The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1990-04-18; Planning Commission; Resolution 3011,- t 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3011 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA APPROVING A NEGATJVE DECLARATION FOR A TENTATIVE TRACT MAP TO DEVELOP A 5 LOT SINGLE FAMILY SUBDIVISION ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF BUENA VISTA AVENUE BETWEEN ARLAND AND VALLEY STREET. CASE NAME: WEST PALM CASE NO.: CT 89-32 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 18th day of April, 3 duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request, and WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all te 3.0 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 arguments, examining the initial study, analyzing the information submitted b considering any written comments received, the Planning Commission considere relating to the Negative Declaration. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning Cc follows: A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct. B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Planning hereby APPROVES the Negative Declaration according to Exhibit "ND", datc 24, 1989, and "PII", dated December 7, 1989, attached hereto and made a based on the following findings: Findinns : 1. The initial study shows that there is no substantial evidence that the projec significant impact on the environment. 2. The streets are adequate in size to handle traffic generated by the propose' 3. There are no sensitive resources located onsite or located so as to be impacted by this project. .... .... .... 28 3, I1 0 0 PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of th I. 11 Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 18th day of April, 1' 2 I! following vote, to wit: 3 4 AYES: Chairperson Schramm, Commissioners: Holmes, McFad Marcus & Hall. 5 11 NOES: None. 6 7 8 ABSENT: Commissioner Schlehuber. ABSTAIN: None. 9 10 l1 ATTEST: __~ ~ SHARON SCHRA", Chairperson CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION 12 13 MICHAEL J. HOLZMILBR 14 I/ PLANNING DIRECTOR 15 16 17 18 19 1 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 PC RES0 NO. 3011 -2- 28 a, NEGATWE DECLARATION PROJECT ADDRESS/LOCATION: Buena Vista Avenue between Arland Roa Valley Street, Carlsbad, California, APN: 156-42-31, 32 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: 5 lot single family subdivision on a level of gently slopi The City of Carlsbad has conducted an environmental review of the above des project pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation of the California EnvironI 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 I significant impact on the environment) is hereby issued for the subject project. Justifi for this action is on file in the Planning Department. A copy of the Negative Declaration with supportive documents is on file in the P1; Department, 2075 Las Palmas Drive, Carlsbad, California 92009. Comments frc public are invited. Please submit comments in writing to the Planning Department 10 days of date of issuance. DATED: December 29, 1989 CASE NO: CT 89-32 MICHAEL J.XOLMILLI Planning Director APPLICANT: George Marhoefer PUBLISH DATE: December 29, 1~g JG:lh 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, California 92009-4859 (619) 431 w ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART If (TO BE COMPLETED BY THE PUNNING DEPARTMENT) CASE NO. CT 89-32 DATE : DECEMBER 7, 1989 BACKGROUND 1. CASE NAME: WEST PALM 2. APPLICANT: GEORGE G. MARHOEFER 3. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: 4437 MAYFAIR COURT CARLSBAD, CA 92008 (619) 434-6440 4. DATE EIA FORM PART I SUBMITTED: SEPTEMBER 1, 1989 5. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: 5 LOT SINGLE-FAMILY SUBDIVISION ON A LEVEL TO GENTLY SLOPING LOT. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS STATE CEQA GUIDELINES, Chapter 3, Article 5, section 15063 requires that the conduct an Environmental Impact Assessment to determine if a project may h; significant effect on the environment. The Environmental Impact Assess appears in the following pages in the form of a checklist. This check1 identifies any physical, biological and human factors that might be impact€ the proposed project and provides the City with information to use as the b for deciding whether to prepare an Environmental Impact Report or Nega Declaration. * A Negative Declaration may be prepared if ths City perceives no substan evidence that the project or any of its aspects may cause a significant ef on the environment. On the checklist, llNO1l will be checked to indicate determination. * An EIR must be prepared if the City determines that there is substan evidence that any aspect of the project may cause a sisnificant effect on enVirOnIneIlt. The project may qualify for a Negative Declaration however adverse impacts are mitigated so that environmental effects can be de insisnificant. These findings are shown in the checklist under the head "YES-sigtl and IIYES-insig" respectively. A discussion of potential impacts and the proposed mitigation measures appt at the end of the form under DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION. Partic1 attention should be given to discussing mitigation for impacts which w( otherwise be determined significant. 1. 0 0 6 PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: YES YES (sig) (Insig) 1. 2. 3. 4, 5. 6. 7. 8. 3. 10. 11. Result in unstable earth conditions or increase the exposure of people or property to geologic hazards? Appreciably change the topography or any unique physical features? Result in or be affected by erosion of soils either on or off the site? 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? Result in substantial adverse effects on ambient air quality? Result in substantial changes in air movement, odor, moisture, or temperature? Substantially change the course or flow of water (marine, fresh or flood waters)? Affect the quantity or quality of surface water, ground water or public water supply? Substantially increase usage or cause depletion of any natural resources? Use substantial amounts of fuel or energy? Alter a significant archeological, paleontological or historical site, structure or object? -2- 0 W BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: YES (sig) Yp 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 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? 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 (sig) YES (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? -3- NO X X X X X NO X X X X X I a 1 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? -4- YES (insig) MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE YES YES (s19) NO (insig) 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. ) 35. Does the project have the possible environmental effects which are in- dividually limited but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively con- siderableP1 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.) X X X 36. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either d.irectly or indirectly? X -5- *, . *. 0 0 4 DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION This project entails the subdivision of a 1.51 acre parcel into 5 family residential lots. The topography is relatively level and has been utilized for agricultural purposes for many years. PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT The subject property is relatively level and the project proposes grading (2500 cubic yards), therefore there will be little apF incorporated into the project and no unstable earth conditions o geologic features are located on the project site or general \ Development of the project would create impervious surfaces on si would reduce absorption rates and increase surface runoff an( velocities, however, drainage facilities will be provided. Implementation of the proposed project will incrementally contribu. depletion of fossil fuel and other natural resources, increase 1 regional air emissions: however, this is not regarded as a sic impact in view of the limited scale of the project. Residential de7 for this site is planned for in the City's General Plan, as well as 1 Local Facilities Management Plan, therefore the above mentionec to physical resources have been anticipated and planned for. The site has been previously disturbed by agricultural uses, the: cultural resource impacts are anticipated. change in topography. Drainage and erosion control facilities BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT Past agricultural uses of the site have greatly disturbed any natu or animal communities, therefore the site has limited biological VE site is surrounded by single family residential development so th threat of introducing new species into a natural area or lim: movement of native animal species. The project will reduce the ava of agricultural land but the parcel is so small that it is an insi reduction. The General Plan designates this area for residenl therefore the loss of this site as agricultural land has been accou HUMAN ENVIRONMENT Traffic impacts, increase to population, increased public facilit and the planned use of the area have all been accounted for and pl in the General Plan and Zone 1 Local Facilities Management P: project will be required to pay public facility fees that will 1 adequatzly mitigate any impacts upon utilities and public facili The proposed project will incrementally increase noise levels ir ,ue to traffic and contribute to light and glare in the project however these impacts are considered insignificant due to the sm: of the project. The development will be compatible with surrour uses and the addition of landscaping will help reduce glare. Th: is required to meet all City standards, ordinances and policies no safety impacts or human health concerns are anticipated. -6- e ANALYSIS OF 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. The small nature of this five lot single-family subdivision located 01 a level and disturbed lot prohibits any phased development and thr proje:t does not lend itself to alternative site design or scale 0: development. This is an infill development, the property is zoned fo; residential uses, and the project conforms to the adopted residential density for the area, therefore alternative uses or alternative site: future time or the no project alternative is not a viable solutior because the area is zoned for the use and delay only postpones thc inevitable development of the site. are not appropriate in this case. Development of the site at somc -7- .-/ .. (C a e L 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 ( the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. - I find that although the proposed project could have a significan' effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effec this case because the mitigation measures described on an attack 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. r)"h&C a t 7qy \. ,$/? ,\. (;-,u cj . -/>-a,- Date "'aig9ure rzcl ZZ/& ' Dat'e LIST MITIGATING MEASURES [IF APPLICABLE) ATTACH MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM (IF APPLICABLE) -8- e APPLICANT CONCURRENCE WITH MITIGATING MEASURES THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT I HAVE REVIEWED THE ABOVE MITIGATING MEASURE: AND CONCUR WITH THE ADDITION OF THESE MEASURES TO THE PROJECT. Date Signature JG: lh -9-