HomeMy WebLinkAboutCUP 184B; Daniels Cablevision Building Expansion; Conditional Use Permit (CUP) (15)EMlIRO"T& IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART IT
(TO BE COMPLETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT)
CASE NO. CUP 184( B)
DATE:
BACKGROUND
1. CASE NAME: < Daniel's Cablevision B ' din
2. APPLICANT: Daniel's Cablevision. Inc. - Joni R. Odum
3. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: 5720 El Camino Real
Carlsbad. CA 92008
(619)438-7741
4. DATE EIA FORM PART I SUBMITTED: December 20.1991
5. PROJECT DESCRIFVION: To add 160-sauare feet of floor area to an existinn eauhment
buildinn and add three additional mound-mounted satellite dishes to an existinn Cablevision
Communication facilitv located east of Sauires Dam.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
STATE CEQA GUIDELINES, Chapter 3, Article 5, section 15063 requires that the City conduct an
Environmental Impact Assessment to determine if a project may have a significant effect on the environment.
The Environmental Impact Assessment appears in the following pages in the form of a checklist. This checklist
8 identifies any physical, biological and human factors that might be impacted by the proposed project and
provides the City with information to use as the basis for deciding whether to prepare an Environmental
Impact Report or Negative Declaration.
* A Negative Declaration may be prepared if the City perceives no substantial evidence that the project or
any of its aspects may cause a significant effect on the environment. On the checklist, "NO' will be checked
to indicate this determination.
* An EIR must be prepared if the City determines that there is substantial evidence that any aspect of the
project may cause a sirrnificant effect on the environment. The project may qualifv for a Negative
Declaration however, if adverse impacts are mitigated so that environmental effects can be deemed
insinnificant. These findings are shown in the checklist under the headings "YES-sig" and 'YES-insif
respectively.
A discussion of potential impacts and the proposed mitigation measures appears at the end of the form under DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION. Particular attention should be given to discussing
mitigation for impacts which would otherwise be determined significant.
5
-
PHYSICAL E"MENT
WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECIZY 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 mounts of fuel or energy?
Alter a significant archeological, paleontological or historical site,
structure or object?
YES YES
big) (insig)
NO
X -
X -
X -
X -
X -
X -
X -
X -
X
X
-
-
x
-2-
BIOLOGICAL ENVIR0"T
WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY:
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
Affect the diversity of species, habitat or numbers of any species of plants (including
trees, shrubs, grass, microflora and aquatic
plants)?
Introduce new species of plants into an area,
or a barrier to the normal replenishment of
existing species?
Reduce the amount of acreage of any
agricultural crop or affect prime, unique
or other farmland of state or local
importance?
Affect the diversity of species, habitat or numbers of any species of animals (birds,
land animals, all water dwelling organisms
and insects?
Introduce new species of animals into an
area, or result in a barrier to the
migration or movement of animals?
"ENVIRONMENT
WIU 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?
YES YES
big)
NO
X -
X -
x
X -
X -
NO
x
x
-3-
"ENVIRONMENT
WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: NO
Result in the need for new or modified sewer
systems, solid waste or hazardous waste control systems?
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
X
X
X
-
-
-
Increase existing noise levels?
Produce new light or glare?
Involve a significant risk of an explosion
or the release of hazardous substances
(including, but not limited to, oil,
pesticides, chemicals or radiation)? X -
Substantially alter the density of the
human population of an area? x
Affect existing housing, or create a demand
for additional housing? x
X - Generate substantial additional traffic?
Affect existing parking facilities, or
create a large demand for new parking? X -
Impact existing transportatidn systems or
alter present patterns of circulation or
movement of people andlor goods? X
X
-
- Alter waterborne, rail or air traffic?
Increase traffic hazards to motor
vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? X -
Interfere with emergency response plans or
emergency evacuation plans? x
Obstruct any scenic vista or create an
aesthetically offensive public view? X -
Affect the quality or quantity of
existing recreational opportunities? X -
4
MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: YES YES
(si@ (dig)
33. Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality
of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wild-
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.
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
relatively brief, definitive period of
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.)
36. Does the project hve environmental
effects which will cause substantial
adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
NO
X -
X -
X -
X -
-5-
DtSCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
The Squires Dam facility for Daniel's Cablevision was approved December of 1980 and consisted of a 160 foot
high communication antenna, two 16 foot diameter ground satellite dishes, and a 320 square foot equipment
building. In August of 1990, an amendment to the Conditional Use Pennit was approved permitting two
additional ground mounted dishes, a 52 foot high tower, and a 20 foot high fence for interference screening.
Negative Declarations were issued for the original pennit and the amendment.
The applicant is now requesting to install three new ground-mounted satellite dishes and expand an existing equipment building needed to accommodate the new dishes. The environmental impacts derived from the
proposal are anticipated to be insidcant. Virtually no impacts are anticipated to the vegetation or animals
within location of the facility. No grading is proposed and soil exposure will not be increased. In addition,
views from residences to the east will not be lost due to an existing naturally occurring berm between the
residences and the facility.
EIA CHECKLIST
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
No earthwork is proposed for the project and therefore no unstable earth conditions or geologic hazards
will be created.
The existing physical features and topography'will not be altered as a result of this project.
Soil exposure will not increase as a result of this project. In fact, the building addition may slightly
reduce exposure.
No rivers or streams channel through or near the facility, and no changes to the bed of Squires Dam
will occur.
The facility does not produce any emissions, and therefor no pollutants will be omitted into the air.
Only minimal emissions may be omitted from senice trucks and machinery needed to install the
facilities and from the maintenance or repair of the facility during operation. No person is needed to
operate the facility.
Operation of the facility will not change air movement, odor or moisture. Slight amounts of radiant heat may be omitted from operation of the facility, but the effects are insignificant as the small quantity
of heat will quickly dissipate upon emission.
See number 4.
The proposed expansion will not substantially divert or increase surface runoff. Because of the small scale of the project, water infiltration into the soil will not be effected.
The small amount of materials needed to establish the facility will not result in the depletion or usage
of any natural resources.
The amount of energy needed to install and operate the additional antennas is insignificant.
-6-
11. The site is previously disturbed and no items of archeological, historical, or paleontological significance
are known to or thought to exist on the site. In addition, because no grading is proposed, disturbance
to any potentially existing artifacts found below the surface would not be disturbed.
12. tnstallation of the antennas and building addition will result in the removal of approximately 5 to 6
native shrubs, but this is an insignificant loss of coastal sage scrub habitat.
13. No new species of plants are proposed to be installed. Only 34 native shrubs are anticipated to be
displaced by the proposed satellite dishes and no displacement wiU occur from the building expansion. AU proposed expansions are enclosed by existing perimeter chain-link fence and within a previously
disturbed area.
14. The existing facility nor the proposed addition of dishes and building expansion are not located upon
or encroaching into agricultural land.
15. Because only an insignificant amount vegetation will be removed, any animals using this vegetation for
food or shelter would not be adversely affected in regards to its numbers or diversity.
16. No new species of animals will be introduced and the only known migrating animals within the area
are birds, which should not be effected by the proposed project.
17. The existing and proposed use is compatible with the surrounding landuses. The facility is adjacent to
a single-family neighborhood to the east and open space to the south, west, and north. No change in
landuse is proposed.
18. By upgrading the quality of cabletelevision service to local residences, public service will be improved.
19. No waste will be generated or stored at the facility and because the topography underlying the facility
is in its natural state, drainage or sewer facilities are not need to collect any surface runoff.
20. Some insignificant short-term noise impacts may'result from installation of the satellite dishes and
building addition, but operation of the facility is silent and no noise-related impacts are anticipated.
21. No additional lighting is proposed and the additional satellite dishes will not produce a significant
amount of glare. No impacts are anticipated.
22. No explosives or hazardous waste materials will be stored or used on site.
23. No impacts to human populations are anticipated as the facility is an unmanned facility.
24. tts anticipated that the existing housing to the east will not be effected by the proposed addition, and
that a demand for new housing will not be created as a result of an enhancement of cable vision services.
25. The facility is unmanned and requires only the occasional need of a vehicle for maintenance or rep&.
No traffic impacts are anticipated.
-7-
e --
26. No parking is needed because of the absence of vehicles. In addition, the site is intended for private
use only and public access to the facility is prohibited.
Impacts to transportation systems are not anticipated for the same reasons stated in number 26.
I
27.
28. The addition of three satellites and building expansion will not interfere with waterborne, air, or rail
traffic. The project is located outside the Airport Influence Zone, and no waterborne vehicles or
railways exist near the site.
29. The facility is entirely enclosed by a 6 foot high chain-link fence which precludes entrance to
pedestrians, bicyclists, and vehicles. In addition, no public trails or roads access the site.
30. The proposal consists of an expansion within an existing facility which would not interfere with
emergency evacuation routes or plans. No impacts are anticipated.
31.
'
The proposed ground-mounted antennas would be virtually screened from the single family residential
units just east of the facility. The natural topography of the area consists of a berm between the project location and the single family homes. This berm adequately screens the existing ground facilities and
the proposed ground facilities should also be adequately screened because the height of these proposed
facilities does not exceed the height of the existing facilities.
32. The proposed project is not located near any recreational facilities and no impacts are antiapated.
33. Because of the small scale and location of the project and the minimal to no impacts imposed on all
aspects of the environment, the quality of the environment will not sustain any substantial deterioration
or damage.
34. No short-term or long-term impacts are anticipated.
35. Other similar facilities do exist within the same vicinity. A tower antenna and facility for Pac Tel
Cellular is located northeast of the dam and a 300 foot tower for KKOS radio station is located
northwest of the dam. Quigley Communications and radio facilities for several City departments are
also nearby. However, considering the small amount of area these facilities incorporate, and the scale
at which the cablevision facility expansion is proposed, no cumulative impacts to the environment are
anticipated.
36. No substantial adverse effects are anticipated to human beings. The satellite dishes are used for the
reception of microwaves only, which sustain no harmful biological, physical or mental effects to human
beings. The Fedend Communications Commission, American Nation Standard Institute, and the
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, have detennined that the frequency transmission
of the satellite antenna is several orders of magnitude lower than the accepted safety standard of
5mw/cm squared. The facility is licensed to operate by the FCC.
-8-
ANALYSIS OF VIABLE ALTERNATIVES 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) The project is to small a scale to phase.
b) The site is constrained, and an alteration to the site czsign woulc be infeasible.
c) The proposed number of antennas is needed to obtain the desired increase in senrices. In turn, the
d) An alternate use consistent with the surrounding uses would include open space, but the facility has
building expansion is needed to accommodate the additional antennas.
already been established and is consistent with the surrounding land use.
e) The proposed improvements are needed now to maintain a quality level of service.
f) Because the Daniel’s Cablevision facility has already been established at a particular location for several
g) The no project alternative would not provide the needed or desired level of service to cablevision
years, it would be infeasible to expand the facility at a separate location.
subscribers.
-9-
DETERMINATION (To Be Completed By The Planning Department)
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
- X t find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
- I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, because the environmental effects of the proposed project have already been considered in conjunction with previously certified environmental documents and no additional environmental review is required.
Therefore, a Notice of Determination has been prepared.
- t find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will 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 ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT is required.
. LIST MITIGATING MEASURES (IF APPLICABLE]
@ F APPLI
-10-
APPLICANT CONCURRENCE WITH MITIGATING MEASURES
THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT I HAVE REVIEWED THE ABOVE MITIGATING MEASURES
AND CONCUR WITH THE ADDITION OF THESE MEASURES TO THE PROJECT.
Date Signature
-11-
c