HomeMy WebLinkAboutSS2 - Review of Telecom Ordinance- CITY OF
NEWPORT BEACH
°9< /FOaN� City Council Staff Report
Agenda Item No. SS2
March 27, 2012
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: Community Development Department
Kimberly Brandt, AICP, Director
949 - 644 -3226, kbrandt @newportbeachca.gov
PREPARED BY: Janet Johnson Brown, Associate Planner
APPROVED: Ste` G LL::6
TITLE: Review of Telecom Ordinance - Chapter 15.70 of the Newport
Beach Municipal Code (Wireless Telecommunication Facilities)
ABSTRACT:
Review Chapter 15.70 (the telecom ordinance) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code
(NBMC) to consider amendments to the code.
RECOMMENDATION:
After Council discussion, provide feedback to staff regarding an amendment of the
NBMC to update provisions regarding wireless telecommunication facilities (telecom
facilities), and incorporate the updated regulations within Title 20 (Planning and Zoning).
FUNDING REQUIREMENTS:
Other than staff time involved in preparing the draft ordinance, there are no direct City
expenses identified at this time. The existing and proposed ordinances provide for full
cost recovery of the City expenditures in the review and issuance of permits for telecom
facilities.
DISCUSSION:
Background
The telecom ordinance was adopted by City Council in October 2002, codifying the
regulations and design standards for wireless telecommunication facilities (telecom
facilities) within the City. At the time the telecom ordinance was adopted, state and
federal case law suggested cities were somewhat limited in how telecom facilities could
be regulated. However, more recent case law favors more appropriate local control to
ensure the compatibility of these facilities with surrounding uses, similar to the manner
in which other land uses are reviewed.
1
2
March 27, 2012
Page 2
Telecom Facility Regulations in Other Jurisdictions
Most cities in California regulate telecom facilities through the Zoning Code as a land
use matter. Typically, a project proponent is required to submit an application for a
minor or conditional use permit. In order to grant approval, the review authority must
make all of the findings required to grant a use permit, including a finding that the use is
compatible with the allowed uses in the vicinity, and that the site is physically suitable to
accommodate the use. Current case law supports this evaluation by local jurisdictions.
Issues
The existing telecom ordinance does not reflect current case law. In addition, the
current design standards and criteria need to be updated to reflect the advances in
technology, and to address the increasing demands for wireless networks.
Based on staff's experience applying existing regulations, several issues have been
identified.
1. Public Notice /Public Hearing Process and Review Authority
a. Existing Provisions: Current regulations do not provide a process or requirement
for public notices and public hearings. Notices are mailed only when "special
review" by City Council is required (such as for review of a proposed false tree,
"slim jim" monopole, standard monopole with attached antenna elements, or
lattice tower).
The Planning Director is designated as the review authority for proposed telecom
facilities that meet the technology, height, location, and design standards
specified in the telecom ordinance. The City Council is the review authority for
more noticeable and conspicuous telecom facilities. Neither process includes a
public hearing.
b. Issues /Concerns: Under the current provisions, public notice is not required, nor
is a public hearing conducted by the review authority. As a result, no public input
is provided giving the review authority information and opinions which may be of
help and assistance in rendering a decision.
c. Potential Solution: Establish a process requiring public notice and public hearing
of all telecom permit applications for a new or modified telecom facility, whether
located on private property, city -owned property, or the public right -of -way. The
process could be consistent with procedures in the Zoning Code.
Designate the Zoning Administrator as the review authority for proposed telecom
facilities that meet the standards and design criteria specified in the telecom
3
March 27, 2012
Page 3
ordinance. Designate the Planning Commission as the review authority for
proposed telecom facilities that deviate from the standards.
2. Appeal Process
a. Existing Provisions: Under the existing telecom ordinance the public cannot file
an appeal; only the applicant may file an appeal.
b. Issues /Concerns: Current provisions do not provide an appeal process for
interested parties other than the applicant.
c. Potential Solution: Establish an appeal process allowing any interested party to
initiate an appeal of a decision, similar to how appeals are handled by the Zoning
Code. The Planning Commission would act as the appellant authority on
appeals of the Zoning Administrator decisions, and the City Council would act as
the appellant authority on appeals of the Planning Commission decisions. The
current fees for appeals have previously been identified as an issue, and staff is
working with the Finance Department to review and study appeal fees in
conjunction with the next update to the fee schedule.
3. Installations in the Public Right -of -Way
a. Existing Provisions: The existing telecom ordinance requires installations in the
public right -of -way to comply with Title 13 (Streets, Sidewalks and Public
Property).
b. Issues /Concerns: The telecom ordinance does not provide specific procedures
for the processing of such applications.
c. Potential Solution: Establish detailed procedures similar to the procedures for
telecom facility installations on private property and city -owned property.
4. License Agreements for Installations on City -Owned Property
a. Existing Provisions: Current procedures require the City Manager to forward a
license agreement and final telecom permit for facilities such as a false tree, "slim
jim" monopole, standard monopole, or lattice tower to the City Council for final
approval.
b. Issues /Concerns: The current procedure does provide any notification
requirements for installations on city -owned property such as streetlight poles,
city parks, libraries, etc.
61'
March 27, 2012
Page 4
c. Potential Solution: Update the process for installations on city -owned property to
include specific procedures for City Council notification of all pending license
agreements. City Council may wish to authorize the City Manager to enter into
license agreements on behalf of the City subject to identified criteria, which could
be reported to the City Council on the regular meeting agendas.
5. Design Standards and Criteria
a Existing Provisions: The current design standards are general in nature,
suggesting methods in which antennas and support equipment may be blended
or screened from view.
b Issues /Concerns: Based on staffs experience administering the telecom
ordinance, the existing standards do not reflect changes in technology, and do
not encourage telecom facilities to be camouflaged and made as visually
inconspicuous as possible.
c Potential Solution: Update the design standards and criteria to provide specific
camouflage design techniques based on the type of antenna installation (e.g.,
building mounted, freestanding structure mounted, streetlight pole mounted, or
sports field light pole mounted).
6. Exceptions to Height Limitations and Location
a. Existing Provisions: Under the existing telecom ordinance, installation of a
telecom facility must comply with the height limitations and location requirements
specified.
b Issues /Concerns: The code does not provide a process for project proponents to
request a deviation from the height limitations or location requirements.
c Potential Solution: Update the telecom ordinance to include a process for
deviations or exceptions to the height limits and location requirements, similar to
how exceptions to development standards are handled by the Zoning Code.
Conclusion
Staff recommends that the above proposed changes be consolidated, and that all
procedures related to telecom facilities be moved from Title 13 (Streets, Sidewalks and
Public Property) and Title 15 (Buildings and Construction) to Title 20 (Planning and
Zoning) to comprehensively and consistently address the issues associated with the
current code.
Staff has identified the following benefits of moving the telecom ordinance to Title 20:
J
Review of Telecom Ordinance - Chapter 15.70 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code
(Wireless Telecommunication Facilities)
March 27, 2012
Page 5
1. Consistent regulations. All regulations and processes would be in one Title of the
Municipal Code (i.e., public hearings and notices, appeal process, required findings,
definitions, etc.) and telecom facilities would be treated as a land use.
2. Efficient Administration of Code. The telecom ordinance could be more efficiently
administered by Planning Division staff by utilizing one Title of the Municipal Code.
3. Consistent applications and findings. Telecom facilities would be processed via
a minor or conditional use permit, and required land use findings would apply.
4. Exceptions. Title 20 provides a process for a project proponent to request a
deviation of specific design standards and height limitations specified in the telecom
ordinance.
5. Temporary Telecom Facilities. The Zoning Code includes a process for limited
term permits, a process which could apply to temporary telecom facilities.
Alternatives
City Council could direct staff to update Title 15 to address the issues identified, and
achieve similar results.
NOTICING:
The agenda item has been noticed according to the Brown Act (72 hours in advance of
the meeting at which the City Council considers the item).
Submitted by:
l
I
Kimberly Brandt, AIC
Director
N
City of Newport Beach
City Council Study Session — March 27, 2012
Review of Telecom Ordinance
Chapter 15.70 of the NBMC
Background
Telecom Ordinance adopted by City Council
in October zooz
At that time, case law suggested regulation
of telecom facilities was limited
More recent case law
appropriate control for the
telecom facilities
favors more
regulation of
Regulations in Other Jurisdictions
Most cities regulate telecom facilities as a land
use matter through the Zoning Code
Approval of a minor or conditional use permit is
required to allow installation of the telecom
facility
The review authority must make all required
findings in order to approve a use permit
Identified Issues /Concerns and
Potential Solutions
■ Public Notice /Public Hearing Process, and
Review Authority
rn Require public notice and public hearing for all
applications
Designate Zoning Administrator and Planning
Commission as Review Authorities
Identified Issues /Concerns and
Potential Solutions (continued)
Appeal Process
Establish an appeal process allowing qDy
interested party to initiate an appeal
Designate Planning Commission as appellant
authority on Zoning Administrator decisions,
and City Council as appellant
Planning Commission decisions
authority on
Review appeal fees with Finance Department
Identified Issues /Concerns and
Potential Solutions (continued)
Installations in the Public Right -of -Way
Establish
detailed
procedures
for telecom
facilities
installed
in
the
PROW,
similar
to the
process for facilities located on private or city -
owned property
L,
I�
Identified Issues /Concerns and
Potential Solutions (continued)
, License Agreements for Installations on
City -Owned Property
Update process to include notification to
City Council of all pending license
agreements
into
„',
s.
Identified Issues /Concerns and
Potential Solutions (continued)
Design Standards and Criteria
Update design standards to reflect changes
in technology
Include criteria to encourage camouflage
design techniques based on type of
installation
Monopole with Antenna Array
i , f i k.
s
IN
ofFnreffi M rrsUr.lTS:r!
0
t � l
,E
�a
Identified Issues /Concerns and
Potential Solutions (continued)
Exceptions
Location
to Height Limitations and
Include process to allow deviations to
height limits and location requirements,
similar to exceptions of development
standards in the Zoning Code
Conclusion
■ Staff recommends:
• Proposed changes be consolidated
• All procedures for telecom facilities be
moved from Title 13 and Title 15 to the
Zoning Code
Benefits of Moving to the Zoning Code
1. Consistent regulations
z. Efficient Administration of Code
I Consistent applications and findings
4. Provision for Exceptions to Code
5. Temporary Telecom Facilities
Next Steps
1. City Council's feedback to staff regarding
proposed changes to existing regulations
H
Staff to prepare a draft ordinance for review
by Planning Commission and stakeholders,
and Planning Commission recommendations
to City Council
Bring the draft ordinance to City Council for
review and
adoption