HomeMy WebLinkAbout1990-12-19; Planning Commission; Resolution 31730 0
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
28
1
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3173
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA APPROVING A NEGATIVE
DECLARATION FOR THE INSTALLATION OF A STORM
DRAIN, CURB, GUTTER, AND SIDEWALK ALONG THE
NORTH SIDE OF OAK AVENUE BETWEEN ROOSEVELT
STREET AND THE AT&SF RAILROAD.
CASE NAME: OAK AVENUE IMPROVEMENTS
CASE NO.: PCD/GPC 90-8
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 19th 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 November 9, 1990, and "PII", dated November 15, 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 project may
have a significant impact on the environment.
2. The site has been previously graded pursuant to an earlier environmental analysis.
...
...
1
0 0
1 II
2 /I PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning
3
4 by the following vote, to wit:
hnmission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 19th day of December, 1990,
5
6
AYES: Chairperson Schramm, Commissioners: Schlehuber, Holmes,
Erwin & Marcus.
I
7
8
ABSTAIN: Commissioner Hall. 9
ABSENT: Commissioner McFadden.
NOES: None.
IO
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ATTEST:
" .
jw A/ ,A/."fl
e L.gr& a,
SHARON SCHRA", Chairperson
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
Y MICHAEL J. HOLZMILLER
PLANNING DIRECTOR
26
27 PC RES0 NO. 3173 -2-
28
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
PROJECT ADDRESS/LOCATION: The north side of Oak Avenue between
Roosevelt Street and the AT&SF railroad right-
of-way in the City of Carlsbad.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Improvements to the storm drain, curb, gutter and
sidewalk.
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 significant 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.
d
DATED: November 15, 1990
CASE NO; PCD/GPC 90-8 Planning Director
APPLICANT: City of Carlsbad
PUBLISH DATE: November 15, 1990
2075 Las Palmas Drive - Carlsbad. California 92009-4859 (61 9) 438-1 161
0
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART II
(TO BE COMPLETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT)
CASE NO. PCD/GPC 90-8
DATE: NOVEMBER 9. 1990
CKGROUND
1. CASE NAME: Oak Avenue ImDrovements
2. APPLICANT: Citv of Carlsbad
3. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: 2075 Las Palmas Drive
Carlsbad, CA 92008
(619)438-1161 ext. 4383
4. DATE EIA FORM PART I SUBMITTED: SeDtember 11. 1990
5. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Installation of a storm drain and immovements to the curb, mtter,
and sidewalk.
NVlRONMENTAL IMPACTS
TATE CEQA GUIDELINES, Chapter 3, Article 5, section 15063 requires that the City conduct an
nvironmental Impact Assessment to determine if a project may have a significant effect on the environment.
he Environmental Impact Assessment appears in the following pages in the form of a checklist. This checklist
dentifies any physical, biological and human factors that might be impacted by the proposed project and
npact Report or Negative Declaration.
rovides the City with information to use as the basis for deciding whether to prepare an Environmental
A Negative Declaration may be prepared if the City perceives no substantial evidence that the project or
any of its aspects may cause a significant 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 simificant 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
insinnificant. These findings are shown in the checklist under the headings YES-sig" and f'YES-insig''
respectively.
1 discussion of potential impacts and the proposed mitigation measures appears at the end of the form under
IISCUSSTON OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION. Particular attention should be given to discussing
nitigation for impacts which would otherwise be determined significant.
w PHYSICAL ENVIR0N"r W
WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY:
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
any bay, inlet or lake? river or stream or the bed of the ocean or
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 archeological,
paleontological or historical site,
structure or object?
YES YES NO
(sid (insis)
X -
X -
X
X - - -
X
X
X - -
X -
X
X -
X - -
-2-
b 0
BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT
ILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECILY OR INDIRECTLY YES YES NO
(sip, (insip,
2. Affect the diversity of species, habitat
or numbers of any species of plants (including
trees, shrubs, grass, microflora and aquatic
plants)? - - X
3. Introduce new species of plants into an area,
or a barrier to the normal replenishment of
existing species? X
4. Reduce the amount of acreage of any
agricultural crop or affect prime, unique
or other farmland of state or local
importance? X - -
5. Affect the diversity of species, habitat
or numbers of any species of animals (birds,
land animals, all water dwelling organisms
and insects? - - X
16. Introduce new species of animals into an
area, or result in a barrier to the
migration or movement of animals? - - X
HUMANENVIRONMENT
NILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY
17. Alter the present or planned land use
18. Substantially affect public utilities,
of an area?
schools, police, fire, emergency or other
public services?
YES YES NO
(.rip) (inrig)
-
-
-
-
X -
X -
-3-
w
HUMANENVIRONMENT
WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY:
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?
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 vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians?
30. Interfere with emergency response plans or
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?
w
YES
(+I
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-4-
YES NO (insis)
x
X
X
-
- -
-
- x
X -
X
X
-
-
x -
- x
- x
x -
X -
X - -
X -
e 0
MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
{ILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY:
3. 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
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.
levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or
YES YES NO
(rip) (imip)
X - -
'4, 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.)
15. 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.)
X - -
X -
36. Does the project have environmental
effects which will cause substantial
adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly? X - -
-5-
w w DISCUSSION OF ENVTRONMENTAL EVALUATION
The project involves the installation of a storm drain and curb, gutter, and sidewalk along the northern sidc
of Oak Avenue between Roosevelt Street and the Atchison, Topeka, and Santa Fe railroad right-of-way. Tht
existing roadway is unimproved and occasionally floods. The south side of Oak Avenue is fully improved ir
a similar manner as this curent proposal. The proposed improvements require removal of a maturc
eucalyptus due to sight-distance hazards at the intersection of Oak Avenue and Tyler Street.
PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT
1. All improvements are being undertaken within the existing right-of-way which has been previousl!
disturbed and is currently level. No unstable earth conditions or geologic hazards will result.
2, The site is currently level and the proposed improvements will closely approximate the curren
topography. No unique physical features exist on site.
3. The proposed improvements include curb, gutter, and storm drain that will carry all runoff towards tht
railroad right-of-way. The existing dirt area will be replaced with concrete and therefore imperviou
to erosion.
4. The project site is not in close proximity to any beaches or rivers and, therefore, no effects to depositio
or channel topography will result.
5. Construction of the improvements will produce an incremental increase in air pollutants but this sho~
term introduction of aerosols is not considered to have a significant affect on ambient air quality.
6. The change from a dirt to concrete surface will produce changes in surface temperature and moistur
however the areal extent of these changes causes them to be insignificant.
7. As discussed in #4 above, no alteration of watercourses is anticipated.
8. There will be an increase in impervious surfaces which will increase surface runoff but this will nc
significantly effect the quantity or quality of surface water, groundwater, or public water supply.
9. Besides the incremental insignificant depletion of natural resources (fossil fuels) during constructior
no increase in usage or depletion is anticipated. No significant natural resources have been identifie
on site.
10. See #9 above.
11. No objects or structures of archeological, paleontological, or historical significance exist within tk
previously disturbed right-of-way. A mature eucalyptus tree will be removed, but recording of the tree
existence satisfies requirements of the Historic Preservation Commission.
-6-
0
1. There is currently a mature eucalyptus tree, approximately 40 feet tall, within the area of work. The
city Engineer has determined that the trunk of the tree causes a sight-distance hazard for the northeast
discussed in #I1 above, historical significance can be mitigated by a recording of the trees existence.
No street improvement design can avoid the hazard. To mitigate this tree removal, the City will plant
several Cottonwood trees on the southern side of Oak Avenue, west of State Street. While these four
Cottonwood trees will not reach maturity for many years, this is acceptable mitigation considering the existing hazardous situation,
intersection of Tyler Street and Oak Avenue and has therefore recommended its removal, As briefly
3. The mitigation detailed above involves the introduction of Cottonwoods to the street scene, however,
these are compatible with the street trees recommended for this area.
4. All improvements are within the existing right-of-way which does not include any agricultural land or
farmland, therefore no affects will result.
5. Removal of the eucalyptus tree may influence the habits of local birds, however there is an abundance
of trees in the downtown area -for birds to utilize.
6. No new animals will be introduced with this proposal.
IUMAN ENVIRONMENT:
7. All improvements are within the existing right-of-way and no changes to land use are proposed.
8. The improvement of the street will positively affect the small amount of existing pedestrian traffic.
Improvements to curb, gutter, and storm drain will also positively affect the drainage of the area. No
adverse affects are anticipated.
.9. The improvements include a storm drain for water runoff, however, no new sewer or waste water
systems will be needed.
!O. There will be an incremental increase in noise levels during construction but this increase is not
considered significant.
21. Since the improvements are within the existing right-of-way, no new light and glare is expected. An
insignificant, short term amount of light may exist during construction if nighttime work crews are
involved.
22. No risk of explosion or release of hazardous substances is expected as trenching and paving operatiom
W;ll be relatively confmed.
23. The improvements will not contribute to an increase in population or density as no residentia
development is being proposed.
24. See #23 above.
-7-
2s.
26.
2 7.
28.
29#
30.
31.
32.
33.
34.
35.
- w
The improvements will facilitate pedestrian traffic but will not generate any additional traffic on Oa:
Avenue.
The improvements will allow the existing on-street parking to remain therefore no adverse impacts tc
parking will result.
A short-term impact to circulation will occur during construction, however, this is considere
insignificant in light of the benefits to circulation at the end of the project.
No waterborne, air, or rail traffic exist on site. No improvements are proposed near the railroad track:
During construction, all hazardous areas will be blocked off and demarcated with safety signage anc
as such no significant impacts to motor vehicles, pedestrians, or cyclists are anticipated.
Through circulation for emergency vehicles will be continually provided during construction therefor
no adverse impacts to emergency access are expected.
Since all improvements are within the existing right-of-way, no adverse impacts to scenic visitors a
anticipated. As discussed previously, the removal of the mature eucalyptus will be compensated t
landscaping along the southern side of Oak Avenue.
No recreational opportunities currently exist within the right-of-way, therefore the propose
improvements will not affect recreational opportunities.
The project will not affect any fish or wildlife habitat, endangered species, or eliminate examples c
California history as the entire right-of-way is already disturbed.
The increase in storm flow drainage will provide a long-term benefit as it will reduce the flood potenti; of Oak Avenue and no environmental impacts are being created.
No cumulative impacts are anticipated as the entire right-of-way is already disturbed.
36. No environmental effects are anticipated since the entire right-of-way is already disturbed and therefo~
no effects will cause adverse impacts on human beings.
-8-
0 a VMYSIS OF VIABLE ALTERNATMZS 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) alternate sites for the proposed, and
g) no project alternative.
a) The project is too small to phase and would involve circulation interruption on two
occasions.
b) Alternate site designs do not provide for on-street parking and could cause sight-distance
hazards.
c) The scale of improvements are necessary to accommodate storm flow and provide on-
street parking.
d) The site is already a transportation route and alternate uses would not be logical.
e) The improvements to the storm drain are necessary now as flooding currently occurs on Oak Avenue.
f) Since improvements to Oak Avenue are site-specific and not pertinent to other sites.
g) See "e" above.
-9-
w 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 NEGATlV
DECLARATION will be prepared.
- r find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there wi 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.
,* 2?LA-l,-Lk
/- /,.. /r /q /G
Signature /i'
\>
&, Date
MG:km
LIST MITIGATING MEASURES (IF APPLICABLE)
ATTACH MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM (IF APPLICABLE]
ci
-1 0-
c @
'PLICANT 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
G:h
. -.,
-1 1-