The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1990-01-03; Planning Commission; Resolution 2963'I 0 0 t 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 I I 28 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2963 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA APPROVING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR A PLANNING COMMISSION DETERMINATION/GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY TO ALLOW PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS TO HOLIDAY PARK. APPLICANT: CITY OF CARLSBAD CASE NO.: PCD/GPC 89-8 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 3rd day o 1990, hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to con request, and WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and consi testimony and arguments, examining the initial study, analyzing the i submitted by staff, and considering any written comments received, tk Commission considered all factors relating to the Negative Declarat NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning Com fol 1 ows : A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct. B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, th Commission hereby recommends APPROVAL of the Negative D according to Exhibit "ND", dated December 22, 1989 and "PI November 21, 1989, attached hereto and made a part hereof, ba following findings: Findinqs: 1. The initial study shows that there is no substantial evidence project may have a significant impact on the environment bc improvements are proposed for an existing park site within an e: neighborhood. 2. The site has previously been developed as a park site pursu earlier environmental analysis. 3. The incremental increase in traffic due to the additional park will be adequately served by the existing street systems. 4. There are no sensitive resources located onsi te or located so significantly impacted by this project. .... 0 0 PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of th Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 3rd day c 1 2j/ 1990, by the following vote, to wit: 3 4 AYES : Chairman Hall, Commissioners: Schlehuber, Erwin, McFadden, Holmes & Marcus. 5 NOES : None. 6 7 ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. €3 9 lo 11 ATTEST: CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSI 14 15 16 17 18 19 I 20 21 22 /I 23 24 25 11 26 27 PC RES0 NO. 2963 -2- 28 ll LXnlDlr ' NEGATIVE DECLARATION PROJECT ADDRESS/LOCATION: Holiday Park located east of Pi0 Pic0 Drive, of Eureka Place and between Pine Avenue and Chestnut Avenue. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Improvements to Holiday Park including a covered 1 shelter, additional pieces of park equipment, hot coal disposal receptacles and sel lighting. The City of Carlsbad has conducted an environmental review of the above desc project pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environn- Quality Act and the Environmental Protection Ordinance of the City of Carlsbad. result of said review, a Negative Declaration (declaration that the project will not h significant impact on the environment) is hereby issued for the subject project. Justific for this action is on file in the Planning Department. A copy of the Negative Declaration with supportive documents is on file in the Pla Department, 2075 Las Palmas Drive, Carlsbad, California 92009. Comments fror public are invited. Please submit comments in writing to the Planning Department 1 ten (10) days of date of issuance. DATED: December 22, 1989 &Fd 4 McHFL J. HoLZE: CASE NO: PCD/GPC 89-8 Planning Director APPLICANT: City of Carlsbad PUBLISH DATE: December 22, 1989 ENM:lh 2075 Las Palmas Drive - Carlsbad, California 92009-4859 - (619) 438. v e IIUVCII ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART I1 (TO BE COMPLETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT) CASE NO. PCD/GPC 89-8 DATE : NOVEMBER 21, 198! BACKGROUND 1. CASE NAME: PCD/GPC 89-8 - HOLIDAY PARK IMPROVEMENTS 2. APPLICANT: CITY OF CARLSBAD 3. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: (6191 438-1161 2 075 LAS PALMAS DRIVE CARLSBAD, CA 92009 4. DATE EIA FORM PART I SUBMITTED: JULY 28, 1989 5. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: UPGRADING AND INSTALLATION OF PARK ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS EOUIPMENT AND AMENITIES FOR HOLIDAY PAR STATE CEQA GUIDELINES, Chapter 3 , Article 5, section 15063 requires tha conduct an Environmental Impact Assessment to determine if a project 1 significant effect on the environment. The Environmental Impact ; appears in the following pages in the form of a checklist. This c identifies any physical, biological and human factors that might be i: the proposed project and provides the City with information to use as for deciding whether to prepare an Environmental Impact Report or Declaration. * A Negative Declaration may be prepared if the City perceives no si evidence that the project or any of its aspects may cause a signific, on the environment. On the checklist, I'NO" will be checked to ind: determination. * An EIR must be prepared if the City determines that there is si evidence that any aspect of the project may cause a sisnificant eff environment. The project may qualify for a Negative Declaration h' adverse impacts are mitigated so that environmental effects can "YES-sig" and "YES-insig" respectively. insignificant. These findings are shown in the checklist under tht A discussion of potential impacts and the proposed mitigation rneasurc at the end of the form under DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION. : attention should be given to discussing mitigation for impacts wl: otherwise be determined significant. w 0 PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: Ti% YES (insig) 1. Result in unstable earth conditions or increase the exposure of people or property to geologic hazards? 2. Appreciably change the topography or any unique physical features? 3. Result in or be affected by erosion of soils either on or off the site? 4. Result in changes in the deposition of beach sands, or modification of the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? 5. Result in substantial adverse effects on ambient air quality? 6. Result in substantial changes in air movement, odor, moisture, or temperature? 7. Substantially change the course or flow of water (marine, fresh or flood waters)? 8. Affect the quantity or quality of surface water, ground water or public water supply? 9. Substantially increase usage or cause depletion of any natural resources? 10. Use substantial amounts of fuel or energy? 11. Alter a significant archeoloqical, paleontoloqical or historical site, structure or object? -2- v 0 BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: YES his) 12. Affect the diversity of species, habitat or numbers of any species of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass, microflora and aquatic plants) ? 13. Introduce new species of plants into an area, or a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? 14. Reduce the amount of acreage of any agricultural crop or affect prime, unique or other farmland of state or local importance? 15. Affect the diversity of species, habitat or numbers of any species of animals (birds, land animals, all water dwelling organisms and insects? YS finnsigl 16. Introduce new species of animals into an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? HUMAN ENVIRONMENT WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: YES YES (sig) (insig) 17. Alter the present or planned land use of an area? 18. Substantially affect public utilities, schools, police, fire, emergency or other public services? 19. Result in the need for new or modified sewer systems, solid waste or hazardous waste control systems? 20. Increase existing noise levels? 21. Produce new light or glare? X -3- w HUMAN ENVIRONMENT WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: YES (sig) 22. Involve a significant risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation)? 23. Substantially alter the density of the human population of an area? 24. Affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing? 25. Generate substantial additional traffic? 26. Affect existing parking facilities, or create a large demand for new parking? 27. Impact existing transportation systems or alter present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? 28. Alter waterborne, rail or air traffic? 29. Increase traffic hazards to motor 30. Interfere with emergency response plans or vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? emergency evacuation plans? 31. Obstruct any scenic vista or create an aesthetically offensive public view? 32. Affect the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? YES (insig) X -4- 0 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE YES (sig) 33. Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wild- life 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 en- dangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. 34. 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.) YEf3nsig) 35. Does the project have the possible environmental effects which are in- dividually limited but cumulatively considerable? (lfCumu1atively con- siderable" means that the incremental effects of an individual project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) 36. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? -5- w 0 DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT: The project will not involve anything to threaten the geologic stab of the site or modify soil or topographic conditions. There will impacts to the quality of air or water resources. No archeolog paleontological or historical resources exist on site. BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT: Since this project involves an existing use in an establ neighborhood there will be no adverse impacts to the existing biolo environment. The proposed improvements will not involve introduction or reduction of animal or plant species on site. HUMAN ENVIRONMENT: The project will not alter existing land uses but rather enhance There will be no impacts to public utilities or public serv Existing noise levels will not be significantly increased. New will be produced by the improvements from the proposed sec lighting, however, they will be directed downward and away from 'adj streets and properties. The project will not affect or increase hc demands or the human population of the area. The project will a the quality and quantity of existing recreational opportunitii providing amenities which will help to enhance them. In conclusion, the proposed improvements will enhance the usage of Park and will not cause any significant environmental impacts. Sta prepare a Negative Declaration. -6- W e ANALYSIS OF VIABLE ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT SUCH AS: a) Phased development of the project, b) alternate site desig c) alternate scale of development, d) alternate uses for the e) development at some future time rather than now, f) alter- nate sites for the proposed, and g) no project alternative a) The nature and extent of the proposed improvements do not rei justify phased development of the project. b) The proposed site design in adequate and appropriate. c) The proposed scale of development is adequate and appropriate d) The site is already designated for a park use (Open Space Ge Designation) . e) The proposed improvements are needed and appropriate at this f ) N/A g) The no project alternative would prevent park users from en benefits and usage of the proposed improvements. -7- 0 e DETERMINATION (To Be Completed By The Planning Department) On the basis of this initial evaluat.ion: X I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect c 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 effec this case because the mitigation measures described on an attach 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. /z. /5. 84 I Date 12 - /s- s9 Date ’ LIST MITIGATING MEASURES (IF APPLICABLE) ATTACH MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM (IF APPLICABLE) -8- 0 0 APPLICANT CONCURRENCE WITH MITIGATING MEASURES THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT I HAVE REVIEWED THE ABOVE MITIGATING ME2 AND CONCUR WITH THE ADDITION OF THESE MEASURES TO THE PROJECT. Date Signature ENM: lh -9-