adopt a resolution approving the current proposal, subject to the conditions of approval, which includes additional landscaping to help screen the site; or 2) continue this case and direct staff to prepare a resolution for denial. He proceeded with a brief PowerPoint presentation. F MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION Commissioner DeLuna clarified that there is a cell coverage gap. Mr. Melloni replied that is correct. AUGUST 18, 2020 Commissioner DeLuna asked if the applicant is amenable to the condition for additional live palm trees. Mr. Melloni replied yes. Chair Holt declared the public hearing open and invited public testimony FAVORING or OPPOSING this matter. ALEXIS DUNLAP, the representative for AT&T, Newport Beach, California, requested a continuance because they want an opportunity to add another document that has not previously been presented to the Planning Commission. They also want a member of the public to speak in favor of the tower, which they were unavailable to speak tonight. If the Commission is not in favor of a continuance, she requested additional time to read a letter from AT&T's counsel. She said Mr. Figueroa from AT&T is also in the Zoom meeting to present information on FirstNet Network that AT&T is currently building out for the government. Chair Holt allowed the applicant additional time. MR. JULIO FIGUEROA, Director of External Affairs for AT&T, Riverside, California, thanked the Planning Commission for allowing him to speak about their infrastructure build -out. He stated that AT&T is the current exclusive provider for FirstNet, which is the first -ever wireless network for first responders that AT&T is managing and building for the federal government. It is a 25-year agreement, and AT&T has goals they must meet with the deployment of infrastructure. When submitting applications for large macro cell sites, AT&T is asking jurisdictions to take into consideration that they are the exclusive provider for FirstNet and will be managing the network for the next 25 years. He mentioned that they would be modifying all their current cell sites to ensure FirstNet radios are capable at those sites. Due to COVID-19, many people are working remotely, and students are doing distance learning. He stated that it is more important now for AT&T and the entire industry to expedite cell sites to be built out. It is important to have hotspots available for school districts, and networks available for distance learning and working from home. He stated that AT&T would do whatever they can to address any issues regarding stealth and landscaping. He offered to answer any questions. Commissioner DeLuna asked if AT&T is willing to, as a condition of approval, add additional live palms in the 40-foot range. MR. FIGUEROA replied that adding live palms would not be a problem. Commissioner DeLuna asked if they would be adding more than two live palms. MR. FIGUEROA replied yes. They would work with the Planning Department to make sure it satisfies the needs of the community. 3 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 18, 2020 MR. CHRIS DOHENY, the representative for AT&T, Irvine, California, mentioned that he did discuss adding more live palm trees with Mr. Melloni. He said AT&T is open to adding trees to screen the monopalm and frontal palms along Washington Street. Vice -Chair John Greenwood asked if the letter could be read that was referenced by Ms. Dunlap. MR. DOHENY read a letter from Busch Law Firm, PLLC, (AT&T counsel) dated August 12, 2020. A response to SBA's objection letter from Mr. John Henning. After approximately ten minutes, Vice -Chair Greenwood interjected that he did not want to take more time by having Mr. Doheny read a 43-page letter. Commissioner DeLuna agreed and felt they have an understanding of the issues. Principal Planner Eric Ceja commented that staff could electronically share the letter with the Planning Commission. MR. JOHN HENNING, the representative for SBA, Los Angeles, California, commented that they just saw a demonstration on how lawyers could make a simple thing look complicated. He stated that City staff does not support what AT&T is saying about the SBA tower. SBA presented the City and Mr. Ceja with all the information that he asked for, and he determined that the SBA tower is not abandoned, and AT&T should be exploring collocation. AT&T had months to do this. He said AT&T had the Architectural Review Commission and the Planning Commission continue this item specifically to allow AT&T to explore collocation, and they did not do it. He stated the reason they did not explore collocation is that they hope to slip this by the Planning Commission based on a flimsy legal theory that the other tower is abandoned. He asked the Commission to deny this project. When the item is denied, and he assumed it would survive on an appeal to the City Council, AT&T will pick up the phone and call SBA. As he mentioned in his letter, it is not going to cost AT&T more than $3,500 a month to rent the SBA tower. He disclosed that if AT&T would have talked to SBA, they would have been able to negotiate the number down significantly. He said it is going to cost AT&T a few thousand dollars a month to rent, no extra tower on Country Club Drive, and the City would be spared the visual effects they are trying to conceal. He also said that the live palm trees they are proposing are going to be much lower than the actual tower. He reiterated that all the City has to do is deny the permit, and AT&T and SBA would come to terms. There would be one tower instead of two in the area. He pointed out that he noticed an argument, which was seeped into the staff's recommendation in the report about maybe coverage is different between the two towers. He remarked the tower is 900 feet away in a flat area, and coverage is essentially the same. He said AT&T wants to claim, by moving the site 900 feet, they are somehow going to give up something that they wanted to have, which is not their original objective. Their argument is backward engineering, which is a typical disingenuous argument that AT&T is making. Chair Holt interjected that Mr. Henning's three minutes for comment is over, and asked Mr. Henning if he could wrap it up. 4 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 18, 2020 MR. HENNING remarked that after AT&T's representative spent 10 minutes reading a letter, he would not mind having an additional minute or two. Chair Holt answered that additional time would be fine. She made clear that typically they allow the applicant as long as it takes to address the Planning Commission. She also noted that the Commission asked the applicant to stop reading the letter. She allowed Mr. Henning to wrap up his comments within two minutes. MR. HENNING thanked the Commission for their forbearance. He respected Mr. Figueroa's attempt to dovetail this tower in AT&T's general objective to provide first responders with the communication tools they need. However, Mr. Figueroa did not say anything about the SBA tower that would preclude that same objective. He stated if AT&T is in a hurry due to COVID-19, the best thing to do is go to the tower that is already operating and functioning and put AT&T equipment on it. It is much easier than building a brand new tower and all the infrastructure. He told AT&T to please pick up the phone and call SBA. They know that AT&T lawyer's argument is baloney when City staff does not support the argument. He stated that City staff has never said one thing that indicates they agree with AT&T's argument. City Staff's position is that SBA has until the end of this year to reactivate the SBA tower. SBA plans to reactivate the tower with AT&T or other communications company. SBA is not going to lose their rights, and the tower is not going to disappear. He asked that the Commission gives AT&T the encouragement that it needs and say no thank you. The tower does not meet the City's code and no legal right under federal law. He voiced for AT&T to call SBA and make a deal, and they will have coverage that the neighbors need and want. He thanked the Planning Commission for their time. With no further testimony offered, Chair Holt declared the public hearing closed. MS. DUNLAP apologized that she had to leave the video portion of the meeting, and had to rejoin the meeting via her phone. She requested a moment to respond to Mr. Henning's comments. Mr. Stendell interjected that Chair Holt would need to reopen the public hearing to allow the applicant to make rebuttal remarks. Chair Holt declared the public hearing open. MS. DUNLAP pointed out that Mr. Henning mentioned staff does not support the proposal by AT&T. As they all heard from Mr. Melloni, City staff does support the tower, and the Architectural Review Commission approved the tower. Mr. Henning also mentioned that if the City denies the proposal, AT&T would contact SBA. However, her client has instructed her if the Planning Commission denies the tower, they would file an appeal to the City Council. Additionally, AT&T strongly feels the SBA tower is abandoned. She said Mr. Henning stated that their coverage maps were fictitious, and they are offended by his comment. She stated that they did not present fictitious coverage maps to the City. The coverage maps were created by radio frequency engineers and noted that the maps were not greatly different, but slightly different at the alternate location. She stated that if the City does deem, according to their code, the SBA tower abandoned, then they would not have two towers and only have one. The one tower that AT&T would like to construct. 5 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 18, 2020 She also stated that they looked at collocation, and they determined it was not feasible and moved forward with their proposal. Lastly, she appreciated the staff's support and assistance with this project. She asked that the Commission support their proposal so they could move forward with this project to fill the gaps in coverage. With no further testimony offered, Chair Holt declared the public hearing closed. Vice -Chair Greenwood asked Mr. Ceja to elaborate on the letter regarding the City staff's position on whether the SBA tower is out of compliance. Mr. Ceja responded that the City has been reviewing this matter, and this situation has never come across before. Therefore, the procedures on how to address an abandoned tower are relatively new. The City was not aware that the SBA tower was non -operational until the application process. Now that they are aware, staff decided the SBA tower is non- operational, and the 180 days started in July. He stated that City staff is not going to take action until the 180 days expire. Vice -Chair Greenwood felt that the Planning Commission should continue this item so that the applicant could provide a case on collocation. He commented that AT&T and SBA have their differences, or AT&T has no interest in collocating. However, the ability is there to collocate. He did not feel from a land -use perspective that this is not an optimal location. The Commission could add a condition to add 15 palm trees to try to disguise a large monopalm located at a primary entrance to the City. If there is an opportunity, he felt that collocation should be evaluated and attempt to collocate. At this point, he leaned more toward continuing this item and direct staff to prepare a resolution for denial. Commissioner DeLuna commented that she is not as concerned about the collocation issue as she is about the service to the community, the people, and children learning at home. They do not have the coverage they need. She pointed out that the applicant is willing to fulfill the conditions of approval to add live palm trees. She stated that the issue of collocation has been going on for quite some time. She felt collocation is less important to the decision making process. She is more concerned about serving the people in the area. She commented that waiting for another six months and filing appeals to the City Council is not in the best interest to anybody. Chair Holt agreed with Commission DeLuna. Commissioner DeLuna commented that they are in a little bit of a pickle with only three Commissioners present; not a full body. Vice -Chair Greenwood asked staff if two votes constitute an approvable vote. Assistant City Attorney Craig Hayes replied yes. If there is a quorum of three, you simply need a majority vote one way or the other. Commissioner DeLuna stated that it is a complicated issue and not completely clear cut. However, given the conditions that they have dealt with in the last two or three meetings, she is relying on the staff's expertise and moved for approval. MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 18, 2020 For clarification purposes, Mr. Stendell noted that Mr. Melloni provided two options in the staff report. Commissioner DeLuna clarified that she moved to approve the tower, with the condition to add live palm trees (more than two) at the level of 40 feet. Chair Holt added that the proposal goes back to the ARC for final approval of the landscape design. Commissioner DeLuna replied yes. Chair Holt seconded the motion. Commissioner DeLuna moved to waive further reading and adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 2779, approving Case No. CUP 19-0002, subject to the conditions of approval; and adopt a Notice of Exemption in accordance with CEQA. The motion was seconded by Chair Holt and carried by a 2-1 vote (AYES: DeLuna and Holt; NOES: Greenwood; ABSENT: Gregory and Pradetto). XI. MISCELLANEOUS None XII. COMMITTEE MEETING UPDATES A. ART IN PUBLIC PLACES Chair Holt reported that the Art in Public Places Commission discussed an artist painting temporary artwork supporting equality and social justice. They also discussed purchasing a sculpture to be placed at the intersection of San Pablo Avenue and Fred Waring Drive. Mr. Stendell interjected that the artwork would be placed at Fred Waring Drive and Portola Avenue. Chair Holt also reported that there is going to be a study session for the art going in at the roundabout on San Pablo Avenue. B. PARKS & RECREATION None XIII. REPORTS AND REMARKS Vice -Chair Greenwood thanked City staff. He said Mr. Melloni is a new Planner and doing a fantastic job. Commissioner DeLuna agreed and thanked staff. She commented that San Pablo Avenue looks fabulous. 7 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 18, 2020 Mr. Stendell mentioned that Phase II bids for San Pablo Avenue would be opened within a week or two. Construction should begin before the end of the calendar year. XIV. ADJOURNMENT With the Planning Commission concurrence, Chair Holt adjourned the meeting at 6:55 p.m. ATTEST: RYAN STENDELL, SECRETARY MONICA O'REILLY, RECORDIN ECRETARY E:3