HomeMy WebLinkAbout1991-03-06; Planning Commission; Resolution 31911
2
3
4
5
6
7
a
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
1E
19
2c
21
22
22
24
25
26
27
28
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3191
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA APPROVING A NEGATIVE
DECLARATION FOR A PLANNING COMMISSION
DETERMINATION OF GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY TO
PROVIDE FOR THE PROTECTION OF CARLSBAD
BOULEVARD BY THE CONSTRUCTION OF A SEAWALL AND
THE PLACEMENT OF ROCK REVETMENTS.
CASE NAME: CARLSBAD BOULEVARD SHORE PROTECTION
CASE NO.: PCD/GPC 91-1
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 6th day of March, 1991,
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 January 31, 1991, and "PII", dated January 22, 1991,
attached hereto and made a part hereof, based on the following findings:
Findinns:
1.
2.
3.
The initial study shows that there is no substantial evidence that the project may
have a significant impact on the environment.
There are no sensitive resources located onsite or located so as to be significantly
impacted by this project.
The project's design including anti-gditi treatment and an art design, reduce
visual aesthetic impacts to insignificance.
,I
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
a
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
1E
19
2c
21
22
22
24
25
26
27
28
4. The project will protect Carlsbad Boulevard from future costly storm damage while
maintaining and enhancing beach access and recreational opportunities.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 6th day of March, 1991, by
the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST:
Chairperson Holmes, Commissioners: Schlehuber, Schramm,
McFadden, Erwin, Marcus & Hall.
None.
None.
None.
MICHAEL J. HVOLZMLER
PLANNING DIRECTOR
PC RES0 NO. 3191
n
W ROBERT HOLMES, Chairperson
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
-2-
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
PROJECT ADDRESSLOCATION: West side of Carlsbad Boulevard adjacent to Agua
Hedionda Lagoon.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Shoreline protection measures designed to protect Carlsbad
Boulevard from storm damage. Involves the construction of a 2,200 foot long, 3.5 foot high
seawall with access points and art design, a structurally similar seawall 290 feet in length and
slope stabilization.
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. If you have any questions, please call Eriwunoz in the Planning
Department at 438-1161, extension 4441.
DATED: January 31, 1991
CASE NO: PCD/GPC 91-1
APPLICANT City of Carlsbad
PUBLISH DATE: January 31,,, 1991
EM:rvo
r""" J. HoUMItLER
Planning Director
2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, California 92009-4859 (619) 438-1 161
%e r)TE Belau:
Project Title: PCD/I;PC 91-1 - Carlsbad Boulevard Seawall
Lead Agency: City of Carlsbd Contact Person: Eric H
Street Address: 2075 Las Patnm$- Phone: (619) 138-1161. ext. 1141
City: Carlsbad Zip: County: San Diego
PROJECT LOCATIQI:.
county: San Diego Ci ty/Nearest Connni ty: Carlsbad
cross Streets: On west side of Carlsbad Boulevard Total Acres:
AssesSorlS Parcel Mo. 210-010-13 Section: --- Tup. --- Range: --- Base: ---
Within 2 Miles: State Hwy #: 1-5 YatWWayS: Pacific Ocean/Aaua Hedionda Laaoon
___________"_______""""""""""..........""-""--"-""--"-....."-"""""..""."""""""."""""~."
".
Airports: --- Rai lways: ATSBF Schools: "_ _"___________"____"""""""""""""""."""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
WaWEWT TIP€
QaA: - MOP - Supplrmcnt/Subraqwnt YEPA: - NO1 OTWR: - Joint Docunent - Early Cons - EIR (Prior SCH No.) EA Final Docunent
X Neg Dec - Other - - - Draft EIS - Other - Draft EIR - FWSI ______"___"_______""""""""""".""""""""""."......"""""""""""""""""""""""""""" -
LOCAL ACTIol TYPE - General Plan Update - Specific Plan Rezone Annexation
General Plan Ameodmtnt Master Plan General Plan Elmnt Comnunity Plan - Site Plan - Land Division (SuMivision, X Other Plmim Camissicn
- - - Prezone Plod Unit Developrrnt - Use Permit
Parcel Hap, Tract Hap, etc.) Dettrmination/Ceneral PLan
- R edeve 1 opncn t
Coastal Permit - - - - - -
Consistency (PCD/GPC)
- Residential: Units Acres Sq. Ft. Acres Enpl oyeer
Comnrcial: Sq. Ft. Acres Enpl oyees - Industrial: Sq. Ft. Acres . ErrplOyeeS - Edwatiorul - Recreational
- Office: -
- Water Facilities: Type MCD - Transportation: Type - Wining: Mineral - Pmr : Type 'darts - Uaate Treatment: Type - Hazardour Waste: Type - Other: Shoreline Drotection seawall and rock X revetments
.___."_.._.__.__"_"""""""--.""""."""""""""""""."."""""".".."""""""-"-"".""--"--"-"-
PROJECT 1-S DIS&SED IN WCulEWT
- X Aesthetic/VisuaL - Flood PlaifVFlooding Schools/Universitiea Uater Quality Agricultural Land Forest LWCire Hazard - Septic Syatrn 'dater Supply/
Air Puality - - Gcologic/Seiamic Sewer Capacity Ground Water
Archacological/Historicrl - - Minerals Soil Erosion/Carprction/Grading - Uetland/Riparian
Drainage/Absorption Popllation/Harring Balance - Toxic/Hazardwr
Ecmic/ Jobs Public Servicr*/Facilities - Traffic/Circulation Landuse
Fiscal
- - - - - -
.- X Coastal Zone - Noi sa Solid YIatr 'di ldlife - - - Growth Inducing - - - - - X Recrcation/Parkr - Vegetation Cunulative Effect - - - x Other Safety - "___"__________.__.""""""""""""""""""""""."".""""""""""""--"---"---"---""---"-"--"
Present Lrd wlZmine/cllml Plm UI.
The project area is on the west si* of a Prim Arterial - Carlsbd Boulevard bordring a long bach with the Pacific Ocean bYd.
The zoning and General Plan dorignations are Opn SpKe. ......................................................................................
Project Deuriptim
Shoreline protection measures designed to protect Carlsbd Boulevard nd arrociatd inprovcnmtr frarn storm WgC including (1)
a 2,200 foot long seawall, 3.5 feet in elevation fram the adjacent ridrwlk, (2) I similar wall 290 feet in lmth and (3) rock
revetments dosigned to stabilize an existing atop supporting southband tams on Carlsbrd Boulevard. See attached Location Hap.
MOTE: Clearinghouse will asrign identification nrnkrr for all IWY projects. If I SCH nukr already exists for I project (e.0.
from a Notice of Preparation or previous draft documt) please fill it in. Revised October 1989 EM: rvc
BACKGROUND
1. CASE
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART tI
(TO BE COMPLETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT)
CASE NO. PCD/GPC 91-1
DATE: Januarv 22. 1991
NAME: Carlsbad Boulevard Seawall
2. APPLICANT: Citv of Carlsbad
3. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: 2075 Las Palmas Drive
Carlsbad. CA 92009
(619) 438-1161
4. DATE EIA FORM PART I SUBMITED: Julv 27.1990
5. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Shoreline protection measures desimed to Drotect Carlsbad Boulevard from storm damage. Involves the construction of 2.200
foot lonn. 3.5 foot high seawall with access points and an art
desim. a similar seawall 290 feet in lennth - and sloDe stabilization.
The Droiect area is on the west side of Carlsbad Boulevard adiacent
to Asma Hedionda Lanoon.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
STATE CEQA GUIDELINES, Chapter 3, Article 5, section 15063 requires that the City conduct an Environmental Impact
Assessment to determine if a project may have a significant effect on the environment. The Environmental Impact
Assessment appears in the following pages in the form of a checklist. This checklist identifies any physical, biological
and human factors that might be impacted by the proposed project and provides the City with information to use as the
basis for deciding whether to prepare an Environmental Impact 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 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 sidcant 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.
A discussion of potential impacts and the proposed mitigation measures appears at the end of the form under
DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION. Particular attention should be given to discussing mitigation for impacts which would otheMrise be determined significant.
.. A
PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT
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
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 archeological,
paleontological or historical site,
structure or object?
YES YES
(si@ (insig)
NO
X -
X
X -
X -
X
X -
X -
X
X
-
-
X -
-2-
BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT
WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTIY OR INDIRECTLY: YES YES
(sip) (insip) NO
Affect the diversity of species, habitat
or numbers of any species of plants (including
trees, shrubs, grass, microflora and aquatic
plants)?
12.
13.
* 14.
15.
16.
X
Introduce new species of plants into an area,
or a barrier to the normal replenishment of
existing species? X
Reduce the amount of acreage of any
agricultural crop or affect prime, unique
or other fannland of state or local
importance?
0
X -
Affect the diversity of species, habitat
or numbers of any species of animals (birds,
land animals, all water dwelling organisms
and insects? X
X -
NO
Introduce new species of animals into an
area, or result in a banier to the
migration or movement of animals?
HUMANENVIRON"'
WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: YES (si& YES
(Ma)
17. Alter the present or planned land use
of an area? X -
X -
18. Substantially affect public utilities,
schools, police, fie, emergency or other public services?
-3-
.. P
HUMANmoNMENT
WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY:
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
Result in the need for new or modified sewer
systems, solid waste or hazardous waste
control systems?
Increase existing noise levels?
Produce new light or glare?
Involve a sigruficant risk of an explosion
or the release of hazardous substances
(including, but not limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation)?
Substantially alter the density of the
human population of an area?
Affect existing housing, or create a demand
for additional housing?
Generate substantial additional traffic?
Affect existing parking facilities, or
create 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 pedesmans?
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?
YES (insig)
x
NO
X
X
X
-
-
X -
X -
X
X
-
-
X -
X -
X -
X -
X -
4-
MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
WILL THE PROPOSAL DtRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY:
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-
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?
YES YES NO
(sip) (insig)
X
X
X -
X -
-5-
DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
Proiect DescriDa
This project involves the protection of the improvements and utilities associated with the recent Carlsbad
Boulevard widening. The City Council declared its intent of reconstxucting and widening Carlsbad Boulevard
though Council Resolution No. 7770 after the storm damage of the 1983 winter season. The Carlsbad
Boulevard widening was intended to be followed by the implementation of an unspecified shore protection
measure.
A feasibility study was performed by Woodward-Clyde Consultants to assess various shore protection
measures. Ultimately, a vertical, anchored steel sheet pile wall with a concrete cap was identified as the most
effective and cost-beneficial shore protection measure. City Council Resolution No, 90-242, approved in July
1990, approved a consultant agreement with Woodward-Clyde to prepare the design for the Carlsbad
Boulevard shore protection project.
The project area, as shown on Attachment "A", is approximately 2,600 feet in length on the west side of
existing Carlsbad Boulevard between the inflow jetty on the north side of Agua Hedionda Lagoon and the
warm water outflow jetty on the south side of the lagoon. This stretch of beach is the area of Carlsbad
Boulevard's lowest elevation averaging + 13 to + 16 feet above Mean Sea Level Datum. The average beach
width is 150 to 200 feet with one to six inch diameter cobbles covered by a thin summer time sand layer
averaging one to three feet in thickness which gets removed during the winter wave season. All these facrors
result in the periodic overtopping and washing out of Carlsbad Boulevard during episodes of high tides and
high wave conditions. This stretch of Carlsbad Boulevard has historically been washed out during such events
resulting in the closure of Carlsbad Boulevard and costly repairs.
The Carlsbad Boulevard improvements that require protection include a divided roadway with a median,
parallel parking on the west side, sidewalks on both sides, landscaping and lighting. In addition, there are
utilities including a 12 inch water main, a four inch H.P. gas main, telephone lines, electrical lines and storm
drains.
The wall selected and being proposed is approximately 2,200 feet long with a vertical, anchored steel sheet
pile wall with a concrete cap which will tie into the existing rock revetments near the jetties at each end of
the project area. There will be five recessed breaks in the wall to allow for beach access approximately every
300 feet in the?orm of three vehicle access ramps and two stairways. Funding for this project is anticipated
from the State of California, Department of Boating and Waterways and appropriated funds from the City of
Carlsbad.
This main seawall will feam an art design the straight-away sections and amenities within the vehicle
ramp areas including one foot raised viewing platforms, benches, trash receptacles, palm tree, lifeguard tower
and drinking fountains. These features are shown on Attachments "B" - "D".
As also shown on Attachment "A", there are two other components to the Carlsbad Boulevard shore protection
project. One is another wall, structurally similar to the one already described, about 290 feet in length
located between the south side of the waxm water outflow jetty and the smaller finger jetty to the south. The
other component is some new rock revetment to be tied into the existing bluff and bedrock toe approximately
380 feet in length located south of the small finger jetty. This project includes the acquisition of easements
from San Diego Gas and Electric and State Lands to implement the scope of the proposed shore protection
measures. The primary environmental issue is potential visual/aesthetic impacts.
-6-
I-
DISCUSSION OF .ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION (cont'd)
Phvsical Environment
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
No unstable earth conditions will result from the construction of the proposed seawall. The seawall's
location is on a natural barrier beach with no known seismic activity. No geologic hazards, therefore,
will be exposed to people or property. The component of this project involving the rock revetment on
the slope adjacent to the southbound lanes of Carlsbad Boulevard is designed to stabilize that slope
from otherwise imminent failure. Therefore, this part of the project will reverse an unstable earth
condition and eliminate the potential of slope failure and possible damage to Carlsbad Boulevard and
people.
The predominately flat beach topography will not be altered by the construction of the seawall or the
placement of the proposed rock revetment. The proposed slope stabilization with rock.revetment also .
will not alter the existing topography. No unique physical features are located in the project area.
The slope to be stabilized on the south end of the project area will not experience any more erosion
which could lead to its failure. With Carlsbad Boulevard on the east side of the seawall and beach
sands on the west side, the erosion of soils on or off the site is not a pertinent issue.
The proposed project will not cause the modification of a river or stream bed or the modification of the
bottom of the Pacific Ocean or Agua Hedionda Lagoon. There will be some changes in the deposition
of beach sands. Carlsbad Boulevard, in its current unprotected state, experiences episodic overwash
conditions during high tide/high "wave events. Also, with the dominant northwest winds which can
reach gale force levels, beach sands get blown over Carlsbad Boulevard and ultimately into Agua
Hedionda Lagoon. The seawall is designed for the episodic overwash events which occur with an approximate frequency of every 3-5 years. The overwash carries beach sands and debris which
combined with the sea water and its associated storm force, will damage Carlsbad Boulevard and
adjacent improvements. The seawall will also act as a banier to wind blown beach sands crossing
Carlsbad Boulevard. The barrier effect of the seawall will also indirectly enhance the adjacent area of
Agua Hedionda Lagoon by preventing the eventual deposition of beach sands which can lead to adverse
physical and biological conditions.
The construction of the seawall may create an insignificant short term impact to air quality by the
operation of machinery. The seawall itself and associated improvements/ amenities will have no impact
on air quality.
The project will have no impact to movement, odor, moisture or temperature.
The proposed seawall will have no interaction with the water of Agua Hedionda Lagoon. By design,
the seawall will act as a barrier to the onshore flow of Ocean water during overwash and storm events.
The construction of the seawall will not involve any contact with the underlying water table. Surface
water and public water supplies will not be affected, however, through irrigation, public water will be
used for some of the seawall's amenities (landscaping, drinking fountains).
The project does not involve the usage or depletion of any natural resources.
-7-
DtSCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION (cont'a
10. The only use of fuel and energy associated with this project will be during construction and is not a
significant impact.
11. There are no archaeological, paleontological or culturd objects or structures on this beach site.
Bioloaical Environment
12,/13 The project site does not contain any plant species or habitats. Palm trees will be used for landscaping,
14. The project site is not associated with any agricultural lands or crops.
15i16The project site does not contain any animal species or habitats. * No new animal species will be
introduced and the seawall will not act as a barrier to animal movement since the site does not
currently act as a corridor for animal movementhnigration.
Human Environment
17. The proposed project is consistent with the Open Space land use designation.
18. The seawall and associated amenities will be adequately served by existing City facilities and services
for water, police patrol, maintenance, etc.
19. The project will not have any additional demand for sewer or solid waste systems. No hazardous waste
will be involved with or generated by the project.
20. Noise levels may be increased during the construction of the seawall but no significant, long term noise
impacts will result fYom the project.
21. Carlsbad Boulevard is already lighted and no new source of light or glare are proposed.
22. Standard construction techniques will be used for the seawall so no risk of explosion or upset is
anticipated.
23/24The project will have no impact on the area's density or housing demands.
25/26The project will not impact the southbound traffic flow on Carlsbad Boulevard or reduce the number
of parking spaces adjacent to the sidervalk. Due to the proposed amenities there may be an increase
in the number of pedestrians and general public using the area for recreation.
27. The project is designed to protect Cqlsbad Boulevard and its improvements from damage by the ocean
so it will aid in the circulation and movement of goods and people that Carlsbad Boulevard provides.
28. Waterborne, rail and air traffic will not be affected by the proposed seawall and associated
improvements. The project site is not involved in any way with these forms of transportation.
-a-
-
DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION (cont'dl
29.
30.
31.
32.
Traffic hazards will not be increased to motor vehicles or bicyclists. The project will not impact the
existing roadway or bicycle lane of Carlsbad Boulevard. Pedestrian traffic hazards may be reduced since
the seawall's design allows for pedestrian use and flow.
The seawall is designed to allow for efficient emergency response in the form of three ramps for
lifeguard truck access to the beach.
The 3.5 foot high seawail will not obstruct the ocean view from approximately car level observation
The wall presents a potential for the creation of an offensive public view. This potential impact has
been reduced to insignificance due to the seawall's design which incorporates an art element. As shown
on Attachment "B", the proposed fish pattern will add an aesthetic component to the long linear
portions of the wall. The design of the three life guard ramp areas include amenities and a palm tree
to improve the wall's usage and appearance. The project's budget included the contracting of an artist
to develop the seawall's aesthetics/art design. The development of the art design from its conceptual
stages was reviewed by the City's Municipal Projects Department as well as the Planning Department.
The design was also reviewed and approved by the City's Arts Commission and Public Art Committee
which both represent Citizen input and approval of public art. The wall's design will also feature the
application of graffiti-proof treatment.
The quality and quantity of existing recreational opportunities will be improved by the proposed
amenities including drinking fountains, benches and viewing ramps. Pedestrian access to the beach will
be provided by two pedestrian ramps as well as the three lifeguard ramps. The viewing ramps and
drinking fountains and overall design of the seawall allow for handicap accessibility and usage.
-9-
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) alternate sites for the proposed, and
g) no project alternative.
Phasing the development of the seawall is not necessary nor desirable since that would provide for
only partial protection of Carlsbad Boulevard. Phasing the proposed amenities (art design) would
also be non-desirable and could lead to significant visual impacts.
The proposed site design incorporates art design and function to protect Carlsbad Boulevard. Other
shore protection measures were assessed but the proposed seawall's type and size were determined
to be the most effective and cost beneficial.
A smaller scale seawall may not provide the required degree of protection while a larger scale
seawall would be an excessive shore protection measure.
No other uses are appropriate on this site. The proposed project allows for pedestrian flow, beach
access and usage, handicap accessibility to the beach area, lifeguard operations and the opportunity
for public art.
Development at some future time or the no project alternative would leave Carlsbad Boulevard in
its current unprotected state which is not the intent of the City Council.
-10-
DETERMINATION (To Be Completed By The Planning Department)
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
- X 1 find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE
DECLARATION will be prepared.
- 1 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.
Date
EM:No
LIST MITIGATING MEASURES (IF APPLICABLE)
ATTACH MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM (IF ApPLIwLa
-1 1-