HomeMy WebLinkAboutCP 03-06; Casa Laguna II; Condo Permit (CP) (3)ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART I
(TO BE COMPLETED BY THE APPLICANT)
CASE NO:
DATE: July 17. 2003
BACKGROUND
1. CASE NAME: Casa Laguna 2
2. LEAD AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS: City of Carlsbad. Planning Dept.
3. CONTACT PERSON AND PHONE NUMBER: David Buckmaster. (760) 721-6498
4. PROJECT LOCATION: North side of Laguna Drive between Buena Vista Circle & Madison St.
5. SPONSOR'S NAME AND ADDRESS: Merit Group. Inc. 2171 El Camino Real Oceanside, CA
6. GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: RMH
7. ZONING: R-3 (R-2 uses such as duplexes allowed)
g. OTHER PUBLIC AGENCIES WHOSE APPROVAL IS REQUIRED (i.e., permits, financing
approval or participation agreements):
9. PROJECT DESCRIPTION/ ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING AND SURROUNDING LAND
USES:
The project consists of a 5 unit condominium development containing 4 duplex units and 1
detached unit. The property consists of 0.51 acres located along the northern side of Laguna
Drive between Buena Vista Circle and Madison Street. The project is north of the Village
Downtown Redevelopment District and within the Mello II segment of the Local Coastal
Program. The surrounding land uses include a single family house to the west (R-3 zoning),
single family homes to the north, a 12-unit condominium project is under construction to the east
and to the south across Laguna Drive, a mix of commercial and office complexes. All five units
are accessed from a 24-foot wide private driveway off of Laguna Drive. The 3 required Visitors
Parking spaces are distributed along the private driveway. Each unit includes a 2 car attached
garage. The architecture is Old Spanish Colonial with tile roofs, wood shutters, and arched
windows and is similar to the project adjacent to the east. Total landscape coverage is 33% of the
1 Rev. 07/26/02
RECEIVED
JUL 2 * 2003
CITY OF CARLSBAD
PLANNING DEPT.
site. Three floor plans are proposed. Plan A and B are duplex type buildings and Plan C is a
detached house. Floor plan areas are as follows: Plan A is 1909 ft2. Plan B is 2182 ft2. & Plan C is
2210 ft'. All the floor plans are 2 story with 2.5 or 3 bathrooms, 3 or 4 bedrooms, formal living
room, formal dining room and good quality large kitchen. Each unit will have a private yard
exceeding 25 X 25 feet in area.
Rev. 07/26/02
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.
I I Aesthetics
I | Agricultural Resources
| | Air Quality
| I Biological Resources
| | Cultural Resources
I I Geology/Soils | | Noise
G Hazards/Hazardous Materials D Population and Housing
in Hydrology/Water Quality | | Public Services
| I Land Use and Planning | | Recreation
G Mineral Resources Q Transportation/Circulation
Mandatory Findings of i—I,,.... „ 0 . ^1—' ... Utilities & Service SystemsSignificance —
Rev. 07/26/02
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
STATE CEQA GUIDELINES, Chapter 3, Article 5, Section 15063 requires that the City 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 following 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 "ElA-Part II". if a proposed project could have a potentially significant adverse effect on the
environment, but all 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 upon 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.
• 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.
• If there are one or more potentially significant adverse effects, the City may avoid 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.
Rev. 07/03/02
• 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
ElA-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. 07/03/02
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources).
(Supplemental documents may be referred to and attached.)
I. AESTHETICS - Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?
(FMEIR 93-01 Pgs 5.11-1-5.11-5)
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including but
not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic
buildings within a State scenic highway? (FMEIR
93-01 Pgs 5.11-1-5.11-5)
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or
quality of the site and its surroundings? (FMEIR 93-
01 Pgs 5.11-1-5.11-5)
d) Create a new source of substantial light and glare,
which would adversely affect day or nighttime views
in the area? (FMEIR 93-01 Pgs 5.11-1 - 5.11-5)
II. AGRJCULTRAL RESOURCES - (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.) Would
the project:
a) 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? (Not mapped as prime or important farmland
CA Dept. of Conservation, 1990)
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or
a Williamson Act contract?? (The site is not in ag.
use and was not covered by the Williamson Act per .
FMEIR Pages 5.6.1-5.6.18)
c) Involve other changes in the existing environment,
which, due to their location or nature, could result in
conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use? (Site
is not in ag use and is zoned residential FMEIR
Pages 5.6.1-5.6.18)
HI. AIR QUALITY - (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.) Would the
project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
applicable air quality plan? (FMEIR 93-01 Pgs 5.3-1
-5.3-12)
Potentially
Significant
Impact
D
D
Potentially
Significant
Unless Less Than
Mitigation Significant No
Incorporated Impact Impact
D D
D D
D D
D
D D D
D D D
D D
D D D
Rev. 07/03/02
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources).
(Supplemental documents may be referred to and attached.)
b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute
substantially to an existing or projected air quality
violation? (FMEIR 93-01 Pgs 5.3-1 - 5.3-12)
Potentially
Significant
Potentially Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
D D m D
D D
D D
D D
c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of I I I I I I
any criteria pollutant for which the project region is —
in non-attainment under an applicable federal or state
ambient air quality standard (including releasing
emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for
ozone precursors)? (FMEIR 93-01 Pgs 5.3-1 - 5.3-
12)
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant I I
concentrations? (FMEIR 93-01 Pgs 5.3-1 - 5.3-12)
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial I I
number of people? (FMEIR 93-01 Pgs 5.3-1 - 5.3- '—'
12)
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES - Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or I I
through habitat modifications, on any species
identified 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 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? (FMEIR
93-01 Pgs 5.4-1 -5.4-24)
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian, I I I I I I
aquatic or wetland habitat or other sensitive natural
community identified in local or regional plans,
policies, or regulations or by California Department
of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
(FMEIR 93-01 Pgs 5.4-1 - 5.4-24)
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally I I I I I I
protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act (including but not limited to marsh,
vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal,
filing, hydrological interruption, or other means?
(FMEIR 93-01 Pgs 5.4-1-5.4-24)
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any I 1 I I I I
native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species
or with established native resident or migratory
wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native
wildlife nursery sites? (FMEIR 93-01 Pgs 5.4-1 -
5.4-24)
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances I I I I j I
protecting biological resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance? (FMEIR 93-01 Pgs
5.4-1-5.4-24)
Rev. 07/03/02
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources).
(Supplemental documents may be referred to and attached.)
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation
Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state
habitat conservation plan? (FMEIR 93-01 Pgs 5.4-1 -
5.4-24)
g) Impact tributary areas that are environmentally
sensitive? (FMEIR 93-01 Pgs 5.4-1 - 5.4-24)
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES - Would the project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource as defined in
§15064.5? (FMEIR 93-01 Pgs 5.8-1-5.8-10)
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the signifi-
cance of an archeological resource pursuant to
§15064.5? (FMEIR 93-01 Pgs 5.8-1 - 5.8-10)
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontologi-
cal resource or site or unique geologic feature?
(FMEIR 93-01 Pgs 5.8-1 - 5.8-10)
d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred
outside of formal cemeteries? (FMEIR 93-01 Pgs
5.8-1-5.8-10)
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:
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. (FMEIR 93-01 Pgs 5.1-1 - 5.1-
15)
ii. Strong seismic ground shaking? (FMEIR 93-01
Pgs 5.1-1-5.1-15)
iii. Seismic-related ground failure, including
liquefaction? (FMEIR 93-01 Pgs 5.1-1 - 5.1-15)
iv. Landslides? (FMEIR 93-01 Pgs 5.1-1-5.1-15)
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?
(FMEIR 93-01 Pgs 5.1-1 - 5.1-15)
Potentially
Significant
Potentially Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
D D D IEI
D
D
D
D
D D
D
D
D D
D
D
D
D D D
D D
D
D
D
D
Rev. 07/03/02
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources).
(Supplemental documents may be referred to and attached.)
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or
that would become unstable as a result of the project,
and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral
spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse?
(FMEIR 93-01 Pgs 5.1-1-5.1-15)
d) Be located on expansive soils, as defined in Table 18 -
]-B of the Uniform Building Code (1997), creating
substantial risks to life or property? (FMEIR 93-01 Pgs
5.1-1-5.1-15)
Potentially
Significant
Impact
D
n
Potentially
Significant
Unless Less Than
Mitigation Significant No
Incorporated Impact Impact:orporated Impact
D D
D D
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use
of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal
systems where sewers are not available for the disposal
of wastewater? (FMEIR 93-01 Pgs 5.1-1 - 5.1-15)
VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS -
Would the project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials? (FMEIR 93-01 Pgs
5.10-1-5.10-5)
b) 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? (FMEIR 93-01 Pgs 5.10-1 -
5.10-5)
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or
acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste
within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed
school? (FMEIR 93-01 Pgs 5.10-1 - 5.10-5)
d) 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? (FMEIR 93-01 Pgs 5.10-1-5.10-5)
e) 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? (FMEIR 93-01 Pgs 5.10-1 - 5.10-5)
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip,
would the project result in a safety hazard for people
residing or working in the project area? (FMEIR 93-01
Pgs 5.10-1-5.10-5)
D D
D D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D D
D D
Rev. 07/03/02
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources).
(Supplemental documents may be referred to and attached.)
g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with
an adopted emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan? (FMEIR 93-01 Pgs 5.10-1 -5.10-5)
h) 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?
(FMEIR93-01 Pgs 5.10-1 -5.10-5)
VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY - Would the
project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge
requirements? (FMEIR 93-01 Pgs 5.2-1 - 5.2-11)
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)?
(FMEIR 93-01 Pgs 5.2-1 - 5.2-11)
c) Impacts to groundwater quality? (FMEIR 93-01 Pgs
5.2-1-5.2-11)
d) 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?
(FMEIR 93-01 Pgs 5.2-1-5.2-11)
e) 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
flow rate or amount (volume) of surface runoff in a
manner, which would result in flooding on- or off-site?
(FMEIR 93-01 Pgs 5.2-1-5.2-11)
f) 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? (FMEIR 93-01 Pgs 5.2-1 - 5.2-11)
g) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality?
(FMEIR 93-01 Pgs 5.2-1 - 5.2-11)
h) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as
mapped on a Federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood
Insurance Rate Map or other flood delineation map?
(FMEIR 93-01 Pgs 5.2-1-5.2-11)
Potentially
Significant
Impact
D
D
D
D
D
D
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
n
n
n n
Less Than
Significant No
Impact Impact
D D
D D
n n
n
n
n
n
n n
10 Rev. 07/03/02
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources).
(Supplemental documents may be referred to and attached.)
i) Place within 100-year flood hazard area structures,
which would impede or redirect flood flows? (FMEIR
93-01 Pgs 5.2-1 -5.2-11)
j) 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? (FMEIR 93-
01 Pgs 5.2-1-5.2-11)
k) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? (FMEIR
93-01 Pgs 5.2-1-5.2-11)
1) Increased erosion (sediment) into receiving surface
waters. (FMEIR 93-01 Pgs 5.2-1 - 5.2-11)
m) Increased pollutant discharges (e.g., heavy metals,
pathogens, petroleum derivatives, synthetic organics,
nutrients, oxygen-demanding substances and trash) into
receiving surface waters or other alteration of receiving
surface water quality (e.g., temperature, dissolved
oxygen or turbidity)? (FMEIR 93-01 Pgs 5.2-1 - 5.2-
11)
n) Changes to receiving water quality (marine, fresh or
wetland waters) during or following construction?
(FMEIR 93-01 Pgs 5.2-1 - 5.2-11)
o) Increase in any pollutant to an already impaired water
body as listed on the Clean Water Act Section 303(d)
list?(FMEIR 93-01 Pgs 5.2-1-5.2-11)
p) The exceedance of applicable surface or groundwater
receiving water quality objectives or degradation of
beneficial uses? (FMEIR 93-01 Pgs 5.2-1 - 5.2-11)
IX. LANDUSE AND PLANNING - Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established community?
(FMEIR 93-01 Pages 5.6-1 - 5.6-18)
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? (FMEIR 93-01
Pages 5.6-1-5.6-18)
Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or
natural community conservation plan? (FMEIR 93-
01 Pages 5.6-1-5.6-18)
X. 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? (FMEIR 93-01
Pgs5.12.1-l-5.12.1-5 & 5.13-1-5.13-9)
Potentially
Significant
Impact
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
Potentially
Significant
Unless Less Than
Mitigation Significant No
Incorporated Impact Impact:orporated Impact
D D
D D
D D
D D
D D
D
D
D D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D D
D D
Rev. 07/03/02
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources).
(Supplemental documents may be referred to and attached.)
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? (FMEIR 93-01 Pgs 5.12.1-1 - 5.12.1-5 &
5.13-1-5.13-9)
XI. NOISE - Would the project result in:
a) 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? (FMEIR 93-01 Pgs 5.9-1 - 5.9-15)
b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive
groundbourne vibration or groundbourne noise
levels? (FMEIR 93-01 Pgs 5.9-1 - 5.9-15)
c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise
levels in the project vicinity above levels existing
without the project? (FMEIR 93-01 Pgs 5.9-1 - 5.9-
15)
d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in
ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above
levels existing without the project? (FMEIR 93-01
Pgs 5.9-1 -5.9-15)
e) 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? (FMEIR 93-01
Pgs 5.9-1-5.9-15)
f) 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? (FMEIR
93-01 Pgs 5.9-1-5.9-15)
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
indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or
other infrastructure)? (FMEIR 93-01 Pgs 5.5-1 - 5.5-6)
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing,
necessitating the construction of replacement housing
elsewhere? (FMEIR 93-01 Pgs 5.5-1 - 5.5-6)
c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating
the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
(FMEIR 93-01 Pgs 5.5-1 - 5.5-6)
Potentially
Significant
Potentially Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impactn n n m
n n
n n
n n
n n
n n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n n
n n
n n
12 Rev. 07/03/02
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources).
(Supplemental documents may be referred to and attached.)
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? (FMEIR 93-01 Pgs 5.12.5-1 -
5.12.5-6)
ii) Police protection? (FMEIR 93-01 Pgs 5.12.6.1 -
5.12.6-4)
iii) Schools? ? (FMEIR 93-01 Pgs 5.12.7.1 - 5.12.7-5
iv) Parks? ? (FMEIR 93-01 Pgs 5.12.8.1 -5.12.8-4)
v) Other public facilities? (FMEIR 93-01 Pgs 5.12.8.1
-5.12.8-4)
XIV. RECREATION
a) Would the project increase the use of existing
neighborhood and regional parks or other
recreational facilities such that substantial physical
deterioration of the facility would occur or be
accelerated? (FMEIR 93-01 Pgs 5.12.8-1 - 5.12.8-7)
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or
require the construction or expansion of recreational
facilities, which might have an adverse physical
effect on the environment? (FMEIR 93-01 Pgs
5.12.8-1-5.12.8-7)
XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC - Would the project:
a) Cause an increase in traffic, which is substantial in
relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the
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)? (FMEIR 93-01 Pgs 5.7.1 - 5.7-22
Consistent with GP & zoning. Construction of 5 units
will not substantially increase traffic).
b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level
of service standard established by the county
congestion management agency for designated roads
or highways? (FMEIR 93-01 Pgs 5.7.1 - 5.7-22)
Potentially
Significant
Impact
D
D
D
D
D
D
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
D
D
D
D
D
D D
D D
D D
Less Than
Significant No
Impact Impact
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
13 Rev. 07/03/02
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources).
(Supplemental documents may be referred to and attached.)
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?
(FMEIR 93-01 Pgs 5.7.1-5.7-22)
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature
(e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or
incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? (FMEIR
93-01 Pgs 5.7.1-5.7-22)
e) Result in inadequate emergency access? (FMEIR 93-
01 Pgs 5.7.1-5.7-22)
f) Result in insufficient parking capacity? (FMEIR 93-
01 Pgs 5.7.1-5.7-22)
g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs
supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turn-
outs, bicycle racks)? (FMEIR 93-01 Pgs 5.7.1 - 5.7-
22)
XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICES SYSTEMS - Would the
project:
a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the
applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board?
b) 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?
c) 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?
d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the
project from existing entitlements and resources, or
are new or expanded entitlements needed?
Potentially
Significant
Potentially Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impactn n n IEI
n n n
ODD
n n n
n n n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
e) 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?
f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted
capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste
disposal needs?
g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and
regulations related to solid waste?
n n
n
n
n . n
n n
14 Rev. 07/03/02
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources).
(Supplemental documents may be referred to and attached.)
XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
a) 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? (Site consists of
0.51 acres of disturbed land with no native habitat
present surrounded by residential development.
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumula-
tively 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?) (Project is zoned for
residential development and designated residential in
the approved GP. Construction of 5 units cannot be
considered a significant cumulative impact).
c) Does the project have environmental effects, which
will cause the substantial adverse effects on human
beings, either directly or indirectly?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
D D
D D
D D D
EARLIER ANALYSIS 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. Final Master Environmental Impact Report for the City of Carlsbad General Plan Update (MEIR 93-01).
City of Carlsbad Planning Department. March 1994.
2. Cilv of Carlsbad Important Farmlands. Map 5.13.2 State of California Department of Conservation, June
1990.
15 Rev. 07/03/02
DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
FOR CATEGORIES WITH IMPACTS FOUND TO BE GREATER THAN NO IMPACT
III. AIR QUALITY—Would the proj ect:
b. Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality- -(Formatted; Bullets and Numbering
violation?
Less Than Significant Impact. The closest air quality monitoring station to the project site is in the City of
Oceanside. Data available for this monitoring site through April, 2002 indicate that the most recent air quality
violations recorded were for the state one hour standard for ozone (one day in both 2000 and 2001) and one day in
2001 for the federal 8-hour average for ozone and one day for the 24-hour state standard for suspended particulates
in 1996. No violations of any other air quality standards have been recorded recently. If there is grading associated
with the project, the project would involve minimal short-term emissions associated with grading and construction.
Such emissions would be minimized through standard construction measures such as the use of properly tuned
equipment and watering the site for dust control. Long-term emissions associated with travel to and from the project
will be minimal. Although air pollutant emissions would be associated with the project, they would neither result in
the violation of any air quality standard (comprising only an incremental contribution to overall air basin quality
readings), nor contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation. Any impact is assessed as
less than significant.
LIST OF MITIGATING MEASURES (IF APPLICABLE)
None Required
ATTACH MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM (IF APPLICABLE)
None Required
17 Rev. 07/03/02