The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1990-02-07; Planning Commission; Resolution 29711 -. -. 0 e 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 a 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2971 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA APPROVING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR A LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED SOUTH AND WEST OF THE CITY OF OCEANSIDE, EAST OF EL CAMINO REAL, AND NORTH OF FARADAY AVENUE. APPLICANT: HOFMAN PLANNING ASSOCIATES CASE NO.: LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN - ZONE 15 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 7th day of 1990, hold a duly noticed pub1 ic hearing as prescribed by 1 aw to con2 request, and WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and consic testimony and arguments, examining the initial study, analyzing the ir submitted by staff, and considering any written comments received, thl Commission considered all factors relating to the Negative Declarat NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning ComI fol 1 ows : A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct. B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, thc Commission hereby recommends APPROVAL of the Negative Dc according to Exhibit "ND", dated December 6, 1989, and "PI November 30, 1989, attached hereto and made a part hereof, ba! following findings: Findinqs: 1. The Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 15 will not significant environmental impacts. The plan is a public planning document that implements the existing General Plan. makes generalized projections as to the demand for and supply facilities, and outlines the provision of adequate public concurrent with estimated demands. The plan recognizes that C will be required prior to mitigation of any public or private pr is generally discussed in the plan. A Negative Declaratior issued on December 6, 1989 and recommended for approval by th Commission on February 7, 1990. .... .... 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 €3 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of thc Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 7. February, 1990, by the following vote, to wit: AYES : Chairperson Schramm, Commissioners: Schlehub Hall and Holmes. NOES : None. ABSENT : Commissioners McFadden and Marcus. ABSTAIN : None. ATTEST: SHARON SCHRAMM, Chairperso CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSI MICHAEL J. HOEMILLW PLANNING DIRECTOR PC RES0 NO. 2971 -2- .% .. Exhibit IIND" NEGATIVE DECLARATION PROJECT ADDRESS/LOCATION: East of El Camino Real, south of Lake Cal west of the City of Vista, north of Faraday Avenue. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Local Facilities Management Plan Zone 15 which guar the adequacy of public facilities concurrent with development to adopted perfor, standards. The City of Carlsbad has conducted an environmental review of the above des project pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environr Quality Act and the Environmental Protection Ordinance of the City of Carlsbad. significant impact on the environment) is hereby issued for the subject project. Justif for this action is on file in the Planning Department. A copy of the Negative Declaration with supportive documents is on file in the PI Department, 2075 Las Palmas Drive, Carlsbad, California 92009. Comments frc p-ublic are invited. Please submit comments in writing to the Planning Department ten (10) days of date of issuance. result of said review, a Negative Declaration (declaration that the project will not DATED: December 6, 1989 CASE NO: LFMP-15 Jfi&&.&+5L& ! 1 ;,{LL& , MICHAEL J. HOLZMILCER Planning Director APPLICANT: Hofman Planning Associates PUBLISH DATE: December 6, 1989 %H:af 2075 Las Palmas Drive - Carlsbad, California 92009-4859 - (619) 438 .. 0 0 Exhibit "PI I" ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART 11 (TO BE COMPLETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT) - CASE NO. LFMP 15 DATE : November 30, l! BACKGROUND 1. CASE NAME: Local Facilities Manaaement Plan Zone 15 2. APPLICANT: Hofman Plannina Associates 3. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: 2386 Faradav, Suite : Carlsbad, CA 92008 (619) 438-1465 4. . DATE EIA FORM PART I SUBMITTED: July 10, 1989 5. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Local Facilities Manaqement Plan ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS STATE CEQA GUIDELINES, Chapter 3 , Article 5, section 15063 requires th conduct an Environmental Impact Assessment to determine if a project significant effect on the environment. The Environmental Impact appears in the following pages in the form of a checklist. This identifies any physical, biological and human factors that might be the proposed project and provides the City with information to use a for deciding whether to prepare an Environmental Impact Report c Declaration.. * A Negative Declaration may be prepared if the City perceives no evidence that the project or any of its aspects may cause a signifi on the environment. On the checklist, I1NOtt will be checked to inc determination. * An EIR must be prepared if the City determines that there is evidence that any aspect of the project may cause a sisnificant ef adverse impacts are mitigated so that environmental effects car insiqnif icant. These findings are shown in the checklist under ti "YES-sig" and "YES-insigl@ respectively. .' environment. The project may qualify for a Negative Declaration A discussion of potential impacts and the proposed mitigation measu at the end of the form under DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION. attention should be given to discussing mitigation for impacts t otherwise be determined significant. PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT m W WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY; ‘ts?$ 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?2J 11. Alter a significant archeological, paleontological or historical site, structure or object? <. y7snslg, NO - >I - >( - 3 - >( - x - X - X - X X - - X - -2- .. 0 e BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT WILL THG PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: YES (sig) YES (insig) 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 or other farmland of state or local importance? - or numbers of any species of animals (birds, land animals, all water dwelling organisms and insects? ' . agricultural crop or affect prime, unique 15. Affect the diversity of species, habitat 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 f. of an area? 18. Substantially affect public utilities, schools, police, fire, emergency or other public services? X 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? -3- w HUMAN ENVIRONMENT w WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: YES YES (sig) NO ( Ins ig) 22. Involve a significant risk of an explosion or the release of ha,zardous substances (including, but not limited to, oil, X pesticides, chemicals or radiation)? - X human population of an area? - X for additional housing? - 23. Substantially alter the density of the 24. Affect existing housing, or create a demand 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. Generate substantial additional traffic? Affect existing parking facilities, or c,reate a large demand for new parking? Impact existing transportation systems or alter present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? Alter waterborne, rail or air traffic? Increase traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? Interfere with emergency response plans or emergency evacuation plans? obstruct any scenic vista or create an aesthetically offensive public view? Affect the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? 2: X - X - x X - - 3 - X - X - X -4- .. .* 0 0 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE YES big) 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. Roes 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.) YE tnsigi 35. Does the project have the possible environmental effects which are in- dividually limited but cumulatively considerable? (I*Cumulatively con- siderablel' 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.),. 1 36. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? -5- w DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION w The Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 15 is a facilitic planning document- The intent of the Plan is to establish parameter and thresholds that assure public fa-cilities are available when need€ 1: as determined by the City's adopted performance standards. accomplish this purpose, occasionally locations and costs of publi facility imprOVeIUentS are estimated for informational purposes. The5 estimates may result in increased development fees. Traditionally, the developer in maximizing their capital return pass€ such fees on to the home buyer .or tenant. This results in higher price housing which affects the availability of low and moderate incorr housing. However, as real estate value is determined primarily t location, without other market incentives, it is unreasonable to assurr the subject property would be developed with either low or moderat income housing. ' It is not the development fee that will force low and moderate incon families into other COmmUnities, but the existing nature of the markc place. It is recognized that CEQA review for these public facilities estimate is general, and does not satisfy CEQA requirements for the specifi Project. The Zone 15 Local Facilities Management Plan requires camplet CEQA review. prior to initialization of any public or private projec discussed in the Local Facilities Management Plan. 1 i: -6- 0 0 ANALYSIS OF VIABLE ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT SUCH AS: a) Phased development of the project, b) alternate site desi 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 alternativ a) The project is a public facility infomation and planning study. Phased planning will not efficiently or adequately address the need for public facilities, b) The project is a public facility information and planning study. C) The project is a pubiic facility information and planning study e d) Uses for the area covered by the plan are based on the existing General Plan. e) The plan considers phased development- f) The project is a public facility information and planning study, g) As the project is a public facility information and planning study, the no project alternative would not assure adequate public facilities to meet demand. The no project alternative would therefore cause the most detriment. -7 - e w 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. !I 130 /PA I Date 34L .' * I.. I dl 1 !L.j - fi/Ll/ d (:. t Y I. c ' ' Date Planni<$ Diredtor LIST MITIGATING MEASURES (IF APPLICABLE) +l ATTACH MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM (IF APPrlICABLE1 -a-