Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1989-07-19; Planning Commission; Resolution 28580 e 1 2 3 4 5 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2858 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CARL5 CALIFORNIA APPROVING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR A MINOR SPEC PLAN AMENDMENT TO CONSTRUCT SIX WASTEWATER TREATMENT TANK REPLACE SIX EXISTING WASTEWATER TREATMENT PONDS AT THE ENCINA F PLANT. APPLICANT: SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC CASE NO.: MINOR AMENDMENT TO SP 144 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 3rd day of May, 7th day of June, 1989, and the 19th day of July, 1989 hold a dl public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request, and WHEREAS, at said pub1 ic hearing, upon hearing and consi testimony and arguments, examining the initial study, analyzing the submitted by staff, and considering any written comments received, t Commission considered all factors relating to the Negative Declara NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning Con fol 1 ows : A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct. B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, t Commission hereby recommends APPROVAL of the Negative I according to Exhibit "ND" dated March 17, 1989, 'ISCH" datec 1989, and I'PII", dated March 17, 1989, attached hereto and I hereof, based on the following findings: Fi ndi nqs: 1. A field survey plus Part I1 of the initial study and commen during the public review process show that there is no evidence that the project may have a significant impa environment. 2. The site has been previously graded, paved and used fol storage. 3, The project will rep1 ace six existing, open wastewater trea and, thereby, eliminate potential ground water contaminatior 4. Visual impacts have been mitigated by 1 andscape treatment a of the tanks to match the existing landscaped backdrop. 28 II 1 2 3 4 0 0 I PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 19th da: 1989, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Chairman Hall, Commissioners: Schlehuber, Schramm, Erwin, Holmes & Marcus. 5 NOES : None. 6 7 ABSENT: Commissioner McFadden. ABSTAIN: None. 8 9 lo ATTEST: CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION I.1 ll 12 13 MICHAEL J. HOL?JdILLEp 14 PLANNING DIRECTOR 15 16 /I l7 II 18 II 19 I 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 PC RES0 NO. 2858 -2- 28 0 0 2075 LAS PALMAS DRIVE CARLSBAD. CA 92009-4859 situ af &rlsbab PLANNING DEPARTMENT NEGATIVE DECLARATION (( PROJECT ADDRESS/LOCATION: 4600 Carlsbad, Boulevard, Carlsbad, California PROJECT DESCRIPTION: A request for permission to install six wastew collection tanks and associated facilities at the Encina Power Plant. The City of Carl sbad has conducted an environmental review of the above descr project pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation of the Califo Environmental Quality Act and the Environmental Protection Ordinance of the of Carlsbad. As a result of said review, a Negative Declaration (declara that the project will not have a significant impact on the environment) is he issued for the subject project. Justification for this action is on file in P1 anning Department. A copy of the Negative Declaration with supportive documents is on file in Planning Department, 2075 Las Palmas Drive, Carlsbad, California 92009. Comml from the public are invited. Please submit comments in writing to the Plan1 Department within thirty (30) days of date of issuance. DATED: March 17, 1989 CASE NO: SP-l44(A) J~\I, k+iG.j w&kc( MICHAEL J. HOL~MIL~ PI anni ng Di rector APPLICANT: SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC CO. PUBLISH DATE: March 17, 1989 MJH: af "_;e 3 ~"" -- ". ...=.."", . .-- . . . - . , - " . __. . -. . . . , . . . . - - . . NOTICE k&*OM AI0 EYVIiKYEMTAL WQlEYT Mllll --*- ""7 see m Belar I =n#- b ~~ 1. Project Title SAN DIEGO (iAS 8 ELECTRIC / SP-144 MENDMENT 2. Led Agency: CITY OF CARLSBAD 3. Contact Person: MICHAEL HOLZ~ILLER 3a. Street Address: 2075 las Palms Drive 3b. City: Carlsbad 3c. county: San Dieso M. Zip: 92009 3e. Phone: J619) 438-1161 PROJECT LOCATION 4. County: San Dieso 4a. City/Cmity: City of Carlsbad 4b.(aptional) Assessor's Parcel No. 210-01-33 4c. Section: Tup. Range Sa. Cross streets: Carlsbad Blvd./Camon Road 5b. Nearest Comnunity: 6. Yithin 2 miles of: a. State Hwy No. 1-5 b. Airports Palunar c. & 7. DOCUMENT TYPE 8. LOCAL ACTION TYPE 10. DEVELOPMENT TYPE For Rural, - CEQA 01 - General Plan Update 01 - Residential: Units Acres - 01 - NOP 02 - New Element 02 - Office: Sq. Ft. 02 - Early Cons 03 - General Plan llmeKment Acres Enployees - 03 x Neg Oec 04 - Master Plan 03 - Shopping/Comnercial: Sq. Ft. 04 "Draft EIR 05 - Annexation Acres Errp 1 oyees 05 - Supplement/ 06 x Specific Plan 04 - Industrial: Sq. Ft. (if so, prior SCH # 07 - Redevelopnent Acres Employees Subsequent EIR Minor Amendnent 1 08 - Rezone 05 - Seuer: HGD w 09 - Land Division 06 - Uater: RGD (Subdivision, Parcel Map. 06 - Notice of Intent Tract Map, etc.) 07 -Transportation: Type 07 - Envir. Assessment/ 10 - Use Permit 08 - Mineral Extraction: Mineral FONSI 08 __ Draft EIS 11 - Cancel Ag Preserve 09 - Pouer Generation: Wattage OTHER 12 - Other Type: 09 - Information Only 10 - Other: 10 - Final Docunent 9 TOTAL ACRES: .9 11 - Other: 11. PROJECT ISSUES DISCUSSED IN DOCUMENT 01 - Aesthetic/Visual' 08 - Geologic/Seismic 15 - Seuer Capacity 22 - Water Sup 02 - Agricultural Land 09 - Jobs/Housing Balance 16 - Soil Erosion 23 - Wetland/R 03 - Air Quality 10 - Minerals 17 - Solid Waste 24 - Wildlife 04 - Archaeological/Historical/ 11 - Noise 18 - Toxic/Hazardous 25 - Grouth Ir Paleontological 12 - Public Services 19 - Traffic/Circulation 26 - Incompati 05 - Coastal 13 - Schools 20 - Vegetation 27 - Cunulati\ 06 - Fire Hazard 14 - Septic System 21 - Water Quality 28 - Other - -07 - Flooding/Drainage 12 FUNDING (approx.) Federal S State t Total t 13 PRESENT LAND USE AND ZONING: Presently paved and used for storage in conjunction uith operation of Encina Pout Plan, Coastal Plan and Zoning is Public Utility (P-U). 14 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: A minor specific plan amendment to replace six wasteuater collection ponds uith six 1 required by Toxic Pits Act of 1984. Detailed 15. SIGNATURE OF LEAD AGENCY REPRESENTATIVE: Date: 3!l o#/ 0 0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART I1 (TO BE COMPETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT) CASE NO. SP-144 - Minor 1 DATE : March 10, 1989 r . BACKGROUND 1. APPLICANT! San Dieao Gas 6 Electric 2. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: 101 Ash Street. San Dieao. California 92101 (619) 696-2410 3. DATE CHECK LIST SUBMITTED: 11. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS (Explanations of all Affirmative Answers are to be written under Section 111 - Discussion of Environmental Evaluation) - YES MAY BE 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? 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? 0 0 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 patterns, 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? - YES MAYBE 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- 0 0 YES MAYBE 4. Plant Life a- 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. Liaht 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- - N( - - - - - - - - - - - e e - 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 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. Powlation - 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? 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 0 0 - YES MAYBE 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? 20. Archeoloaical/Historical/Paleontoloaical - Will the proposal have significant results in the alteration of a significant archeological, paleontological or historical site, structure, object or building? 21. Analyze viable alternatives to the DroDosed proiect such as: a) Phased development of the project, b) alternate site desigr c) alternate scale of development, d) alternate uses for the 6 e) development at some future time rather than now, f) alter- nate sites for the proposed, and g) no project alternative. The project is being done in order to comply with the Toxic Pi 1984. Phasing or a no project alternative is not possible. with the new law, SDG&E studied two alternatives: relining the ponds or using steel tanks to hold the water. SDG&E chose t steel tanks. While the tanks are the costlier of the two alte they are the safest and most environmentally-sound. The Regio Quality Control Board has directed SDG&E to complete the pi August, 1990. -6- .a 0 YES MAY BE 1 22. Mandatory findinss of sianificance - a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, or curtail the diversity in the environment? 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.) 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 effecty of the total of significant.) those impacts on the environment is d. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? 111. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION Proiect DescriDtion: 18. The wastewater treatment tanks will be 18 to 30 feet in height. The ponds are not visible. The tanks ,will be constructed of steel ant visible from Carlsbad Boulevard. However, they will be painted a c makes them compatible with the existing landscaping that backdrops In addition, planting along the front perimeter of the site is incl into the project for screening purposes. -7- IV. DETERMINATION (To Beqompleted By The Planning Department) e On the basis of this initial evaluation: X I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significa effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect this case because the mitigation measures described on an attache 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. -311 0/43c1 1 Date !I, D/i / Date V.MITIGATING MEASURES (If Applicable) VI. APPLICANT CONCURRENCE WITH MITIGATING MEASURES THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT I HAVE REVIEWED THE ABOVE MITIGATING MEASI AND CONCUR WITH THE ADDITION OF THESE MEASURES TO THE PROJECT. Date 'signature -8-