Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1994-07-20; Planning Commission; Resolution 36861 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 e PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3686 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FORA CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW THE HOLY CROSS EPISCOPAL CHURCH TO LOCATE TO AN EXISTING SUITE OF APPROXIMATELY 4,570 SQUARE FEET WITHIN AN INDUSTRIAL OFFICE COMPLEX FOR A FIVE YEAR PERIOD AT 6066 CORTE DEL CEDRO IN FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 5. CASE NAME: HOLY CROSS EPISCOPAL CHURCH CASE NO: CUP 94-03 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 20th day of July, l! THE P-M ZONE IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD IN LOCAL 10 duly noticed public hearings as prescribed by law to consider said request, and 11 WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all t 12 and arguments, examining the initial study, analyzing the information submitted l3 11 and considering any written comments received, the Planning Commission consi 14 15 factors relating to the Mitigated Negative Declaration. 16 I) NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning COI 17 11 as follows: I.8 il A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct. 19 20 21 22 B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission hereby APPROVES the Mitigated Negative Declaration a to Exhibit "ND", dated May 28, 1994, and "PII", dated May 1: attached hereto and made a part hereof, based on the following find subject to the following condition: 23 I1 FindinF: 24 25 26 27 1. The initial study shows that there is no substantial evidence that the pro have a significant impact on the environment since the proposed church IC for an existing suite within an existing industrial office complex that recc environmental review with its original approval (CT 80-27). By all01 proposed church (considered an assembly type use) for a five year pt significant environmental impacts will be created. 28 II 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 a 9 10 0 0 2. The site has been previously graded and contains no sensitive animal species. The site is currently developed and a use intensification within ar suite will not create additional or new environmental impacts. 3. The existing streets are adequate in size to handle the anticipated traffic g by the church since the majority of church patronage and activity will not t during typical weekday working hours. The Corte del Cedro street systen internal site circulation will continue to be adequate in serving the area. 4. There are no sensitive resources located onsite, located in the vicinity or 1( as to be significantly impacted by the proposed use change and introducti church use for a five year period. 5. All environmental impacts identified in this project’s Mitigated Negative DE that require mitigation will be mitigated through the implementation of this conditions of approval as contained in Planning Commission Resolution P Condition: 11 II AI // 1. This approval is based on compliance with all conditions of approval of C1 12 as contained in Planning Commission Resolution No. 3687, inch l3 // Environmental Mitigation Conditions, incorporated herein by reference. 14 15 16 17 .... .... .... 18 .... 19 21 20 .... 23 22 24 **.* 25 .... 26 27 pc 28 .. . . .... .... RES0 NO. 3686 -2- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 e 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, 199 following vote, to wit: AYES: Chairperson Savary; Commissioners Noble, Mon Nielsen. NOES: Commissioners Compas, Erwin and Welshons. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. 11 12 l3 ATTEST: CAFUSBAD PLANNING-CO~MI: 14 11 15 16 I'7 PLANNING DIRECTOR v 18 19 20 21 I 22 23 24 25 I1 26 27 PC RES0 NO. 3686 -3 - 28 MITIGATED NEGATlVE DECLARATION PROJECT ADDRESS/LOCATION: Lot 11 of Carlsbad Tract CT 79-14, 6606 Corte D Cedro in the City of Carlsbad. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: A request for a Conditional Use Permit to allow the Holy Cro Episcopal Church to locate to an existing suite I approximately 4,570 square feet within an existing mull tenant industrial office complex (The Landing). The City of Carlsbad has conducted an environmental review of the above described proje pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality A and the Environmental Protection Ordinance of the City of Carlsbad. As a result of sa review, a Mitigated Negative Declaration (declaration that the project will not have significant impact on the environment) is hereby issued for the subject projec Justification for this action is on file in the Planning Department. A copy of the Mitigated Negative Declaration with supportive documents is on file in th Planning Department, 2075 Las Palmas Drive, Carlsbad, California 92009. Comments fro1 the public are invited. Please submit comments in writing to the Planning Departmer within 21 days of date of issuance. If you have any questions, please call Eric Munoz i the Planning Department at (619) 438-1161, extension 4441. DATED: MAY 28, 1994 CASE NO: CUP 94-03 Planning Director CASE NAME: HOLY CROSS EPISCOPAL CHURCH PUBLISH DATE: MAY 28,1994 ENM:vd 2075 Las Palmas Drive - Carlsbad. California 92009-1 576 - (61 9) 438-1 16 e 0. ENVIRONMENTAL EMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART II (TO BE COMPLETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT) BACKGROUND CASE NO. CUP 94-1 DATE: May 18. 1. CASE NAME: Holy Cross Episcopal Church 2. APPLICANT: Robert B. Haro 3. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: P.O. Box 92 Cardiff, CA 92007 1619) 943-8366 4. DATE EIA FORM PART I SUBMITTED: March 15. 1994 5. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: A request for a Conditional Use Permit to allow the I- Episcopal Church to locate to an existing suite of approximately 4,570 square feet existing multi-tenant industrial office complex (The Landing) at 6606 Corte Del Ced~ of Carlsbad Tract CT 79-14). Church office activities would take place during the T worship services occurring one weekday night out of the week, Sundays and holic request involves a three year approval for the use. Since a use change is (conditionally allowed assembly me use as opposed to the permitted industrial/c uses) environmental review must take place per CEOA. Since existing structures are the primary environmental consideration is public safety throunh compliance with the McClellan Airport Comprehensive Land Use Plan (CLUP) and land use compatibility sensitivity of the proposed use and the proximity to the airport. A Mitigated Declaration is beinn prepared to address related interior noise attenuation requirem ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS STATE CEQA GUIDELINES, Chapter 3, Article 5, section 15063 requires that the City co Environmental Impact Assessment to determine if a project may have a significant effect on the envj The Environmental Impact Assessment appears in the following pages in the form of a checkl checklist 8 identifies any physical, biological and human factors that might be impacted by the project and provides the City with information to use as the basis for deciding whether to PI Environmental Impact Report or Negative Declaration. * A Negative Declaration may be prepared if the City perceives no substantial evidence that the 1 any of its aspects may cause a significant effect on the environment. On the checklist, "NO" will bl to indicate this determination. . 0. ' An EIR must be prepared if the City determines that there is substantial evidence that any asF project may cause a simificant effect on the environment. The project may qualify for a Declaration however, if adverse impacts are mitigated so that environmental effects can b insinnificant. These findings are shown in the checklist under the headings 'YES-sig" and '* respectively. A discussion of potential impacts and the proposed mitigation measures appears at the end of the fc DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION. Particular attention should be given to 1 mitigation for impacts which would otherwise be determined significant. -2- 0 e PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: YES YES (sig) (insig) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 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? Use substantial amounts of fuel or energy? Alter a significant archeological, paleontological or historical site, structure or object? -3- NC ')i - E - r - r - - > - - 2 - r E - - - e e BIOLOGICAL, ENVIRONMENT WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: 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 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? YES (sigl HUMAN ENVIRONMENT WILL THE PROPOSAL .DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: 17. Alter the present or planned land use of an area? YES (sig) - 18. Substantially affect public utilities, schools, police, fire, emergency or other public services? - YES N( (insig) 7 A - - - - - - - YES NI (in%) 1 - - - - -4- a 0 HUMAN ENVIRONMENT WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: YES big) 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? - - 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? - - - -5- YES (insig) - N( - - 1 - - - - 1 - 7 - - - - - - - a 0 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: YES YES NC (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 comrnunity, 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. 1 - 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.) 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? 1 1 - . 1 - - -6- 0 0 DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION Physical Environment Since an existing multi-tenant industrial office/manufacturing complex is involved; and the prop a use change to allow a church group (Holy Cross) to conduct worship services during "off' hc adjacent tenants are mostly not there (a weekday night and Sundays/holidays), there will be no i the physical environment. No grading, earth movements, additional landscaping, exterio~ modifications or parking lot/circulation changes are required or involved. There will be no impa bodies of water (drainage channels, floodways, underground water tables, lagoons or ocean). TI nor adversely impact public water supplies, increase the usage of any natural resources or use 5 amounts of fuel or energy. No archeological, paleontological, historical or cultural resources will bc by the proposed use change to allow the church to operate in the existing suite being proposed. Biolonical Environment No sensitive plant or animal species are associated with this existing industrial office complex. No landscaping or other plant species will be introduced into the project area from the approval of tf conditional use permit request. No agricultural crops, prime or unique farmlands, or farmlands local importance are associated with the site. There will be no impacts to the biological environn project location since it is already built out. Human Environment Except for this project's requirement to attenuate interior noise levels consistent with the Paloma land use plan, this proposed use change and conditional use permit request will not impact any c( of the human environment of the project site as discussed below. The three year allowance of a church use at the proposed location will not significantly impact t or planned land uses of the area. As a conditional use, with conditions of approval and yearly n the church use will not alter the planned industrial/office uses permitted within the area. The tin church's worship services (a weekday night and Sundays/holidays) will not impact the mid-1 functions of the rest of the industrial/office complex. Only church office activities will take place weekdays. All public services and facilities are already in place and are adequate to serve the c The City's Fire Department has conditioned this project to submit building plans for review prior 1 permit issuance and to disclose to adjacent tenants that occupancies requiring the storage or use of materials can not be allowed while the church use is occurring. There will be no need for new or modified sewer systems, solid waste or hazardous waste contrc No new sources of light or glare are associated with the church use and hazardous materials are no hazardous materials are even restricted from the adjacent tenants per Fire Department condit church use will not involve any dwelling units so there will not be a significant alteration of the arc nor will there be an affect on existing housing or create the demand for additional housing. Additil will be created by the church use but since it will coincide with periods of low occupancy withir complex no adverse traffic or circulation impacts will occur. Existing parking facilities will be u will be adequate since a weekday night and Sundays/holidays will see most of the church's act associated parking requirements. -7- e 0 The proposed use change within the existing industrial office area will not impact the movemenl or services or alter present circulation pattern; will not alter waterborne, rail or air traffic; will nc traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians. Citywide emergency response plans or si emergency evacuation plans can be implemented with the conditional allowance of the proposed ch office complex in general and specifically the suite being proposed do not obstruct any scenic vista! aesthetically offensive public views. No recreational opportunities are associated with the church project location. The proposed use is listed as a conditionally compatible use within the Palomar Airport land Specifically, due to the proximity of the airport and the project’s location within the 60-65 CNEL (C Noise Equivalent Level) noise contours, the proposed church use must mitigate interior noise le CNEL. This requires a noise survey of existing interior noise levels and a listing of noise attenuatior that must be done structurally to the building to achieve the interior noise level maximum of 45 C requirement for the noise study and incorporation of noise mitigations into the building permit E will be specific mitigation requirements of this Mitigated Negative Declaration. Also invob requirement for an avigation easement which essentially discloses that the church is aware associated noise that may impact the proposed use during its operation. The church is awar environmental considerations and corresponding mitigation measures. Given the lack of envi impacts resulting from the three year approval of the Holy Cross Episcopal Church and the r required to address airport noise on the use, no significant environmental impacts are associatec project and a Mitigated Negative Declaration will be prepared. -8- 0 e 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. a) This project is not of appropriate scale to consider phasing. b) No site designs are involved since an existing office complex and suite are involved. 1 floor plans have been reviewed but they create no environmental impact consideration c) The proposed scale of development is appropriate and does not warrant an asse alternative scales of development; an existing suite is proposed to be used for a churd d) Other uses are specifically allowed on the project site (warehouse, manufacturing and o However, the proposed use can be allowed and supported for a three year initial apprc if adequately conditioned. e) Development at some future time would not lessen any environmental impacts or cons The church is viewing this site for a 3 to 6 year time period at which time they hope to another location with a more permanent type set-up/building space. f) Alternative sites for the church would be desirable to lessen and possibly eliminate th noise attenuation concerns. However, the proposal will be adequately conditioned s approval of the church for a three year period can be supported. g) The no project alternative would leave the church without a place to congregate and w would leave the subject space vacant and without occupancy. More importantly, the alternative would not create a far superior situation as far as environmental impacts. conditional use permit conditions and requirements, staff can recommend approval of t -9- e 0 'DETERMINATION (To Be Completed By The Planning Department) On the basis of this initial evaluation: - I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a P DECUIRATION will be prepared. - I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, bl environmental effects of the proposed project have already been considered in conjun, previously certified environmental documents and no additional environmental review is Therefore, a Notice of Determination has been prepared. X 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 Mitinated Negative Declaration will be ProDosed. - I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIROI IMPACT REPORT is required. S*Zi* 9Y ci& mLG7 . - .r Date Signature 3 - qyb ,4Mii Planning Director . LIST MITIGATING MEASURES (IF APPLICABLE) Mitigation measures: 1. A noise study assessing existing interior noise levels and outlining building retro-fit mitj attenuate interior noise levels to 45 CNEL shall be submitted to the Planning Director p: issuance of building permits. 2. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the noise attenuation measures identified in the r shall be incorporated into the building permit plans and construction. -10- 0 0 '3. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the property owner shall record an avigation easeme property to the County of San Diego and submit a copy of the recorded document to the Director. ATTACH MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM (IF APPLICABLE) -11- 0 9 'APPLICANT CONCURRENCE WITH MITIGATING MEASURES THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT I HAVE REVIEWED THE ABOVE MITIGATING MEASURES AND CONCUR WITH THE ADDITION OF THESE MEASURES TO THE PROJECT. TM" x bq Wid Date" ENM:vd -12- ENVIRQ~~~M mGAmON MO-RING~ECKUST Page 101 NILilVULR Z f 5 U m .. 5 rn E 3 z =! w CL 5 8 l .;a 8 8 .13 2 8 z .. z U b 0 E 5 :I rY Q, :& z 3 4.4 :# .. 2 $ l3 z 2 9 != 2 r3 1: z Id (3 t Q\ 0 N r( (5 CJ .. E d $ g k$ aGu $J -3 g 8 :p %$ m = 30 a5 *a (d a 22 4.4 3 0527 ",E x.2 % 0-2 .sj *f; 0 c1 VIP -au VMY -- VI Q1 asv gz 5 3 59 ; .F y %-a M g afj 01 2 (d *!a *:g oog .; 4 .? 5 3 -2 uvg s gs s '5; 3 -%I Q) T Y 55 &5 El *g i3 a g4 vs 3 d$ gzgj EM M -n 5 o(d mh suo oa 2-E v, 0 a%? jii G- o -5 2 a%% cd :C@q 2 5'Sd 2 azs 0 zcu gEg 0 z g-g -3 ac: 5-5 8 QI .f g 2 6 oi;; 3033 * Q) -9 2 2. d- co +sa - ,dGUa, b o Ed $ Y dad -3 2 2 3 E 53 .F:n g g -2 3 3 0 2s V ~ aJa (d a a 9 2 (dY &%(d -3 3 7 .$ .d q$$ b-a ma d mq: WEE0 -E VI2 g 04 az -2 z.5 (d 2358 ac b a$ g Q) 0 2-s gszs E .I? 2 .5 -E c &, $2.2 5 Gcq 3dao O-2 G % B&I,,% -5 a 3 '43 g II II g s e$: E$ E.?@ It a.2 5% 2 3 $ g:d dm r&m a bo a, $ a* 3E:d ~1 boo =JGbosbo E ":ng.s GZgj c VI a)& 04 (dr 0; an32 *- a a 11s oh as? bEm>d Rod Q) aJ