Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1994-07-20; Planning Commission; Resolution 36651 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 0 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3665 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA APPROVING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR TWO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AMENDMENTS TO ALLOW AN EXPANSION OF AN EXISTING TELEPHONE ELECTRONIC SWITCHING FACILITY AND TO PERMIT TEMPORARY PMNG/IMPOUND OF SEIZED VEHICLES IN THE PLANNED INDUSTRIAL ZONE ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF CAMINO VIDA ROBLE JUST WEST OF YARROW DRIVE. CASE NAME: PACIFIC BELL/VEHICLES UNLIMITED CASE NO: CUP 154(A)/CUP 154(B) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 15th day of June, 15 on the 6th day of July, 1994, and on the 20th day of July, 1994, hold a duly notice hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request; and WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all tc and arguments, examining the initial study, analyzing the information submitted and considering any written comments received, the Planning Commission consid factors relating to the Negative Declaration. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning Corn as follows: A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct. B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the F Commission hereby APPROVES the Negative Declaration according to "ND", dated April 18, 1994 and "PII", dated April 4, 1994, attachec and made a part hereof, based on the following findings: FiIldirlpS 1. The initial study shows that there is no substantial evidence that the projc have a significant impact on the environment. 2. The site has been previously graded pursuant to an earlier environmental a 3. The streets are adequate in size to handle traffic generated by the proposed ; 4. There are no sensitive resources located onsite or located so as to be signi impacted by this project. !I 0 0 PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the : Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 20th day of July, 1993 following vote, to wit: 1 2 3 4 5 AYES: Chairperson Savary; Commissioners Welshons, Noble, Monroy and Nielsen. 6 NOES: Commissioner Erwin. 7 ABSENT: None. 8 ABSTAIN: None. 9 10 11 12 l3 ATTEST: CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMIS l4 ii 17 18 19 Planning Director 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 PC RES0 NO. 3665 -2- 0 City of 0 Carlsbac NEGATIVE DECLARATION PROJECT ADDRESS/LOCATtON: 2175 Camino Vida Roble Carlsbad, CA 92009 South side of Camino Vida Roble just west of Yarro Drive. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Conditional Use Permit Amendment to permit an expansion ( an existing telephone switching facility and to allow temporal auto storage/impound of seized vehicles in conjunction with towing business. The City of Carlsbad has conducted an environmental review of the above described projec pursuant to the Guidelines for [mplernentation of the California Environmental Quality A( and the Environmental Protection Ordinance of the City of Carlsbad. As a result of sai review, a Negative Declaration (declaration that the project will not have a significar impact on the environment) is hereby issued for the subject project. Justification for th. action is on file in the Planning Department. A copy of the Negative Declaration with supportive documents is, on file in the Plannin: Department, 2075 Las Palmas Drive, Carlsbad, California 92009. Comments from th public are invited. Please submit comments in writing to the Planning Department withi1 21 days of date of issuance. If you have any questions, please call Teni Woods in th Planning Department at (619) 438-1 161, extension 4447. DATED: APRIL 18, 1994 CASE NO: CUP 154(A) . Planning Director CASE NAME: VEHICLES UNLIMITED PUBLISH DATE: APRIL 18, 1994 TW:vd 2075 Las Palmas Drive - Carlsbad, California 92009-1 576 - (61 9) 438-1 161 0 0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART 11 (TO BE COMPLETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT) CASE NO. CUP 154(P BACKGROUND DATE: April 4, 1991 1. CASE NAME: Vehicles Unlimited 2. APPLICANT: Varley Enterprises 3. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: 2095 W. Vista Wav, Suite 219 ." """_" Vista. CA 92083 (61 9) 941 -5444 4. DATE ETA FORM PART I SUBMITTED: November 17, 1993 5. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Request to amend an existing Conditional Use Permit (CU to allow an expansion of the existing telephone switching; facility and to permit temporarv storaze/irnpound or seized vehicles in coniunction with a towinn business on the site. ENVIRONMENTAL [MPACTS STATE CEQA GUIDELINES, Chapter 3, Article 5, section 15063 requires that the City con Environmental Impact Assessment to determine if a project may have a significant effect on the envir The Environmental Impact Assessment appears in the following pages in the form of a checkli: checklist identifies any physical, biological and human factors that might be impacted by the propose( and provides the City with information to use as the basis for deciding whether to prepare an Enviro Impact Report or Negative Declaration. ',': A Negative Declaration may be prepared if the City perceives no substantial evidence that the pr any of its aspects may cause a significant effect on the environment. On the checklist, "NO" will be to indicate this determination. ': An EIR must be prepared if the City determines that there is substantial evidence that any aspec project may cause a significant effect on the environment. The project may qualify for a r\ Declaration however, if adverse impacts are mitigated so that environmental effects can be insianificant. These findings are shown in the checklist under the headings 'YES-sig" and 'YE respectively. A discussion of potential impacts and the proposed mitigation measures appears at the end of the forn DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION. Particular attention should be given to dis rnicigation for impacts which would orhenvise be determined significant. 0 e PHysrcAL ENVIRONMENT WILL THE PROPOSAL DKECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: YES big) 1. Result in unstable earth conditions or increase the exposure of people or property to geologic hazards? 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 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? Use substantial amounts of fuel or energy? Alter a significant archeological, paleontological or historical site, structure or object? -2- - - - - - - - - - - YES NC (insig) - x - X - X - - X - X - - X - - X - - X - - X X - - - - X - - '0 e BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: YES (big) 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 normal replenishment of existin.g 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 n.ew species of animals into an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? - - - - HUMAN ENVIRONMENT WILL THE PROPOSAL DtRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: YES (sig) 17. Alter the present or planned land use of an area? - 18. Substantially affect public utilities, schools, police, fire, emergency or other public services? - -3- YES (inslg) - - - - - YES (insig) - - N( x - X - X - X - X - NO X - X - 0 0 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? YES big) 20. Increase existing noise levels? - 27. Produce new Iighr 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? - 25. 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) - - - - NC X X - - - x X - X - X X - - X - X X - - X - X - X - X - 0 0 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE 'WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: YES YES N( big) (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. - - 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 environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of time while long-term impacts will endure well into the future.) - 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.) 36. Does the. project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? - - X - - - " -5- a 0 DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION The proposed project is a request to expand an existing telephone electronic switching facility and to permit vehicle storage/impound or seized vehicles in conjunction with a separate and unrelate business on a lot in the Palomar Airport Business Park. .The-structure for the telephone switching fa' previously expanded beyond that approved under their existing Conditional Use Permit (CUP 1: requested conditional use permit would legitimize the expanded structure. Further, the applicant is r< permission to store vehicles, in conjunction with a towing service, on the southern portion of the 1 storage/impounds are permitted in the PM Zone subject to a Conditional Use Permit. The lot is fully improved with paving, screen fences and landscaping. No additional improvements are propose of the application. Physical Environment 1-11. The project site was previously graded and padded-out as part of the Palomar Airport BusiI development. Only fine grading would have been necessary to pave the rear portion 0. The area surrounding the site is fully developed. No native vegetation is likely to have bee: site prior to the improvements being made, as the lor was fully graded previously. The tc switching facility employs three persons at the site. The combined traffic impacrs f telephone facility and the temporary vehicle storage business are negligible at less than 25 day. The project should not result in substantial adverse effects on ambient air quality, ch course or flow of water, substantially affect the quantity or quality of surface water, subs increase usage of natural resources or energy, nor alter a significant archeological, paleonl or historical site. Biological Environment 12-16. It is unlikely that there was significant sensitive native vegetation on the site prior to imprc as the site had been previously graded and the area surrounding the site is fully develope project is unlikely to have had a significant impact on the diversity of sensitive species habitat or resulted in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals. Human Environment 17-32; The proposed uses are consistent with the General Plan and are compatible with the existj of the area. With only three employees on-site, no significant impacts are anticipated t( services or utilities. No increases in noise or light and glare are anticipated. This i: residential project, therefore, no housing is proposed. With only three employees, no si@ demand for additional housing is anticipated. Impacts to traffic and parking are negligible M, than 25 average daily trips. The project should not significantly impact scenic views or afi quality or quantity of recreational opportunities. -6- 0 0 ANALYSIS OF VIABLE ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSEE 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 [han now, f) alternate sites for the proposed project, and g). no project alternative. No impacts have been identified as a result of project implementation. The proposed project is sm, requiring no additional improvements. Thus, alternatives are impractical and unnecessary. -7- 0 0 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 r\ DECLARATION will be prepared. - I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, be environmental effects of the proposed project have already been considered in conjunc, previously certified environmental documents and no additional environmental review is Therefore, a Notice of Determination has been prepared. - I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attac 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 ENVIRON tMPACT REPORT is required. 4/d9r LA -0- Date Signature 41 I7" Dkte ' Planning Direct% u Tw vd -8-