HomeMy WebLinkAbout1988-05-18; Planning Commission; Resolution 27321, 11
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
0 0
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2732
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA APPROVING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO DEVELOP A 28,300 SQUARE FOOT JOINT USE SENIOR CENTER AND
CmLSBAD UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE.
APPLICANT: CITY OF CARLSBAD
CASE NO.: CUP 88-4
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 18th day of May,
1988, hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to
consider said request, and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering
all testimony and arguments, examining the initial study,
analyzing the information submitted by staff, and considering any
written comments received, the Planning Commission considered all
factors relating to the Negative Declaration.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning
Commission as follows:
A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Planning Commission hereby APPROVES the Negative Declaration according to Exhibit ItNDtg and ttPII1t, dated April
22, 1988, attached hereto and made a part hereof, based on the
following findings:
Findinss:
1. The initial study shows that there is no substantial evidence that the project may have a significant impact on the environment.
2. The site has been previously graded pursuant to an earlier
3. The streets are adequate in size to handle traffic
4. There are not sensitive resources located onsite or
environmental analysis.
generated by the proposed project.
located so as to be significantly impacted by this
1
2
3
0 0
project .
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the
4
5
Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on
the 18th day of May, 1988, by the following vote, to wit:
6
7
8
AYES : Chairperson McFadden, Commissioners: Hall, Holmes,
NOES : Marcus, Schlehuber and Schramm.
None.
ABSENT : None.
9
10
ABSTAIN: None.
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
ATTEST :
n
IN
J&ANNE MCFADDEN, Chairperson
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
MICHAEL J. HOLZMILLER
PLANNING DIRECTOR
23
24
25
26
27
2811 PC RES0 NO. 2732 -2-
e
.ANNlNG DEPARTMENT
rAn1~1 I “NU”
a 2075 LAS PALMAS DRIVE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92009-4859
(619) 438-1 161
Cltp of Carls’bab
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
PROJECT ADDRESS/LOCATION: 801 Pine Avenue, Carlsbad
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Construction of a two-story 28,300 square foot joint use Senior Center and Carlsbad Unified School District Administrative Office with 178 at-grade parking stalls on a 3.31 acre site.
The City of Carlsbad has conducted an environmental review of the
above described project pursuant to the Guidelines for
Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act and
the Environmental Protection Ordinance of the City of Carlsbad.
As a result of said review, a Negative Declaration (declaration that the project will not have a significant impact on the
environment) is hereby issued for the subject project.
Justification for this action is on file in the Planning
Department.
A copy of the Negative Declaration with supportive documents is
on file in the Planning Department, 2075 Las Palmas Drive, Carlsbad, California 92009. Comments from the public are
invited. Please submit comments in writing to the Planning Department within ten (10) days of date of issuance.
DATED: AQril 22, 1988
CASE NO: CUP 88-4 Planning Director
APPLICANT: City of Carlsbad
PUBLISH DATE: April 22, 1988
0 . EXHIBIT IlPll"
ENVIRONMXNTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART I1
(TO BE COMPETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT)
CASE NO. CUP 88-4
DATE : March 23, 1988
I. BACKGROUND
1. APPLICANT: City of Carlsbad
2. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: 2075 Las Palmas Drive,
Carlsbad, California 92008 (619) 438-1161
3. DATE CHECK LIST SUBMITTED: March 2. 1988
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?
b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction or overcovering of the soil?
c. Change in topography or ground surface relief features?
d. The destruction, covering of modification of any unique geologic or physical features?
e. Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or
off the site?
X
X
X
X
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
e
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:
a. Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements,
in either marine or fresh waters?
b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patters, or the rate and amount of surface water runoff?
c. Alterations to the course or flow
of flood waters?
d. Change in the amount of surface water in any water body?
e. Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration of surface water quality, including but not limited to, temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity?
f. Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground waters?
g. Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations?
h. Reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies?
-2-
a
YES MAY BE - NO
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
0 0
YES
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. Liqht 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?
-3-
MAY BE NO
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
a m
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?
10. 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?
11. Population - Will the proposal signif-
icantly alter the location, distribu-
tion, density, or growth rate of the
human population of an area?
12. Housinq - 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:
a. Generation of additional vehicular movement?
b. Effects on existing parking facili- ties, or demand for new parking?
c. Impact upon existing transportation
systems?
d. Alterations to present patterns of
circulation or movement of people
and/or goods?
e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or
air traffic?
f. Increase in traffic hazards to
motor vehicles, bicyclists or
pedestrians?
- YES MAY BE - NO
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
-4-
0 0
YES
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. Enersv - Will the proposal have
significant 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)?
-5-
MAY BE - NO
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
18.
19.
20.
21.
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
0 0
YES MAY BE - NO
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
Recreation - Will the proposal have significant results in the impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? X
Archeolosical/Historical - Will the proposal have significant results in the alteration of a significant archeological or historical site,
structure, object or building? X
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) alter- nate sites for the proposed, and g) no project alternative.
This project, Seniors' Center and School Administrative
Offices, is proposed as a single project satisfying an immediate need. At some future date, the School District will vacate site and this part of the project will convert
to Senior Center uses.
The project when proposed went through four months of design review with various interested parties (City of Carlsbad, Senior Citizen Commission, Historic Preservation Commission, Cultural Arts Group, and Carlsbad Unified School District) . The proposed project was designed with
input from these groups and responds specifically to their
identified needs.
The scale of the development was selected in response to satisfying the identified needs of those groups it would service.
The site currently is developed with the School District Administrative Off ices. With the proposed pro j ect , both this use and the Seniors' Center will be provided for.
The existing School District Offices are currently in non
compliance with building safety codes because they are seismically unsafe. In accordance with this concern and given the existing demand for seniors' facilities, development at some future time is not a feasible
-6-
-, a 0
alternative.
f) This site was selected because of its close proximity to
the former Senior Center and the City's predominant
seniors population and because the School District already
occupies the property.
s) N/A
-7-
*. a a
- YES MAY BE - NO
22. Mandatory findinss of sisnificance -
a. Does the project have the potential
to degrade the quality of the environment, or curtail the diversity in the environment? X
b. 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
c. 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
d. Does the project have environmental
effects which will cause substantial
adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly? X
11. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
The City of Carlsbad is proposing to construct a 28,300 square
foot Seniors' Center with Administrative Office for the Carlsbad
Unified School District on a 3.31 acre level site which is
currently developed with Administrative Offices for the School District (which will be demolished) and the School District's maintenance yard. For this environmental analysis, staff conducted several field trips to the subject property. There are no sensitive environmental resources upon this already developed site. Although the site is zoned for Open Space Uses, it has been occupied by the School District for years. In addition, the proposed Senior Center is a relatively low intensity use which is permitted within the 0-S zone with the
approval of a Conditional Use Permit. Overall, because (1) the subject property is currently developed, (2) it is located
within an urban area, and (3) there exist no sensitive
environmental resources on or near the property, no significant environmental impacts are anticipated. There were no public comments received during the public review period for
-8-
e a
1ISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION (Continued)
this negative declaration.
-9-
e 0
V. 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.
3/23 -8% && a&
Date Sidnature
. MITIGATING MEASURES (If Applicable)
/A
-10-
" e e
ITIGATING MEASURES (Continued)
[. 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 PROJECT.
Date Signature
-11-