The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1990-12-05; Planning Commission; Resolution 3167I 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 w e PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3167 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA RECOMMENDING APPROVAL, OF A NEGATrVE DECLARATION FOR A ZONE CODE TO ADJUST PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR LIBRARIES. CASE NAME: CITY OF CARLSBAD CASE NO.: ZCA 90-1 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 5th day of December, 1990, hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to 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 Commission considered all factors relating to the Negative Declaration. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning Commission as follows: A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct. B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Planning Commission hereby recommends APPROVAL of the Negative Declaration according to Exhibit "ND", dated October 25, 1990, and "PII", dated November 1, 1990, attached hereto and made a part hereof, based on the following findings: Findings: 1. The initial study shows that there is no substantial evidence that the proposed zone code amendment may have a simcant impact on the environment. 2. As no site specific project is proposed with this amendment, no sensitive resources will be impacted by this proposal. ... w c 1 PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning 2 by the following vote, to wit; 3 Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 5th day of December, 1990, 4 AYES: Chairperson Schramm, Commissioners Schlehuber, Holmes, 5 Marcus & Holmes. 6 7 8 9 NOES: Commissioners: McFadden & Erwin. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. 10 11 12 ATTEST: CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION 13 II PLANNING DIRECTOR 16 17 18 19 2o ! 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 PC RES0 NO. 3167 .2 - 28 ., NEGATIVE DECLARATION PROJECT ADDRESS/LOCATION: CITY OF CARLSBAD PROJECT DESCRIPTION: REVISION OF CHAPTER 21.44 OF THE CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL CODE TO ADJUST THE PARKING STANDARDS FOR LIBRARIES. 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 sigruficant 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 30 days of date of issuance. DATED: OCTOBER 25, 1990 CASE NO: ZCA 90-1 MICHAEL J. HaZmLER Planning Director APPLICANT: CITY OF CARLSBAD PUBLISH DATE: NOVEMBER 1, 1990 MG:h 2075 Las Palmas Drive - Carlsbad, California 92009-4859 - (619) 438-1 161 t .. .m 0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART IX (TO BE COMPLETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT) CASE NO. ZCA 90-1 DATE: OCTOBER 25, 1990 3ACKGROUND 1. CASE NAME: AMENDMENT OF LIBRARY PARKING STANDARDS 2. APPLICANT: CITY OF CARLSBAD 3. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: 2075 LAS PALMAS DW CARLSBAD, CA 92008 (619) 438-1161 4. DATE EIA FORM PART I SUBMITTED: OCTOBER 23,1990 5. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: REVISION OF CHAPTER 21.44 OF THE CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL CODE TO ADJUST PARKING STANDARDS FOR LIBRARIES. WIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 'ATE CEQA GUIDELINES, Chapter 3, Article 5, section 15063 requires that the City conduct an tvironmental Impact Assessment to determine if a project may have a significant effect on the environment. Le Environmental Impact Assessment appears in the following pages in the form of a checklist. This checklist xttifies any physical, biological and human factors that might be impacted by the proposed project and ovides the City with information to use as the basis for deciding whether to prepare an Environmental lpact Report or Negative Declaration. A Negative Declaration may be prepared if the City perceives no substantial evidence that the project or any of its aspects may cause a sigruficant effect on the environment. On the checklist, "NO" will be checked to indicate this determination. An EIR must be prepared if the City determines that there is substantial evidence that any aspect of the project may cause a sinnificant effect on the environment. The project may qualify for a Negative Declaration however, if adverse impacts are mitigated so that environmental effects can be deemed insimificant. These findings are shown in the checklist under the headings "YES-sig" and "YES-insig" respectively. iiscussion of potential impacts and the proposed mitigation measures appears at the end of the form under SCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION. Particular attention should be given to discussing tigation for impacts which would otherwise be determined significant. VILL 1. ?. 3. b. b. I 1. 1. .. a PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY Result in unstable earth conditions or increase lhhe 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 E3 E& - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - NO X X X X - X X X X X X X .. W 0 BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT ILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY ?. Affect the diversity of species, habitat or numbers of any species of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass, microflora and aquatic plants)? %I. Introduce new species of plants into an area, or a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? .I Reduce the amount of acreage of any agricultural crop or affect prime, unique or other farmland of state or local importance? i. Affect the diversity of species, habitat or numbers of any species of animals (birds, land animals, all water dwelling organisms and insects? gis xgl - - - - - . Introduce new species of animals into an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? HUMANENVIRONMENT :LL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: . Alter the present or planned land use of an area? . Substantially affect public utilities, schools, police, fire, emergency or other public services? - - xgs YES (iw3) - - - -5- NO X X X X X NO X X a ENVIRONMENT VILL THE PROPOSAL, DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: 9. Result in the need for new or modified sewer systems, solid waste or hazardous waste control systems? :O. Increase existing noise levels? I. Produce new light or glare? 2. Involve a significant risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances pesticides, chemicals or radiation)? (including, but not limited to, oil, 3. Substantially alter the density of the human population of an area? 4. Affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing? 5. Generate substantial additional traffic? i. Affect existing parking facilities, or create a large demand for new parking? 7. Impact existing transportation systems or alter present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? 3. Alter waterborne, rail or air traffic? ?. Increase traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? I. Interfere with emergency response plans or emergency evacuation plans? . Obstruct any scenic vista or create an aesthetically offensive public view? 1. Affect the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? -4- e YES (sk) YES (Insig) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - NO X X X X X X X X X X - X X X X ,. a 0 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE YILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: 3. 4. 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. 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.) i. Does the project have the possible environmental effects which are in- dividually limited but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively 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.) 1. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? E? E8 NO - X X - - X - - X - - -5- 1 .* a e DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION The project involves the evaluation and subsequent adjustment of the zoning code governing the parking requirements for libraries. Prelminary research has indicated that the current standard is too restrictive. The new standard would consequently relax the present ratio of one space per one hundred and fifty square feet of library space to perhaps one space per two-hundred or two-hundred and fifty square feet. Since this zone code amendment deals with only a parking development standard and all subsequent library development projects will receive an individual, site-specific environmental review, no environmental impacts are anticipated. PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT 1 - 4. Since no site-specific project is proposed with this zone code amendments, no changes in topography that would result in unstable earth conditions, erosion of soils, or alteration of deposition patterns will occur. No geological impacts will result from this proposal. 5 - 8. As this project is completely administrative and proposes no specific site development, no affects to air quality or climatological indices are expected. Each library project that will be subject to the new parking standards will undergo site specific environmental review that will evaluate potential impacts to watercourses and the quantity and quality of various water sources. 9 - 10. This zone code amendment does not involve any development project and, therefore, will not deplete any natural 'resources or other forms of energy. 11. Only a site specific environmental review for a particular library development could identify the existence of a significant archeological, paleontological or historical structure or object on site. This administrative, non-project specific zone code amendment, therefore, has no historical impacts. BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT 12 - 16. Because this zone code amendment proposes no actual development, and because each library development will be reviewed for possible biologically-related impacts no impacts to the diversity of flora and fauna condition of ecosystems, or agricultural areas and farmlands are anticipated. HUMAN ENVIRONMENT 17. This amendment to the zoning code does not affect any land use issues. It merely alters the parking requirement for a specific land use. 18 - 19. The reduction in parking required for library developments will not, in and of itself, affect the supply or demand for any public utilities or services. -6- .. m e 20 - 22. Since no site-specific development is associated with this zone code amendment, no site related nuisances such as excessive noise, light and glare, release of hazardous substances, and explosion will occur. 23-24. As this zone code amendment deals only with the parking standards for libraries, no impacts to either the density of human population or the housing supply are expected. 25. See #17 below. 26. The new parking standard recommended for the zoning code will be a product of research into the parking needs of libraries and current library parking situations. As such, this zone code amendment should not create a demand for new parking as the parking required by the zoning code will be sufficient. The only existing library parking lot within the City may be brought into conformance by this zone code amendment. 27 - 30. Since this amendment proposal does not propose site specific development, no impacts to existing transportation systems or waterborne, rail, or air traffic will occur. The possibility of a specific library project producing traffic hazards or interfering with emergency circulation plans will be evaluated on a project-by-project basis. 31 - 32. As this zone code amendment involves no physical development, no obstruction of scenic vistas or diminishing of existing recreational opportunities are anticipated. 33. See #11 and #12 above. 34 - 36. Since the project does not propose any site specific development and, as shown above, it does not affect any geological, biological, or cultural resources, neither long-term nor cumulative negative environmental impacts will result from this action. -7- .* w W NALYSES OF VIABLE ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT SUCH AS: a) Phased development of the project, b) alternate site designs, d) alternate uses for the site, e) development at some future time rather than now, f) alternate sites for the proposed, and g) no project alternative. c) alternate scale of development, A) No development is proposed with this action therefore no phasing or postponement of development is possible. B) No site specific development is associated with this proposal therefore discussion of alternate site designs, scale of development, uses of site or sites C) See B above. D) See B above. E) See A above. F) See B above. G) The no project alternative would be contrary to that indicates that a previous research change in library parking standards is necessary. This may result in unnecessary parking on sites that could accommodate increased library project area or landscaping. MG:lh -8- '. c rn v IETERMINATION (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 NEGATM DECLARATION will be prepared. - I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there wil 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 ENVIRONMENTA! IMPACT REPORT is required. + ,~ Signature ifIl~!LjO Planning Director w U LIST MITIGATING MEASURES (IF APPLICABLE) ATTACH MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM (IF APPLICABLE) -9- w w PPLICANT 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-