HomeMy WebLinkAboutCUP 85B; Pilgrim Congregational Church; Conditional Use Permit (CUP) (2)ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACI' ASSESSMENT FORM - PART I1
(TO BE COMPLETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT)
CASE NO. CUP 85tB)
DATE: September 20. 1991
BACKGROUND
1. CASE NAME: CUP 85[B) - Pil& Connegational Church
2. APPLICANT: Richard Allen
3. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: 3609 Laredo Street
Carlsbad, CA 92008
4. DATE EIA FORM PART I SUBMITTED: November 19, 1990
5. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Request for an amendment to an existinn Conditional Use Permit
allowing a church expansion to include an adiacent single family residence to be used for
Sunday school classes and adult meetinm.
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
8 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
insimificant. 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
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?
YES NO
(insig)
X
X
X -
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
-2-
-
BIOLOGICAL ENVIR0"T
WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: YES
big)
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
Affect the diversity of species, habitat
or numbers of any species of plants (including
trees, shrubs, grass, microflora and aquatic
plants)?
Introduce new species of plants into an area,
or a barrier to the normal replenishment of
existing species?
Reduce the amount of acreage of any
agricultural crop or affect prime, unique
or other farmland of state or local
importance?
Affect the diversity of species, habitat
or numbers of any species of animals (birds,
land animals, all water dwelling organisms
and insects?
Introduce new species of animals into an
area, or result in a barrier to the
migration or movement of animals?
HUMAN ENVIRONMENT
WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY:
17. Alter the present or planned land use
of an area?
18. Substantially affect public utilities, schools, police, fie, emergency or other
public services?
YES NO
(insig)
X
X -
X -
X
X
YES NO
(big>
- X
X -
-3-
HUMAN ENVIRONMENT
WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: YES NO
(insig)
Result in the need for new or modified sewer
systems, solid waste or hazardous waste
control systems?
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
X
Increase existing noise levels? X
Produce new light or glare? X
Involve a significant risk of an explosion
or the release of hazardous substances
(including, but not limited to, oil,
pesticides, chemicals or radiation)? X
X
Substantially alter the density of the
human population of an area?
Affect existing housing, or create a demand
for additional housing? X
Generate substantial additional traffic? X
X
Affect existing parking facilities, or
create a large demand for new parking?
Impact existing transportation systems or
alter present patterns of circulation or
movement of people and/or goods? X
X Alter waterborne, rail or air traffic?
Increase traffic hazards to motor
vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? X
Interfere with emergency response plans or
emergency evacuation plans? X
X
Obstruct any scenic vista or create an
aesthetically offensive public view?
Affect the quality or quantity of
existing recreational opportunities? 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?
X
X
X
X
-5-
DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
1-16. The proposed church expansion to include an adjacent existing single family residence for the purpose
of providing additional Sunday School classroom space and adult meeting rooms will create no adverse
environmental impact to the surrounding physical or biological environment since it requires no
additional grading or exterior structural alteration to the existing development.
17. Although the proposed conversion of a single family residence to church class and meeting rooms is an
alteration of the present residential land use, church uses are allowed in residentially designated areas
by conditional use permit.
18-19. The proposed church expansion in an existing single family residence will have no significant impact
on public services, utilities, or existing sewer systems.
20. The proposed church expansion may result in increased noise levels during very limited time periods
since the church classrooms will be occupied by children attending Sunday School classes held
concurrent with Church services on Sunday morning and for church meetings to be held occasionally
in the evening hours. The facility will be occupied only during these limited time periods; therefore,
the intermittent increase in noise levels will not create a significant impact.
21-22. The church expansion involves the addition of an existing single family residence to the church facility
for classroom purposes; therefore, no new light or glare or risk of an explosion or the release of
hazardous substances will be produced.
23. The church expansion will not substantially alter the density of the human population of the area since
the project consists only of new church class/meeting rooms to accommodate the existing Church
membership.
24. The church expansion will not significantly impact existing housing or create a demand for additional
housing since the project involves a change in use of only one single family residence from residential
to church class/meeting rooms to accommodate the existing church membership.
25-27. The church expansion to create Sunday school classrooms attended by children on Sunday mornings
concurrent with Church services and adult church meeting rooms in an existing single family residence
will generate no additional traffic and will not significantly impact existing parking facilities or
transportation systems or alter present circulation patterns since no additional trips or new demand for
parking will occur as a result of the proposed project.
28-31. The proposed project consists of a use change in an existing structure, therefore, it will not alter
traffic or create traffic hazards, interfere with emergency response or emergency evacuation plans,
obstruct any scenic view or create an aesthetically offensive public view, or affect the quality or quantity
of existing recreational opportunities.
-6-
ANALYSIS OF VIABLE ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT SUCH AS:
a) Phased development of the project,
b) alternate site designs,
c) alternate scale of development,
d) alternate uses for the site,
e) development at some future time rather than now,
f) alternate sites for the proposed, and
g) no project alternative.
a) Phased development of the project is not applicable since the proposed church expansion involves no new
construction.
b&c)The proposed church expansion involves no physical changes to the existing site design other than
expanding the church site to include the existing single family structure on an adjacent lot. Therefore, a
discussion of alternative site designs or scale is inappropriate.
d) The proposed church expansion consists of the part time use of an adjacent single family residence for
Sunday school classrooms and adult meeting rooms. Church uses are allowed in single family zones with
an approved conditional use permit which ensures compatibility with the surrounding single family uses.
The existing residential use is the only alternative use permitted by the zone.
e) Development at some future time is not applicable to this project since no new development or site
alteration is proposed.
f) The proposed site is a single family lot with frontage on the same collector street as the adjacent Church
site. The existing church facility has two parking lots located within walking distance of the proposed site
which provide adequate parking facilities to conveniently serve users of the meeting rooms. Alternative
sites include other surrounding single family lots located along local streets which are not easily accessible
from the church site. The use of these alternative sites located on local streets could impact the
surrounding neighborhoods if the lack of easy access from existing church parking lots resulted in on street
parking.
g) The proposed church expansion will result in no new development or site alteration and will have no
significant impact on the surrounding neighborhood since no additional traffic will be generated and no
new parking facilities are required. The no project alternative is therefore not applicable to this project.
-7-
DETERMINATION (To Be Completed By The Planning Department)
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE
DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, because the
environmental effects of the proposed project have already been considered in conjunction with
previously certified environmental documents and no additional environmental review is required.
Therefore, a Notice of Determination has been 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.
LIST MITIGATING MEASURES (IF APPLICABLE)
ATTACH MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM (IF APPLICABLE)
-8-
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
AH:vd
-9-