DATE: March 5, 2024
TO: Board of Supervisors
SUBMITTED BY: Steven E. White, Director
Department of Public Works and Planning
SUBJECT: Appeal Planning Commission’s approval of Unclassified Conditional Use Permit No. 3769 and Initial Study No. 8429 (Appellant: Rosemary Chan; Applicant: Leesa Gendel, SAC Wireless.)
RECOMMENDED ACTION(S):
TITLE
1. Consider Appeal of the Planning Commission’s approval of Unclassified Conditional Use Permit No. 3769 proposing to allow an unmanned freestanding 80-foot tall monopine style co-locatable wireless telecommunication facility on a 8.58-acre parcel within the R-E (Recreational) Zone District.
2. If the Appeal is denied and the Planning Commission’s approval of Unclassified Conditional Use Permit No. 3769 is upheld:
a) Adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for Initial Study No. 8429 and approve the proposal subject to the proposed Mitigation Measures and Conditions of Approval; and
b) Make the required Findings specified in Fresno County Zoning Ordinance, Section 873(f) to uphold Unclassified Conditional Use Permit No. 3769 approval; and
c) Adopt Resolution approving Unclassified Conditional Use Permit No. 3769, with Conditions of Approval and Project Notes.
The subject parcel is located on the southwest corner of E. Nares Avenue and S. Pico Avenue, within the Unincorporated Community of Laton (APN: 057-090-34) (6345 Nares Avenue) (Sup. Dist. 4).
REPORT
This item comes before your Board on appeal of the Planning Commission’s approval of the subject application (5 to 2, one Commissioner absent, one Commission vacancy) at its November 16, 2023 hearing. Staff notes that the Zoning Ordinance requires your Board determine, independent from the Planning Commission, whether the Unclassified Conditional Use Permit Application (CUP) should be approved, approved with stated conditions, or disapproved. A copy of the Planning Commission’s action is included in Attachment A which includes Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, Conditions of Approval, and Project Notes as approved by the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission Staff Report is included as Attachment B. This item pertains to a location in District 4.
ALTERNATIVE ACTION(S):
If your Board is unable to make the required findings for granting CUP No. 3769, therefore reversing the Planning Commission’s approval, you may make a motion to approve the appeal, citing in the motion how the required findings cannot be made, and deny CUP No. 3769.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no Net County Cost associated with the recommended action. Pursuant to the County’s Master Schedule of Fees, the Applicant/Owner has paid $15,070 in land use processing fees to the County for the processing of the subject land use application and the Appellant paid $508 to appeal the Commission’s decision.
DISCUSSION:
The project proposes to allow an unmanned freestanding 80-foot-tall monopole style co-locatable wireless telecommunications facility on an 8.58-acre parcel in the R-E (Recreational) Zone District within the Unincorporated Community of Laton.
Pursuant to Zoning Ordinance Section 837(F), to approve a CUP, the following Findings must be made:
1. That the site of the proposed use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate said use and all yards, spaces, walls and fences, parking, loading, landscaping, and other features required by this Division, to adjust said use with land and uses in the neighborhood.
2. That the site for the proposed use relates to streets and highways adequate in width and pavement type to carry the quantity and kind of traffic generated by the proposed use.
3. That the proposed use will have no adverse effect on abutting property and surrounding neighborhood or the permitted use thereof.
4. That the proposed development is consistent with the General Plan.
5. That the conditions stated in the resolution are deemed necessary to protect the public health, safety, and general welfare.
At its first hearing of October 12, 2023, the Commission moved to continue the item until November 16, 2023 to allow the applicant to hold a community meeting to address public concerns. A community meeting was held on November 12, 2023 in Laton by the applicant to further introduce the project and answer questions community members expressed.
At the November 16, 2023 Planning Commission hearing, the Applicant’s representative provided testimony in support of the project stating the need to provide enhanced telecommunication services to the surrounding area. During the hearing, two members of the public provided testimony in opposition to the application specifically expressing concerns related to health, safety, alternative locations available, and aesthetic issues. Discussions over cell tower placement and proposed alternative sites were made. The applicant asserted the tower placement was deemed the most ideal location to provide service to the community.
After receiving staff’s presentation and considering public testimony in support of and in opposition to the subject application, the Planning Commission made a motion to approve the project which resulted in a vote of five to two.
On December 1, 2023 an appeal of the Planning Commission’s approval was received by an area resident. The appeal indicates that the tower will degrade the character of the community and a more through environmental analysis needs to be done, noting its proximity to an oak woodland, residential area, and nearby schools. The appeal also asserts that the applicants failed to prove that a genuine need exists for the tower along with the need for a comprehensive evaluation of its environmental impacts. A copy of the appeal is included as Attachment C.
If your Board is able to make the required Findings for granting CUP No. 3769, it would be appropriate to make a motion to adopt the proposed resolution on file with the Clerk which adopts Mitigated Negative Declaration (Attachment D) prepared for the project based on Initial Study No. 8429, and uphold the Planning Commission’s approval stating the basis for making the required Findings and approving CUP No. 3769 subject to the mitigation measures, conditions of approval, and project notes, included as Attachment A, Exhibit B.
Staff recommends that if your Board approves the request, the following indemnification condition also be included in your motion:
The Applicant shall enter into an agreement indemnifying the County for all legal costs associated with its approval of IS No. 8429 and CUP No. 3769 and provide security in an amount determined by the County for any such legal costs incurred. The agreement and payment of security shall be due unless the litigation period has expired, in which case the requirements for the indemnification agreement and security shall be considered null and void.
If your Board is unable to make the required Findings for granting approval of CUP No. 3769, it would be appropriate to make a motion stating the reasons the Findings cannot be made and uphold the appeal, thereby overturning the Commission’s decision approval of the Conditional Use Permit.
ATTACHMENTS INCLUDED AND/OR ON FILE:
Attachments A - D
On file with Clerk - Resolution
Additional Information
CAO ANALYST:
Salvador Espino