The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1988-07-06; Planning Commission; Resolution 2752i I1 e 0 1 ll 2 // PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2752 3 4 5 6 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA APPROVING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW A DAYCARE/PRESCHOOL AND A HIGH SCHOOL TO OPERATE OUT OF CHURCH FACILITIES AT 2780 PI0 PIC0 DRIVE. APPLICANT: FIRST BAPTIST CHURCH CASE NO.: CUP 88-5 7 11 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 6th day of July, 8 11 1988, hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to 9 10 11 12 13 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 '*I1 Commission considered all factors relating to the Negative l5 1) Declaration. 16 17 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning Commission as follows: l8 11 A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct. l9 I B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Planning Commission hereby recommends APPROVAL of the 2o Negative Declaration according to Exhibit I1NDg1 and llPII1t, 21 dated May 13, 1988, attached hereto and made a part hereof, based on the following findings: 22 I/ Findinqs: 23 24 1. Part I1 of the initial study (Exhibit rlPII1l) shows that there is no substantial evidence that the project may have a significant impact on the environment. 2511 2. The site is located in an urbanized area. 26 3. The streets are adequate in size to handle traffic 27 generated by the proposed project. 28 4. There are not sensitive resources located onsite or I 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 1~ 0 0 located so as to be significantly impacted by this project . PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 6th day of July, 1988, by the following vote, to wit: AYES : Chairperson McFadden, Commissioners: Marcus, NOES: None. ABSENT : Commissioner Hall. ABSTAIN: None. Erwin, Schramm and Holmes. CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION ATTEST : ,..’ 1 q e’ . ?.,’,>+&&?&. 4//#.+&- ,q LA e MICHAEL K wL~MILLER~ ’> PLANNING DIRECTOR I PC RES0 NO. 2752 ~ -2- 0 2075 US PALMAS DRIVE CARLSBAD, CA 92009459 0 tAHltjl I "NO" r TELEPHONE (619) 438-1161 aitn of QIdibail PLANNING DEPARTMENT NEGATIVE DECLARATION PROJECT ADDRESS/LOCATION: 3780 Pi0 Pic0 Drive, Carlsbad PROJECT DESCRIPTION: First Baptist Church proposal to conduct a preschool/daycare in church building Monday through Friday, and to allow Victory Christian High School to locate in modular buildings on church property. 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: May 13, 1388 CASE NO: CUP 88-5 +& I 1" p. l-%bJU% I MICHAEL J. .4~~~~~~~~~ Planning Director APPLICANT: First Baptist Church PUBLISH DATE: May 13, 1988 + a1i CJ: Stdu ;:eIr.>lgWusa. ::. 7T.r-t iveL* --x. 2;. Sacramma, U 3Sdii brrnION AW GWIRO(UEMK - FOM 0 NOTK L;a-.,oL: St. :dii jeicw I . -1 1" L I 1. mjct ~(~1,: First Baptist Church - 2. md AqigllKy: City of Carlsbad 3. Contast Person:. Nancy Rollman k. sant wmss: 2075 Las Palmas 38. Cfty: Carlsbad 3c. County: . San Dieao 3d. ZIP: 92009 3e. Phone: (619) 438-1161 PROJECT LOCI rc;n 4. "0: San Diego a. Ctty/Consruntty: Carlsbad "- "_ ." 4b.(optiwl) aswser's Parcel NO. LU9-Z70-43 4c. Sectton Tup. Range 5,. cmSr stntcs: Pi0 Pico/Tamarack 'b. tleardrt commnfty: For Rural - 6. Yithin 2 tiles of: a. State Huy No. 1-5 b. Atrwrta c. W~~WM~S Pacific Ocean 7. WWENT TYPE 3. LCCAL ACTIOn TYPE IO. OZYELOPMEHI TYPE - __ -. sa! 01 General Plan Updl~ 01 -7eridcntfrl: UnlU Acres 01 -7OP 02'Ncw Elmt 02 -Office: Sq.Ft. - 02 Early Cons 03 Gtrmal Plan Pnmkment kru "10Yrn a3 XNaq or 04 Mrt8~ Ptan 03 -Shopplng/~lr.I: Sq.Ft. os -SUPPlmmt/ 06 -Sprcttie Plan 01 Industrial: Sq.ft. L 08 Ruom 05 Smr: n&o 01 Oraft EIR os -Annurtion krr, "10Y-s Subsequent EIR (ff so. prfor So( t 07 -Radmvelopmt Acnr Wlw- NWA - 09 Land Ofvlslon 06 Mtu: w&o 06 rrotlce of intart (Subbivislon. Parcel bo, Trac: be. etc.) 07 TnnsDortltion: Type 07 Envfr. Arrestamti 10 Xuse Pmtt FONSI Oa -WmaI ExOlcMoru: Hlmrrl a8 Oraft €IS OTHER" - 10 Xowter: Davcare/Preschool/HiahBl 11 Cum1 &q Presare 09 pcuer Generatton: '&rage 12 otka Type: 09 Infrlmtlon Only 10 fh8l ooamnt 9. mALAcRLf: 11 Other 11. PROJECT ISSUES OfSQlSSED IN OOCWENT 01 Aatbetic/Vlsual 08 -(troloplclSetsaic 15 Sewer Capacity 22 ht8? s$R!glY 02 -4gdcultural Land 09 -Joes/Hourl*~ @lance IS Sofl Erosion 23" Uetlad/Rlparlan 03 XAlr Quality 10 Minerals 17 Solfd Marta 24 xdl ldl ife . 04 -Arehaeological/Wlatortul 11 Xbtse - 18 Toxfc/Hazardour 2S Grorth Inducing 05 Isul I2 Public SmlCW 19 ~Traffic/Circulatlon 26 -1ncompatibIr Landuse 06 Flrr nrurd 13 Schools 20 XvIprtatfon 27 Cumulative Effects 07 Flooding/Orrtnage 14 Septic Systrrs 21 Uatrr Pu~lity za Other - . .. 12. NBOING(a~rox.) Federal s state f Total f 13. PRESENT LANO USE AM ZOM!ffi: Existing: church building, modular buildings, parking lot, open field. Zoning: R-3 and R-1. church building and allow a private high school to locate in modular buildings on church property. 14. PROJECT 3ESQI?T:O.Y: Conditional use permit to conduct a preschool/daycare in -)&Lwk z. I&$& 4L 15. SIQANRE CF LEAD AGZ!ICY ai?RESiYTATIVE: oat* May 6, 1988 II ~, .. . .. ".l \, ^I." .,".. , -.,"* *" . "-.= r- 0 e ~A111 DI I "rl I- ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART I1 (TO BE COMPETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT) CASE NO. CUP 88-5 DATE : May 5, 1988 I. BACKGROUND 1. APPLICANT: First BaPtist Church 2. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: 3780 Pi0 Pico, Carlsbad. CA 92008 3. DATE CHECK LIST SUBMITTED: March 9. 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 a 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 e 4. Plant Life - Will the proposal have significant results in: YES 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. Lisht 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- MAYBE - NO X X V A X v A X V A X X X 0 0 - YES MAY BE 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 UDset - 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. PoDulation - 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. TransDortation/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? -4- - NO X x. X X X X X X X X X 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 0 0 18. 19. 20. 21. a) b) c) d) e) f) 9) - 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 Prorsosed Proiect 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. N/A The buildings presently are in place. The scale of development will not be beyond an occupant load as established by the Uniform Building Code. The property ultimately could be used for commercial or residential, per the land use designations of the General Plan. The high school needs to be relocated by September 1988. The church is looking for larger quarters and anticipates possibly moving in 1989. The church would remain as is, with services on weekends and little activity during the week. However, the location on a collector street and the fact that there is a school next door would alleviate significant impacts caused by the proposal. -6- a 0 YES MAY BE NO - 22. Mandatory findinas of sianificance - 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 TI. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION The First Baptist Church is proposing to conduct a preschool and daycare of up to 75 children in the existing church building from Monday to Friday 6:30 a.m. to 6:OO p.m. The church also wants to allow Victory Christian High School to locate in the modular buildings behind the church (90 - 120 students) . The following paragraphs will discuss the environmental evaluation. Because the property is located in an urbanized, developed area and will utilize the existing buildings and parking areas, there will be no impacts related to grading, air, water, plant or animal life. Being located next to another school and close to the freeway, the proposal will not increase noise levels significantly. The land use is not inappropriate, as schools are allowed in the zone and many times are located in conjunction with churches. The proposal will increase the number of vehicle trips around the church property, but this is not considered a significant -7- 0 e SCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION (Continued) impact because there are two separate accesses into and out of the church property, adequate drop off, and sufficient parking. The additional trips for the high schoolt are merely being transferred from its existing location. The location on a collector near a freeway will facilitate the traffic. None of the other environmental areas will be impacted by the proposed project. -8- 0 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. May 6, 1988 b,L:u?,Lkq MA.&" Date Si#ature . MITIGATING MEASURES (If Applicable) -9- .- 0 e CTIGATING MEASURES (Continued) I. 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 -10-