Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1992-02-19; Planning Commission; Resolution 3246' I1 a 0 /I PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3246 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 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA APPROVING A NEGATlVE DECLARATION FOR A LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED EAST OF EXISTING TERMINUS OF FARADAY AVENUE, SOUTH OF SQUIRES DAM, WEST OF THE CITY OF VISTA, AND NORTH OF THE EXISTING TERMINUS OF EL FUERTE. APPLICANT: PAUL TCHANG CASE NO: LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN - ZONE 16 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 19th day of February, 1992, 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 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 finding: Finding: 1. The Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 16 will not cause any significant 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 of adequate public facilities concurrent with estimated demands. The plan recognizes that CEQA review will be required prior to mitigation of any public or private project that is generally discussed in the plan. A Negative Declaration has been issued on January 31, 1991, and recommended for approval by the Planning Commission on February 5, 1992. 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 PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 19th day of February, 1992, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Chairman Erwin, Commissioners: Schlehuber, Schramm, Holmes, Savary, Noble & Hall. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. ATTEST: TOM ERWIN, Chairperson CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION MICHAEL J. HOLYMILL& PLANNING DIRECTOR PC RES0 NO. 3246 -2- I w 0 - NEGATIVE DECLARATION PROJECT ADDRESSLOCATION: East of existing terminius of Faraday Avenue, south of Squires Dam, west of the City of Vista, and north of the existing terminus of El Fuerte. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 16. 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: JANUARY 22, 1991 CASE NO: LFMP 16 5 MICHAEL J. BOL~ILLER Planning Director APPLICANT: PAUL TCHANG PUBLISH DATE: JANUARY 31,1991 BH:km 2075 Las Palmas Drive - Carlsbad, California 92009-4859 - (619) 438-1 161 w a E!X"ROI"ENTAL JMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART 11 (TO BE COMPLETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT) CASE NO. LFMP 16 DATE: January 22,1991 'ACKGROUND 1. CASE NAME: Local Facilities Management Plan Zone 16 2. APPLICANT: Paul Tchang 3. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: 3575 Kenvon Street San Diego, CA 921 10 (619) 223-1663 4. DATE EIA FORM PART I SUBMITTED: January 15,1991 5. PROJECT DESCRIPTION; Local Facilities Manameent Plan which guarantees the adeqacy o public facilities concurrent with development to adoptec performance standards. NVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS iTATE CEQA GUIDELINES, Chapter 3, Article 5, section 15063 requires that the City conduct a1 lnvironmental Impact Assessment to determine if a project may have a significant effect on the environmenl 'he Environmental Impact Assessment appears in the following pages in the form of a checklist. This checklis identifies any physical, biological and human factors that might be impacted by the proposed project anc n-ovides the City with information to use as the basis for deciding whether to prepare an Environmenta mpact Report or Negative Declaration. 7 A Negative Declaration may be prepared if the City perceives no substantial evidence that the project o any of its aspects may cause a significant effect on the environment. On the checklist, "NO" will be checkec to indicate this determination. r An EIR must be prepared if the City determines that there is substantial evidence that any aspect of th project may cause a simificant effect on the environment. The project may qualify for a Negativ Declaration however, if adverse impacts are mitigated so that environmental effects can be deeme insignificant. These findings are shown in the checklist under the headings "YES-sig" and 'YES-insig respectively. i discussion of potential impacts and the proposed mitigation measures appears at the end of the form unde >ISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION. Particular attention should be given to discussin nitigation for impacts which would otherwise be determined significant. w PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT VILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY; I. 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? to. Use substantial amounts of fuel or energy? t 1. Alter a significant archeological, paleontological or historical site, structure or object? -2- e YES YES (+I (insig) - - - - - NO X X X X X X X X X X X w e BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT mL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: YES YES NO bid (insig) 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? 5. Affect the diversity of species, habitat . or numbers of any species of animals (birds, land animals, all water dwelling organisms and insects? X X 6. Introduce new species of animals into an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? HUMANENVIRONMENT VILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY .7. Alter the present or planned land use .8. Substantially affect public utilities, of an area? schools, police, fire, emergency or other public services? - - X YES big) YES (insig) NO X - - X - - -3- w e HUMANENVIRONMENT 'ILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: YES YES NO big) (insig) J. 1. 1. 1. 3. 1. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 0. 1. 2. 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 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? - X X - - - - - - x X - - - X - - X X - - - - X - - X X - - - - - X - - X - - X - - - X - - -4- W m MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE IILL 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 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. 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.) 5. ,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 the effects of probable fkture projects.) effects of other current projects; and 6. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, . either directly or indirectly? YES bid YES (insig) NO X - X X - X -5- W 0 ISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION ie LocaI Facilities Management Plan for one 16 is a facilities planning document. The intent of the plan is I establish parameters and thresholds that assure public facilities are available when needed as determined 1 the City's adopted performance standards. The land uses analyzed are taken from the adopted general an. Locations and costs of facility improvements are estimates for informational purposes only. is recognized that CEQA review for these public facilities estimates is general and does not satisfy CEQA !quirements for the specific project. The Zone 16 Local Facilities Management Plan requires complete CEQA view prior to initialization of any public or private project discussed in the Local Facilities Management Plan. -6- a e 8ALysrs 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 information and planning study. Phased planning will no1 efficiently or adequately address the need for public facilities, b) The project is a public facility infomation and planning study. c) The project is a public facility information and planning study. d) Uses within the plan reflect the existing General Plan. e) 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 most detrimental. -7- w e FETERIMINATION (To Be Completed By The Planning Department) On the basis of this initial evaluation: L I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE 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 descAbed on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A Conditional Negative Declaration will be proposed. - I fhd the proposed project MAY have a signif'icant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENT4 IMPACT REPORT is required. I + B&<* Signature ' " . Planning Direytor IH:h ,IST MITIGATING MEASURES (IF APPLICABLE) ITTACH MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM (IF APPLICABLE) -8- >,. .* w 0 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 H:km -9-