HomeMy WebLinkAboutRP 00-04; Metricom Downtown Carlsbad; Redevelopment Permits (RP) (3)NOTICE OF EXEMPTION 1.
To: County Clerk
County of San Diego
Mailstop 833, Attn: Mita
PO Box 121750
SanDiego CA 92112-1750
^ FrMi: 2000 CITW)F CARLSBAD
^^ANNING DEPARTMIWanitiig Departmeflt
Carlsbad 1635c*)iaraday Av^e ,11 L
CsMad CA 920l"'''-''"^''-^-^-!fean,y£c
0 602-4600 JUh OQ 2000
" OEPufy" Subject: Filing of this Notice of Exemption is in compliance with Section 21152b of the Public
Resources Code (Califomia Enviroimiental Quality Act).
Project Title: Metricom Intemet Antennas - RP 0Q-Q4/CDP 00-21
Project Location - Specific: 3045 Carlsbad Boulevard
Project Location - Citv: Carlsbad Project Location - County: SanDiego
Description of Project: Installation of a total of tv^elve antennas and related equipment for the
transmission of wireless Intemet service, completely enclosed within the existing Carlsbad Inn
structures.
Name of Public Agency Approving Project: City of Carlsbad
Name of Person or Agency Carrying Out Project: Metricom, Inc.
Exempt Status: (Check One)
Ministerial (Section 21080(b)(1); 15268);
Declared Emergency (Section 21080(b)(3); 15269(a));
Emergency Project (Section 21080(b)(4); 15269 (b)(c));
Categorical Exemption - State type and section number: 15303, section 3
Statutory Exemptions - State code number:
Reasons why project is exempt: Construction and installation of small new equipnient facilities
Lead Agency Contact Person: Michael Grim Telephone: (760) 602-4623
If filed by applicant:
1. Attach certified document of exemption finding.
2. Has a notice of exemption been filed by the public agency approving the project?
MICHAEL J. HOfSfJiiLLfeR", Planninj Planning Director Date
M c- T ^ A ^^^LED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY CLERK 2^ Signed by Lead Agency IIIM n - onnn
^>AN DISGO COUNTY ON ^ ^ ™
POST CD v - l OiJl^HEMOVED juL 0 6 20Q0
RETURNED TO AGENCY ON
DEPUTY
INSTRUCTION SHEET FOR FILLING OUT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART I
This Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Form - Part I will be used to determine what type
of environmental documentation (i.e.. Environmental Impact Report, Mitigated Negative
Declaration, Negative Declaration or Exemption) will be required to be prepared for your
application, per the Califomia Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and Title 19 of Carlsbad's
Municipal Code. The clarity and accuracy of the information you provide is critical for purposes
of quickly determining the specific environmental effects of your project.
Recent judicial decisions have held that a "naked checklist," that is checklist that is merely
checked "yes" or "no," is insufficient to comply with the requirements of the Califomia
Environmental Quality act. Each "yes" or "no" answer must be accompanied by a written
explanation justifying the "yes" or "no" answer. This is especially important when a Negative
Declaration is being sought. The more information provided in this form, the easier and quicker
it will be for staff to complete the Environmental Impact Assessment Form - Part II.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART I
(TO BE COMPLETED BY THE APPLICANT)
CASE NO: RPOQ-Q^ /Ct^^00-2,\
DATE RECEIVED: S/zz/oO
(To be completed by staff)
BACKGROUND
1. CASE NAME: Metricom - Downtown Carlsbad
2. APPLICANT: Metricom. Inc.
3. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: 9805 Scranton Road, ^100
San Diego, CA 92121
4. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant proposes to install three
sectors with four antennas per sector within the gables of an
existinq hotel. The antennas and all related equipment will be
completely screened from view.
SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
Please check any of the environmental factors listed below that would be potentially affected by this
project This would be any environmental factor that has at least one impact checked "Potentially
Significant Impact," or "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated" in the checklist
on the following pages.
I I Land Use and Planning Transportation/Circulation |^ Public Services
I I Population and Housing Q] Biological Resources Q]] Utilities & Service Systems
I I Geological Problems Q Energy & Mineral Resources [_J Aesthetics
Q Water Q Hazards Cultural Resources
Air Quality Q Noise Recreation
I I Mandatory Findings of Significance
1 Rev. 03/28/96
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
STATE CEQA GUIDELINES, Chapter 3, Article 5, Section 15063 requires that the City
conduct an Enviromnental 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 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 (EIR), Negative
Declaration, or to rely on a previously approved EIR or Negative Declaration.
• A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are
adequately supported by an information source cited in the parentheses following each
question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information
sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved. A
"No Impact" answer should be explained when there is no source document to refer to, or
it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards.
• "Less Than Significant Impact" applies where there is supporting evidence that the
potential impact is not adversely significant, and the impact does not exceed adopted
general standards and policies.
• "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation
of mitigation measures has reduced an effect fi-om "Potentially Significant Impact" to a
"Less Than Significant Impact." The developer must agree to the mitigation, and the
City must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the
effect to a less than significant level.
• "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an
effect is significant.
• Based on an "EIA-Part II", if a proposed project could have a potentially significant
effect on the environment, but all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed
adequately in an earlier EIR or Mitigated Negative Declaration pursuant to applicable
standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or Mitigated
Negative Declaration, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon
the proposed project, and none of the circumstances requiring a supplement to or
supplemental EIR are present and all the mitigation measures required by the prior
environmental document have been incorporated into this project, then no additional
environmental document is required (Prior Compliance).
• When "Potentially Significant Impact" is checked the project is not necessarily required
to prepare an EIR if the significant effect has been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR
pursuant to applicable standards and the effect will be mitigated, or a "Statement of
Overriding Considerations" has been made pursuant to that earlier EIR.
• 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.
Rev. 03/28/96
• If there are one or more potentially significant effects, the City may avoid preparing an
EIR if there are mitigation measures to clearly reduce impacts to less than significant, and
those mitigation measures are agreed to by the developer prior to public review. In this
case, the appropriate "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated"
may be checked and a Mitigated Negative Declaration may be prepared.
• An EIR must be prepared if "Potentially Significant Impact" is checked, and including
but not limited to the following circumstances: (1) the potentially significant effect has
not been discussed or mitigated in an Earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards, and
the developer does not agree to mitigation measures that reduce the impact to less than
significant; (2) a "Statement of Overriding Considerations" for the significant impact has
not been made pursuant to an earlier EIR; (3) proposed mitigation measures do not reduce
the impact to less than significant, or; (4) through the EIA-Part II analysis it is not
possible to determine the level of significance for a potentially adverse effect, or
determine the effectiveness of a mitigation measure in reducing a potentially significant
effect to below a level of significance.
A discussion of potential impacts and the proposed mitigation measures appears at the end ofthe
form under DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION. Particular attention
should be given to discussing mitigation for impacts which would otherwise be determined
significant.
Rev. 03/28/96
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
wplen^tm
I. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal:.
a) Conflict with general plan designation or zoning?
(Source #(s): ( )
b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or
policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the
project? ( )
c) Be incompatible with existing land use in the vicinity?
( )
d) Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g. impacts
to soils or farmlands, or impacts from incompatible
land uses? ( )
e) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an
established community (including a low-income or
minority community)? ( )
Potentially
Significant
Impact
•
•
•
•
•
Potentially Less Than No
Significant Significan Impact
Unless t Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
II. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the proposal:
a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local
population projections? ( )
b) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or
indirectly (e.g. through projects in an undeveloped area
or extension of major infrastructure)?
( )
c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable
housing? ( )
•
•
•
• •
• •
• • X
III. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result in or
expose people to potential impacts involving:
a) Fault rupture? ( )
b) Seismic ground shaking? ( )
c) Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction?
( )
d) Seiche, tsunami, or volcanic hazard?
( )
e) Landslides or mudflows? ( )
f) Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil
conditions from excavation, grading, or fill?
( )
g) Subsidence of the land? ( )
h) Expansive soils? ( )
i) Unique geologic or physical features?
( )
IV. WATER. Would the proposal result in:
a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage pattems, or the
rate and amount of surface runoff? ( )
b) Exposure of people or property to water related hazards
such as flooding? ( )
• • • X
• • • X
• • • X
• • • X
• • • m • • • a
• • • H
• • •
• • • X
• • • a
• • •
Rev. 03/28/96
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
(Supplemmtammrnm^^Mmme^^
c) Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of
surface water quality (e.g. temperature, dissolved
oxygen or turbidity)? ( )
d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any water
body?( )
e) Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water
movements? ( )
f) Changes in the quantity of ground waters, either
through direct additions or withdrawals, or through
interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations or
through substantial loss of groundwater recharge
capability? ( )
g) Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater?
( )
h) Impacts to groundwater quality? ( )
i) Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater
otherwise available for public water supplies?
( )
PotentiaUy
Significant
Impact
•
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
•
Less Than
Significan
t Impact
•
No
Impact
X
• • • a
• • • a
• • • m
• • • •
• • • ra • • • X
AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal:
a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an
existing or projected air quality violation?
( )
b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants?
( )
c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or cause
any change in climate? ( )
d) Create objectionable odors? ( )
VI. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the
proposal result in:
a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion?
( )
b) Hazards to safety from design features (e.g. sharp
curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses
(e.g. farm equipment)? ( )
c) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses?
( )
d) Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site?
( )
e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists?
( )
f) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting altemative
transportation (e.g. bus tumouts, bicycle racks)?
( )
g) Rail, waterbome or air traffic impacts?
( )
• • • X
• • • X
• • • X
• • • X
• • • H
• • • m
• • • X
• • • X
• • • X
• • • X
• • • X
Rev. 03/28/96
Potentially
Significant
Impact
VII. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal result
in impacts to:
a) Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats
(including but not limited to plants, fish, insects,
anunals, and birds? ( )
b) Locally designated species (e.g. heritage frees)?
( )
c) Locally designated natural communities (e.g. oak
forest, coastal habitat, etc.)? ( )
d) Wetland habitat (e.g. marsh, riparian and vemal pool)?
( )
e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors?
( )
VIII. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the
proposal?
a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans?
( )
b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and
inefficient manner? ( )
c) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral
resource that would be of future value to the region and
the residents of the State? ( )
JX. HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve:
a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous
substances (including, but not limited to: oil, pesticides,
chemicals or radiation)? ( )
b) Possible interference with an emergency response plan
or emergency evacuation plan? ( )
c) The creation of any health hazard or potential health
hazards? ( )
d) Exposure of people to existing sources of potential
health hazards? ( )
e) Increase flre hazard in areas with flammable brush,
grass, or trees? ( )
X. NOISE. Would the proposal result in:
a) Increases in existing noise levels? ( )
b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels?
( )
XI. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an effect
upon, or result in a need for new or altered govemment
services in any of the following areas:
a) Fire protection? ( )
Potentially Less Than No
Significant Significan Impact
Unless t Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
b) Police protection? (
c) Schools? (
)
• • • a
• • • H
• • • H
• • • H
• • • H
• • • X
• • • X
• • • X
• • • X
• • • •
• • • 0
• • • E
• • • H
• • • a
• • • H
• • • X
• • • X
• • • X
Rev. 03/28/96
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
(Supplemental documents may be referreUiQWtdattached)
d) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads?
( )
e) Other govemmental services? ( )
Potentially
Significant
Impact
•
•
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
•
•
Less Than
Significan
t Impact
No
Impact
• H
• 0
XII. UTILITIES AND SERVICES SYSTEMS. Would the
proposal resuk in a need for new systems or supplies,
or substantial aherations to the following utilities:
a) Power or natural gas? ( )
b) Communications systems? ( )
c) Local or regional water treatment or distribution
facilities? ( )
d) Sewer or septic tanks? ( )
e) Storm water drainage? ( )
f) Solid waste disposal? ( )
g) Local or regional water supplies? ( )
• • •
• • • X
• • • IxJ
• • • B
• • • m • • • m • • •
XIII. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal:
a) Affect a scenic or vista or scenic highway?
( )
b) Have a demonsfrate negative aesthetic effect?
( )
c) Create light or glare? ( )
XIV. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal:
a) Disturb paieontological resources? ( )
b) Disturb archaeological resources? ( )
c) Affect historical resources? ( )
d) Have the potential to cause a physical change which
would affect unique ethnic cultural values?
( )
e) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the
potential impact area? ( )
XV. RECREATIONAL, Would the proposal:
a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional
parks or other recreational facilities?
( )
b) Affect existing recreational opportunities?
( )
• • •
• • • a
• • • X
• • • •
• • • •
• • •
• • • X
• • • •
• • •
• • •
Rev. 03/28/96
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
iMl^^^^nts^maKbe yrekrreimm
XVI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the
quality of the environment, substantially reduce the
habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or
wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels,
threaten to eluninate a plant or animal community,
reduce the number or resfrict the range of a rare or
endangered plant or animal or eliminate important
examples of the major periods of Califomia history or
prehistory?
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable?
("Cumulatively considerable" means that the
incremental effects of a 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)?
c) Does the project have environmental effects which will
cause the substantial adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
•
•
•
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
•
•
•
Less Than
Significan
t Impact
No
Impact
• E
• H
• X
XVII. EARLIER ANALYSES.
Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA
process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative
declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case a discussion should identify the
following on attached sheets:
a) Earlier analyses used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available
for review. ,, N/A
b) Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist
were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant
to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by
mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis.
N/A
c) Mitigation measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation
Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or
refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-
specific conditions for the project.
N/A
Rev. 03/28/96
DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
Please use this area to discuss any of the environmental factors that were checked "No impact"
yet lack any information citations and any factors that were checked "Potentially Significant
Impact" or "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated." The City has
adopted a "Statement of Overriding Consideration" with regard to air quality and circulation
impacts resulting from the normal buildout according to the General Plan. The following sample
text is intended to guide your discussion of the impacts to these environmental factors.
AIR OUALITY:
The implementation of subsequent projects that are consistent with and included in the updated
1994 General Plan will result in increased gas and electric power consumption and vehicle miles
traveled. These subsequently result in increases in the emission of carbon monoxide, reactive
organic gases, oxides of nitrogen and sulfiir, and suspended particulates. These aerosols are the
major contributors to air pollution in the City as well as in the San Diego Air Basin. Since the
San Diego Air Basin is a "non-attainment basin", any additional air emissions are considered
cumulatively significant: therefore, continued development to buildout as proposed in the
updated General Plan will have cumulative significant impacts on the air quality of the region.
To lessen or minimize the impact on air quality associated with General Plan buildout, a variety
of mitigation measures are recommended in the Final Master EIR. These include: 1) provisions
for roadway and intersection improvements prior to or concurrent with development; 2) measures
to reduce vehicle trips through the implementation of Congestion and Transportation Demand
Management; 3) provisions to encourage altemative modes of transportation including mass
transit services; 4) conditions to promote energy efficient building and site design; and 5)
participation in regional growth management strategies when adopted. The applicable and
appropriate General Plan air quality mitigation measures have either been incorporated into the
design of the project or are included as conditions of project approval.
Operation-related emissions are considered cumulatively significant because the project is
located within a "non-attainment basin", therefore, the "Initial Study" checklist is marked
"Potentially Significant Impact". This project is consistent with the General Plan, therefore, the
preparation of an EIR is not required because the certification of Final Master EIR 93-01, by City
Council Resolution No. 94-246, included a "Statement Of Overriding Considerations" for air
quality impacts. This "Statement Of Overriding Considerations" applies to all subsequent
projects covered by the General Plan's Final Master EIR, including this project, therefore, no
further environmental review of air quality impacts is required. This document is available at the
Planning Department.
CIRCULATION:
The implementation of subsequent projects that are consistent with and included in the updated
1994 General Plan will result in increased traffic volimies. Roadway segments will be adequate
to accommodate buildout traffic; however, 12 full and 2 partial intersections will be severely
impacted by regional through-traffic over which the City has no jurisdictional control. These
generally include all freeway interchange areas and major intersections along Carlsbad
Boulevard. Even with the implementation of roadway improvements, a number of intersections
9 Rev. 03/28/96
are projected to fail the City's adopted Growth Management performance standards at buildout.
To lessen or minimize the impact on circulation associated with General Plan buildout, numerous
mitigation measures have been recommended in the Final Master EIR. These include 1)
measures to ensure the provision of circulation facilities concurrent with need; 2) provisions to
develop altemative modes of transportation such as trails, bicycle routes, additional sidewalks,
pedestrian linkages, and commuter rail systems; and 3) participation in regional circulation
strategies when adopted. The diversion of regional through-traffic from a failing Interstate or
State Highway onto City streets creates impacts that are not within the jurisdiction of the City to
control. The applicable and appropriate General Plan circulation mitigation measures have either
been incorporated into the design of the project or are included as conditions of project approval.
Regional related circulation impacts are considered cumulatively significant because of the
failure of intersections at buildout of the General Plan due to regional through-traffic, therefore,
the "Initial Study" checklist is marked "Potentially Significant Impact". This project is
consistent with the General Plan, therefore, the preparation of an EIR is not required because the
recent certification of Final Master EIR 93-01, by City Council Resolution No. 94-246, included
a "Statement Of Overriding Considerations" for circulation impacts. This "Statement Of
Overriding Considerations" applies to all subsequent projects covered by the General Plan's
Master EIR, including this project, therefore, no further environmental review of circulation
impacts is required.
LIST OF MITIGATING MEASURES gP APPLICABLE^
The project as proposed requires no mitigation measures
because no potentially significant impacts have been
identified. The proposed design of the antenna and equipment
placement insures that nothing will be visable from
surrounding properties.
ATTACH MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM (IF APPLICABLE^
Not applicable.
10 Rev. 03/28/96
PART I EIA
METRICOM - CARLSBAD INN
L LAND USE PLANNING
a) No impact. The proposed project is in conformance with the general plan and
zoning designation for the property.
b) No impact. The proposed project will conform vdth applicable environmental
plans and policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project.
c) No impact. The project is compatible with the existing land use in the vicinity.
d) No impact. The project will not affect agricultural resources or operations since
the site has not been used for agricultural purposes.
e) No impact. The proposed project will not disrupt or divide the physical
arrangement of any established communities. The proposed project consists of the
installation of 3 antenna arrays wiih four antennas moimted within existing gables
on an existing building.
IL POPULATION AND HOUSING
a) No impact. Since the proposed project consists of an addition to an existing
building, it will not alter the planned distribution or housing in the area.
b) No impact. The proposed project will not induce substantial growth in the area.
c) No impact. The site for the proposed project will not displace existing housing
since the site already contains existing buildings.
IIL GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS
a) No impact. The site is not lactated near active faults and no geologic conditions
exist that could constrain development of the property or increase the exposure of
people or property to geologic hazards. (1)
b) No impact. Due to the distance from known active faults from the site, the
proposed project vdll not expose people to significant seismic ground shaking.(l)
c) No impact. This project will not expose people to seismic ground failure
including liquefaction, due to the distance of the known active faults from the site.
(1)
d) No impact. The site is not located in an area of volcanic activity and does not
have a history of seiche or tsvmami hazards. Therefore, the proposed project will
1
not expose people to impacts involving seiche, tsunami or volcanic hazards.
e) No impact. The project site is not located within an area of landslides or
mudflows. (1)
f) No impact. The site was already mass graded when the existing buildings were
constructed.
g) No impact. The project site is not located in an area known for subsidence and is
not expected to result in or expose people to potential to impacts involving
subsidence of the land. (1)
h) No impact. The proposed project will not result in or expose people to potential
impacts involving expansive soils. The property is not located in an area known
to have expansive soils. (1)
i) No impact. No unique geologic or physical features are known to exist at the
project site. (1)
IV. V/ATER
a) No impact. The project will have no impact on absorption rates, drainage
pattems, or amount of surface runoff. The antennas are proposed on top of an
existing stmcture.
b) No impact. The site is not in an area that is prone to flooding or other water
hazards. (1)
c) No impact. The project will not alter the quality of any surface water body.
d) No impact. The project will not significantly affect the amount of surface water
in any water body since no storm water will discharge directly into any water
body. (1)
e) No impact. The proposed project will not significantly affect currents or the
course or direction of water movements. (1)
f) No impact. The project will not affect the quantity or the quality of ground
waters either through direct additions or withdraws or through interception of an
aquifer by cuts or excavations or through substantial loss of recharge capability.
(1)
g) No impact. Since the proposed project does not use groundwater, the project will
not alter direction of the rate of flow of groundwater. (1)
h) No impact. The project will not significantly impact groundwater quality, since
there will be no direct infiltration into any known groundwater supply. (1)
i) No impact. The proposed project wdll not cause a substantial reduction in the
amount of groimdwater otherwise available for public water supplies since the
project will not use groundwater nor impact a significant area othenvise available
for groimdwater percolation. (1)
V, AIR OUALITY
a) No impact. The project will have no affect upon air quality.
b) No impact. The project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants.
c) No impact. The proposed project will not alter air movement, moisture,
temperature or cause a change in climate.
d) No impact. The proposed project will not create objectionable odors.
YL TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION
a) No impact. The project will not increase ADT.
b) No impact. The project vdll not result in hazards to safety from design features.
(1)
c) No impact. The proposed project will no affect access.
d) No impact. The proposed project vdll not affect parking.
e) No impact. The project will not produce any hazards or barriers for pedestrians
or bicyclists.
f) No impact. The proposed project will conform with adopted policies supporting
altemative transportation.
g) No impact. No impacts to or from the railroad will result. No waterbome traffic
occurs in the vicinity.
VII. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
a) No impact. The site does not have any endangered, threatened or rare species or
their habitats. It is a developed site.
b) No impact. The site does not contain locally designated species.
c) No impact. The site does not contain locally designated commimities.
d) No impact. The proposed project is not located on wetland habitat, so it will not
impact wetland habitat.
e) No impact. There vdll be no impacts to vdldlife dispersal or migration corridors.
VIII. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES
a) No impact. The proposed project will conform vdth adopted energy conservation
plans.
b) No impact. The proposed project will not use non-renewable resources in a
wasteful inefficient manner.
c) No impact. The proposed project will not result in the loss of availability of a
known mineral resource that would be of future value to the region and the loss of
availability of a known mineral resource that would be of future value to the
region and the residents of the State.
IX, HAZARDS
a) No impact. The proposed project will not involve the storage, application, use or
disposal of hazardous materials or substances and therefore will not involve a risk
of accidental explosion or release of hazardous substances.
b) No impact. The proposed project will be designed so as not to interfere with any
emergency response or evacuation plans. The projects circulation system will be
reviewed by all pertinent City department to ensure that there will be no impacts
to any emergency response procedures or evacuation plans.
c) No impact. The project vdll not create any health hazards or any potential health
hazards.
d) No impact. There are no existing health hazards on the site.
e) No impact. The project vdll be constmcted in compliance with all applicable
City policies and codes regarding fire suppression and low fuel planting
NOISE
a) No impact. Development of the site will not substantially increase noise levels
beyond the short term constmction noise impacts.
b) No impact. The project will not involve exposure of people to severe noise levels
beyond the short term constmction noise impacts.
XL PUBLIC SERVICES
a) No impact. The project is located within the five minute response time for fire
protection.
b) No impact. Police protection is provided by the City of
Carlsbad and demand for additional police services beyond the demand created by
a typical commercieil development of this site is not anticipated.
c) No impact. The proposed project vdll not effect upon or result in a need for new
schools.
d) No impact. The proposed project vdll pay appropriate public
facilities fees as dictated by the City.
e) No impact. The proposed project vdll pay appropriate public
facilities fees as dictated by the City.
XII. UTILITIES AND SERVICES SYSTEMS
a) No impact. The majority of utilities have already been established for the
existing stmctures.
b) No impact. The proposed project is not anticipated to create
significant new demand for major facilities of communication or cable nor will it
require substantial eilteration to existing facilities.
c) No impact. The proposed project is in conformance with the EIR 93-01 for the
site and no potentially significant impacts are anticipated.
d) No impact. The proposed project is in conformance with the EIR 93-01 for the
site and no significant impacts to the City's sewer or septic tanks are anticipated.
e) No impact. The proposed project is in conformance vdth the EIR 93-01 for the
site and no significant impacts to the City's storm drainage system is anticipated.
f) No impact. The proposed project is in conformance vdth the EIR 93-01 for the
site and no significant impacts to the City's solid waste disposal system is
anticipated.
g) No impact. The proposed project is inconformance with the EIR 93-01 forthe
site and no significant impacts to the City's local or regional water supplies are
anticipated.
XIIL AESTHETICS
a) No impact. The proposed project vdll not affect a scenic highway or vista. All
antennas will be adequately screened from public view.
b) No impact. The proposed project vdll not have a negative aesthetic
effect. All antennas vdll be adequately screened from public view
c) No impact. The project vdll be designed in such a manner as to not create
significant off-site light or glare. Lighting within the project vdll be directed
towards the ground in order to meet required City specifications.
XIV. CULTURAL RESOURCES
a) No impact.. The project has already been mass graded in the constmction of the
existing buildings.
b) No impact.. The project has eilready been mass graded in the constmction of the
existing buildings.
c) No impact. No historical resources are known to exist vdthin the project area.
d) No impact. Unique ethnic cultural values are not known to be associated with
this site.
e) No impact. No religious or sacred uses are known to exist vdthin the project
area.
XV. RECREATION
a) No impact. The proposed project is non-residential, so no impact to park
facilities are anticipated.
b) No impact. The project will not affect recreational activities.
XVI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
a) No impact.. The proposed project will not degrade the quality of the
environment, substantially reduce the habitat of fish or wildlife species, cause 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
endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods
of Califomia history or prehistory.
b) No impact. The project vdll contribute to cumulative air quality impacts,
however, a statement of overriding consideration was adopted for this cumulative
impact.
c) No impact. The proposed site will not cause substantial adverse effects on human
beings.
XVII. Earlier Analvsis
a) Source documents are on file in the Planning Department located at 2075 Las Palmas
Drive, Carlsbad, Phone (760) 438-1161.
1. "Final Master EIR for tiie City of Carlsbad General Plan Update", March 1994.
Citv of Carlsbad
Housing & Redevelopment Department
June 8, 2000
Bill Ponder
Califomia Coastal Commission
3111 Camino Del Rio North, Suite 200
San Diego, CA 92108
Re: Notice of Final Action for Metricom Internet Antennas
(RP 00-04/CDP 00-21)
Dear Bill:
Attached, please find a Notice of Final Action for the above referenced project. I
have also included one set of plans and a copy of the Administrative
Redevelopment Permit and Coastal Development Permit applications with the
conditions of approval.
If you have any questions pertaining to the enclosed documents or require
additional information, please contact me at 760-434-2813.
Sincerely,
CITY OF CARLSBAD L^ll Y Ul- UAh
LORI H. ROSENSTEIN
Management Analyst
Attachments
2965 Roosevelt St., Ste. B • Carlsbad, CA 92008-2389 • (760) 434-2810/2811 • FAX (760) 720-2037 ^
Citv of Carlsbad
Housing & Redevelopment Department
NOTICE OF FINAL ACTION
COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT
The following project is located within the City of Carisbad Coastal Zone. A coastal permit application
for the project has been acted upon.
Application #: RP00-04/CDP00-21
Case Name: Mefricom Intemet Antennas
Filing Date: 3/22/00
Decision Date: 5/24/00
Applicant: Mefricom, Inc.
Address: 9805 Scranton Rd., #100, San Diego,
CA 92121
Agent (if different): Kathie Wagner
Address: Same
Phone: Same
Phone: 858-362-5802
ACTION:
I I APPROVED
APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS
I I DENIED
(Copy affinal resolution is sent to: Coastal Commission, any persons who specifically requested it, and
the applicant).
COASTAL COMMISSION APPEAL STATUS:
NOT APPEALABLE TO THE COASTAL COMMISSION.
APPEALABLE TO THE COASTAL COMMISSION pursuant to Coastal Act Section
30603. An aggrieved person may appeal this decision to the Coastal Commission within ten
(10) working days following Coastal Commission receipt of this notice. Applicants will be
notified by the Coastal Commission as to the date the Coastal Commission's appeal period
will conclude. Appeals must be made in writing to the Coastal Commission's district office
at the following address: Califomia Coastal Commission, 3111 Camino Del Rio North,
Suite 200, San Diego, Califomia 92108-1725, Telephone (619) 521-8036.
The time within which judicial review ofthis decision must be sought is governed by Code of Civil Procedures, Section 1094.6,
which has been made applicable in the City ofCarlsbad by Carlsbad Municipal Code Chapter 16. Any petition or other paper
seeking judicial review must be filed in the appropriate court not later than ninety (90) days following the date on which this
decision becomes final; however, if within ten (10) days after the decision becomes final a request for the record ofthe
proceedings accompanied by the required deposit in an amount sufficient to cover the estimated cost of preparation ofsuch a
record, the time within which such petition may be filed in court is extended to not later than thirty (30) days following the date
on which the record is either personally delivered or mailed to the party, or his attorney of record, if he has one. A written
request for the preparation ofthe record ofthe proceedings shall be filed with the City Clerk, City of Carlsbad, 1200 Carlsbad
Village Drive, Carlsbad California 92008.
2965 Roosevelt St., Ste. B • Carisbad, CA 92008-2389 • (760) 434-2810/2811 • FAX (760) 720-2037 @
•
Citv of Carlsbad
Housing & Redevelopment Department
NOTICE OF FINAL ACTION
COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT
The following project is located within the City of Carlsbad Coastal Zone. A coastal permit application
for the project has been acted upon.
Application #: RP00-04/CDP00-21
Case Name: Mefricom Internet Antennas
Filing Date: 3/22/00
Decision Date: 5/24/00
Applicant: Mefricom, Inc.
Address: 9805 Scranton Rd., #100, San Diego,
CA 92121
Agent (if different): Kathie Wagner
Address: Same
Phone: Same
Phone: 858-362-5802
ACTION:
I I APPROVED
APPROVED V^ITH CONDITIONS
I I DENIED
(Copy of final resolution is sent to: Coastal Commission, any persons who specifically requested it, and
the applicant).
COASTAL COMMISSION APPEAL STATUS:
NOT APPEALABLE TO THE COASTAL COMMISSION.
I I APPEALABLE TO THE COASTAL COMMISSION pursuant to Coastal Act Section
30603. An aggrieved person may appeal this decision to the Coastal Commission within ten
(10) working days following Coastal Commission receipt of this notice. Applicants will be
notified by the Coastal Commission as to the date the Coastal Commission's appeal period
will conclude. Appeals must be made in writing to the Coastal Commission's district office
at the following address: Califomia Coastal Commission, 3111 Camino Del Rio North,
Suite 200, San Diego, Califomia 92108-1725, Telephone (619) 521-8036.
The time within which judicial review of this decision must be sought is governed by Code of Civil Procedures, Section 1094.6,
which has been made applicable in the City ofCarlsbad by Carlsbad Municipal Code Chapter 16. Any petition or other paper
seeking judicial review must be filed in the appropriate court not later than ninety (90) days following the date on which this
decision becomes final; however, if within ten (10) days after the decision becomes final a request for the record of the
proceedings accompanied by the required deposit in an amount sufficient to cover the estimated cost of preparation of such a
record, the time within which such petition may be filed in court is extended to not later than thirty (30) days following the date
on which the record is either personally delivered or mailed to the party, or his attorney of record, if he has one. A written
request for the preparation of the record ofthe proceedings shall be filed with the City Clerk, City ofCarlsbad, 1200 Carlsbad
Village Drive, Carlsbad, Califorma 92008.
2965 Roosevelt St., Ste. B • Carlsbad, CA 92008-2389 • (760) 434-2810/2811 • FAX (760) 720-2037 @