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-