Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1996-04-03; Planning Commission; Resolution 39121 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. 3912 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA APPROVING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR A SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDMENT TO ALLOW A 12,200 SQUARE FOOT EXPANSION TO THE EXISTING PRICE CLUB BUILDING ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED SOUTH OF PALOMAR AIRPORT ROAD BETWEEN PASEO DEL NORTE AND HIDDEN VALLEY ROAD IN LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 5. CASE NAME: PRICE CLUB EXPANSION CASE NO: SDP 90-05(A) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 3rd day of April, 19! a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request, and WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all te! and arguments, examining the initial study, analyzing the information submitted by st considering any written comments received, the Planning Commission considered all relating to the Negative Declaration. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Pi Commission as follows: A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct. B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Pi Commission hereby APPROVES the Negative Declaration accord Exhibit "ND", dated March 3, 1996, and "PII", dated February 23, attached hereto and made a part hereof, based on the following findj Findings: 1. The Planning Director has found that, based on the EIA Part-11, this Subs Project was described in the MEIR 93-01 as within its scope with regard to air and circulation; AND there will be no additional significant effect, not ar therein; AND that no new or additional mitigation measures or alternatit required; AND that therefore this Subsequent Project is within the scope of th EIR; and no new environmental document nor Public Resources Code 21081 fi are required. .... 0 0 1 Project have been incorporated into this Subsequent Project. 2 2. The Planning Commission finds that all feasible mitigation measures 01: alternatives identified in the MEIR 93-01 which are appropriate to this SUI 3 t 3. The initial study shows that there is no substantial evidence that the project r, 4 4. The site has been previously graded pursuant to an earlier environmental i 5 a significant impact on the environment. 6 5. The streets are adequate in size to handle traffic generated by the proposed 7 /I 6. There are no sensitive resources located onsite or located so as to be sigr 8 9 impacted by this project. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting ’ * 11 Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 3rd day of Apr ” 11 by the following vote, to wit: 12 13 14 15 16 17 AYES: Chairperson Compas, Commissioners Monroy, Nielsen Savary and Welshons NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Erwin ABSTAIN: None 18 19 20 21 d& h d WILLIAM COMPAS, Chairperson 22 II CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION 23 24 ATTEST: 25 26 27 MICHAEL J. ~T~LZMWLER Planning Director 28 PC RES0 NO. 3912 -2- I! * City of 0 Carlsbac NEGATIVE DECLARATION PROJECT ADDRESS/LOCATION: South of Palomar Airport Road, between Pase del Norte and Hidden Valley Road, in the City ( Carlsbad, County of San Diego. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Request for a Site Development Plan Amendment tl allow a 12,200 square foot addition to the existin! 121,000 square foot Price Club warehouse retail cent€ within the existing developed area. The City of Carlsbad has conducted an environmental review of the above describe1 project pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environment: Quality Act and the Environmental Protection Ordinance of the City of Carlsbad. As 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 Negative Declaration with supportive documents is on file in the Planninl Department, 2075 Las Palmas Drive, Carlsbad, California 92009. Comments from th public are invited. Please submit comments in writing to the Planning Department withi 30 days of date of issuance. If you have any questions, please call Mike Grim in th Planning Department at (61 9) 438-1 161, extension 4499. i result of said review, a Negative Declaration (declaration that the project will not have DATED: MARCH 3, 1996 CASE NO: SDP 90-05(A) CASE NAME: PRICE CLUB EXPANSION PUBLISH DATE: MARCH 3, 1996 h &X& MG:kr 2075 Las Palmas Dr. 0 Carlsbad, CA 92009-1 576 - (61 9) 438-11 61 - FAX (61 9) 438-089~ e 0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART II (TO BE COMPLETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT) CASE NO. SDP 904 DATE: February BACKGROUND 1. CASE NAME: Price Club Addition 2. APPLICANT: Mulvanny Partnership 3. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: 11820 Northrup Way, Suite E-300, 4. DATE EM FORM PART I SUBMITTED: November 16, 1995 5. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: 12,200 square foot addition to existing 121,000 square foot PI buildinp generally located east of Interstate 5, south of Palomar Airport Road and west of 1 Norte, in the City of Carlsbad. WA 98005 SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The summary of environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involvir one impact that is a “Potentially Significant Impact’’, or “Potentially Significant Impact Unless R, Incorporated” as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. - Land Use and Planning - Transportation/Circulation - Public Services - Population and ,Housing - Biological Resources - Utilities and Service - Geological Problems - Energy and Mineral Resources - Aesthetics - Water - Hazards - Cultural Resources - Air Quality - Noise - Recreation - Mandatory Findings of Significance 1 Rev. 3/28/95 0 DETERMINATION. 0 (To be completed by the Lead Agency). On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I fiid that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that the proposed project MAY have significant effect(s) on the environment, but at least one potentially significant effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicab legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as descril on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standa~ and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project Therefore, a Notice of Prior Compliance has been prepared. ; z/&b Planning Direcz SiMure Date 2 Rev. 3/28/95 0 0 Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact I. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal: a) Conflict with general plan designation or zoning? - - - b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project? - - - c) Be incompatible with existing land use in the vicinity? - - - d) Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g. impacts to soils or farmlands, or impacts from incompatible land uses)? - - - e) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community (including a low- income or minority community)? - - - 11. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the proposal: a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections? - - - b) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or indirectly (e.g. through projects in an undeveloped area or extension of major infrastructure)? - - - c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable housing? - - - 111. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result in or expose people to potential impacts involving: a) Fault rupture? - - - 3 Rev. 3/28/95 J 0 0 Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): b) Seismic ground shaking? c) Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? d) Seiche, tsunami, or volcanic hazard? e) Landslides or mudflows? f) Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading, or fill? g) Subsidence of the land? h) Expansive soils? i) Unique geologic or physical features? IV. WATER. Would the proposal result in: a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff? b) Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding? c) Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of surface water quality (e.g. temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity)? d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any water body? e) Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements? Potentially Significant Impact - - - - - - - - - - - - - Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Mitigation Significant Incorporated Impact - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 4 Rev. 3/28/95 0 0 Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact f) Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations or through substantial loss of groundwater recharge capability? - - - g) Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater? - - - h) Impacts to groundwater quality? - - - i) Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater otherwise available for public water supplies? - - - V. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal: a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation? - - - b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? - - - c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or cause any change in climate? - - - d) Create objectionable odors? - - - VI. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the proposal result in: a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? - - - b) Hazards to safety from design features (e.g. sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (eg farm equipment)? c) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses? - - - - - - 5 Rev. 3/28/95 0 Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): d) Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site? e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? f) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation (e.g. bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? g) Rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts? VII. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal result in impacts to: a) Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats (including but not limited to plants, fish, insects, animals, and birds? b) Locally designated species (e.g. heritage trees)? c) Locally designated natural communities (e.g. oak forest, coastal habitat, etc.)? d) Wetland habitat (eg marsh, riparian and vernal pool)? e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? VIII. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal: a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient manner? 6 0 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Rev. 3/28/95 0 0 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): Impact Incorporated Impact c) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of future value to the region and the residents of the State? - - - IX. HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve: a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to: oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation? - - - b) Possible interference with an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? c) The creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard? d) Exposure of people to existing sources of potential health hazards? e) Increase fire hazard in areas with flammable brush, grass, or trees? - - - - - - - - - - - - X. NOISE. Would the proposal result in: a) Increases in existing noise levels? - - - b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? - - - XI. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered government services in any of the following areas: a) Fire protection? - - - b) Police protection? - - - c) Schools? - - - 7 Rev. 3/28/95 e Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): Impact Incorporated Impact d) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? - - - e) Other governmental services? - - - XII. UTILITIES AND SERVICES SYSTEMS. Would the proposal result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a) Power or natural gas? - - - b) Communications systems? - - - c) Local or regional water treatment or distribution facilities? - - - d) Sewer or septic tanks? - - - e) Storm water drainage? - - - f) Solid waste disposal? - - - g) Local or regional water supplies? - - - XIII. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal: a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? b) Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect? - - - - - - c) Create light or glare? - - - XIV. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal: a) Disturb paleontological resources? - - - 8 Rev. 3/28/95 0 Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): b) Disturb archaeological resources? c) Affect historical resources? d) Have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? e) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? XV. RECREATION. Would the proposal: a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities? b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? Potentially Significant Impact - - - - - - Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Mitigation Significant Incorporated Impact - - - - - - - - - - - - 9 Rev. 3/28/95 0 0 Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): XVI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality qf 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 endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of a 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) c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact - - - - - - - - - 10 Rev. 3/28/95 0 0 XVII. EARLIER ANALYSES. The Price Club Expansion project qualifies as a Subsequent Project with respect to the previous1 Environmental Impact Report pursuant to section 15168(c) of the State CEQA Guidelines, that being the 1 recent update to the City’s General Plan. This document examined the cumulative impacts of air q circulation and made a Statement of Oveniding Consideration regarding these regionally-based impacts detailed discussion of this environemtnal evaluation can be found in sections V (Air Quality (Transportation/Circulation) below. 11 Rev. 3/28/95 0 8 DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION The proposed Price Club addition involves the expansion of an existing retail building into an currently occupied by landscaping and parking. The parking amounts after construction will still be than that required by local ordinance and all landscaping will be replaced in like kind and inte~ Based upon review of the proposed specific plan project, the Planning Director finds that no signii adverse environmental impacts associated with the project. Therefore, a Negative Declaration WI filed. Following is the analysis that supports the declaration of no significant effect on the environr The analysis takes the format of the preceding checklist. I. LAND USE AND PLANNING. a) Conflict with general plan designation or zoning? No alterations to the general plan or zoning are proposed. The proposed bakery and preparation uses fit within the allowed commercial uses on site and the building expansior, meets all applicable zoning development standards. No conflict with the general plan design; or zoning will occur. b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies adopted by agencies jurisdiction over the project? The proposed 12,200 square foot expansion does not cause any conflicts with the preT Negative Declaration or the City's MER. As shown above the project does not conflict wit! general plan or zoning. The expansion of the existing retail use is also not in conflict wit1 applicable Local Coastal Program segment. c) Be incompatible with existing land use in the vicinity? The existing land uses are either commercial or industrial in nature which produce no cod with the proposed commercial expansion. d) Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g. impacts to soils or farmlands, or imp from incompatible land uses)? No agricultural resources or operations exist within the fully developed project site and no site impacts should result from the 12,200 square foot expansion. Therefore, the Price ( Expansion should not affect agricultural resource or operations. e) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community (including a income or minority community)? No residential development exist within or adjacent to the Price Club site and the buil expansion would occupy an area already used for landscaping and parking. The proposal not disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community. 12 Rev. 3/28/95 0 0 11. POPULATION AND HOUSING. a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections? Since the Price Club Expansion project does not involve any residential developmen alterations in the population projections should result from the construction and occupatic the proposal. b) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or indirectly (e.g. through projec an undeveloped area or extension of major infrastructure)? The proposed commercial expansion does not involve any residential development an( expansion of an existing retail operation by ten percent will not induce large amount of grc Therefore, no substantial growth will occw in the area, either directly or indirectly, due tc expansion project. c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable housing? Since no residential development exists within or adjacent to the Price Club site, no displace] of existing housing will occur. 111. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result in or expose people to potential impacts involving: Fault rupture, seismic ground shaking or seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? No faults exist in the project area and only remedial grading is proposed with the 12,200 sq foot commercial expansion project therefore no risk of exposure of people to potential imp involving fault rupture, seismic ground shaking, seismic ground failure exists. Seiche, tsunami, or volcanic hazard? No large bodies of water, oceans or volcanos exist within close proximity to the existing E Club site and the expansion project does not propose any development that would increase proximity to these features or expose people to risk of impacts involving seiches, tsunami volcanic hazards. Landslides, mudflows, erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions fi excavation, grading, or fill, subsidence of the land, expansive soils or unique geologic physical features? Since only remedial grading is proposed with the commercial expansion project, no signifi earthwork will be conducted in conjunction with the development. All remedial gral operations will be subject to the existing process of grading permit review and enginee standards with regard to erosion control, slope stability and soil compaction. No unique geolc or physical features exist within the Price Club site therefore no impacts to such will result 13 Rev. 3/28/95 e 0 IV. WATER. Would the proposal result in: a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface ru' The Price Club Expansion proposes only minor alterations to the existing drainage swales v the parking lot and, with the conservation of landscaping area, no alteration to su absorptivity will occur. The rate and amount of surface runoff should remain unaffected , only minor physical alterations are included in the project. Therefore no significant impact: to drainage or runoff should occur. b) Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding? Since the site is fully developed and designed with drainage structures and without sump exposure of people to water related hazards should occur with the proposed come expansion. c) Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of surface water quality (e.g. temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity)? No surface waters exist within the Price Club site and none are proposed with the expal project. All runoff shall continue to be channelled into the existing pollutant elimination sy: Therefore, no discharge into or other alteration of surface waters will occur as a result ol Price Club Expansion project. e) Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements? No watercourses lie within the Price Club site and none are proposed with the comme expansion project. There is a drainage course adjacent to the site, however no expansio alteration of this drainage is proposed. Therefore, no changes in currents or the cours direction of water movements will occur. f) Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrav or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations or through substantial 10s groundwater recharge capability? Since only remedial grading is proposed with the Price Club Expansions project, no cui excavations that would intercept an aquifer or reduce groundwater recharge capability will o as a result of development. No wells or other groundwater extraction systems are include the commercial expansion and no impacts to groundwater quality or quantity are expected. g) Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater, impact groundwater quality, substantially reduce the amount of groundwater otherwise available for public w supplies? As discussed above, no alteration of the groundwater supply or system is proposed or expe due to the construction and occupation of the commercial expansion project. Therefore, change in the direction or rate of flow of any groundwater sources should occur, nor should impacts to the groundwater quality or quantity occur. 14 Rev. 3/28/95 0 0 V. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal: Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air qt violation; expose sensitive receptors to pollutants; alter air movement, moisturc temperature, or cause any change in climate; or create objectionable odors? The implementation of subsequent projects that are consistent with and included in the upc 1994 General Plan will result in increased gas and electric power consumption and vehicle 1 traveled. These subsequently result in increases in the emission of carbon monoxide, rea organic gases, oxides of nitrogen and sulfur, and suspended particulates. These aerosols ar major contributors to air pollution in the City as well as in the San Diego Air Basin. Sinc San Diego Air Basin is a “non-attainment basin”, any additional air emissions are consic cumulatively significant: therefore, continued development to buildout as proposed in the upc General Plan will have cumulative significant impacts on the air quality of the region. To lessen or minimize the impact on air quality associated with General Plan buildout, a va of mitigation measures are recommended in the Final Master EIR. These include: 1) provi: for roadway and intersection improvements prior to or concurrent with development; 2) mea: to reduce vehicle trips through the implementation of Congestion and Transportation Der Management; 3) provisions to encourage alternative modes of transportation including transit services; 4) conditions to promote energy efficient building and site design; an participation in regional growth management strategies when adopted. The applicable appropriate General Plan air quality mitigation measures have either been incorporated intc design of the project or are included as conditions of project approval. Operation-related emissions are considered cumulatively significant because the project is loc within a “non-attainment basin”, therefore, the “Initial Study” checklist is marked “Potent Significant Impact”. This project is consistent with the General Plan, therefore, the prepar: of an EIR is not required because the certification of Final Master EIR 93-01, by City COL Resolution No. 94-246, included a “Statement Of Overriding Considerations” for air qu; impacts. This “Statement Of Overriding Considerations” applies to all subsequent proj covered by the General Plan’s Final Master EIR, including this project, therefore, no ful environmental review of air quality impacts is required. This document is available at Planning Department. VI. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the proposal result in: Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion; hazards to safety from design features (e.g. sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g. farm equipme inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses; insufficient parking capacity on or off-site; hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists; conflicts with adopted polj supporting alternative transportation (e.g. bus turnouts, bicycle racks); or rail, waterbc or air traffic impacts? The implementation of subsequent projects that are consistent with and included in the upd 15 Rev. 3/28/95 0 e 1994 General Plan will result in increased traffic volumes. Roadway segments will be adec to accommodate buildout traffic; however, 12 full and 2 partial intersections will be sev impacted by regional through-traffic over which the City has no jurisdictional control. 1 generally include all freeway interchange areas and major intersections along Carlsbad Boule Even with the implementation of roadway improvements, a number of intersections are projj to fail the City’s adopted Growth Management performance standards at buildout. To lessen or minimize the impact on circulation associated with General Plan buildout, numl mitigation measures have been recommended in the Final Master EIR. These include mea: to ensure the provision of circulation facilities concurrent with need; 2) provisions to del alternative modes of transportation such as trails, bicycle routes, additional sidewalks, pede5 linkages, and commuter rail systems; and 3) participation in regional circulation strategies 1 adopted. The diversion of regional through-traffic from a failing Interstate or State Highway City streets creates impacts that are not within the jurisdiction of the City to control. applicable and appropriate General Plan circulation mitigation measures have either incorporated into the design of the project or are included as conditions of project approv; Regional related circulation impacts are considered cumulatively significant because of the f; of intersections at buildout of the General Plan due to regional through-traffic, therefore “Initial Study” checklist is marked “Potentially Significant Impact”. This project is consi with the General Plan, therefore, the preparation of an EIR is not required because the rc certification of Final Master EIR 93-01, by City Council Resolution No. 94-246, includ “Statement Of Overriding Considerations” for circulation impacts. This “Statement Of Overrj Considerations” applies to all subsequent projects covered by the General Plan’s Master including this project, therefore, no further environmental review of circulation impac required. 16 Rev. 3/28/95 0 0 VII. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal result in impacts to: Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats (including but not limited to plants, fish, insects, animals, and birds? Since the Price Club site and surrounds are already developed, no endangered, threatened 0: species or their habitats exist within or in proximity to the urbanized site and no impacts to should result. Locally designated species (e.g. heritage trees) or locally designated natural commur (e.g. oak forest, coastal habitat, etc.)? As the Price Club site is fully urbanized, no sensitive or locally designated species or na communities exist within the development area. All development will be well contained 01 and not encroach into any previously undeveloped areas. Wetland habitat (e.g. marsh, riparian and vernal pool)? No marshes, riparian areas, vernal pools or other wetland habitat exist within the urbanized 1 Club expansion area and, therefore, no adverse impacts to such should result due to the spe plan project. Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? No wildlife use the urbanized Price Club site for dispersal or migration, therefore the prop commercial expansion within the developed site will not adversely affect wildlife dispers migration. VIII. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal: a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? All required energy conservation techniques will be incorporated into the construction oi commercial expansion through the building permit plancheck process and no specific en conservation or utilization plans are included in the project. All applicable existing and fi energy conservation plans would still apply to the Price Club Expansion and, therefore conflicts would occur. b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient manner? The use of non-renewable resources in the Price Club proceeds under the same regulatior throughout the remainder of the City. No components of the proposed commercial expan would encourage or otherwise cause the use of non-renewable resources in a wasteful ar inefficient manner. 17 Rev. 3/28/95 9 0 c) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of future T to the region and the residents of the State? No known mineral resources exist within the Price Club site, therefore no loss of availabili such would occur with the development and occupation of the commercial expansion. discussed above, the resource consumption rates for the Price Club are not expected to ck significantly because of the 12,200 square foot expansion, therefore no loss in availabilit; to excess consumption should occur. IX. HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve: a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to: oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation? All proposed construction is subject to Fire Department approval and inspection an1 potentially volatile substances on site must be kept in a fashion consistent with current s regulations. No increase in the risk of explosion or accidental explosion or release of hazar substances should occur as a result of the Price Club Expansion project. b) Possible interference with an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? All existing circulation patterns on and off site are remaining or being replaced in like directly adjacent to their previous position. Therefore no barriers to emergency respons evacuation plans will result. c) The creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard? As stated above all volatile materials used for construction will be securely stored and u inspection by the Fire Department. All internal operations of the proposed bakery, meat and preparation areas are under the San Diego County Health Department jurisdiction and 1 remain in a healthy status. Therefore, no health hazards or potential health hazards will rt from the Price Club Expansion project. d) Exposure of people to existing sources of potential health hazards? No existing sources of potential health hazards have been identified within the Price Club No new sources of potential health hazards are proposed with the project therefore, no ri: exposure of people to existing sources of potential health hazards should occur. e) Increase fire hazard in areas with flammable brush, grass, or trees? No areas of flammable brush, grass or trees exist within the Price Club site and no flamm brush, grass or trees are proposed with the project. Therefore, no increase in fire hazards sh result. 18 Rev. 3/28/95 * 0 X. NOISE. Would the proposal result in: a) Increases in existing noise levels? There will be a short-term, incidental increase in noise levels during construction of the Club Expansion however, upon completion, the occupation of the commercial addition wil create any additional noise. Therefore, no significant increase in existing noise levels sl occur as a result of the proposed development. b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? The prominent noise sources related to the project are during construction. These constru noise sources are not considered severe. Since no new noise sources are proposed wit1 commercial addition, no increase in the current exposure of people to these existing noise 11 will occur and no significant adverse impacts should result. XI. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for ne altered government services in any of the following areas: 0 Fire and police protection? The existing levels of fire and police protection for the Price Club site are adequate and : current Growth Management standards. All development plans for the proposed expansiol subject to Fire Department review and the expansion project will not necessitate an increa: the required level of fire or police protection services. Schools? The Price Club Expansion is a non-residential project and does not contribute to the neec schools. Therefore, no significant adverse impacts to school facilities should result. 0 Maintenance of public facilities, including roads, and other governmental series? All public facilities serving the Price Club site are currently, and will continue to be, mainta through the City’s Community Service Department. Since maintenance of existing pi facilities, and future, planned facilities, are managed through General Fund monies, no additi governmental services will be required to meet demands and no adverse impacts to such sh occur. XII. UTILITIES AND SERVICES SYSTEMS. Would the proposal result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations to the following utilities: Power or natural gas transmission or communication systems? The Price Club Expansion involves a proportionately small increase in square footage, ten pel of the existing building size, and will not significantly contribute to the need for new powc 19 Rev. 3/28/95 * 0 natural gas systems or supplies. All existing ' communication systems should also re adequate to serve the Price Club addition and no adverse impacts to such should occur. Local or regional water treatment or distribution facilities, sewer or septic tanks, si water drainage, local or regional water supplies? All water and sewer treatment, distribution, drainage and water supply facilities and sys needed to serve the Price Club and the proposed expansion are in place. No septic tanks or are proposed within the project site. Since the proposed expansion is relatively smal expansion of the existing facilities and systems is needed and no adverse impacts to such sh occur. Solid waste disposal? Solid waste disposal is handled by Coast Waste Management on a City-wide basis. The : Club site and proposed expansion are currently served by this solid waste disposal and mL and the ten percent expansion of the existing facility will not impact solid waste dis~ systems in a significantly adverse manner. XIII. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal: Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway of have a demonstrable negative aesthetic affe No scenic vistas or scenic highways exist within the Price Club site. The site is visible : Interstate 5 and Palomar Airport Road, both of which are designated as potential scenic corric The architecture and landscaping for the proposed expansion will match the existing developr and the mass of the commercial addition is proportionate to the existing building. demonstratable negative aesthetic effects to scenic vistas or scenic highways will result. Create light or glare? Since the project involves an expansion of the existing building, all existing light sources simply be relocated and no new sources of light of glare will be created. XIV. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal: Disturb paleontological or archeological resources? Since the Price Club site is already developed and no significant grading is proposed with Barrio Specific Plan Project, no paloentological or archeological resources likely remain or likely be disturbed. No significant adverse impacts to paleontological or archeological resou should occur. Affect historical resources? No historical resources exist within or in proximity to the recently developed Price Club therefore no significant adverse impacts to such should occur. 20 Rev. 3/28/95 9 0 Have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultu values? No areas of unique ethnic cultural values exist within or in close proximity to the Price Clul and, therefore, the proposed expansion will have no affect on such. Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? No religious or sacred uses exist within or in close proximity to the Price Club site, there no significant impacts to such will occur. XV. RECREATION. Would the proposal: a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilit Since no residential development is proposed with the Price Club Expansion project, no inc~ in the demand for recreational facilities will occur. b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? No recreational opportunities currently exist within or in close proximity to the Price Club and no adverse impacts to such will occur. 21 Rev. 3/28/95 0 e XVI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substanl reduce the habitat of a fish or wild life species, cause a fish or wildlife population to below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduc number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or elim important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? As previously stated, no significant habitat exists within the developed Price Club site an significant examples of California history or pre-history are present. Therefore no signif adverse impacts to the quality or quantity or environment, habitat or plant or animal corn1 should result. b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively consider2 (“Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of a project considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of c current projects, and the effects of probable future projects) Since no significant impacts are anticipated and the proposal is consistent with the City’s Ge Plan, no cumulative considerable impacts will occur. c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effecl human beings, either directly or indirectly? As explained above, no adverse impacts should result from the Price Club Expansion projecl would indirectly or directly impact human beings since no dangerous conditions will be crt and all required public facilities are in place to serve development. 22 Rev. 3/28/95 9 0 LIST MITIGATING MEASURES (IF APPLICABLE) N/A ATTACH MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM (IF APPLICABLE) N/A 23 Rev. 3/28/95 9 e APPLICANT CONCURRENCE WITH MITIGATION MEASURES THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT I HAVE REVIEWED THE ABOVE MITIGATING MEASI AND CONCUR WITH THE ADDITION OF THESE MEASURES TO THE PROJECT. Date Signature 24 Rev. 3/28/95 NEGATIVE DECLARATION PROJECT ADDRESS/LOCATION: South of Palomar Airport Road, between del Norte and Hidden Valley Road, in the Carlsbad, County of San Diego. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Request for a Site Development Plan Amendrr allow a 12,200 square foot addition to the e 121,000 square foot Price Club warehouse retail within the existing developed area. The City of Carlsbad has conducted an environmental review of the above de: project pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation of the ,California Environ Quality Act and the Environmental Protection Ordinance of the City of Carlsbad : result of said review, a Negative Declaration (declaration that the project will not significant impact on the environment) is hereby issued for the subject F 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 PI; Department, 2075 Las Palmas Drive, Carlsbad, California 92009. Comments frc public are invited. Please submit comments in writing to the Planning Departmeni 30 days of date of issuance. If you have any questions, please call Mike Grim Planning Department at (61 9) 438-1 161, extension 4499. DATED: MARCH 3, 1996 CASE NO: SDP 90-05(A) CASE NAME: PRICE CLUB EXPANSION PUBLISH DATE: MARCH 3, 1996 h &Ai%! MG:kr 2075 Las Palmas Or. .I Carlsbad. CA 92009-1576 (619) 438-1161 FAX (61 9) 43t ~ ~~ ~ ~~