Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCT 91-06; Tienda De La Esquina; Tentative Map (CT) (9)City of Carlsbad Planning Department NEGATIVE DECLARATION PROJECT ADDRESS/LOCATION: Southeast corner of Camino de los Rancho Santa Fe Road. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Development of a 7.6 acre neighborhood commercial center which includes a gas station, office and retail suites. 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, a Negative Declaration (declaration that the project will not have a significant impact on the environment) 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, 2075 Las Palmas Drive, Carlsbad, California 92009. Comments from the public are invited. Please submit comments in writing to the Planning Department within 21 days of date of issuance. If you have any questions, please call Christer Westman in the Planning Department at 438-1161, extension 4448. DATED: MAY 2, 1991 CASE NO: CT 91-6/SDP 91-6/ CUP 91-4/PUD 91-3 APPLICANT: TIENDA DE LA ESQUINA PUBLISH DATE: MAY 2, 1991 MICHAEL J. HOLZMILLER Planning Director CW:vd 2O75 Las Palmas Drive • Carlsbad, California 92OO9-4859 (619) 438-1161 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART H (TO BE COMPLETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT) CASE NO. CT 91-6/SDP 91-6/CUP 91-4/PUD 91-3 DATE: April 24. 1991 BACKGROUND 1. CASE NAME: Tienda De La Esquina 2. APPLICANT: Cunningham Barisic 3. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: Cunningham Barisic Development Corp 340 South Flower Street Orange. CA 92668 4. DATE EIA FORM PART I SUBMITTED: 5. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Development of a 7.6 acre neighborhood commercial center which includes a gas station, office and retail suites located at the southeast comer of Camino De Los Coches and Rancho Santa Fe Road. 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 or Negative Declaration. * 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 effect on the environment. On the checklist, "NO" will be checked to indicate this determination. * An EIR must be prepared if the City determines that there is substantial evidence that any aspect of the project may cause a significant effect on the environment. The project may qualify for a Negative Declaration however, if adverse impacts are mitigated so that environmental effects can be deemed insignificant. These findings are shown in the checklist under the headings "YES-sig" and "YES-insig" respectively. 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. PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY:YES (sig) YES (insig) NO 1. Result in unstable earth conditions or increase the exposure of people or property to geologic hazards? 2. Appreciably change the topography or any unique physical features? 3. Result in or be affected by erosion of soils either on or off the site? 4. Result in changes in the deposition of beach sands, or modification of the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? 5. Result in substantial adverse effects on ambient air quality? 6. Result in substantial changes in air movement, odor, moisture, or temperature? 7. Substantially change the course or flow of water (marine, fresh or flood waters)? 8. Affect the quantity or quality of surface water, ground water or public water supply? 9. Substantially increase usage or cause depletion of any natural resources? 10. Use substantial amounts of fuel or energy? 11. Alter a significant archeological, paleontological or historical site, structure or object? -2- BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: YES YES NO (sig) (insig) 12. Affect the diversity of species, habitat or numbers of any species of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass, microflora and aquatic plants)? X 13. Introduce new species of plants into an area, or a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? X 14. Reduce the amount of acreage of any agricultural crop or affect prime, unique or other farmland of state or local importance? X 15. Affect the diversity of species, habitat or numbers of any species of animals (birds, land animals, all water dwelling organisms and insects? X 16. Introduce new species of animals into an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? X HUMAN ENVIRONMENT WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: YES YES NO (sig) (insig) 17. Alter the present or planned land use of an area? X 18. Substantially affect public utilities, schools, police, fire, emergency or other public services? X -3- HUMAN ENVIRONMENT WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY:YES YES NO (sig) (insig) 19. Result in the need for new or modified sewer systems, solid waste or hazardous waste control systems? 20. Increase existing noise levels? 21. Produce new light or glare? 22. Involve a significant risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation)? 23. Substantially alter the density of the human population of an area? 24. Affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing? 25. Generate substantial additional traffic? 26. Affect existing parking facilities, or create a large demand for new parking? 27. Impact existing transportation systems or alter present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? 28. Alter waterborne, rail or air traffic? 29. Increase traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? 30. Interfere with emergency response plans or emergency evacuation plans? 31. Obstruct any scenic vista or create an aesthetically offensive public view? 32. Affect the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? _x_ X -4- MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: 33. Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wild- life species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or en- dangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. 34. Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the dis- advantage of long-term, environmental goals? (A short-term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of time while long-term impacts will endure well into the future.) 35. Does the project have the possible environmental effects which are in- dividually limited but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively con- siderable" means that the incremental effects of an individual project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) 36. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? YES YES NO (sig) (insig) -5- DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION The project proposes approximately 27,500 cubic yards of cut and fill. Grading quantities based on a net pad area of 5.9 acres will be less than 5000 c.y. per acre. Grading will eliminate a split pad situation and create a single superpad. Because the site has been previously graded the change in topography will not be significant. Slope planting and other erosion control methods will be employed to eliminate the affects of erosion. The project location is not adjacent to any significant bodies of water. There is a riparian corridor on an adjacent property to the south which is in an open space designation. That corridor will not be directly affected by development of the subject site. At some future date the corridor may be enhanced as part of a City wide trails implementation program. Although CEQA does allow for a certain percentage of particulates to be released the cumulative effect has created a level of substandard air quality on a regional level. The projects location, adjacent to a section of the City's proposed trail system and in close proximity to apartments and single family residential developments, will offer the opportunity of greater than average pedestrian movement the higher numbers of visits by foot or bicycle will theoretically reduce the impacts on air quality. It is not anticipated that the proposal will have an effect on air movement, odor, moisture, or temperature. The buildings proposed are single story and relatively low and no uses have been identified which would have offensive odors, create moisture or change the general temperature. Although the project site is located adjacent to a riparian corridor there is no intended disturbance to be carried out. That corridor is within a designated open space zone and will be enhanced as open space. From project construction the rate at which water percolates to the water table will be altered. Because it will be over a relatively small area it is not expected that there will be a significant effect. The project will also include a drainage system which will filter urban pollutants which further protects the ground water. No significant natural resources have been identified as being used for operation or construction of the project. It is not anticipated that substantial amounts of fuel or energy will be necessary to operate any of the proposed uses. The Project has been disturbed by previous grading. There has been no evidence of archeological, paleontological or historical significance on the site. BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT Field observation did not reveal the presence of any mature trees or significant areas of mature shrubs. The cause of the absence of plant life on the site must be do to the previous grading activity which denuded the site and created pads. Once the project is built and landscaped there will be more landscape than is currently onsite. The site has not been used as an agricultural site nor is it a viable location for crop production. There is not enough acreage for agriculture and its proximity to Rancho Santa Fe Road may have negative effects if there was fanning. -6- It is assumed that because there is an absence of vegetation onsite that there are no species of animals which are dependent on the site. No wildlife was observed during field inspections. HUMAN ENVIRONMENT The site is designated as a commercial zone on the General Plan and also as commercial in the La Costa Master Plan. The intended use is consistent with these designations. There is no application pending to change the designated zoning or General Plan. It is not anticipated that there will be a significant increase on the demand for services from public utilities, schools, police, or fire. Sewer needs can be accommodated by existing systems so there is no need to expand or create a new system. Noise and light will be generated by the project, however not in significant quantities. Commercial lighting will be designed to focus the throw on parking lots and specified locations on the buildings. Noise will be produced primarily by automobile traffic and related sources. Noise levels will not exceed existing levels of adjacent uses. A gasoline service station is proposed as part of the project. Installation of the gas tanks will be subject to current standards. As mentioned earlier in this analysis a filter system will be implemented to protect the surrounding environment from contaminated surface run off. Because of these precautions the impacts will be reduced to insignificance. The project will not alter the density of human population in the area nor will it affect existing housing or create a demand for additional housing. The project will ultimately serve the existing neighborhood. Traffic will be generated by the development. A traffic study has been done and some mitigation has been designed into the project to lessen impacts. A deceleration lane will be provided on Rancho Santa Fe Road for an ingress only. A full exit/entrance will be provided on Camino de los Coches where there will also be a nearby traffic signal. All parking necessary will be provided on site. Because of these provisions there will not be a significant impact on the environment. The project will not impact existing transportation systems; alter waterborne, rail or air traffic; increase traffic hazards; or interfere with emergency response plans. The site is both cut and fill. Closest to the intersection of Rancho Santa Fe Road and Camino de los Coches the site is at its lowest point relative to the streets. The buildings are designed as single story structures and will therefore not have a significant impact relative to view obstruction. The proposal will neither add to nor remove from existing recreational opportunities. -7- ANALYSIS OF VIABLE ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT SUCH AS: a) Phased development of the project, b) alternate site designs, c) alternate scale of development, d) alternate uses for the site, e) development at some future time rather than now, f) alternate sites for the proposed, and g) no project alternative. If the development was phased the ultimate impacts of the project would be delayed until all phases were complete. However, the ultimate impacts are not considered significant so there would not be an overriding environmental benefit by phasing. The project could be redesigned, the scale of development could be reduced or the uses could be different. Any combination of the above alternatives may have an effect on the overall impacts. Because of the relatively small size of the site any changes made would not have a significant beneficial environmental impact. Development at a future date will postpone impacts until that time. Services are available now and there are no significant biological impacts that have been identified. No alternate sites have been reviewed. The no project alternative would have no environmental impacts to existing conditions but could have an economic impact. -8- DETERMINATION (To Be Completed By The Planning Department) On the basis of this initial evaluation: X I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a 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 Conditional Negative Declaration will be proposed. I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. Dalte / 2*1 A 1 Signature Date Planning Directo CW:km LIST MITIGATING MEASURES (IF APPLICABLE) ATTACH MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM (IF APPLICABLE) -9- APPLICANT CONCURRENCE WITH MITIGATING MEASURES THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT I HAVE REVIEWED THE ABOVE MITIGATING MEASURES AND CONCUR WITH THE ADDITION OF THESE MEASURES TO THE PROJECT. Date Signature CW:km -10- Carlsbad Journal Decreed A Legal Newspaper by the Superior Court of San Diego County Mail all correspondence regarding public notice advertising to W.C.C.N. Inc. P.O. Box 230878, Encinitas, CA 92023-0878 (619) 753-6543 Proof of Publication STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ss. COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the county aforesaid; I am over the age of eighteen years, and not a party to or interested in the above entitled matter. I am principal clerk of the printer of the Carlsbad Journal, a newspaper of general circulation, published weekly in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, and which newspaper is published for the dissemination of local news and intelligence of a general character, and which newspaper at all times herein mentioned had and still has a bona fide subscription list of paying subscribers, and which newspaper has been established, printed and published at regular intervals in the said City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, for a period exceeding one year next preceding the date of publication of the notice hereinafter referred to; and that the notice of which the annexed is a printed copy, has been published in each regular and entire issue of said newspaper and not in any supplement thereof on the follow- PROJECT ADDRESS/LOCA- TION: Southeast corner of Camteo de losftancho fttnf a Fo fload- PROJECT DESCRIPTION: De- velopment of a 7.« «em neighbor- hood commercial crater which in- cludes • |*i station, oBlee and re- taUmttM. The City of Carlibad hat eoo- ducted an environmental review of tin above described project pur-suant to the Guideline! tar Imple- mentation of the California En- vironmental Quality Act and the Environmental Protection. Ordi- nance of the CHjrof Carlibad. Ai a • AMP****! _(ton wltt supportive document! if on flle in the Planning Department, 9075 Las Palmai Drive, Carlibad, California MOW. Comments from the public an Invited. Mease sub- mit comments In writing to the Planning Department within Jl dan of date of issuance. If you hi Westman in the Planning Depart- ment at 438-1U1, extension 4MB. Dated: May », IBM CaseNo:CT»l-MIH»91-« Applicant Tienda de la Esauina MICHAEL J. HOLZMXLLER Planning DirectorCJoWO.Mayl.lWl ing dates, to-wit: May 02 19 91 19 19 19 19 I certify under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed at Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of Cali- fornia on day of the 2nd way, iyyi / Clerk of the Printer