HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-02-15 STAFF REPORTS 1E it
�OQ?ALMS..
i2
� c
I V N
O Ort EO
RN�P CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
DATE: February 15, 2006 Public Hearing
SUBJECT: AN APPLICATION BY NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS FOR A
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION,
OPERATION, AND MAINTENANCE OF A WIRELESS
TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITY TO INCLUDE A 50-FOOT
TALL STEEL MONOPALM AND 20' X 11.6' X 10' EQUIPMENT
SHELTER SURROUNDED BY A 6' TALL WROUGHT IRON
FENCE, LOCATED AT 788 SOUTH VELLA ROAD, ZONE M-1,
SECTION 19.
FROM: David H. Ready, City Manager
BY: Department of Planning Services
SUMMARY
,An application has been submitted by Nextel Communications for a Conditional Use
Permit for the construction, operation, and maintenance of a wireless
telecommunications facility to include a 50-foot tall steel monopalm tower and a 20' x
11'6" X 10' equipment shelter surrounded by a 6' tall wrought iron fence.
'The monopalm will have 3 sectors with 5 antennas each for a total of 15 antennas and a
232 square foot equipment shelter within an 800 square foot lease area at the northwest
corner of the facility located at 788 South Vella Road. Nextel's representative is
Veronica Arvizu. The property owner is Big Ten Mini Storage, LLC.
RECOMMENDATION
1. Adopt Resolution No. "OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND
APPROVING, SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS, CASE NO. 5.1060 CUP, AN
APPLICATION BY NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS, FOR THE CONSTRUCTION,
OPERATION, AND MAINTENANCE OF A WIRELESS
TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITY TO INCLUDE A 50 FOOT TALL STEEL
MONOPOLE AND 20' X 11.6' X 10' EQUIPMENT SHELTER SURROUNDED BY
ITEM NO. ��_ °
City Council Staff Report
Case 5.1060 CUP
January 18, 2006
A 6' TALL WROUGHT IRON FENCE, LOCATED AT 788 SOUTH VELLA ROAD,
ZONE M-1, SECTION 19."
PRIOR ACTIONS TAKEN ON THE PROJECT
On July 25, 2005, the Architectural Advisory Committee reviewed this project and voted
6-0 to recommend approval of the project subject to the following conditions:
1. The AAC advised extending the wrought iron fencing from the edge of the
equipment shelter to the CMU wall, thereby closing off the space and making it
inaccessible to the public.
On October 26, 2005 the Planning Commission voted 7-0 to recommend that the City
Council adopt the negative declaration of the environmental impacts and approve
Conditional Use Permit No. 5.1060, subject to the conditions set forth in Exhibit A of the
resolution (see attached Commission meeting minutes).
13ACKGROUND AND SETTING
Nextel Communications has submitted an application for a Type 11 Conditional Use
Permit to install a wireless telecommunications facility that will include a 50-foot tall
monopalm tower with three (3) sectors, housing five (5) antenna each for a total of
fifteen (15) antenna, a 232 square foot equipment shelter, and a six foot tall wrought
iron fence surrounding the perimeter of an 800 square foot lease area. The antennas
will be placed within the faux palm fronds and painted to match the color of the palm.
The remainder of the pole will be painted to resemble the trunk of the faux tree.
The project site is located at 788 Vella Road within an existing mini-storage complex.
The surrounding area consists of several different uses including residential to the
immediate west of the property. The lease area will be located in the rear of the property
adjacent to the existing CMU wall, which is 10 feet in height, and a CMU building side
that is 23 feet in height. The cell tower lease area and equipment shelter will not be
clearly visible from South Vella Road; only the monopalm will be visible.
The associated equipment will be housed in a 20' x 11.6' x 10' 1-hour fire rated state
approved radio equipment shelter. The equipment shelter is constructed of CMU block
in a natural earth tone color. A black wrought-iron fence will enclose the equipment
shelter.
Table 1: Surrounding land uses, General Plan, Zoning
Land Use General Plan Zonin
North Ind./Church IND M-1
South Industrial IND M-1
East Industrial IND M-1
West Single-family residences L6 R-1-C
2 : . 0=2
City Council Staff Report
Case 5.1060 CUP
January 18, 2006
ANALYSIS
Section 93.08.03 of the Palm Springs zoning ordinance addresses the regulations for
Commercial Communication Antennas. This section of the Code states a commercial
communication antenna that may have a visual impact on the surrounding area shall
require the issuance of a Conditional Use Permit (CUP). The proposed monopalm is
located within the M-1 zoning district. Although surrounded by industrial use, it was
determined by staff that the installation of a 50-foot monopalm would have a visual
impact; thereby requiring the CUP.
'The proposed project will be located within an existing mini-storage facility. The
surrounding area includes a freight/shipping company to the south, single-family
residential to the west, a mini-storage facility to the east, and a commercial office center
to the north. The design of the project as a monopalm and its placement within the
mini-storage facility mitigates the visual impact; therefore making the project compatible
with all surrounding uses.
The project site is located within the "N" noise impact and nonsuit covenant-combining
zone (Zoning Code Section 92.19.00). The purpose of this combining zone is to,
"identify properties which may be affected by noise, vibration, odors, smoke, air quality
changes or other results attendant to any airport in which area development may be
allowed." The Zoning Code requires that prior to approval of any permit, approval or
other entitlement, "a standard `avigation easement and nonsuit covenant' in a form
prescribed and approved by the city attorney, be provided by and with reference to
present and future owners of the parcel of land on which the structure is to be located".
The project site is located within the proximity of the Palm Springs airport. The
applicant submitted the project plans to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) with a
request for an Aeronautical Study. The FAA performed the study and determined that
"the structure, as proposed at 50 feet in height, does not exceed obstruction standards
and would not be a hazard to air navigation provided the following condition is met. Staff
has included the FAA's recommendation as condition of approval #4 for the project.
The AAC indicated that while the design of the monopalm was compatible with the
surroundings, it was not preferable to have exposed antennas at this site. Staff has
spoken to the applicant regarding this issue and the applicant has stated that
technologically it would not be possible to place the antennae inside the pole. The
"fronds" on the monopalm are attached with hardware that would prohibit inside
installation of the antennae. Staff also discussed installing "flush mounted' antennae
with the applicant, however the problems would be identical. The applicant indicated
that to place the antennae inside the pole or flush mounted would require. a .higher pole.
The FAA has approved the pole at a height no greater than 50 feet; therefore, the
applicant would have to return to the FAA to request approval of a taller pole. It is not
known if the FAA would grant approval of a higher pole. The Planning Commission
recommends that a monopalm at 50 feet with exposed antennae would be preferable to
R. _ 00CW3
3
i
City Council Staff Report
Case 5.1060 CUP
January 18, 2006
I
a monopole greater in height. Staff has added a condition of approval to ensure the
height compliance of no greater than 50 feet.
Table 2: Comparison of required and proposed development standards
Required Proposed
Front Yard 25 feet 280 feet
Side Yard 0 feet 3 feet and 107 feet
Rear Yard 0 feet 5 feet
Building Height 60 feet 50 feet
REQUIRED FINDINGS
The City Council must make certain findings in order to approve this Conditional Use
Permit pursuant to Section 94.02.00 of the zoning ordinance. Those findings are
analyzed by staff as follows:
1. The use applied for at the location set forth in the application is one for which a
conditional use permit is authorized by the City Zoning Ordinance.
Pursuant to Section 94.02.00 of the Zoning Ordinance, a communications
antenna is authorized in the M-1 Zone pursuant to approval of a Type II
Conditional Use Permit.
2. The use applied for is necessary or desirable for the development of the
community, is in harmony with the various elements or objectives of the General
Plan, and is not detrimental to existing uses or to future uses specifically
permitted in the zone in which the proposed use is to be located.
The proposed communications antenna is in harmony with the various elements
and objectives of the City of Palm Springs General Plan and is not detrimental to
existing uses specifically permitted in the zone in which the proposed use is to be
located. The proposed communications antenna will not have a significant visual
impact on the surrounding area because all associated equipment will be
enclosed within a block wall equipment shelter. In order for the proposed
monopole to better blend into the surrounding area it will be designed to
resemble a palm tree.
3. The site for the intended use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate said
use, including yards, setbacks, walls or fences, landscaping and other features
required in order to adjust said use to those existing or permitted future uses 'of
the land in the neighborhood.
The site for the communications antennae, an 800 square foot lease area at the
rear corner of an industrial/warehouse development located at 788 South Vella
Road, is adequate in shape and size to accommodate said use, including all
00 4
4
City Council Staff Report
Case 5.1060 CUP
January 18, 2006
features required in order to adjust said use to those existing or permitted future
uses of the land in the neighborhood. Location of and development of the lease
area will not affect the functioning of the industrial/warehouse use.
4. The site for the proposed use related to streets and highways is properly
designed and improved to carry the type and quantity of traffic to be generated
by the proposed use.
The site for the proposed communications antennae will not have a direct or
indirect impact on streets and highways and is properly designed in the subject
area.
5. The conditions to be imposed and shown on the approved site plan are deemed
necessary to protect the public health, safety and general welfare, including any
minor modifications of the zone's property development standards.
All proposed conditions of approval are necessary to ensure public health and
safety.
E=NVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
Pursuant to Section 15063 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
Guidelines, an Initial Study was prepared and a Notice of Intent to adopt Negative
Declaration was sent to applicable agencies and published on September 16, 2005 in
the Desert Sun for a 20-day review period ending October 9, 2005. The Negative
Declaration is attached to this report. No comments were received on this project. The
Negative Declaration found the environmental impacts of the proposed project to be
less than significant.
NOTIFICATION
A public hearing notice was mailed to all property owners within 400 feet of the subject
property and published in The Desert Sun. As of the writing of this report, staff has not
received any comment.
0101
5
City Council Staff Report
Case 5.1060 CUP
January 18, 2006
FISCAL IMPACT IFinance Director Review:
'This project will have no fiscal impact.
Craig A.Ewing, AL,CP Tom Wilson
DirectQr..of'Planni�ig Services Assistant City Manager
David H. Ready, City 4-aa rig r
ATTACHMENTS
1. Vicinity Map
2. Site Plan and Elevations
3. Planning Commission Minutes (10/26/05, excerpt)
44. Negative Declaration
5. Draft Resolution
6. Conditions of Approval
00
6
"s. Department of Planning Services IN
W+E
Vicinity Map
'i IIOF�\Y
S Pi:
0
CAMINO SAN MIGUEL w
0
z
a
w
J
SUNNY DUNES RD
L/
CALLE SAN ANTONIO
Q J
LU
Q Q
a
J SAN RAPHAEL
Uj
J
� U
PASFO !'.ARCH FTA
Legend
500 Feet
MESQUITE AVE -
CITY OF PALM SPRINGS
CASE NO: 5.1060 CUP DESCRIPTION: To construct a 52 foot cell antenna
with equipment shelter on a 40' x 20' lease area at
APPLICANT: NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS the rear of Big 10 Mini-Storage located at 788 South
Vella Road, Zone M-1. APN: 680-160-025.
- C` `j%),67
�_ RwEcr wroBurnox
u.ssmn
.rvwex`.m`�'Togarf�
uggEM ISSIIa 0>T
EMEB�nR NEX
Im-13-05
CA-5302A
Imo%ZONING
Eu�A,E S,NEDEB
TAHQUITZ CREEK
(BIG TEN STORAGE)
" .....�:.' •� ` `$_n o��.r»r�ow.+..��....a.��eR..�w,.,._ _ _ SHEET DESCRIPTION w+s v o er-�
u^ •� _ "+' '''` „pus
GENERAL CONTRACTORdNOTE5 �PROJEGTwDESCRIPTION - O.�
c APPLICANi/LE55�E ARCHITECT
VICINITY MAP AF LICMrs REFRESENTATIV 5urz yog
FROF�—T INFORIA9IXJ e
DRIVING DIRECTIONS °°`
TITLE SHEET
uim4i� a r W wvry wcn<ne.vsroim HEU NUMBER
CODE COMPLIANCE PROJECT SUMMARY PROJECT TEAM SHEET INDEX T-1
r_.
Vs o0 oL A R 0mA D _
e ieess v e
I �''
a;aaaaaeaFgs- � �
--------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------
�£geh�gs0�§oaf
F 5`9�'gp•���
o�
mm
� uti k
s
P
6 E
� E
ee 333 pp
N6 �� "� .•,.x..o W l �a
0
83
NO
:fib sr „ss4 � F�� § s's 7n :^� �€�• 9 a ag
n.v 2r aos� € asaF o a� �a�a a n_ s^' s €��a „5�
a x ara a s 7 _
s p ,ca
sE a^ R �sy A
�n te$ ¢o NyzAn sPg a ¢ e g � i o,SL@
TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY
CELL SITE CA5302 COMMUNICATIONS a aeno x aosoc INC
TAHQUITZ CANYON °vo'°" `s °Nrv.cnu CEIVI md sm o
1 .1 788 SOUTH VELLA ROAD INX i��:�� 1°ssd"°° �......so-mu
PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA 92264 " b°-'- j
r TOJEC iAFpPMi
�m ., 1 uT lbbJ
IIIII�C nwV��i
pARr-J.3d I
I0-13-05
��� ���•� _____ _ pi I00%ZONING
i 11 I ioT:�r--------------------
v:�nre�ssw.n
• - t� _ _ _ _ __ -- _
9
i av
_ _ _ n _ �1 s PTCTMEo @ �
�V _ V _ - A —� .Ia
_ — _ �
al x.^w IIM w�wrx.�wxw
rtiwwrr-.w—I �1 mna¢eemi
L r �I-/ortrvTlMnb J
_ MWN .1iV
suPE
PPGGEL]6
v En^u
SITE PLAN
�� MEE.x�MaEP
51Tr PLAN
AEXM
xwEc aawnox
,
__—____ .��•• �,�• a rew.iss10-13-05
m�x
Eo ar•�
� I
wwry er_cxx—aPv
iio a a.
r-----— ---- —,—
I I
L _ _J
m<,. mm, ENLARGED
SITE PLAN
II r nu aex
A-2
ENLARGED SITE PLAN .,
— aER��FaaM<nax
10-13-05
100 o ZONING
- asrt�ssuco raa=er
uvs vasa<aeo arm
WEST ELEVATION 1 O
L
.ate. ,.�' ` �%�• ,� '�O � o wux er. wx=aw
' x er m ow aw
��� s \ xwuxuFina w
i � / cu+suaE
I I
xTf
_ J i
z
SOUTH ELEVATION 2 A-3
City of Palm Springs
Planning Commission Minutes
of October 26, 2005
2C. Case 3.2779 AA - An application by Brad Kious to construct a 3,976 square foot single-
family residence located at 3133 Barona Road, Zone R-1-B, Section 35, APN 512-190-
033.
Director of Planning Services, Craig Ewing, requested this project be removed from the agenda
pending the AAC's recommendations.
2D. Case 3.2795 AA - An application by Anthony Francis to construct a 5,633 square
foot single-family residence located at 587 Camino Calidad, Zone R-1-A, Section 22,
APN 513-260-029.
M/S/C (Cohen/Hutcheson, 7-0) to approve, subject to Conditions of Approval.
3. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
Case 5.1060 CUP — An application by Nextel Communications to construct a 52' tall
cellular antenna with a prefabricated equipment shelter surrounded by a 6' tall wrought
iron fence on a 40'x20' lease area located at 788 South Vella Road (Big Ten Mini
Storage), Zone M-1, Section 19, APN 680-160-025.
Director of Planning Services, Craig Ewing, provided background information as outlined in the
staff report dated October 26, 2005.
Chairwoman Marantz opened the Public Hearing.
Chip Clustka, with ALCOA Wireless Services representing Nextel Communications, addressed
concerns regarding the surrounding fence and palm trees
James Cahill, Palm Springs, addressed concern with potential red blinking lights.
Robert Harrison, Palm Springs, lives directly behind Big Ten Mini Storage, concerned about
potential health issues, property values, and represented neighbors whom are not happy about
this project.
Chairwoman Marantz closed the Public Hearing.
Recommendation: Recommend that the City Council adopt a Negative Declaration and
approve Case 5.1060 CUP.
M/S/C (Ringlein/Roath, 7-0) to approve, subject to Conditions of Approval, and recommend that
City Council adopt a Negative Declaration.
4. ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW: None.
5. MISCELLANEOUS: None.
2
_ y
INITIAL STUDY / NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Nextel Communications Cell Tower
Site Number CA-5302a - Tahquitz Creek
Case No. 5.1060
688 South Vella Road
* ,PAL
QABM SA0 Prepared by
A.
i2
The City of Palm Springs
9 September 2005
O'POORATEO 1
cqO FO RN�P
�,.:• on L
NEXTEL COMMUI, .aTIONs FACILITY AT BIG-TEN MINI STORAGEAN +L STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
1. Project title:
Case No. 5.1060 - Nextel Communications Cell Tower, Site Number CA-5302a Tahquitz Creek
at Big 10 Mini Storage Facility
2. Lead agency name and address:
City of Palm Springs
3200 E.Tahquitz Canyon Way
Palm Springs, CA 92262
3. Contact person and phone number:
Joe Prutch, Principal Planner (Contract)
(760) 323-8245
4. Project location:
788 South Vella Road, Palm Springs, CA. APN: 680-160-025
(See Figure 1, Project Vicinity Map and Figure 2, Location Map)
5. Project sponsor's name and address:
Mr. Chip Clustka
Alcoa Wireless Services
167 Technology Drive
Irvine, CA 92618
6. General plan designation:
IND (Industrial)
7'. Zoning:
M-1 (Service/Manufacturing)
The "M-1" Service/Manufacturing Zone is intended to provide for the development of service
industries for commercial and hotel uses and for industrial uses which include fabrication,
manufacturing, assembly or processing of materials that are in already processed form and
which do not in their maintenance, assembly, manufacture or plant operation create
smoke, gas, odor, dust, sound, vibration, soot, glare or lighting to any degree which might be
obnoxious or offensive to persons residing in or conducting business in either this or any other
zone.
B., Description of project:
Nextel Communications is proposing to place a 52-foot monopolm cellular antenna tower in
the rear northeast corner of the Big-Ten Mini Storage property at 788 S. Vella Road. Nextel
Communications will lease a 40' x 20' area from Big-Ten Mini Storage. The site currently
contains mini-storage buildings and parking. The monopalm will have three sectors, each
Nextel Communications Facility at Big-Ten Mini Storage, Initial Study/Negative Declaration
September 2005
NEXTEL COMMUN, .TIONs FACILITY AT BIG-TEN MINI STORAGE IIN. .L STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
sector will house five antenna each, for a total of 15 antennas. Each antenna will be
approximately 72 inches long by 12 inches wide. Additionally, the project applicant is
proposing to place a prefabricated 11'6" x 20' x 10' shelter that will house Nextel radio
equipment directly adjacent to the monopalm. The equipment will be enclosed by a 6-foot
chain link fence. The site layout and monopalm elevations are shown in Figures 3 and 4
respectively. The antenna will be placed within the faux palm fronds and painted to match
the color of the palm. The proposed facility will be unmanned, and will require periodic
routine maintenance (approximately once per month). The proposed project will require a
Type II Conditional Use Permit (CUP). (See Figure 3, Site Plan and Figure 4, Site Elevations).
IV. Surrounding land uses and setting: Briefly describe the project's surroundings:
The proposed project is within an existing mini-storage facility site.
North: Light Manufacturing
South: Light Manufacturing
East: Self-Storage
West:Single-Family Residential
10. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or
participation agreement).
a. Palm Springs Police Department
b. Palm Springs Fire Department
c. Palm Springs Building Inspector
d. Riverside County Environmental Health Department
Nextel Communications Facility at Big-Ten Mini Storage,Initial Study/Negative Declaration
September 2005
1.0-Zlt'� ,
215
10 San Bernardino County
— — — — — — — 62— — — — — — — Riverside County — — —
_J Riverside• •Desert
60 Banning Cabazon Hot Springs
•� 91 •
Moreno
\ Valley 111
S�Y6gLC$
site
• Cathedra
Palm City
•`.. 15 Springs 0 palm Desert
• 74 Rancho • Indio
�.` Sunk Hemet Mirage •
City Indic La Quinta 10
Wells
215
lake 74
Elsinore
M meta Hot 371 Salton
/ Temecula Springs Sea
—.—•—� 79
San Diego County
h .
m
215
� w
I0
� I
m
0 x 93
j Q FIGURE I
SCALE
PROJECT VICINITY MAP
Palm Springs Airport
Ramon Road
E Camino Parocela
vN., E Camino Parocela
Sunny Dunes Ad. o Sunny Dunes Rd.
P$
Project
Site
Q
Mesquite Ave. " Mesgm[e Ave
h
0
0
N
N
N
W
O
a
fl
(4
N
J
m
0 x A FIGURE 2
—j Scale in Feet LOCAv ON MAP
l�
CO
i
oece a,
/r I
--- - - ._u "_--- -- --
.avnA� I i u��..eerva i
n.mv
l - 1 a
i� 1 �
{
`� IY
wl arn. �
al yam\
FAl«:o
Source ALMA wrzel—Ser,—X05
FIGURE 3
SITE FLAN
�r;
ut
I I
WEST ELEVATION
` v _:r ....a _r.
..
•� , —ems,..
Source ALCOA Wireless Services,2005 L
o x FIGURE 4
SITE ELEVATIONS
Scalem Feel
L
NEXTEL COMMUN MONS FACILITY AT BIG-TEN MINI STORAGE/IN, .AL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project,
involving at least one impact that is a 'Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the
checklist on the following pages.
❑ Aesthetics ❑ Agriculture Resources ❑ Air Quality
❑ Biological Resources ❑ Cultural Resources ❑ Geology/Soils
❑ Hazards & Hazardous Materials ❑ Hydrology/Water Quality ❑ Land Use/Planning
❑ Mineral Resources ❑ Noise ❑ Population/Housing
❑ Public Services ❑ Recreation ❑ Transportation/Traffic
❑ Utilities/Service Systems ❑ Mandatory Findings of Significance
Nextel Communications Facility at Big-Ten Mini Storage, Initial Study/Negative Declaration
September 2005
1.0-7 On, J�
NEXTEL COMMUN. .(IONS FACILITY AT BIG-TEN MINI STORAGE AN. .L STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
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 MITIGATED
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 impact" or
"potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one
effect 1) 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 EIR or
NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed
upon the prop sec project, nothing further is required.
f r ff
Signatuye, Joe Prutch Date
;f
Nextel Communications Facility at Big-Ten Mini Storage, Initial Study/Negative Declaration
September 2005
1.0-8
f1 �4
NEXTEL COMMUN. ,TIONS FACILITY AT BIG-TEN MINI STORAGE/IN, .L STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS:
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 falls 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) Once 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 may be significant. If there are one
or more 'Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an FIR 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 than significant level
(mitigation measures "Earlier Analyses,"as described in (5) below, may be cross-referenced).
5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program FIR, or other CEQA
process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier FIR or negative declaration.
Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following:
a) Earlier Analysis 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 that 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.
7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or
individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion.
Nextel Communications Facility at Big-Ten Mini Storage, Initial Study/Negative Declaration
September 2005
1.0-9
NEXTEL COMMUN. .rIONS FACILITYAT BIG-TEN MINI STORAGE/IN. .L STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
8) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however,
lead agencies should normally address the questions from 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 significant.
Nextel Communications Facility at Big-Ten Mini Storage, Initial Study/Negative Declaration
September 2005
1.0-10
NEXTEL COMMON, JIONS FACILITY AT BIG-TEN MINI STORAGE/IN, .L STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Less Than
Significant
Potentially with Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant
Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact
I. AESTHETICS. Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic ❑ ❑ ® ❑
vista?
b) Substantially damage scenic resources,
including, but not limited to, trees, rock ❑ ❑ ® ❑
outcroppings, and historic buildings within a
state scenic highway?
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual
character or quality of the site and its ❑ ❑ ® ❑
surroundings?
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare
that would adversely affect day or nighttime ❑ ❑ ® ❑
views in the area?
a-c) Less than Significant. The site and surrounding area are generally flat and do not contain
any scenic vistas. This project is not located within a state scenic highway corridor. The
site is currently being used for mini-storage. The proposed equipment shelter will not be
visible from outside of the enclosed mini-storage area. The north side of the proposed
shelter abuts the brick well of a storage building, and the east side of the proposed
shelter abuts a brick wall. The monopalm and shelter will be placed on a portion of the
mini-storage site that is currently used for parking.
The proposed communication facility has been designed to resemble a palm tree, which
are prevalent throughout the project vicinity. The monopalm will be approximately 52-
feet tall, and will be visible from adjacent residences. The installation of the single
monopalm will not significantly alter the existing visual character of the project area. This
impact is considered less than significant.
The visual character of the site will be temporarily impaired during construction activities,
which may be visible to certain homeowners in the project vicinity. However,
construction activities will be temporary (approximately 6 weeks) and long-term
operation and maintenance will not result in significant aesthetic impacts.
d) Less than Significant. The proposed project involves the installation of outdoor lighting
that could create glare and/or impact nighttime views in the area. The lighting is
designed to be below the sight line of the surrounding area and would only be on for
emergencies or during maintenance activities (approximately once per month). This
impact is, therefore, less than significant.
Nextel Communications Facility at Big-Ten Mini Storage, Initial Study/Negative Declaration
September 2005
1.0-11
t
NEXTEL COMMUN, .TIONs FACILITY AT MG-TEN MINI STORAGE/IN,. ..L STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant
Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact
II. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES. In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are
significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land
Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997), prepared by the California Department of
Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would
the project:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or
Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland),
as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the ❑ ❑ ❑
Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of
the California Resources Agency, to non-
agricultural use?
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural ❑ ❑ ❑
use, or a Williamson Act contract?
c) Involve other changes in the existing
environment which, due to their location or ❑ ❑ ❑
nature, could result in conversion of Farmland
to non-agricultural use?
a) No Impact. The Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources
Agency has not designated this area as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland
of Statewide Importance. No impact to farmland would occur.
b) No Impact. No Williamson Act Contracts are located on the parcel comprising the
project site. Furthermore, no Williamson Act Contracts are located in the immediate
vicinity of the project site (Williamson Act Contracts) of the Palm Springs General Plan EIR
(Palm Springs, 1992). Therefore, no impacts to Williamson Act Contracts would occur.
c) No Impact. The proposed project site is located in an urban area surrounded by an
existing mini-storage facility. Implementation of the proposed project would therefore
not result in conversion of farmland to non-agricultural uses. There will be no impact to
agricultural land.
Nextel Communications Facility at Big-Ten Mini Storage, Initial Study/Negative Declaration
September 2005
1.0-12 C (1 ?
NEXTEL COMMUNE .fIONS FACILITY AT BIG-TEN MINI STORAGE/I N1 .L STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant
Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact
Ill. AIR QUALITY. Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality
management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following
determinations. Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the ❑ ❑ ® ❑
applicable air quality plan?
b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute ❑ ❑ ® ❑
substantially to an existing or projected air
quality violation?
c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net
increase of any criteria pollutant for which the
project region is in non-attainment under an ❑ ❑ ® ❑
applicable federal or state ambient air quality
standard (including releasing emissions that
exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone
precursors)?
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant ❑ ❑ ® ❑
concentrations?
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
number of people?
a-e) Less than Significant. The project is within the jurisdiction of the South County Air Quality
Management District (SCAQMD). The SCQAMD Governing Board adopted the 2003 Air
Quality Management Plan (AQMP) on August 1, 2003. The 2003 AQMP updates the
attainment demonstration for federal standards for ozone and PM10; replaces the 1997
attainment demonstration for the federal carbon monoxide (CO) standard and provides
a basis for a maintenance plan for CO for the future; and updates the maintenance
plan for the federal nitrogen dioxide (NO2) standard that the South Coast Air Basin has
met since 1992. The revision of the AQMP points to the urgent need for additional
emissions reductions (beyond those incorporated in the 1997/99 Plan) from all sources,
specifically those under the jurisdiction of the California Air Resources Board and the US
EPA which account for approximately 80 percent of the ozone precursor emissions in the
Basin (www.agmd.gov/agmp/).
The project is not anticipated to conflict with or obstruct implementation of 2003 AQMP.
There will be no impact.
The Federal and California State Ambient Air Quality Standards for important pollutants
are summarized in Table 1 and described in detail below.
TABLE 1
FEDERAL AND STATE AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
Pollutant Averaging Time Federal Primary Standard State Standard
Ozone(O,) 1-Hour 0.12 ppm 0.09 PPM
8-HOUR 0.08 ppm —
Carbon Monoxide (CO) 8-Hour 9.0 ppm 9.0 ppm
1-Hour 35.0 ppm 20.0 ppm
Nextel Communications Facility at Big-Ten Mini Storage, Initial Study/Negative Declaration
September 2005
1.0-13
NEXTEL COMMUN. MONS FACILITY AT BIG-TEN MINI STORAGE/IN,- _.L STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Nitrogen Oxide(NO,) Annual 0.05 ppm —
1-Hour -- 0.25 ppm
Annual 0.03 ppm —
Sulfur Dioxide(SO,) 24-Hour 0.14 pain 0.05 ppm
1-Hour — 0.5 ppm
Annual 50 Wm' 30 lWm'
PM10 24-Hour 1501g/m' 50Wrn,
Annual 15 Wm' —
PM 2.1 24-1-lour 65/g/m' _
Lead 30-Day Avg. — 1.5/g/m'
Month Avg. 1.5/g/m' -
Source- California Air Resources Board, "Ambient Air Quality Standards,"January 25, 7999.
ppm =parts per million
1.g1m3 = Micrograms per Cubic Meter
Ozone(O.)is the most prevalent of a class of photochemical oxidants formed in the urban atmosphere, The creation of ozone is a
result of complex chemical reactions between hydrocarbons and oxides of nitrogen in the presence of sunshine. Unlike other
pollutants, ozone is not released directly into the atmosphere from any sources. The major sources of oxides of nitrogen and reactive
hydrocarbons,known as ozone precursors,are combustion sources such as factories and automobiles,and evaporation of solvents and
fuels. The health effects of ozone are eye irritation and damage to lung tissues.
Carbon Monoxide (CO) is a colorless, odorless, toxic gas formed by incomplete combustion of fossil fuels. CO concentrations are
generally higher in the winter, when meteorological conditions favor the build-up of directly emitted contaminants CO health
warning and emergency episodes occur almost entirely during the winter. The most significant source of carbon monoxide is gasolme-
powered automobiles, as a result of inefficient fuel usage in internal combustion engines Various industrial processes also emit
carbon monoxide.
Nitrogen Oxides(NOx) the primary receptors of ultraviolet light initiating the photochemical reactions to produce smog. Nitric oxide
combines with oxygen in the presence of reactive hydrocarbons and sunlight to form nitrogen dioxide and ozone Oxides of nitrogen
are contributors to other air pollution problems including:high levels of fine particulate matter,poor visibility and acid deposition.
Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) results from the combustion of high sulfur content fuels. Fuel combustion is the major source of 502, while
chemical plants, sulfur recovery plants, and metal processing are minor contributors. Sulfates result from a relation of sulfur dioxide
and oxygen in the presence of sunlight S02 levels are generally higher in the winter than in the summer(when sunlight is plentiful
and sulfate is more readily formed).
Particulate Matter(PM70 and PM2.5) consists of particles in the atmosphere as a by-product of fuel combustion, through abrasion
such as file wear, and through soil erosion by wind Particulates can also be formed through photochemical reactions in the
atmosphere PM 10 refers to finely divided solids or liquids such as soot, dust, and aerosols which are 10 microns or less in diameter
and can enter the lungs. Fine particles are those less than 2.5 micrometers in diameter and are also referred to as PM2.5.
Lead is found in old paints and coatings,plumbing and a variety of other materials. Once in the blood stream, lead can cause damage
to the brain,nervous system,and other body systems. Children are most susceptible to the effects of lead. The South County Air Basin
and riverside County portion of the Salton Sea Air Basin are in attainment for the federal and State standards for lead
The SCQAMD has established significance thresholds for operational and construction-
related emissions. Daily and quarterly thresholds are established. Since a project's
quarterly emissions are determined by averaging over a 3-month period (including only
actual working days), it is possible to not exceed the quarterly thresholds while
exceeding the daily thresholds shown in Table 2.
TABLE 2
EMISSIONS SIGNIFICANCE THRESHOLD CRITERIA(POUNDS/DAY)
Pollutant CO ROG NO, SO, Pm,
Operational Emissions
Pounds/Day 550 55 55 ISO 150
Construction Emissions
Pounds/Day 550 75 100 150 150
Source: SCQAMD,CEQA Air Quality Handbook, November 7993
Projects in the Coachella Valley with peak (highest daily) operation-related emissions that exceed any of these
emissions thresholds should be considered significant.
The project site is also located within the Salton Sea Air Basin. This basin has been
designated as a "severe-]7" Ozone non-attainment area due to violations of the federal
Nextel Communications Facility at Big-Ten Mini Storage, Initial Study/Negative Declaration
��5
1.0-14
Septemb r ,
NEXTEL COMMUN._ JIONS FACILITY AT BIG-TEN MINI STORAGE/INI. ,L STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
ambient air quality standards for ozone prirnarily due to pollutant transport from the
South Coast Air Basin. This designation indicates that the attainment date for Federal
ozone standards is November 2007 (17 years after the enactment of the Federal Clean
Air Act).
The project's proposed land use is consistent with the existing City General Plan and
Zoning. When adopted in 1993, the City Council adopted a Statement of Overriding
Consideration regarding air quality. This statement acknowledges that it is not feasible to
reduce City-growth impacts to air quality to a level of insignificance at this time. The
project will also be consistent with the South Coast Air Quality Management District
CEQA Air Quality Handbook.
Construction of the proposed project will result in the disturbance of the site that could
generate dust. The project developer will be required to complete a Stormwater
Pollution Prevention Plan SWPPP/PM10 Plan that must be prepared and implemented to
the satisfaction of the City Building and Safety Department. The Plan must be consistent
with the approved AQMD standards intended to minimize health hazards.
Sensitive receptors are generally defined as people that are at the highest risk of
respiratory problems from air emissions. Sensitive receptors are often times associated
with schools, hospitals, convalescent homes, etc. The site is located within an existing
mini-storage facility. The nearest potential sensitive receptors are the single-family
residences located west of the project site. As discussed above, the proposed project is
not anticipated to generate substantial pollutant concentrations and will not create
objectionable odors beyond those associated with common construction activities
(diesel fumes, etc.).
The proposed project will have no significant air quality impacts.
Nextel Communications Facility at Big-Ten Mini Storage, initial Study/Negative Declaration
September 2005
1.0-15 C)Cl�,� '� J
NEXTEL COMMUNI- .I IONS FACILITY AT BIG-TEN MINI STORAGE/INI.. L STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant
Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly
or through habitat modifications, on any species
identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special
status species in local or regional plans, policies ❑ ❑ ❑
or regulations, or by the California Department
of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service?
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian
habitat or other sensitive natural community
identified in local or regional plans, policies or ❑ ❑ ❑
regulations, or by the California Department of
Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally
protected wetlands, as defined by Section 404 of
the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited ❑ ❑ ❑
to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal wetlands, etc.),
through direct removal, filling, hydrological
interruption or other means?
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any
native resident or migratory fish or wildlife
species or with established native resident or ❑ ❑ ❑
migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of
native wildlife nursery sites?
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances
protecting biological resources, such as a tree ❑ ❑ ❑
preservation policy or ordinance?
fl Conflict with the provisions of an adopted
Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community El El ❑
Conservation Plan, or other approved local,
regional or state habitat conservation plan?
a) No Impact. The project will not have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or
through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or
special status species in local or regional plans, policies or regulations, or by the
California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The proposed
project site is located in a developed, industrial area of Palm Springs, and no sensitive
habitat occurs onsite. Therefore, the project would not result in impacts to endangered,
threatened, or rare species or their habitats.
b) No Impact. The site is not identified as having any natural community that could be
affected by the project. Therefore, the project would not have an adverse effect on
any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community,
c) No Impact. Section 404 of the Clean Water Act regulates the dredge and/or fill of waters
and wetlands of the United States, specifically relating to how these activities may cause
an adverse effect to, or loss of, federal wetland/water resources. Regulatory responsibility
falls under the jurisdictional authority of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE). Under
Section 404, any development or activity which may result in temporary or permanent
Nextel Communications Facility at Big-Ten Mini Storage, Initial Study/Negative Declaration
September 2005
1.0-16
NEXTEL COMMUN._.,rIONS FACILITY AT BIG-TEN MINI STORAGE/INI..,.L STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
impacts to these federally-protected resources must prepare a Pre-Construction
Notification for review, and potential permitting, by the ACOE. The site does not contain
any wetland areas or waters. Therefore, no impact to federally protected wetlands as
defined by Section 404 would occur.
d) No Impact. The project site is located within an existing mini-storage facility and is
currently paved. Due to the proximity of urbanized developments surrounding the
project site, it is logical to assume that wildlife would use areas of less human habitation
as corridors. No impact is anticipated.
e) No Impact. The project does not propose any removal or disturbance of sensitive
biological resources or landmark trees. Therefore, no conflicts with local policies or
ordinances protecting biological resources would occur.
t) No Impact. The City of Palm Springs does not have an adopted Habitat Conservation
Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or State
habitat conservation plan. Therefore, the project would have no impact on these types
of plans.
Nextel Communications Facility at Big-Ten Mini Storage, Initial Study/Negative Declaration
September 2005
I
1.0-17j �_�
NEXTEL COMMUNI- .,IONS FACILITY AT BIG-TEN MINI STORAGE/INI,. .,STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant
Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the ❑ ❑ ® ❑
significance of a historical resource as defined in
§ 15064.5?
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the 1-1 El ® ❑
significance of an archaeological resource
pursuant to § 15064.5?
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique ❑ ❑ ® ❑
paleontological resource or site or unique
geological feature?
d) Disturb any human remains, including those ❑ ❑ ® ❑
interred outside of formal cemeteries?
a-d) Less than Significant. The site has been previously graded. As defined in CEQA 15064.5,
no significant historic resources exist on this site. Construction of the proposed project will
not require significant site grading activities. The project applicant has arranged to lease
an 800 square foot area of parking lot at the Big-Ten Mini Storage facility.
The General Plan for the City of Palm Springs indicates there should be no impact to
prehistoric archeological resources as a result of this project.
The Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians utilized a vast territory beyond the bounds of
the existing reservation. The possibility of finding human remains does exist in this area. In
accordance with Public Resources Code 5.097.94, if human remains are found, the
Riverside County Coroner must be notified within 24 hours of the discovery. If the coroner
determines that the remains are not recent, the coroner will notify the Native American
Heritage Commission in Sacramento to determine the most likely descendent for the
area. The designated Native American representative then determines in consultation
with the property owner the disposition of the human remains.
Due to the proximity of Tribal lands, there is the potential for previously undiscovered
cultural resources to be discovered during project construction and site grading
activities. Tribal interests in such previously undiscovered resources prescribes the
following Conditions of Approval:
1. An archeologist qualified according to the Secretary of Interior's Guidelines shall
perform a record search of the proposed project area, to be conducted prior to the
initiation of construction.
2. A Cultural Resources Monitor, designated by the Agua Caliente Cultural Resource
Office, shall be present during all ground-disturbing activities. Should buried deposits be
encountered, the Cultural Resources Monitor shall have the authority to halt construction
and notify a Qualified Archaeologist (Secretary of the Interior's Standards and
Guidelines) to prepare a mitigation plan for submission to the City, State Historic
Preservation Officer and the Agua Caliente Cultural Resource coordinator for approval
Nextel Communications Facility at Big-Ten Mini Storage, Initial Study/Negative Declaration
September 2Q0f.
1.0-18 t V `') �Fa
NEXTEL COMMUN...ITIONs FACILITY AT BIG-TEN MINI STORAGE/IN..,AL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
and any repatriation of cultural materials be done in cooperation with the Agua
Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians.
Adherence to the Conditions of Approval identified above will ensure potential impacts to
cultural resources are less than significant.
Nextel Communications Facility at Big-Ten Mini Storage, Initial Study/Negative Declaration
September 2005
1.0-19 >,uTl�'
NEXTEL COMMUNI, .,IONs FACILITY AT BIG-TEN MINI STORAGE/IN].. STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Less Than
Significant
Potentially with Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant
Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact
VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project:
a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial
adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury or
death, involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as
delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the
State Geologist for the area or based on other ❑ ❑ ❑
substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to
Division of Mines and Geology Special
Publication 42.
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? ❑ ❑ ❑
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including El El Elliquefaction?
iv) Landslides? ❑ ❑ ❑
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of ❑ El
topsoil?
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is
unstable, or that would become unstable as a result
of the project, and potentially result in on- or off- ❑ ❑ ❑
site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence,
liquefaction or collapse?
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table
18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), ❑ ❑ ❑
creating substantial risks to life or property?
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the
use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater ❑ El ❑
disposal systems where sewers are not available for
the disposal of wastewater?
a)
i) No Impact. The majority of Riverside County lies within areas subject to seismic
hazards. The subject site lies approximately one mile south of the Banning Fault,
Mission Creek Strand. The site is not located within an Alquist-Priolo earthquake
hazard zone and there are no known faults crossing the project site. However,
the project site, as with virtually all sites within the state, would be vulnerable to
ground shaking in the event of an earthquake. The project site and surrounding
vicinity are relatively flat, eliminating the potential for landslides. The City of Palm
Springs General Plan requires that the project be designed and constructed in
accordance with the requirements of the Uniform Building Code (UBC).
Adherence to the provisions of the UBC would reduce potential for structural
damage in the event of an earthquake. Therefore, no impact would occur.
ii) No impact. Any major earthquake damage in the City of Palm Springs is likely to
occur from ground shaking and seismically related ground and structural failures.
Nextel Communications Facility at Big-Ten Mini Storage, Initial Study/Negative Declaration
September 2005
1.0-20 ,J f�
NEXTEL COMMUN,_.TIONS FACILITY AT BIG-TEN MINI STORAGE/IN,-AL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Local soil conditions, such as topography, soil strength, thickness, density, water
content, and firmness of underlying bedrock affect seismic response. Seismically
induced shaking and some damage should be expected to occur but damage
should be no more severe in the project area than elsewhere in the region.
Therefore, no impact would occur.
iii) No impact. There are no known geological hazards caused by ground failure or
liquefaction which would prevent use of the site. Therefore, no impact would
occur.
iv) No impact. The ground is level and approval of the project would not expose
people or structures to potential landslides. Therefore, no impact would occur.
b) No impact. Existing codes regulate land grading and erosion control if and when
construction occurs during winter months (November-March). Therefore, no impact
would occur.
c-d) No Impact. See items a and b, above.
e) No Impact. The proposed project will not generate any wastewater and no septic
facilities are proposed as part of the project. There is no impact.
Nextel Communications Facility at Big-Ten Mini Storage, Initial Study/Negative Declaration
September 2005
1.0-21 (.1;-1"'5
NEXTEL COMMUNI JIONs FACILITY AT BIG-TEN MINI STORAGE/INI._.L STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Less Than
Potentially Significant With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use or ❑ ❑ ❑
disposal of hazardous materials?
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable
upset and accident conditions involving the ❑ ❑ ❑
release of hazardous materials into the
environment?
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or
acutely hazardous materials, substances or waste ❑ ❑ ❑
within one-quarter mile of an existing or
proposed school?
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code §65962.5 and, as a result, ❑ ❑ ❑
would it create a significant hazard to the public
or the environment?
e) For a project located within an airport land use
plan area or, where such a plan has not been
adopted, within two miles of a public airport or a El ❑ ❑
public use airport, would the project result in a
safety hazard for people residing or working in
the project area?
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private
airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard ❑ ❑ ❑
for people residing or working in the project area?
g) Impair implementation of, or physically interfere
with, an adopted emergency response plan or ❑ ❑ ❑
emergency evacuation plan?
h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of
loss, injury or death involving wildland fires,
including where wildlands are adjacent to ❑ ❑ ❑
urbanized areas or where residences are
intermixed with wildlands?
a, b) No Impact. The proposed project will not create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials
Therefore, no impact would occur.
c-d) No Impact. The project site is not included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled
pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5. No impact would occur.
e-f) No Impact. The nearest airport is the Palm Springs Regional Airport located at Gene
Autry Trail. The Federal Aviation Administration has completed an aeronautical study
under the provisions of 49 U.S.C., Section 44718 and, if applicable, Title 14 of the Code of
Federal Regulations, part 77. The aeronautical study concluded that the structure does
not exceed obstruction standards and would not be a hazard to air navigation.
Nextel Communications Facility at Big-Ten Mini Storage, Initial Study/Negative Declaration
September 2005
1.0-22
NEXTEL COMMUNIe .11ONs FACILITY AT BIG-TEN MINI STORAGE it Nh-L STU DYi NEGATIVE DECLARATION
g) No Impact. The City of Palm Springs Emergency Plan was established to address
planned response to extraordinary emergency situations associated with natural disasters
and technological incidents. The Plan focuses on operational concepts relative to large-
scale disasters, which can pose major threats to life and property requiring unusual
emergency responses. The proposed project will have no impact on the City's ability to
implement this Plan.
h) No Impact. Based on the site's location in an urban area, it would not be subject to
wildland fire. No impact would occur.
Nextel Communications Facility at Big-Ten Mini Storage, Initial Study/Negative Declaration
September 2005
1.0-23
NEXTEL COMMUNI—IFIONs FACILITY AT BIG-TEN MINI STORAGE ANi.—L STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant
Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact
VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste El ❑ Eldischarge requirements? IN
b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or
interfere substantially with groundwater recharge
such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer
volume or a lowering of the local groundwater ❑ ❑ ❑
table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing
nearby wells would drop to a level which would
not support existing land uses or planned uses for
which permits have been granted)?
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of
the site or area, including through the alteration of
the course of a stream or river, in a manner which ❑ ❑ ❑
would result in substantial erosion or siltation on-or
off-site?
d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of
the site or area, including through the alteration of
the course of a stream or river, or substantially ❑ ❑ ❑ Q
increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a
manner that would result in flooding on-or off-site?
e) Create or contribute runoff water which would
exceed the capacity of existing or planned ❑ El El
drainage systems or provide substantial
additional sources of polluted runoff?
f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? ❑ ❑ ❑
g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area
as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Li El ❑
Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard
delineation map?
h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures
that would impede or redirect flood flows? ❑ ❑ ❑
i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of
loss, injury or death involving flooding, including ❑ ❑ ❑
flooding as a result of a failure of a levee or dam?
j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami or mudflow? ❑ ❑ ❑
a, e) No Impact. The project would be required to meet all applicable water quality
standards or waste discharge requirements thereby avoiding violation of such standards
or requirements. The project site is currently graded and paved. Construction and
operation of the proposed project would not add additional impervious surface areas to
the project site. Therefore, no additional shormwater runoff or changes in existing
drainage patterns or volumes is anticipated.
Nextel Communications Facility at Big-Ten Mini Storage, Initial Study/Negative Declaration
September 2005
1.0-24
NEXTEL C0MMUNk—f[ON s FACILITY AT BIG-TEN MINI STORAGE/INI.—L STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
b) No Impact. The proposed project does not require potable water. A net deficit in aquifer
volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table is not anticipated and therefore, no
impact would occur.
c-d) No Impact. The project would not alter the course of any stream or river, as none are
located on-site or in the immediate vicinity of the site. Therefore, no impact would occur.
f) No Impact. No additional impacts to water quality are anticipated.
g-h) No Impact. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) indicates in the Flood
Insurance Rate Map for the project site area, that the site is not within the 100-year
floodplain. Because the project site is not located within the 100-year floodplain, and will
not involve structures that impede flood flows, flooding impacts associated with the
proposed project are not considered significant.
i) No Impact. The Palm Springs General Plan Environmental Impact Report does not identify
flooding as a result of levee or dam failure as having a potential to expose people or
structures to a significant risk of loss injury or death in City of Palm Springs. Therefore, no
impact would occur.
j) No Impact. The City of Palm Springs is not located in an area subject to seiche, tsunami
or mudflow. Therefore, no impact would occur.
Nextel Communications Facility at Big-Ten Mini Storage, Initial Study/Negative Declaration
September,20Q�5
1.0-25 UA ^1 �L)
NEXTEL COMMUNi_ .f1ONs FACILITY AT BIG-TEN MINI STORAGE/INI....L STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant
Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact
IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established community? ❑ ❑ ❑
b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy or
regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the
project (including, but not limited to, the general ❑ El Elplan, specific plan, local coastal program or zoning
ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or
mitigating an environmental effect?
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation ❑ El
plan or natural community conservation plan?
CO No impact. The proposed project consists of a new communications facility (cell tower)
and limited supporting structures in an existing industrial area. The project would not
divide an established community and no impact would occur.
b) No Impact. The proposed project would be consistent with the allowable uses within the
industrial (IND) land use designation, which allows for warehousing and retail land uses.
The proposed communication facility use is not specifically listed as allowable uses in the
M-1 zone, but may be allowed upon authorization by commission decision. The
proposed project would seek approval of a CUP from the City of Palm Springs as
required for consistency with the Zoning Code. No other land use plans or regulations
are applicable to the proposed project site. Therefore, no impact would occur.
c) No Impact. The project would not conflict with an applicable habitat conservation plan
or natural community conservation plan. No impact would occur.
Nextel Communications Facility at Big-Ten Mini Storage, Initial Study/Negative Declaration
September 2005
1.0-26
NEXTEL COMMUNI—I-IONS FACILITY AT BIG-TEN MINI STORAGE/INI....L STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Less Than
Potentially Significant With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
X. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral
resource that would be of value to the region and the El El Ll 0
residents of the state?
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important
mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local
general plan, specific plan or other land use plan?
a-b) No Impact. No significant mineral resources have been identified in the project area.
The Palm Springs General Plan FIR (Palm Springs, 1992) has not identified any mineral
resources in the planning area. Therefore, no impact to mineral resources would occur.
Nextel Communications Facility at Big-Ten Mini Storage, Initial Study/Negative Declaration
September 2005
1.0-2 7
NEXTEL COMMUNk .rIONs FACILITY AT BIG-TEN MINI STORAGE/INI,...L STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
XI. NOISE. Would the project result in:
a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise
levels in excess of standards established in the El ❑ ❑
local general plan or noise ordinance or of
applicable standards of other agencies?
b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive
groundborne vibration or groundborne noise ❑ ❑ ❑
levels?
c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise
levels in the project vicinity above levels existing ❑ ❑ ❑
without the project?
d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in
ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above ❑ ❑ ❑
levels existing without the project?
e) For a project located within an airport land use
plan area or, where such a plan has not been
adopted, within two miles of a public airport or a ❑ El ❑
public use airport, would the project expose
people residing or working in the project area to
excessive noise levels?
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip,
would the project expose people residing or ❑ El Elworking in the project area to excessive noise
levels?
a,b,d) No Impact. All surrounding land uses are industrial in nature, with the exception of the
single-family residences located west of the site. The proposed project would not subject
surrounding residents to noise elevations and/or ground vibration. Construction and site
grading activities associated with the proposed project will produce temporary increases
in the ambient noise level in the immediate vicinity of the project site. Construction
activities are regulated by City Ordinance 1581, which limits construction activities to
7AM-7PM Monday through Friday, 8AM-5PM Saturdays, and prohibits construction
activities on Sundays and major holidays. Adherence to this ordinance will ensure that
no impact would occur. Operation of the communication facility will not generate noise
levels above the existing conditions.
cJ No Impact. No increase in noise over the existing mini-storage use is anticipated, and the
project is not anticipated to exceed any applicable noise standards. The proposed
project would not be exposed to excessive noise from neighboring uses. Therefore, this
impact is not considered significant.
e-f) No Impact. The proposed project is an unmanned communications facility. The project
will not expose employees or residents to excessive airport noise.
Nextel Communications Facility at Big-Ten Mini Storage, Initial Study/Negative Declaration
September 2005
y T
1.0-25
NEXTEL COMMUN I,_.fIONs FACILITY AT BIG-TEN MINI STORAGE/1 NI....L STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant
Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact
XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project:
a) Induce substantial population growth in an area,
either directly (e.g., by proposing new homes and El ❑ ❑
businesses) or indirectly (e.g., through extension of
roads or other infrastructure)?
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing,
necessitating the construction of replacement ❑ ❑ ❑
housing elsewhere?
c) Displace substantial numbers of people,
necessitating the construction of replacement ❑ ❑ ❑
housing elsewhere?
a-c) No Impact. The project does not propose any new homes, and no housing exists on the
proposed project site. No existing residents or housing would be displaced to
accommodate the proposed project. The proposed project will not have a direct or
indirect impact on regional population growth. There is no impact to population and
housing.
Nextel Communications Facility at Big-Ten Mini Storage, Initial Study/Negative Declaration
September 2005
1.0-29
NEXTEL COMMUN I.,..r10Ns FACILITY AT BIG-TEN MINI STORAGE AN1,. L STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant
Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact
XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with
the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered
governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in
order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of
the following public services:
a) Fire protection? ❑ ❑ ® ❑
b) Police protection? ❑ ❑ ® ❑
c) Schools? ❑ ❑ ❑
d) Parks? ❑ ❑ ❑
e) Other public facilities? ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
a) Less than significant impact. The project site is located in the Palm Springs Fire
Department service area. Onsite fire protection will include fire hydrants and fire
extinguishers located as required by the City Fire Department. Sprinkler systems will be
installed as required by the City Fire Department.
b) Less than significant impact. The project site is located within the service area of the City
of Palm Springs Police Department. The Palm Springs Police Department currently has
adequate staff resources to provide police protection services as needed to the
proposed project. Therefore, impacts to police protection would be less than significant.
c) No impact. The project site is located within the Palm Springs School District. The Leroy F.
Green School Facilities Act of 1998, which governs a school district's authority to levy
school impact fees, assists in mitigating impacts to schools. California Government Code
Sections 65995(h) and 65996(b) note that payments of fees provide full and complete
school facilities mitigation. The project does not propose any new residences or other
facilities than would affect schools. Therefore, no impact would occur.
d) No impact. The project site is located within the boundaries of the Palm Springs
Department of Parks and Recreation service area. State law requires each new
residential development to dedicate land for park facilities or pay an in-lieu fee to cover
the cost of acquiring park land elsewhere. The City uses a dedication formula of 5-acres
per 1,000 persons. The amount of population generated by the project does not reach
the 1,000-person standard. The project does not include any development or uses that
would lead to an increased demand for parks and recreation services. Therefore, no
impact would occur.
e) No impact. The project would not create any significant impacts to the service levels of
other public facilities. Therefore, no impact would occur.
Nextel Communications Facility at Big-Ten Mini Storage, Initial Study/Negative Declaration
September 2005
1.0-30
NEXTEL COMMUNI_ JIONs FACILITY AT BIG-TEN MINI STORAGE/IN i._.L STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
XIV. RECREATION.
a) Would the project increase the use of existing
neighborhood and regional parks or other
recreational facilities such that substantial physical ❑ ❑ ❑
deterioration of the facility would occur or be
accelerated?
b) Does the project include recreational facilities, or
require the construction or expansion of ❑ El El
facilities, which might have an
adverse physical effect on the environment?
a-b) No Impact. The proposed project does not include any development or features that
would increase the use of existing recreation facilities or increase demand for additional
recreational facilities. The project proposal does not include any new recreational
facilities and would not induce population growth either directly or indirectly. Therefore,
no impact would occur.
Nextel Communications Facility at Big-Ten Mini Storage, Initial Study/Negative Declaration
September 2005
1.0-31
NEXTEL COMMUN,_ JIONs FACILITY AT BIG-TEN MINI STORAGE/INI.—L STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Less Than
Significant
Potentially with Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would the project:
a) Cause an increase in traffic that is substantial in
relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of
the street system (i,e., result in a substantial ❑ ❑ ® ❑
increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the
volume-to-capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at
intersections)?
b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level
of service standard established by the county El El ® El
management agency for designated
roads or highways?
c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including
either an increase in traffic levels or a change in ❑ ❑ ❑
location that results in substantial safety risks?
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design
feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous El El Elintersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm 79
equipment)?
e) Result in inadequate emergency access? ❑ ❑ ❑
t) Result in inadequate parking capacity? ❑ ❑ ® ❑
g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans or programs
supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus ❑ ❑ ® ❑
turnouts, bicycle racks)?
a,b) Less than significant impact. Impacts to traffic resulting from the proposed project will
consist of minor short-term increases in vehicle trips during project construction. Traffic
generated during long-term operation and maintenance is limited to monthly
maintenance trips and is not expected to increase traffic significantly above existing
levels, nor would it result in unacceptable levels of services (LOS). This impact is
considered less than significant.
c) No impact. The proposed project does not include any components that could impact
air traffic operations. The proposed project is located within two miles of Palm Springs
International Airport. As discussed previously in this Initial Study, the Federal Aviation
Administration has completed an aeronautical study under the provisions of 49 U.S.C.,
Section 44718 and, if applicable, Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations, part 77. The
aeronautical study concluded that the structure does not exceed obstruction standards
and would not be a hazard to air navigation.
d-e) No impact. The proposed project will not substantially increase hazards due to a design
feature. Emergency access to the project site will comply with the requirements
identified by the City Fire Department.
f-g) Less than significant. Implementation of the proposed project would require parking for
the crew and equipment during construction and subsequent maintenance visits.
Temporary and maintenance parking could be accommodated on the large paved
Nextel Communications Facility at Big-Ten Mini Storage, Initial Study/Negative Declaration
September 2005
1.0-32 �n T
NEXTEL COMMUNI_ .rIONs FACILITY AT BIG-TEN MINI STORAGE/INI..nL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
surface areas surrounding the project site. The proposed project will result in the removal
of approximately 5 parking spaces that are currently used for vehicle storage at the Big-
Ten Mini Storage facility. The removal of these parking spaces will not result in the
exceedance of any City parking requirements. Therefore, the proposed project will not
result in a reduction of adequate parking in the area.
Nextel Communications Facility at Big-Ten Mini Storage, Initial Study/Negative Declaration
September 2005
1.0-33
NEXTEL COMMUNk—rIONs FACILITY AT BIG-TEN MINI STORAGE AN1,.nL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Less Than
Significant
Potentially with Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project:
a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the ❑ ❑ ❑
applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board?
b) Require or result in the construction of new water
or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of ❑ ❑ ❑
existing facilities, the construction of which could
cause significant environmental effects?
c) Require or result in the construction of new storm
water drainage facilities or expansion of existing ❑ ❑
facilities, the construction of which could cause
significant environmental effects?
d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the
project from existing entitlements and resources, or ❑ ❑ ❑
are new or expanded entitlements needed?
e) Result in a determination by the wastewater
treatment provider that serves or may serve the
project that it has adequate capacity to serve the ❑ ❑ ❑
project's projected demand, in addition to the
provider's existing commitments?
f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted
capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste ❑ ❑ ❑
disposal needs?
g) Comply with federal, state and local statutes and ❑ ❑ ❑
regulations related to solid waste?
a-b, e) No impact. The project would not increase the amount of wastewater flows to the RWTP.
The proposed project will not have restroom facilities and will not generate wastewater.
Therefore, no impact to wastewater treatment facilities would occur.
c) No Impact. The proposed project would not result in a need for additional stormwater
facilities or expansion of existing facilities.
d) No impact. There are no proposed project components that would result in a need for
water service; therefore, the project will not deplete existing water supplies or result in a
need for new or expanded water supplies.
f-g) No impact. The City of Palm Springs contracts with Palm Springs Disposal Services (PSDS)
for solid waste collection services. Solid waste generated in the area is disposed of at the
Edom Hill landfill or the Coachella landfill. As of the 1993 General plan, these landfills
were anticipated to have a remaining life of 30 years and 26 years respectively. The
proposed project would not generate a significant quantity of solid waste. Therefore, no
impact would occur.
Nextel Communications Facility at Big-Ten Mini Storage, Initial Study/Negative Declaration
September 2005
1.0-34
T rt
NEXTEL COMMUN._. TIONS FACILITY AT BIG-TEN MINI STORAGE/IN I.,AL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGSOFS16NIFICANCE
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 wild-life population to drop below self-
sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or ❑ ❑ ❑
animal community, reduce the number or restrict
the range of rare or endangered plants or animals,
or eliminate important examples of the major
periods of California history or prehistory?
b) Does the project have impacts that are
individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable? "Cumulatively considerable" means
that the incremental effects of a project are ❑ El ❑
considerable when viewed in connection with the
effects of past projects, the effects of other current
projects, and the effects of probable future
projects.
c) Does the project have environmental effects that
will cause substantial adverse effects on human ❑ ❑ ❑
beings, either directly or indirectly?
a) No Impact. The proposed project would not degrade the quality of the environment;
result in an adverse impact on fish, wildlife, or plant species including special status
species, or prehistoric or historic cultural resources because project components do not
include any construction or development on areas that are not identified as sensitive.
Prehistoric or historic cultural resources would not be adversely affected because no
archeological or historic resources are known to exist in the project areas. The project is
proposed to occur in an existing industrial park, and does not propose any construction,
development or grading activities in which cultural or historic resources would be
anticipated to be discovered. Further, project implementation includes compliance with
appropriate procedures for avoiding or preserving artifacts or human remains if they are
discovered.
b) No Impact. The project would be consistent with the City's General Plan and would not
create any significant impacts. All project impacts would be reduced by adhering to
basic regulatory requirements and/or conditions of approval, as well as mitigation
measures identified in this environmental document.
c) No Impact. The proposed project would not have any direct or indirect adverse impacts
on humans. Therefore, the proposed project would not have any direct or indirect
adverse impacts on humans.
RF_FERENCES ^
1) City of Palm Springs. City of Palm Springs Draft Environmental Impact Report, December
1992.
Nextel Communications Facility at Big-Ten Mini Storage, Initial Study/Negative Declaration
September 2005
1.0-35 CV-11 c15
NEXTEL COMMUM, TIONS FACILITY AT BIG-TEN MINI STORAGE/INI.,AL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
2) City of Palm Springs. City of Palm Springs General Plan. 1992.
3) City of Palm Springs. City of Palm Springs Zoning Code. 2004.
4) City of Palm Springs. Smoketree Ranch: Communications Facility Mitigated Negative
Declaration. 2005.
5) South Coast Air Quality Management District. CEQA Air Quality Handbook. 1993
6) U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 33, Chapter 26, Subchapter IV, "Clean Water Act"
1994
7) Government Code Section 65962.5(f), "Hazardous Waste and Substances Statement"
8) Jeppesen. Notice of Proposed Construction or Alternation to FAA. 2003.
Nextel Communications Facility at Big-Ten Mini Storage, Initial Study/Negative Declaration
September 2005
1.0-36 r 1r�q
RESOLUTION NO.
OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS,
CALIFORNIA, ADOPTINGA NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND
APPROVING, SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS, CASE NO.
5.1060 CUP, AN APPLICATION BY NEXTEL
COMMUNICATIONS, FOR THE CONSTRUCTION,
OPERATION, AND MAINTENANCE OF A WIRELESS
TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITY TO INCLUDE A 50
FOOT TALL STEEL MONOPOLE AND 20' X 11.6' X 10'
EQUIPMENT SHELTER SURROUNDED BY A 6' TALL
WROUGHT IRON FENCE, LOCATED AT 788 SOUTH VELLA
ROAD, ZONE M-1, SECTION 19.
WHEREAS, Nextel Communications (the "Applicant") has filed an application with the City
pursuant to Section 94.02.00 of the Zoning Ordinance for the construction, operation and
maintenance of a Nextel Communications commercial communication facility to include a
50 foot tall cellular tower and 20' x 11.6' x 10' equipment shelter surrounded by a 6' tall
wrought iron fence, located at 788 South Vella Road, Zone M1, APN: 680-160-025; and
WHEREAS, notice of a public hearing of the Planning Commission of the City of Palm
Springs to considerthe application for Case No. 5.1060 CUP was given in accordance with
applicable law; and
WHEREAS, on October 26, 2005, a public hearing to considerthe application for Case No.
5.1060 CUP was held by the Planning Commission in accordance with applicable law; and
WHEREAS, notice of a public hearing of the City Council of the City of Palm Springs to
considerthe application for Case No. 5.1060 CUP was given in accordance with applicable
law; and
WHEREAS, on February 15, 2006, a public hearing to consider the application for Case
No. 5.1060 CUP was held by the City Council in accordance with applicable law; and
WHEREAS, a Negative Declaration of environmental impacts was drafted for this project
pursuant to requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines
and routed for the required 20-day public review period, which ended October 9, 2005. It
was determined that the project would not have significant environmental impacts,
therefore, no mitigation measures were required; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has carefully reviewed and considered all of the evidence
presented in connection with the hearing on the project, including, but not limited to, the
staff report, and all written and oral testimony presented.
THE CITY COUNCIL DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1: Pursuant to Section 15063 of the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) Guidelines, an Initial Study was prepared and a Notice of Intent to
adopt Negative Declaration was sent to applicable agencies and published
on September 16, 2005 in the Desert Sun for a 20-day review period ending
October 9, 2005. The Negative Declaration found the environmental impacts
of the proposed project to be less than significant.
Section 2: Pursuant to Section 94.02.00 of the Palm Springs Zoning Ordinance:
1. The use applied for at the location set forth in the application is one for which a
conditional use permit is authorized by the City Zoning Ordinance.
Pursuant to Section 94.02.00 of the Zoning Ordinance, a communications antenna
is authorized in the M-1 Zone pursuant to approval of a Type II Conditional Use
Permit.
2. The use appliedforis necessary ordesirable forthe developmentof the community,
is in harmony with the various elements or objectives of the General Plan, and is not
detrimental to existing uses or to future uses specifically permitted in the zone in
which the proposed use is to be located.
The proposed communications antenna is in harmony with the various elements
and objectives of the City of Palm Springs General Plan and is not detrimental to
existing uses specifically permitted in the zone in which the proposed use is to be
located. The proposed communications antenna will not have a significant visual
impact on the surrounding area because all associated equipment will be enclosed
within a block wall equipment shelter. In order for the proposed monopole to better
blend into the surrounding area it will be designed to resemble a palm tree.
:3. The site for the intended use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate said
use, including yards, setbacks, walls or fences, landscaping and other features
required in order to adjust said use to those existing or permitted future uses of the
land in the neighborhood.
The site for the communications antennae, an 800 square foot lease area at the
rear corner of an industrial/warehouse development located at 788 South Vella
Road, is adequate in shape and size to accommodate said use, including all
features required in order to adjust said use to those existing or permitted future
uses of the land in the neighborhood. Location of and development of the lease
area will not affect the functioning of the industrial/warehouse use.
Al. The site for the proposed use related to streets and highways is properly designed
and improved to carry the type and quantity of traffic to be generated by the
proposed use.
The site for the proposed communications antennae will not have a director indirect
impact on streets and highways and is properly designed in the subject area.
5. The conditions to be imposed and shown on the approved site plan are deemed
necessary to protect the public health, safety and general welfare, including any
minor modifications of the zone's property development standards.
All proposed conditions of approval are necessary to ensure public health and
safety.
Section 3. The City Council adopts the Negative Declaration for Case No. 5.1060 CUP,
:and approves a conditional use permit forthe construction, operation and maintenance of a
Nextel Communications facility at 788 South Vella Road, subject to the conditions of
approval.
ADOPTED THIS 15th day of February, 2006.
David H. Ready, City Manager
ATTEST:
James Thompson, City Clerk
CERTIFICATION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss.
CITY OF PALM SPRINGS )
I, JAMES THOMPSON, City Clerk of the City of Palm Springs, hereby certify that
Resolution No. is a full, true and correct copy, and was duly adopted at a regular
meeting of the City Council of the City of Palm Springs on by the
following vote:
,AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
James Thompson, City Clerk
City of Palm Springs, California
EXHIBIT A
Case No. 5.1060 CUP
Nextel Communications
788 South Vella Road
February 15, 2006
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Before final acceptance of the project, all conditions listed below shall be completed to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer, the Director of Planning, the Chief of Police, the Fire Chief or
their designee, depending on which department recommended the condition.
Any agreements, easements or covenants required to be entered into shall be in a form approved
by the City Attorney.
PLANNING
Administrative
1. The proposed development of the premises shall conform to all applicable regulations of
the Palm Springs Zoning Ordinance, Municipal Code, or any other City Codes, ordinances
and resolutions which supplement the zoning district regulations.
2. The owner shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Palm Springs, its agents,
officers, and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding against the City of Palm
Springs or its agents, officers or employees to attach, set aside, void or annul, an approval
of the City of Palm Springs, its legislative body, advisory agencies, or administrative
officers concerning Case 5.1060. The City of Palm Springs will promptly notify the
applicant of any such claim, action, or proceeding against the City of Palm Springs and the
applicant will either undertake defense of the matter and pay the City's associated legal
costs or will advance funds to pay for defense of the matter by the City Attorney. If the
City of Palm Springs fails to promptly notify the applicant of any such claim, action or
proceeding or fails to cooperate fully in the defense, the applicant shall not, thereafter, be
responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless the City of Palm Springs.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, the City retains the right to settle or abandon the matter
without the applicant's consent but should it do so, the City shall waive the indemnification
herein, except, the City's decision to settle or abandon a matter following an adverse
judgement or failure to appeal, shall not cause a waiver of the indemnification rights
herein.
3. That the property owner(s) and successors and assignees in interest shall maintain and
repair the improvements including and without limitation sidewalks, bikeways, parkways,
parking areas, landscape, irrigation, lighting, signs, walls, and fences between the curb
and property line, including sidewalk or bikeway easement areas that extend onto private
property, in a first class condition, free from waste and debris, and in accordance with all
applicable law, rules, ordinances and regulations of all federal, state, and local bodies and
agencies having jurisdiction at the property owner's sole expense. This condition shall be
included in the recorded covenant agreement for the property if required by the City.
(Y17.
4. If marking and/or lighting are accomplished on a voluntary basis, it shall be installed and
maintained in accordance with FAA Advisory Circular 70/7460-1 70/7460-1 K.
Cultural Resources
5. Prior to any ground disturbing activity, including clearing and grubbing, installation of
utilities, and/or any construction related excavation, an Archaeologist qualified according
to the Secretary of the Interior's Standards and Guidelines, shall be employed to survey
the area for the presence of cultural resources identifiable on the ground surface.
a) Experience has shown that there is always a possibility of buried cultural
resources in a project area. Given that, a Native American Monitor(s) shall be
present during all ground disturbing activities including clearing and grubbing,
excavation, burial of utilities, planting of rooted plants, etc. Contact the Agua
Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indian Cultural Office for additional information on the
use and availability of Cultural Resource Monitors. Should buried cultural
deposits be encountered, the Monitor shall contact the Director of Planning
Services and after the consultation the Director shall have the authority to halt
destructive construction and shall notify a Qualified Archaeologist to investigate
and, if necessary, the Qualified Archaeologist shall prepare a treatment plan for
submission to the State Historic Preservation Officer and Agua Caliente Cultural
Resource Coordinator for approval.
b) Two copies of any cultural resource documentation generated in connection with
this project, including reports of investigations, record search results and site
records/updates shall be forwarded to the Tribal Planning, Building, and
Engineering Department and one copy to the City Planning and Zoning
Department prior to final inspection.
Final Design
6. Final landscaping, irrigation, exterior lighting, and fencing plans shall be submitted for
approval by the Department of Planning and Zoning, Building Department, Department
of Public Works, and Department of Parks and Recreation, prior to issuance of a building
permit. Landscape plans shall be approved by the Riverside County Agricultural
Commissioner's Office prior to submittal. All landscaping located within the public right of
way or within community facilities districts must be approved by the Public Works
Director.
7. The block wall surrounding the lease area shall be of a color matching any existing block
wall adjacent to the lease area or of a natural sand color to the satisfaction of the
Department of Planning Services.
8. The monopalm and palm fronds shall be a maximum of 50 feet in height.
9. The antennas shall be painted to match the faux fronds on the monopalm. The balance
of the pole shall be painted to resemble the trunk of a palm tree.
10. To avoid an "open area" between the existing block walls on the north and east sides of
the proposed equipment shelter, the applicant shall install wrought iron fencing that
extends from the equipment shelter to the existing block walls.
General Conditions/Code Requirements
'11. This Conditional Use Permit approval shall be valid for a period of two (2) years.
Extensions of time may be granted by the Planning Commission upon demonstration of
good cause. Once constructed, the conditional use permit, provided all conditions of
approval have been complied with, does not have a time limit and runs with the land.
12. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, a Fugitive Dust and Erosion Control Plan shall be
submitted and approved by the Building Official. Refer to Chapter 8.50 of the Municipal
Code for specific requirements.
13, The grading plan shall show the disposition of all cut and fill materials. Limits of site
disturbance shall be shown and all disturbed areas shall be fully restored or landscaped.
14, No outside storage of any kind shall be permitted except as approved as a part of the
proposed plan.
BUILDING
15. The distance between the new equipment shelter and the existing storage building shall
be shown on the final plans.
16. The distance between the existing storage building and the proposed equipment shelter
shall comply with Sections 504.1 and 505 of the Uniform Building Code (UBC).
FIRE
17. Provide one 2-A:10-B:C portable fire extinguisher for every 75' of floor or grade travel
distance for normal hazards.
18. Building shall be clearly identified on the exterior. (904.1 CFC)
19. A KNOX key box is required in accordance with the 8 California Fire Code (CFC), Article
9, Section 902.4. A field inspector shall determine the location for this box. The
applicant shall contact the Fire Department for a KNOX application as soon as possible.
20. A minimum of 20 feet of access width is required between the proposed equipment
shelter and the existing storage buildings to allow access by the Fire Department.
PROOF OF PUBLICATIONN r-Ij 3 1 id il 4tp Is space for County Clerk's Filing Stamp
(2015.5.C.C.P)
No. 0397
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
CITY COUNL
STATE OF CALIFORNIA CITY OF PALM SPRINGS
County of Riverside CASE NO,5.1060 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS
7a8 SOUTH VELLA ROAD
popfOrhe C CE S HEREBY Sp GIVEN
ho dca
2006. 7r. heaCity CcUl at IDll meetm If
egme aty6?Od
pm. In the Council Chamber at bCityeg Hall, Saw
1 am a citizen of the United States and a resident of East Tahqu200
ttz canyon way, Palm Springs.
the County aforesaid;I am over the age of eighteen The purpose of the hearing is to consider an ap-
p)rca ion by NeiCemmunioaticns to construct
years,and not a party to or interested in the a 52• tall cell antenna, with a 12' x 20' prefabrl-
cared equipment shelter standin 10' tall, all sur-
above-entitled matter.I am the principal clerk of a rounded by a 6' tall chain link fence one 40' x
20' feased area. The site contains mini-storage
printer of the,DESERT SUN PUBLISHING p buildings and paved,parking. The storage facility
COMPANY a newspaper of general circulation, Would lose five park[ spaces.The prom1t is lo-
g rated at 768 South Vella Woes.
(Big Ten Mra Stoi-
printed and published in the city of Palm Springs, age), zone M-1, Section 20,
County of Riverside,and which newspaper has been
adjudged a newspaper of general circulation by the EH
�Plrn;,as���,�oSuperior Court of the County of Riverside,State of
California under the date of March 24,1988.CaserNumber 191236;that themotice,of which the ,,,�. ��•\ ,Iannexed is a rinted co set in t e not smaller
than non pariel,has been published in each regular �_�and entire issue of said newspaper and not in any •i�supplement thereof ou the following dates,to wit: —- �.-�Februmry4o',2006 �i_______________..___ _ _ __ 1E rvDome 9 ),aCnN°f' ..A•II In the ear 2006 ---'-----�--- - - -- - q yrd
Y ENVIRONMENTAL DETERM NATION, q Draft
Negative Declar no w prepared for
Project under the guideline the California
I Certify for declare)under'penalty of perjury that the Viewed➢ he QualltY Act r EQA) an tl wIli➢e re-
Y y Gysure! at the hearing. Mem-
foregoing is true and correct. hers of the publlc may view this documare at the
Planningg Services'Department, Git yy Hall, 3200
East Tahguitz Canyon Way,
Palm Sprin s, and
Elated at Palm Springs,California this----7'n,----day Council hitten comments at, or prior to, sre City
� REVIEW OF PROJECT INFORMATION:The pro-
of----------Cebr• ery --------------,2006 posed application, site plan and related docu-'
merits are available for ppublic review at City Hall
between the hours of 8;00 a m, and 5:DD p.m.
y—"`���..._•---•-„ Monday through Friday Please contact the ONIce
of the Cit Clerk at 7 y { 6D) 3ment to If you would
______�_ ___--___- hke to schedule an appointment to review these
Signsr � ' Y '- documents.
\r¢ r� COMMENT ON THIS APPLICATION: Re
spponse
__ ..• to this notice may be mad.verbally et the Pub6o
\� Healing and/or in writing before the hearing.Writ-
ten comments may he made to the City Council
,by letter (mall or hand delivery) to:
James Thompson, City y Clerk
320 palm SprEast ings hqLlt CAa92262Way
Any challenge of the proposed project in court'
G' may be limited to raising only those issues raised
t he encrsoetlwdtteen written not or
ice
Clerk at, or pnor, to the gable hearing. (Govern-
ment Code Section 65009ib1[21).
An opportunity Will be given at said hearing for all
fritereing this acasermays be dlr be ectetl trd o EdWartl Flop rd-
son, Planning Services Department at (780)
323-8245,
Si necesfa ayuda con esta carta,porfavor(lame a
I
a Cfudad de Palm Springgs y puede hablar con
Nadine Fieger telefono (760) 323-8245,
Published:2/4/2006James,Thompscn, City Clerk
I
pALMS
`I1\\p�'2 City of Palm Springs
uiiiiTTTT m
Office of the City Ctegs
x �CORPonnre°'93 # 3200 E. Tahquitz Canyon Way • Palm Springs,, California 92262
O ��ge %P Tel. (760)323-5204 • Fax: (760)322-8332 • Web: www.a.palm-sprmgs.ca us eFOR^�
AFFIDAVIT
OF
MAILING NOTICES
I, the undersigned City Clerk of the City of Palm Springs, California, do hereby
certify that a copy of the Notice of Public Hearing, to consider an application by
Nextel Communications to construct a 52' tall cell antenna, with a 12' x 20'
prefabricated equipment shelter standing 10' tall, all surrounded by a 6' tall
chain link fence on a 40' x 20' leased area, was mailed to each and every person
set forth on the attached list on the 2nd day of February, 2006, in a sealed
envelope, with postage prepaid, and depositing same in the U.S. Mail at Palm
Springs, California. (74 notices mailed)
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
Dated at Palm Springs, California, this 2nd day of February, 2006.
'MESTHOMPSON
Ity Clerk
/kdh
H:IUSERS\C-CLK\Hearing NoticesW ridavit-NexTel CUP 02-15-06PHN.doc
03CT
Post Office Box 2743 ° Palm Springs, California 92263-2743
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF PALM SPRINGS
CASE NO. 5.1060 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS
788 SOUTH VELLA ROAD
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Palm Springs, California, will hold
a public hearing at its meeting of February 15, 2006. The City Council meeting begins at 6:00
p.m. in the Council Chamber at City Hall, 3200 East Tahquitz Canyon Way, Palm Springs.
The purpose of the hearing is to consider an application by Nextel Communications to construct a
52' tall cell antenna, with a 12' x 20' prefabricated equipment shelter standing 10' tall, all
surrounded by a 6' tall chain link fence on a 40' x 20' leased area. The site contains mini-storage
buildings and paved parking. The storage facility would lose five parking spaces. The project is
located at 788 South Vella Road (Big Ten Mini Storage), Zone M-1, Section 20.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: A Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared for
this project under the guidelines of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and will be
reviewed by the City Council at the hearing. Members of the public may view this document at
the Planning Services Department, City Hall, 3200 East Tahquitz Canyon Way, Palm Springs,
and submit written comments at, or prior to, the City Council hearing. '
REVIEW OF PROJECT INFORMATION: The proposed application, site plan and related
documents are available for public review at City Hall between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00
p.m. Monday through Friday. Please contact the Office of the City Clerk at (760) 323-8204 if you
would like to schedule an appointment to review these documents.
COMMENT ON THIS APPLICATION: Response to this notice may be made verbally at the
Public Hearing and/or in writing before the hearing. Written comments may be made to the City
Council by letter(mail or hand delivery) to:
James Thompson, City Clerk
3200 East Tahquitz Canyon Way
Palm Springs, CA 92262
Any challenge of the proposed project in court may be limited to raising only those issues raised
at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City
Clerk at, or prior, to the public hearing. (Government Code Section 65009[b][2]).
An opportunity will be given at said hearing for all interested persons to be heard. Questions
regarding this case may be directed to Edward Robertson, Planning Services Department at (760)
323-8245.
Si necesita ayuda con esta carta, porfavor Ilame a la Ciudad de Palm Springs y puede hablar con _
Nadine Fieger telefono (760) 323-8245.
es Thompson, City Clerk
��/ (Yr' n.,m
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF PALM SPRINGS
CASE NO. 5.1060 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS
788 SOUTH VELLA ROAD
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Palm Springs, California, will hold
a public hearing at its meeting of February 15, 2006. The City Council meeting begins at 6:00
p.m. in the Council Chamber at City Hall, 3200 East Tahquitz Canyon Way, Palm Springs.
The purpose of the hearing is to consider an application by Nextel Communications to construct a
1152' tall cell antenna, with a 12' x 20' prefabricated equipment shelter standing 10' tall, all
surrounded by a 6' tall chain link fence on a 40' x 20' leased area. The site contains mini-storage
buildings and paved parking. The storage facility would lose five parking spaces. The project is
Located at 788 South Vella Road (Big Ten Mini Storage), Zone M-1, Section 20.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: A Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared for
this project under the guidelines of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and will be
reviewed by the City Council at the hearing. Members of the public may view this document at
the Planning Services Department, City Hall, 3200 East Tahquitz Canyon Way, Palm Springs,
and submit written comments at, or prior to, the City Council hearing.
REVIEW OF PROJECT INFORMATION: The proposed application, site plan and related
documents are available for public review at City Hall between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00
p.m. Monday through Friday. Please contact the Office of the City Clerk at (760) 323-8204 if you
would like to schedule an appointment to review these documents.
COMMENT ON THIS APPLICATION: Response to this notice may be made verbally at the
Public Hearing and/or in writing before the hearing. Written comments may be made to the City
Council by letter(mail or hand delivery) to:
James Thompson, City Clerk
3200 East Tahquitz Canyon Way
Palm Springs, CA 92262
Any challenge of the proposed project in court may be limited to raising only those issues raised
at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City
Clerk at, or prior, to the public hearing. (Government Code Section 65009[b][21).
An opportunity will be given at said hearing for all interested persons to be heard. Questions
regarding this case may be directed to Edward Robertson, Planning Services Department at (760)
323-8245.
Si necesita ayuda con esta carta, portavor Ilame a la Ciudad de Palm Springs y puede hablar con
Nadine Fieger telefono (760) 323-8245.
J6Aes Thompson, City Clerk
Department of Planning Services W IN E
Vic in ity Map 5
nna
CAMINO SAN MIGUEL
❑
z
w
J
O
SUNNY DUNES RD
CALLE SAN ANTONIO
O
U)
� 4
LLJ
d �
O J SAN RAPHAEL
Ilj
J
� U
U
PASFO RARnlFTA
Legend
Sde
500 Feet
MESQUITE AVE -
CITY OF PALM SPRINGS
CASE NO: 5.1060 CUP DESCRIPTION: To construct a 52 foot cell antenna
with equipment shelter on a 40' x 20' lease area at
APPLICANT: NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS the rear of Big 10 Mini-Storage located at 788 South
Vella Road, Zone M-1. APN: 680-160-025.
NEIGHBORHOOD COALITION REPS MS APRIL HILDNER
Public Hearing Notice (TAHQUITZ RIVERS ESTATES) MR TIM HOHMEIER
Case 5.1060 241 EAST MESQUITE AVENUE (DEEPWELL ESTATES)
CC Meeting-02.15.06 PALM SPRINGS CA 92264 1387 CALLE DE MARIA
PALM SPRINGS CA 92264
MS ROXANN FLOSS MR STEVEN PERRIN MS SHERYL HAMLIN
(BEL DESIERTO NEIGHBORHOOD ) (DEEPWELL RANCH) (HISTORIC TENNIS CLUB AREA)
930 CHIA ROAD 1334 INVIERNO R\DRIVE 565 WEST SANTA ROSA DRIVE
PALM SPRINGS CA 92262 PALM SPRINGS CA 92264 PALM SPRINGS CA 92262
MR JOHN HANSEN MS MALLIKA ALBERT MS DIANE AHLSTROM
(WARM SANDS NEIGHBORHOOD) (CHINO CANYON ORGANIZATION) (MOVIE COLONY NEIGHBORHOOD)
PO BOX 252 2241 NORTH LEONARD ROAD 475 VALMONTE SUR
PALM SPRINGS CA 92263 PALM SPRINGS CA 92262 PALM SPRINGS CA 92262
MR KENT CHAMBERLIN MR BOB MAHLOWITZ MS PAULA AUBURN
(TENNIS CLUB AREA) (SUNMOR NEIGHBORHOOD GROUP) (SUNRISE/VISTA CHINO AREA)
373 MONTE VISTA 246 NORTH SYBIL ROAD 1369 CAMPEON CIRCLE
PALM SPRINGS CA 92262 PALM SPRINGS CA 92262 PALM SPRINGS CA 92262
MR BILL SCOTT MR. SEIMA MOLOI
MR BOB DICKINSON (OLD LAS PALMAS NEIGHBORHOOD) (DESERT HIGHLAND GATEWAY)
VISTA LAS PALMAS HOMEOWNERS 540 VIA LOLA 359 W. SUNVIEW AVENUE
755 WEST CRESCENT DRIVE PALM SPRINGS, CA 92262 PALM SPRINGS, CA 92262-1459
PALM SPRINGS CA 92262
MR PETE MORUZZI
PALM SPRINGS MODERN COMMITTEE
MODCOM & HISTORIC PO BOX 4738
SITE REP I I I PALM SPRINGS CA 92263-4738
CITY OF PALM SPRINGS CASE NO 5.1060
PLANNING &ZONING DEPT MRS JOANNE BRUGGEMANS
VERIFICATION NOTICE I 1 1 ATTN SECRETARY 506 W SANTA CATALINA ROAD
PO BOX 2743 PALM SPRINGS CA 92262
PALM SPRINGS, CA 92263-2743
MS MARGARET PARK
AGUA CALIENTE BAND OF CAHUILLA AGUA CALIENTE BAND OF CAHUILLA
INDIANS 1 1 I I I 1 INDIANS
650 E TAHQUITZ CANYON WAY
PALM SPRINGS CA 92262
MR RON RATAJCZAK MS.VERONICA ARVIZU
BIG TEN MINI-STORAGE, LLC NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS
SPONSORS-APPLICANT 3055 BLACKWELL DRIVE 29992 CENTER ROAD,#105- 166
VISTA, CA 92084 MURIETTA, CA 92563
����wo
680-084-012 680-093-003 680-093-010
GRANGER ALAN W WIEFELS&SON WIEFELS&SON
4466 E SUNNY DUNES RD 630 S VELLA RD 630 S VELLA RD
PALM SPRINGS,CA 92264 PALM SPRINGS,CA 92264 PALM SPRINGS,CA 92264
680-094-006 680-151-001 680-151-002
DILLMAN MAX G HAY CHARLES GREGORY EROS ALEXANDER V
1322 E OCEANFRONT 4489 E SUNNY DUNES RD 4465 E SUNNY DUNES RD
NEWPORT BEACH,CA 92661 PALM SPRINGS,CA 92264 PALM SPRINGS,CA 92264
680-151-003 680-151-004 680-151-012
VILLALOBOS MARTIN MILLER JOHN J TARICCO ANTHONY F
4433 E SUNNY DUNES RD 4411 E SUNNY DUNES RD 49 HARTFORD ST
PALM SPRINGS,CA 92264 PALM SPRINGS,CA 92264 SAN FRANCISCO,CA 94114
680-151-013 680-151-014 680-151-015
SONICO DENNIS L RODRIGUEZ ALICIA PARK FON YOUNG
4412 E CALLE SAN ANTONIO 4424 CALLE SAN ANTONIO 4460 E CALLE SAN ANTONIO
PALM SPRINGS,CA 92264 PALM SPRINGS,CA 92262 PALM SPRINGS,CA 92264
680-151-016 680-151-017 680-151-018
JOHNSON MARILYN A CAHILL JAMES HARRISON ROBERT W
740 S CALLE PAUL 762 S CALLE PAUL 784 S CALLE PAUL
PALM SPRINGS,CA 92264 PALM SPRINGS,CA 92264 PALM SPRINGS,CA 92264
680-151-019 680-151-020 680-151-021
FERRO LEONARD RIVERA FELIX OREA JESUS F
812 S CALLE PAUL 852 S CALLE PAUL 886 S CALLE PAUL
PALM SPRINGS,CA 92264 PALM SPRINGS,CA 92264 PALM SPRINGS, CA 92264
680-151-022 680-151-023 680-151-024
ESCOBAR JOSE LUIS GUILLERMO COME SANTOS MEYERS SPIKE
906 S CALLE PAUL 932 CALLE PAUL PO BOX 2384
PALM SPRINGS,CA 92264 PALM SPRINGS,CA 92262 PALM SPRINGS,CA 92263
680-151-025 680-152-001 680-152-002
MAGLIONE CAROLYN W PALOMO SONIA HERNANDEZ AGRIAM NORLITO
976 S CALLE PAUL 765 S CALLE PAUL 933 S PASEO CAROLETA
PALM SPRINGS,CA 92264 PALM SPRINGS,CA 92264 PALM SPRINGS,CA 92264
680-152-003 680-152-004 680-152-005
PELTON GERALD PELTON GERALD E HICKS STEPHENS A
819 S CALLE PAUL 819 S CALLE PAUL 2420 2ND AVE
PALM SPRINGS,CA 92264 PALM SPRINGS,CA 92264 SEATTLE,WA 98121
680-152-006 680-152-007 680-152-008
BARKER OLIVE F MORTON CLIFF C HERNANDEZ ENRIQUE
905 S CALLE PAUL 927 S CALLE PAUL 965 S CALLE PAUL
PALM SPRINGS,CA 92264 PALM SPRINGS,CA 92264 PALM SPRINGS,CA 92264
I
I
I
680-152-014 680-152-015 680-152-016
STEVENS VIRGIL J STEVENS VIRGIL J CALLEJA JUAN
928 S CALLE TOMAS 928 S CALLE TOMAS 880 S CALLE TOMAS
PALM SPRINGS,CA 92264 PALM SPRINGS,CA 92264 PALM SPRINGS,CA 92264
680-152-017 680-152-018 680-152-019
EPSTEIN VICKI THOMPSON DARIN L ALBRECHT HARRY E
820 S CALLE TOMAS 802 S CALLE TOMAS 792 S CALLE TOMAS
4 PALM SPRINGS,CA 92264 PALM SPRINGS,CA 92264 PALM SPRINGS,CA 92264
I
680-160-003
680-152-020 INTERNATIONAL MEMORIAL SOCIETY 680-160-016
I HERRERA DOUGLAS ALEXIS KOMER JOHN W
766 S CALLE TOMAS INC 815 S WILLIAMS RD
PALM SPRINGS,CA 92264 BLAINE,WA 98230 PALM SPRINGS, CA 92264
680-160-017 680-160-018 680-160-020
PATTON DON BOCHNER KURT RICHARDT ELOYCE G
160 S SATURMEVO DR#3 771 S WILLIAMS RD 7863 ELMHURST AVE
PALM SPRINGS, CA 92262 PALM SPRINGS,CA 92264 RANCHO CUCAMONGA,CA 91730
680-160-024 680-160-025 680-160-026
BOCI-INER KURT BIG TEN MINI STORAGE LLC JAMISON JOHN W
771 S WILLIAMS RD 3055 BLACKWELL DR PO BOX 3191
PALM SPRINGS,CA 92264 VISTA,CA 92084 PALM SPRINGS,CA 92263
680-160-027 680-160-030 680-160-032
WHITEHEAD PROP PALM SPRINGS DISPOSAL SERVICES W/J LESSOR WEST COAST
4511 SUNNY DUNES RD#B PO BOX 2711 600 N PEARL LB 149#650
PALM SPRINGS, CA 92264 PALM SPRINGS, CA 92263 DALLAS,TX 75201
680-160-033 680-160-036 680-160-037
HADDAD JACK EVANS ROGER A TRUST WILLIAMS DONALD E
2246 BETTY LN 49275 CROQUET CT 4511 E SUNNY DUNES RD#B
BEVERLY HILLS,CA 90210 INDIO, CA 92201 PALM SPRINGS,CA 92264
680-160-040 680-160-042 680-160-043
GENERAL TELEPHONE CO OF CALIF WHITEHEAD PROP WHITEHEAD PROP
PO BOX 152206 4511 SUNNY DUNES RD#B 4511 SUNNY DUNES RD#B
IRVING,TX 75015 PALM SPRINGS, CA 92264 PALM SPRINGS,CA 92264