HomeMy WebLinkAbout75A - PH - ORDINANCE AMEND SAMC TELECOM FACILITIESREQUEST FOR
COUNCIL ACTION
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE:
MARCH 21, 2011
CLERK OF COUNCIL USE ONLY:
TITLE: APPROVED
PUBLIC HEARING - ORDINANCE AMENDING ? As Recommended
THE SANTA ANA MUNICIPAL CODE ? As Amended
REGULATING TELECOMMUNICATIONS ? Ordinance on 151 Reading
? Ordinance on 2"d Reading
FACILITIES IN THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY ? Implementing Resolution
? Set Public Hearing For
"MANAGER
RECOMMENDED ACTION
CONTINUED TO
FILE NUMBER
Adopt an ordinance adding Article X to Chapter 33 of the Santa Ana Municipal Code
regulating telecommunication facilities in the public right-of-way (OA-2010-01).
2. Approve the Negative Declaration for the Telecommunications Facilities in the Public Right-
of-Way Ordinance (ER-2011-1).
3. Adopt a resolution establishing fees for plan checking and permitting telecommunications
facilities in the public right-of-way.
DISCUSSION
The Public Works Agency manages the public right-of-way and issues permits for construction
of utilities. Recently staff has received applications from wireless telecommunications providers
to install cell phone antennas and other related equipment in the street right-of-way. Although
Chapter 41 of the City's municipal code regulates wireless installation on private property, the
municipal code currently does not contain regulations specifically related to wireless facilities
within the public right of way.
Public Works staff and the City Attorney's Office have prepared an ordinance to regulate
telecommunications facilities in the public right-of-way. Staff has also coordinated with and
received input from residents and the telecommunication providers on the proposed set of
regulations. The ordinance was presented and discussed with the Environmental and
Transportation Advisory Committee at its February 10, 2011 meeting.
The ordinance specifies noticing requirements, including notification of adjacent property owners
and neighborhood associations and posting at the site. It also provides direction on siting
preferences, maximum height of installations, mounting options, and aesthetic considerations.
The ordinance also establishes requirements related to public safety and ongoing maintenance
of the installed facility.
75A-1
Ordinance Amending the Santa Ana
Municipal Code Regulating Telecommunications
March 21, 2011
Page 2
The ordinance specifies the information to be submitted with an application for a facility in the
public right-of-way, including a gap coverage analysis to establish the need for the facility in a
particular area and an alternative site analysis to show why other less intrusive sites were not
selected by the provider. The ordinance allows for review of the analyses by a qualified radio
frequency consultant. The application will also include photo simulations and a statement that
the installation will comply with all applicable radio frequency emission standards. The
ordinance will provide the Public Works Agency with the ability to effectively regulate
telecommunications facilities in the public right-of-way.
A resolution has been prepared which establishes fees in connection with processing
telecommunications facility permit applications. The application fee provides for cost recovery to
compensate the City for staff time and costs related to review, site investigation, and public
notice, as well as review of the gap analysis and alternative site analysis. The fee also includes
a permit fee in connection for permit including staff time related to permit issuance and
inspection during installation.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, Environmental Review No. ER-2011-01
has been completed and a Negative Declaration has been filed for this project.
FISCAL IMPACT
Fees collected as part of the telecommunications facility permit process will be deposited in the
Residential Street Improvement Revenue Fund (accounting unit 05817002-53706) and the
Transportation Planning and Project Management Revenue Fund (accounting units 08617002-
51704 and 08617002-56305).
Rau Godinez II
Executive Director
Public Works Agency
APPROVED AS TO FUNDS AND ACCOUNTS:
'? ?llm ? LA P 1 l 1 e N
Francisco Gutierrez r-A
Executive Director
Finance & Management Services Agency
RG/TH
Exhibit 1: Ordinance
Exhibit 2: Negative Declaration
Exhibit 3: Resolution
75A-2
lss2/25/ I 1
ORDINANCE NO. NS-XXX
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF SANTA ANA ADOPTING GUIDELINES FOR
TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES IN THE PUBLIC
RIGHT OF WAY
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA DOES ORDAIN AS
FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The City Council of the City of Santa Ana hereby finds, determines
and declares as follows:
A. The guidelines set forth in this ordinance are necessary to preserve public
health, safety, welfare, and aesthetic interests in the public right of way.
None of these guidelines are, however, adopted solely for aesthetic interests.
B. Given the increasing use of telecommunications facilities in society today, the
City expects to receive applications for permits for such facilities in increasing
number, some of which facilities are significantly larger than most similarly
situated existing installations; and
C. The City does not intend that this ordinance prohibits or has the effect of
prohibiting telecommunications service; rather, the City seeks to limit
development of telecommunications facilities in and around residential
neighborhoods to the fullest extent allowed by law; and
D. The City recognizes its responsibilities under the Federal
Telecommunications Act of 1996 and State law, and believes that it is
exercising its regulatory authority to the fullest extent under the current state
of the law in ensuring that irreversible development activity does not occur
that would harm the public health, safety or welfare.
Section 2. The City Council has reviewed and considered the information contained
in the initial study and the negative declaration prepared with respect to this Ordinance.
The City Council has, as a result of its consideration and the evidence presented at the
hearings on this matter, determined that, as required pursuant to the California
Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") and the State CEQA Guidelines, a Negative
Declaration adequately addresses the expected environmental impacts of this Ordinance.
On the basis of this review, the City Council finds that there is no evidence from which it
can be fairly argued that the project will have a significant adverse effect on the
environment. The City Council hereby certifies and approves the negative declaration and
75A-3
Iss2/25/11
directs that the Notice of Determination be prepared and filed with the County Clerk of the
County of Orange in the manner required by law.
Pursuant to Title XIV, California Code of Regulations ("CCR") § 735.5(c)(1), the City
Council has determined that, after considering the record as a whole, there is no evidence
that the proposed project will have the potential for any adverse effect on wildlife resources
or the ecological habitat upon which wildlife resources depend. The proposed project
exists in an urban environment characterized by paved concrete, roadways, surrounding
buildings and human activity. Therefore, pursuant to Fish and Game Code § 711.2 and
Title XIV, CCR § 735.5(a)(3), the payment of Fish and Game Department filing fees is not
required in conjunction with this project.
Section 3. Article X is added to Chapter 33 of the Santa Ana Municipal Code to
read in full as follows:
ARTICLE X
TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES IN
THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY
SECTIONS
33-230 Purpose and Intent
33-231 Definitions
33-232 Siting Preferences
33-233 Prohibited On Roadway of Public Street
33-234 Dangerous Condition or Obstruction
33-235 Permit Required
33-236 Application Required
33-237 Fee
33-238 Notice of Application Submittal
33-239 Permit Issuance
33-240 Appeal
33-241 Site Selection Guidelines and Criteria
33-242 Visual Impact Guidelines
33-243 Public Safety Guidelines
33-244 Maintenance Standards
33-245 Compliance with Applicable Law and Regulations
33-246 Nonexclusive Use of Public Right of Way
33-247 Director's Guidelines
33-248 Submittals
33-249 Indemnity and Insurance
33-250 Coordination with other Projects
33-251 Installation in Streets Subject to Future Improvement
33-252 Urban Forest
33-253 Permit Non-Compliance; No Waivers
75A-4
]ss2/25/11
33-254 Future Changes in the Law
Sec. 33-230. Purpose and Intent.
The City Council finds and determines that it is in the interest of the City of
Santa Ana to establish a process that balances the need for Santa Ana residents to
access wireless communications, the general welfare of Santa Ana residents, and the
requirements of state and federal law, to guide applicants for telecommunication
facilities within or along the public right of way. Accordingly, this article is adopted:
(1) To provide uniform standards for the community desired design,
placement, permitting and monitoring of telecommunication facilities consistent with
applicable state and federal requirements.
(2) To manage the public right of way as to the time, place, and manner in
which it is accessed.
(a) To minimize the environmental and aesthetic impacts of installations in
crowded public rights of way.
(b) To strongly encourage telecommunications facilities to be installed
only as ancillary uses at new and existing sites.
feasible.
(c) To require installation on arterial rather than local streets when
(3) To preserve view corridors, to discourage visual blight and clutter and to
encourage aesthetic placement of telecommunication facilities.
(4) To accommodate public and City use of the public right of way, so as to
permit maintenance of telecommunication facilities, and to minimize disruption to
vehicular traffic and pedestrian flow; and on-street parking.
(5) To minimize unnecessary disruption of the public right of way by
coordinating installations so as to effectively manage use of the public right of way.
(6) To ensure the structural integrity, reliability, performance, safety, quality,
ease of maintenance, and aesthetic integrity of the public right of way.
(7) To ensure that similarly situated public right of way users are treated in a
competitively neutral and non-discriminatory manner while complying
with applicable state and federal requirements.
(8) To ensure compliance with all federal, state, county, and local laws.
75A-5
lss2/25/11
(9) To prevent hazardous conditions along the public right of way.
(10) To manage the long-term use of the public right of way.
Sec. 33-231. Definitions.
For the purpose of this Article, the following words or phrases are defined below:
(a) "Agency" means the City's Public Works Agency.
(b) "Antenna array" means one or more rods, panels, discs, or similar devices
used for the transmission or reception of radio frequency signals, which may include
omni-directional antennas (whip), directional antennas (panel), and parabolic antennas
(dish), but excluding any support structure.
(c) "Director" means the Executive Director of the Public Works Agency or
designee.
(d) "Parkway" means that area between the sidewalk and the curb of any
street, and where there is sidewalk adjacent to the curb, that area between the sidewalk
and the right of way line and where there is no sidewalk, that area between the curb or
edge of the roadway and the right of way line adjacent thereto.
(e) "Permit" means a permit issued pursuant to this Chapter allowing the
placement of a telecommunication facility within a specifically designated portion of
the public right of way.
(f) "Person" means any individual, firm, company, partnership,
corporation, entity, agency, or other organization.
(g) "Primary use" means the main purpose for which a site is developed
and occupied, including the activities that are conducted on the site a majority of the
hours which activities occur, including, but not limited to, a street light or power pole.
(h) "Public sidewalk" means any surface dedicated to the use of
pedestrians by license, easement, operation of law or by grant to the City.
(i) "Public right of way" or "right-of-way" means the area on, below, or
above a city owned or controlled street or alley public right of way and the sidewalk
and/or parkway adjacent thereto.
(j) "Roadway" means that portion of a public street improved, designed or
ordinarily used for vehicular traffic.
75A-6
lss2/25/11
(k) "Shared use" means a site or facility where a wireless provider shares a
telecommunications facility with an existing structure, such as a street light or utility pole
or a similar replacement of an existing structure.
(1) "Significant Gap" means a gap in the telecommunications signal,
including geographic coverage, interference and capacity issues resulting in the
inability of telecommunications users to reliably place, maintain or receive calls.
(m) "Support structure" means a freestanding structure designed and
constructed to solely support an antenna array and that may consist of a monopole,
a self-supporting lattice tower, a guy-wire support tower, or other similar structure.
(n) "Telecommunication Facility" means and includes any wire or line,
antenna, pipeline, pipe, duct, conduit, converter, cabinet, pedestal, meter, tunnel, vault,
equipment, drain, manhole, splice box, surface location marker, pole, structure, utility, or
other appurtenance, property, or tangible thing used to provide telecommunications
and/or video services to the public.
(o) "Work" means all labor, materials, equipment, services, and all other
things necessary for a person to install a telecommunication facility in the public right of
way, including without limitation any changes requested by the City, in accordance with
this Article and all applicable laws and regulations.
Sec. 33-232. Siting Preferences
Whenever possible telecommunication facilities shall be located on feasible sites
outside of and non-adjacent to property zoned or used for residential purposes. To the
extent possible, telecommunications facilities shall be located outside the public right-of-
way. If an alternative site analysis indicates the only feasible site is in the right-of-way
within one hundred forty feet (140) of property zoned or used for residential purposes,
placement may be approved on arterial streets. If facility must be sited on a local street
to fill a significant gap, placement may only be allowed on an existing street light or
utility pole, or a replacement pole located at the same site. For purposes of this section,
feasible sites are sites that 1) are not encumbered by deed restrictions or other legal
impediments that prohibit the installation of telecommunication facilities; 2) are owned or
controlled by an entity that is willing to allow the use of the proposed site for a
telecommunication facility installation; 3) include existing structures (such as street
lights and utility poles) upon which telecommunication facilities can be mounted; 4)
require no new permanent disruptions (i.e. access roads, retaining walls, etc.) that do
not primarily serve the primary use; and 5) where the proposed telecommunication
facility, including accessory cabinets, can be designed, treated or screened in an
aesthetic manner that is in keeping with the surrounding area.
75A-7
lss2/25/11
Sec. 33-233. Prohibited on roadway of public street
No person shall install, use or maintain any telecommunication facility in such a manner
that it impedes travel on the right-of-way, nor shall such installation violate siting
regulations imposed by the California Public Utilities Commission.
Sec. 33-234. Dangerous condition or obstruction
No person shall install, use or maintain any telecommunication facility which in whole or
in part rests upon, in or over any public sidewalk or parkway, when such installation,
use or maintenance endangers or is reasonably likely to endanger the safety of persons
or property, or when such telecommunication facility unreasonably interferes with or
impedes the flow of pedestrian or vehicular traffic including any legally parked or
stopped vehicle, the ingress or egress from any residence or place of business, the use
of poles, posts, traffic signs or signals, hydrants, mailboxes, permitted sidewalk dining,
permitted street furniture or other objects permitted at or near said location.
Sec. 33-235. Permit Required.
No person shall install or maintain any telecommunication facility which in whole or in
part rests upon the public right of way without first obtaining a permit from the Director
under this Chapter.
Sec. 33-236. Application Required.
Before a permit is issued, a written application must be filed with the Agency on a form
approved by the Director. The application shall contain the following:
1. The name, address and telephone number of both the applicant and the owner
of the telecommunication facility;
2. The name, address and telephone number of the responsible person whom the
City may contact at any time concerning the telecommunication facility;
3. The applicant shall show legal authority to occupy and use for the purpose
mentioned in the application, the streets, alleys, sidewalks or other public
places where the excavation, placement, location or installation of
telecommunication facilities is proposed to be made;
4. A site plan to scale, elevation drawings, before installation photographs
showing the exact location of the proposed telecommunication facility
(including a description of the location in a format compatible with the City's
geographic information system database), including other improvements in
the project area, renderings and/or photo simulations of the installed
telecommunication facility with appurtenances including power meter boxes
and surrounding landscaping elements;
5. At the request of the Director, a photograph and model number of the
telecommunication facility being proposed;
75A-8
lss2/25/11
6. A coverage map indicating the area which will be served by the proposed
telecommunication facility and any significant gap which will be filled by such
installation;
7. A construction plan and schedule, to include start and end dates and phasing,
as required by the Agency, including additional telecommunication facility
locations which the applicant plans to install within five years from the date of
application submittal;
8. Engineering certification demonstrating compliance with all existing RF
emission standards. The technical information submitted must include
support/analysis to justify the proposed location and height of the
telecommunication facility;
9. The applicant shall include a list of names and addresses of all property owners,
as shown on the latest assessment roll of the county assessor, and tenants
within three hundred feet (300') of the exterior boundaries of the proposed site or
location. This list shall be in an approved mailing label format,
10.An alternative site analysis, including a map indicating the address and
Assessor's parcel number of each alternative site within the coverage
objective, a statement of what good faith efforts and measures were taken to
secure each of these alternative sites, why each such site is not
technologically, legally or economically feasible, how and why the proposed
site is essential to meet service demands for the geographic service area and
the citywide network. This information is necessary to determine whether
there will be a significant gap in coverage if the project is not approved or
whether alternatives exist for providing coverage;
11.A non-refundable application and processing fee, in an amount established by
resolution of the City Council to defray the City's costs to process the
application and to inspect the telecommunication facility.
Sec. 33-237. Fee
(a) Processing Fees. The fee for any permit or application required by this
article shall be set by the City Council by resolution from time to time.
(b) Independent Consultant. As reasonably required, the Applicant may be
required to provide an authorization waiver to permit the City to hire an independent
qualified consultant to evaluate any technical aspect of the proposed telecommunication
facility. Any authorization for this purpose shall include an agreement by the applicant to
reimburse the City for all reasonable costs associated with the consultation. Any
proprietary information disclosed to the City or the consultant is hereby deemed not to
be a public record, shall remain confidential, and not be disclosed to any third party
without the express consent of the applicant, except as hereafter required by operation
of law or by court order.
75A-9
lss2/25/ 11
Sec. 33-238. Notice of Application Submittal
(a) Within five (5) business days of acceptance of a complete application, the
Director shall give or cause notice to be given that the application has been submitted.
The notice shall provide a brief description of the proposed telecommunication facility, a
map indicating the proposed location, information describing the permit review process
including the anticipated action date on the permit request. Notice shall be
accomplished by:
(i) mailing notices to the owners of property located in residential
districts and within 300 feet of the exterior boundaries of the
proposed installation site.
(ii) mailing notices to any neighborhood association representing
residential property located within 300 feet of the exterior
boundaries of the proposed installation site.
(iii) Posting a notice at the proposed installation site on the existing
utility pole, street light or similar structure to be modified or
replaced, or as close thereto as reasonably possible.
(b) Written comments received by the Director shall be considered as part of
the staff review. The comment review period shall be 30 days from the date notice is
provided.
(c) The applicant shall work cooperatively with the City to consider or
otherwise respond to comments received by the Director.
Sec. 33-239. Permit Issuance.
(a) A permit for a telecommunication facility shall be granted, denied or conditionally
granted by the Director within a reasonable time after receiving a completed application
(b) The Director shall issue a permit if the Director makes all of the
following findings:
(1) The proposed telecommunication facility is visually compatible with the
surrounding neighborhoods;
(2) The applicant has demonstrated that the installation will not substantially
interfere with the use of the public right-of-way and existing subterranean infrastructure;
(3) The proposed telecommunication facility complies with all applicable
regulations of the Federal Communication Commission;
(4) The applicant has demonstrated that the proposed site will close a
significant gap in coverage and the proposed site is the least intrusive means of
providing telecommunication services available to the applicant;
75A-10
lss2/25/11
(6) The applicant has coordinated the final siting location of the
telecommunication facility with the Director;
(7) The applicant has posted a performance bond or other security in an
amount rationally related to the cost of removal; and
(8) All notification requirements for the proposed telecommunication facility
have been met.
(c) In granting or denying an application, the Director shall make a written finding
which shall specify all facts relied upon in rendering his decision. A copy of the decision
shall be filed with the City's Public Works Agency and mailed to the applicant and to any
person who has submitted a comment on the proposed application pursuant to Section
33-238 (b), above.
Sec. 33-240. Appeal
Any interested person may appeal the decision of the Director pursuant to chapter 3 of
this Code.
Sec. 33-241. Site Selection Guidelines and Criteria.
(a) The Director may authorize support structures within the public right of way
only with a finding that such support structure is required to fill a significant gap and is
less intrusive than placement on a primary use in terms of visibility, access or
aesthetics.
(b) Traffic Obstruction. The placement of the telecommunication facility shall
not permanently impede vehicular or pedestrian traffic flow;
(c) No modification to above-ground or at-grade telecommunication facilities,
including those related to size, color and shape of the housing, may be made by the
applicant without first having obtained approval of the Director.
(d) To the maximum extent feasible, all appurtenant equipment, including
radio base station, electrical panel, and control panel assembly, shall be placed below
ground. Where feasible, as new technology becomes available, the applicant shall
place an existing or proposed above-ground telecommunication facility below ground.
Sec. 33-242. Visual Impact Guidelines.
(a) Unobtrusive Design. Telecommunication Facilities shall be designed to be
as visually unobtrusive as feasible. Colors and designs must be visually neutral,
integrated and compatible with surrounding buildings and/or uses in the area. Facilities
shall be sited to avoid or minimize obstruction of views from adjacent properties and
otherwise preserve the aesthetic integrity of the public right of way.
75A-11
lss2/25/11
(b) An antenna array shall be installed as a shared use on an existing or
replacement pole and shall not extend over seven feet beyond the top of the pole.
However no telecommunication facility located within 140 feet of a residential property
shall exceed thirty-five (35) feet in height. Additionally, no telecommunication facility
shall exceed sixty (60) feet in height from the ground level as measured from the
nearest street curb.
(c) Camouflaged Design and Screening. When feasible, Applicant shall
use state of the art, well camouflaged designs and screening to minimize visual
impact of the telecommunication facility. For example, the visual impact of a
telecommunication facility may be mitigated by integrating it into existing functional
facilities, by the planting of trees to screen the antenna from adjacent private
properties.
(d) Landscaping. New landscaping and irrigation designs shall be restored
to like or better condition approved by the Director in accordance with the City's
landscaping standards.
1. For telecommunication facilities installed in the public right of way in an
area where no sidewalk exists, the permittee shall install landscaping
immediately surrounding the installation and restore any landscaping
disturbed by the installation. The installed and restored landscaping shall be
consistent with the existing surrounding landscaping.
2. All new landscaping shall be served by an automatic irrigation system
installed, or if existing, modified, to sustain landscaping. If an automatic
irrigation system is not feasible, applicant shall submit a manual irrigation
plan with its application, and guarantee to replace any vegetation that dies
from lack of watering.
(e) No Telecommunication Facility shall be illuminated unless specifically
required by the FAA or other governmental agency for security or clearance
purposes.
(f) Signs and Advertising. No advertising signage or identifying logos shall
be displayed on any telecommunication facility except for small identification,
address, warnings, and other similar information plates. Such information plates
shall be identified in the telecom application and shall be subject to approval by the
Director.
(g) If an applicant proposes to replace a pole in order to accommodate
their telecommunication facility, the pole shall match the appearance of the original
pole to the extent feasible and shall be approved by the Director.
75A-12
lss2/25/11
(h) Historic Structures. The telecommunication facility should not be
located immediately in front of, beside or behind historic resources recognized by
the City pursuant to Chapter 30 of this Code.
Sec. 33-243. Public Safety Guidelines.
(a) Arterial Highway Pedestrian Passage. In public rights of way that are
designated in the Circulation Element of the City's General Plan as "arterial" streets
or highways, and which have an existing sidewalk, the telecommunication facility
should be located on the sidewalk or parkway such that there is a minimum six feet
(6) unobstructed distance between the edge of the cabinet and any private property,
in order to provide sufficient clearance for pedestrians and wheelchairs. If the paved
sidewalk is less than six feet (6') wide, the applicant may propose to construct
additional sidewalk to meet this requirement if possible; provided, however, that a
sufficient length of sidewalk shall be constructed to leave no discontinuities in the
new path of access. The telecommunication facility shall be installed in the public
right of way with a minimum of eighteen (18) inches of unobstructed distance
maintained between the edge of the cabinet and the edge of the curb face
(b) Non-arterial Highway Pedestrian Passage. In public rights of way that
are not designated in the Circulation Element of the City's General Plan as "arterial"
streets or highways, and which have an existing sidewalk, the telecommunication
facility shall be located on the sidewalk or parkway such that there is a minimum four
feet (4') unobstructed distance between the edge of the cabinet and any private
property line, in order to provide sufficient clearance for pedestrians and
wheelchairs. If the paved sidewalk is less than four feet (4') wide, the applicant may
propose to construct additional sidewalk to meet this requirement if possible;
provided, however, that a sufficient length of sidewalk shall be constructed to leave
no discontinuities in the new path of access. The telecommunication facility shall be
installed in the public right of way with a minimum of eighteen (18) inches of
unobstructed distance maintained between the edge of the cabinet and the edge of
the curb face
(c) Non-paved Sidewalks. In public rights of way with no existing sidewalk
pavement, the telecommunication facility shall be located in the parkway such that
there is a minimum four feet (4') unobstructed distance between the edge of the
cabinet and any private property line, in order to provide sufficient clearance for
pedestrians and wheelchairs by one of the following methods:
1. Where there is no curb face, the telecommunication facility shall
be installed in the public right of way with a minimum of four (4) feet of unobstructed
distance between the edge of the cabinet and the edge of the paved street; or
2. Where there is a curb face, the telecommunication facility shall
be installed in the public right of way with a minimum of eighteen (18) inches of
75A-13
lss2/25/11
unobstructed distance between the edge of the cabinet and the edge of the curb
face.
(d) Vehicular Line of Sight and Sight Distance. The telecommunication
facility shall not be located in the "visibility triangle," defined as that portion of both
public and private property located at any corner and bounded by the curb line or
edge of roadway of the intersecting streets and a line joining the points on the curb
or edge of the roadway of the intersection streets forty-five feet (45) from the point
of intersection of the extended curb lines or edges of roadway. The
telecommunication facility shall not be located adjacent to street intersections,
driveways and alley intersections where they would reduce the sight distance for
existing vehicular traffic to less than the distance required by City standards on file
with the Public Works Agency.
Sec. 33-244. Maintenance Standards
All telecommunication facilities subject to this Chapter shall comply with the
following standards:
(a) The applicant shall provide on-going maintenance of its telecommunications
facilities, including ensuring the facilities are reasonably free of:
1. General dirt and grease
2. Chipped, faded, peeling and cracked paint
3. Rust and corrosion
4. Cracks, dents, blemishes and discoloration
5. Graffiti, bills, stickers, advertisements, etc; and
6. Broken and misshapen structural parts.
(b) If an applicant discontinues use or abandons any telecommunication facility,
the applicant shall immediately notify the Director, remove the equipment and
restore the site to the condition it existed prior to installation of the
telecommunication facility in a manner approved by the Director.
(c) All above-ground telecommunications facilities shall be properly maintained in
accordance with the following procedures:
1. All necessary repairs, including graffiti removal, shall be completed
by the applicant within 48 hours after discovery or receipt of
notification of the need for such repairs.
2. The applicant shall provide routine maintenance within 10 working
days after receiving notice of the need for such maintenance.
3. Telecommunications facilities shall be replaced, in kind, within 45
days, if routine or emergency maintenance is not sufficient to return
the equipment to the condition at the time of installation.
75A-14
lss2/25/ 11
Sec. 33-245. Compliance with Applicable Law and Regulations
This Article is not intended to be the exclusive means of regulating installation of
Facilities in the public right of way and nothing herein is intended to waive any other
applicable City requirements, including but not limited to building permit, storm water
runoff, business license, excavation and undergrounding regulations. The
applicant/permittee shall obtain all permits, licenses, and similar authorizations that are
required by other governmental entities for the installation of its Facilities. The
applicant/permittee must also be and remain in compliance with all applicable statutes,
ordinances, rules, regulations, orders, and decisions issued by any federal, state or
local governmental body or agency, including without limitation those issued by the
California Public Utilities Commission and the Federal Communications Commission.
Sec. 33-246. Nonexclusive Use of public right of way
All permits to construct or place Facilities in the public right of way shall be
nonexclusive. The granting of a permit under this article by the City does not provide
any permittee with an exclusive use of the public right of way.
All telecommunication facilities permitted by this chapter shall, upon the demand of the
Director, be relocated if required by the City to avoid potential conflicts with a proper
governmental use of a street, alley, sidewalk or other public place. All expenses
incurred in relocating shall be paid by the telecommunication facility owner.
Sec. 33-247. Director's Guidelines
To the extent not preempted by applicable laws, the Director may prescribe additional
guidelines covering the location, size and depth of excavations in public streets and
sidewalks as the Director may deem necessary for the public safety and welfare. Where
such guidelines are general in character and are designed to apply to all excavations of
a certain type or nature, they shall be promulgated in writing showing the date of their
enactment, and a copy thereof, duly certified to by the Director shall be kept on file
where they may be made available for public inspection upon the demand of any
person. All Work performed under this Article shall be subject to such guidelines.
33-248. Submittals
Prior to the issuance of any permit, each Applicant shall provide the Agency with
evidence that it has obtained all applicable business licenses, state permits, and other
licenses, as well as insurance in an amount and form specified by the Agency.
Sec. 33-249. Indemnity; insurance
Prior to issuance of any permit under this article, each applicant shall:
(a) Represent, stipulate, contract and agree that such applicant will indemnify
75A-15
lss2/25/11
and hold harmless and defend the City of Santa Ana, its officers and
employees from and against any and all suits, actions, judgments, losses,
costs, demands, claims, expenses (including attorney's fees), damages, and
liabilities of every kind for any and all claims for damage to property, or injury
to, or death of persons arising out of or resulting from the issuance of the
permit or the placement of the telecommunication facility, except to the extent
any damage or injury is due to the gross negligence or willful misconduct of
the City, its officers or employees.
(b) Obtain and file with the Clerk of the Council, and thereafter maintain during
the term of any such permit, certificates evidencing comprehensive general
liability insurance policy or policies, approved as to form by the city attorney,
issued by an insurance company or companies authorized to do business in
the State of California. The City of Santa Ana, its officers and employees shall
be named as additional insureds on said policy or policies. The policy limits of
said insurance policy or policies shall be not less than one million dollars
($1,000,000.00) combined single limit for both bodily injury and property
damage, or equivalent.
Said policy or policies shall also contain a provision that no termination,
cancellation, or change of coverage of insured or additional insured shall be
effective until after twenty (20) days' notice thereof has been given in writing
to the Clerk of the Council.
Sec. 33-250. Coordination with other Projects
To the maximum extent possible and as permitted by law, an Applicant shall design and
schedule its Work so as to coordinate its Work with other persons installing,
constructing, or maintaining Facilities in the public right of way and with the City.
Sec. 33-251. Installation in Streets Subject to Future Improvement
Except in an Emergency or in the case of new service connections to a newly
constructed or substantially remodeled building, a Telecommunication Facility shall not
be installed in areas proposed for future street improvements pursuant to the City's
adopted five year capital improvement plan.
Sec. 33-252. Protection of Urban Forest
The permittee may be requested to retain, at its own cost, a certified arborist to advise
the permittee's contractor doing underground work in the public right of way as to
appropriate locations for underground vaults, conduits and other equipment and root
pruning techniques, if needed, so as to ensure minimal impact to existing trees and
other landscaping materials that are a part of the City's urban forest. The permittee's
arborist shall coordinate their work with the City's Community Forester.
75A-16
lss2/25/11
Sec. 33-253. Permit Non-Compliance; No Waivers
No permittee shall be excused from complying with any of the provisions of this
article by any failure of the City on any one or more occasions to seek, or insist
upon, compliance with any requirements or provisions of this Code. Regardless of
the City's failure to seek compliance on any occasions, such action shall not be
considered a waiver of any requirements of this Code.
Sec. 33-254. Future Changes in the Law
The City's rights under this Article are coextensive with the City's rights under state law
with regard to the use of the public right of way by telecommunication corporations (as
defined by the Public Utilities Code). If future changes to state or federal law authorize
the City to regulate the Utility and its activities within the City and the public rights of
way to a greater degree than is now authorized by this article, nothing in this Article
will be deemed to limit, restrict in any way, or to modify the City's exercise of that
regulatory authority.
Section 3. Any provision of the Code that is inconsistent with the provisions of
this Ordinance, to the extent of such inconsistencies and no further, is hereby
repealed or modified to that extent necessary to effect the provisions of this
Ordinance.
Section 4. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this
ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any
court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining
portions of this ordinance. The City Council of the City of Santa Ana hereby declares that it
would have adopted this ordinance and each section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase
or portion thereof irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections,
sentences, clauses, phrases, or portions be declared invalid or unconstitutional.
ADOPTED this day of , 2011
Miguel A. Pulido
Mayor
75A-17
lss2/25/ 11
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Joseph Straka, Interim City Attorney
By:
Laura Sheedy
Assistant City Attorney
AYES: Councilmembers
NOES: Councilmembers
ABSTAIN: Councilmembers
NOT PRESENT: Councilmembers
CERTIFICATE OF ATTESTATION AND ORIGINALITY
I, MARIA D. HUIZAR, Clerk of the Council, do hereby attest to and certify that the
attached Ordinance No. NS-XXX to be the original ordinance adopted by the City
Council of the City of Santa Ana on , and that said ordinance was
published in accordance with the Charter of the City of Santa Ana.
Date:
Clerk of the Council
City of Santa Ana
75A-18
MAYOR
:'
Miguel A. Pulido A
MAYOR PRO TEM ++
Claudia C. Alvarez
COUNCIL MEMBERS N
P. David Benavides ?,'a
Carlos Bustamante
Michele Martinez
Vincent sam,iento
Sal Tinajero
CITY OF SANTA ANA
PLANNING & BUILDING AGENCY
20 Civic Center Plaza (M-20)
P.O. BOX 1988 • Santa Ana, California 92702
(714) 667-2700 • Fax (714) 973-1461
www.santa-ana.org
CITY MANAGER
David N. Ream
CITY ATTORNEY
Joseph Straka
CLERK OF THE COUNCIL
Patricia E. Healy
NEGATIVE DECLARA T/ON
Pursuant to the Procedures of the City of Santa Ana for implementation of the California
Environmental Quality Act, the Environmental Evaluator has completed an Initial Study for the
project described below:
Project Number:
Applicant:
Project Location / Address:
Project Title / Description:
OA-2011-01
City of Santa Ana
Citywide
Telecommunications Ordinance
pOSTEQ
And does hereby find:
uI
CORDER
rorn o?Y • ?? OEPt1TY
That the proposed project cannot, or will not, have a significant effect on the environment.
Negative Declaration status is therefore granted for this project. No mitigation measures are
required for the proposed project.
Signature:
VOW Date: Q
vo nnmental Coordinator
This determination is not final until adopted by the decision-making body or administrative official,
and a Notice of Determination is filed.
75A-19
REQUEST
The proposed project is a request to amend the City of Santa Ana Municipal Code to
adopt an ordinance to establish development standards and a permitting process for the
installation of telecommunication devices in the public right of way.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed amendment to the Municipal Code would establish development
standards and a permitting process for the installation of telecommunication devices in
the public right of way within the City of Santa Ana. Below are the standards for the
proposed Telecommunications Facilities in the Public Right of Way ordinance.
Telecommunication Facilities in the Public Right of Way Proposed Regulations
Item Recommendation
Definitions (a) "Agency" means the City's Public Works
Agency.
(b) "Antenna array" means one or more rods,
panels, discs, or similar devices used for the
transmission or reception of radio frequency signals,
which may include omni-directional antennas (whip),
directional antennas (panel), and parabolic antennas
(dish), but excluding any support structure.
(c) "Director" means the Executive Director of
?t
O the Public Works Agency or designee.
4
05 ` (d) "Parkway" means that area between the
id
lk
d
s
ewa
an
the curb of any street, and where there is
8 oszv,
°
?p sidewalk adjacent to the curb, that area between the
?
, ° sidewalk and the right of way line and where there is no
sidewalk, that area between the curb or edge of the
roadway and the right of way line adjacent thereto.
(e) "Permit" means a permit issued pursuant
to this Chapter allowing the placement of a
telecommunication facility within a specifically
designated portion --f the public right of way.
(f) "Person" means any individual, firm,
company, partnership, corporation, entity, agency, or
other organization.
75A-20
(g) "Primary use" means the main purpose for
which a site is developed and occupied, including the
activities that are conducted on the site a majority of the
hours which activities occur, including, but not limited to,
a street light or power pole.
(h) "Public sidewalk" means any surface
dedicated to the use of pedestrians by license,
easement, operation of law or by grant to the City.
(i) "Public right of way" or "right-of-way"
means the area on, below, or above a city owned or
controlled street or alley public right of way and the
sidewalk and/or parkway adjacent thereto.
Q) "Roadway" means that portion of a public
street improved, designed or ordinarily used for
vehicular traffic.
(k) "Shared use" means a site or facility where
a wireless provider shares a telecommunications facility
with an existing structure, such as a street light or utility
pole or a similar replacement of an existing structure.
(1) "Significant Gap" means a gap in the
telecommunications signal, including geographic
coverage, interference and capacity issues resulting in
the inability of telecommunications users to reliably
place, maintain or receive calls.
P ?1 ED
(m) Support structure means a freestanding
structure designed and constructed to solely support an
antenna array and that may consist of a monopole, a
*? p??y C1 ER FECOPDEI? ?EPUTV self-supporting lattice tower, a guy-wire support tower,
or other similar structure.
(n) "Telecommunication Facility" means and
includes any wire or line, antenna, pipeline, pipe, duct,
conduit, converter, cabinet, pedestal, meter, tunnel,
vault, equipment, drain, manhole, splice box, surface
location marker, pole, structure, utility, or other
appurtenance, property, or tangible thing used to
provide telecommunications and/or video services to the
public.
o) "Work" means all labor. materials
75A-21
MAYOR
Miguel A. Pulido
MAYOR PRO TEM
Claudia C. Alvarez
COUNCIL MEMBERS
P. David Benavides
Carlos Bustamante
Michele Martinez
Vincent F. Sarmiento
Sal Tinajero
February 3, 2011
CITY OF SANTA ANA
PLANNING & BUILDING AGENCY
20 Civic Center Plaza (M-20)
P.O. BOX 1988 - Santa Ana, California 92702
(714) 667-2700 • Fax (714) 973-1461
www.santa-ana.org
County Clerk/County of Orange
P.O. Box 238
Santa Ana, CA 92702
To Whom It May Concern:
CITY MANAGER
David N. Ream
CITY ATTORNEY
Joseph Straka
CLERK OF THE COUNCIL
Maria D. Huizar
Please post the following Notice of Exemptions. All fees should be charged to the
City of Santa Ana account with the County Clerk. We would appreciate if you would
send us a copy of each filed Notice Exemption.
Please send the filed copies to:
Thank you for your cooperation,
Hally Soboleske
Associate Planner
City of Santa Ana
20 Civic Center Plaza
P.O. Box 1988 (M-20)
Santa Ana, CA 92702
(714) 667-27459
Hally Sob eske
Associate Planner
HS
HS: \1W i reless_Ordinance_C haper331n ecDec_cover.docx
75A-22
MAYOR
Miguel A. Pulido
MAYOR PRO TEM
Claudia C. Alvarez
COUNCIL MEMBERS AI
P. David Benavides ?«'
Carlos Bustamante
Michele Martinez
Vincent Sarrniento
Sal Tinaja ro
CITY OF SANTA ANA
PLANNING & BUILDING AGENCY
20 Civic Center Plaza (M-20)
P.O. BOX 1988 . Santa Ana, California 92702
(714) 667-2700 • Fax (714) 973-1461
www.santa-ana.org
NEGA T/VE DECLARA T/ON
CITY MANAGER
David N. Ream
CITY ATTORNEY
Joseph Straka
CLERK OF THE COUNCIL
Patricia E. Healy
Pursuant to the Procedures of the City of Santa Ana for implementation of the California
Environmental Quality Act, the Environmental Evaluator has completed an Initial Study for the
project described below:
Project Number:
Applicant:
Project Location / Address
Project Title / Description:
And does hereby find:
OA-2011-01
City of Santa Ana
Citywide
Telecommunications Ordinance
That the proposed project cannot, or will not, have a significant effect on the environment.
Negative Declaration status is therefore granted for this project. No mitigation measures are
required for the proposed project.
Signature: Date: Q
vi onmental Coordinator
This determination is not final until adopted by the decision-making body or administrative official,
and a Notice of Determination is filed.
75A-23
REQUEST
The proposed project is a request to amend the City of Santa Ana Municipal Code to
adopt an ordinance to establish development standards and a permitting process for the
installation of telecommunication devices in the public right of way.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed amendment to the Municipal Code would establish development
standards and a permitting process for the installation of telecommunication devices in
the public right of way within the City of Santa Ana. Below are the standards for the
proposed Telecommunications Facilities in the Public Right of Way ordinance.
Telecommunication Facilities in the Public Right of Way Proposed Regulations
Item -7 1
Recommendation
Definitions (a) "Agency" means the City's Public Works
Agency.
(b) "Antenna array" means one or more rods,
panels, discs, or similar devices used for the
transmission or reception of radio frequency signals,
which may include omni-directional antennas (whip),
directional antennas (panel), and parabolic antennas
(dish), but excluding any support structure.
(c) "Director" means the Executive Director of
the Public Works Agency or designee.
(d) "Parkway" means that area between the
sidewalk and the curb of any street, and where there is
sidewalk adjacent to the curb, that area between the
sidewalk and the right of way line and where there is no
sidewalk, that area between the curb or edge of the
roadway and the right of way line adjacent thereto.
(e) "Permit" means a permit issued pursuant
to this Chapter allowing the placement of a
telecommunication facility within . a specifically
designated portion of the public right of way.
(f) "Person" means any individual, firm,
company, partnership, corporation, entity, agency, or
other organization.
75A-24
(g) "Primary use" means the main purpose for
which a site is developed and occupied, including the
activities that are conducted on the site a majority of the
hours which activities occur, including, but not limited to,
a street light or power pole.
(h) "Public sidewalk" means any surface
dedicated to the use of pedestrians by license,
easement, operation of law or by grant to the City.
(i) "Public right of way" or "right-of-way"
means the area on, below, or above a city owned or
controlled street or alley public right of way and the
sidewalk and/or parkway adjacent thereto.
(j) "Roadway" means that portion of a public
street improved, designed or ordinarily used for
vehicular traffic.
(k) "Shared use" means a site or facility where
a wireless provider shares a telecommunications facility
with an existing structure, such as a street light or utility
pole or a similar replacement of an existing structure.
j (1) "Significant Gap" means a gap in the
telecommunications signal, including geographic
coverage, interference and capacity issues resulting in
the inability of telecommunications users to reliably
place, maintain or receive calls.
(m) "Support structure" means a freestanding
structure designed and constructed to solely support an
antenna array and that may consist of a monopole, a
self-supporting lattice tower, a guy-wire support tower,
or other similar structure.
(n) "Telecommunication Facility" means and
includes any wire or line, antenna, pipeline, pipe, duct,
conduit, converter, cabinet, pedestal, meter, tunnel,
vault, equipment, drain, manhole, splice box, surface
location marker, pole, structure, utility, or other
appurtenance, property, or tangible thing used to
provide telecommunications and/or video services to the
public.
(o) "Work" means all labor, materials,
75A-25
equipment, services, and all other things necessary for a
person to install a telecommunication facility in the
public right of way, including without limitation any
changes requested by the City, in accordance with this
Article and all applicable laws and regulations.
Zones Impacted by All zones
Ordinance
Nonconformance Grandfather only those facilities that were legally
operating at the time of the ordinance.
Responsibility of Application and fee required for permit
Applicant
Permit Issuance Upon finding the project meets all the requirements
established by said ordinance, a permit may be issued
by Executive Director of the Public Works Agency or
designee.
RESPONSES TO ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
The following is an analysis of potential environmental impacts associated with the
proposed amendment to the Municipal Code to establish an ordinance to regulate
telecommunication facilities to be installed in the public right of way. The analysis is
based upon the City of Santa Ana Environmental Check List. The analysis focuses on
impacts associated with approval of the proposed amendment to the municipal code.
AESTHETICS
A. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?
B. Damage scenic resources, including but not limited to trees, rock
outpourings and historic buildings within a State highway?
No Impact
Approval of the proposed amendment to the Municipal Code to establish development
standards and a permitting process for the installation of telecommunication devices in
the public right of way within the City of Santa Ana would not result in adverse impacts
to any scenic vista, or scenic resource because the standards are meant to uphold
aesthetic values. Additionally, the City of Santa Ana is not the responsible agency for
telecommunication facilities located on State Highways.
C. Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and
its surroundings?
No Impact
75A-26
Establishment of development standards and a permitting process for the installation of
telecommunication devices in the public right of way within the City of Santa Ana would
not degrade the visual character of the City, in that the proposed ordinance serves to
create development standards that uphold visual character. If anything, the ordinance
would result in encouraging positive impacts to aesthetics. The ordinance would not
result in any new development or construction.
D. Create a new source of substantial light or glare, which would adversely
affect day or nighttime views in the area?
No Impact
The proposed amendment to development standards and a permitting process for the
installation of telecommunication devices in the public right of way within the City of
Santa Ana would not introduce any amount of new light and glare impacts, in that the
proposed ordinance would not have any effect on existing or potential onsite lighting.
The proposed ordinance prohibits illumination unless specifically required by FAA or
another governmental agency for security or clearance purposes.
II. AGRICULTURE
A. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland or Farmland of Statewide
Importance to non-agriculture use?
B. Conflict with existing zoning for agriculture use or a Williamson Contract?
C. Involve other changes in the existing environment, which, due to their
location or nature, could individually or cumulatively result in loss of
Farmland, to non-agriculture use?
No Impact
According to the California Department of Conservation Farmland Mapping and
Monitoring Program, the City of Santa Ana contains a limited amount of Prime and
Unique Farmlands. Approval of the proposed amendment to the Municipal Code to
development standards and a permitting process for the installation of
telecommunication devices in the public right of way within the City of Santa Ana would
not result in impacts to agriculture resources.
III. AIR QUALITY
A. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of applicable Air Quality
Attainment Plan or congestion Management Plan?
No Impact
The City of Santa Ana is included within the South Coast Air Quality Management
District and subject to the requirements of the Clean Air Act at both the Federal and
75A-27
State level. The South Coast Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) is the primary
planning document to monitor if air quality standards and objectives are being achieved
in the South Coast Air Basin. The air quality objectives in the AQMP are based upon
population and growth projections provided in regional planning programs and local
general plans. A project could be in conflict with the AQMP if it results in population and
growth impacts beyond those identified in regional planning programs and local general
plans. The proposed ordinance to establish development standards and a permitting
process for the installation of telecommunication devices in the public right of way within
the City of Santa Ana would not have any effect on the growth projections in the City's
General Plan. Therefore, approval of the proposed ordinance would not be in conflict
with the South Coast AQMP.
B. Violate any stationary source air quality standard or contribute to an
existing or proposed air quality violation?
C. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any
criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an
applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard?
D. Expose Sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?
E. Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people?
No Impact
Approval of the proposed amendment to the Municipal Code to establish development
standards and a permitting process for the installation of telecommunication devices in
the public right of way within the City of Santa Ana would not result in any short-term
construction related or long-term operational air quality impacts or odor impacts, in that
approval of the proposed ordinance would not involve any activities that would emit
long-term or short-term air quality emissions or odor pollutants.
lll. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
A. Have a substantial adverse impact, 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 Services?
B. Have a substantial adverse impact on any riparian habitat or natural
community identified in local or regional plans, policies, and regulations or
by the California Department of Fish and game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service?
C. Adversely impact federally protected wetlands either individually or in
combination with the known or probable impacts of other activities through
direct removal, filling hydrological interruption, or other means?
D. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological
resources, such as tree preservation policy or ordinance?
75A-28
No Impact
According to the City's Updated General Plan Land Use Element EIR and the California
Department Fish and Game Natural Diversity Data Base, there is a limited amount of
sensitive biological resources within the City. Approval of the proposed amendment to
the Municipal Code to establish development standards and a permitting process for the
installation of telecommunication devices in the public right of way within the City of
Santa Ana would not result in any adverse impacts to any sensitive biological
resources. The proposed ordinance does not affect any sensitive biological resources.
IV. CULTURAL RESOURCES
A. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a
historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5?
B. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a unique
archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5?
C. Directly or indirectly disturb or destroy a unique paleontogical resource or
site?
D. Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal
cemeteries.
No Impact
According to the City's General Plan Land Use Element EIR, the City of Santa Ana is
known to contain known many cultural resources. Additionally, according to the General
Plan Land Use Element EIR there is high probability that unknown cultural resources
may exist in the City. Approval of the proposed amendment to the Municipal Code to
establish development standards and a permitting process for the installation of
telecommunication devices in the public right of way within the City of Santa Ana does
not affect any existing structures, buildings, or sites. As determined by previous citywide
surveys, there are no historic streetlamps, posts, or poles within the city limits.
V. GEOLOGY/SOILS
A-1. 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?
A-2. Strong Seismic Ground shaking?
A-3. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction?
A-4. Landslides
No Impact
According to the City's General Plan Land Use Element EIR there are no active
earthquake faults, Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Zones or landslides within the City.
However, several active faults are located within fifty miles of the City. In the event a
75A-29
moderate to high earthquake occurs along one of these faults, portions of the City could
experience moderate seismic shaking impacts. However, the seismic risks in Santa Ana
are similar to other areas in the overall southern Californian region. Additionally,
according to the General Plan Land Use Element EIR, the potential for liquefaction
hazards within the City ranges from very low to very high.
Approval of the proposed amendment to the Municipal Code to establish development
standards and a permitting process for the installation of telecommunication devices in
the public right of way within the City of Santa Ana would not increase the potential for
seismic impacts, and liquefaction impacts, in that the approval of proposed ordinance
would not directly involve the development of any structures, objects, buildings or sites.
B. Would the project result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?
No Impact
Approval of the proposed amendment to the Municipal Code to establish an
development standards and a permitting process for the installation of
telecommunication devices in the public right of way within the City of Santa Ana would
not result in or increase the potential for soil erosion or sedimentation impacts, in that
the approval of the proposed ordinance would not involve any activities that would
disturb soils. Through the permitting process any new telecommunication devices would
be subject to the City's erosion control requirements during the construction period.
C. Would the project result in the loss of a unique geological feature?
No Impact
According to the City's General Plan Land Use Element EIR there are no known
geological hazards or unique geologic features in the City. Therefore, approval of the
proposed amendment to the Municipal Code to establish development standards and a
permitting process for the installation of telecommunication devices in the public right of
way within the City of Santa Ana would not result in the loss of any unique geologic
features.
D. In the project located on strata 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?
E. Where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater is the soil
capable of supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater
disposal systems?
No Impact
75A-30
According to the City's General Plan Land Use Element EIR, Santa Ana contains a wide
variety of soil types and associated geotechnical constraints. Approval of the proposed
amendment to the Municipal Code to establish development standards and a permitting
process for the installation of telecommunication devices in the public right of way within
the City of Santa Ana would not involve the construction of any structures that would be
subject to geotechnical constraints. Through the permit process, any new
telecommunication facilities would be subject to the City's wastewater disposal and
storm water drainage laws. However, this ordinance does not directly involve the
development of any structures, objects, buildings or sites.
VI. HAZARDS/HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
A. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the
routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials?
B. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous
materials, substance or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or
proposed school?
C. Be located on a site which is located on a list of hazardous material sites
compiles pursuant to Government Code Section 659662.5 and, as a result,
would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment?
No Impact
Approval of the proposed amendment to the Municipal Code to establish development
standards and a permitting process for the installation of telecommunication devices in
the public right of way within the City of Santa Ana would not result in the creation of or
increase the potential of any significant hazardous material impacts to the public, in that
the approval of the proposed ordinance would not involve any activities that would
include the handling, storage or distribution of hazardous materials or emit hazardous
emissions. This ordinance does not directly involve the development or construction of
any structures, objects, buildings or sites.
D. For a project located within an airport land use plan or where such a plan
has not been adopted, within two miles where a public airport or public use
airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or
working in the project area?
No Impact
According to the City's General Plan Land Use Element EIR and the Orange County
Airports Environs Land Use Plan, Santa Ana is not located within any aircraft accident
potential zones. Additionally, there are no private airstrips in the City. Therefore,
approval of the proposed amendment to the Municipal Code would not increase the
potential for safety hazards for people residing in or working within the City.
75A-31
VII. HYDROLOGY/WATER QUALITY
A. Violate Regional Water Quality Control Board water quality standards or
waste discharge requirements?
E. Otherwise substantially degrade water quality?
1. Result in an increase in pollutant discharges to receiving waters?
N. Tributary to an already impaired water body, as listed on the Clean Water
Act Section 303(d) list. If so, can it result in an increase in any pollutant of
which the body is already impaired?
R. Cause or contribute to an exceedance of applicable surface or groundwater
receiving water quality objectives or degradation of beneficial uses?
No Impact
The City of Santa Ana is included within four watersheds; San Diego Creek, Santa Ana
River, Talbert and Westminster. Each of these watershed areas are under the
jurisdiction of the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board and subject to the
objectives, water quality standards and Best Management Practice requirements
established in the Santa Ana River Basin Plan and Orange County Drainage Area
Management Plan.
The City of Santa Ana does not contain any impaired water bodies, as defined by
Section 303 of the Clean Water Act. However, the City does contain several drainage
facilities that convey surface water runoff into bodies of water that are classified as
impaired.
Approval of the proposed amendment to the Municipal Code to establish development
standards and a permitting process for the installation of telecommunication devices in
the public right of way within the City of Santa Ana would not directly involve routine
waste discharges that would be in conflict with water quality standards established by
the State Regional Water Quality Control Board, in that the approval of the proposed
ordinance would not involve any construction activity that would involve the discharge of
water.
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.
Q. Have a potentially significant adverse impact on groundwater quality?
No Impact
75A-32
The City of Santa Ana receives 66% of its water from underground water supplies. The
underground water basin in the City ranges from -50-feet to +40-feet above sea level.
Presently, the City pumps underground water from 21 water wells. Fourteen of the
water wells pump ground water into small surface reservoirs. The remaining seven
water wells pump underground water into the City's distribution system.
Approval of the proposed amendment to the Municipal Code to establish development
standards and a permitting process for the installation of telecommunication devices in
the public right of way within the City of Santa Ana would not result in adverse impacts
to underground water supplies or prevent the recharge of underground water supplies,
in that approval of the proposed ordinance would not involve any activities that would
impact underground water supplies or provide impervious surfaces that would prevent
the recharge of underground water supplies.
C. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area,
including through the alteration of the course of stream or river, or
substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner,
which would result in flooding on or off-site?
D. Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of
existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial
additional sources of polluted run-off?
L. Result in increased impervious surfaces and associated runoff?
M. Create a significant adverse environmental impact to drainage patterns due to
changes in runoff flow rates or volumes.
No Impact
The City of Santa Ana has a Master Plan of Drainage to guide the construction of
adequate drainage facilities in the City. The facilities include a series of underground
storm drain systems, open storm drain systems, catch basins and natural drainages. A
significant drainage impact can occur when existing rates of surface water runoff are
increased and existing drainage facilities are unable to accommodate the additional
rates of runoff. Existing rates of surface water runoff can increase through the
introduction of additional amounts of impervious surfaces, or through changes to
existing drainage patterns.
Approval of the proposed amendment to the Municipal Code to establish development
standards and a permitting process for the installation of telecommunication devices in
the public right of way within the City of Santa Ana would not alter existing drainage
patterns or increase existing rates of surface water runoff, in that approval of the
proposed ordinance would not introduce any additional impervious surfaces or involve
the development of any activities that would impact existing drainage patterns.
75A-33
F. Place housing within a 100-year floodplain, as mapped on a federal Flood
Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard
delineation map?
G. Place within a 100-year floodplain structures which would impede or
redirect flood flows?
H. Place housing within a 100-year floodplain, as mapped on a federal Flood
Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard
delineation map?
No Impact
The City's General Plan identifies that portions of Santa Ana are within the 100-year
flood Zone. Approval of the proposed amendment to the Municipal Code to establish
development standards and a permitting process for the installation of
telecommunication devices in the public right of way within the City of Santa Ana would
not facilitate development within areas subject to 100-year flood risks.
J. Result in significant alteration of receiving water quality during or following
construction.
K. Could the proposed project result in increased erosion downstream?
No Impact
Erosion refers to the removal of soil from exposed bedrock surfaces by water or wind.
The effects of erosion are intensified with an increase in slope, the narrowing of runoff
channels and by the removal of groundcover, which leaves the soil exposed. Approval
of the proposed ordinance would not result in any erosion impacts, in that the proposed
amendments would not involve any construction activities that would disturb or uncover
soils to facilitate erosion impacts.
0. Tributary to other environmentally sensitive areas? If so, can it exacerbate
already existing sensitive conditions?
P. Have a potentially significant environmental impact or surface water quality
to either marine, fresh or wetland waters?
S. Impact aquatic, wetland or riparian habitat?
No Impact
According to the City's General Plan Land Use Element EIR, there are no sensitive
marine waters, fresh waters or wetlands in the City. However, the City does contain
several drainage systems that convey drainage flows to sensitive marine resources.
Pollutants conveyed through these drainage systems could adversely impact sensitive
marine resources. Approval of the proposed ordinance would not result in any activities
75A-34
that would discharge pollutants into sensitive downstream marine resources as it
involves no construction activity.
VIII. LAND USE/PLANNING
A. Physically divide an established community?
No Impact
The proposed amendment to the Municipal Code to establish development standards
and a permitting process for the installation of telecommunication devices in the public
right of way within the City of Santa Ana would provide location criteria and design
standards to ensure that telecommunication facilities installed in the right of way would
not encroach into private property boundaries. No adverse land use impacts would be
associated with the approval of the proposed ordinance.
B. Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an
agency with jurisdiction over the project adopted for the purpose of
avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?
No Impact
The proposed project would amend the City's Municipal Code by establishing an
ordinance that provides criteria for the location and development of telecommunication
facilities installed in the right of way in the City of Santa Ana. Approval of the proposed
ordinance would not be in conflict with any portion of the City's General Plan or any
other relevant planning program in the City.
C. Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural
community plan?
No Impact
According to the City's General Plan Land Use Element EIR, there are no habitat
conservation plans or natural community conservation plans established within the City
of Santa Ana. Therefore, approval of the proposed ordinance would not be in conflict
with any habitat conservation or natural community conservation plan.
IX. MINERAL RESOURCES
A. 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?
75A-35
No Impact
The City's General Plan Land Use Element EIR identifies that there are no areas in
Santa Ana that contains Significant Mineral Aggregate Resource Areas. Therefore,
approval of the proposed ordinance would not result in adverse impacts to any
significant mineral resource.
X. NOISE
A. Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of
standards established in local general plan or noise ordinance, or
applicable standards of other agencies.
B. A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project
vicinity above levels existing without the project.
C. Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration
or groundborne noise levels.
D. A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the
project vicinity above levels existing without project.
No Impact
Approval of the proposed amendment to the Municipal Code to establish development
standards and a permitting process for the installation of telecommunication devices in
the public right of way within the City of Santa Ana would not result in any long-term
noise or ground borne vibration impacts, in that the proposed ordinance would not
involve any activities that would emit long term operation noise impacts or short term
construction related noise impacts. Through the conditional use permit process, future
telecommunication facilities constructed under the proposed ordinance would be
evaluated for any potential noise impacts and would be subject to the City's noise
standards.
E. For a project located within an airport land use plan or where such a plan
has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use
airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project
area to excessive noise levels?
No Impact
According to the Orange County Airport Environs Land Use Plan portions of Santa Ana
are impacted by aircraft noise. Approval of the amendment to the Municipal Code to
establish an ordinance for the regulation of telecommunication facilities installed in the
City's right of way would not facilitate further development within areas impacted with
aircraft noise.
XI. POPULATION/HOUSING
75A-36
A. Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly or indirectly
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?
No Impact
The proposed amendment to the Municipal Code to establish development standards
and a permitting process for the installation of telecommunication devices in the public
right of way within the City of Santa Ana would not induce substantial growth in the City
or displace substantial numbers of existing housing or population, in that approval of the
proposed ordinance would not involve any activities that would generate additional
population or displaces homes and/or population.
XII. PUBLIC SERVICES
Fire Protection, Police Protection, Schools, Parks, Other Public Facilities
No Impact
Approval of the proposed amendment to the Municipal Code to establish development
standards and a permitting process for the installation of telecommunication devices in
the public right of way within the City of Santa Ana would not increase the demand for
additional public services over current levels of service being provided in the City, in that
the approval of the proposed ordinance would not involve any activities that would
substantially increase the demands for public services. The proposed ordinance actually
increases the potential for providing public services.
XIII. 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 recreational facilities, which might have an adverse
physical effect on the environment.
No Impact
Approval of the proposed ordinance would not increase the use of any recreational
facilities or result in the significant need for additional recreational facilities, in that the
proposed ordinance would not involve any activities that would increase the demands
for recreational facilities. No adverse impacts to recreation facilities would be
associated with the approval of proposed ordinance.
75A-37
XIV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC
A. Cause an increase in traffic, which is substantial in relation to the existing
traffic load and capacity of the street system?
B. Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard
established by the county congestion 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 to a design feature
E. Result in inadequate emergency access
F. Result in inadequate parking capacity
G. Conflict with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation
No Impact
Approval of the proposed amendment to the Municipal Code to establish development
standards and a permitting process for the installation of telecommunication devices in
the public right of way within the City of Santa Ana would not have an impact on traffic
volumes, roadway configurations, parking capacities, emergency access or level of
services established in the County of Orange Congestion Management Plan, in that the
proposed ordinance would not involve any activities that would generate additional
traffic or parking needs.
XV. UTILITIES/SERVICE SYSTEMS
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. Are sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing
entitlements and resources or are new or expanded entitlements needed?
E. Result in the determination by the wastewater treatment provider, which
serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the
project's projected demand in addition to the providers existing
commitments.
F. Is the project 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?
75A-38
No Impact
Approval of the proposed amendment to the Municipal Code to establish development
standards and a permitting process for the installation of telecommunication devices in
the public right of way within the City of Santa Ana would not increase the demand for
additional utilities and service systems over current levels of service being provided in
the City, in that the proposed ordinance would not involve any activities that would
increase the demands for utility systems. The proposed ordinance actually increases
the potential for providing public services/public utilities such as telecommunication
services.
XVI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
A. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the
environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species,
cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels,
threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or
restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate
important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory.
No Impact
The proposed ordinance would not have a direct impact on any plant or wildlife species
or historical property in Santa Ana, in that the proposed ordinance would not involve any
activities that would impact plant, wildlife or historic resources or degrade the quality of
the environment.
B. Does the project have impacts that are individually limited but cumulatively
considerable?
No Impact
Approval of the proposed ordinance would not result in any significant cumulative
impacts, in that the proposed ordinance would not involve any activities that would
result in cumulative impacts to the environment.
C. Does the project have environmental effects, which will cause substantial
adverse effects on human beings either directly or indirectly?
No Impact
Approval of the proposed ordinance would not cause any substantial adverse effects on
human beings, in that the proposed ordinance would not involve any activities that
would result in adverse effects to human beings or the environment.
75A-39
XVIII. DETERMINATION
Based upon the evidence in light of the whole record documented in the above
evaluation and cited references, I find that the proposed project would not have a
significant impact on the environment and a Negative Declaration has been prepared.
XVIV. REFERENCES
City of Santa Ana General Plan, 1997
City of Santa Ana, General Plan EIR, 1997
California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines
California Department of Conservation Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program
South Coast Air Quality Management District Air Quality Management Plan
California Department of Fish and Game Natural Diversity Data Base
Orange County Airport Environs Land Use Plan
XX. PREPARER
Hally Soboleske, Associate Planner, City of Santa Ana
75A-40
Environmental Checklist
CEQA Compliance
PLANNING DIVISION
1. Project Title: Telecommunications Ordinance
II. Project Numbers:-OA-2011-01
III. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Santa Ana, Public Works Agency, 20 Civic Center Plaza,
Santa Ana, CA 92702
IV. Contact and Phone Number: Taia Higgins, Principal Civic Engineer, 714-647-5071
V. Project Location: Citywide
VI. Project Sponsor's Name and Address:
City of Santa Ana, Public Works Agency, 20 Civic Center Plaza, Santa Ana, CA 92702
VII. General Plan Designation:
N/A - Citywide Ordinance
VIII. Zoning:
N/A - Citywide Ordinance
IX. Description of Project:
The proposed amendment to the Municipal Code would establish development standards and a permitting
process for the installation of telecommunication devices in the public right of way within the City of Santa Ana.
Below are the standards for the proposed Telecommunications Facilities in the Public Right of Way ordinance.
X. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting:
N/A - Citywide Ordinance
XI. Other agencies whose approval is required.
N/A
75A-41 Page 1 of 2
Environmental Checklist
CEQA Compliance
Environmental Factors Potentially Affected:
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by that project, involving at least one
impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
O Aesthetics
O Agricultural Resources
O Air Quality
O Biological Resources
O Cultural Resources
O Geology and Soils
O Hazards and Hazardous Materials
O Hydrology and Water Quality
O Land Use and Planning
Environmental Determination
On the basis of this initial evaluation, I find that:
O Mineral Resources
O Noise
O Population and Housing
O Public Services
O Recreation
O Transportation and Traffic
O Utilities and Service Systems
O Mandatory Findings of Significance
A. ® The proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment and a NEGATIVE
DECLARATION will be prepared.
B. ? Although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant
effect in this case because revisions to the project have been made by or agreed to by the applicant. A
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
C. ? The proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
REPORT is required.
D. ? 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 (EIR No. - ) pursuant to applicable
standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation
measures that are imposed upon the project, nothing further is required.
E. ? Pursuant to Section 15164 of the CEQA Guidelines, an EIR (EIR No. - ) has been prepared earlier and only
minor technical changes or additions are necessary to make the previous EIR adequate and these changes do
not raise important new issues about the significant effects on the environment. An ADDENDUM to the EIR
shall be prepared.
F. ? Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, an EIR (EIR No. - ) has been prepared earlier; however,
subsequent proposed changes in the project and/or new information of substantial importance will cause one
or more significant effects no previously discussed. A SUBSEQUENT EIR shall be prepared.
Signature Dote
.9411\1
Printed N me
75A-42 Page 2 of 2
Responses to
Environmental Checklist
For CEQA Compliance
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts:
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).
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.
111. 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 EIR is required.
IV. "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 from "Earlier Analyses," as
described in (V) below, may be cross-referenced).
V. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an
effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR 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 which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the
extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project.
VI. 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.
VII. Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals
contacted should be cited in the discussion.
VIII. 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.
IX. The explanation of each issue should identify:
a) The significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and
b) The mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance
75A-43
Responses to
101 Environmental Checklist
For CEQA Compliance
Less than
Significant
Potentially with Less Than
Issues & Supporting Information Sources ® Significant
Impact Mitigation
Incorporated Significant No
Impact Impact
1. Aesthetics - Would the project:
A. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? ? ? ?
B. Damage scenic resources, including but not limited ? ? ?
to, trees, rock outcroppings and historic buildings
within a state 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
which would adversely affect day or nighttime views
in the area? ? ? ?
II. Agricultural 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 prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in
assessing impacts on agricultural and farmland. Would the project:
A. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland or ? ? ? X
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 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?
? ? rQ
? ?
75A-44
Responses to
Environmental Checklist
For CEQA Compliance
Issues & Supporting Information Sources
Less than
Significant
Potentially with Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
III. 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 ? ? ?
applicable Air Quality Attainment Plan or Congestion
Management Plan?
B. Violate any stationary source air quality standard or
contribute to an existing or proposed air quality
violation?
C. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase
of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is
non-attainment under an applicable federal or state
ambient air quality standard (including releasing
emission which exceeds quantitative thresholds for
ozone precursors)?
D. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations?
E. Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial
number of people?
IV. Biological Resources - Would the project:
A. Have a substantial adverse impact, 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 Services?
B. Have a substantial adverse impact on any riparian
habitat or other sensitive natural community
identified in local or regional plans, policies, and
regulations or by the California Department of Fish
and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
? ?
? ?
? ?
? ?
? JZ
0 .0
? .?
X
I
75A-45
Responses to
Environmental Checklist
For CEQA Compliance
Less than
Significant
Potentially with Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Issues & Supporting Information Sources ® Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
C. Adversely impact federally protected wetlands ? ? ?
(including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool,
coastal, etc.) either individually or in combination
with the known or probable impacts of other
activities through direct removal, filling, hydrological
interruption, or other means?
D. Interfere 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 tree
preservation policy or ordinance?
F. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat ? ? ?
Conservation Plan, Natural Community
Conservation Plan, or other approved local,
regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
V. Cultural Resources - Would the project:
A. Cause a substantial adverse change in the ? ? ?
significance of a historical resource as defined in
Section 15064.5?
B. Cause a substantial adverse change in the ? ? ?
significance of a unique archaeological resource
pursuant to Section 15064.5?
C. Directly or indirectly disturb or destroy a unique ? ? ?
paleontological resource or site or unique
geological feature?
D. Disturb any human remains, including those ? ? ?
interred outside of formal cemeteries?
75A-46
Responses to
Environmental Checklist
For CEQA Compliance
Issues & Supporting Information Sources
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:
1. 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?
2. Strong seismic ground shaking?
3. Seismic-related ground failure, including
liquefaction?
4. Landslides?
B. Would the project result in substantial soil erosion
or the loss of 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 waste water
disposal systems where sewers are not available
for the disposal of waste water?
Less than
Significant
Potentially with Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
? ? ?
? ? ? e
? ? ? ?l
? ? ?
? ? ?
? ? ?
? ? ?
? ? ?
75A-47
till Responses to
Environmental Checklist
For CEQA Compliance
Less than
Significant
Potentially with Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Issues & Supporting Information Sources ® Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
VII. Hazardous 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 ? ? ? g
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, substance or waste
within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed
school?
D. Be located on a site which is located on a list of ? ? ?
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code Section 659662.5 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 ? ? ? RJ
or where such a plan has not been adopted, within
two miles where of a public airport or public use
airport, would the project result in a safety hazard
for people residing or working in the project area?
F. For 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 wild fires, including
where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or
where residences are intermixed with wildlands?
75A-48
Responses to
IN Environmental Checklist
For CEQA Compliance
Less than
Significant
Potentially with Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Issues & Supporting Information Sources ® Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
Vlll. Hydrology and Water Quality - Would the project:
A. Violate any Regional Water Quality Control Board ? ? ? JAI'
water quality standards or waste discharge
requirements?
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 (i.e., 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 situation on or
off-site. or substantially increase the rate or
amount of surface runoff in a manner which would
result in flooding 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
increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a
manner which would result in flooding on or off-
site?
E. Create or contribute runoff water which would ? ? ? J?
exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm
water drainage systems or provide substantial
additional sources of polluted run-off?
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
Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard
delineation map?
75A-49
Responses to
Environmental Checklist
For CEQA Compliance
Issues & Supporting Information Sources
Less than
Significant
Potentially with Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
H. Place within a 100-year flood hazard area ? ? ?
structures which would impede or redirect flood
flows?
1. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of ? ? ? J?
loss, injury, or death involving flooding, including
flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam.
J. Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? ? ? ?
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
plan, 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 ? ? ?
plan or natural community conservation plan?
X. Min eral 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 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?
75A-50
Responses to
In Environmental Checklist
For CEQA Compliance
Less than
Significant
Potentially with Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Issues & Supporting Information Sources ® Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
A. Noise - Would the project result in:
A. Exposure of persons to or generation of noise ? ? ?
levels in excess of standards established in the
local general plan or noise ordinance, or 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 project?
E. For a project located within an airport land use plan ? ? ? o
or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within
two miles of a public airport or 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
working in the project area to excessive noise
levels?
XII. Population and Housing - Would the project:
A. Induce substantial population growth in an area, ? ? ? R(
either directly (for example, by proposing new
homes and business) or indirectly (for example,
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?
75A-51
Responses to
In Environmental Checklist
For CEQA Compliance
Less than
Significant
Potentially with Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Issues & Supporting Information Sources ® Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
XIII. Public Services
A. 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 rations, response
times or other performance objectives for any of
the public service:
1. Fire protection? ? ? ?
2. Police protection? ? ? ?
3. Schools? ? ? ?
4. Parks? ? ? ?
5. Other public facilities? ? ? ?
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
recreational facilities which might have an adverse
physical effect on the environment?
75A-52
Responses to
Environmental Checklist
For CEQA Compliance
Issues & Supporting Information Sources
Less than
Significant
Potentially with Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
XV. Transportation /Traffic
A. Cause an increase in traffic which 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)?
? ? ? 0
B. Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level
of service standard established by the county
congestion 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
intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm
equipment)?
E. Result in inadequate emergency access?
F. Result in inadequate parking capacity?
G. Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs
supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus
turnouts, bicycle racks)?
? ? ? )e
? ? ?
? ? ?
? ? ?
XVI. Utilities and Service Systems
A. Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the ?
applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board?
? ? 2f
75A-53
Responses to
Environmental Checklist
For CEQA Compliance
Issues & Supporting Information Sources
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. Are sufficient water supplies available to serve the
project from existing entitlements and resources or
are new or expanded entitlements needed?
E. Result in the determination by the wastewater
treatment provider which 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. Is the project served by a landfill with sufficient
permitted capacity to accommodate the project's
solid waste disposal needs?
G. Does the project comply with federal, state and
local statutes and regulations related to solid
waste?
Less than
Significant
Potentially with Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
? ? ? 2T
? ? ? z
? ? ? 0
? ? ?
? ? ?
? ? ?
75A-54
Responses to
" Environmental Checklist
For CEQA Compliance
Less than
Significant
Potentially with Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Issues & Supporting Information Sources ® Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
XVIL Mandatory Findings of Significance
A. Does the project have the potential to degrade the ? ? ? Zf
quality of the environment, substantially reduce the
habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or
wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining
levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal
community, reduce the number or restrict the range
of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate
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 considerable
when viewed in connection with the effects of past
projects, effects of other current projects and the
effects of probable future projects.)
C. Does the project have environmental effects which ? ? ?
will cause substantial adverse effects on human
beings, either directly or indirectly?
M:\wireless_Ordinance_Chapter33\Te lecom_2011_i nitialstudy. doc
75A-55
75A-56
Iss:3/7/11
RESOLUTION NO. 2011-xxx
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SANTA ANA SETTING THE AMOUNT OF PERMIT AND
INSPECTION FEES FOR APPLICATIONS TO INSTALL
TELECOMMUNICATION FACILITIES IN THE PUBLIC
RIGHT OF WAY PURSUANT TO SECTION 33-237 OF THE
SANTA ANA MUNICIPAL CODE AND ADDING SAID
INCREASED FEES AND CHARGES TO THE
MISCELLANEOUS FEE SCHEDULE
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA AS
FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The City Council of the City of Santa Ana hereby finds, determines
and declares as follows:
A. Section 33-237 of the Santa Ana Municipal Code (Code), adopted by
Ordinance No NS - XXXX, regulates the installation of telecommunication
facilities in the public right of way, and authorizes the City Council to
establish by resolution, a permit processing fee to recover City costs in
reviewing applications for such installations.
B. The City Council finds as to this fee:
It is appropriate that the provider desiring to place facilities in the
public right of way pay the reasonable cost of the City's services in
reviewing the application and inspecting the installation of the
telecommunication facility to ensure compliance with the ordinance.
2. The fee for this service would not duplicate any existing fee or
charge currently collected by the City or any public agency, and
would be distinct and separate from any current or future permit fee
charged pursuant to the City's rules and regulations relating to
telecommunication facilities in the right of way.
C. Based on the City's study the cost of processing an application for
siting telecommunication facilities in the right of way exceeds the
permit processing fee which will be imposed. A study confirming
these facts in greater detail is on file with the Clerk of the Council
and is incorporated herein by reference as though fully set forth.
75A-57
D. Based upon all the testimony, reports and other evidence submitted on this
matter, this City Council makes the above specific findings. Request For
Council Action regarding this Resolution, together with Ordinance No. NS-
XXXX, and all background information and studies presented to the City
Council at the March 21, 2011, meeting are incorporated herein by this
reference as though fully set forth.
E. Unless otherwise indicated, the definitions set forth in Section 33-231 shall
govern the application and interpretation of this resolution.
Section 2. An application processing fee in the amount of $918.15, and a
permit fee of $637.96 shall be collected by the Santa Ana Public Work Agency with the
receipt of each application to install telecommunication facilities in the public right of
way.
Section 3. If any charge, fee, service charge, section, subsection, sentence,
clause, phrase or word of this Resolution is for any reason held to be invalid by a court
of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining
portions of this Resolution. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed
and adopted this Resolution, and each and all provisions hereof, irrespective of the fact
that one or more provisions may be declared invalid.
Section 4. This Resolution shall take effect upon the approval of Ordinance
No. NS- and the Clerk of the Council shall attest to and certify the vote adopting this
Resolution. Should said Ordinance not be adopted, or should said Ordinance not
become effective, this Resolution shall be deemed null and void and of no further effect.
Section 5. That without further action of the City Council the fees, charges and
surcharges established by this resolution shall be incorporated into the City's
Miscellaneous Fee Schedule.
ADOPTED this day of , 2011.
Miguel A. Pulido
Mayor
75A-58
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Joseph Straka, Interim City Attorney
By:
Laura Sheedy
Assistant City Attorney
AYES: Councilmembers
NOES: Councilmembers
ABSTAIN: Councilmembers
NOT PRESENT: Councilmembers
CERTIFICATE OF ATTESTATION AND ORIGINALITY
I, MARIA D. HUIZAR, Clerk of the Council, do hereby attest to and certify the attached
Resolution No. 2011-XXX to be the original resolution adopted by the City Council of the
City of Santa Ana on
Date:
Clerk of the Council
City of Santa Ana
75A-59
EXHIBIT A
TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITY PERMIT
PROCESSING FEE STUDY
75A-60
Public ROW Telecommunications Permit
Task
Pre-Submittal Field Meeting
Notify Attendees and set Meeting
Personnel Rate Time (Hours) Cost
Asst Engineer $ 88.63 0.5 $44.31
Prep for Field Meeting Principal Engineer $ 130.63 0.5 $65.31
Asst Engineer $ 88.63 0.5 $44.31
Field Meeting Principal Engineer $ 130.63 1 $130.63
Asst Engineer $ 88.63 1 $88.63
Submittal
Receive and Login Plan Check Application Asst Engineer $ 88.63 0.5 $44.31
Send Notications Asst Engineer $ 88.63 0.5 $44.31
Admin $ 33.01 0.5 $16.51
RF Consultant Coordination (send Ap) Asst Engineer $ 88.63 0.5 $44.31
Admin $ 33.01 0.5 $16.51
Review, comment application & make available (1st Round) Senior Engineer * $ 104.90 0 $0.00
Asst Engineer * $ 88.63 0 $0.00
RF Consultant Coordination (receive and review report) Principal Engineer $ 130.63 0.5 $65.31
Senior Engineer $ 104.90
0.5
$52.45
Recieve and Respond to comments Principal Engineer $ 130.63 2 $261.25
Processing Total $918.15
Permit
Receive and Login Permit Application Asst Engineer $ 88.63 1 $88.63
Insurance & License Coordination and Issue Permit Asst Engineer $ 88.63 1 $88.63
Review and Cordination Principal Engineer $ 130.63 2 $261.25
Inspection Inspector $ 66.49 3 $199.46
$637.96
Permit Total
Burden per TC
Rates Hourly for support Burdened Rate
Principal Engineer $ 104.50 $ 1.25 130.63
Senior Engineer $ 83.92 $ 1.25 104.90
Asst Engineer $ 70.90 $ 1.25 88.63
Admin $ 26.41 $ 1.25 33.01
Inspector $ 53.19 $ 1.25 66.49
* = Separate Charge
75A-61
75A-62