• Email
  • Print

Staff Site Plan Review Committee Meeting Minutes FEBRUARY 2, 2006

Staff Site Plan Review Committee Meeting Minutes FEBRUARY 2, 2006

THURSDAY, 9:00 A.M., FEBRUARY 2, 2006

CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Rosen called the meeting to order at 9:06 a.m.
COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT: Eastman, Rosen, Allen, Voronel, Tabatabaee, and Petropulous
STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Kusch, Abalos, Leopold, Kou
OTHERS PRESENT: Michelle Cho, Lisa Choi, and Robert Perez


January 19, 2006 minutes APPROVED as submitted.




Planner Abalos provided a staff report pertaining to a request to install a 50'-0" tall monopole antenna on property located at 330 S. Hale Avenue (north side of Valencia Drive, south of the terminus of Hale Avenue) (M-P zone) (Categorically exempt under Section 15332 of CEQA Guidelines) (AKU/JAB).

Planner Abalos informed the Committee of a monopole antenna located at 2356 Walnut Avenue, located approximately 750 feet east of the subject site. The existing monopole antenna was designed and approved in 2001 by the Staff Review Committee to accommodate the collocation of additional antenna. Staff suggested that the currently proposed antenna be collocated onto the existing monopole.

Planner Abalos identified the location of the proposed monopole antenna between the back of an existing building and the railroad right-of-way parallel with Valencia Drive. The proposed site location is unpaved and contains several palm trees. Some of the palm trees have missing crowns and appear to be dead. If approved by the Committee, staff is recommending the submittal of a landscape and irrigation plan that would reflect the replanting of any dead palms. Staff is also recommending designing the monopole in the form of a palm tree to blend with the existing palm trees.

Public hearing opened.

The applicant, Robert Perez, Parsons, Inc., stated they are proposing a separate monopole is because there is no opportunity to co-locate antenna on the monopole at 2356 East Walnut Avenue located approximately 800 feet away. He said there is no space for a shelter near the existing monopine. He said the proposed shelter would screen the equipment. If the design of the proposed monopole is changed from a palm tree to a "monopine", Mr. Perez would like to have the artificial branches extend above the antenna and increase the overall height to 55 feet. The submitted application indicates a 50-foot tall structure.

Senior Planner Eastman's concern is that there is another antenna within the proximity that is conditioned for co-location. He stated that based on the aerial photographs it appears there is adequate room in the setbacks behind the existing building to place the equipment. The applicant said he would provide documentation as to why co-location would not be possible.

There was discussion about the existing plans on-site being dead, and that the living palms aren't that tall, so a mono-palm might not fit in as well as a mono-pine.

MOTION made by Committee Member Eastman, SECONDED by Committee Member Tabatabaee, and carried by all present to APPROVE PRJ06-00013 - ZON06-00004 as conditioned below (Resolution No. 438).

  1. The monopole shall be designed to have the appearance of a pine tree. The artificial branches shall screen the antenna array from public view. The branches of the monopine shall start no greater than 15 feet above the ground. The branches shall be staggered rather than symmetrical along the "trunk" of the "monopine." The monopine trunk shall have the appearance of bark.

  2. All exterior materials and color used to screen the equipment shelter shall be graffiti sensitive and match the existing building.

  3. The applicant shall provide landscape and irrigation plans for review and approval by the Director of Development Services Department. The submitted plans shall indicate the retention and maintenance of existing palm trees. All dead palm trees shall be removed and replaced with similar size and species.

  4. A one-year maintenance cash deposit in the amount equal to 50% of the combined cost of the landscaping materials and irrigation system, but not less than $500, will be deposited as a prerequisite to final approval of the development.

  5. The applicant shall provide a letter from the property owner or authorized agent for 2356 Walnut Avenue stating why the proposed antenna and equipment cannot be co-located on that property where a telecommunication facility was previously designed and approved for antenna co-location.

  6. The antenna and equipment installation shall not impede the existing door and pathway on the southwest side of the building.

  7. All corrections generated through the plan check and inspection processes are incorporated by reference as conditions of approval and would include any requirements generated by the Engineering Division.

  8. Place the following notes on submitted plans:

    1. Public Safety - Nextel recognizes that the frequencies used by the cellular facility located at 330 S. Hale Avenue, Fullerton is extremely close to the frequencies used by the City of Fullerton for Public Safety. This proximity will require extraordinary "comprehensive advanced planning and frequency coordination" engineering measures to prevent interference, especially in the choice of frequencies and radio ancillary hardware. This is encouraged in the "Best Practices Guide" published by the Association of Public-Safety Communications Officials-International, Inc. (APCO), and as endorsed by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). Prior to the issuance of any permits to install the facility, Nextel shall meet in good faith to coordinate the use of frequencies and equipment with the Communications Division of the Orange County Sheriff-Coroner Department to minimize, to the greatest extent possible, any interference with the Public Safety 800 MHz Countywide Coordinated Communications System (CCCS). Similar consideration shall be given to any other existing or proposed wireless communications facility that may be located on the subject property.

    2. 800 MHz Radio Frequency - At all times, Nextel shall not prevent the City of Fullerton from having adequate spectrum capacity on City's 800 MHz radio frequency.

    3. Post-Installation Test - Before activating its facility, Nextel will submit to a post-installation test to confirm that "advanced planning and frequency coordination" of the facility does was successful in not interfering with the City of Fullerton Public Safety radio equipment. This test will be conducted by the Communications Division of the Orange County Sheriff-Coroner's Department or a Division-approved contractor at the expense of Nextel. This post installation testing process shall be repeated for every proposed frequency addition and/or change to confirm the intent of the "frequency planning" process has been met.

    4. 24-Hour Phone Number - Nextel shall provide a 24-hour phone number to which interference problems may be reported. This condition will also apply to all existing facilities in the City of Fullerton.

    5. Single Point of Contact - Nextel will provide a "single point of contact" in its Engineering and Maintenance Departments to insure continuity on all interference issues. The name, telephone number, fax number and e-mail address of that person shall be provided to City's designated representative upon activation of the facility.

    6. Lessees or Other Users - Nextel shall insure that lessee or other user(s) shall comply with the terms and conditions of this permit, and shall be responsible for the failure of any lessee or other users under the control of to comply.

Chief Planner Rosen explained the appeal process.


Assistant Planner Kusch provided a staff report pertaining to a request to allow a tutoring facility consisting of up to 5 instructors and 15 children, on property located at 1532 West Commonwealth Avenue (south side of Commonwealth Avenue, between approximately 405 and 513 feet west of the southwest corner of Orchard and Commonwealth Avenues) (C-2 zone) (Categorically exempt under Section 15301 of CEQA Guidelines) (AKU)

Assistant Planner Kusch reminded the Committee of the approval last year of a Minor Site Plan for a dance studio for the subject property. He mentioned that it was his understanding that the previous applicant was no longer pursuing the opening of the dance studio.

Assistant Planner Kusch reviewed some of the possible conditions made by the Water Engineering and the Fire Departments. One of the conditions from the previous Minor Site Plan approval for the dance studio included a van-accessible handicapped parking space.

Committee Member Tabatabaee questioned if the back gate along the alley was previously approved and Assistant Planner Kusch answered no.

Assistant Planner Kusch indicated that staff was concerned that all loading and unloading occur on site in the parking area. Senior Civil Engineer Voronel expressed her concerns that Commonwealth would be an unsafe situation and there is no guarantee that a pick up area would not be occupied by cars (i.e. it's a public street).

The applicant stated the students would be 12 - 16 years old with tutoring of 3 or 4 hours per day. Committee Member Tabatabaee stated, based on that information, the existing office use occupancy would need to be changed to an "E" occupancy.

Some requirements based on the "E" Occupancy are:
  • The building has to have fire sprinklers;
  • An elevator is needed for disabled access to the second floor.
The applicant stated that the downstairs will be split into two halves and made for office use. The plans presented did not reflect the extent of the office improvements.

Committee Member Tabatabaee stated since the use is changing, a fire sprinkler system is needed.

Committee Member Tabatabaee requested that the applicant bring updated floor plans for review.

Public hearing opened.

Property Manager, Lisa Choi, requested clarification on what staff requires from her before the next meeting. She expressed her concerns regarding parking spaces for tenants.

Senior Planner Eastman explained that there shouldn't be a problem leasing the building for general office use. He explained the reasons why parking is an issue.

Senior Planner Eastman stated he'd prefer to see the drop off/pick up location located very close to the building so children are not walking across the parking lot. Children should not be dropped off in the drive lanes.

MOTION made by Committee Member Tabatabaee, SECONDED by Committee Member Eastman, and carried by all present to CONTINUE PRJ06-00020 - ZON06-00005 to a date uncertain.

BY: Ruth Leopold, Clerical Support