The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1992-11-04; Planning Commission; Resolution 3453I 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 0 a PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3453 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA APPROVING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR A CITYWIDE SIDEWALK PROGRAM. CASE NAME: CITY OF CARLSBAD SIDEWALK PROGRAM CASE NO: PCD/GPC 92-04 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 4th day of November, 199 hold a hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request, and WHEREAS, at said hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony a1 arguments, examining the initial study, analyzing the information submitted by staff, a1 considering any written comments received, the Planning Commission considered all factc relating to the Negative Declaration. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning Commissic as follows: A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct. B) That based on the evidence presented at the hearing, the Planning Commissic hereby APPROVES the Negative Declaration according to Exhibit "ND", datl October 1, 1992, and "PII", dated September 25, 1992, attached hereto and mal a part hereof, based on the following findings: FhdillES: 1. The initial study shows that there is no substantial evidence that the project m have a significant impact on the environment. 2. The project is an implementation document which identifies the timing and locatil of hture public sidewalk improvements. 3. The individual future improvements will require subsequent environmental revit which may include Class 1 Categorical Exemption. .... .... 1 0 a 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 Plann Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 4th day of November, 19 by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Chairperson Erwin, Commissioners: Schlehuber, Schran Noble, Welshons, Savary & Hall. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. ATTEST: 4 7 c P TOM ERWIN, Chairperson CARLSBAD PLANN~NG COMMISSION 5 ~ PLANNING DIRECTOR PC RES0 NO. 3453 -2- w 0 NEGATIVE DECLARATION PROECX ADDRJSS/LOCATION: City of Carlsbad Citywide Sidewalk Program PROECT DES(=RIPTTON: A review of a program assessment for the priority need and subsequent installation of sidewalks in the City of Carlsbad for consistency with the City's General Plan. 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 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 the date of issuance. If you have any questions, please call Christer Westman in the Phnning Department at (619) 438-1161, extension ,W. review, a Negative Declaration (declaration that the project will not have a significant DATED: OCTOBER 1,1992 MICHAEL Jh!IOL&IUF.R CASE NO: PCD/GPC 92-04 Planning Director CASE NAME: CITY OF CARLSBAD - CITY SIDEWALK PROGRAM PUBLISH DATE: mOBER 1,1992 mlh '2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, California 92009-1 576 - (61 9) 438-1 161 " m ENVIRONMENTAL IMPAn ASSESSMENT FORM. PART II (TO BE COMPLETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT) . CASE NO. PCD/GPC 92-04 BACKGROUND DATE: SEPTEMBER 8. 1992 1. CASE NAME: CITY SIDEWALK PROGRAM 2. APPLICANT: CITY OF CARLSBAD 3. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: 2075 LAS PALMAS CARLSBAD, CA. 92009 4. DATE EXA FORM PART I SUBMITTED: AUGUST 31.1992 5. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: A PROGRAM ASSESSMENT FOR THE' PRIORITY NEED P SUBSEOUENT INSTAUATION OF SIDEWALKS IN THE C OF CARLSBAD. 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 form of a checklist. This checl 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 Environme Impact Report or Negative Declaration. * A Negative Declaration may be prepared if the City perceives no substantial evidence that the projec any of its aspects may cause a significant effect on the environment. On the checklist, "NO" will be chec 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 sianificant efkt on the environment. The project may qualify for a Negs Declaration howeveq if adverse impacts are mitigated so that environmental effects can be dee: insinnificant. These findings are shown in the checklist under the headings 'YES-sig" and 'YES-ir respectively. A discussion of potential impacts and the proposed mitigation measures appears at the end of the form UI DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION. Particular attention should be given to discus mitigation for impacts which would otherwise be determined significant. ? w e PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT WILL THE PROPOSAL, DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY YES big) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 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 soils 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? - - - - - - - - 10. Use substantial il~f~ounts of fuel or energy? 11. Alter a si~cant~logical, paleontological or- hbtorical site, structure or object? - - -2- ? YES NO (insig) X - X - X - X - - X - X - X - X - X X - - X - - w e BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT WE THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY YES (id 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 nod 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? - - - HuMANENvzRoNMENT WILL THE PROPOSAL, DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: YES (a9 17. .Aker the present or planned land use of an area? - 18. Substantially affecCpubk utilities, schools, police, h- or other public services? - -3- 1 YES rial - - - - YES cinsig) - - NO X - X .x X X - NO X - X - .I 0 .. I"ANm0m WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY YES YES big) (wig) 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? - - 7 - - - 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. Involve a significant risk of an explosion (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 or the release of hazardous substances 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 scd vista or create an aesthetically offensive public view? Affect the quality or qdty of existing recreational opportunities? - - - - - x - - - - - - - - 7 - - - - - - - - 4 I NO X x X - - - X - X - X X - - X - - - X X - X - X - X - m 0 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNWICANCE WILL THE PROPOSAL, DIRECI'LY OR INDIRECTLY: YES YES NO (si& (iig) 33. Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality 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. of the environment, substantially X - - 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 relatively brief, definitive period of time while long-term impacts will endure well into the future.) environment is one which occurs in a 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- ! e m DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION PHysrcAL ENURONMENT There is no indication that the program will have an effect on the physical environment. The program Implementation of the program will take into account specific conflicts which may occur with existing structural improvements. None are anticipated. BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT The program only identifies areas which need sidewalks. Implementation of the program will have an effect on the areas through which sidewalks will be constructed. Because the proposed sidewalks arc within existing right-of-way adjacent to roadways, it has been assumed that there will be no significan impacts to flora or fauna. HUMAN ENVIRONMENT Implementation of the program will have a positive effect on pedestrian circulation within the projec area. Sidewalks will be provided in areas that currently do not have sidewalks. design is to provide safe pedestrian circulation adjacent to existing vehicular travel ways, -6- t 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) altemate uses for the site, e) development at some future time rather than now, f) alternate sites for the proposed, and g) no project alternative. Review of the application and program has determined that implementation will not have a significan effect on the environment. Discussion or analysis of alternative designs, uses, or locations will not alte: the level of impact to the environment by the project. CW:lh -7- ! . -' e e .DETERMINATION (To Be Completed By The Planning Department) On the basis of this iniiid evaluation: - X I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGA? DECLARATION will be prepared. - I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, because environmental effects of the proposed project have already been considered in conjunction I previously certified environmental documents and no additional environmental review is requi Therefore, a Notice of Determination has been prepared. - I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there 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 siccant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMEh IMPACT REPORT is required. +-Zcj 45 -1 &?%br LO&& Date - 41ADwa- Signature Planning Director -8- t