Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1992-02-19; Planning Commission; Resolution 3333I1 e 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 a 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3333 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA APPROVING A NEGATlVE DECLARATION FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW RETENTION OF TWO DISHES AND NINE ADDITIONAL ANTENNA DISHES TO BE PLACED ON AN EXISTING 150 FOOT HIGH TOWER TO GIVE A TOTAL OF ELEVEN ANTENNA DISHES. CASE NAME: SQUIRES DAM COMMUNICATIONS FACILITY CASE NO: CUP 87-7(A) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 19th day of February, 1992, hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request, and WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, examining the initial study, analyzing the information submitted by staff, and considering any written comments received, the Planning Commission considered all factors relating to the Negative Declaration. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning Commission as follows: A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct. B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Planning Commission hereby APPROVES the Negative Declaration according to Exhibit "ND", dated January 9,1992, and "PII", dated December 23,1991, attached hereto and made a part hereof, based on the following findings: Findinns: 1. The initial study shows that there is no substantial evidence that the project may and two antenna dishes do not adversely impact the environment. Nine additional antenna dishes will not create any significant impacts to the environment . 2. The site has been previously reviewed pursuant to the earlier environmental analysis performed with CUP 87-7 resulting in a Negative Declaration datec August 12,1987. have a significant impact on the environment because the existing 150 foot towel ... !I a 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 za 3. The existing unpaved access road is adequate in size to handle the maintenancl traffic generated by the proposed project. 4. There are no sensitive resources located onsite or located so as to be significantl; impacted by this project. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Plannin Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 19th day of February, 1991 by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Chairman Erwin, Commissioners: Schlehuber, Schram Holmes, Savary, Noble & Hall. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. ATTEST: LL c TOM ERWIN, Chairperson CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION 4AAAA". MICHAEL J. HOLMILLE~ PLANNING DIRECTOR PC RES0 NO. 3333 -2- w w NEGATlVE DECLARATION PROJECT ADDRESS/LOCATION: North of Squires Dam off of Sunny Creek Road. APN: 169-011-24/169-010-38 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Amendment to CUP 87-7 to allow for the placement of up to seven additional digital dish antennas with variable locations on an existing 150 foot tower. The tower currently supports four dish antennas. The City of Carlsbad has conducted an environmental review of the above described project pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act and the Environmental Protection Ordinance of the City of Carlsbad. As a result of said review, a Negative Declaration (declaration that the project will not have a significant impact on the environment) is hereby issued for the subject project. Justification for this action is on file in the Planning Department. A.copy of the Negative Declaration with supportive documents is on file in the Planning Department, 2075 Las Palmas Drive, Carlsbad, California 92009. Comments from the public are invited. Please submit comments in writing to the Planning Department within 21 days of date of issuance. If you have any questions, please call Eric Munoz in the Planning Department at 438-1 161, extension 4441. h DATED: JANUARY 9, 1992 Ma MICHAEL J. HO MILLE# CASE NO: CUP 87-7(A) Planning Director CASE NAME: SQUIRES DAM COMMUNICATION FACILITY PUBLISH DATE: JANUARY 9, 1992 ENM:vd 2075 Las palmas Drive - Carlsbad, California 92009-1 576 * (61 9) 438-1 16’ w 0 ENVIRONIL ,CAI, IMPACX ASSESSMENT FOEb PART LI (TO BE COMPLETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT) BACKGROUND CASE NO, CUP 87-71 DATE: December 23. 15 1. CASE NAME: Sauires Dam Communications Facility 2. APPLICANT: PacTel Cellular 3. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: 4777 Mercurv Street San Diego, CA 92111 (61 9) 540-0992 4. DATE EL4 FORM PART I SUBMITTED: October 16. 1991 5. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: A request for an amendment to CUP 87-7 to allow for the Placer of UP to seven additional diaital dish antennas with variable locations on an existina 150 1 hinh antenna SUDDO~C tower. The tower currently SUPDOITS four antenna dishes. The tower existinn eauipment shelter are located on a flat .13 acre site north of the Sauires Dam sit the Citv of Carlsbad. The antennas will serve as a link in strenahenina refion-wide cell phone systems. APN: 169-011-24/169-010-38 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS STATE CEQA GUIDELINES, Chapter 3, Article 5, section 15063 requires that the City conduct Environmental Impact Assessment to determine if a project may have a sigmficant effect on the environm The Environmental Impact Assessment appears in the following pages in the form of a checklist. This chec: 8 identifies any physical, biological and human factors that might be impacted by the proposed project provides the City with information to use as the basis for deciding whether to prepare an Environme Impact Report or Negative Declaration. * A Negative Declaration may be prepared if the City perceives no substantial evidence that the projet any of its aspects may cause a significant effect on the environment. On the checklist, "NO" will be chec to indicate this determination. * An EIR must be prepared if the City determines that there is substantial evidence that any aspect of project may cause a sidcant effect on the environment. The project may qualify for a Neg: Declaration however, if adverse impacts are mitigated so that environmental effects can be dee insinnificant. These findings are shown in the checklist under the headings 'YES-sig" and "YES-ir respectively. A discussion of potential impacts and the proposed mitigation measures appears at the end of the form u DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION. Particular attention should be given to discu: mitigation for impacts which would otherwise be determined significant. V PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: 1, 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. Result in unstable earth conditions or increase the exposure of people or property to geologic hazards? Appreciably change the topography or any unique physical features? Result in or be affected by erosion of soils either on or off the site? Result in changes in the deposition of beach sands, or modification of the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? Result in substantial adverse effects on ambient air quality? Result in substantial changes in air movement, odor, moisture, or temperature? Substantially change the course or flow of water (marine, fresh or flood waters)? Affect the quantity or quality of surface water, ground water or public water supply? Substantially increase usage or cause depletion of any natural resources? Use substantial amounts of fuel or energy? Alter a significant archeological, paleontological or historical site, structure or object? -2- e YES (sig) - - - - - - - - - - - YES (insig) - - - - - - - - - - - NO X X X X - X X X X X X X w m BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT WILL THE PROPOSAL DtRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: '12: Affect the diversity of species, habitat or numbers of any species of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass, microflora and aquatic plants)? 13. Introduce new species of plants into an area, or a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? 14. Reduce the amount of acreage of any agricultural crop or affect prime, unique or other farmland of state or local importance? 15. Affect the diversity of species, habitat or numbers of any species of animals (birds, land animals, all water dwelling organisms and insects? 16. Introduce new species of animals into an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? HUMANENVIRONMENT WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY 17. Alter the present or planned land use of an area? 18. Substantially affect public utilities, schools, police, fire, emergency or other public services? -3- YES big) - - - - - YES . (Ski - - YES NO (insig) X - x - X - X - X - YES NO Wig) - x X - - e HUMANENVIRONMENT WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: 19. .20. 21. 22, 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32, Result in the need for new or modified sewer systems, solid waste or hazardous waste control systems? Increase existing noise levels? Produce new light or glare? Involve a si@cant risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation)? Substantially alter the density of the. human population of an area? Affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing? Generate substantiai additional traffic? Affect existing parking facilities, or create a large demand for new parking? tmpact existing transportation systems or alter present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? Alter waterborne, rail or air traffic? Increase traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? Interfere with emergency response plans or emergency evacuation plans? Obstruct any scenic vista or create an aesthetically offensive public view? Affect the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? -4- 0 YES (sig) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - YES (insig) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - NO A X x x X X X X x X X X X X - X 0 rn' MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: 33. Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially life species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or en- dangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. reduce the habitat of a fish or wild- 34. Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the dis- advantage of long-term, environmental goals? (A short-term impact on.the environment is one'which occurs in a time while long-term impacts will endure well into the future.) 35. Does the project have the possible environmental effects which are in- dividually limited but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively con- siderable" means that the incremental effects of an individual project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) relatively brief, definitive period of 36. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? YES YES NO big) (insig) X - - X - - X - - X - - -5- e 0 DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT Q 1,2,3. Since the antenna support tower and site is existing, no grading will be included with this projecl Therefore, no unstable earth conditions, geologic hazards, or onsite or offsite soil erosion situation will occur. No change to the existing flat topography is proposed. 4. Due to the project's location, there will be no impacts to beach sand movement patterns, or rive. stream, lagoon or inlet modifications. 5,6. The placement of additional antenna dishes on the existing tower will not impact air qualit movement, odor, moisture or temperature. 7,8. Due to the location and nature of the project there-will be no impacts to any water flows (mark fresh or flood waters) or any water supplies. The current tower does not impact any of the resources. 9,10. The placement and use of additional antenna dishes dl1 not deplete any natural resources or u substantial amounts of fuel or energy. 11. No cultural or archeological sites exist on the site or on the tower. BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT 12,13. Since the proposed project involves an existing site, there will be no impacts to the diversity habitat of plants. Landscaping currently exists around the perimeter of the project site but additional plant species will be introduced into the area by this project. 14. The existing .13 acre project site does not contain any agricultural land or uses. 15,16. Since the proposed project involves an existing site, there will be no impacts to the diversity habitat of animals. No animals will be introduced into the area by this project. Currently I existing tower does not present a banier to the migration or movement of animals. HUMAN ENVIRONMENT 17. The project will not alter the present or planned land uses of the area. As stated in the staff re1 for CUP 87-7 it is consistent with the City's General Plan, to cluster these types of communical facilities/towers in one part of the City. Additionally, this use will not impact Squires Dam or City's water supply. 18,19. This project will have no effect on public utilities or City services, or create a need for new modified sewer or solid waste systems. 20,21. Additional antennas wiil not create an increase to existing noise levels or produce new ligh glare. -6- 22. 23,24. 25,26. 27,28 ' 29. 30. 31. 32. e The proposed antenna . >hes will not release hazardous s ;tames nor represent a risk c 0 explosion. The communication antenna dishes will have no impacts to the area's density, population patter or cause the need for additional housing. A dirt access road currently serves the site for maintenance purposes, however, no additional traff will be generated by the project and a need for new parking will not be created. Due to the project's isolated location, there will be no impacts to existing transportation system waterborne, rail or air traffic. Since no paved roads exist in the area, there will be no increasc traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicycles or pedestrians. Emergency response/evacuation plans will not be impacted by the placement of additional anten dishes on the existing tower. Since the tower already exists with four dishes and there are other disWcommunication facilit: in the immediate area, an offensive public view will not be created. The adjacent resident subdivision in the City of Vista was constructed after the existing tower and they currently ha westerly views over the Squire's Dam Area toward the coast and coastal horizon. The land in this area is owned by a public entity (Carlsbad Municipal Water District) and does r offer any public recreational opportunities. -7- e m ANALYSIS OF VIABLE ALTERNATnrES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT SUCH AS: a) Phased development of the project, b) alternate site designs, c) alternate scale of development, d) alternate uses for the site, e) development at some future time rather than now, f') alternate sites for the proposed, and g) no project alternative. a) All seven additional dishes are proposed at this time to serve as a link in the region-wide cellular phc system. b) N/A c) Up to eleven (four existing, seven proposed) antenna dishes are required to serve the intenc communications function. d) The site is already used for this use. Continuation of this use at this site is desirable. e,g) The dishes are needed at this time. f) Alternate sites are not as desirable as the proposed site since the use already exists. -8- ..A w m DETERMINATION (To Be Completed By The Planning Department) On the basis of this initial evaluation; x X I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGAT DECLARATION will be prepared. - I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, because environmental effects of the proposed project have already been considered in conjunction t previously certified environmental documents and no additional environmental review is requi Therefore, a Notice of Determination has been prepared. - I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A Conditional Negative Declaration will be proposed. - I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMEN' IMPACT REPORT is required. /.z* 42 C& /tl-?d$ Date Signature J r] &pi L Date Planning Directo? U LIST MITIGATING MEASURES (IF APPLICABLE) ATTACH MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM (IF APPLICABLE) -9-