The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1991-07-17; Planning Commission; Resolution 3242'r I( e 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 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3242 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR A LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED WEST OF EL CAMIN0 REAL, NORTH OF ALGA ROAD, SOUTH OF LAS PALMAS DRIVE AND EAST OF THE PACIFIC RIM MASTER PLAN AREA. APPLICANT: JACK HENTHORN & ASSOCIATES CASE NO: LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN - ZONE 21 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 17th day of July, 1991, hold : duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request, and WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony an( arguments, examining the initial study, analyzing the information submitted by staff, an( 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 a: 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 May 2, 1991, and "PII", dated April, 23, 1991, attached hereto and made a part hereof, based on the following findings: FhdirlpS 1. The Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 21 will not cause any signifcant environmental impacts. The plan is a public facilities planning document that implements the existing General Plan. The plan makes generalized projections as to the demand for and supply of public facilities, and outlines the provision oi adequate public facilities concurrent with estimated demands. The plan recognizes that CEQA review will be required prior to mitigation of any public or private issued on May 2, 1991 and recommended for approval by the Planning Commission on July 17, 1991. project that is generally discussed in the plan. A Negative Declaration has been .... 0 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 ~ I I I ~ ' PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 17th day of July, 1991, bJ the following vote, to wit: AYES: Chairperson Holmes, Commissioners: Schlehuber, Savary: Erwin, Noble & Hall. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Schramm. ABSTAIN: None. . . . . -. . -. ". . " V.,W ""I >>:. ROBERT HOLMES, Chairperson CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION ATTEST: PLANNING DIRECTOR ~ ~ PC RES0 NO. 3242 -2- NEGATIVE DECLARATION PROJECT ADDRESS/LOCATION: West of El Camino Real, North of Alga Road, South of Las Palmas Drive, East of the Pacific Rim Master Plan Area. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 21 which guarantees the adequacy of public facilities concurrent with development to adopted performance standards, 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 21 days of date of issuance. If you have any questions, please call Brian Hunter in the Planning Department at 438-1161, extension 4468. DATED: MAY 2,1991 CASE NO: LFMP 21 MICHAEL J. H~LZM~~LER Planning Director APPLICANT: JACK HENTHORN PUBLISH DATE: MAY 2, 1991 BH:vd 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, California 92009-4859 - (619) 438-1 161 e 0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART 11 (TO BE COMPLETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT) BACKGROUND CASE NO. LFMP 21 DATE: APRIL 23, 1991 1 1. CASE NAME: Local Facilities Manaaement Plan Zone 21 2. APPLICANT: Jack Henthom 3. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: 5431-G Avenida Encinas. Carlsbad, CA 92008 (61 9) 438-4090 4. DATE EIA FORM PART I SUBMITTED: December 6. 1990 5. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Local Facilities Management Plan which marantees the adequacy of public facilities concurrent with development to adopted performance standards, ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS STATE CEQA GUIDELINES, Chapter 3, Article 5, section 15063 requires that the City conduct a1 Environmental impact Assessment to determine if a project may have a significant effect on the environmenl The Environmental Impact Assessment appears in the following pages in the form of a checklist. This checklis 8 identifies any physical, biological and human factors that might be impacted by the proposed project an( provides the City with information to use as the basis for deciding whether to prepare an Environment: Impact Report or Negative Declaration. * A Negative Declaration may be prepared if the City perceives no substantial evidence that the project ( any of its aspects may cause a significant effect on the environment. On the checklist, "NO" will be checke to indicate this determination. * An EIR must be prepared if the City determines that there is substantial evidence that any aspect of tt project may cause a sianificant effect on the environment. The project may qualify for a Negatil Declaration however, if adverse impacts are mitigated so that environmental effects can be deemt insimificant. These findings are shown in the checklist under the headings "YES-sig" and "YES-insi respectively. A discussion of potential impacts and the proposed mitigation measures appears at the end of the form und DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION. Particular attention should be given to discussh mitigation for impacts which would otherwise be determined significant. -, 0 PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 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 scils 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- Q YES YES (ski (insig) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - NO X X X x X X X - X X X X m W BIOLOGICAL ENWRONMENT WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: YES YES NO (six) (insig) '8 12. Affect the diversity of species, habitat or numbers of any species of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass, microflora and aquatic plants)? - X 13. Introduce new species of plants into an area, or a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? X 14. Reduce the amount of acreage of any agricultural crop or affect prime, unique or other farmland of state or local importance? X . i .. - 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 banier to the migration or movement of animals? X - X - r"ANENVrR0NMENT WILL 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 (si& (insig) X - - X - - -3- I. 0 Q 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 simcant 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? 4- YES YES NO big) (insig) - X - - X - - X - - - - x " L x - - X - - X - X - - - x - - X - - - x - - X - X - - - - x e 0 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY 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 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 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 bid (insid X - X - X - X -5- 0 0 DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION The Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 21 is a facilities planning document. The intent of the pla is to establish parameters and thresholds that assure public facilities are available when needed as determine by the City's adopted performance standards. The land uses analyzed as taken from the adopted General PlaI Locations and costs of facility improvements are estimates for information purposes only. It is recognized that CEQA review for these public facilities is general and does not satisfy CEQA requiremen for the specific project. The Zone 21 Local Facilities Management Plan requires complete CEQA review pric to initialization of any public or private project discussed in the Local Facilities Management Plan. . i .. - -6- 0 0 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. a) The project is a public facility informational planning study. Phased planning will not efficiently adequately address the need for public facilities. b) The project is a public facility information and planning study. c) The project is a public facility information and planning study. d) Uses within the plan reflect the existing General Plan. $ The plan considers phased development. f) The project is a public facility information and planning study. g) The no project alternative would not assure public facilities to meet demand and is therefore the ml .- detrimental. -7- 0 0 DETERMINATION (To Be Completed By The Planning Department) On the basis of this initial evaluation: z 1 find the proposed projecr COULD NOT have a sigmficant effect on the environment, and a NEGATY DECLARATION will be prepared. - I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, because t environmental effects of the proposed project have already been considered in conjunction w previously certified environmental documents and no additional environmental review is requirc Therefore, a Notice of Determination has been prepared. - I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there v 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 ENVIRONMENT, IMPACT REPORT is required. 4-23-91 &&AdW Date Signature +Iwp? t Date LIST MITIGATING MEASURES (IF APPLICABLE] ATTACH MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM (IF APPLICABLE) -a- e SPLICANT 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 TfiE PROJECT. Date Signature !H:vd -9-