HomeMy WebLinkAbout1664
.- ,
.~- -,
e
~
" -
II
RESOLUTION NO. 1664
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO.
01-027 TO INSTALL A NEW PCS WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS
FACILITY CONSISTING OF 12 ANTENNAS AND ONE GPS UNIT AT
5630 PECK ROAD.
WHEREAS, on September 28, 2001, a Conditional Use Permit application
was filed by Cox PCS Associates (a.k.a. Sprint PCS) to place and maintain an
unmanned wireless communications facility with a 45-foot high monopalm,
Development Services Department Case No. C.U.P. 01-027, at property
commonly known as 5630 Peck Road; and
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on November 13, 2001, at which
time all interested persons were given full opportunity to be heard and to present
evidence.
NOW THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ARCADIA HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. That the factual data submitted by the Development
Services Department in the attached report is true and correct.
SECTION 2. This Commission finds for the reasons set forth in the above
report:
1. That the granting of such Conditional Use Permit will not be
detrimental to the public health or welfare, or injurious to the property or
improvements in such zone or vicinity.
2. That the use applied for at the location indicated is a proper use for
which a Conditional Use Permit is authorized.
,-, 3. That the site for the proposed use is adequate in size and shape to
accommodate said use, and all yards, spaces, walls, fences, parking, loading,
landscaping and other features required to adjust said use with the land and uses
in the neighborhood.
4. That the granting of such Conditional Use Permit will not adversely
affect the comprehensive General Plan.
-1-
1664
e
.
--
5. That the use applied for will not have a substantial adverse impact on
the environment, and that based upon the record as a whole there is no evidence
that the proposed project will have any potential for an adverse effect on wildlife
resources or the habitat upon which the wildlife depends.
SECTION 3. That for the fbregoing reasons this Commission grants' a
Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 01.027 to install an unmanned wireless
communications facility with a 45'-0" high monopalm, upon the fOllowing
conditions:
1. The cellular installation and the site shall be maintained in a manner
that is consi.stent with the plans and materials submitted and approved for CUP
01-027.
2. That the concrete masonry wall around the air conditioning equipment
shall be painted to match the existing storage units.
3. All City code requirements regarding accessibility, fire protection,
occupancy, and safety shall be complied with to the satisfaction of Building
Services, Public Works Services, Development Services, and the Fire
Department
4. Approval of CUP 01-D27 shall not take effect until the property owner
and applicant have executed and filed the Acceptance Form available from the
Development Services Department to indicate acceptance of the conditions of
approval.
SECTION 4. The Secretary shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution
and shall cause a copy to be forwarded to the City Council of the City of Arcadia.
-2-
1664
-
.
II
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the forgoing Resolution was adopted at a
regular meeting of the Planning Commission held 011 November 13, 2001, by the
following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Commissioners Huang, Olson, Kalemkiarian
None
Commissioners Baderian and ,~
--
.-, Chairma Planning Commission
,/ City of Ar adia
~.TT. E.ST:j . /) ~
~,c6~~~
i Gsecretary, Planningtommission
City of Arcadia
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
~p,~
Stephen P. Deitsch, City Attomey
City of Arcadia
-3-
1664
I
STAFF REPORT
D~OPMENTSERWCESDEPARTMENT
November 13, 2001
TO: Arcadia City Planning Commission
FROM: Donna Butler, Community Development Administrator
SUBJECT: Conditional Use Permit No. 01-027
SUMMARY
This Conditional Use Permit (C.U.P.) application was submitted by Cox PCS to install
8 new PCS wireless communications facility consisting of 12 antennas and one GPS
unit. The antennas will be installed on a 45'-0" high monopalm located at 5630 Peck
Road.
.
The Development Services Department is recommending approval of CUP 01-027
subject to the conditions set forth in the' staff report and adoption of Resolution 1664
granting Conditional Use Permit No. 01-027 for a 45'-0" high unmanned wireless
communication facility at 5630 Peck Road.
GENERAL INFORMATION
APPLICANT: Cox PCS Associates (a.k.a. Sprint PCS)
LOCATION: 5630 Peck Road
REQUEST:
A Conditional Use Permit for an unmanned wireless
communications facility with a 45'-0" monopalm.
220 sq. ft. for the monopalm - the entire site contains approximately
4 acres.
SITE AREA:
FRONTAGES: 160 Feet on Peck Road
EXISTING LAND USE & ZONING:
The site is developed with a 154,000 sq. ft. storage facility (Storamerica);
zoned M-1 & D.
tilt
--
.
-
SURROUNDING LAND USES & ZONING:
Property to the north is in the City of Irwindale and currently being developed
with the Foothill Transit facility and properties to the east, south and west are
developed with industrial uses, zoned M-1 & D.
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION:
The subject site is designated as Industrial.
PROPOSAL
Communications equipment facilities are permitted in any zone with a Conditional
Use Permit (Sec. 9275.1.11). The proposed location is a 220 sq. ft. area located
along the southerly property line adjacent to storage Building B. This is a landscape
area with three trees that will remain. The proposed antennas will be mounted on a
45'-0" high monopalm in the center of the trees. In addition two air conditioning units
will be located in the easterly portion of the landscape area, screened by a 4'-0" high
concrete masonry wall. The equipment cabinets will be placed within one of the
storage units.
The applicant is also requesting a height modification of 45'-0" in lieu of the 35'-0"
maximum allowed in the M-1 zone. The additional height is requested because it is
necessary to provide the best level of service.
Site Selection
As noted in the applicant's application, cell sites are "Iocationally dependent". The
proposed site meets the technical objectives of engineering staff, and concurrently
provides the best siting option with regard to other key criteria that include, but are
not limited to accessibility, utility connections, zoning compatibility, liability and risk
assessment, site acquisition, maintenance and construction costs.
ANALYSIS
Uses such as this wireless communications equipment facility are permitted in any
zone with a Conditional Use Permit (Sec. 9275.1.11). Based upon the applicant's
proposal and location it is staffs opinion that the proposed monopalm will be an
appropriate use for the industrial site.
The applicant shall be required to comply with all code requirements as determined
necessary by the Building Official, Fire Marshall, Public Works Services Director and
Community Development Administrator.
CUP 01-027
November 13,2001
Page 2
--
~
.
CEQA
Pursuant to the provIsions of the California Environmental Quality Act, the
Development Services Department has prepared an initial study for the proposed
project. Said initial study did not disclose any substantial or potentially substantial
adverse change in any of the physical conditions within the area affected by the
project including land, air, water, minerals, flora, fauna, ambient noise and objects of
historical or aesthetic significance. When considering the record as a whole, there is
no evidence that the proposed project will have any potential for adverse effect on
wildlife resources or the habitat upon which the wildlife depends. Therefore, a
Negative Declaration has been prepared for this project.
RECOMMENDATION
The DeveloprT)ent Services Department recommends approval of Conditional Use
Permit No. CUP 01-027 subject to the following conditions:
1. The cellular installation and the site shall be maintained in a manner that is
consistent with the plans and materials submitted and approved for CUP 01-027.
2. The concrete masonry wall around the air conditioning equipment shall be painted
to match the existing storage units.
2. All City code requirements regarding accessibility, fire protection, occupancy, and
safety shall be complied with to the satisfaction of Building Services, Public Works
Services, Development Services, and the Fire Department
3. Approval of CUP 01-027 shall not take effect until the property owner and
applicant have executed and filed the Acceptance Form available from the
Development Services Department to indicate acceptance of the conditions of
approval.
FINDINGS AND MOTIONS
Approval
The Planning Commission should move to adopt the Negative Declaration and
approve CUP 01-027 by adopting Resolution No. 1664: A Resolution of the
Planning Commission of the City of Arcadia, California, granting Conditional
Use Permit No. 01-027 for a 45'-0" unmanned wireless communication facility
at 5630 Peck Road.
CUP 01-027
November 13, 2001
Page 3
--
~
-.
Denial
If the Planning Commission intends to deny this Conditional Use Permit application,
the Commission should move for denial and direct staff to prepare a resolution that
incorporates the Commission's decision and specific findings.
If any Planning Commissioner, or other interested pa~ has any questions or
comments regarding this matter prior to the October 9 public hearing, please
contact Assistant Planner, Thomas Li, at (626) 574-5447
Attachments: Applicant's plans and narrative
Land Use and Zoning Map
Negative Declaration & Initial Study
Resolution 1664
CUP 01-027
November 13,2001
Page 4
-
.,
.
Application for a Conditional Use Permit is requested to
Establish a Wireless Telecommunication Facility at
5630 Peck Road
Arcadia, California 91006
Proiect DescriDtion
Introduction
Cox PCS Assets, L.L.C, (a,k.a, Sprint PCS) is a registered public utility, licensed and regulated
by the Public Utilities Commission (Puq and the Federal CommunicatiollcS Commission (FCC).
As a public utility the FCC licensed COX to provide Personal Communication Services
throughout the United States. In December 1994 COX was awarded twenty-nine PCS licenses
including one for the Los Angeles Major Trading Area (MTA). COX utilizes an all digital high
frequency system that wiIl operate between 1850 and 1990 MI1z range.
Efforts arc currently underway in Los Angeles County to establish the required infrastrocture for
PCS. COX has retained WFl to facilitate the land use entitlement process. WFI is currently
seeking approval of Conditional Use Permit for the establishment, use and maintenance of
wireless telecommunications facility at 56JO Peck Road, Arcadia, California 9] 006.
Background
PCS will change the future of telecommunications with easy-to-use, lightweight and highly
mobile communications devices including portable telephones, computers and Personal Digital
Assistants (PDAs). PCS will provide voice, e-mail and internet access capabilities for customers
communications needs virtually anywhere and at any time.
The PCS network being developed by COX differs from typical ceIlular nctworks in that it uscs
state ofthe art digital technology versus traditional analog ceIlular systems (i.e., AT&T Wireless
and Airtouch) which have been in use sincc the early 1980's. The benefits include increased
capacity over analog based systems, call privacy and security, improved voice quality, and an
expanded menu of affordable products and services for personal and professional
communications necds. In the future COX network will also feature a locator device that will
connect 911 caIls to local police and fire departments. In the event of an emergency, speciaIly
equipped emergency vehicles will be able to identify a customer's location once a caIl is received.
Project Overview
COX is proposing to install an all new PCS facility con.sistingoftwelve (12) antennas and one (I)
GPS unit. The design will be a monopalm. The top height of the monopalm wiil be 45' -0". The
proposal also includes five equipment cabinets located inside the adjacent storage unit. Two air
conditioning units, which will be entirely screened from view, are proposed to the east of the
monopalm, along the eastern property line.
LA54XC555C - StorAmerico
Page /
9/20/0/
-
~
--
Each antenna measure 4' -4" high x 8.0" wide x 3.0" deep and each BTS cabinet measures 6'-6"
high x 2'-7" wide x 2'-7" deep. The specific location and design of the proposed project is
illustrated in further detail on thc attached drawings, and photo simulations.
Operational Overview
The proposed communications facility will transmit at a frequency range of between 1850 and
1990 MHz. Sprint and all the other carriers are separate from one another; all the antennae
operate at different frequencies, and will not interfere with each other. A typical PCS site
operates on standard telephone lines and commercial electrical power.
When operational, the transmitted signals from the site will consist of non-ionizing waves
generated at less than 1 uW/cm2. This is significantly lower than the maximum allowable public
exposure of 1000 uW/cm2 as set by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) and
Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers (IEEE). The current ANSI/IEEE standards for
protection against radiofrequency/microwave (RFIMW) fields are set at 50 times below a level
that scientists believe may pose a health risk to human populations.
Once constructed and operational, customers will receive 24-hnur service seven (7) days a week.
Apart from initial construction activity, a COX technician will service the wireless facility on a
periodic basis. It is reasonable to expect that routine maintenance/inspection of the facility will
occur once a month after nonna! working hours. Beyond this intermittent service, COX requires
24-hour access to the facility to ensure that technical support is immediately available if and
whcn warranted.
Overview of Coverage Objective(s)
Radiofrequency (RF) engineers at Cox have identified the proposed facility as an integral site in
improving Cox's PCS network coverage in and around thc intcrsection of Live Oak Avenue and
Peck Road. This site will improve the coverage and capacity of the Sprint PCS wireless network
in the cities of Arcadia, Monrovia and Irwindale. At present, Cox PCS customers are
experiencing poor service in this area.
The subject site will enable Cox network engineers to expand the range of wireless services
provided to customers who live and work in the proposed service area. Traditional mobile
telephone service will also be improved for customers who travel in and around the area.
Overview of Site Design/Location Criteria
The network of COX cell sites throughout the region is "Iocationally dependent," meaning that
there is a necessary and logical interrelationship between each cell site. Eliminating or relocating
a single cell site can lead to gaps in the system and prohibit COX from providing uninterrupted
service to customers in a defined coverage area. Further, the elimination or relocation of a cell
site will most often have a "domino" effect on other cell site locations and necessitate significant
dcsign changes or modifications to the network.
In identifying the proposed PCS location, Cox network deployment personnel have selected a site
that not oniy meets the technical objectives of RF engineering, but concurrently provides the best
siting option with regard to other key criteria that include, but are not limited to: accessibility,
LA54XC555C - SforAmerica
Page il
9/ilO/01
-
..
1-
utility connections, zoning compatibility, liability and risk assessment, site acquisition,
maintenance and construction costs.
Sprint PCS has been trying to find a suitable site in the area surrounding Garfield and Interstate
10 for several years, however, due. to a number of reasons, this site is the only available location
for Sprint PCS in the surrounding area.
Compatibility with Other Site Development Standards
The location, size, design, and operating characteristics of the proposed communications facility
will not create unusual noise, traffic or other conditions or situations'that may be objectionable,
dctrimentaI or incompatible with the surrounding land uses, The proposed use is consistent with
this finding in that:
The equipment associated with the telecommunication structure operates quietly qr virtually noise
free.
The equipment does not emit fumes, smoke, or odors that could be considered objectionable.
The telecommunications facility is unmanned and only requires periodic maintenance, which
cquates to approximately one trip per month. The proposed communication facility will not
result in conditions or circumstances contrary to the public health, safety and the general welfare.
The proposed use is consistent with this finding in that:
The proposed communications facility will operate in full compliance with the U.S. standards for
radio frequency emissions as published by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI).
The ANSI was developed by the committee composed of 125 scientists from universities, non-
profit laboratories and Federal Health Laboratories (FDA, NIOSH, EPA). In 1992 the ANSI
established, as a public safety standard, a maximum exposure level to radio frequency emissions
of 1000 microwans per centimeter squared (l,000 uW/cm2). The typical exposure level ofa PCS
facility is less than I microwatt per centimeter squared (<1 uW/em2).
The radiofrequency emissions emitted by the proposed COX PCS facility will fall within the
portion of the electromagnetic spectrum which transmits non-ionizing electromagnetic emissions.
At the low levels associated with this type of wireless technology, these emissions are not
hannful to living cells. Items which result in non-ionizing electromagnetic, emissions include
radios, television broadcasts, CB radios, microwave ovens, and a variety of common security
systems. Conversely, items transmitting ionizing electromagnetic emissions include uitraviolct
light, medical x-rays and gamma rays.
Data currently available on the effects of electromagnetic transmission on public health indicate
that there is no likelihood of negative impacts to public health and safety.
LA54XC555C - StarAmorica
Page 3
9/20/0/
F G
.597 I- ) UVEO(>$.
2 ,.
l? <
:t
~
l'
..
VICINITY MAP
SITE: 5630 PECK RD.
tit
-"."
J.,
,.
,"- ;;:::.~
.'.
GC MAPPING SERVICE
711 MISSION ST. SUITE B
SOUTH PASADENA CA 91030
(626) 441-1080
~-_~~"'::ft.::i';"':..~_
:r=:M=--;~~=-"
l~~ ~s...~~-_
1____ t_=__
._::.:..r:t.-_ ::='"'-=->.
1'x:'Dr.: CO'..:?:. :~CE
....--..-..--"'"'--....
'0.Ct/':;l'ln"p
-~-
~.::&.'C..,:,.m=;;'~"~-=,,,,__
i;R!V!!~G Ci,ifC'T:CNS
~
Sprint.
.
Sprint pes '"
STORAMERICA
LA54XC555C
5630 PECK RD.
ARCADIA, CA 91006
....__.._---~.
='-='::="--==-1.:: _
,~_..""'fII...,"
-_.._--,-
J::""'...=.~.:.::r.":l..._........
-.-
.~.:t1.:~,:T:'J::
~Dl'f""=
-."'-""""'"
=- ;,a"=-"'"
- -..-
N1!)'i::~'i DE~.:::m:)~:r'.J'.;
:;::::!I;:'r'.:lW:,"";!_~'''::'
f\~~"':
~IIO'-~",~
'''' --,
.....~ml.~.f....~::.'O_
--
:r,~::::N:M_- -
_/.._--
-, -..-.....
.-...-- -........
-, --""
::: ~:E.'C,~",~;",;;r~F,
w:.t=~
er-......~';::.. _
_=..-J'
..~~~l"",t';.t
~...
~...~~...
--
--
::'4'"':h.iI';"~'_~':::'__
;;; B:
--~
.of'lf.i'J.;'::~IK'1l:I::t:.o'{!':'~il.'
:,.-
,---,-
-:::.:"'"
ID2"''-'f1:Ur..
-'IIU._~.".
-~
-_.
-.-
__.1.10/.
=- II::
=- :=
::roc" : ~~__...,
=-I~a...
=- --I r.;:-;;!"_
....-....,
-_OO;...=.:....~..::.::..'-
-..--
PIV"';.iE!. T s<r>~':?v.n'{
z:,:r,::1t:CrYE",M
--
r- __
U'l........,.
"
-,. -_.__..~._-
".~ --....,..--
--
ZONING
S;~€F--; INO~.D(
9''''JOO
;~f,,;o;: t....I,:'.;.~<&:.<;;.~
==~1:"""A'"'"-t"~~~~
:.~-..~-~-"'-"
r~;;UE?!..;. r;t.m~::~~:I):~ NO~~
4-Sptint.
-~
OOU_-,\IlIIl.lI;I
_0-
SlOOAMEIIC4
W4XCSSSC
-~~
~~.,-
<OS_L,ES(CUIf!'t
~Ollt,
09/21/~
.~
ZONING
~-
=m...
0.1!!0II\_ JIl
l$!iII[lll'OIl
,,--'"
&~/"fOt_Z~ .00
.......~.
b DElTA GROUPS
UlGUUlUHG. Ute.
-.......
.-.......-,-
-........
~~-
,
t~..t..~~~~,.l~ 1
-~-,...
~:=I'-
w. ::-.-_
110 I"" I rg I
D
j-=:J
1;=1 ~
,
"..-
""'_.""""'!'__~_..l&f_
"""'-
~-
"-t-narrmN>..:
--
c.'WIflIrk~IU5h_
"f'I ..._ -FC." lIMtIll"".a..-
...u. _ 1<'_... __...11/1tJt'
~=;.;;.=:-~.:::~r.~'~~~
Drdu/Sunzy
-,~
BA_if~
.e.-_~_.Ci'GlI
.........
1l/'lI.IIM....n~IClIU1OIOml1IO._...tovJr
~.JlIJIIIUl_
,-
(l,
0" /
'l:',
'<t /
tJ'
q,'" /
,
/
r
t::-~
, .
/
/
/
/
ft.._!
Q~
-..........
,
/
/
/
/
..........
-~
,
/
/
,
/
,
'/
/
COW'IDCSCWi
11l . III "
.m:r~
..........
C,-~.........._
/i<( ...........
Sl'/i ..........,
eli',/, ..........,
..........
..........
'-
t
~
t
i
;;
r
..
1--
w.........
~ .-
-.-
;; 5?-::'
!:;.::;...
. -,-
-..~-
1=::'
- --
, :..":..
: :=::.:'"
---
~=
;.:',!a.
=""'--
::.~--
m=-
~c
~-
--
:::::...
---
--'
e
.: Sprjnt.
...."".
4casOWlO'lOOlNE.9JO't: tilO
PI,[..~(AJ.t25
n.._[]
STORAMEFUCA
lAs4XC555 C
:1lJOPtt>clttl.
~.Co"<<16
'"'....",""""
I w;-"'~_Ol II
IE '.. DESIGN ~
1l'[\I:~-":.~=1n'
S!!,VAD(i
SUR'VWINO. exc.
_........_rr--._._
:"7:J:i
---
__,__m._.>Jl,
-............
'''C_UMI>>'
In'~~
[~~!Q
R
<i>
=-
~
~
~
"
~ ~.
~ --
(JOmmoo[]o
0-..
.
i
~l
L.
SUit olNe MeM
--
_lU.co_
,-
-
_ -f.u::.:"
-...-...-....
-
..~.-...
i
BUILDING "AM
,_~__\\f
UlI__ o.OJ
I
'-. I
--'- - .
Ii'\_...._oon...._
~--u.... ......__....
j._w~.J.1Ittf01I"l~
.
";
BUll DING -S-
.1
~ I
;
,
,
.,
-
: Sprint.
-..-
~~;:"l'lQ
~ a,w=
~ll((1(IIO.
~~gl~
l.OSMCilLn Cl;IUN1V
ro>oIt."'~""'f
~ 09/21/01 II
~ ",. ZONING ~
1'C/;nar;:,=tlBtRIMO< ~
11 OIl)ll/01 ~l~:n
ISSUrlIfOR
01/:1/0' 'Oll'Cl{lIoIlIOC
&lli!IIltI/lIl'~O:
>>
>>
>>
\il'fI(........fll
~ ..DElTA GROUPS
fNGlHEUtNG. 'He.
.................
~.:'~,:unc'-
tn-lIm t..,.. Ul'_.n.
~ m::::~;.!iJ!.L
.~.
'01,............
fr"!;~ ~ - -_.::=11
~ lll'rlro I,
I SO, ~ I
~. 0 ~ A1l:J
0'''-"...n
@u.u_
0~
<:>'nell~
r'.,'
0~c.-.
<i>:=:=-
0-(-"
0--
,,~
........-
.
, c.r
~l
'I i
I
!
OOO[llO(][]O[llOOOOO
ODDOODO[llOOOIJD
u-....l
~
~.6
--......
--~
".?~
~"...
--~
--
(1..._.....,
J.t'IlO'I'~
~~-
~
,,~
uo.c_._
.'.."
......
EB:=".:.,
-. '\,
.-,
---.-----------,
r---------~
, ,
. .
, ,
'--~~----------'
,
--------...
,
,
,
, ,
'------------..
I
~ i
I
'_r
,.~
Ir--"ll [!I r--! .1-, .I',
L...J .--1 . . .
,
"
~. .. O(]Oooo[J[IIOOOmODD
~Sprin
..., t.
-"'-
'C4.l000ll:l)l~1lIlI(IlIIJ
lIU.~(J.""l;I
~"_IOII
STOIAMB$C4
lA54XC5=
~P(tw!ll).
oJIClOIolu.tUlOG
10!"CCU:5~
I ~ ":9;;1/01 II
['" .... ZONING ~
.?O&.'f,==tl(:SClIF/IQIt~
&ClJt:1 .=o::::.c
&olV:n/o'~:""
fA GG,MlIll =r:o=.
"
"
"
~--'~
DElTA GROUPS
~::~~
.....-m.. tw. _.>It
.-
._. _....- (loO
1$"'0 c._
........
, ...........
-=--"~'g]
'~.4
"..~
PROJECT .\R'(A PLPN
lAYOUl
'A2~
,
-'"-
-----
~"'--
,.".'""'"'..._...o:<;lOlI......,
-......-
-,-
-- , I ,
!
, r ,
--- I , ,
-,- I ~ ~
~::.: ,
...-
OOOOOIDoooomllO
-~-
--~---.-
-...--..
,......."""'-1--1
-.-.....,
,,-
~.
o (]ODUlOoooomO
_....~-_..
i I I ,-- I .
-- , I !
! I , I I
i ~ r :P-~'" ~ ~ r
., ~ ~
-.......
---,-
--
__.J!
,--
nOODO[IJ[][lDODmO
~.
OOOOIDOOOOOIDO
Wll!f1tl'lSWfl)ll. II
I 09/21/0\
. ....,.. ~
-- I
! I i ZONING
, I
I I ~lL~l;!IO- '"
r--
--. ~
-.- ~ .
~...-....-
'_u.n:,,"
,-- 1$SI40'0/I
M' llllftlOOliHG "
&. rJ4fl'lOl ~ol!:c "
&. WI~/Ol ~~ "
~...,
....... 0 0. DELlA GROUPS
. . . ltlGUUlllttG.lr<<:.
--
:.:tt':.'I,r-'....
..~...." nt-1lI> ..........._"
OHWl.fMll.
WFI
1~!'1..~:;'~J J~~:m
-""'":'"'"_-,...
~.-
"'""",''',"
Aw.J 8't.=a.w.t=_ Q]
t=J
[ SOUl" & NOR1H
WEST &- EASl
ElEVt.1I0NS
~. fJ ~A3~
STOIlAMEll<A
1.A54XC555C -
~"UliIlD.
,fJlt./Dlol..c..t1(:Q&
lCll;~t(llJIm
File No. ern po ,,~
e
CITY OF ARCADIA
240 WEST HUNTINGTON DRIVE
ARCADIA, CA 91007
(626) 574-5400
ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION FORM
q/7f".JO'
Date Filed:
General Information
1. Name and address of developer or project sponsor:
-
CoxPCS Assets LLC (a.k.a, Sprint PCS) 468.'J Chabot Dr. #100
Pleasanton, CA 94588
2.
Address of project (Location):
5.630 Peck Road, Arcadia, CA 91006
.3.
Name, address and telephone number of person to be contacted concerning this project:
Ryan Leaderman at WFI 15901 Hawthorne Blvd_ #306, Lawndale, CA
90260 (310) 214-1850 ryan.leaderman@wfinet.com
4. List and describe any other related permits and other public approvals required for this
project, including those required by city, regional, state and federal agencies:
FCC and FAA notification
5. Zoning: M1
6. General Plan Designation:
.Proiect Descriction
_7.
Proposed use of site (project description):
The installation and operation of antennas and associated
equipment cabinets for Sprint PCS's wireless telecommunications
network,
-
lot with 133,400 sf.
Site Size: 210sf on'a Sq. Ft.1 Acre(s)
9. Square footage per building:
No new building being added.
10. Number of floors of construction:
NA -- 45' high monopalm.
11. Amount of off-street parking provided:
NA -- unmanned wireless telecommunications facilitv.
12. Proposed scheduling of project:
Construction within a month of receiving building permit.
13. Associated projects:
Wireless network being created across the county, state and country.
.4.
Anticipated incremental development:
More wireless sites to fill coverage gaps and increase network's
15.
If'i-~Efa~Mi~l: include the number of units, schedule of unit sizes, range of sale prices or
rents, and type of household sizes expected:
16. If commercial, indicate the type, i.e. neighborhood, city or regionally oriented, square
footage of sales area, and loading facilities, hours of operation: _
17. If industrial, indicate type, estimated employment per shift, and loading facilities:
No employees per shift, no loading facilities.
18. If institutional, indicate the major function, estimated employment per shift, estimated
occupancy,' loading facilities, and community benefits to be derived from the project:
Community gets great wireless coverage.
_9.
If the project involves a variance, conditional use permit or zoning application. state this
and indicate clearly why the application is required:
A CUP is required for a new freestanding antenna structure.
En,jronlntoFcrm
-2-
4/01
_0. Are the following items applicable to the project or its effects?
checked yes (attach additional sheets as necessary).
YES NO
D ~ 21.
D lil 22.
D (i) 23.
D ~ 24.
D [iJ 25.
D [iJ 26.
D [) 27.
.~ Cl 28.
~
-... 29.
el IU 30.
el IU 31.
Discuss below all items
Change in existing featl,Jres of any hills, or substantial alteration of ground
contours.
Change in scenic views or vistas from existing residential areas or public
lands or roads.
Change in pattern, scale or character of general area of project.
Significant amounts of solid waste or litter,
Change in dust, ash; smoke, fumes or odors in vicinity.
Change in ground water quality or quantity, or alteration of existing drainage
patterns.
Substantial change in existing noise or vibration levels in the vicinity.
Is site on filled land or on any slopes of 10 percent or more?
Use or disposal of potentially hazardous materials, such as toxic substances,
flammable or explosives There is a battery cabinet proposed.
Substantial change in demand for municipal services (police, fire, water,
sewage, etc.)
Substantial increase in 'fossil fuel consumption (electricity, oil, natural gas,
etc.)
GJ D 32. Relationship to a larger project or series of projects Wireless sites are being
created all across the nation.
D CliI 33. Has a prior environmental impact report been prepared for a program, plan,
policy or ordinance consistent with this project?
D D 34. If you answered YES to question no. 33, may this project cause significant
effects on the environment that were not examined in the prior EIR?
Environmental SettlnQ .
Describe (on a separate sheet) the project site as it exists before the project, including
information on topography, soil stability, plants and animals, any cultural, historical or
scenic aspects. Describe any eXisting structures on the site, and the use of the
structures. Attach photographs of the site. (Snapshots or Polaroid photos will be
accepted.)
35.
tit
EnVlronlnroForm
-3-
4101
e
.
-.
Environmental Settin!! .
35. The site is a large parcel filled with many storage units. The equipment cabinets will be located inside
the adjacent storage unit TIle monopalm location will be located between three trees at the
southeastern corner or the property. The soil is flat and there are no noticeable animals there.
36. The surrowuling properties appear to all be indusbialfrn;mufacturing uses. To the north along Peck is
Pic a Part. It appears that it is a rock quany. In addition, Pic A Part sits on top of a landfill. The
subject proposal meets the setback requirements for this zone. In addition, the location is setback from
the street to minimize the visibility from Peck Road. The monopalm design further helps to mitigate
negative aesthetic impacts, if any.
LA54XC555C - StorAmerico
Page 4
9/20/01
e6.
Describe (on a separate sheet) the surrounding properties, including information on
plants, animals, any cultural, historical or scenic aspects. Indicate the type of land uses
(residential, commercial, etc.), intensity of land use (one-family, apartment houses,
shops, department stores, etc.), and scale of development (height, frontage, set-backs,
rear yards, etc.). Attach photographs of the vicinity. Snapshots or Polaroid photos will
be accepted.
Certification
I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in .the attached exhibits present the
data and information required for this initial evaluation to the best of my ability, and that the
facts, statements, and information presented are true and correct to the best of my knowledge
and belief.
Date
9('70(0/
(Signatrf~~
L~
f/
For
U)f f /5 M~ tt-~
.
tit
EnvirgnlnfoForm
-4-
4/01
e
.
-
>
'l
i....
-~..; -4
=
'''~,,,
\- ."
.. ~,-
;.:'\
, .'
.- ". )~.
::.,..... .t
..-,:
f_~.~"
. ,""
View Looking to the North of Monopalm Location
t;==>~__-
I '_.',
I
. .
. "
. '. I
~--,.,-_'\ '
- .-
"
--: -"---i._~...:. -_~-- ~~---"'-
'."
" ,-:,
,--+- .
---.........-.. ~.:......
View Looking to the South of Mono palm Location
e
.
--
rT7-i'- .~
~ . !
I
I~ :.
I ..~~
,
!---
,
I
,.
I
I
H :~,lj"'~If..JII:;ti ;il.'~ .~
'~rl/t' .'lI ,.,'.' ~"
I.. ". "I'.'~II;lI'!I'.:
.I~" 1,,1, '. II J
1 ,,'~~"'~fu :lll~ _I",
_ I r .', -J" ~..t! jll"1 I
"'.\I;j~l Iff II.r~':".'::'I
L.i" ~:f.~~~:",~.:.~:.~. '
II 'i;),. t . 'IYt ~I
~ll';Jll !i-" 1~I'l~ '.:
" ~\..I>_t II,}~'I...-,~
!,;j,~i+'~ :'I:iJ:'~;" ...
i:' :;t~t."~'~~oi;~" t '
." - -t"'r .
<~~ ..::.~,'~: ~ .
r,:
t..:1',
. . ":'; ,: ,::;-."
. ,"', ;f .'..~
. .. '.:'::';" ;-~
....~'.!.~,,_.
~. d
,/
.~-
'- j" ~': ,.
View of Monopalm Location
y
I .... ,'" ~'. .-.._ r"
, ;' '''!');' .' '~"II"" ' ~:;'.: -..
1.1G I,~I!\, I' ~,. ~,,,,:,,MJ,'IJ. .tt;.~ ~:'r!- I,.';'
'~' " .. ", "c l"'-~"
~... ..t'll ,'= I'" ......t-'".,...r ~
I' I~ 0"' "I ~.' '-,~: , 'I
,i ':I"!'>:, "~!lt' ," I'~':""''':,j'.
"'~''-'" .,' .'~,.
. '~<II .'1 ,-. "',.,............-' ."
1111... .~ I" oj/> , -" '
\ I,~..... ~ 4'" "tt. ~ --. .f
~. I!;::: ~.. 'ri"-i. -.- I,.
. ,~., 1;-,\" '. , b"., .: M~"fr L .
.' I .'Irti/:j - I"~ ~.,.~€, .~.A..- ~ "
n');\ I.:""'" "l,.- I' ", . .
hi" . '. . ,. 1
.'~~_II' ~'I""~' l~ . ~ 't I
'I ,I ~.-'~l "" oL -<L. ~ _ ~ ^ ...~'\:-.:.
.' ,., ',I) T' " <~, .' ~-
'~~'\ ,'." 1 ..' 'I '_~jru~. _". --"'. "'-"--
'If.~ ,.... ",Il,~" ,.~.
" 1 'l!',.I:1 II; . '~..~ I,
. ," " /" , ". ,~ '
li~l:': ;,~~,,~~,~ ';;!/,,!i*'" ~.~ "~~' ,
'''I~kr,.. '~II'~c"t'otli,;.. "
.' \~1I1J,.:1 ;:.. Jt . 1 ....!1t;\0,.~1 [:~, ~.rt~~
,I
,
L:
) "':,
.
\,' "
. ,.
,'\."
..: ....~~:':l'
View of Monopalm Location
----.-------;
--.-.. --
_.,....~_~--.r-_ -=-'> '.~
;' ~
e
~-
-~~
---::: ~
,----"'-~_...~.I'l-
I .,
1-
--. :.-~
- ~-
L
};, ,
.
View Looking to the West of Monopalm Location
-
.. .-..
---." -~........._-
:~;
'-,
" :" -~ ,:;
..~..' -' .
"0~'.'
. '--~-x <
l~.~
u'r
-.. .
. ,
e
.
--
FileNo.:
CUP 01-027
CITY OF ARCADIA
240 W. HUNTINGTON DRIVE
ARCADIA, CA 91007
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
A. Title and Description of Project:
A Conditional Use Permit (CUP 01.027) to install a new PCS wireiess communications facility
consisting of 12 antennas and one GPS unit with a 45-foot high monopalm antenna at 5630 S.
Peck Road.
B. Location of Project:
5630S. Peck Road
In the City of Arcadia, County of Los Angeles
C. Name of Applicant, Sponsor or Person Undertaking Project:
Ryan Leaderman
Cox PCS Assets LLC
15901 Hawthorne Blvd., Ste 306
Lawndaie, CA 90260
(310) 214.1850
The City Council 0 Planning Commission 0, having reviewed the Initial Study of this proposed project
and having reviewed the written comments received prior to the public meeting of the City Council.
including the recommendaiton of the City's staff, does hereby find and declare that the proposed project
will not have a siglnificant effect on the environment. A brief statement of the reasons supporting the City
Council's findings are as follows:
The City Council Q Planning Commission 0, hereby finds that the Negative Declaration reflects Its
independent judgement. A copy of the Initial Study may be obtained at:
Community Development Division
City of Arcadia
240 W. Huntington Dr.
Arcadia, CA 91007
(626) 574-5423
The location and custodian of the documents' and any other material which constiture the record of
proceedings upon which the City based its decisiOn to adopt this Negative Declartion are as follows:
Community Development Division
City of Arcadia
240 W. Huntington Dr.
Arcadia, CA 91007 /
(626)574t{L~~~K?~
tStaff ---. -
Date:
Date Posted:
4/01
e
.
-.
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
I. Project Title:
Conditional Use Permit No. 01-027
2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Arcadia
Development Services Department
Community Development Division / Planning Services
240 W. Huntington Drive
P.O. Box 60021
Arcadia. CA 91066-6021
3. Contact Person and Phone Number:
Donna Butler (626) 574-5442
4. Project Location: 5630 N. Peck Road
5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Ryan Leaderman
Cox PCS Assets LLC (aka Sprint PCS)
15901 Hawthorne Blvd., Ste 306
Lawndale, CA 90260
6. General Plan Designation:
Industrial
7. Zoning: M-I - Planned Industrial District
8. Description of Project: (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to later
phases of the project, and any secondary, support, or off-site features necessary for its
implementation. Attach additional sheet(s) if necessary.):
A Conditional Use Permit to install a new PCS wireless communications facility consisting of 12
antennas and one GPS unit with a 45-foot high monopalm antenna at 5630 S. Peck Road.
. 9. Surrounding Land Uses and setting: (Briefly describe the project's surroundings.)
The surrounding properties are developed with industrial buildings and are zoned M-I & D.
10. Other public agencies whose approval is required.(e.g., permits, financing approval, or
participation agreement):
City Engineering Division / City Maintenance. Department / City Water Division / Los Angeles
County Engineer
CEQAFORMS/CHECKLIST
10118/01
Page I of 4
e
.
--
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least
one impact that isa "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
Aesthetics Agriculture.Resources Air Quality
Biological Resources Cultural Resources Geology I Soils
Hazards & Hazardous Hydrology I Water Quality Land Use I Planning
Materials
Noise Population I Housing
Mineral Resources
Recreation Transportation I Traffic
Public Services
- Mandatory Findings of
Utilities I Service Systems Significance
DETERMINATION (To be completed by the Lead Agency):
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a
NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I 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 revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to
by the project proponent. A MmGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant or "potentially significant unless
mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect I) has been adequately analyzed in an
earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation
measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because
all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE
DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant
to that earlier ElR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that
~rrrJjosed upon the proposed ~nothing further 'is required.
LS~7~~~~ ~, 10-18-01
SIgnature Date
Donna Butler CITY OF ARCADIA
Printed Name .For
CITY IR VPUB/2000200 1/546265
FORM
HJ'1
Page 2 of 4
e
.
--
,
EV ALUA TION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMP ACTS:
1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are
adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites 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 (e.g. the
project Jails outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is
based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g. the project will not expose
sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis).
2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-
site, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as
operational impacts.
3) Oncc the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the
checklist answers.must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant
with mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is
substantial evidence that an effect is significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant
Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required.
4) "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where
the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant
Impact" to' a "Less than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation
measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less thaa significant level
(mitigation measures from Section xvn, "Earlier Analyses," may be cross-referenced).
5) Earlier anaiyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA
process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier ErR or negative declaration. Section
l5063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following:
a) Earlier Analyses Used. Identify and state where they are.available for review.
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.
c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation
Measures 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.
6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information
sources for potential impacts (e.g. general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously
prepared Or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages
where the statement is substantiated.
CITY/RVPUB12001/3l3785 FORM "1"
Page 3 of 4
e
.
-
7) Supporting Information Sources. A source list should be attached, and other sources used or
individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion.
8) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however,
lead agencies should normally address the questions form this checklist that are relevant to a
project's environmental effects in whatever format is selected.
9) The explanation of each issue should identify:
a) the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and
b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance.
CITYIRVPUB12001l313785 FORM "]"
Page 4 of 4
e
.
-.
Would the proposal result in
potential impacts involving:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
1. LAND USE AND PLANNING - Would the proposal:
a) Conflict with general plan designations or
zoning?
[ ]
b) Conflict with applicable environmental
plans or policies adopted by agencies with
jurisdiction over the project?
[ 1
c) Be compatible with existing land uses in
the vicinity?
[ ]
d) Affect agricultural resourCes or operations
(e.g.. impacts to soils or farmlands, or
impacts from incompatible land uses)?
[ 1
e) Disrupt or divide the physical
arrangement of an estnblished community
(including a low-income or minority
community)?
[ 1
File No.: CUP 01-027
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
[Xl
[Xl
[Xl
[Xl
[Xl
The proposed wireless communication facility Is consistent with the general plan and zoning designations.
for the area, and will complement surrounding uses. The construction and operation of the proposed
service will be subject to aU other environmental ptans or policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction
over this area. There are uo agricultural resources or operations in the vicinity.
2. 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)?
[ 1
c) Displace existing housing, especially
affordable housing?
[ 1
[ 1
[ 1
[Xl
[Xl
[Xl
The proposed service Is consistent with the general plan and zoning designations for the area and will not
impact the population or housing.
[ 1
[ 1
3. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS - Would the proposal result in or expose people to potential impacts
Involving:
a) Fault rupture?
[ ]
[ 1
b) Seismic ground shaking?
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ 1
[ 1
[ ]
[ 1
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
CEQA Checklist
7/99
[Xl
[Xl
e
.
-
Would the proposal result in
potential impact,s involving:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
c) Seismic ground failure, including
liquefaction?
[ ]
[ 1
d) Landslides or mudflows?
e) Erosion changes in topography or unstable
soil conditions from excavation, grading,
or fill?
[ 1
[ 1
[ 1
[ 1
f) Subsidence of the land?
g) Expansive soils?,
h) Unique geologic or physical features?
File No.: CUP 01-027
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
[ 1
[ ]
[ 1
[ ]
[ 1
Less Than
Significant
Impact
[ 1
[ 1
[ 1
[ ]
No
Impact
[Xl
[Xl
[Xl
[Xl
[Xl
[X]
White thlsentire region is subject to the effects of seismic activity, the. subject location has not been
determined to be especially susceptible to any of the above geologic problems.
4. WATER - Would the proposal result in:
a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage
patterns, or the rate and amount of surface
runoff?
[ ]
b) Exposure of people or property to water
related hazards such as flooding?
[ 1
c) Discharge into surface waters or other
aJteration of surface water quality (e.g.,
temperature, dissolved oxygen, or
turbidity)?
[ 1
d) Changes in the amount of surface walcr in
any water body?
[ 1
e) Changes in currents, or the course or
direction of water movements?
[ 1
f) Change in the quantity of ground waters,
either through direct additions or
withdrawals, or through interception of
any aquifer by cuts or excavations or
through substantial loss of ground water
recharge capability?
[ 1
g) Altered direction or rate.of flow of ground
waler?
[ 1
[ 1
h) Impacts to ground water quality?
[ 1
[ ]
[ 1
[ 1
[ ]
[ ]
[ 1
[ 1
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ 1
[ ]
CEQA Checklist
7/99
[Xl
[Xl
[Xl
[Xl
[Xl
[Xl
[Xl
[X]
FileNo.: CUP 01-027
Potentially
e Significant
Potentially Unless Less Than
Would the proposal result in Significant Mitigation Significant No
potential impacts involving: Impact Incorporated . Impact Impact
i) Substantial reduction in the amount of
ground water otherwise available for
public water supplies? [ ] [ ] [ I [X]
Tbe proposed site alterations would uot result in any of lbe above impacts.
5. Am QUALITY - Would the proposal:
a) Violate any air quality standard or
conlcibute to an existing or projected air
quality violation? [ J [ 1 [Xl
b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? [ ] [ ] [ 1 [X]
c) Alter air movement. moisture, or
temperature or cause any cbange in
climate? [ ] [ ] [Xl
d) Create objectionable odors? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
.
The proposed wireless communications facility will be subject to local air quality regulations as
administered by tbe Soutb Coast Air Quality Management District whicb sbould prevent any impacts
relative to items (a) and/or (b) above. There are no exterior improvements proposed tbat woutd result in
alterations to air movement, moisture or temperature, or cause a cbange in climate. No objectionable
odors bave beeu associated wilb lbe proposed use.
6. TRANSPORTATION I CmCULATION - Would the proposal result in:
a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic
congestion?
[ ]
[ ]
[ 1
[X]
b) Hazards to safety from design features
(e.g., sharp curves or dangerous
intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g.,
farm equipment)?
[ 1
[ 1
[ 1
[X]
c) Inadequate emergency accesses or access
to nearby uscs?
[ ]
[ ]
[ 1
[X]
d) Insufficient parking capacity on-site or
off-site?
[ 1
[ ]
[ 1
[X)
e) Hazards or barriers for peaeslrians or
bicyclists?
[ ]
[ ]
[Xl
[ I
--
t) Conflicts with adopted policies supponing
alternative transportation (e.g., bus
turnouts, bicycle racks)?
[ ]
[XI
g) Rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts?
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[Xl
CEQA Checklist
7/99
e
.
--
File No.: CUP 01-027
Would the proposal result in
potential impacts involving:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
No
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact
The proposed wireless communication facility would not generate traffic other than the occasional
maintenance access. The proposed project may be subject to mitigation measures should any traffic or
parking related impacts arise.
7. 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, animals and birds)? ( ] [ ] ( ] [Xl
b) Locally designated species (e.g.. beritage
trees)? [ ] [ ] [ 1 [Xl
c) Locally designated natural comrnunlUes
(e.g., oak forest, coastal babitat, etc.)? [ ] [ I [ ] [X]
d) Wetland habitat (e.g., marsh, riparian and
vernal pool)? [ ] [ ] [ I [X]
e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? [ ] [ ] [ ] [Xl
The proposed service will be bebind an industrial building in an industrial area. None of the above
circumstances exist.
8. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES - Would the proposal:
a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation
plans?
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[X]
b) Use non-renewable resources in a
wasteful and inefficient manner?
[ ]
[ ]
[ I
[Xl
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?
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[X]
The proposed project will be required to comply with adopted energy conservation requirements. None of
tbe above impacts have been associated with the proposed type of use.
9. HAZARDS - Would. the proposal involve:
a) A risk of accidental explosion or release
of hazardous supsiances (including, but
not limited to: oil, pesticides, chemicals
or radiation)?
[ ]
[ I
[ I
[X]
b) Possible interference with an emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation
plan?
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[Xl
CEQA Checklist
7/99
File No.: CUP 0.1-027
e
Would the proposal result in
potential impacts involving:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
c) The creation of any health hazard or
potential health hazard?
[ ]
[ I
[ J
[X]
d) Exposure of people to existing sources of
potential health hazards?
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[X]
e) lncreased fire hazard in areas with
flammable brush, grass or Irees?
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[Xl
The City Building Services and the City Fire Department will review the plans for the wireless
communications facility to prevent any of the above impacts. No existing sources of potential health
hazards have been identified at tbe subject property.
10. NOISE - Would the proposal result in:
a) lncreases in existing noise levels?
b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels?
I ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[XI
[XJ
.
The site of the proposed use is in an existing industrial building in an industrial area and neither of the
above impacts is associated with this location or the proposed use. Should any problems arise howe,'cr,
compliance with noise regulations wiU prevent any unreasonable noise levels.
11. PUBLIC SERVICES - Would the proposal have an effect upon. or result in a need for new or altered
government services in any of the following areas:
a) .Fire protection? [ ] [ ] [X]
b) Police protection? [ ] [ J [XI
c) Schools? [ ] [ ] [X]
d) Maintenance of public facilities, including
roads? [ ] [ ] [X]
e) Other governmental services? [ ] [ ] [Xl
The proposed use is consistent with the planned uses for thearen and will not result in any of the ahove
impacts.
12. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the proposal result in a need for new systems or
supplies, or substantial alterations to the following utilities:
a) Power or natural gas? [ ] [ ] [Xl
b) Communications systems? [ ] [ ] [X]
-- c) Local or regional water treatment or
distribution facilities? [ ] [ ] [ ] [Xl
CEQACheckIist
7/99
File No.: CUP 01-027
Potentially
e Significant
Potentially Unless Less Than
Would the proposal result in Significant Mitigation Significant No
potential impacts invoiving: Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
d) Sewer or seplic tanks? [ 1 [ ] [ ] [X]
e) Storm water drainage? [ ] [ 1 [ ] [X]
f) Solid waste disposal? [ ] [ 1 [X]
g) Local or regional water supplies? [ 1 [ 1 [X]
Its is not anticipated that aDY oC the above utilities or service systems will be significaDtly impacted.
Nevertheless, the proposed improvemeDts will be reviewed Cor, and the developer will be required to
provide, if Decessary, any Dew systems or supplies Decessary to mitigate aDY such impacts.
13. AESTHETICS - Would the proposal:
a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway?
[ 1
[ 1
b) Have a demonstrablc negative aesthetics
effect?
[ 1
r 1
c) Create light or glare?
[ ]
.
[Xl
[Xl
[ J
[ ]
[ ]
[X]
The proposed ose will be located by aD existiDg iDdustria! building, and any exterior improvements will be
required to comply with local architectural standards and iIIDmination limits and will not resulUn any of
the above impacts.
14. CULTURAL RESOURCES - Would the proposal:
a) Disturb paleontological resources?
[ 1
[ ]
[ ]
[ 1
[ 1
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 ar.ea?
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ 1
[ 1
[ ]
[ ]
[X]
[X]
[X]
[X]
[Xl
The proposed use will be iD aD existing iDdostria! buildiDg. NODe oC the above resources have beeD
ideDtified at the subject area, aDd Done of the impacts have beeD associated with the proposed ose.
15. RECREATION - Would the proposal:
-
a) Increase the demand for neighborhoOd or
regional parks or other recreational
facilities?
[ 1
[ ]
[ ]
CEQA Checklist
7/99
[X]
,
FileNo.: CUP 01-027
Potentially
e Significant
Potentially Unless Less Than
Would the proposal result in Significant Mitigation Significant No
potential impacts involving: Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
The proposed use will be in an existing industrial building, and the proposed project willl)ot.result in any
of the above impacts.
16. MANDA TORY FlNDINGS 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 eliminate a plant or
animal community, reduce the number or
restrict the range of a rare or endangered
plant or animal or eliminate impnrtant
examples of the major periods of
California history or prehistory?
[ ]
[ ]
[ )
[Xl
.
b) Does the project have the potential to
achieve short-tenn, to the disadvantage of
long-tenn. environmcntal goals?
[ 1
[ 1
[ ]
[X]
c) 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 thc effects of
past projects, the effects of other current
projects. and the effects of probable future
project.)
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[X]
d) Does the project have environmental
effects, which will cause substantial
adverse effects on human beings. either
directly or indirectly?
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[X]
The proposed use will be in an existing industrial bnilding, and the proposed projeet will not result in any
of the above impacts.
17. EARLIER ANALYSES
No additional documents were referenced
pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or
other CEQA .processes to analyze any noted
effeet(s) resulting from the proposal.
.
CEQA Checklist
7/99