Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1991-12-04; Planning Commission; Resolution 3325.. ,, I < n W 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. 3325 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA APPROVING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW A TEMPORARY EMERGENCY SHELTER FOR 50 MIGRANT WORKERS ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF IMPALA Dm BETWEEN PALMER WAY AND ORION WAY. CASE NAME: LA POSADA GUADALUPE DE CARLSBAD CASE NO: CUP 91-10 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 4th day of December, 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. €3) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Planning Commission hereby APPROVES the Negative Declaration according to Exhibit "ND", dated November 14, 1991, and "PIL", dated October 11, 1991, attached hereto and made a part hereof, based on the following findings: Findinm: 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. 3. The streets are adequate in size to handle traffic generated by the proposed project. 4. There are no sensitive resources located onsite or located so as to be significantly impacted by this project. I( 1. t f ll @ @ /I PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planninj 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 4th day of December, 1991 by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Chairman Holmes, Commissioners: Schlehuber, Savary, Erwin, Nobl & Hall. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Schramm. __ . ,I_. . .". ABSTAIN: None. .>. % . ,. 3 " ROBERT HOLMES, Chairperson CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION !I 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 I 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 PC RES0 NO. 3325 -2- I. w .e> NEGATIVE DECLARATION t PROJECT ADDRESS/LOCATION: North side of Impala Drive between Palmer Way and Orion Way in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Temporary emergency shelter for homeless migrant workers in four modular structures. 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 Mike Grim in the Planning Department at 438-1161, extension 4499. DATED: NOVEMBER 14, 1991 -m, CASE NO: CUP 91-10 8$7 Planning Director APPLICANT: CATHOLIC CHARITIES OF SAN DIEGO PUBLISH DATE: NOVEMBER 14,1991 MG:km 2075 Las Palmas Drive - Carlsbad, California 92009-4859 * (619) 438-1 161 I. w ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART tI (TO BE COMPLETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT) CASE NO. CUP 91-10 DATE: OCTOBER 11.19' BACKGROUND t 1. CASE NAME: LA.POSADA GUADALUPE DE CARLSBAD 2. APPLICANT: CATHOLIC CHARITIES 3. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: 349 CEDAR STREET SAN DIEGO. CA 92101 (619) 231-2828 4. DATE EIA FORM PART I SUBMITTED: AUGUST 2,1991 5. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: TEMPORARY EMERGENCY SHELTER FOR HOMELESS MEN THREE MODULAR STRUCTURES. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS STATE CEQA GUIDELINES, Chapter 3, Article 5, section 15063 requires that the City conduct Environmental Impact Assessment to determine if a project may have a significant effect on the environm The Environmental Impact Assessment appears in the following pages in the fokn of a checklist. This chec: 8 identifies any physical, biological and human factors that might be impacted by the proposed project provides the City with information to use as the basis for deciding whether to prepare an Environmt Impact Report or Negative Declaration. * A Negative Declaration may be prepared if the City perceives no substantial evidence that the proje any of its aspects may cause a significant effect on the environment. On the checklist, "NO" will be che to indicate this determination. * An EIR must be prepared if the City determines that there is substantial evidence that any aspect o project may cause a sidcant effect on the environment. The project may qualify for a Neg Declaration however, if adverse impacts are mitigated so that environmental effects can be dec insianificant. These findings are shown in the checklist under the headings "YES-sig" and 'YES-i respectively. A discussion of potential impacts and the proposed mitigation measures appears at the end of the form I DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION. Particular attention should be given to &sa mitigation for impacts which would otherwise be determined significant. 1. 1 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? r 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 come 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 fud or energy? 11. Alter a significant archeological, paleontological or historical site, structure or object? -2- V YES YES NO big) (insig) X - - - X - - X - - X - - X - - X - - X - - X - - X X - - - - - X - - - ,. a. 0 w BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: 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? HUMANENVIRONMENT WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: 17. Alter the present or planned land use of an area? YES YES NO (si@ (insig) X 7 - - X - - X - - X - - - X - - - YES YES NO (sit!) (insid X - - - 18. Substantially affect public utilities, schools, police, fire, emergency or other public services? - - X - -3- ') P I"ANENvl[RomENT MLL 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. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. Produce new light or glare? Involve a significant 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 pedestrians? 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? -4- w YES (sig) - - - - - - - - - - - - - YES (insig) - - - - - - - - - - - - - NO x X X X X x - X - X X X X X X - X - .. c w MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE A WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: YES YES NO d big) (insig) 33. Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat o€ 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.) X - - X - - 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.) X - - 36. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? X - - - -5- I. @ w XSCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION The project involves the temporary location of three modular structures on temporary foundations on a pre-graded, industrial infill lot. No grading will be required for the development nd the driveway and parking lot will be surfaced with decomposed granite. The site will be fenced and landscaped and overhead exterior lighting will be provided for safety. Based upon field visits to the disturbed infill site, staff has concluded that no adverse environmental impacts will result from this proposal. I PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT 1. No grading is proposed for the existing, pregarded industrial pad, therefore no geologic hazards or unstable soil conditions are anticipated. 2. No topographic changes are proposed and no unique physiographic features exist on the 3. While the site will be landscaped and irrigated, all drainage will be directed to the street site, therefore, no;impacts will result. and no ovefflow down surrounding slopes should occw. As groundcovers are proposed, no impacts due to erosion of soils is expected. 4. No beaches or stream channels exist on or near the site and no modification to such will occur. 5. While no standard traffic generation route excess for this use, it is expected that the incremental increase in ambient aerosol production resulting from this project is insignificant. 6. Covering the undeveloped pad with buildings and landscaping will slightly change climatological indices, however, this change is small in scale and considered insignificant. 7. No marine, fresh, or flood watercourses exist on or near the site and all drainage will be 8. The incremental depletion in water supply due to this project is considered insignificant directed to the street. No adverse impacts to water courses will result. and no impacts to ground or surface water will result as these water sources do not exist within the project area. 9.10. Construction and operation of the facility will result in an incremental increase in the consumption of fuel and natural resources, however this minor increase is insignificant. 11. The pre-graded, infill pad contains no archeological, paleontological, or historical structures or objects therefore, no adverse impacts to such will result. -6- .< ’ *. W BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT - 12/13. Currently, the graded pad contains very little vegetation, consisting of weeds. The proposed landscaping will be in keeping with the landscaping of the surrounding developments and will not adversely affect the diversity of flora in the area. 14. No agricultural crop or farmland exist on the site and future development of the site will be industrial rather than agricultural. No adverse impacts to crops or farmland will result from this project. 15/16. The existing graded, infill pad contains no si@cant diversity of fauna and no new species of animals are proposed to be introduced. No adverse impacts to crops or farmland will result from this project. HUMAN ENVIRONMENT 17. While this conditional use will differ from the adjacent land uses, the daily operation periods of the uses will not overlap and there will be no change in the future industrial land use designation. No adverse land use impacts are anticipated. 18. All public utilities and services required to serve the proposed project are in place and adequate to accommodate the use. No adverse impacts are expected. 19. All existing sewer and waste control systems are adequate to accommodate the proposed 20. While installation and operation of the facility will produce an incremental increase in use and no additional systems or modification to the existing systems is needed. noise levels, this is considered insignificant because of the neighboring industrial uses. 21. Some exterior lighting will be installed on the project site, the lighting is in character 22. No hazardous substances are proposed onsite and no significant risk of explosion is with the surrounding development and no significant adverse impacts will result. expected as a result of the proposed development. 23. The maximum of 50 temporary residents of the shelter is not considered a substantial alteration of density of human population. 24. The proposal is providing a housing supply, not creating a. demand therefore no adverse impacts are expected. 25. The project is not expected to generate traffic equal to an industrial or office use and is therefore considered insignificant. 26. No existing parking facilities exist on site and all parking demands should be accommodated within the project area. No adverse impacts to parking is anticipated. -7- < -. w w 27.28. No existing transportation systems or circulation patterns traverse the project site and therefore no impacts to such is expected. 299 The modular trailers will be transported along pre-approved haul routes and all construction and assembly will occur out of the public right-of-way. No increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicycles or pedestrians is anticipated. 30. No emergency response plans or evacuation plans involve the project site and no impacts to such are expected. 31. The project will not obstruct any scenic vistas and landscaping and setbacks will eliminate any significant aesthically offensive public views. 32. No recreational opportunities exist onsite and the project is not expected to create additional demands on recreational opportunities. 33. The infill, temporary development on the pre-graded pad will not degrade the quality of the environment, habitats, or examples of California history since these features do not exist onsite. 34. The project will not produce either short-term or long-term environmental disadvantages 35. No cumulative impacts are anticipated since all affects of the proposed development re since it is a temporary use on a previously disturbed, infill industrial lot. well below the level of significance. 36. No direct or indirect impacts to human beings are anticipated from this infill development as it provides for emergency shelter for homeless individuals without impacting the site or public services. -8- ... w w 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 too small to phase and must be completed as a whole in order to function properly. B) Alternate site designs do not produce any environmental advantages alternatives. C) The proposed scale of development is necessary for the proposed. D) The proposal is temporary and the ultimate use of the site will be industrial, as designated int he City's general Plan. E) The emergency shelter is in response to a current housing need. Development at a future time would postpone addressing this issue. F) Since this site accommodate the proposed without any significant impacts, alternate sites do' not necessarily produce environmental benefits. G) See E) above. 'MG:lh -9- .. w w DETERMINATION (To Be Completed By The Planning Department) On the basis of this initial evaluation: B & I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATM DECLARATION will be prepared. - I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, because thf environmental effects of the proposed project have already been considered in conjunction wit1 previously certified environmental documents and no additional environmental review is required Therefore, a Notice of Determination has been 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 ENVIRONMENT4 IMPACT REPORT is required. dz-..J~/ P&#s- Signature v, - Ii i /I 1f.y;: I \I i ,./i \ 1 iL P. &+ - 1k . '\, ", . L 'i .+ Date Planning Director -, LIST MITIGATING MEASURES (IF APPLICABLE] ATTACH MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM (IF APPLICABLE] -10- 14 . .. .* ' w w APPLICANT 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 -1 1-