Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm Reports/2001/07/11 AGENDA PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Chula Vista, California 6:00 p.m Wednesday, July 11, 2001 Council Chambers 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL/MOTIONS TO EXCUSE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE and MOMENT OF SILENCE INTRODUCTORY REMARKS ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Opportunity for members of the public to speak to the Planning Commission on any subject matter within the Commission's jurisdiction but not an item on today's agenda. Each speaker's presentation may not exceed three minutes. 1. PUBLIC HEARING: PCC-00-58; Conditional Use Permit to install, operate and maintain a wireless telecommunications facility consisting of a 66- foot high light standard supporting nine antennas; and an associated equipment building at an unlit baseball field within Rohr Park, 4548 Sweetwater Road. Applicant Cox/Sprint PCS. Project Manager: Kim Vander Bie Adjournment of the Regular Planning Commission meeting to the immediately following workshop. PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP 1. Graffiti Abatement Program Presenter: Richard Preuss, Crime-Free Multi-Housing Coordinator DIRECTOR'S REPORT COMMISSIONER COMMENTS: ADIOURNMENT: COMPLIANCE WITH THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT The City of Chula Vista, in complying with the American with Disabilities Act (ADA), requests individuals who require special accommodations to access, attend, and/or participate in a City meeting, activity, or service, request such accommodations at least forty-eight hours in advance for meetings, and five days for scheduled services and activities. Please contact Diana Vargas for specific information at (619) 691-5101 or Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf (TOO) at PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA STATEMENT Item: 1 Meeting Date: 7/11/01 ITEM TITLE: Continued Public Hearing: PCC-00-58; Conditional Use Permit to install, operate and maintain a wireless telecommunications facility consisting of a 66-foot-high light standard supporting nine antennas; and an associated equipment building at an unlit baseball field within Rohr Park, 4548 Sweetwater Road. Applicant: Cox/Sprint PCS Cox/Sprint PCS is requesting a Conditional Use Permit to construct and operate an unmanned cellular communications facility at 4548 Sweetwater Road (Rohr Park). The project will consist of a 384-square-foot equipment and storage building, and a 66-foot-high light standard supporting nine antennas. The light standard location is proposed in the right field of a currently unlit baseball diamond at the park. The City will use revenue generated from the antennas to purchase and install five additional lights at the ball field. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: On January 17,2001, this project was brought before the Planning Commission. Public testimony was heard, and the project was continued until the Initial Study for the six light standards could be completed. (See minutes, Attachment 4.) The project had previously been continued from December 13, 2000. On June 18, 2001, the Resource Conservation Commission determined that the Initial Study prepared for this project was adequate, and recommended adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration. The public comment period, as noticed by the Environmental Review Coordinator regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND), ended on July 5, 2001. The final adoption of the MND is subject to review at the Planning Commission public hearing, with final approval at the City Council public hearing. RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission adopt the Resolution PCC-OO-58 (Attachment 2) recommending adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration and approval of the Rohr Park wireless communications facility, subject to the conditions of approval (including the mitigation monitoring and reporting program measures). DISCUSSION: 1. Site Characteristics The project site is an unlit baseball field, east and across the parking lot from a lit baseball field, within a 23-acre public park owned by the City of Chula Vista. It is accessed by a 400-foot-long driveway to the north that runs parallel to Sweetwater Road, which is about / Page 2, Item: Meeting Date: 7/11/01 five feet higher in elevation than the field. There is a dirt parking lot east of the field, and a paved parking lot west of it. Between the paved parking lot and the field are a block wall restroom building and a few small trees. The baseball field consists of a clay infield surrounded by a grassy outfield. A chain link fence encloses the diamond on three sides, and spectator bleachers are positioned on two sides. There are some light poles in the paved parking lot, but there are currently none in the ball field. 2. General Plan, Zoning, and Land Use General Plan Zoning Current Land Use Site: Public & Open Space AD-Agricultural with Rohr Park Parks & Recreation design overlay North: Residential, Low Residential (County) Single-Family Residential South: Public & Open Space AD-Agricultural with Rohr Park Parks & Recreation design overlay East: Residential RE-Residential Estates Vacant Low-Medium West: Residential, Low RED-Residential Estates Single-Family Residential 3. Proposal Cox/Sprint proposes to construct an unmanned cellular communications facility at 4548 Sweetwater Road, in particular, a 66-foot-high light standard consisting of field lights at approximately 55-feet-high, and nine antennas (each of which is approximately six-feet- long and eight-inches-wide) at the top of the pole, 11 feet higher. The pole would be placed on the southwest edge of the infield, near right field. Telephone, electrical and radio equipment would be placed in a 384-square-foot building to be constructed directly north of an existing restroom building west of the ball field, and would be constructed of the same materials as the restroom building (block wall with asphalt shingles). The new building would also include a storage area for the park. The proposed site would provide service to portions of Sweetwater Road, commercial areas along Bonita Road, and surrounding residential areas. The revenue generated to the City of Chula Vista by the proposed light standard in Rohr Park would be approximately $80,000 over a five-year time period. The city has elected to enter into an agreement with the applicant that would result in prepayment of up to $80,000 for installation of five other lights in the ball field, as the one light standard this project proposes would not adequately light the field. The 55-foot-high lights would be ,2 Page 3, Item: Meeting Date: 7/11/01 installed in conjunction with the proposed light standard, or shortly thereafter. The City's Parks & Recreation Department is supportive of this proposal, as this would provide the park with a second lit baseball field. The proposed light standard supporting nine antennas is an Unclassified Use, according to Section 19.54 of the City of Chula Vista Municipal Code. Section 19.54.010 states that matters "possessing characteristics of such unique and special form as to make impractical their being included automatically in any classes of use as set forth in the various zones herein defined" are unclassified uses, and, as such, are required to have Conditional Use Permits. Section 19.54.020 requires the project to be considered by the City Council, upon recommendation by the Planning Commission. 4. Analvsis In order to accomplish its desired radius of service, the applicant originally sought two or three different locations to place antennas. Those locations included a church in San Diego County at the intersection of Sweetwater Road and Bonita Road; the Kaiser Permanente building at the intersection of Willow Street and Bonita Road; and the water tank on Greenwood Place. It was determined that the buildings on the south side of Bonita Road were too low to meet the applicant's objectives. Therefore, the applicant concentrated on locations north of the Sweetwater River, and discovered that the Rohr Park location could serve a broad area, requiring only one antenna site rather than two or three to accomplish the desired radius of service. The city encourages applicants of wireless telecommunications facilities to co-locate with other companies whenever possible in order to keep the number of new poles and structures to a minimum. There are currently very few wireless communication facilities within the city limits in the region where the light standard/antenna is proposed, however. Two companies have co-located through architectural integration at the intersection of Willow Street and Bonita Road, and one company has architecturally integrated on the water tank at Greenwood Place. The water tank was determined to be too high for the applicant's objectives. With the attached conditions of approval, the proposal is consistent with the City of Chula Vista Municipal Code and the General Plan. CONCLUSION: Staff recommends approval of the proposed conditional use permit in accordance with the attached Planning Commission Resolution. 3 Page 4, Item: Meeting Date: 7/11/01 Attachments 1. Locator Map 2. Planning Commission Resolution 3. Draft City Council Resolution 4. Minutes from 1/17/01 PC Meeting 5. Mitigated Negative Declaration 6. Disclosure Statement H:\HOME\PLANNING\KIM\REPORTS\PCC-OO-58 Cox Sprint, Rohr.doc 9- ROHR PARK CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL GOLF COURSE 9 C HULA VISTA PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT LOCATOR PROJECT COX/SPRINT pcs PROJECT DESCRIPTION: C9 APPUCANT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PROJECT Rohr Park, ADDRESS: 4548 SWeetwater Road Request: Proposed wireless telecommunications facility consisting of up to (9) panel antennas mounted on SCALE: FILE NUMBER: -r:;- a 72 foot light standard. All equipment will be located NORTH No Scale PCC 00-58 - on the ground adjacent to the base of the pole. C:\myfilesllocators\PCC0058.cdr 01/05/01 ATTACHMENT 1 RESOLUTION NO. PCC-00-58 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL GRANT A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, PCC-00-58, TO COX/SPRINT PCS TO CONSTRUCT AN UNMANNED CELLULAR COMMUNICATIONS FACILITY AT 4548 SWEETWATER ROAD (ROHR PARK). WHEREAS, a duly verified application for a Conditional Use Permit was filed with the City of Chula Vista Planning Department on May 12,2000 by Cox/Sprint PCS; and WHEREAS, said application requests permission to construct an unmanned cellular communications facility consisting of a 66-foot-high light standard supporting nine antennas, and a 384- square-foot equipment building in the area of a baseball field within Rohr Park at 4548 Sweetwater Road; and WHEREAS, the Resource Conservation Commission determined that the initial study was adequate and recommended adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration as to the effects of the proposal on the environment in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act; and WHEREAS, the Planning Director set the time and place for a hearing on said Conditional Use Permit and notice of said hearing, together with its purpose, was given by its publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the city and its mailing to property owners and residents within 500 feet of the exterior boundaries of the property at least 10 days prior to the hearing; and WHEREAS, the hearing was scheduled and advertised for December 13, 2000 at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the Planning Commission; was continued to January 17, 200 I at 6:00 p.m.; and was continued again to July II, 200 I; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered all reports, evidence, and testimony presented at the public hearings with respect to subject application. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION does hereby recommend that the City Council approve Conditional Use Permit PCC-00-58 in accordance with the findings and subject to the conditions and findings contained in the attached City Council Resolution. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT a copy of this resolution be transmitted to the City Council. PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA, this 11 th day of July 200 I by the following vote, to-wit: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Kevin O'Neil, Chair ATTEST: Diana Vargas, Secretary (., 11:\IIOME\PLANNING\KIM\Planning Commission Resolutions\PCC-OO-58 Cox Sprint, Rohr.doc ATTACHMENT 2 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, PCC-00-58, TO COX/SPRINT PCS TO CONSTRUCT AN UNMANNED CELLULAR COMMUNICATIONS FACILITY AT 4548 SWEETWATER ROAD (ROHR PARK). A. RECITALS 1. Project Site WHEREAS, the parcel that is the subject matter of this resolution is represented in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, and for the purpose of general description is located at Rohr Park, 4548 Sweetwater Road ("Project Site"); and 2. Project Applicant WHEREAS, on May 12, 2000 a duly verified application for a Conditional Use Permit (PCC-00-58) was filed with the City of Chula Vista Planning Division by Cox/Sprint PCS (Applicant); and 3. Project Description; Application for Conditional Use Permit WHEREAS, Applicant requests permission to construct an unmanned cellular communications facility consisting of a 66-foot-high light standard supporting nine antennas, and a 384-square-foot fenced equipment and storage building on the Project Site; and 4. Environmental Determination WHEREAS, the Resource Conservation Commission determined that the Initial Study prepared by the Environmental Review Coordinator was adequate and recommended adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration on June 18, 2001, in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act. The Planning Commission recommended adoption ofthe same Mitigated Negative Declaration on July 11, 2001. 5. Planning Commission Record on Application WHEREAS, the Planning Commission scheduled and advertised a public hearing on the Project for December 13, 2000; continued the Project to January 17,2001; and continued the project again to July 11, 2001; and 7 ATTACHMENT 3 WHEREAS, at the July 11, 2001 meeting, the Planning Commission considered a motion to support staff's recommendation for the cellular facility; and 6. City Council Record of Application WHEREAS, a duly called and noticed public hearing on the Project was held before the City Council of the City of Chula Vista on to receive the recommendation of the Planning Commission, and to hear public testimony with regard to same. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council does hereby find, determine and resolve as follows: B. PLANNING COMMISSION RECORD The proceedings and all evidence on the Project introduced before the Planning Commission at their public hearing on this Project held on July 11, 2001 and the minutes and resolution resulting therefrom, are hereby incorporated into the record of this proceeding. C. CERTIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE WITH CEQA The City Council does hereby find that the environmental determination of the Environmental Review Coordinator, the Resource Conservation Commission, and the Planning Commission was reached in accordance with requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act, the State EIR Guidelines, and the Environmental Review Procedures of the City of Chula Vista. D. INCORPORATION OF MITIGATION MEASURES The City does hereby adopt and incorporate herein as conditions for this approval all applicable mitigation measures, as set forth in the Environmental Document IS-01-044. E. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FINDINGS The City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby make the findings required by the City's rules and regulations for the issuance of conditional use permits, as herein below set forth, and sets forth, thereunder, the evidentiary basis that permits the stated finding to be made. 1. That the proposed use at the location is necessary or desirable to provide a service or facility which will contribute to the general well being of the neighborhood or the community. The proposed cellular facility is necessary to provide and maintain a quality cellular phone system in southern Chula Vista, specifically providing service for portions of Highway 54, Sweetwater Road, commercial areas along Bonita Road, and surrounding residential areas '6 Resolution No. Page #3 in all directions. The cellular facility will contribute to the general well being of the community by facilitating telephonic communication in the area surrounding said facility. 2. That such use will not under the circumstances of the particular case, be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinity or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity. Emissions from cellular antennas have been shown to be below any levels that would cause hazardous biological effects. In addition, cellular antemta emissions are so far below all recognized safety standards that they constitute no hazard to public health or safety. The project has been conditioned that the applicant prove compliance with the accepted ANSI standards for emissions control. 3. That the proposed use will comply with the regulations and conditions specified in the code for such use. Conditional Use Permit PCC-00-58 requires the permittee to comply with all the applicable regulations and standards specified in the Municipal Code for such use. The conditioning of PCC-00-58 is approximately proportional both in nature and extent to the impact created by the proposed development in that the conditions imposed are directly related to and are of a nature and scope related to the size and impact of the project. 4. That the granting of this conditional use permit will not adversely affect the general plan of the City or the adopted plan of any government agency. Land use patterns within the City will not be affected by the granting of PCC-OO-58. Monthly maintenance visits that the project may generate will not result in the intensification of the use of the site and is an insignificant increase in the traffic for the neighborhood. The integration of the light standard with other field lights will not be a visual intrusion in Chula Vista. F. TERMS OF GRANT OF PERMIT The City Council hereby grants Conditional Use Permit PCC-00-58 subject to the following conditions whereby the applicant and/or property owner shall: 1 . Construct the Project as described in the application, except as modified herein to allow for the light standard and equipment/storage building. The light standard shall be no taller than 66- feet, and shall support no more than nine antennas. The telephone, electrical and radio equipment shall be placed in a new 384-square-foot block wall building adjacent to the ball field, and shall match an existing restroom building to the south of the new building. cr -. ._,-_.,-_._.,-_.,-_.,-~....-"., Resolution No. Page #4 2. Cooperate in good faith with other communications companies in co-locating additional antenna on pole structures and/or on the tops of buildings, provided said co-locates have received a conditional use permit for such use at said site from the City. Permittee shall exercise good faith in co-locating with other communications companies and sharing the permitted site, provided such shared use does not give rise to a substantial technical level- or quality-of-service impairment of the permitted use (as opposed to a competitive conflict or financial burden). In the event a dispute arises as to whether permittee has exercised good faith in accommodating other users, the City may require a third party technical study at the expense of either or both the permittee and applicant. 3. Comply with ANSI standards for EMF emissions. Within six (6) months of the Building Division final inspection of the project, the Applicant shall submit a project implementation report to the Director of Planning and Building which provides cumulative field measurements of radio frequency (EMF) power densities of all antennas installed at subject site. The report shall quantify the EMF emissions and compare the results with currently accepted ANSI standards. Said report shall be subject to review and approval by the Director of Planning and Building for consistency with the project proposal report and the accepted ANSI standards. If on review the City in its discretion finds that the Project does not meet ANSI standards, the City may revoke or modify this conditional use permit. 4. Ensure that the project does not cause localized interference with reception of area television or radio broadcasts. If on review the City, in its discretion, finds that the project interferes with such reception, the City may revoke or modify the conditional use permit. 5. Provide one 2A: lOBC fire extinguisher at a location satisfactory to the Fire Marshal upon completion of construction. 6. Obtain all necessary permits from the Chula Vista Building Division and Fire Department. 7. Comply with the City's Municipal Code noise standards. Within three (3) months of the Building Division's final inspection, the applicant shall submit a report to the Director of Planning and Building which provides cumulative field measurements of facility noises. The report shall quantify the levels and compare the results with current standard specified in the Municipal Code for public and open space uses. Said report shall be subject to review and approval by the Director of Planning and Building for consistency with the project proposal dated May 12, 2000 and Municipal Code noise standards. If on review the City finds that the project does not meet the Municipal Code noise standards, the City may revoke or modify the permit. /0 Resolution No. Page #5 8. This permit shall be subject to any and all new, modified or deleted conditions imposed after approval of this permit to advance a legitimate governmental interest related to health, safety or welfare which the City shall impose after advance written notice to the Permittee and after the City has given to the Permittee the right to be heard with regard thereto. However, the City, in exercising this reserved right/condition, may not impose a substantial expense or deprive Permittee of a substantial revenue source, which the Permittee can not, in the normal operation of the use permitted, be expected to economically recover. 9. This Conditional Use Permit shall become void and ineffective if not utilized or extended within one year from the effective date thereof, in accordance with Section 19.14.260 of the Municipal Code. 10. Upon cessation of the business operations and use of the light standard for antennas by the applicant, the applicant has 90 days to submit a substitute user to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning and Building Department and/or remove the antennas from the light standard and equipment from the storage building. Any changes on the conditional use permit shall require modification. 11. Applicant/operator shall and does hereby agree to indemnify, protect, defend and hold harmless City, its City Council members, officers, employees, agents and representatives, from and against any and all liabilities, losses, damages, demands, claims and costs, including court costs and attorney's fees (collectively, liabilities) incurred by the City arising, directly or indirectly, from (a) City's approval and issuance of this Conditional Use Permit, (b) City's approval or issuance of any other permit or action, whether discretionary or non-discretionary, in connection with the use contemplated herein, and c) Applicant's installation and operation of the facility permitted hereby, including, without limitation, any and all liabilities arising from the emission by the facility of electromagnetic fields or other energy waves or emissions. Applicant/operator shall acknowledge their agreement to this provision by executing a copy of this Conditional Use Permit where indicated, below. Applicant's/operator's compliance with this provision is an express condition ofthis Conditional Use Permit and this provision shall be binding on any and all of Applicant's/operator's successors and assigns. 12. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit a site plan which identifies any and all existing site features which are anticipated to be disturbed/disrupted by construction activity related to the project and appropriate notes and construction details which describe the construction methods and materials to be utilized to restore site features to original condition. Said site plan is subject to the review and approval by the Director of Public Works and the Director of Parks and Recreation or their designees prior to issuance of building permit. !I ..-.---..-...'.--.".-......--.,....'... Resolution No. Page #6 13. Project site shall be inspected six months subsequent to the issuance of building permits to check conformance with project plans and conditions of approval. 14. A graffiti resistant treatment shall be specified for all wall and building surfaces. This shall be noted on any building and wall plans and shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Director prior to issuance of building permits. Additionally, the project shall conform to Sections 9.20.055 and 9.20.035 of the C.V.M.C. regarding graffiti control. 15. The power source for the project shall be independent of existing site facilities. Electrical service connections and the locations of related components such as meters and transformers shall be coordinated with SDG&E and City ofChula Vista Electrician prior to issuance of building permit. Disruption of existing site improvements and facilities, including site landscaping improvements, resulting from the installation of said electrical services shall be replaced/repaired in kind subject to the approval of the Director of Public Works, Director of Planning and Building, and Director of Parks and Recreation or designees. 16. Damage of existing park grounds and/or facilities resulting from the installation and/or maintenance of the antenna including but not limited to turf areas, walkways, irrigation systems, any and all site utilities and fixtures shall be replaced in kind and under the authority and supervision of the Director of Public Works and Director of Parks and Recreation or designees. 17. Installation and scheduled maintenance of the antenna and related components shall be coordinated with parks operation personnel and on-site recreation staff prior to commencement of work to minimize the potential for conflicts with recreation programs occurring at the site. 18. Any disruption or interruption of site service resulting from the installation of and/or continued maintenance of the antenna and related components shall be mitigated to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works and Director of Parks and Recreation or Designees. G. EXECUTION AND RECORDATION OF RESOLUTION OF APPROVAL The property owner and the applicant shall execute this document by signing the lines provided below, said execution indicating that the property owner and applicant have each read, understood and agreed to the conditions contained herein. Upon execution, this document shall be recorded with the County Clerk of the County of San Diego, at the sole expense of the property owner and/or applicant, and a signed, stamped copy returned to the Planning Department. Failure to return a signed and stamped copy of this recorded document within ten days of recordation to the City Clerk shall indicate the property owner/applicant's desire that the project, and the corresponding application for building permits and/or a business license, be held in abeyance /<2. _.._,._.,----'_.,~._---,._._,._.,. .. Resolution No. Page #7 without approval. Said document will also be on file in the City Clerk' Office and known as Document No. Signature of Representative of Cox/Sprint PCS Date H. ADDITIONAL TERM OF GRANT This permit shall expire five (5) years after the date of its approval by the City Council. After the first five (5) years, the Zoning Administrator shall review this Conditional Use Permit for compliance with the conditions of approval, and shall determine, in consultation with the Applicant, whether or not the tower height can be lowered. 1. NOTICE OF EXEMPTION The City Council directs the Environmental Review Coordinator to post a Notice of Exemption and file the same with the County Clerk. J. INVALIDITY; AUTOMATIC REVOCATION It is the intention of the City Council that its adoption of this Resolution is dependent upon the enforceability of each and every term, provision and condition herein stated; and that in the event that anyone or more terms, provisions or conditions are determined by a Court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable, this resolution and the permit shall be deemed to be automatically revoked and of no further force and effect ab initio. Presented by Approved as to form by Robert A. Leiter Director of Planning and Building John M. Kaheny City Attorney H:\HOME\PLANNING\KIM\City Council Resolutions\PCC-OO~58 Cox Sprint, Rohr.doc /5 ROHR PARK CHULA \I1STA MUNJCIPAl GOLF COURSE 9 C HULA VISTA PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT LOCATOR PROJECT COX/SPRINT PCS PROJECT DESCRIPTION: C) APPUCANT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PROJECT Rohr Park, ADDRESS: 4548 Sweetwater Road Request: ProPOsed wireless telecommunications facility consisting of up to (9) panel antennas mounted on SCAlE: FILE NUMBER: a 72 foot light standard. All equipment will be located NORTH No Scale PCC 00-58 on the ground adjacent to the base of the pole. C:\myfiles\locators\PCC0058.cdr 01/05/01 )'1' EXHmIT A Planning Commission Minutes - 4 - January 17, 2001 2. PUBLIC HEARING: PCC-00-58; Conditional Use Permit to install, operate and maintain a wireless telecommunications facility consisting of a 66-foot high light standard supporting nine antennas, and an associated equipment building at 4548 Sweetwater Road (Rohr Park). Cox/Sprint PCS. Jim Sandoval, Assistant Planning Director stated that this item has received a considerable amount of public interest, therefore, staff held a community meeting to hear those concerns. The purpose of tonight's meeting is to give the Commission an opportunity to hear comments from the community, and staff is therefore recommending that the Commission not take any action tonight, but that the Public Hearing be opened, public testimony be taken, and thatthis item be continued to April 11 ,2001 for final action. Background: Kim Vander Bie, Associate Planner, reported that Cox/Sprint PCS is requesting a Conditional Use Permit to install, operate and maintain a wireless telecommunications facility consisting of a 384 sf equipment and storage building, and a 66-foot high light standard supporting nine antennas at 4548 Sweetwater Road (Rohr Park). The light standard location is proposed in the right field of a baseball diamond at the park, and the project would result in the Ie;- ATTACHMENT 4 Planning Commission Minutes :J January 17, 2001 City adding five more lights to the baseball field. The project site is an unlit baseball field across the parking lot of a lit baseball field. The pole would be placed on the southwest edge of the endfield near right field. The proposed site would provide service to portions of Sweetwater Road, commercial areas along Bonita Road and surrounding residential areas. The revenue generated to the City by the proposed light standard w,?uld be approximately $80,000 over a five-year time period and the City has elected to enter into an agreement with the applicant that would result in prepayment of installation of five other lights in the ball field. The 55-foot high lights would be installed in conjunction with the proposed light standard or shortly thereafter. Because of the additional lights that would be added as a result of the monopole, the Environmental Review Coordinator has concluded that this project is subject to CEQA and an Initial Study is required. There were seven private citizens, staff and the applicant present at the community forum and three primarv concerns that were expressed. Staff's responses to these concerns are: 1. That the monopole would be the tallest structure in the area. Topo maps from GIS clearlv indicate that the monopole would not be the tallest structure in the area. Copies of those maps will be presented to the Commission at the next hearing. 2. That putting the monopole in the park is perceived to be a commercial enterprise by the City. The $80,000 generated by this proposal would be put back into the park and not into the City's General Fund. 3. Health concerns. This project would compliance with FCC health standards. Staff recommendation: That the Planning Commission review the application, hear public testimony, and continue this project until the Initial Study is completed. Public Hearing Opened 7:55. Mike Sloop, representing Sprint pes stated that various sites in the area were looked into, but other than the proposed site, there existed topographical constraints and would not offer optimal coverage to the area. This proposal meets the federal safety standards that are overseen by the Federal Communications Commission. Based on the concerns that were raised by the citizens, the applicant re-evaluated the calculations for EMF emissions in the areas closes to the monopole, which would be the area around first base and some bleacher seating, and it would be less than 1/2 of 1 % of the FCC /tp Planning Commission Minutes - 6 - January 17, 2001 standard, which is over 200 times below the standard. Peter Pearce, 4802 Birch Bark, Bonita, CA, representing the Bonita Woods homeowners group expressed their collective concern with "commercializing" the park and the precedence this would set for other carriers to come into the park as well. In their opinion, parks are designed to have a large open space with vegetation and to be enjoyed by people, not for artificial structures or commercia! enterprises. Gil Hartson, 4231 Sweetwater Road, Bonita, CA stated he opposes the project because the pole would create an eye-sore. Additionally, he is not convinced that the emissions would not create d hazardous condition because the effect of EMF exposure is not an exact science. Christa Hoffman, 3580 Evergreen Road, Bonita, CA stated that the beautiful view of the park she enjoys from her home of mature vegetation, Jovlul noise of families and children enjoying the park, and the serenity it brings would be diminished with the 66 foot high light standard with 9 antennas. which is totally incompatible with the park. Therefore, she urged the Commission to vole against it. Mike Kujawa, 3580 Evergreen Road, Bonita, CA stated he opposes the facility as it would be a very imposing and the tallest structure in the Immediate area. He also is not convinced that the health hazards are as benign as previously stated because the standards that are used to measure today are nine years old. Lilia Pedrum, 4328 Grace Road, Bonita, CA opposes the project because of the visual impacts the artificial structure will create. Additionally, as a cancer survivor, she is especially concerned with the potential health hazards the project could pose, therefore, she urged the Commission to vote against it. Phil Pedrum, 4328 Grace Road, Bonita, CA stated that he too is concerned with health risks and with the light standard being an eye-sore that could potentially diminish his property value, therefore, he urged the Commission to vote against it. MSC (McCann/Cortes) (7-0) to continue public hearing to April 11, 2001. Motion carried. /7 Mitigated Negative Declaration PROJECT NAME: Rohr Park Outdoor Lighting System & Wireless Communications facility PROJECT LOCATION: Rohr Park, SoftballlSoccer field # 18 4548 Sweetwater Road ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO.: 593-240-22 PROJECT APPLICANT: City of Chula Vista & Sprint PCS CASE NO.: IS-O 1-044 DATE: May 29, 2001 A. Project Setting The project site consists a softball field with a soccer field overlay located in Rohr Park ("ball field"). Rohr Park is an approximately 23 acre public park located south of Sweetwater Road and the northern City limits, west of Bonita Road and east of Willow Road (Exhibit A - Locator Map). The park is located within the 1 DO-year flood plain of the Sweetwater River Basin and north of the Chula Vista Municipal Golf Course ("Golf Course"). Access to Rohr Park is via three entrances off of Sweetwater Road. Rohr Park is developed as an active community park with two equipped playgrounds at the western end, a jogging trail connecting around the Golf Course, an equestrian facility at the eastern end, and a miniature train ride in the central area. The park also contains one lighted and three unlighted softball/soccer fields ("ball field") used by Chula Vista organized sports leagues. The lighted ball field (#17) is located in the eastern area of the park. The two unlighted ball fields (#15 & #16) are located in the western area of the park and the third (#18) is located in the eastern area. The subject unlighted ball field is referred to as ball field #18. It is located approximately 120- feet east of the lighted ball field and is separated by a paved parking lot. Restroom facilities are situated between the paved parking lot and the subject ball field. A dirt parking lot and equestrian facility are located immediately east of the ball field. A park entrance is located immediately northeast of the subject ball field. This entrance provides access to both the paved and dirt parking lots. Sweetwater Road is approximately 5 feet higher in elevation than the subject ball field. Tall mature trees are planted throughout and at the perimeter of the park. or 1 05/30/01 ATTACHMENTS Zoning and General Plan designations for the land uses adjacent to the 23-acre park are as follows: General Plan Zoning Current Land Use North: Residential, Low Residential (County) Church & Single Single Family Res. Rohr Park! C.V. Golf Course South: Public & Open Space AD- Agricultural with Design overlay East: West: Residential, Low Medium Residential, Low Commercial (County) RED - Residential Estate (Design Modifying District) Commercial & Office Single-Family Res. B. Project Description The City of Chula Vista is proposing a sports lighting system in an existing softban field/soccer field (#18) overlay located at the eastern area ofRohr Community Park (Exhibit B - Arial Photo). The system will include six (6) sport field lighting standards (Exhibit C - Light Structure Location Map). The overall height of each light standard varies from 60-feet to 70-feet depending on the specific location at the edge of the sports field area. Four of the light standards win be 60-feet in height (two at the home plate area and two at the outfield), one will be 70 feet high (between home plate and 3rd base), and the sixth light structure win be 66-feet high (at the southwest edge of the infield, near right field). Cox/Sprint PCS proposes to incorporate a cellular transceiver base station ("base station") with a total of nine (9) antennas on the sixth light structure. The proposed base station would provide wireless phone service for commercial and residential customers along portions of Sweetwater Road and Bonita Road. The lights will be located approximately 56 feet from the base of the pole and the antennas will be located at the top of the pole, approximately 11 feet higher. The antennas consist of 3 sectors with 3 antennas per sector. The antennas are approximately six feet long and eight inches wide. This combination light standardlbase station will have a slightly varied appearance from the other light standards. The galvanized steel pole win not have the slight taper in the diameter of the pole from the base to the top of the pole like the other light structures, but will remain a constant diameter from the base to the top of the pole. The proposal includes a 384 square foot (12' x 32') concrete block equipment building. The equipment building is proposed directly north of the existing restroom building west of the ban field (Exhibit D ~ Base Station & Equipment Building location). The proposed building will be constructed to match the restroom building. Telephone, electrical, and radio equipment for the PCS transceiver base station would be housed within 264 square feet of the -.)JUilding and 120 square feet win be dedicated for the storage of parks equipment. C. Compliance with Zoning and Plans Rohr Park is zoned AD ~ Agricultural with design overlay and designated Public & Open Space, Parks & Recreation on the City's General Plan. The proposed project is consistent with the Zoning and General Plan designation. 19 2 OS/29/01 .--..----.~.-.---.-'-----....,---'1.--~-,..~---.....----......- D. Public Comments On March 27, 2001 a Notice of Initial Study was circulated to property owners within 500- foot radius of the proposed project site. The public comment period ended April 6, 2001. No written comments were received. E. Identification of Environmental Effects An Initial Study conducted by the City of Chula Vista (including an attached Environmental Checklist form) determined that the proposed project will not have a significant environmental effect, and the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report will not be required. This Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared in accordance with Section 15070 of the State CEQA Guidelines. 1. Aesthetics & Mandatory Findings of Significance Light and Glare The proposed project will result in a new source of light and glare on the unlighted ball field and views from the adjacent residential uses could be noticeably affected because of the current absence of lighting at the project site. To reduce any potential light and glare impacts to surrounding residential properties the proposed lighting system shall be directed downward to provide the uniform distribution of lighting on to the ball field and soccer field overlay and reduce wasted spill light. The project will be subject to mitigation measures outlined below in Section F. 2. Hazards Fuel Spillage A 24-hour power outage is an unlikely event, however, an emergency power generator would be brought to the site if an extended power outage (i.e., in excess of two hours) should occur. These generators have an internal diesel fuel tank that provides a minimum of 24 hours of run time. To prevent any fuel spillage associated with the use of a generator, the project will be subject to mitigation measures outlined below in Section F. F. Mitigation Necessary to Avoid Significant Impacts Project-specific mitigation measures are required to reduce potential environmental impacts identified in the Initial Study to a less than significant level. The mitigation measures will be made a condition of approval, as well as requirements of the attached Mitigation Monitoring Program (Attachment "A"). Aesthetics & Mandatory Findings of Significance 1. The proposed lighting system shall be directed downward to provide a uniform distribution of lighting on to the subject ball field and soccer field overlay and reduce wasted spill light. Ju 3 OS/29/01 Hazards 1. In the event that an emergency power generator is needed, a liner would be required to prevent any fuel spillage that could result in a potential fire hazard. I agree to implement the mitigation measures required as stated in this Section (F) of this Mitigated Negative Declaration. 0/tidJdr Jliu--> At]~ ~{ s rf ~ ~ 'f c S Name, Title . ItJjLf./'iJ I , 1 Date 7'rJ~~~~ ~,~o. ame, Title ' ~:", "'~ Da / M ' >kc....\- (~"("<U- fo>-. blY'eL\.'G\ dot- ~4 ~ ~h ""'" \ G. ConsultatIOn .--> ~I . 1. City of Chula Vista: Edalia Olivo-Gomez, Environmental Projects Manager Jim Sandoval, Assistant Director of Planning & Building Beverly Blessent, Principal Planner Kim Vander Bie, Associate Planner Mary Hofinockel, Principal Landscape Architect Michael Meacham, Special Operations Manager Applicant's Agent: Rob Kerbs, R.C. Riley & Associates Andy CampbeJl, Director of Parks & Recreation 2. Documents Chula Vista Municipal Code Chula Vista General Plan 3. Initial Study This environmental determination is based on the attached Initial Study, any comments received on the Initial Study and any comments received during the public review period for this Mitigated Negative Declaration. The report reflects the independent judgement of the City of Chula Vista. Further information regarding the environmental review of this project is available from the Chula Vista Planning Department, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 91910. 0~/~~~. Marilyn R. F. Ponseggi ..) Environmental Review Coordinator Date: U/'T//}I I I . cJ-( 4 05/30/01 'f Y ~r --;\:::\W-' / \~'\;X;-.~\,.~.~~\~~~ '\ ~ ,y "/\\/~~L----:::/:'--- -\ r -llJ ~ )~/\ ~ ~ If'- \....Y --<t y PROJECT (' 8 ~\5? (~~~ VI. ~~:HRCOMMUNITY 'iP ~ ~) /;;j~ /~ . ~ \' \)..'5:'\ / YA\..'< ~\\\ ~y /~~ c~ l: '\\. If nl'J CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL )// \,----" .i\ (:\ (~~V ~. GOC GOURS~;;::/.\ ~ '{ ~~ \S: n-'-;S; \~'" \]0 ~ ~I \k ,~ ~ \,?:~ \M' ~\~If ~~/ ~ ~~)\. ~ ~! I\' \~I ~ ,,~V/\(: 1:' .--1-; I \ \ J,~'\\p\~ ~ , (~;/\ ./'\ ~ ~ ~\~~\ \ ~'~),\ '" /\ ~ \~pv~ \ %' ~\==\:.- Y'P ~ C h ~ -I' 1\\-t~ ~ .1'\':~ /J .,-~r ~ t-IYM ~ ::\",\\ ;;~'LL1.. I~ ~ ~~~01r"- ~^ ^' "'-J.] ~ \\~~ ~0r--n><J;lh \~\f-\-'\h~ ~ \\ \~:z 0<~ ~ ('0 ,(' ~ \ dyK.:iT\~~ ~~~ C\ ~ ') /\ ~J ~- ;>~' ,y ~ 1: -'~ H~~ <1J.~ ,.O\~~ ~~.~~~~_0lJJ. :\'I of Sf' ~S'" \ ~/ \ -\ \':8 'f!!!J.i- __cO\J~OI'C""~A Ac-I,v/~ fii3:: ___ G -1 ~1 \ -~ ~ CHULA VISTA PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT LOCATOR PROJECT ROHR PARK PROJECT DESCRIPTION: C) APPLICANT: INITIAL STUDY PROJECT 4548 SWEETWATER RD Request: Wireless Communication Facility; pes transceiver ADDRESS: base station with 3 antenna sectors located on a light SCALE: FILE NUMBER: d cl.. pole adjacent to a public baseball field. Equipment to match existing restroom facilities. NORTH No Scale lS-01-044 Related Cases: PCC-OO-58 h:lhome\planninglcarlos\locatorslis01044.cdr 3.23.01 Exhibit A Exhibit B Page 2 of2 PROPOSED SPORTS FIELD LIGHTING ~y~ 1 ~IVI Light Structure Location Map ... ~\i '" ._,C /" -C" 0\ ~ ~; ~~Z_' - '" ~ . I I Rohr Park Field No. 18 , , , \ B' '" ~' .-Jr...--- .~- IF I. \)J ~ /.)- -- -<.:.. r I \ / ,/ / /' /---/ ,'/ / . ' /.~ ,"/ - ,I~.' C2 ;":> . .".,/ - \ r j-- \ - - .,,- .C1- .~ V \ ,/ \ ,/ ),-../'" , /' ~ /ffj/ H Not To Scale $ LEGEND Location AI, A2, CI, C2 ~' BI ~$ B2 Light Structure Height 60-feet 70-feet 66-fool High Light Structure with Base Station (Li hts @ 55-feet) Exhibit C ..._---,,-~...---"--_._.~.._- ._---_..-_...-~-,.._.~-' ~ ~ '! ~ <'" ;; ~ ~~ ~~ "':;7 I<~ ~K ~gt ~: _m_ '::3 (9 ~ o .. ~ '" -~ '<. ~- (::\ V ::: ,/ - ~ / ! ~ ~ o ~, ~i -~ J. g~~:! fig: ~:s: ~ ! ~ :....E~ t; ~ li~i i! , o' ~I H ~ ! D~ ~::' . ~! II ." r"~I''''l L:J \ \\ J\ , , ! I; J, J : I J i ,I J I'" ,'" , J 'I ,I! II! 1,1" i i! ' Ii,! I' ! , , ~ ,i I I' J i / !! ~~ ~"""~ p~ ~ !io:.' ",~2 :::~~ -,- "[ ;;iE! ~ ..$:.;.i~ "@ ii"! Mi~ dip Exhibit D ATTACHMENT "A" Mitigation Monitoring Reporting Program 18-01-044 This Mitigation Monitoring Program is prepared for the City of Chula Vista in conjunction with the proposed Rohr Park Outdoor lighting System & Wireless Communications Facility project (lS-0l-044). The proposed project has been evaJuated in an Initial StudylMitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and City/State CEQA guidelines. The legislation requires public agencies to ensure that adequate mitigation measures are impJemented and monitored on Mitigated Negative Declarations, such as IS-0l-044. AB 3180 requires monitoring of potentially significant and/or significant environmental impacts. The Mitigation Monitoring Program for this project ensures adequate implementation of mitigation for the following potential impacts(s): . Aesthetics . Findings of Mandatory Significance, and . Hazards. Due to the nature of the environmental issues identified, the Mitigation Compliance Coordinator shall be the Environmental Review Coordinator for the City of Chula Vista. It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that the conditions of the Mitigation Monitoring Reporting Program are met to the satisfaction of the Environmental Review Coordinator. Evidence in written form confirming compliance with the mitigation measures specified in MND/IS-Ol-044 shall be provided by the applicant to the Environmental Review Coordinator. The Environmental Review Coordinator will thus provide the ultimate verification that the mitigation measures have been accomplished. ,,;)7 ::::i ... o o -c - :;, o t: (II a.. ... .!: o a::: :; o . ..... o . en I/) OJ :;::: '0 (II U- I/) C o :;::: (II u c :;, E E o u OJ a; l- I/) I/) ~ OJ ... 3: ~ ~ - c OJ E .c <.> I'll :::: <( ~ 'E ~ E E o <.> " ~ ;; C. E o u I- en ::J ~ (.) W ::J:~ (.) :E ~ C> o c:: 0. C> ~ Z 0.2 0);;; ;::: c(,) ~ 'E~ 0: t=~ 0. W c:: C Z <( C> z 1i2 o !:: z o :E z o ~ <( C> ~ :.E ~nt :g:g x 0.0 m';':':: ~ . -'::5 x 6.,2 t,tilts ~,'~ .Il;;O '+P "'Ot;~ " " ~ g ~ ~ W -.: Q _ .- :::s "'.. bO 0< "O..c "'0 :.= '- ".;: c_ i!'".D~,":= i-~,a=._ "'C 0.. 'tat c;j"'O V V) ~~~ a r.;:: "'0 WiL), .... .S::! 50 E..8 ~ ~ - ~ -;::::..c ~ :r;:, ~:;..... d) !d:Q}; r.f.) c-o: ~ u 0;;1\1 ClJ ~:B~ ,~, .5 ~ ~ ~ >:i-c;:: > :"nJ;- 0 0) "'0 ~.~. ~ 5. -5 ~ ~!"'O 0 .8 ;>. "f; Q)...... ~ "U),; ~ '"'0 c::: "'i:: ;"~,: 0. ~ 0 d) :a;~2~gp2; =; 0..:::";:: "'C U)j (I) ~ ..c:: --;;-:: CD:: ..... 0 0.0::: .'!t. f= "" := "" ~ ~ " . ~ ~ ;:;: ~ .2 10 g ~ ~o oZ ;~ ~ ~ 0)" - ~ ::: nI ::;; ~ ::;; 'E ~ ~~ 0- 0- ... x " Ol) . ~"E ::= c-o: Q.N ~~.:~ .... "'0 d) Q.) 0_ ,., ~ o.::S~r.;:: ~ 0 >._ U :s ::: ~ = ~ '': 11) 1-0 ...... C OJ.) ~ = a.> ~:8~o a c;j ~ 0.. 11) ... 0. CI:I :: 13 0 .S ,. "" ~ ......11)!1.}.=:: C':I 11).-::: ~ .g = VJ Q.) ~ .~ C 1-0 = - 0 "'0 ~b"'O"'5 (1) e.~ 8 (I) d) :::I ...... .s C r::r ro ~~~-5 N ~ "" ~ c. c.2~ --------r--- Case No.IS-01-044 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM 1. Name of Proponent: City of Chula Vista Cox/Sprint PCS 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Chula Vista 276 Fourth A venue Chula Vista, CA 91910 3. Address and Phone Number of Proponent: 4683 Chabot Drive, Suite 100 Pleasanton, CA 94588 4. Name of Proposal: IS-OI-044 5. Date of Checklist: May 29, 2001 Potentially Significant ImpacI Potentially Signifiaml Unless Mitigated Less than Significant Impact No Impact I. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal: a) Conflict with general plan designation or zoning? o o o r8] b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project? c) Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g., impacts to soils or farmlands, or impacts from incompatible land uses)? d) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community (including a low- income or minority community)? o o o r8] o o o r8] o o o r8] Comments: The project is consistent with the Public & Open Space land use designation (Parks and Recreation) of the General Plan. The project is also consistent with the zoning designation of the AD - Agricultural with Design Overlay and designated. The proposed ball field lights and cellular transceiver base station ("base station") are permitted with a Conditional Use Permit (CUP). The site is located within a City Park (Rohr Park). The proposed site is a public park. The proposed ball field lights are proposed for an existing baJJ field and the proposed base station will be incorporated in the design of one of the light standards. The subject ball field is located at the eastern portion of the Park. Rohr Park is a 23-acres in size and is surrounded by residential development to the north (County of San Diego) and west, commercial to the east, and the Chula Vista Municipal Golf Course to the south. The proposed project does not require the physical arrangement of the community to be changed. c::21 Page - I :\1itigation: No mitigation measures are required. II. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would rhe 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? Potentially Potentially Sit:oiflC3nl Lesstban SigniflOlot Dnless Significant No Impact Mitigated Impact Impact 0 0 0 C!II 0 0 0 C!II o o o C!II Comments: The proposed project would result in the installation of lights and base station (for wireless communications) on an existing ball field in a public park. The project does not exceed regional or local population projections because it does not create any growth. The project does not create any employment opportunities or housing units in the area. The project does not displace any housing, including affordable housing. Therefore, the project will not result in any potential impacts related to population and housing. Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required. III. GEOPHYSICAL. Would the proposal result in or expose people to potential impacts involving: a) Unstable earth conditions or changes in geologic substructures? b) Disruptions, displacements, compaction or overcovering of the soil? c) Change in topography or ground surface relief features? d) The destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical features? e) Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the site? f) Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands, or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay inlet or lake? g) Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mud slides, ground failure, or similar hazards? 3D Page - 2 Potentially Potentially Significant Less th.an Significant UoI"" SigniftCant No Imp''' Mitigated Imp''' Impact 0 0 0 C!II 0 0 0 C!II 0 0 0 C!II 0 0 0 C!II {] 0 0 C!II 0 0 0 C!II o o o C!II . _ .___.._.._._.m.____._., '.__."~.__. '____--,.~..,.___,...____~__.. ...~_ ___ Comments: There are no known geophysical conditions present that expose people to geologic or earth hazards and the proposal does not include any grading. Therefore, no significant impacts have been identified. Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required. POll;'DtiaUy PotentiaU,. Significant Less than IV. WATER. Would the proposal result in: Significant UnLess SignifIcant No Impact Mitigated Impact Impact a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, 0 0 0 0 or the rate and amount of surface runoff? b) Exposure of people or property to water 0 0 0 0 related hazards such as flooding or tidal waves? c) Discharge into surface waters or other 0 0 0 0 alteration of surface water quality (e.g., temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity)? d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any 0 0 0 0 water body? e) Changes in currents, or the course of direction 0 0 0 0 of water movements, in either marine or fresh waters? f) Change in the quantity of ground waters, either 0 0 0 0 through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? g) Altered direction or rate of flow of 0 0 0 0 groundwater? h) Impacts to groundwater quality? 0 0 0 0 i) Alterations to the course or flow of flood 0 0 0 0 waters? j) Substantial reduction in the amount of water 0 0 0 0 otherwise available for public water supplies? Comments: Construction of the light standards and 384 square foot equipment building would have a negligible effect on surface runoff and would not have any effect on groundwater because no grading is proposed. The proposed park improvements will be located within the 100 year flood plain of the Sweetwater River. Due to the nature of the project, no significant impacts related to flooding are anticipated. As a standard Engineering Division condition of approval the applicant is required to implement Best Management Practices to prevent pollution of stonn drainage systems, during and after construction. Therefore, no significant impacts to water resources have been identified and no mitigation is required. 3/ Page - 3 Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required. V. 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, either locally or regionally? d) Create objectionable odors? e) Create a substantial increase in stationary or non-stationary sources of air emissions or the deterioration of ambient air quality? Potentially PoIl.'ntiaDy Significant Less than Significant Unless Signirlc;ant No Impact Mitigated Impact Impact 0 0 0 18! 0 0 0 18! 0 0 0 18! o o o 18! o o o 18! Comments: The ball field lights and base station would not produce any air emissions. One to two service truck trips per month would be generated for the maintenance of the telecommunications equipment. The proposed lighting would allow the use of the ball field until the park closes at 10:00 PM. According to the Engineering Division, the proposed project will generate an insignificant amount of daily trips. Therefore, no significant air quality impacts would result and no mitigation is required. Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required. 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 alternative transportation (e.g. bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? g) Rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts? 3d-. Page - 4 Potentially Potentially Significant Less than Significant Unless Significant No Imp'ct Mitigated Impact Impact 0 0 18! 0 0 0 0 18! 0 0 0 18! 0 0 0 18! 0 0 0 18! 0 0 0 18! o o o 18! h) A "large project" under the Congestion Management Program? (An equivalent of 2400 or more average daily vehicle trips or 200 or more peak -hour vehicle trips.) Comments: No additional roadway facilities are required to serve the site. Short-term effects would consist of construction trucks required to install the ball field lights and base station. Long-term effects would consist of one to two service truck trips per months associated with the base station and an insignificant amount of daily vehicle trips associated with the use of the ball field in the evening hours. On-site parking is provided in a paved parking lot immediately south of the ball field. Parking is also available in a dirt parking lot immediately east of the ball field adjacent to the equestrian facility. Therefore, no significant transportation effects would result and no mitigation is required. Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required. VII. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal result in impacts to: a) Endangered, sensitive species, species of concern or species that are candidates for listing? b) Locally designated species (e.g., heritage trees)? c) Locally designated natural communities (e. g. , oak forest, coastal habitat, etc.)? d) Wetland habitat (e.g., marsh, riparian and vernal pool)? e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? f) Affect regional habitat preservation planning efforts? o o o o Potentially PolcnlLally SignifICant Lesstban Significant Unless Significant No Impact Mitigated Impact Jmpac1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Comments: The project site is currently developed as a public park and contains no native vegetation or habitat. The subject ball field is fully improved with a clay infield and turf. Rohr Park is not identified as containing significant biological resources on the City's General Plan. The Draft Multiple Species Conservation Program (MSCP) Subarea Plan identifies Rohr Park as an area designated for development (developed or take authorized). Therefore, no endangered, threatened, or rare plant or animal species are expected to occur on site. Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required. VIII. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal: a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? 33 Page - 5 Potentially Potentially Significant '-""t..... Significant U"""' Significant No Impact Mitigated Impact Impact 0 0 0 0 ~,- ._---_.__."---,-._....---_..._--~ b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and 0 0 0 0 inefficient manner? c) If the site is designated for mineral resource 0 0 0 0 protection, will this project impact this protection? Comments: The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan Open Space and Conservation Element. The project does not conflict with the recently adopted C02 Reduction Plan. The proposed project does not result in the use of resources in a wasteful and inefficient manner because the proposed lights will operate during the off-peak hours (after 6:30 PM) when energy reliability is not a primary concern. The project is not located in an area designated for mineral resource protection as defined in the City's General Plan. Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required. IX. HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve: a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to: petroleum products, 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 hazard? d) Exposure of people to existing sources of potential health hazards? PotentiaDy Potentially Significant Less (han Significant Unless SignifICant No Impact Mitigated Impact Impact 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 e) Increased fire hazard in areas with flammable brush, grass, or trees? Comments: The proposed sports lighting system and base station would not involve operations involving hazardous substances. The base station is subject to Federal Communication Commission (FCC) regulations. Sprint has a license to operate from the FCC and is required to provide documentation for the proposed base station to the FCC for verification that Federal regulations are met. No significant impacts are expected to occur due to compliance with FCC permitting requirements. A 24-hour power outage is an unlikely event, however, an emergency power generator would be brought to the site if an extended power outage (i.e., in excess of two hours) should occur. These generators have an internal diesel fuel tank that provides a minimum of 24 hours of run time. In the event an emergency power generator is needed, a liner would be required to prevent any fuel spillage that could result in a potential fire hazard. Compliance with the condition for a liner would result in a less than significant impact. 31f Page - 6 Mitigation: In the event that an emergency power generator is needed, a liner would be required to prevent any fuel spillage that could result in a potential fire hazard. Poll'lItjall" X. NOISE. Would the proposal result in: Potentially SiJ:nificant Less-Ihan Si~ificalll Unless Si~nificant No hnpact Mitigated Impact Impact a) Increases in existing noise levels? 0 0 0 Cjj b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? 0 0 Cjj 0 Comments: The proposed lighting system and base station are not anticipated to result in a significant increase in existing noise levels. The proposed lighting system will extend the use of the e"isting sports fields until 10:00 PM Monday through Friday. Weekend night use of the lighted field is not typical, but could occur; however, the light system will not operate past 10:00 PM. The subject ball field is located on the valley floor, approximately 5-feet lower in elevation than Sweetwater Road and the nearest single-family residential units to the north. Therefore, due to the separation from the nearest residential units and the difference in elevation the proposed sports field lighting system and base station are not anticipated to result in significant noise impacts. Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required. XI. 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: Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Si~nificant Unless Mitigated Less than Significant Impact No Impact d) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? 0 0 0 Cjj 0 0 0 Cjj 0 0 0 Cjj 0 0 0 Cjj 0 0 0 Cjj a) Fire protection? b) Police protection? c) Schools? e) Other governmental services? Comments: No new or altered governmental services will be required to serve the project. The proposal does not impact existing Fire and Police services. Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required. XII. Thresholds. Will the proposal adversely impact the City's Threshold Standards? Pot1:"ntiaUy Potentially Significant Less than Significant Unless Significant No Impact Mitigated Impact Impact 0 0 0 Cjj As described below, the proposed project does not adversely impact any of the seen Threshold Standards. ~ 3~ Page - 7 .. ---"'~.'-~"-"'--'.'-"-- PotentiaUy Potentially Sii;nificant Less than Sii;Dirtcanl Un"" Significant Nn Impact Mitigated Impact Impact a) Fire/EMS 0 0 0 0 The Threshold Standards requires that fire and medical units must be able to respond to calls within 7 minutes or less in 85 % of the cases and within 5 minutes or less in 75 % of the cases. Comments: The addition of a sports lighting system and base station to an existing sports field does not impact the provision of Fire/EMS services to the site. The City ofChula Vista Fire Department has indicated that they will be able to meet this Threshold Standard without adding any additional equipment or personnel. The nearest fire station is approximately 1.5 miles away and the estimated response time is 3 to 4- minutes. Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required. POlentiaUy PotentiaUy Significant Less than Significant UnI= SignuK:ant Nn Impact Mitigated Impact Impact b) Police 0 0 0 0 The Threshold Standards require that police units must respond to 84 % of Priority 1 calls within 7 minutes or less and maintain an average response time to all Priority 1 calls of 4.5 minutes or less. Police units must respond to 62.10% of Priority 2 calls within 7 minutes or less and maintain an average response time to all Priority 2 calls of 7 minutes or less. Comments: The Police Threshold Standard would be met as reported by the Police Department. Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required. PotentiaUy potentiaUy Significant Less tban SignifiCant UnI= SignifIcant No Impact Mitigated Impact Impact C) Traffic 0 0 0 181 1. City-wide: Maintain LOS "c" or better as measured by observed average travel speed on all signalized arterial segments except that during peak hours a LOS "D" can occur for no more than any two hours of the day. 2. West of 1-805: Those signalized intersections which do not meet the standard above may continue to operate at their current 1991 LOS, but shall not worsen. 3", Page - 8 Comments: The Traffic Section of the Engineering Division has reported that the proposed project will generate an insignificant amount of daily trips associated with the extended usage of the sports fields. Therefore, no significant impact to the City's Traffic Threshold Standard is anticipated. Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required. Potentially Potentially Significant Less than Significant Unless Significant No Impact Mitigated Impact Impact d) Parks/Recreation 0 0 0 !OJ The Threshold Standard for Parks and Recreation is 3 acres of neighborhood and community parkland with appropriate facilities per 1,000 residents east of Interstate 805. Comments: The proposed project does not impact Threshold Standards for Parks and Recreation because the proposal does not result in an increase in population. The proposed lighting structure will provide extended use of an existing recreational facility within a City park. Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required. Potentially Potentially Significant Less than Sif?;llificant Unless Significant No Impact Mitigated Impact Impact e) Drainage 0 0 0 '" The Threshold Standards require that storm water flows and volumes not exceed City Engineering Standards. Individual projects will provide necessary improvements consistent with the Drainage Master Planes) and City Engineering Standards. The proposed project will comply with this Threshold Standard. Comments: No additional storm water flows would be generated by the installation of the proposed sports lighting system and base station. Therefore, no conflict with the City's threshold is anticipated. Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required. Potentially PoteDUally Signifkant u...... Significant Unless Significant No Impact Mitigated Impact hnpact t) Sewer 0 0 0 !OJ The Threshold Standards require that sewage flows and volumes not exceed City Engineering Standards. Individual projects will provide necessary improvements consistent with Sewer Master Planes) and City Engineering Standards. The proposed project will comply with this Threshold Standard. 37 Page - 9 Comments: No sewer facilities are required to serve the proposed sports lighting system and base station. Therefore, no conflict with the City's Sewer Threshold Standard is anticipated. Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required. PotentiaUy Pote.atiaUy Significant Less than SigMJCaDt Unless Sig:Dmcant No Impact Mitigated Impact Impact g) Water 0 0 0 181 The Threshold Standards require that adequate storage, treatment, and transmission facilities are constructed concurrently with planned growth and that water quality standards are not jeopardized during growth and construction. The proposed project will comply with this Threshold Standard. Applicants may also be required to participate in whatever water conservation or fee off- set program the City of Chula Vista has in effect at the time of building permit issuance. Comments: No water service is required to serve the proposed sports lighting system and base station. Therefore, no conflict with the City's Water Threshold Standard is anticipated. Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required. XIII. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the proposal result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations 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? Potentially Signif'lC8nt Impact Potentially SignUlCaDt Unku Mitigated No Impo" Less than Signifkant Impact 0 0 181 0 0 0 181 0 0 0 0 181 0 0 0 181 0 0 0 181 0 0 0 181 f) Solid waste disposal? Comments: The proposed sports lighting system and base station would not result in the need for new systems or substantial alteration of existing utilities. Electrical service will be extended to the site from an existing transformer located within the Park. The extension of electrical services would not require new systems to be installed, or alterations of existing utilities. No significant impacts to utilities and service systems is anticipated. Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required. 3'? Page - 10 a) Obstruct any scenic vista or view open to the public or will the proposal result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? Potentially Potentially Sii:nificant Less than Si~ificllnt Unless Si!,:nir~nt ~o hnpact Mitil);ated Impact Imp.u;t 0 0 0 0 XIV. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal: b) Cause the destruction or modification of a scenic route? o o o o c) Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect? d) Create added light or glare sources that could increase the level of sky glow in an area or cause this project to fail to comply with Section 19.66.100 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, Title 19? o o o o o o o o e) Produce an additional amount of spill light? o o o o Comments: The proposed lighting system for the ball field # 18 and the proposed base station are not anticipated to obstruct any scenic vista or view open to the public. The subject ball field is located on the valley floor, approximately 5-feet lower in elevation than Sweetwater Road and the nearest single-family residential units to the north. Dense vegetation including tall eucalyptus trees block most of the view of the ball field from Sweetwater Road and the subject site is separated from Bonita Road (a designated scenic roadway) by the Chula Vista Municipal Golf Course ("Golf Course"). The proposal is not anticipated to obstruct any scenic vista or view open to the public because of the surrounding topography and vegetation and the separation by Sweetwater Road from the nearest single-family residences to the north. These conditions provide an effective shield for residential properties closest to the subject ball field. Additionally, due to the separation from Bonita Road to the south by the Golf Course, and the existing vegetation on the Golf Course and Park, the proposal is not anticipated to cause the destruction or modification of Bonita Road, which is identified as a scenic route in the City's General Plan. The proposed project would create a new source of light and glare on the unlighted ball field and views from the adjacent residential uses could be noticeably affected because of the current absence of lighting at the project site. However, because the Park already contains existing lighting associated with the parking lots and ball fields, the proposed lighting of ball field #18 would not be expected to create a noticeable increase in light and glare from distant views. Additionally, the proposed lighting system (manufactured by Musco Systems) increases light levels up to 25 % and reduces wasted spill light up to 95 %, thereby reducing impacts to surrounding residential properties. In an effort to reduce any potential light and glare impacts to surrounding residential properties the proposed lighting system shall be directed downward to provide the uniform distribution of lighting on to the ball field and soccer field overlay and reduce wasted spill light. Mitigation: 1. The proposed lighting system shall be directed downward to provide a uniform distribution of lighting on to the subject ball field and soccer field overlay and reduce wasted spill light. 31 Page. II XV. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would rhe proposal: a) Will the proposal result in the alteration of or the destruction or a prehistoric or historic archaeological site? b) Will the proposal result in adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or historic building, structure or object? c) Does the proposal have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? d) Will the proposal restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? e) Is the area identified on the City's General Plan EIR as an area of high potential for archeological resources? Potentially Potentially Significant ee" than Signiflc.ant Unless Significant Nn Impact Mitigated Impact Impact 0 0 0 I8J o o o I8J o o . o I8J o o o I8J o o o I8J Comments: The Conservation and Open Space Element of the General Plan does not identify the subject site or surrounding vicinity as an area of potential cultural resources. The project does not include grading for the installation of the sports lighting system and base station; therefore, there would be no significant impacts to cultural resources on the project site. XVI. PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Will rhe proposal result in the alrerarion of or rhe destruction of paleonrological resources? Comments: The Conservation and Open Space Element of the General Plan does not identify the subject site or surrounding vicinity as an area of potential paleontological resources. The project does not include grading for the installation of the sports lighting system and base station; therefore, there would be no significant impacts to paleontological resources on the project site. Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required. XVII. RECREATION. Would rhe proposal: a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities? b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? 1'0 Page - 12 Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Un!", Mitigated Nn Impact Less than Significant Impact o o o I8J Potentially Potentially Significant Less than Significant Un!", Significant Nn 1m.." Mitigated Impact Impact 0 0 0 I8J 0 0 0 I8J c) Interfere with recreation parks & recreation plans or programs? o o o 1;1 Comments: The proposed project is a sports lighting system and base station in an existing City park, which does not affect the need for parks and recreational facilities. The proposed project would extend the use of an existing recreational facility. Therefore, no significant impacts to recreational needs are anticipated from the proposed project. XVIII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE: See Negarive Declararionfor mflndatory findings of significance. If an EIR is needed. rhis section should be completed. 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 conununity, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods or California history or prehistory? Potentiall)" Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated No Impact Less than Signilkanl Impact o o o 1;1 Comments: The proposed project is located in a fully developed park in the City of Chula Vista. The surrounding area is developed with residential uses and a municipal golf course. Neither sensitive plant nor animal resources, nor historical or archeological resources are present on the site. The proposed project will have no significant impact to the quality of the environment, reduction of habitat of wildlife species or threaten the historical preservation of the area. b) Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? Potentially Sign.ific:a.nt Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated No Impact 1=",,0 Significant 1m.." o o o 1;1 Comments: Installation of the sports lighting system and the base station is consistent with the City's General Plan and the City Council approved Draft Multiple Species Conservation Plan (MSCP) dated October 9, 2000. The proposed project will not negatively affect long-term environmental goals. c) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project --7/ Page-13 Potentially Signifkant 1m.." Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated No 1m.." 1= .... SignifkaDt 1m.." o o o t;I 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.) Comments: There are no other current or foreseeable projects in the surrounding area that would contribute to cumulatively considerable impacts. The proposed project is consistent with the Rohr Park Master Plan. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required. PotimtiaUy Significant Impact PotentiaUy- Significant Unless Mitigated '-"'than Sig:nificant Impact No Impact d) Does the project have environmental effects, which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? o o o o Comments: The proposed sports lighting system and base station is not anticipated to cause any direct or indirect substantial adverse effects on human beings. The proposed project would not involve operations involving hazardous substances. The base station is subject to Federal Communication Commission (FCC) regulations. Sprint has a license to operate from the FCC and is required to provide documentation for the proposed base station to the FCC for verification that Federal regulations are met. No significant impacts are expected to occur due to compliance with FCC permitting requirements. The proposed project will result in a new source of light and glare on the unlighted ball field and views from the adjacent residential uses could be noticeably affected because of the current absence of lighting at the project site. To reduce any potential light and glare impacts to surrounding residential properties the proposed lighting system shall be directed downward to provide the uniform distribution of lighting on to the ball field and soccer field overlay and reduce wasted spill light. Mitigation: The proposed lighting system shall be directed downward to provide a uniform distribution oflighting on to the subject ball field and soccer field overlay and reduce wasted spill light. XIX. PROJECT REVISIONS OR MITIGATION MEASURES: Aesthetics & Mandatory Findings of Significance I. The proposed lighting system shall be directed downward to provide a uniform distribution of lighting on to the subject ball field and soccer field overlay and reduce wasted spill light. Hazards 1. In the event that an emergency power generator is needed, a liner would be required to prevent any fuel spillage that could result in a potential fire hazard. 42 Page - 14 XX. AGREEMENT TO IMPLEMENT MITIGATION MEASURES By signing the line(s) provided below, the Applicant(s) and/or Operator(s) stipulate that they have each read, understood and have their respective company's authority to and do agree to the mitigation measures contained herein, and will implement same to the satisfaction of the Environmental Review Coordinator. Failure to sign the line(s) provided below prior to adoption of the Addendum shall indicate the Applicants' and/or Operator's desire that the Project be held in abeyance without approval. \:;V(+ V~~)oS k ~ S Printed Nam.e and Tit~e of 1!liCant or A' horized Representa ive c1/IiU~~ Signature of Applicant or Authorized Representative ~ J ~DS 0f /0 / Date .~/~{ 1t.1 Date o z...oO' XXI. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: Tbe environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" or "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated," as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. D Land Use and Planning D Transportation/Circulation D Public Services D Population and Housing D Biological Resources D Utilities and Service Systems D Geophysical D Energy and Mineral Resources . Aesthetics D Water . Hazards D Cultural Resources D Air Quality D Noise D Recreation D Paleontological D Mandatory Findings of Significance Resources -';--3 Page - J 5 XXII. DETERMINATION: On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, 0 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 the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environmel!t, and an 0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that the proposed project MA Y have a significant effect(s) on the environment, but at 0 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, if the effect is a "potentially significant impacts" or "potentially significant unless mitigated." 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, 0 there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. An addendum has been prepared to provide a record of this determination. 2~1?~~. Environmental Review Coordinator .y~ Page - 16 ~. . '-"'_.~---_._.._--.""-"'-- .---.------~-'t~-.- -_.~---- Appendix 8 THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA' DISCLOSURE STATEMENT You are required to file a Statement of Disclosure of certain ownership or financial interests, payments, or campaign contributions, on all matters which will require discretionary action on the part of the City Council, Planning Commission, and all other official bodies. The following information must be disclosed: 1 . List the names of all persons having financial interest in the property which is the subject of the application or the contract, e.g., owner applicant, contractor, subcontractor, material supplier. City of Chula Vista Cox/Sprint PCS Lucent, Inc 2. If any person" identified pursuant to (1) above is a corporation or partnership, list the names of all individuals owning more than 10% of the shares in the corporation or owning any partnership interest in the partnership. 3. If any person" identified pursuant to (1) above is non-profrt organization or a trust, list the names of any person serving as director of the non-profit organization or as trustee or beneficiary or trustor of the trust. 4. Have you had more than $250 worth of business transacted with any member of the City staff, Boards, Commissions, Committees, and Council within the past twelve months? Yes No X If yes, please indicate person(s): - 5. Please identify each and every person, including any agents, employees, consultants, or independent contractors who you have assigned to represent you before the City in this matter. Wireless Facilities Incorporated (WFI) 6. Have you and/or your officers or agents, in the aggregate, contributed more than $1,000 to a Councilmember in the current or preceding election period? Yes _ No L If yes, state which Councilmember(s): (NOTE: A TTACH ADDITIONAL PAGES AS NECESS Print or type name of contracto applicant Date: s-/''L/rrv ( ( '" Person is defined as: "Any individual. fum. co-partnership, joinr venJU~. association. social club. fnolernaJ organization, corporation, estale. trust, receiver, syndicate. this and any other county, city and coumr)', city municipality. district, or other political subdivision. 01' o'V' other group or combination acting as a unil. ,. 4')' ATTACHMENT 6