The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1993-04-21; Planning Commission; Resolution 3501f ll 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 27 213 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3501 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A NEGATJYE DECLARATION FOR A ZONE AMENDMENT TO AMEND TITLE 21 OF THE CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL CODE TO DEFINE HABITABLE SPACE AND AMEND THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR ACCESSORY STRUCTURES IN THE RESIDENTIAL ZONES OF THE CITY. CASE NAME: ACCESSORY STRUCTURES ZCA CASE NO: ZCA 92-07 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 7th day of April, 1993, an on the 21st day of April, 1993, hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law t. consider said request, and WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimon; and arguments, examining the initial study, analyzing the information submitted by staff and considering any written comments received, the Planning Commission considered al factors relating to the Negative Declaration. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning Commissior as follows: A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct. B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the PlanninE Commission hereby recommends APPROVAL of the Negative Declaration according to Exhibit "ND", dated October 15, 1992, and "PII", dated October 5, 1992, attached hereto and made a part hereof, based on the following findings: Findlnns: 1. The initial study shows that there is no substantial evidence that the project may have a significant impact on the environment. .... .... 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 Pld Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 21st day of April, 1993, by tl following vote, to wit: AYES: Chairman Noble, Commissioners: Schlehuber, Schrm Welshons, Savary, Erwin & Hall. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. n& n" BAILEY NOBLEy Chairperson CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION ATTEST: W v MICHAEL J. HOLZMILLER PLANNING DIRECTOR PC RES0 NO. 3501 -2- 0 e - NEGATlvE DECLARATlON PROJECT ADDRESS/LOCATION: City of Carlsbad PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Amendment to various sections of Title 21 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code to establish new development standards for accessory 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 Phning 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 date of issuance. If you have any questions, please call Don Neu in the Planning Department at (619) 438-1161, extension 4446. DATED: OCTOBER 15, 1992 CASE NO: ZCA 92-07 MICHAEL J.%OLi%ILLER Planning Director CASE NAME: ACCESSORY STRUCI'URES ZONE CODE AMENDMENT PUBLISH DATE: OCTOBER 15,1992 DN:lh 2075 Las Palmas Drive - Carlsbad, California 92009-1576 - (619) 438-1 161 @ STATE OF CALIFORNIA 0 e PETE WILSON. Gavemc GOVERNOR'S OFFICE OF PLANNING AND RESEARCH 1400 TENTH STREET SACRAMENTO, CA 95814 . I. , Nov 09, 1992 DON NEU CITY OF CARLSBAD 2 075 LAS 'PALMAS DRIVE CARLSBAD, CA 52005 Subject: ACCESSORY STRUCTURES ZONE CODE AMENDMENT - ZCA 92097 SCH # 92101044 Dear DON NEU: , The State Clearinghouse submitted the above named environmental document to selected state agencies for review. The review period is closed and none of the state agencies have'comments. This letter acknowledges that you have complied with the State Clearinghouse review requirements for draft environmental documents, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act. Please call Tom Loftus at (916) 445-0613 if you have any questions regarding the environmental review process. When contacting the Clearinghouse in this matter, please use the eight-digit State Clearinghouse number so that we may respond promptly. Sincerely, .HA& 6 Christine Kinne Acting Deputy Director, Permit Assistance 0 ENVRON"JTAL WAC" ASSESSMENT FORM - PART II (TO BE COMPLETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT) CASE NO. ZCA 92-07 3ACKGROUND DATE: OCTOBER 5.199 1. CASE NAME: ACCESSORY STRUCTURES ZONE CODE AMENDMENT 2. APPLICANT: CITY OF CARLSBAD PLANNING DEPARTMENT 3. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: 2075 LAS PALMAS DRNE CARLSBAD. CA 92009 (619) 438-1161 X 4446 4. DATE EIA FORM PART I SUBMITTED: N/A 5. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: A ZONE CODE AMENDMENT ESTABLISHING NEV DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR ACCESSORY STRUCTURES Ir THE RESIDENTLAL ZONES OF THE CITY. 'NVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS TATE CEQA GUIDELINES, Chapter 3, Article 5, section 15063 requires that the City conduct a nvironmental Impact Assessment to determine if a project may have a significant effect on the environment 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 an( rovides the City with information to use as the basis for deciding whether to prepare an Environmenta npact Report or Negative Declaration. A Negative Declaration may be prepared if the City perceives no substantial evidence that the project 01 any of its aspects may cause a significant effect on the environment. On the checklist, "NO" will be checked to indicate this determination. An EIR must be prepared if the City determines that there is substantial evidence that any aspect of the project may cause a significant effect on the environment. The project may qualify for a Negative Declaration however, if adverse impacts are mitigated so that environmental effects can be deemed insignificant. These findings are shown in the checklist under the headings 'YES-sfg" and "YES-insig" respectively. discussion of potential impacts and the proposed mitigation measures appears at the end of the form under [SCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION. Particular attention should be given to discussing itigation for impacts which would otherwise be detennined significant. e 0 PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY YES (sig) 1. Result in unstable earth conditions or increase the exposure of people or property to geologic hazards? 2. Appreci.ably 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. hubstantially change the course or flow of water (marine, fiesh 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? - - - - - - - - - LO. Use substantial amounts of fiel or energy? - 11. Alter a significant archeological, paleontological or historical site, structure or object? - -2- YES NO (insig) - X - x - X - - X - X - - X - X X X X - - - X - 0 0 BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT MLL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: YES (sig) !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? .4. Reduce the amount of acreage of any agricultural crop or affect prime, unique or other fannland 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? - - - .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 INDIRECI'LY YES (sig) 7. Alter the present or planned land use of an area? 8. Substantially affect public utjlities, schools, police, fire, emergency or other public services? - - -3- YES NO (insig) - X - - - X - X - - X X YES NO. (big) - X - X e 0 HUMANENVIRONMENT NILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIREC"L,Y: YES (sig) 19. Result in the need for new or modified sewer systems, solid waste or hazardous waste control systems? !O. Increase existing noise levels? - - !I. Produce new light or glare? !2. Involve a significant risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation)? - - !3. Substantially alter the density of the human population of an area? - !4. Affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing? - !5. Generate substantial additional traffic? - !6. Affect existing pafking facilities, or create a large demand for new parking? !7. Impact existing transportation systems or alter present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? - - !8. Alter waterborne, rail or air traffic? - !9. 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 (insig) - - - - - - - - - NO X X X X X X X X X X X X X X .. e . MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE NILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: YES YES NO (sig) (insig) 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 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. 14. 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 1.5. 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 effects of other ament projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) - - X 16. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? - - X -5- 0 DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION The project consists of an amendment to various sections of the Carlsbad Municipal Code to include new development standards for accessory structures. The City Council has adopted an urgency ordinance which prohibits the acceptance, processing, issuance of building permits, or continued construction of accessory or other structures located within rear or side yard setbacks which exceed one story in height. The proposed zone code amendment development standards for accessory structures increases the required setbacks for accessory structures as well as limiting the height of the structures to one-story in height. Other standard are being proposed as well. No physical alteration of the environment is associated with this project, therefore no significant ?hysicd, biological, or human environmental impacts will .result. This zone code amendment establishes specific development standards for accessory structures. This type of structure is usually proposed for an already developed residential property. They are considered to be ministerial projects which qualify as statutory exemptions from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15268 of the CEQA Guidelines. -6- a. a 0 LWALYSIS 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 project, and g) no project alternative. Project alternatives are required when there is evidence that the project will have a significant adverse impact OR the environment and an alternative would lessen or mitigate those adverse impact. Public Resources Code Section 21002 forbids the approval of projects with significant adverse impacts when feasible alternatives or mitigation measures can substantially lessen such impacts. A "significant effect" is defined as one which has a substantial adverse &pacts. If the project has "NO' significant impacts than there is no substantial adverse impacts and no justification for requiring a discussion of alternatives, (There is no alternative to no substantial adverse impact). This project has no significant impacts therefore no alternatives are required. -7- ., 0. 0 IETERMINATION (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 NEGATN DECLARATION will be prepared. - I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, because th environmental effects of the proposed project have already been considered in conjunction wit 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 wi 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 ENVTRONMENTA IMPACT REPORT is required. r- /o - 5- 92 Date Signature /0/6/4 #I z- Date Planning Directow W ,IST MITIGATING MEASURES (IF APPLICABLE) ;T?'ACH MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM (IF APPLICABLE] -8- *' . .. 0 0 4PPLICANT CONCURRENCE WETH MITIGATING MEASURES THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT I HAVE REVIEWED THE ABOVE MITIGATING MEASURES AND CONCUR WlTH THE ADDITION OF THESE MEASURES TO THE PROJECT. Date Signature )N:lh -9-