HomeMy WebLinkAboutPIP 87-13; Carlsbad Airport Center Lot 4 Unit 1; Planned Industrial Permit (PIP) (5)ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART I1
(To Be Completed by the Planning Department)
CASE NO. PIP 87-13
DATE: 3anuary 12, 1988
I. BACKGROUND
1. APPLICANT: Austin Hansen Fehlman Group
2. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: 9605 Scranton Road, Suite
202. San Dieao. California 92121. (619) 458-1361
3. DATE CHECK LIST SUBMITTED: December 21. 1987
11. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
(Explanations of all Affirmative Answers are to be Written Under
Section I11 - Discussion of Environmental Evaluation)
YES MAY BE NO - -
1. Earth - Will the proposal have
significant results in:
a. Unstable earth conditions or in
changes in geologic substructures? X
b. Disruptions, displacements, com-
paction or overcovering of the soil? X
c. Change in topography or ground
surface relief features? X
d. The destruction, covering or
modification of any unique geologic
or physical features? X
e. Any increase in wind or water
erosion of soils, either on or off the site? X
f. Changes in deposition or erosion
of beach sands, or changes in
siltation, deposition or erosion
which may modify the channel or a
river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? X
2. - Air - Will the proposal have
significant results in:
a. Air emissions or deterioration
of ambient air quality?
b. The creation of objectionable
odors?
C. Alteration of air movement,
moisture or temperature, or any
change in climate, either locally
or regionally?
3. Water - Will the proposal have
significant results in:
MAYBE NO -
X
X
a.
b.
C.
d.
e.
f.
9.
h.
Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements,
in either marine or fresh waters?
Changes in absorption rates,
drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface water runoff?
Alterations to the course or flow
of flood waters?
Change in the amount of surface
water in any water body?
Discharge into surface waters,
or in any alteration of surface
water quality, including but not
limited to, temperature, dissolved
oxygen or turbidity?
Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground waters?
Change in the quantity of ground
waters, either through direct
additions or withdrawals, or through
interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations?
Reduction in the amount of water
otherwise available for public water supplies?
X
-2-
4. Plant Life - Will the proposal have
significant results in:
a. Change in the diversity of species,
or numbers of any species of plants
(including trees, shrubs, grass, crops, microflora and aquatic plants)?
b. Reduction of the numbers of any
unique, rare or endangered species of plants?
c. Introduction of new species of plants
into an area, or in a barrier to the
normal replenishment of existing
species?
d. Reduction in acreage of any
agricultural crop?
5. Animal Life - Will the proposal have significant results in:
a. Changes in the diversity of species,
or numbers of any species of animals
(birds, land animals including reptiles,
fish and shellfish, benthic organisms, insects or microfauna)?
b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique,
rare or endangered species of animals?
c. Introduction of new species of animals
into an area, or result in a barrier
to the migration or movement of
animals?
d. Deterioration to existing fish or
wildlife habitat?
6. Noise - Will the proposal significantly
increase existing noise levels?
7. Light and Glare - Will the proposal sig-
nificantly produce new light or glare?
8. Land Use - Will the proposal have
significant results in the alteration of the present or planned land use of an
area?
MAY BE NO -
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
-3-
YES -
9. Natural Resources - Will the proposal
have significant results in:
a. Increase in the rate of use of any
natural resources?
b. Depletion of any nonrenewable
natural resource?
IO. Risk of Upset - Does the proposal
involve a significant risk of an
explosion or the release of hazardous
substances (including, but not limited
to, oil, pesticides, chemicals or
radiation) in the event of an accident or upset conditions?
MAYBE NO -
X
X
X
11. Population - Will the proposal signif-
icantly alter the location, distribu-
tion? density, or growth rate of the
human population of an area?
12. Housing - Will the proposal signif-
icantly affect existing housing, or
create a demand for additional housing?
13. Transportation/Circulation - Will the
proposal have significant results in:
X
X
a.
b.
C.
d.
e.
f.
Generation of additional vehicular
movement? X
Effects on existing parking facilit-
ies, or demand for new parking? X
Impact upon existing transporation
systems? X
Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people
and/or goods? X
Alterations to waterborne, rail or
air traffic? X
Increase in traffic hazards to
motor vehicles, bicyclists or
pedestrians? X
-4-
c
14. Public Services - Will the proposal have
a significant effect upon, or have signif- icant results in the need for new or altered governmental services in any of the following areas:
a. Fire protection?
b. Police protection?
c. Schools?
d. Parks or other recreational facilities?
e. Maintenance of public facilities,
including roads?
f. Other governmental services?
15. Energy - Will the proposal have signif-
icant results in:
a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel
or energy?
b. Demand upon existing sources of
energy, or require the development
of new sources of energy?
16. Utilities - Will the proposal have
significant results in the need for new
systems, or alterations to the following utilities:
a. Power or natural gas?
b. Communications systems?
c. Water?
d. Sewer or septic tanks?
e. Storm water drainage?
f. Solid waste and disposal?
17. Human Health - Will the proposal have
significant results in the creation of
any health hazard or potential health
hazard (excluding mental health)?
MAY BE NO -
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
-5-
YES - MAY BE NO -
18. Aesthetics - Will the proposal have
significant results in the obstruction
of any scenic vista or view open to the
public, or will the proposal result in
creation of an aesthetically offensive
public view? X
19. Recreation - Will the proposal have
significant results in the impact upon
the quality or quantity of existing
recreational opportunities? X
20. Archeological/Historical - Will the
proposal have significant results in
the alteration of a significant
archeological or historical site,
structure, object or building? X
21. Analyze viable alternatives to the proposed project such as:
a) Phased development of the project, b) alternate site designs, c) alternate scale of development, d) alternate uses for the site, e) development at some future time rather than now, f) alternate sites for the proposed, and g) no project alternative.
Staff feels the proposed project is well suited to accommodate the site,
and no alternative proposals were found necessary. The proposed project
is appropriate for the following reasons:
a) The proposed project consists of only one building, so phasing is
not necessary.
b) The proposed site design meets or exceeds the design standards laid out
in the City's Zoning Ordinance. This includes requirements for
parking, setbacks, landscaping, and building height.
c) Alternate scale of development is not necessary since proposed project complies with the General Plan. It is harmonious with
surrounding industrial developments.
d) The proposed use is consistent with section 21.34.020 (Permitted Uses)
of the Zoning Ordinance.
e) The proposed development is concurrent with the development of
surrounding area in the Carlsbad Airport Center.
f) The proposed project has been designed for this particular piece
of property and would have to be changed considerably if moved to
an alternate site.
After assessing alternatives for the proposed project, staff concludes
that the proposed project appears to be the most appropriate for the site.
-6-
YES - MAY BE NO -
22. Mandatory Findings of Significance -
a.
b.
C.
d.
Does the project have the potential
to degrade the quality of the environment, or curtail the diversity
in the environment? X
Does the project have the potential
to achieve short-term, to the dis-
advantage of long-term, environmental goals? (A short-term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a
relatively brief, definitive period of
time while long-term impacts will
endure well into the future.) X
Does the project have impacts which
are individually limited, but
cumulatively considerable? (A
project may impact on two or more separate resources where the impact
on each resource is relatively small,
but where the effect of the total of
those impacts on the environment is
significant.) X
Does the project have environmental
effects which will cause substantial
adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly? X
111. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
The proposed project has been found to have no significant environmental impacts. The site is a 3.16 acre pad graded lot ideally suited for the proposed development of a two-story corporate office building. Environmental assessment for the area was previously done in connection with the Specific Plan (SP-181) for Carlsbad Airport Center.
As stated, the site is a pad graded lot that will only require an
additional 1560 cubic yards of grading. This should not, change the topography in any major way. Since the lot has already been graded, any
plant or animal life that may have been impacted is minimal. The grading
also would have disturbed any possible archeological findings at the site. Since none were discovered during excavation, staff feels confident that the proposed project will not impact any archeological or historical sites.
The proposed site will also have no significant impacts on circulation.
The proposed project will generate approximately 600 average daily trips. Camino Vida Roble can comfortably accommodate this additional traffic. The applicant has also provided 177 parking spaces which exceeds the
City's parking requirements of 166 spaces.
-7-
DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION (Continued)
The proposed project will not create a significant impact on public
services. The applicant has agreed to provide for any public facilities
necessary for this development. The proposed project will also not
require any new utility systems.
The proposed industrial project is consistent with the General Plan designation (PI) for this area and will not alter the planned land use in any way. It should not affect the distribution of population or create a
significant demand for housing in the area.
In conclusion, the proposed project should have no significant environmental impacts, and staff feels comfortable in issuing a Negative
Declaration.
-8-
IV. DETERMINATION (To Be Completed by the Planning Department)
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
X I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on
the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant
effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in
this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached
sheet have been added to the project. A Conditional Negative
Declaration will be proposed.
I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the
environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
V. MITIGATING MEASURES (If Applicable)
-9-
MITIGATING MEASURES (Continued)
VI. APPLICANT CONCURRENCE WITH MITIGATING MEASURES
THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT I HAVE REVIEWED THE ABOVE MITIGATING MEASURES
AND CONCUR WITH THE ADDITION OF THESE MEASURES TO THE PR03ECT.
-10-