HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001-09-18; City Council; 16329; Chase Field Restroom/Snack Bar Facility-
A
CITY OF CARLSBAD - AGENDA BILL w A.k 1
B# lb, 3aT TITLE:
AUTHORIZATION TO ADVERTISE FOR BIDS TO REMODEL
MTG. 9/l 1 /Ol CHASE FIELD RESTROOM/SNACK BAR FACILITY
CONTRACT NO. FAC02-06
DEPT. PW/GS 1 1 CITY MGR w
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Adopt Resolution No. soot- 2 7 ? approving contract documents, special provisions
and specifications, and authorizing the City Clerk to advertise for bids to remodel the
restroom/snack bar facility at Chase Field - Contract No. FAC02-06.
ITEM EXPLANATION:
Chase Field consists of a one-acre parcel, which has been actively used by youth
baseball and softball activities for northern Carlsbad for the past 30-plus years.
Volunteers originally constructed the field in the 1960s. Over the years, the City has
provided improvements to this site, which have included new fencing and backstops, new
bleachers, improved landscaping, new dugout facilities and some minor park furnishings
(trash receptacles and picnic benches). Over 800 members of youth groups and their
parents use the three-baseball field complex. Local residents also use the fields for pick-
up games.
The older restroom/snack bar facility built by volunteers and then improved in the 1980s
from City funds, is in need of replacement. The restroom is in poor condition and suffers
from poor drainage and air circulation. The snack bar portion is overly crowded into a
small space. There is inadequate storage for Park Maintenance materials and for the
youth groups’ needs. Remodeling this facility will remedy these problems.
The project will include replacing the existing 850 square foot, single-story building with a
2,692 square foot, two-story building. The new building will be located on, and slightly
beyond, the existing building footprint. See site plan as Exhibit 2. Use of the new building
will continue to be for restrooms, concessions, and storage.
In addition to the renovation plans, this project will include the installation of two batting
cage facilities. The two batting cages are identical and consist of a rectangular shaped
area, which is fully enclosed with chain link fencing material. Initially, ball pitching will be
manual. Ultimately, however, a mechanical ball-pitching machine may be installed in the
cage(s). The batting cages will be located adjacent to the outfield of one of the ball fields,
along Chestnut Avenue.
The Carlsbad Youth Baseball organization has reviewed the plans and is in agreement
with this project. On November 20, 2000, the City’s Parks and Recreation Commission
reviewed and approved this project. And, on February 7, 2001, the City’s Planning
Commission adopted Resolution No. 4907 approving CUP 00-16 for this project.
Attached, as Exhibit 3 is the minutes from the Parks and Recreation Commission, as well
as the staff report and resolution from the Planning Commission.
It is estimated that this project will cost $160,000 and will take approximately 100 days to
complete. Contract documents and plans are on file in the Public Works/General
Services office. This project will address the Council Goal as described below.
“Ensure the effective and efficient delivery of top-quality services to our
community.”
PAGE 2 OF AGENDA BILL NO. 1 b I 327
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
A Negative Declaration has been prepared in accordance with requirements of CEQA and
has been approved by the Planning Commission on February 7, 2001 (Resolution No.
4906).
FISCAL IMPACT:
The estimated cost for this project is $160,000. Sufficient funds are available in the City’s
C.I.P. Program budget for this project.
EXHIBITS:
1. Resolution No. m\ -d 39approving contract documents, special provisions and
specifications, and authorizing the City Clerk to advertise for bids to remodel the
restroom/snack bar facility at Chase Field - Contract No. FAC02-06.
2. Project Site Plan.
3. Park and Recreation Commission Minutes and Planning Commission Report.
3
RESOLUTION NO. 2o01-27g
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CONTRACT
DOCUEMENTS, SPECIAL PROVISIONS AND SPECIFICATIONS
AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY CLERK TO ADVERTISE FOR
BIDS TO REMODEL THE RESTROOM/SNACK BAR FACILITY
AT CHASE FIELD - CONTRACT NO. FACO2-06
7 WHEREAS, the contract documents, special provisions and specifications for the
8 furnishing of all labor, material and equipment necessary to remodel the restroom/snack bar
9 facility at Chase Field, Contract No. FAC02-06 have been prepared and are on file in the Public
10 Works/General Services office and are incorporated by reference herein; and
11
12
WHEREAS, sufficient funds are available for this project in the Capital Improvement
Project budget.
13 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Carlsbad,
14 California, as follows:
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
1. That the above recitations are true and correct
2. That the contract documents, special provisions and specifications as presented are
hereby approved.
//I
I//
/I/
//I
//I
//I
//I
/I/
//I
Ill
I
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
9
li
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3. That the City Clerk of the City of Carlsbad is hereby authorized and directed to
proceed to publish, in accordance with law, Notice Inviting Bids for the work of said contract
documents, special provisions and specifications.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a Regular Meeting of the City Council of the
City of Carlsbad on the 18th day of September > 2001, by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Lewis, Kulchin, Finnila, and Hall.
NOES: None.
Al-TEST: ,i!
?
. . . /’
-2-
(SEAL)
* Dsawm omnilhrml -A
--+-
lMd, --- &!mL RE5TROOMICONCES5l0NFAClLlTY HIIW~w.seIWCIwi li 114*1-u* k 81(w.w
CHA5EFIEtP,CAKL56AD tat WmQula
3-x
EXHIBIT 2
_. -------
-
---_----_
-y- ! 1 ! ! ! I
1 ! 1 ! !
I
ii I!
7 ii ij 1 1 ! [ I i I--
I i.
A
c
CHESNLU AVENIE -_-____-_-.-.-------- ------------_---_-__~~-~-----~-.-----
-_-_-_-_-_-.-~---_--------~-~------~-~ __________________ PhLM AVENUE
T
1
I
.i ! ! ! ! ! ! I j !
i I I ! i ! I ! 1 j ! [ I j, ! ! ! ! 1 ! ! !
I-
! I
]
! I
yj i -4 --. i ,’ 9
fl
i
“*, 4’d ; #+ , .-e t l.,- 3’ - Nyrr, -. I I / I
j. i& 7. -
.-
RESTROOMICONCESSIONFAClLlTY
CHA5E FIELD, CAKL56AD
CT--
I
EXHIBIT 3
Parks and Recreation Commission -4- November 20,200O
ACTION: On motion by Commissioner Cox, AB #l lOO-7, to accept the
recommendations of the Ledgerwood Subcommittee as presented.
AYES: Chairman Davidson, Commissioners Cunningham, Ramirez, Cox, and
Pieratt
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: Commissioners Schulberg and Pacheco
8. AB #llOO-8 CHASE FIELD CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
Doug Duncanson, General Services Manager, gave the presentation on this item. He explained
that the site never had a Conditional Use Permit (CUP). He described the changes in detail. He
added that the concession stand was run by the Carlsbad Youth Baseball.
Questions and discussion included the following issues:
+ Where funds for additional items could come from
+ The importance of youth leagues being involved
Jim Comstock President of Carlsbad Youth Baseball, 2755 Jefferson Street, Carlsbad,
explained that the new snack bar was long overdue. He added that more storage rooms were
needed and that the bathrooms were embarrassing. He mentioned that the batting cages would
not impact any residents in the area. Mr. Comstock described what his group was trying to
accomplish in the barrio community. He commented that there was very little money available
for the Carlsbad Youth Baseball organization to contribute to the project.
Brian Donald, 2410 Stromberg, Carisbad, stated that he volunteered to help and work on the
project. He said that the batting cages would be a significant improvement for practice at the
field. He added that he did not think there would be a lot of money for the Carlsbad Youth
Baseball organization to contribute towards the project. Mr. Donald emphasized his belief that
this field should be brought up to standard before new fields were built.
Further questions and discussion included the following issues:
+ The possibility of improving restrooms in the interim
+ The impact on the baseball season
Mr. Donald stressed that the parents would put up with anything for this project to be
completed.
ACTION: On motion by Commissioner Cunningham, AB #l lOO-8, to direct staff to
continue with the Chase Field CUP.
AYES: Chairman Davidson, Commissioners Cunningham, Ramirez, Cox, and
Pieratt
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: Commissioners Schulberg and Pacheco
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Since there was a quorum of the commissioners who attended the October meeting, the Parks
and Recreation Commission voted on the October 16, 2000 minutes.
EXHIBIT 3
The City of Carlsbad Plaiming Department
A REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION
Item No. 1 0
Application complete date: November 14, 2000 - .
P.C. AGENDA OF: February 7,200l Project Planner: Jason Martin
Project Engineer: David Rick
SUBJECT: CUP 00-16 - CHASE FIELD - Request for approval of a Negative Declaration
and a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to allow improvements to, and establish a
CUP for, Chase Field, in the Open Space (OS) Zone in Local Facilities Management Zone 1.
I. RECOMMENDATION
That the Planning Commission ADOPT Planning Commission Resolution No. 4906
APPROVING a Negative Declaration and ADOPT Planning Commission Resolution No. 4907
APPROVING CUP 00- 16 based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein.
II. BACKGROUND
This item was scheduled for January 17,2001, but was continued due to the unavailability of the
representatives from Carlsbad Youth Baseball, the primary users of Chase Field.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Planning Commission Resolution No. 4906 (Neg Dee)
2. Planning Commission Resolution No. 4907 (CUP)
3. Staff Report dated January 17,200l with attachments
AUG-24-2001 FRI IO:54 AM CITY OF CARLSBAD FAX NO. 760 602 8559 P* 02
. . .9
1
2
3
4
s
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
2G
27
28
PJaANNJNG COMiVJI!$SION lW!$Q.LUTION NO 4906 ..I
A RESOLUTION 01: THE PLANNJNG COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, APJ’ROVJNG A
NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO ALLOW IMPROVEMENTS
AT, AND ESTABLISH A CUP FOR, CHASE PJHLD, AN
EXJSTlNG CJW PARK, 1N LOCAL FACJJ,I’CtES
MANAGEMENT ZONE 1.
CASE NAME: CHASE FJJ?LD
CASENO,: CUP 00-16
WfjEREAS, City of Carlsbad Parks and Recreation Dcpartmcnt,
%cvekqer,” has filed a vcrifkd appIication with the City of Carlsbad regarding p~~pcrty owned
by City of Carlsbad, “Owner,” located at the southwest corner of Chestnut Avenue and Harding
Street (“the Property’); and
WHEREAS, a Negafive Declaration was prepared in conjunction with said
project; and
WHEREAS, the Plarn~ing Commission did on the 17th day of January 2001 and
on Ihe 7tb day oi February 2001 hold a duly noticed public hearing as prcscribcd by law to
consider said request; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all tcslimnony
and arguments, examining the initial study, analyzing the information submittti by staff, and
considering any written comments received, the Planning Commission considered al1 factors
relating lo the Negative Declaration.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Phtnning
Commission as follows:
That the foregoing tecitatioxrs arc: true and corrccl.
That basecl 011 the evidence prcscnted at the public heuing, the Planuing
Commission hereby ~ROYHS the Negative Declaration according to Exhibit
‘ND” dated Navcmber 21, 2000, a~~4 “PII” dated November 16, 2000, ~~kchcll
hereto and made a pert her&, based on the following findings:
AW24-2001 FRl IO:54 AM CITY OF CMLSBAD FAX NO. 760 602 8559 P, 03
. . . *
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
16
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
2c
21
2E
.-. ,'i
1. The Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad does hcrcby find:
A, It has rcviewcd, aualyzed and consider& the Negative I)cclaration, and the cnvironmenta1 impacts thoreiu idtiltificd for this project and any comments thereon prior to APPROWNG the projccl; 3nd
B. The Negative Declrratlon has been prepared in itccordance with rqkxncnrs of the C3lifi.xnia EnvironmcntaI Quality Act, the State Guideliucs 3nd the Environmental Protcclion Procedures of the City of Carlsbad; and
c. It reflects the independent judgment of the Pku~ning Commission of the City of C&bad; 3nd
D. Based on the EIA Part IT, 3nd comments thcte~n, there is no substanliitl ovidencc the project will have 3 signifkxnt effect on the euviromnent.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED 3t a regular mecling of the Planning
Commission oI’ the City of Carlsbad, Qlifornia, hdd on the 7th day of Fehr~ry 2001, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Segall, Comntissioncrs Baker, Compaq Hcincman, L’Heureux, Niclsen, and Trig;is
NOES:
ABSEW:
ABSTAIN:
66 CAKLSBk PLANNIN:C%:BSLON
ATTEST:
Plannnii~g Director
PC RESO NO. 4906 -2-
City of Carlsbad
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Project Address/Location: Southwest comer of Chestnut Avenue and Harding Street.
Project Description: New construction and installation of improvements at the existing
City park known as Chase Field. The project involves the removal
of an existing 850 square foot, one-story, restroom/concessions /storage building and the construction of a new 2,692 square foot,
two-story building for similar uses; installation of 2 batting cages,
and other miscellaneous, minor site improvements such as fencing,
paving, landscaping.
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, the
initial study (EL4 Part 2) identified potentially significant effects on the environment, but (1)
revisions in the project plans or proposals made by, or agreed to by, the applicant before the
proposed negative declaration and initial study are released for public review would avoid the
effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effect on the environment
would occur, and (2) there is no substantial evidence in light of the whole record before the City
that the project “as revised” may have a significant effect on the environment. Therefore, a
Negative Declaration 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 Planning
Department, 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, California 92008. Comments from the public are
invited. Please submit comments in writing to the Planning Department within 20 days of date
of issuance. If you have any questions, please call Jason Martin in the Planning Department at
(760) 602-4619.
DATED: NOVEMBER 2 1,200O
CASE NO: CUP 00-16
CASE NAME: CHASE FIELD
PUBLISH DATE: NOVEMBER 2 1,200O
MICHAEL J. HO>MILI%R
Planning Director
1635 Faraday Avenue . Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 l (760) 602-4600 l FAX (760) 602-8559 l www.ci.carlsbad.ca.us
City of Carlsbad
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT - Part II
CASE NAME Chase Field CASE NO. CUP 00-16
LEAD AGENCY
DEPARTMENT
CONTACT TITLE
City of Carlsbad
Planning Department
Jason Martin
Associate Planner
APPLICANT
CONTACT
TITLE
City of Carlsbad
Parks and Recreation Dept.
Doug Duncanson
Public Works Manager
(Initial Study Checklist)
OTHER PUBLIC AGENCIES WHOSE APPROVAL IS
REQUIRED (i.e. permits, financing approval, or
participation agreements)
ADDRESS
TELEPHONE E-MAIL
163 5 Faraday Ave
Carlsbad, CA 92008-73 I4
(760) 602-4619
jmart@ci.carlsbad.ca.us
ADDRESS
TELEPHONE E-MAIL
1166 Carlsbad Village Drive
Carlsbad, CA 92008
(760) 602-2855
ddunc@ci.carlsbad.ca.us
1. None
2.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION, LOCATION, AND ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
For the purposes of the review required under the California Environmental Quahty Act (CEQA),
Conditional Use Permit (CUP) 00-07 involves a request by the City of Carlsbad Parks and Recreation
Department to 1) demolish an existing restroom/concessions/storage building and construct a new
building, and 3) install 2 baseball batting cages. For the purpose of the City’s CUP review, however, the
project involves not only the new building and batting cages, but the overall park facility. The City’s
CUP review involves the overall park facility since the original park was established a number of years
ago, prior to the requirement for a CUP, and therefore currently has no CUP. The review contained in
this CEQA document is limited to the expansion of an exiting use.
The project is located on the grounds of an existing City park known as Chase Field. Chase Field is an
exclusive, baseball facility comprised of 3 baseball fields, ball field lighting, an 850 square foot
restroom/concessions/storage building, bleacher seating and picnic areas, and other ancillary installations.
Chase Field is approximately 2.74 acres in size, flat, and situated within an established residential
neighborhood known as the “Barrio”, generally located in the northwest quadrant of the City. The site is
bordered by streets on all four sides: Chestnut Avenue in the northwest, Harding Street in the northeast,
Palm Avenue in the southeast, and Jefferson Street in the southwest. Facility parking is provided on
streets which bound the park. Surrounding land uses in the vicinity of the site are residential in the south,
east and west and other park facilities (Brierly Field) in the north.
I
1 Rev. 05/03/00
1635 Faraday Avenue l Carlsbad. CA 92008-7314 l (760) 602-4600 l FAX (760) 602-8559 l www.ci.carlsbad.ca.us
The primary component of the project involves the replacement of the existing, 850 square foot. srngle-
story building with a 2,692 square foot, 2-story building. The new building is located on, and slightI>
beyond, the existing building footprint, at the approximate midpoint along the site’s street frontage on
Harding Street. Use of the new building will continue to be for restrooms, concessions, and storage.
New uses involve a game announcer area, and meeting space (i.e. for the Youth Group Board of Director
and other civic groups). - .
A secondary component of the project involves the installation of 2 batting cage facilities. The 2 batting
cages are identical and consist of a rectangular shaped area measuring 16 feet by 60 feet, which is fully
enclosed with chain link fencing material. The height of the fencing is 12 feet. Initially ball pitching
would be manual. Ultimately, however, a mechanical ball pitching machine may be installed in the
cage(s). The batting cages are located adjacent to the outtield of one of the ball fields, along Chestnut
Avenue.
2 Rev. 05/03/00
!XJMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The summary of environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project,
involving at least one impact that is a “Potentially Significant Impact,” or “Potentially Significant Impact
Unless Mitigation Incorporated” as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
El Agricultural Resources
0 Air Quality
cl Geology/Soils
cl Hazards/Hazardous Materials 0 Population and Housing
q Hydrology/Water Quality q Public Services
cl Biological Resources 0 Land Use and Planning Cl Recreation
0 Cultural Resources q Mandatory Findings of
Significance cl Transportation/Circulation
cl Mineral Resources Cl Utilities & Service Systems
3 Rev. Q5/03/QO
DETERMINATION.
(To be completed by the Lead Agency)
IXI
cl
0
cl
cl
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 MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find 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 applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation
measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. A Neg Dee 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 Master Environmental
Impact Review (MEIR 93-01) pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been voided
or mitigated pursuant to that earlier Master Environmental Review (MEIR 93-Ol),
including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project.
Therefore, a Notice of Prior Compliance has been prepared.
11 \w[@
Date
Planning Director%kignat&
1 IlUJbO
Date
Rev. 5/3/00
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
STATE CEQA GUIDELINES, Chapter 3, Article 5, Section 15063 requires that the Cir\.
conduct an Environmental Impact Assessment to determine if a project may have a significant
effect on the environment. The Environmental Impact Assessment appears in the follo\\ing
pages in the form of a checklist. This checklist identifies any physical, biological and human
factors that might be impacted by the proposed project and provides the City with information to
use as the basis for deciding whether to prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR), Negative
Declaration, or to rely on a previously approved EIR or Negative Declaration.
A brief explanation is required for all answers except “No Impact” answers that are
adequately supported by an information source cited in the parentheses following each
question. A “No Impact” answer is adequately supported if the referenced information
sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved. A
“No Impact” answer should be explained when there is no source document to refer to, or
it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards.
“Less Than Significant Impact” applies where there is supporting evidence that the
potential impact is not significantly adverse, and the impact does not exceed adopted
general standards and policies.
“Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated” applies where the incorporation
of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from “Potentially Significant Impact” to a
“Less Than Significant Impact.” The developer must agree to the mitigation, and the
City must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the
effect to a less than significant level.
“Potentially Significant Impact” is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an
effect is significantly adverse.
Based on an “EIA-Part II”, if a proposed project could have a potentially significant
adverse effect on the environment, but fi potentially significant adverse effects (a) have
been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or Mitigated Negative Declaration pursuant to
applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR
or Mitigated Negative Declaration, including revisions or mitigation measures that are
imposed up.on the proposed project, and none of the circumstances requiring a
supplement to or supplemental EIR are present and all the mitigation measures required
by the prior environmental document have been incorporated into this project, then no
additional environmental document is required (Prior Compliance).
When “Potentially Significant Impact” is checked the project is not necessarily required
to prepare an EIR if the significant adverse effect has been analyzed adequately in an
earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards and the effect will be mitigated, or a
“Statement of Overriding Considerations” has been made pursuant to that earlier EIR.
A Negative Declaration may be prepared if the City perceives no substantial evidence that
the project or any of its aspects may cause a significant adverse effect on the
environment.
Rev. 5/3/OO
l If there are one or more potentially significant adverse effects, the City ma)* a\.oid
preparing an EIR if there are mitigation measures to clearly reduce adverse impacts to
less than significant, and those mitigation measures are agreed to by the developer prior
to public review. In this case, the appropriate “Potentially Significant Impact Unless
Mitigation Incorporated” may be checked and a Mitigated Negative Declaration may be
prepared.
0 An EIR must be prepared if “Potentially Significant Impact” is checked, and including
but not limited to the following circumstances: (1) the potentially significant adverse
effect has not been discussed or mitigated in an Earlier EIR pursuant to applicable
standards, and the developer does not agree to mitigation measures that reduce the
adverse impact to less than significant; (2) a “Statement of Overriding Considerations”
for the significant adverse impact has not been made pursuant to an earlier EIR; (3)
proposed mitigation measures do not reduce the adverse impact to less than significant,
or; (4) through the EIA-Part II analysis it is not possible to determine the level of
significance for a potentially adverse effect, or determine the effectiveness of a mitigation
measure in reducing a potentially significant effect to below a level of significance.
A discussion of potential impacts and the proposed mitigation measures appears at the end of the
form under DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION. Particular attention
should be given to discussing mitigation for impacts which would otherwise be determined
significant.
Rev. 5/3/00
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). .
I.
a)
b)
cl
4
II.
4
b)
cl
III.
a)
AESTHETICS -Would the project:
Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?
(#2:Pgs 5.11-l - 5.11-5)
Substantially damage scenic resources, including but
not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic
buildings within a State scenic highway? (#2:Pgs 5.1 l-
1 - 5.11-5)
Substantially degrade the existing visual character or
quality of the site and its surroundings? (#2:Pgs 5.11- 1
- 5.1 l-5)
Create a new source of substantial light and glare
which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in
thearea?(#2:Pgs5.11-1-5.11-5)
AGRICULTRAL RESOURCES - Would the project:
(In determining whether impacts to agricultural
resources are significant environmental effects, lead
agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land
Evaluation and Site Assessment Model-1997 prepared
by the California Department of Conservation as an
optional model to use in assessing impacts on
agriculture and farmland).
Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or
Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as
shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland
Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California
Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? (#2:Pgs
5.6-l - 5.6-18)
Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a
Williamson Act contract? (#2:Pgs 5.6-l - 5.6-18)
Involve other changes in the existing environment
which, due to their location or nature, could result in
conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use?
(#2:Pgs 5.6-l - 5.6-18)
AIR QUALITY - Would the project:
(Where available, the significance criteria established
by the applicable air quality management or air
pollution control district may be relied upon to make
the following determinations).
Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
applicable air quality plan? (#2:Pgs 5.3-l - 5.3-12)
Potentially PotentialI! Less Than \O
Sgnificant Significant Sigmkant Inipxl
Impact Unless impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
cl cl Cl w
cl cl 0 w
cl
cl
cl
0
0
cl
El cl
0 cl
cl 0
El w
0 w
0 El
0 w
0 w
0 lxl
Rev. 5/3/00
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potentiallv
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Less Than
Slgnitk3nt Impact
Impact
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources).
lncoaorated
b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute
substantially to an existing or projected air quality cl q q w
violation? (#2:Pgs 5.3-l - 5.3-12)
c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of
any criteria pollutant for which the project region is in cl q q w
non-attainment under an applicable federal or state
ambient air quality standard (including releasing
emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for
ozone precursors)? (#2:Pgs 5.3-l - 5.3-12)
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations? (#2:Pgs 5.3-l - 5.3-12) El 0
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial
number of people? (#2:Pgs 5.3-l - 5.3-12) q cl
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES - Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or
through habitat modifications, on any species identified q a
as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in
local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by
California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish
and Wildlife Service? (#2:Pgs 5.4-l - 5.4-24)
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian
habitat or other sensitive natural community identified 0 q
in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations or by
California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish
and Wildlife Service? (#2:Pgs 5.4-l - 5.4-24)
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected
wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water q
Act (including but not limited to marsh, vernal pool,
coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filing,
hydrological interruption, or other means? (M:Pgs 5.4-
1 - 5.4-24)
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native
resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with q
established native resident or migratory wildlife
corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery
sites? (#2:Pgs 5.4-l - 5.4-24)
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances
protecting biological resources, such as a tree q
preservation policy or ordinance? (#t:Pgs 5.4-I - 5.4-
24)
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation cl
Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat
conservation plan?
q Ix1
0 El
Cl q
q El
q q El
q q lzl
q
q
q El
q El
Rev. 5/3/00
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than ko
Slgnlficant Impacr
Impact
V. CULTURAL, RESOURCES - Would the project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance
of a historical resource as defined in $15064.5? (#2:
Pgs 5.8-l - 5.8-10)
0 cl q El - .
q IE3 q q b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance
of an archeological resource pursuant to §15064.5?
(#2: Pgs 5.8-l - 5.8-10)
q q El lxl c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological
resource or site or unique geologic feature? (#2: Pgs
5.8-l - 5.810)
q q 0 El d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred
outside of formal cemeteries? (#2: Pgs 5.8-l - 5.8-10)
VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS - Would the project:
a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial
adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury or
death involving: (#t:Pgs 5.1-1 - 5.1-15)
q q 0 IXI i. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated
on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault
Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the
area or based on other substantial evidence of a
known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and
Geology Special Publication 42. (#2:Pgs 5. l-l -
5.1-15)
q
q
q
q
q q lxl
q q lxl
cl q (x1
q q Ix1
0 q lxl
ii. Strong seismic ground shaking? (#2:Pgs 5.1-1 - 5.1-
15)
iii. Seismic-related ground failure, including
liquefaction? (#2:Pgs 5.1-1 - 5.1.15)
iv. Landslides? (#2:Pgs 5.1-1 - 5.1-15)
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?
(#2:Pgs 5.1-1 - 5.1-15)
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or
that would become unstabie as a result of the project, q
and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral
spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse?
(#2:Pgs 5.1-1 - 5.1-15)
q q lxl d) Be located on expansive soils, as defined in Table 18 -
1-B of the Uniform Building Code ( 1994), creating q
substantial risks to life or property? (#2:Pgs 5.1-I - 5.1-
15)
Rev. 5/3lQO 9
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources).
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use
of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal
systems where sewers are not available for the disposal
of waste water? (#2:Pgs 5.1-1 - 5.1-15)
VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS - Would
the uroiect:
a)
b)
cl
4
e)
f)
k9
h)
VIII.
4
‘Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials? (#2:Pgs 5.10. l-l -
5.10.1-5)
Create a significant hazard to the public or environment
through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident
conditions involving the release of hazardous materials
into the environment? (##2:Pgs 5.10.1-l - 5.10.1-5)
Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or
acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste
within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed
school? (#2:Pgs 5.10.1-l - 5.10.1-5)
Be located on a site which is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result,
would it create a significant hazard to the public or
environment? (#2:Pgs 5.10.1-l - 5.10.1-5)
For a project within an airport land use plan or, where
such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a
public airport or public use airport, would the project
result in a safety hazard for people residing or working
in the project.area? (#2:Pgs 5.10.1-l - 5.10.1-5)
For a project within the vicinity of a private airs&p,
would the project result in a safety hazard for people
residing or working in the project area?
Impair implementation of or physically interfere with
an adopted emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan? (#2:Pgs 5.10.1-l - 5.10.1-5)
Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss,
injury or death involving wildland fires, including
where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or
where residences are intermixed with wildlands?
(#2:Pgs 5.10.1-l - 5.10.1-5)
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY - Would
the project:
Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge
requirements? (#2:Pgs 5.2-l - 5.2-l 1)
10
Potentially Potentially Less Than s 0
Significanl Significant Significant lmpacr Impact tinless Impact
Mitigation
incorporated
III q 0 w
q
q
q
cl
q
cl
cl
q
q
q
q
q
q w
cl El
cl lxl
q lxl
cl El
q lxl
cl cl q w
q cl q IXI
q cl cl 1xI
Rev. 5/3/00
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources).
b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere
substantially with ground water recharge such that
there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a
lowering of the local ground water table level ( i.e. the
production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would
drop to a level which would not support existing land
uses or planned uses for which permits have been
granted)? (#2:Pgs 5.2-l - 5.2-l 1)
cl Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the
site or area, including through the alteration of the
course of a stream or river, in a manner which would
result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site?
(#Z:Pgs 5.2-l - 5.2-I 1)
4 Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the
site or area, including through the alteration of the
course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the
rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which
would result in flooding on- or off-site? (#2:Pgs 5.2-I -
5.2-l 1)
e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed
the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage
systems or provide substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff? (#2:Pgs 5.2-l - 5.2-l 1)
r) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? (#2:Pgs
5.2-l .- 5.2-l 1)
d Place housing within a loo-year flood hazard area as
mapped on a Federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood
Insurance Rate Map or other flood delineation map?
(#2:Pgs 5.2-l - 5.2-11)
h) Place within a lOO-year flood hazard area structures
which would impede or redirect flood flows? (#2:Pgs
5.2-l - 5.2-l 1)
9 Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss
injury or death involving flooding, including flooding
as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? (#2:Pgs 5.2-
1 - 5.2-il)
j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow?
IX.
4
LANDUSE AND PLANNING - Would the project:
Physically divide an established community?
Potentially Potentially Less Than \ I,
Significant Sqnificant Significant Irllpxl
impact bless Impact
Mltyatlon
lncomorated 0
q
lzl
q
III
cl
0
cl
0
cl
q
cl
q cl
cl El
cl cl
cl cl
0 5
El 5
cl 5
III 5
cl 5
0 5
cl 5
0 5
q 5
III 5
11 Rev. S/3/00 ’ i
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). Potentially PotentialI! Less Than \‘ 0
Significant Significant Sy-iificant hlp3Cl
Impact ljnless Imp3cr
Mirigation
incorporated
cl q El w b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or
regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the
project (including but not limited to the general plan,
specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning
ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or
mitigating an environmental effect?
q cl
X.
a)
Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan
or natural community conservation plan? q q w
MINERAL RESOURCES - Would the project:
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? (#2:Pgs 5.12.1-I - 5.12.1-5
& 5.13-l - 5.13-9)
q q cl 5
III b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important
mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local
general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan?
0 0 5
XI.
4
NOISE - Would the project result in:
Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in
excess of standards established in the local general plan
or noise ordinance or applicable standards of other
agencies? (#2:Pgs 5.9- 1 - 5.9- 15)
q III q 5
q cl cl 5
El 5
q 5
q 5
Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive
groundbourne vibration or groundboume noise levels?
(#2:Pgs 5.9-l - 5.9-15)
W
cl
4
e)
q q A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise
levels in the project vicinity above levels existing
without the project?
0 q A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient
noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing
without the project?
q q For a project located within an airport land use plan or,
where such a plan has not been adopted, within 2 miles
of a public airport or public use airport, would the
project expose people residing or working in the
project area to excessive noise levels?
q q 5 For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip,
would the project expose people residing or working in
the project area to excessive noise levels?
q f,
12 Rev. 513100
XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING - Would the project:
a) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly (for
example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or q
indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or
other infrastructure)? (#2:Pgs 5.5-l - 5.5-6)
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing,
necessitating the construction of replacement housing cl
elsewhere?‘(#2:Pgs 5.5-l - 5.5-6)
c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating
the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? q
(#2:Pgs 5.5-l - 5.5-6)
XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES
a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical
impacts associated with the provision of new or
physically altered government facilities, a need for new
or physically altered government facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant
environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable
service ratios, response times, or other performance
objectives for any of the public services:
i) Fire protection? (#2:Pgs 5.12.5-l - 5.12.5-6) q
ii) Police protection? (#2:Pgs 5.12.6-1 - 5.12.6-4) cl
iii) Schools? (#2:Pgs 5.12.7.1 - 5.12.7-s) cl
iv) Parks? (#2:Pgs 5.12.1-I - 5.12.8-7) cl
v) Other public facilities? (#2:Pgs 5.12.1-l - 5.12.8-7) El
XIV. RECREATION
a) Would the project increase the use of existing
neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational cl
facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of
the facility would occur or be accelerated? (#2:Pgs
5.12.8-l - 5.12.8-7)
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or
require the construction or expansion of recreational q
facilities which might have an adverse physical effect
on the environment? (#2:Pgs 5.12.8-l - 5.12.8-7)
xv. TFWNSPORTATION/TRAFFC - Would the project:
a) Cause an, increase in traffic which is substantial in
relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the q
street system (i.e. result in a substantial increase in
either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to
capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)?
(#2:Pgs 5.7-l - 5.7.22)
cl
q
q
0
q
q
Cl
0
q
q
Cl
cl El
q 5
q w
cl (XI
q 5
q 5
0 5
cl 5
q 5
q 5
q 5
13 ’ ’ Rev. S/3/00
b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of
service standard established by the county congestion
management agency for designated roads or highways
c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including
either an increase in traffic levels or a change in
location that results in substantial safety risks
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature
(e.g. sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or
incompatible uses (e.g. farm equipment)? (#2:Pgs 5.7-l
- 5.7.22)
4
9)
XVI.
4
W
cl
4
e>
f)
Result in inadequate emergency access? (#2:Pgs 5.7-l -
5.7.22)
Result in insufficient parking capacity? (#2:Pgs 5.7-l -
5.7.22)
Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs
supporting alternative transportation (e.g. bus turnouts,
bicycle racks)? (#2:Pgs 5.7-I - 5.7.22)
UTILITIES AND SERVICES SYSTEMS - Would the
project:
Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the
applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board?
(#2:Pgs 5.12.1-l - 5.12.1-S % 5.13-l - 5.13-9)
Require or result in the construction of new water or
wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing
facilities, the construction of which would cause
significant environmental effects? (#2:Pgs 5.12. l- 1 -
5.12.8-7)
Require or result in the construction of new storm
water drainage facilities or expansion of existing
facilities, the construction of which could cause
significant environmental effects? (#2:Pgs 5.12.2-I -
5.12.3-7)
Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the
project from existing entitlements and resources, or are
new or expanded entitlements needed? (#2:Pgs 5.12.3-
1 - 5.12.3-7)
Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment
provider which serves or may serve the project that it
has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected
demand in addition to the provider’s existing
commitments? (#2:Pg 5.2-8)
Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted
capacity to accommodate the project’s solid waste
disposal needs? (#2:Pgs 5.12.4-l - 5.12.4-3)
cl q
Cl q
cl q
cl Cl
cl q
q
cl
q
q
q
q
q
El
q
q
cl
q
q
q
q 5
q 5
q - El
q 5
q 5
q 5
cl 5
q 5
0 5
q 5
q 5’
q lxl
14 Rev. 5/3/00
XVII.
4
b)
c)
Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and
regulations related to solid waste? (#2:Pgs 5.12.2-I -
5.12.3-7)
MANDATORYFINDINGSOFSIGNIFICANCE
Does the project have the potential to degrade the
quality of the environment, substantially reduce the
habitat of a fish or wildlife 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?
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)?
Does the project have environmental effects which will
cause the substantial adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
III 0
cl cl
cl cl
El cl
cl lxl
cl w
0 lxl
cl w
XVIII. EARLIER ANALYSES
Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA
process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative
declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case a discussion should identify the
following on attached sheets:
a) Earlier analyses used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available
for review.
b) Impacts adequately addressed. Identifjl which effects from the above checklist
were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant
to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by
mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis.
cl Mitigation measures. For effects that are “Less than Significant with Mitigation
Incorporated,“ describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or
refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-
specific conditions for the project.
15 Rev. 5/3/00
DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
NONE
EARLIER NALYSIS USED AND SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES
The following documents were used in the analysis of this project and are on file in the City of
Carlsbad Planning Department located at 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, California, 92008.
1. Carlsbad General Plan, Updated. City of Carlsbad Planning Department. September
1994.
2. Final Master Environmental Impact Report for the City of Carlsbad General Plan Update
(MEIR 93-01). City of Carlsbad Planning Department. March 1994.
3. Local Coastal Pro.eram. City of Carlsbad Planning Department. July 1996.
16 Rev. 5/3lOQ
AIJG-24-2001 FRI 11:03 AM CITY OF CARLSBAD FAX No, 760 602 8559 P. 21
. 5
c ,
1
2
3
4
5
G
. 7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
2a
21
22
23
24
25
2c
21
2E
PLANNING COMMlSSION RESOLUTION NO. 4907
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNJNG COMMJSSION OF THE
CITY OF CARJ,SBAD, CALIFORNJA, APPROVJNG A
CONDlTIONAL USE PERMlT TO ALLOW 1MPROVEMENTS
AT, AND FSrABLISH A CUP FOR, CIIASE FIELD, AN
EXJSITNG CITY PARK JN LOCAL FACILITIES
MANAGEMENT ZONE 1.
CASE NAME: CHASE FIELD
CASE NO.: CUP 00-16
WHEREAS, City of Car&bad Parks and Recreation I)cportmcut,
uDcveloper,” has filed a verified appliciltion with tic City of Ckrlsbad regarding properly owned
by the City of CarJsbad, “Owner,” located at the southwest corner of Chestnut Avenue and
Harding Strnr (“the Property”); and
WHEREAS, said vcrikd application constitutes a request for 8 Conditional Use
Permit as shown on Exhibits UA” - GEn dated January 17, 2001, on file in the Carlsbad
Planning Department, CHASE FIELD - CUP 00-16, as provided by Chapters 11.32,21.42. ant1
21.50 of the C&bad MunicipaI Code, and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did, on the 171h day of January 2001 and
on the 7th day of February 2001, hold a duly noticccl public hearing as prescribed by Iaw to
consider said request; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering alI tcstinlony
and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, solid Commission considered all factors
r&king to the CUP.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad as follows:
A)
B)
‘i’bat the foregoing rccitalions are true and correct.
That based on the evidence presented z~t the public hearing, 11x Commission
APPROVES CHASE FJELU - CUP 00-16, based on the following findings and
subject to the following conditions:
AUC-24-2001
. L
1 I
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
21)
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
2E
FRI 11: 03 All CITY OF CARLSBAD
,-,
FAX NO. 760 602 8559 f. 22
1. The proposed use is: a) necessary and desirable for the doveiopment of the community in
that the community bone% from the avrilabiJity of baseball facilities as a
recreational resource; b) consistent with the GcncraI Plan in that thhc Geucr4 Phtn
School land use designation does not precladc the provisioa of baseball facilities;
and the Generd Plan calls for the joint use of facilitin between local school districts
and the geacral community and, c) uot detrimental lo pcrmittcd uses in tire OS zone h%
that the desJgn and operational fcatares of tbc faciiity (i.e. park hours of operation,
24 hour JJghtlng, etc.) mJnimJze its potential for negative impacts to the surrounding
community;
2. The proposed site is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the USC in that the
proposed improvements can be easily accommodated on tbe site with only minimal
removal of existing budscape matcrinls;
3. All featnres necossa~y to adjust the quested use to the existing WCS arc provided in that
t4e facility wilt have limited hours of operation consistcut with other City parks;
4. The street system serving the proposed use would not be significantly impacted by the
proposed conditional USC in that additioual vehicle trips wotrld bc minimal and
generated outside of peak traffJc periods.
$Tondition;
1.
2.
3.
4.
If any of the following conditions fail to occur; or if they arc, by their terms, to be
implemented and maintained over time, if ahoy of such conditions fail to bc so
implemented and maintained according to their terms, the City shall have the righ? to
revoke or modify all approvaJs herein grant&, deny or further condition issuance of all
liilurc buitding permits; deny, revoke or further condition all certificates of occupancy
issued under the authority of approvals herein granted; institute: and prosecuto litigation to
compel their compliance with said conditions or seek damages for their violation. No
vested rights am gained by Developer or a successor in interest by the City’s approval of
this Conditionsl Use Permit.
StalI’ is authorizcd and directed lo make, or require the Parks and Recreation
Department to make, all corrections and modifications to the Conditional Use Permit
documents, as necessary to make them inleraaily consistent and in conformity with the
final action on the project. Development shall occur substantially as &own on the approved Fxbibit and as dcscribcd in the Planning Commission staff report. Any
proposed development diGrent from this approval, shall rquirc an runcndmcnt to this
upprovat .
The Devekper shall comply wilh all applicable provisions of fcdcnrl, state, and Ima!
Jaws and regulations in efkct at the time of building pernlit issuance.
A. This Couditional Use Pamit shall bc reviewed by 11~ Planning ikector on a
yearly basis to dctb,rminc if all conditions of this permit have been met and illat
PC RESO NO. 4907 -2-
AUG-24-2001 FRI 11:04 AM CITY OF CARLSBAD FAX NO, 760 602 8559 P, 23
. .
-. :
1
2
3
4
s
G
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
t8
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
2c
2;
2E
-; .-
the use dots not have a substantial ucgativc effect on surrounding propcrtics or
the public health and welfare. If the Planning Bircctor dctcrmines that the use has
’ such substantial negative efkcts, the Planning Director shall recommend that the
Planning Commission, a&r prov&g the pcnnittcc: the opporlunity to bc heard,
add additional conditions to reduce or eliminate tbc sobsta&l negative cl&~.
PASSED, Al,YROVED AND ADOPTED at a ~qular meeting of the Planning
Commissioi~ of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 7th day of k’ebrurry 2001 by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Se&l. Comrnissioncrs Baker, Compas, He&man, L’Hcnreux, Nielsen, ‘and Trigas
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTATN:
JE6F’l& N. SEC&& Cl&person
CARLSBAD PLANtiG dOMMlSSiON
ATTEST:
Planning Director
PC KESO NO. 4907 -3-
The City of Carlsbad Planning Department
A REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION
Item No.
Application complete date: November 14.2000
PC. AGENDA OF: January 17,200l Project Planner: Jason Martin
Project Engineer: David Rick
SUBJECT: CUP 00-16 - CHASE FIELD - Request for a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to
allow improvements to, and establish a CUP for, Chase Field, and a proposed
Negative Declaration, in the Open Space (OS) Zone in Local Facilities
Management Zone 1.
I. RECOMMENDATION
That the Planning Commission ADOPT Planning Commission Resolution No. 4906
APPROVING a Negative Declaration and ADOPT Planning Commission Resolution No. 4907
APPROVING CUP 00-16 based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein.
II. INTRODUCTION
CUP 00-16 involves a request by the City of Carlsbad Parks and Recreation Department to install
improvements at Chase Field and to establish a CUP for the existing Chase Field. All the
required findings for the CUP can be made and the project can be approved.
III. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND
CUP 00-16 involves a request by the City of Carlsbad Parks and Recreation Department to: 1)
demolish an existing restroom/concessions/storage building and construct a new building; 2)
install 2 new baseball batting cages; and, 3) install miscellaneous site improvements such as
hardscape, landscape and outfield fencing. For the purpose of the City’s CUP review the project
involves not only the new building and batting cages, but the overall park facility, since the
original park was established a number of years ago, prior to the requirement for a CUP, and
therefore currently has no CUP.
The popularity of youth baseball activities in the City, coupled with the age and deteriorated
condition of the existing facility, have prompted the project. Chase Field is exclusively a
baseball facility, comprised of 3 baseball fields, field lighting, an 850 square foot
restroom/concessions/storage building, bleacher seating and picnic areas, and other ancillary
installations. Chase Field is approximately 2.74 acres in size, flat, and situated within an
established residential neighborhood informally known as the “Barrio,” generally located in the
northwest quadrant of the City. The site is bordered by streets on all four sides: Chestnut
Avenue in the northwest, Harding Street in the northeast, Palm Avenue in the southeast, and
Jefferson Street in the southwest. Facility parking is provided on streets that bound the park.
Surrounding land uses in the vicinity of the site are residential in the south, east and west and
other park facilities (Brierly Field) and the Pine School site in the north.
CUP 00- 16 - CHASE FIELD
January 17,200l
PaPe 2
The primary component of the project involves the replacement of the existing, 850 square foot.
single-story building with a 2,692 square foot, 2-story building. The new building is generally
located on the existing building footprint, at the approximate midpoint along the site’s street
frontage on Harding Street. Use of the new building will continue to be for .restrooms,
concessions, and storage. New uses involve a game announcer area, and meeting space (i.e. for
the Youth Group Board of Directors and other civic groups).
A secondary component of the project involves the installation of 2 batting cage facilities. The 2
batting cages are identical and each consists of a rectangular shaped area measuring 16 feet wide
by 60 feet long, which is fully enclosed with chain link fencing material. The height of the
fencing is 12 feet. Initially, ball pitching would be manual. Ultimately, a mechanical ball
pitching machine may be installed in the cage(s). The batting cages are located adjacent to the
outfield of one of the ball fields, along Chestnut Avenue.
IV. ANALYSIS
The proposed project is subject to the following regulations:
A. The City of Carlsbad General Plan - Parks and Recreation Element;
B. The Carlsbad Zoning Ordinance - Conditional Uses;
C. Growth Management.
Staffs recommendation of approval for this conditional use was developed by analyzing the
project’s consistency with the applicable City regulations and policies. This anaIysis includes
issues identification and will present, in text, the project’s consistency with the applicable
regulations listed above.
A. General Plan
The Chase Field site is designated as a school site in the City’s General Plan. Stated goals in the
City General Plan call for the joint use of recreational facilities between local school districts and
the general community. Chase Field serves such a function and is therefore consistent with the
General Plan. Additionally, the General Plan calls for a diversified, comprehensive City park
system that meets the needs of all Carlsbad citizens. Continued Chase Field operations, and the
expansion/refbrbishment of facilities to meet park demands, promotes this goal and is therefore
consistent with the City General Plan.
B. Cooditional Use Permit Regulations
The conditional use permitting procedure provides the means to evaluate the appropriateness of
certain types of uses which possess, because of their nature, the potential to adversely impact
surrounding land uses, and to apply conditions of approval to minimize any identified potential
impacts. Identified issues, and the design and operational features which have been incorporated
into the project to address those issues if needed, are outlined below:
CUP 00- 16 - CHASE FIELD
January 17,200l
Pane 3
The Carlsbad Zoning Ordinance identifies four “findings” or facts that must be found to exist, in
granting approval of a CUP. Staff believes that continued operation of Chase Field and
expansion of its facilities can be supported. The required findings and supporting evidence are
outlined as follows:
1.
2.
3.
4.
D.
The proposed use is: a) necessary and desirable for the development of the community in
that the community benefits from the availability of baseball facilities as a recreational
resource; b) consistent with the General Plan in that the General Plan School land use
designation does not preclude the provision of baseball facilities; and c) not detrimental
to permitted uses in the OS zone in that the design and operational features of the facility
(i.e. park hours of operation, 24 hour lighting, etc.) minimize its potential for negative
impacts to the surrounding community;
The proposed site is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the use in that the
proposed improvements can be easily accommodated on the site with only minimal
removal of existing landscape materials;
All features necessary to adjust the requested use to the existing uses are provided in that
the facility will have limited hours of operation consistent with other City parks;
The street system serving the proposed use would not be significantly impacted by the
proposed conditional use in that additional vehicle trips would be minimal and generated
outside of peak trafftc periods.
Growth Management
The proposed facility is located within Local Facilities Management Plan Zone 1. Improvements
to Chase Field support Growth Management goals of providing adequate recreational/park
facilities in the Zone.
V. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) an environmental impact
assessment was conducted for the project. For the purposes of the review required under the
CEQA, environmental review was limited only to the improvements/expansion proposed under
the project. No environmental impacts were identified. A Negative Declaration was prepared
and noticed for the project.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Planning Commission Resolution No. 4906 (Neg Dee)
2. Planning Commission Resolution No. 4907 (CUP)
3. Location Map
4. Background Data Sheet
5. Exhibit “A” - “E” dated January 17,200l
JM:cs
SITE
f
\
I
CHASE FIELD
CUP 00-16
BACKGROUND DATA SHEET
CASE NO: CUP 00-l 6
CASE NAME: Chase Field
APPLICANT: Citv of Carlsbad Parks and Recreation Department
REQUEST AND LOCATION: A request to allow improvements to. and establish a CUP for,
Chase Field, an existing Citv Park located at the southwest comer of the Chestnut Avenue
Harding Street intersection.
APN: 204-193-01 Acres: .2.6 Proposed No. of Lots/Units: N/A
GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING
Land Use Designation: School
Density Allowed: N/A Density Proposed: N/A
Existing Zone: Onen Space Proposed Zone: No change
Surrounding Zoning, General Plan and Land Use:
Zoning
Site Open Space
North Open Space
South Mult-Family Res.
General Plan
School
School
Current Land Use
Park
Park/School
Res. Medium High Density
Res. Medium High Density
Res. Medium Density
Residential
East Multi-Family Res
West Multi-Family Res
Residential
Residential
PUBLIC FACILITIES
School District: Carlsbad Water District: Carlsbad Sewer District: Carlsbad
Equivalent Dwelling Units (Sewer Capacity): N/A
Public Facilities Fee Agreement, dated: N/A
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT
lx Negative Declaration, issued November 16.2000
0 Certified Environmental Impact Report, dated
cl Other,
RE5TROOMICONCESStON FACtltTY
CHASE FIELD, CARLSBN
o--