The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1992-07-01; Planning Commission; Resolution 3413? * II e e 1 2 3 4 5 6 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3413 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA APPROVING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT AN ELECTRICAL SUBSTATION ON A 3.3 ACRE PREGRADED SITE IN THE PLANNED INDUSTRIAL ZONE. CASE NAME: PALOMAR SUBSTATION CASE NO: CUP 92-3 ~ WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 1st day of July, 1992, hold 7 I/ a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request, and 8 9 WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony 10 and ar-ments, examining the initial study, analyzing the information submitted by staff, 11 and considering any written comments received, the Planning Commission considered all 12 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning Commissior 13 factors relating to the Negative Declaration. l4 11 as follows: 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct. B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Planninr Commission hereby APPROVES of the Negative Declaration according to Exhibi "ND", dated June 4, 1992, and "PII", dated May 27, 1992, attached hereto and madr a part hereof, based on the following findings: Findings: 1. The initial study shows that there is no substantial evidence that the project mq have a significant impact on the environment. 22 23 2. The site has been previously graded pursuant to an earlier environmental analysis ll 3. The streets are adequate in size to handle traffic generated by the proposed projecl 24 25 26 4. There are no sensitive resources located onsite or located so as to be significant1 impacted by this project. 27 28 "' ... ... 0 e 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Plannin Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 1st day of July, 1992, by tf following vote, to wit: AYES: Chairperson Erwin, Commissioners: Schlehuber, ~chrarnn Noble, Savary & Hall. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Welshons. ABSTAIN: None. 10 11 12 ATTEST: % TOM ERWIN, Chairperson CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION 13 14 15 16 l’lr 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 MICHAEL J. HMZMIMER PLANNING DIRECTOR 25 II 26 27 28 PC RES0 NO. 3413 -2- W NEGATIVE DECLARATION PROJECT ADDRESS/LOCATION: On the south side of Camino Vida Roble between Palomar Oaks Way and Palomar Airport Road, Carlsbad, San Diego County, California. APN: 212-092-19 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Construction of a Electrical Substation on a 3.3 pre-graded site in the Industrial Zone. 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 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 Van Lynch in the Planning Department at (619) 438-1161, extension 4325. impact on the environment) is hereby issued for the subject project. Justification for this DATED: JUNE 4, 1992 CASE NO: CUP 92-03 MICHAEL J. HOYZMIL~R Planning Director CASE NAME: PALOMAR SUBSTATION PUBLISH DATE: JUNE 4, 1992 VL: km 2075 Las Palmas Drive - Carlsbad, California 92009-1 576 - (61 9) 438-1 161 6 0 0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART 11 (TO BE COMPLETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT) 4CKGROUND CASE NO. CUP 92-0: DATE: MAY 27, 199: 1. CASE NAME: Palomar Substation 2. APPLICANT: San Dieno Gas & Electric 3. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: P.O. Box 1831 San Dieao, CA 921 12 ~ ~~ 4, DATE ETA FORM PART I SUBMITTED: March 20, 1992 5. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Construction of an electrical substation on a 3.3 acre site in the Industrial Zone ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS STATE CEQA GUIDELINES, Chapter 3, Article 5, section 15063 requires that the City conduct i Environmental lrnpzct Assessment to determine if a project may have a significant effect on the environme The Environmental Impect Assessment appears in the following pages in the form of a checklist. This check! 8 identifies any physical, biological and human factors that might be impacted by the proposed project a provides the City with information to use as the basis for deciding whether to prepare an Environmen [mpact Reporr or Negative Declaration. ": A Negative Declaration may be prepared if the City perceives no substantial evidence that the project any cf its aspects may cause a significant effect on the environment. On the checklist, "NO" will be checE to indicate this determination. '" An EIR must be prepared if the City determines that there is substantial evidence that any aspect of project may cause a simificant effect on the environment. The project may qualify for a Xegat Declaration however, if adverse impacts are mitigated so that environmental effects can be deen insianificant. These findings are shown in the checklist under the headings 'WS-sig" and "YES-in: respectively. A discussion of potential impacts and the proposed mitigation measures appears at the end of the form ur DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION. Particular attention should be given tg discus: r;,i;igation for impacts which would atherwise be determined significant. W e PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT NILL 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 big) - - - - YES (insig) - - NO X X X x X X X X X X X -2- W 0 BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT YlLL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: YES big) .2. Affect the diversity of species, habitat or numbers of any species of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass, microflora and aquatic plants)? - .3. Introduce new species of plants into an area, or a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? L4. Reduce the amount of acreage of any agricultural crop or affect prime, unique or other farmland of state or local importance? I .5. 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? HUMAN ENVIRONMENT WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: 17. Alter the present or planned land use of an area? e YES Csig) - !8. Substantially affect public utilities, schools, police, fire, emergency or other public services? - YES (ins ig) - - - YES (hig) - - NO X X X X X NO X X -3 - w HUMAN ENVIRONMENT 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? 2.5. 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- 0 YES (si@ - - - - - - - - YES (insig) - - - - - - - - - - NO X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 0 0 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE ILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: YES YES NO big) (insig) 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. 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.) 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? X - X - - X - - -5- U DISCUS5ION 0% ENVIRONMENTAL EVALU,QTION 0 PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT Since the site is a pregraded lot, there will not be any changes in topography, soil erosion or changes in wi flow. The electrical substation, by nature of the use, will not effect the ambient air quality or result in ; substantial changes of the air’s characteristics. The substation will not increase the usage of natural resour nor use substantial amounts of energy, but will only convert existing electrical energy to a more useable st; BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT The site, being pregraded, will not affect the diversity of plant or animal species. The project will introduce any new animal species as none are associated to the project. The project is proposing to introd new plant species to the area for landscaping purposes but will not be a significant impact to the area. HUMAN ENVIRONMENT The electrical substation, an allowed use by the General Plan, will minimally affect public utilities becal the use does not increase the demand of services. The project is actually providing electrical service to surrounding area. Since the site is designated for industrial uses, the project will not affect the density or demand for housing units. The project will only require occasional service, therefore not generat significant traffic volumes. The electrical equipment will be screened by a perimeter wall for safety, sew and aesthetics, -6- a 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. Alternative site designs and scale of development are not applicable since the design and scale are set the nature of the structures for use. The project is being developed as one phase and to phase the projt or to develop the site at a later date would have no environmental benefits. The site and surrounding ar is designated for industrial uses, therefore any other use, other than industrial, would conflict with t Zoning and General Plan designations. To locate the proposed use to an alternate site may not be feasiE in that the substation needs to be adjacent to a power source (high tension lines). Other sites would n be environmentally beneficial. The no project alternative will only stall the location of such a facility the surrounding area. -7- I. 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 NEGATP 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 wi previously certified environmental documents and no additional environmental review is require Therefore, a Notice of Determination has been prepared. - I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there w 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 ENVIRONMENT1 IMPACT REPORT is required. <-29 -92 tJ* -“A /g Date Signatup4 qzqh 1, Date’ LIST MITIGATING MEASURES (IF APPLICABLE] ITTACH MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM (IF APPLICABLE) -8- *. 1 e WLICANT CONCUFiRENCE WITH MITIGATING MEASURES THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT I HAVE REVTEWED THE ABOVE MITIGATING MEASURES AND CONCUR WETH THE ADDITION OF THESE MEASURES TO THE PROJECT. Date Signature iL:vd -9-