The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1993-04-07; Planning Commission; Resolution 3509I( 0 e Ir 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1'7 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 I PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3509 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA APPROVING A NEGATISE DECLARATION FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW CHURCH USES TO OCCUPY AN EXISTING OFFICE INDUSTRIAL BUILDING ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 6359 PASEO DEL LAG0 IN THE PM ZONE. CASE NAME: COMMUNITY CHURCH CENTER CASE NO: CUP 92-09 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 7th day of April, 1993, holl a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to 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 std and considering any written comments received, the Planning Commission considered a] factors relating to the Negative Declaration. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning Commissiol as follows: A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct. B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Plannin, Commission hereby recommends APPROVAL. of the Negative Declaration accordin to Exhibit "ND", dated March 11, 1993, and "PII", dated March 11, 1993, attachel hereto and made a part hereof, based on the following findings: FhdiIlES: 1. The initial study shows that there is no substantial evidence that the project ma have a significant impact on the environment. 2. The site has been previously graded pursuant to an earlier environmental analysi! 3. The streets are adequate in size to handle traffic generated by the proposed projec 4. There are no sensitive resources located onsite or located so as to be significantl impacted by this project. ~ // 0 0 1 11 PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Plannir Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 7th day of April, 1993, by tl. following vote, to wit: 2 3 4 5 6 AYES: Chairperson Noble, Commissioners: Schlehuber, Schramn Welshons, Savary, Erwin & Hall. NOES: None. 7 11 ABSENT: None. 8 II ABSTAIN: None. 9 10 11 12 ATTEST: 4x4. BAILEY NOBL4, JI Chairperson CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION 13 14 15 MICHAEL J. HO-MILLM PLANNING DIRECTOR 16 17 18 19 I 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 11 PC RES0 NO. 3509 -2- 28 I/ NEGATIVE DECLARATION PROJECT ADDRESS/LOCATION: 6359 Paseo del Lago, Carlsbad, CA 92009 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Request for a conditional use permit to allow a church with seating for approximately 800 people to occupy an existing office/industrial building located in the PM 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 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 Pkmning 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 Anne Hysong in the Planning Department at (619) 438-1161, extension 4477. DATED: MARCH-11, 1993 CASE NO: CUP 92-09 Planning Director CASE NAME: COMMUNITY CHURCH CENTER PUBLISH DATE: MARCH 11,1993 AH:lan 2075 Las Palmas Drive - Carisbad, California 92009-1 576 - (61 9) 438-1 161 0 0 ENVlR0N"AL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART II (TO BE COMPETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT) BACKGROUND CASE NO. CUP 924 DATE: March 2.195 1. CASE NAME: Communitv Church Center 2. ' APPLICANT: Jerrv Blackwell 3. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: 1967 N. Hw 101 Leucadia. CA 92024 4. DATE ELA FORM PART I SUBMITTED: December 17.1992 5. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Reauest for a CUP to allow a church with seatinn - for aDDroximatf 800 Deode to OCCUDY an existinn office/industrial buildinn located in the Planned lndustr JPM) Zone. 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 environme: The Environmental Impact Assessment appears in the following pages in the form of a checklist. This checkl 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 Impact Report or Negative Declaration. * A Negative Declaration may be prepared if the City perceives no substantial evidence that the project any of its aspects may cause a sihplificant effect on the environment. On the checklist, "NO" will be check to indicate this determination. * An EIR must be prepared if the City detennines that there is substantial evidence that any aspect of 1 project may cause a sidcant effect on the environment. The project may qualify for a Negat Declaration however, if adverse impacts are mitigated so that environmental effects can be deen insirmificant. These findings are shown in the checklist under the headings 'YES-sig" and 'YES-ins respectively. A discussion of potential impacts and the proposed mitigation measures appears at the end of the form unc DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION. Particular attention should be given to discuss mitigation for impacts which would otherwise be determined.significant. 0 a PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT VILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY YES YES NO big) (insig) 1. Result in unstable earth conditions or increase the exposure of people or property to geologic 'hazards? - - X 2. Appreciably change the topography or any unique physical features? - - X 3. Result in or be affected by erosion of soils either on or off the site? - - - X 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? X - - - x - - - 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? X - - X - - - X - - - 9. Substantially increase usage or cause depletion of any natural resources? 10. Use substantial amounts of fuel or energy? 11. Mter a significant archeological, paleontological or historical site, structure or object? - - - X X - - - X - -2- a 0 BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT NILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY YES (si@ 12. Affect the diversity of species, habitat or numbers cf any species of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass, microflora and aquatic plats)? 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 DIRECIZY OR INDIRECIZY: YES big) . . 17.. Alter the present or planned land use of an area? - 18. Substantially affect public utilities, schools, police, h, emergency or other public services? - -3- YES (big) I - - - - YES (insig) - - NO X .- X X X X NO X. X - e 0 HUMANENVIRONMENT VILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY .9. Result in the need for new or modified sewer systems, solid waste or'hazardous waste control systems? YES (si@ - !O. Increase existing noise levels? - !1. 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)? - - 23. 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? 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 - - - - - - - - - - YES ' (insig) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - NO X X X - - - X - X - X X - - X - X X - - X - X - X - X - 0 0 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE VIU THE PROPOSAL DERECnY OR INDIRECTLY: YES YES NO (si@ (big) 13, 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.) 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 cumat projects, and ’ the effects of probable future projects.) i. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? - - -. X - - - X - - X - -5- 0 0 1fSCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION HYSICAL AND BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT -16. The project consists of the proposed occupancy of a 27,837 square foot existing multi-tenan industrial building by a church. No exterior alteration of the previously developed site or buildin! is proposed; therefore, no further impacts to the physical and biological environment will QCCU> U"N ENVIRONMENT 7. The project will not alter the present or planned land use of the area since the proposed site i designated by the General Plan for industrial use and Chapter 21.42 of the Zoning Ordimnce allow! churches in industrial zones with an approved Conditional Use Permit. 8. The project will not adversely impact public services since. compliance with fire codes will bt required prior to occupancy, and increased traffic congestion'will not result since church service! will occur on Sunday when the majority of surrounding industrial uses are closed. 0. Increased noise levels are likely to result on Sunday mornings during church services, however, tht majority of the surrounding uses will not be impacted since they will be closed, and the 1-2 how time period will not result in a sisnificant adverse impact. 1. The proposed church will occupy an existing facility and no new light or glare will be produced, 2. No significant risk of explosion or release of hazardous substances will occur as a result of tht proposed church use since.no storage of chemicals or hazardous substances is necessary. Project conditions requiring compliance with UBC regulations will ensure that the use will be conducted in such a say as to reduce potential risk in this connection below a level of significance. 3. The proposed church will not substantially alter the density of the human population of the industrial area since the congregation will meet on Sunday mornings when the majority of the surrounding industrial uses are closed. 4. Housing supply will not be impacted by the church use. 5-27. No substantial additional trafiic will be generated by the proposed church since the church will provide seating for a maximum of 800 people and peak use hours will occur during evening horn and on Sunday so that any traffic or parking conflicts with other industrial park users is avoided 8-32. Since the proposexi church will occupy an existing industrial multi-tenant building in the Planned Industrial Zone, it will not alter traffic, increase traffic hazards, interfere with emergency response plans, affect the quality or quantity of recreational opportunities, or obstruct a scenic vista or create an offensive public view. -6- 0 NALYSIS OF VIABLE ALTERNATlvES 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. Iternate uses for the proposed site include all uses permitted by right in the industrial zone, however lurches are allowed in the area if findings of consistency with the General Plan, site and street systen iequacy, and compatibility with surrounding uses can be made. The proposed church site and street systen ming the site are adequate to handle the use and the use is compatible with surrounding uses since traffic nd parking conflicts are avoided due to differing peak operating times lternate sites for the proposed development include residentially or commercially zoned parcels. The cos F land acquisition and development in residential zones has become prohibitive for many small churches ant le leasing of space in commercial developments results in traffic and parking conflicts since commercial use: re typically open on Sunday during church peak operating hours. -7- 6 0 0 ETERMINATION (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 NEGAm DECLARATION will be prepared. - I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, because th~ environmeital effects of the proposed project have already been considered in conjunction wid previously certified environmental documents and no additional environmental review is required Therefore, a Notice of Determination has been prepared. - I fkd 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 ENVROIf"N'I'A IMPACT REPORT is required. 3) ... 2 - L, 27 id Date * .4-d- Planning Direca ,IST MITIGATING MEASURES (IF APPLICABLE) i'ITACH MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM (IF APPLICABLE1 -8- e 0 SPLICANT CONCURRENCE WITH MITIGATING MEASURES THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT I HAW REVIEWED THE ABOVE MITIGATING MEASURES AND CONCUR WITH THE ADDITION OF THESE MEASURES TO THE PROJECX. Date Signature ,H:km:vd -9-