CC RESOLUTION 4148RESOLUTION NO. 4148
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EL
SEGUNDO, CALIFORNIA, DENYING THE APPEAL OF
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2458, WHICH
DENIED ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT EA -491 AND
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CUP 99 -9 TO ALLOW A NEW
UTILITY- MOUNTED WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITY
AT 505 EAST IMPERIAL AVENUE, IN THE PUBLIC RIGHT -OF-
WAY (PARKWAY). PETITIONED BY: NAT PENDLETON OF
O'NEAL COMMUNICATIONS GROUP, INC., REPRESENTATIVE
FOR PACIFIC BELL WIRELESS.
WHEREAS, on September 29, 1999, an application was received by the Planning Division
from Pacific Bell Wireless requesting approval of an Environmental Assessment and Conditional
Use Permit (CUP) to allow a new utility- mounted wireless communication facility (WCF) to have
antenna arms which extend horizontally more than 18 inches, at 505 East Imperial Avenue, in the
public right -of -way (parkway);
WHEREAS, an Environmental Assessment (EA -491), which included an Initial Study and
Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impacts for the proposed use, was prepared
and circulated to all interested parties, staff, and affected public agencies for review and
comment in the time and manner prescribed by law;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the application and supporting evidence
with the authority and criteria contained in the California Environmental Quality Act, State CEQA
Guidelines, and the City of El Segundo Guidelines for the Implementation of the California
Environmental Quality Act (Resolution No. 3805);
WHEREAS, on November 29, 1999, the Planning Commission did hold, pursuant to law,
a duly advertised public hearing on such matter in the Council Chamber of the City Hall, 350
Main Street, and notice of the public hearing was given in the time, form and manner prescribed
by law;
WHEREAS, at said hearing, an opportunity was given to all persons present to speak for
or against the findings of Environmental Assessment EA -491 and CUP 99 -9;
WHEREAS, at said hearing, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2458
denying Environmental Assessment EA -491 and Conditional Use Permit CUP 99 -9;
WHEREAS, on December 9, 1999, within the ten day appeal period, an appeal of Planning
Commission Resolution No. 2458 was filed by Nat Pendleton of O'Neal Communications Group,
Inc., representative for Pacific Bell Wireless;
WHEREAS, on January 18, 2000, the City Council did hold, pursuant to law, a duly
advertised public hearing of the appeal in the Council Chamber of the City Hall, 350 Main Street,
and notice of the hearing was given in time, form and manner prescribed by law;
WHEREAS, at said hearing, opportunity was given to all persons present at the meeting to
present testimony or documentary evidence for or against the findings of Environmental
RESOLUTION NO. 4148
DENYING APPEAL EA -491 & CUP 99 -9
PAGE NO. 1
Assessment EA-491 and Conditional Use Permit CUP 99 -9; and,
WHEREAS, at said hearings the following facts were established:
The project is a request for approval of a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to allow a utility-
mounted wireless communication facility (WCF) to extend horizontally more than 18
inches from an existing utility-pole which it would be attached to. The proposed WCF
would be located in the public right -of -way (parkway), at 505 East Imperial Avenue.
2. The project site is the existing 60 -foot high Los Angeles Department of Water and Power
(LADWP) utility pole located approximately 125 feet east from the intersection of Sheldon
Street and Imperial Avenue, in front of 500 East Imperial Avenue (mortuary property). The
project site also includes a portion of the parkway (about 49.50 square feet) located
approximately 175 feet east from the intersection of Sheldon Street and Imperial Avenue,
in front of 530 East Imperial Avenue (elementary school). The distance between the utility
pole and the affected portion of the parkway is about 49' -7 ".
3. The WCF would contain 3 panel antennas attached to 2 antenna arms [with a horizontal
extension of 5 feet per arm on each side of the utility pole, for a total horizontal length of
10 feet per arm] located about 26 feet high on the utility pole. The WCF would also
contain 3 Base Transceiver Station (BTS) electronic equipment cabinets, which range in
height from 4 feet to 5.75 feet, which would be located on a 49.50 square foot concrete
pad in the parkway. The WCF would be unmanned.
4. Nearby and adjacent land uses include a mortuary and elementary school to the south,
public right -of -way to the east and west, Imperial Avenue and a landscaped open space
strip (which separates Imperial Avenue from Imperial Highway) to the north, and Imperial
Highway and Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) further north.
5. According to the Public Works Department, Pacific Bell Wireless is not required to sign a
franchise agreement with the City for locating the WCF in the public right -of -way because
it is considered a public utility company which is exempt from signing such agreements as
determined by the Public Utilities Commission.
6. The City of El Segundo, acting as the lead agency, has determined that a Mitigated
Negative Declaration of Environmental Impacts is the appropriate environmental review for
the project, in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). No
potentially significant environmental impacts are anticipated due to the development or
operation of the proposed project.
7. The Draft Initial Study was made available to all local and affected agencies and for public
review and comment in the time and manner prescribed by law. As the C.U.P. was
denied. The Planning Commission additionally denied the certification of the Mitigated
Negative Declaration.
8. On November 29, 1999, at the public hearing, the Planning Commission determined that
the utility- mounted WCF would not be visually compatible with the surrounding area; the
landscaping around the BTS cabinets would protrude into the available on- street parking;
the WCF would be detrimental to aesthetics; alternative locations for the WCF should be
explored; and, that the WCF is not in conformance with the goals, objectives and policies
RESOLUTION NO. 4148
DENYING APPEAL EA-491 & CUP 99 -9
PAGE NO. 2
of the General Plan.
9. On December 9, 1999, Nat Pendleton of O'Neal Communications Group, Inc.,
representative for Pacific Bell Wireless, filed a letter of appeal with the City Clerk, within
the 10 day appeal period. In his letter of appeal, Mr. Pendleton claims that the
Commission: 1) did not show proper discretion when it closed the public hearing because
it brought forth three (3) new issues which the applicant was not given an opportunity to
respond to; and, 2) the Commission's decision was not supported by evidence presented
by the applicant or information contained in the Planning staff report.
10. On January 18, 2000, at the public hearing, the City Council denied the appeal of Planning
Commission Resolution 2458 finding as follows:
a) The proposed WCF does not blend into the surrounding environment, in fact due to
the height and bulk of the ground- mounted portions of the facility and the narrowness
of the parkway where it is proposed to be sited, visual screening to make the proposed
WCF adequately blend into the surrounding environment cannot be achieved;
b) The landscape screening of the proposed WFC would be likely to protrude into the
adjacent public right -of -way and /or improperly intrude into the adjacent sidewalk and
vehicle parking area and present an inconvenience and /or possible hazard to the
public;
c) Due to its overall size and its proposed location, the WCF would present a visual
blight;
d) The appellant has not adequately explored alternative sites for this WCF, and has not
presented sufficient evidence that indicates there are not ample adequate alternative
sites where this WCF may be located that will both serve the technical needs of the
appellant and provide a more aesthetically pleasing and less obtrusive alternative to
the proposed location;
e) The proposed WCF is not compatible with the surrounding land uses in the area
because it presents a visual blight and a potential inconvenience and /or hazard to
users of the public right -of -way and, due to the overall size of the WCF and the severe
limitations of the proposed site, such incompatibility cannot be adequately mitigated;
f) The siting of the proposed WCF is not in conformance with the goals, objectives and
policies of the General Plan or Title 20 of the El Segundo Municipal Code.
SECTION 1. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that after considering the above facts of
proposed Environmental Assessment EA -491 and Conditional Use Permit CUP 99 -9, the City
Council upholds the Planning Commission's decision and in so doing, denies the appeal, thereby
denying the project.
RESOLUTION NO. 4148
DENYING APPEAL EA -491 & CUP 99 -9
PAGE NO. 3
SECTION 2. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this resolution; shall cause
the same to be entered in the book of original resolutions of said City; and shall make a minute of
the passage and adoption thereof in the records if the proceedings of the City Council of said City,
in the minutes of meeting which the same is passed and adopted.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 18th day of January 2000.
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
G zc�
lark D. He�l y
City Attorney
Mike'Gordon, Mayor
Of the City of El Segundo,
California
RESOLUTION NO. 4148
DENYING APPEAL EA -491 & CUP 99 -9
PAGE NO.4
I NfNAA,
,.MM1�.0 /✓
Mike'Gordon, Mayor
Of the City of El Segundo,
California
RESOLUTION NO. 4148
DENYING APPEAL EA -491 & CUP 99 -9
PAGE NO.4
ATTEST:
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES) SS
CITY OF EL SEGUNDO )
I, Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk of the City of El Segundo, California, do hereby certify that the whole
number of members of the City Council of said City is five; that the foregoing Resolution No. 4148 was
duly passed and adopted by said City Council, approved and signed by the Mayor of said City, and
attested to by the City Clerk of said City, all at a regular meeting of said Council held on the 18`b day of
January, 2000, and the same was so passed and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Gordon, Jacobs, Gaines, McDowell, Wernick
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Mark Hensley, City Attorney
RESOLUTION NO. 4148
DENYING APPEAL EA -491 & CUP 99 -9
PAGE NO. 5