HomeMy WebLinkAboutPIP 89-02; Opus Plaza Phase II; Planned Industrial Permit (PIP) (5)ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART I1
(TO BE COMPETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT)
CASE NO. PIP 89-2
DATE : February 2, 1989
I. BACKGROUND
1. APPLICANT: OPUS SOUTHWEST CORPORATION
2. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: (602) 468-7000
4742 NORTH 24TH STREET # 270 - PHOENIX, ARIZONA 85016
3. DATE CHECK LIST SUBMITTED: Januarv 10, 1989
11. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
(Explanations of all Affirmative Answers are to be written under Section I11 - Discussion of Environmental Evaluation)
1. Earth - Will the proposal have significant results in:
a. Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic
substructures?
b. Disruptions, displacements,
compaction or overcovering
of the soil?
c. Change in topography or ground
surface relief features?
d. The destruction, covering of
modification of any unique
geologic or physical features?
e. Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the site?
f. Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands, or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which may modify the channel or a river or stream or the bed of the
ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? V A
MAY BE - NO
2. Air - Will the proposal have
significant results in:
a. Air emissions or deterioration
of ambient air quality?
b. The creation of objectionable
odors?
c. Alteration of air movement, moisture or temperature, or any change in climate, either locally
or regionally?
3. Water - Will the proposal have
significant results in:
a.
b.
C.
d.
e.
f.
g*
h.
Changes in currents, or the course
or direction of water movements,
in either marine or fresh waters?
Changes in absorption rates,
drainage patters, or the rate and amount of surface water runoff?
Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters?
Change in the amount of surface water in any water body?
Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration of surface water quality, including but not
limited to, temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity?
Alteration of the direction or
rate of flow of ground waters?
Change in the quantity of ground
waters, either through direct
additions or withdrawals, or through
interception of an aquifer by cuts
or excavations?
Reduction in the amount of water
otherwise available for public
water supplies?
V A
X
X
v A
., A
X
n
-2-
"
- YES MAY BE - NO
4. Plant Life - Will the proposal
have significant results in:
a. Change in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass, crops, microflora and aquatic plants)? X
b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of plants? X
c. Introduction of new species of plants
into an area, or in a barrier to the
normal replenishment of existing
species? X
d. Reduction in acreage of any
agricultural crop? X
5. Animal Life - Will the proposal have significant results in:
a. Changes in the diversity of species,
or numbers of any species of animals (birds, land animals including reptiles, fish and shellfish, benthic organisms,
insects or microfauna)? X
b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique,
rare or endangered species of animals? X
c. Introduction of new species of animals
into an area, or result in a barrier
to the migration or movement of
animals? X
d. Deterioration to existing fish or
wildlife habitat?
6. Noise - Will the proposal significantly
increase existing noise levels? X
7. Lisht and Glare - Will the proposal sig-
nificantly produce new light or glare? X
8. Land Use - Will the proposal have significant results in the alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? X
-3-
MAY BE
9. Natural Resources - Will the proposal have significant results in:
a. Increase in the rate of use of any
natural resources?
b. Depletion of any nonrenewable
natural resource?
10. Risk of Ulsset - Does the proposal
involve a significant risk of an
explosion or the release of hazardous
substances (including, but not limited
to, oil, pesticides, chemicals or
radiation) in the event of an accident
or upset conditions?
11. Population - Will the proposal signif- icantly alter the location, distribu- tion, density, or growth rate of the human population of an area?
12. Housinq - Will the proposal signif-
icantly affect existing housing, or
create a demand for additional housing?
13. Translsortation/Circulation - Will the
proposal have significant results in:
a. Generation of additional vehicular
movement?
b. Effects on existing parking facili-
ties, or demand for new parking?
c. Impact upon existing transportation
systems?
., A
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
d. Alterations to present patterns of
circulation or movement of people
and/or goods? X
e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or
air traffic? X
f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? X
-4-
"
14.
a.
b.
C.
d.
e.
f.
15.
a.
b.
16.
a.
b.
C.
d.
e.
f.
17.
YES
Public Services - Will the proposal have a significant effect upon, or have signif-
icant results in the need for new or ~
altered governmental services in any of
the following areas:
Fire protection?
Police protection?
Schools?
Parks or other recreational facilities?
Maintenance of public facilities, including roads?
Other governmental services?
Enerav - Will the proposal have
significant results in:
Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy?
Demand upon existing sources of
energy, or require the development
of new sources of energy?
Utilities - Will the proposal have significant results in the need for new systems, or alterations to the following
utilities:
Power or natural gas?
Communications systems?
Water?
Sewer or septic tanks?
Storm water drainage?
Solid waste and disposal?
Human Health - Will the proposal have
significant results in the creation of
any health hazard or potential health
hazard (excluding mental health)?
MAY BE - NO
v A
X
V A
n
X
X
-5-
7".
18
19.
20.
21.
a.
b.
C.
d.
e.
f.
g.
MAY BE - NO YES
Aesthetics - Will the proposal have significant results in the obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the
public, or will the proposal result in
creation of an aesthetically offensive public view? X
Recreation - Will the proposal have
significant results in the impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities?
Archeoloaical/Historical/Paleontoloaical - Will the proposal have significant results in the alteration of a significant archeological, paleontological or
historical site, structure, object or
building?
Analyze viable alternatives to the proposed Droiect 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) alter- nate sites for the proposed, and g) no project alternative.
This project is the second phase of a two phase project.
This site design is an alternative. The original site plan located
the proposed structure parallel with Palomar Airport Road. This
proposal locates the structure perpendicular to this major road,
thereby responding to visual concerns.
In that the project complies with all required development standards
and has incorporated structural relief, scale is not an issue.
N/A since the site is designated for office uses.
N/A since the site is currently rough graded and Phase I of the
project is already completed.
N/A
N/A since the site would ultimately be developed with a similar use.
-6-
,-
22. Mandatory findinqs of siqnificance -
a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, or curtail the diversity in the environment?
b. 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.)
X
X
c. Does the project have impacts which
are individually limited, but
cumulatively considerable? (A
project may impact on two or more
separate resources where the impact
on each resource is relatively small, but where the effect of the total of those impacts on the environment is significant.)
d. Does the project have environmental
effects which will cause substantial
adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
X
v
111. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
The project applicant is proposing to construct a 45,919' office building upon a 2.5 acre previously graded site. For this environmental
analysis, staff conducted several field trips to the subject property.
With the exception of an offsite Oak Grove (west of the property) which
will be maintained in open space. there exists no sensitive
environmental resources upon or in close proximity to the site. The
site is designated and zoned for office uses. Potential visual impacts
associated with the construction of a 35' tall structure along the
Palomar Airport Road Corridor have been mitigated through project
redesign including; 1) the incorporation of relief into the southern and western structural facades, 2) setting the structure back an additional
15' from the top of slope along this major road and 3) incorporating a landscaped buffer between the road and the structure.
Overall, because the subject property has been (1) previously graded,
and (2) there are no sensitive resources upon or in close proximity to
it which will be affected by development, no significant environmental
-7-
DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION. (CONTINUED):
impacts are anticipated. There were no public comments received during
the public review period for the Notice of Prior Compliance.
IV. 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 NOTICE OF PRIOR COMPLIANCE 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.
Date Signature
Date Planning Director
V. MITIGATING MEASURES (If Applicable)
-a-
VI. 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
-9-