Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1981-01-28; Planning Commission; ; CUP 191 - SUN FAIRESTAFF REPORT DATE: January 28, 1981 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Planning Department SUBJECT: CUP-191 -SUN FAIRE -Request to conduct annual faire on the easterly portion of Carlsbad Raceway in the C-2 zone. I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The applicant is requesting to hold a faire on the easterly portion of the Carlsbad Raceway property north of Palomar Airport Road and west of Linda Vista Road. The property which is to be utilized for the faire is approximately 14 acres in size and was previously occupied by a skateboard park. The event will be held on an annual basis during the summer months from early May to the middle of September. The faire will be open from 10:00 A.M. to 7:00 P.M., Thursday through Sunday. II. ANALYSIS Planning Issues 1) Is the street system serving the proposed use adequate to properly handle all traffic generated by the use? 2) Is the site for the proposed use adequate in size and shape to accomodate the use? 3) Will the features necessary to adjust and to make the requested use compatible with other existing or permitted uses in the neighborhood provided and maintained? 4) Is the proposed use desirable for the community and in harmony with the various elements and objectives of the General Plan? III. DISCUSSION This is a request to hold an annual faire on the east- erly portion of Carlsbad Raceway in the area more specifically described above. "Sun Faire" is proposed to be a combination cultural event and County faire in which various regions of the world and historical time periods will be depicted. The faire is proposed to be open four days a week (Thursday, Friday, Saturday and Sunday) from 10:00 A.M. to 7:00 P.M during the summer months (May to September) starting in 1981. As shown on Exhibit A, seven re- gional sections of the world will be represented; the Market Place of the Middle East, Merry Olde England, Africa, The Orient, the Old West, South America and the Land of Discovery. The culture of each region will be portrayed through entertainment, costumes, authentic art and crafts and food and beverages. Costumed merchants will be able to rent space within each region to display and sell merchandise appropriate to the region. In addition to the various regions which will be linked by walking paths, there will be an open-air theater offering continual entertainment such as international dance troops, musical performances and theatrical productions. Also, there will be group activities and game areas where visitors will be invited to partici- pate in games representative of the different regions of the world. The applicant has indicated to staff that an average daily attendance of approximately 2,500 to 3,000 people is anticipated. There may be certain days (i.e. holidays) when attendance might exceed the average and possibly reach 5,000 people. Staff's primary concern with respect to the proposed faire had to do with traffic impacts. Staff was con- cerned as to whether the street system serving the faire could adequately handle the traffic generated by the use based upon the attendance figures provided by the applicant. Although staff recognizes that atten- dance at existing events at the raceway sometimes greatly exceeds what is anticipated on an average basis at the proposed faire, the events at the raceway do not normally occur on weekdays and are not conducted on a regular, weekly basis. Entrance to the faire will be from the existing en- trance to the raceway which takes access from the intersection of Palomar Airport Road and Linda Vista Road. This entrance requires some difficult movements because of the existing configuration of the inter- section. For the above reasons, staff required a traffic impact report prepared by a private traffic consultant. The traffic impact report which includes an initial report dated December 29, 1980 and an addendum dated January 6, 1981 is attached for Planning Commission review. -2- The report concludes that based upon available infor- mation, the street system serving the project can ade- quately handle the traffic generated by the faire if certain mitigating measures are complied with. Staff is recommending that these mitigating measures be applied as conditions of approval to the project. The report does point-out that there is not alot of back- ground data and information available because of the uniqueness of the proposed use and suggest that traffic data be collected by the applicant during the faire to provide better base data. A secondary concern of staff had to do with adequate parking. Approximately 4 acres of the site (the south- erly portion) as shown on Exhibit A will be used for parking. This should be sufficient for days when the average anticipated attendance is reached. However, to ensure that adequate parking is available especially on certain days such as holidays when the average atten- dance is exceeded, the applicant has agreed to lease the strip of property between the subject site and Palomar Airport Road for overflow parking. The area is shown as Parcel 17 on the attached Assessor's Map. With this arrangement, staff feels that the subject site is adequate in size and shape to accomodate the proposed use. Staff is recommending a number of conditions of ap- proval involving such items as security, traffic con- trol, and hours of operation to ensure that the faire is compatible with other uses in the neighborhood. From a compatibility standpoint, staff feels that the applicant has selected a very appropriate site for the type of use being requested. Because of the uniqueness of the use, staff is also recommending that this condi- tional use permit be brought back next year after one season of operation, to determine whether the faire has caused any unforseen problems and to determine whether any additional conditions need to be applied. If it is determined that additional conditions are needed, a new public hearing would be held next year. Otherwise, staff is recommending that the conditional use permit be approved for a six year period (the amount of time the applicant has the option to lease) unless an extension is requested and approved by the Planning Commission after six years. The project is consistent with the General Plan which recommends "Recreational Commercial" for the site. Staff feels that the use will provide a desirable and enjoyable event for the city of Carlsbad. IV. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The Planning Director has determined that this project will not have a significant impact on the environment and, therefore, has issued a Negative Declaration on January 5, 1981. V. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Planning Commission approve the Negative Declaration issued by the Planning Director and adopt Resolution No. 1760 APPROVING CUP-191 based on the findings and subject to the conditions con- tained therein. ATTACHMENTS PC Resolution No. 1760 Traffic Impact Report dated December 29, 1980 with addendum dated January 6, 1981 Background Data Sheet Location Map Reduced Site Plan Assessor's Map Disclosure Form Environmental Documents Exhibit A dated December 11, 1980 MJH: jt 1/14/81 -4- .,,. December 29, 1980 Mr. Peter Meisen P.O. Box 453 Cardiff, California 92007 Dear Mr. Meisen: TRAFFIC & TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING RECEIVED DEC 301980 CITY OF CARLSBAD Plannlns Department This letter summarizes our review of the traffic factors and related impacts of your proposed Sun Faire Festival at the Carlsbad Raceway. The study has been based upon information provided by you, the City Staff and available reference data. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The project consists of the use of the existing Carlsbad Raceway facilities for a international festival or fair. Plans for the fair are for a Thursday through Sunday schedule with the gates opened between 10 AM and 6 PM. Access to the site will be from Palomar Airport Road at the existing Raceway entrance westerly of Linda Vista Road. The festival is to operate during the summer months of May through October. EXISTING CONDITIONS Palomar Ariport Road adjacent to the site is a two lane facility with an average daily traffic volume of 13,000 vehicles(l)_ The intersection of Palomar Airport Road and El Camino Real is controlled by a four-way STOP. Palomar Airport Road is connected to the San Diego Freeway (I-5) by a diamond type interchange. Easterly of the site, Palomar Airport Road extends into San Marcos with some sections widened to provide four lanes and turn channelization. (1) "Draft Enviromnental Impact Report, San Diequito Circulation Element, GPA 80-CE," County of San Diego, July, 1980. 2651 EAST CHAPMAN AVENUE • SUITE 110 • FULLERTON, CALIFORNIA 92631 • (714) 871-2931 -2- TRIP GENERATION AND ASSIGNMENT Due to the uniqueness of the project, there is a limited amount of data available to project trip generation. Studies by our firm of the Orange County Fair indicated a range of 2.6 to 3.5 persons per vehicle. Similar studies at the Universal Amphitheater indicated an average of 2.6 person~ per vehicle. On the basls of these studies, a rate of 2.6 persons per vehicle has been utilized for this project. Information provided by you, indicates a projected daily attendance of 2,000 to 3,000 persons. The total trip ends for a 3,000 attendance day would be 2,300 trip ends (1150 in and 1150 out). In order to assign the project traffic to the road system, it is necessary to determine a geographic trip distribution pattern. Based upon population distribu- tions, previous studies and our knowledge of the area, a trip distribution pattern was developed and is illustrated in Figure 1. By applying these percentages to the estimated trip generation, daily project traffic at selected locations on the road system were obtained. These daily project traffic volumes are also indicated on Figure 1. ANALYSIS The principal concern related to this project with respect to traffic is the ability of the existing road system to accommodate the project traffic. As was stated previously, the current daily traffic on Palomar Airport Road is 13,000 vehicles. With the project, the total would increase to approximately 15,000 which is near the capacity for this type of facility. These are daily volume/capacity comparisons which are general in nature and peak conditions are better indicators of actual conditions. No data are available relative to peak hour trip generation rates for events of this type. General observations of similar events indicates a heavy inbound flow near opening time with outbound traffic being dispersed over a longer period of time. Activities such as sporting events and concerts have been found to have 80 percent of the total trips arrive in the hour preceeding the event. <2> Since the festival would not have a precise starting time similar to a sporting event or concert, the (2) "Traffic Considerations for Special Events," Institute of Transportation Engineers, 1976. 20% 230 \ lliTI 50% 5% PALOMAR 805 ..... ~ 805 (645] 5% A I RP ORT RD 920 ------920 740 LEGEND (1s5] 230 20% .,....-: '/1' 230 20% -TRIP DISTRIBUTION 230 -DAILY PROJECT TRAFFIC jl85] -PEAK INBOUND FLOW TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND DAILY PROJECT TRAFFIC FIGURE l . -.• - peak arrival period could be assumed to be more dispersed; however, for a worst case condition, we have assumed an 80 percent factor. -3- The peak inbound volumes would be 740 on Palomar Airport Road from the west with 460 of these utilizing the northbound off-ramp from the San Diego Freeway. These peak inbound volt.anes are indicated on Figure 1. ln addition to the magnitude of the peak, the time of occurrence is critical. The festival is planned to open at 10 AM which would indicate a peak inbound flow between 9 and 10 AM. This is a relatively light traffic period since work trips are generally off the roads and shopping and other trips have not begun. Review of the peak hour volume projects with consideration for time of occurrance indicates a potential problem at the El Camino Real/Palomar Airport Road intersection and at the entrance to the site. It is recommended that provisions be made for Police traffic control at these two locations until actual conditions indicate the need for this additional control is not required. Based upon the assumptions discussed above, it is not anticipated that exiting traffic will require jpecial provisions or control. In addition, the projected volumes at the Palomar Airport Road/San Diego Freeway do not indicate any potential problems. The estimated vehicle occupancy ratio of 2.6 persons per vehicle would indicate the need for 1150 parking spaces on-site. Provisions should be made for additional parking facilities to cover peak attendance days. It is recommended that data be collected during the operation of the festival to provide a basis for revised analyses. These data should include vehicle occupancy ratios, entering and exiting volumes by time of day, and approach routes. Represent- ative days should be selected to obtain these data. Home address zip codes would be useful in determining approach routes. SUMMARY The study has examined the traffic factors and potential impacts of the proposed Sum Faire Festival at the Carlsbad Raceway. In general, it was found that the existing road system would be adequate to acco11lll0date the projected traffic. This condition is based upon the data and assumptions described in the report. Recommenda- tions have been made to reduce potential impacts and to provide data for future events. -4- Principal findings of the study are the following: 1. An event with 3,000 attendees would generate 2,300 daily trip ends. 2, For a worst case condition, 920 vehicles would enter during the peak hour. 3. Exiting traffic would be dispersed over a period of time to reduce potential impacts. 4. The existing road system can accommodate the project traffic with the recommended mitigation measures. 5. For an event with 3,000 attendees, parking for 1,150 vehicles would be required. MITIGATION MEASURES The following measures are reconnnended to mitigate potential impacts and provide data for future event planning. 1. Police traffic control should be provided at El Camino Real and Palomar •Airport Road and at the entrance until conditions indicate it is not required. 2. Traffic data should be collected during the festival to provide base data for future events. * * * We trust that this report will be of assistance to you and the City of Carlsbad. If you have any questions or require additional information, please contact us. Respectfully submitted, WESTON PRINGLE AND ASSOCIATES Weston S, Pringle, P.E. WSP:cd 110670 January 6, 1981 Mr. Michael Holzmiller Planning Department City of Carlsbad 1200 Elm Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008 Dear Mr. Holzmiller: JAN 7 1981 fLAN.NING TRAFFIC & TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING This letter is an addend\Dll to our report of December 29, 1980, relative to the potential traffic impacts of the proposed Sun Faire Festival at the Carlsbad Raceway. The previous report was contained in a letter addressed to Mr. Peter Meisen. This addend\llll addresses traffic operations at the Palomar Airport Road/ Linda Vista Road/Encinitas Road intersection which also serves as the entrance to the Carlsbad Raceway. EXISTING CONDITIONS Palomar Airport Road is a two-lane facility with a separate left turn pocket provided for eastbound traffi.c at Linda V lsta/End.nitas. Thia left turn pocket has a storage of approximately 50 feet and a width of approximately 10 feet. Palomar Airport Road forms a "Y" intersection with Linda Vista/Encinitas Roads at this point. Westbound traffic on Encinitas is controlled by a YIELD sign at its entrance to Palomar Airport Road. A short section of Linda Vista Road is utilized for all other movements between Palomar Airport Road and Encinitas Road, These are no advanced warning signs on Palomar Airport Road indicating the Linda Vista/Encinitas intersection. The entrance to the Carlsbad Raceway is an extension of Linda Vista Road. This results in all traffic entering or leaving the Raceway having to cross the westbound traffic on Encinitas Road. A STOP sign does exist for vehicles existing from the Raceway at Encinitas Road. 2651 EAST CHAPMAN AVENUE • SUITE 110 • FULLERTON. CALIFORNIA 92631 • (714) 871-2931 ... . - ANALYSIS There are two potential problems at this intersection that could develop with the Sun Faire ·Festival operation. The first is the increased activity at the Palomar Road/Linda Vista intersection. As is indicated by the length of the existing left turn pocket, current volumes are relatively light and traffic 0n Palomar Airport Road may not be aware of the intt.•rscct Lon. Sight di.stance for vehicles on Palomar Airport Road approaching the intersection is somewhat restricted due to horizontal and vertical alignment of this road. -2- A similar potential problem exists for westbound traffic on Encinitas Road. Since there is normally little traffic flow in or out of the Raceway, drivers are not anticipating any conflicts and are watching traffic on Palomar Airport Road. In our previous report, we recommended police traffic control at this intersection during peak periods. Due to the conditions described above, it is also recommended that advanced intersection warning signs be installed on both approaches on Palomar Airport Road and the westbound approach on Encinitas Road. These signs should be installed approximately 750 feet in advance of the intersection. A second potential problem is related to the length of the left turn pocket for eastbound traffic on Palomar Airport Road. It would be desirable to extend this pocket to provide a 200 foot storage area. This would reduce the changes of rear-end collisions and the blocking of the eastbound through lane. This change in striping could be accomplished without additional pavement. SUMMARY This letter stumnarizes an additional review of the potential impacts of the Sun Faire Festival at the Palomar Airport Road/Linda Vista Road/Encinitas Road intersection. Potential problems were identified due to the increased use of the intersection which would result from the festival and the restricted sight distances. It has been recommended that advanced intersection warning signs be installed on all approaches to the intersection. In addition, it is recommended that the eastbound left turn lane on Palomar Airport Road be lengthened to provide a 200-foot storage area. -3- * * * * * We trust that these additional comments and recommendations will be of assistance to you in your review of this project. If you have any questions or require additional information, please contact us. Respectfully submitted, WESTON PRINGLE AND ASSOCIATES Weston S. Pringle P.E. cc: Mr. Peter Meisen WSP:cd 110670 BACKGROUND DATA SHE:e1' CASE ID: CUP-191 APPLICANT: SUN FAIRE REQUEST .AND LO:ATION: Pennission to conduct a festival of nations (Faire) north side of Palomar Airport Road between El Camino Real and Linda Vista Igd. LEX;AL DESCRIP'l'ION: Southwest Quarter of Northeast Quarter of Section 18 in township 12, South Range 3 West San Bernadine Base and Meridian, filed 9/17/1889 Assessors Parcel Nl.m'il:)er: 221 010 22 ------ Acres 14 No. of Lots _ _.::..Nz..;VA~--- GEm:RAL PIAN AND ZONING General Plan Land Use Designation __ RC _____ _ Density Allowed _N...:./._A ____ _ Density Proposed _N~VA ____ _ Existing Zone ____ c-_2 _______ _ Proposed Zone ____ N..;:.V..;..A__, ___ _ Surrounding zoning and Land Use: ZOning Land Use North E-1-A (County) South~ Vacant and Agriculture Vacant ---- East E-1-A (County) Vacant West C-2 ----Racewai PUBLIC FACILI'l'IES San Marcos Carlsbad Municipal Water District School District water District Sewer District Carlsbad EDU' s N/A _ _..:, ____ _ Public Facilities Fee Agreement, dated -~Dec:::::=:.:anber=ea==._,2=-i,........,1=980<.!0,.___ _______ _ (other: -----------------------------'> ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENI' _x ___ Negative Declaration, issued January 5, 1981 Log No. CUP-191 ____ E.I.R. Certified, dated ________ _ Other,------------------------------ t N ~OCATDON C~1S!E NO. CUP \'\ L APt?R.HCANT .SU1'J E& \\?)E JEct-~- fEITT'f VtCt~IT-Y MA-P . i I . I I· 19 I • ! ' I ® SHTI 0 93.82 AC. 3,0, 0.3 • SEC. 7 T 12 SR. 3 W ® SHTZ < 1 t- el) atRM: > ©- 11/0 53.87AC 0 q110 @ 0 40.00 AC. z ... ------.. VISTA 17-~ i ---Y . 7;;;.,/ :. 4LI • /j ,,;-j) UNIF"IEO ;JHl()M 0 32.69N:.. 7143.IC. 4 ,,-. .... 1:-:. ·.(;✓' (,!" 35.70AC 0 3 • S'1M fAlRE. . ,. ,.:f 13·?,?.• ,,,,. ... /333! R.AcE· ,1328 os ' MAP 7 8 CD 18 17 ZQDOAC C/1 i !J 11i,f!- I f::-N..) l.. 8 Sri r I -·-. L, .l""·· ...:.; -J :.f' -- SEC 18 SEC IJ ROS 64 If after the inform.ition· you hzivc submitted has been nivicwcd, it is determined tnat further information i -·equircd, you will be so advis~_,.·...__ APPLICANT: Name Cindi vi dual, artnersh1.p, joint venture, corporation, syndica, tion). Business Address Telephone Number • AGENT: fr ,.,..11'\.d.,. Name f, b, Berl Business Address Telephone Number ' MEMBERS: c;q 2-o ~~\o LA:ttt-~ wt~ ~ Horne Address-) "Cj'l-(:, I'{~ artner joint venture, corporation, syndication) Business Address Telephone Number Name Business Address 'J::e lephone Number s1rrt--e.. • Telephone Number Telephone Number ~ ""~"e. A-R..e.. --r\\-e. 3 ~~ .pM,~c.R..~ .. r s\,)~~,~ tC-O'W\,'-bte.. \..,,.,.,~_er ,£ L.,\m ,,-e.t) e~n1~~ \IS fd14--ew \ (Attach more sheets if necessary) I/We declare under penalty of perjury that the information contained in thi.s dis- closure is true and correct and that it wiil remain true and correct and may be relied upon as being true and correct until amended. 1200 ELM AVENUE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 -- . ~itp of ctarlsbab NEGATIVE DECLARATION - TELEPHONE: • • (714) 438-5621 PROJECT ADDRESS/LOCATION: Fast ~rtion of Carlsbad Raceway on the north . side of Palc;.mar Aiq:ort Road between F.l Camino ·Real and San Marcos Blvd.· .. . . . . ' . . ~ . . PROJECT DESCRIPTION: conditional Use Permit for a privately operatE:d _______________________ ...;_, _______ _ faire with en~imnent, arts and crafts and games represen:ti,ng several ·· different•nati.ons-and regions of the world. The City of Carlsbad has conducted an epvirorunenta~ rev~ew of the abo~e de~cribed 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 doctnnents is on file in the Planning Department, City Hall, 1200 Elm Avenue, Carlsbad; CA-.. 92008. Corranents from the public arc invited. Please submit comments in writing to the Planning Department within ten (10) days of date of cation.c· •. . . . DATED: January 5, 1981 :JM~l"·~~~~~n~QU,? JAMES C. I A. CASE NO: CUP-191 • APPLICANT: sun Faire PUBLISH DATE: January 10 1 1981 Director of Plan -City of Catlsb ND 4 1200 i:LM AVENUE CARLSBAD; CALIFORNIA 92C08 PLEASE 1i\KE NOTICE: -- Citp of Carls6ab PUBLIC NOTICE OF PREPARATION ..... - The Planning Department of the City of Carlsbad intends to prepare a Negative Declaration, x • Conditional ·Negative Declaration, ---Environmental Impact Report for the following project: Project Description:· Conditional use Permit for a priyateli- • operated faire with entertaininent, arts & crafts and • games ·representing several· different nations or regio·nL • • • • of·the world.· . ' .. • .. Project address/Location: East portion of Carlsbad Raceway on • . . • the north side of Palomar.·Airport· Road between El Camino Real ·and San Marcos Blvd. Anticipated s_ignificant impacts: Traffic• impacts • We need to know your ideas about the effect this project might have on the environment and your suggestions for ways the project could be re- vised to reduce or avoid any significant environmental damage~ Your ideas will help us decide what issues to analyze in the environmental review of this J)roject. Your comments on the.environmental impact of the proposed project may be submitted in writing to the Planning Department, 1200 Elm Avenue, Carlsbad, CA 92008, no later than Jan 9 • DATED: ·oecember 19, 1980 ~~ C TELEPHONE: (714) 729-1181 CASE NO: CUP-191 D: • • ~~.,......, ..... ~ ..... !\"""·~!>.""', .....---,.~---- APPLICANT: SUN FAIRE Planning Direct • City of Carlsb PUBLISH DATE: Decenber 24, 1980 ND 3 ENVIllOi~Mr:t-ffAT, J:\fPACT ASSESSMENT FOR\1 -Part II (To nc Completed By '01e PU\NNING DEPAR'lH!'.NT) CASENo. cvP-191 pATE:_DE~-10., 11'30 • l. BACKGROUND 1. APPLICfu\1T: 2. .ADDRESS AND PI IOI':E 1\'UMBDR OF APPLICAJ\JT ;_._..fe,"'--tt.:-.a,..~ _ _::0:::-Ra.:;.,..GH ... • .a.JiL..ll>i-c.-. _-4_-=tJ:;_. -=E J -------+--(:1:1~): +0·1 .;_· 10·3 h 3. DATE • Ct-JECKLIST SUBMITIED : __ i)_f:._L_~_· --~SE(L=-· =---'--, _-. _-Z...---ift-0-l.._'3-'o-..-0:..-. -_-__ II. • ENVIRONME~·)T.ll.L IMPACTS (E.XPl,1\;-,.:f\TH);\S OF .ALL AFFIRMATIVE A\lSl\'ERS ARE -TO BE ·wRITTB-~ UNDE!l Section J Il -DISCUSSION OF ENVIRON,lENTJ\L r..-VALUATION) ~ J. Earth Will the proposal have ~~gni- ficant rc~ults in: a. Unstc:.h1c earth conditions or in clmngcs in geologic substructures? _ b. Disruptions> displacements, com- ·paction or overcovering of the soil? c. Change in topography or ground surface Te1icf features? d. 'I11e destruction, covcTing or . modification of any unique geologic or physical features? • e, Any increase in wind or water e1·osion of soils, either on or off the site? f. Ch:mgcs in clcposi tion or ·ero- sion of hc-m:h !>ands, or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which m:1y mod.if)' the ch:rnnel of a river or ~;trenm or tl1c hcd o[ the occnn or :my ha)'; :i.n]ct or l,1kc? ·yes • ·Maybe .... / ... /· .. . / )JI), 2. Air: Will the proposal have s~gni- resul ts in: • • a. Air emissions qr deterioration of ambient air quality? b. The creation of objectionable odors? c. -Alteration of air movement, _ mositure or temperature, or any change in climate, either locally or regionally? ' 3; Water: Will the proposal have-sigi- ·ricant Tesul ts in: a. Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water move- ments, in either marine or fresh 'waters? b. Changes-in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the Tate and amount of surface water runoff? c. Alteration!.. to the course or flow of flood waters? o... Cha11ge in the amount of sur- face watci-in any water body? e. Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration of surface water quality, in~luding but not limited to temperatm~c, dissolved O>..')'gcn or turbidity? • £. Alteration of the direction or rate of flm·1 0£ ground waters? g.. Change in' the qu:1.ntity of· • ground ,._,atcrs, either through • direct additions or ,-tith<lrawals, or through interception of: an aquifer hy cuts or excavations? h, Rcductiori in the amoimt of watcl-· otherwise .1v.1il~blc. f,or public watci· supplies? Yes .• •• / ·/ .. / _/ .... / .. / .... / • ·-... 4. Plant Life. Will the proposal have signi- "f icant results in: a. Change in the diversity of species, -or numbers of any species of plants ·(including trees, shrubs, grass, crops, micro flora and aquatic pl.ants)? b .. Reduction of the mnnbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of ·plants? c. Introduction of new species . of plants into an area, or in a barrier to the normal replenish- men~ of existing species? d. Reduction in a.creage of any agricultural crop? S, • "Animal Life. Will ·the proposal have signi- · ficant results in: a. Changes in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of <1ni)nals (binls, land animals including reptiles, fish and sJrll~ fish, benthic organisms, insects or micro fauna)? b, Reduction of the nwnbcrs o_f any 1.mique, rare or endangered species of rulimals? • c. Introduction of new species of an:iJ11als into an area, or i-esul t in a barrier to the migration o.r movement of animals? • . . d. Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife lwbi tat? 6, ·."Noise. Will the proposnl signi- Iicantly inci·cnsc existing noise levels? 7. "J.,igl1t nnd GI.ire. Will the pro~ ))Osnl s:fgi1i .Cfrantly produce new light or glnrc? 8. • Lnncl Use. W.ill the proposal h:1vc s:ignTC".fc-,mt results in the nl t crnt:ion of tJic present or plmmed J a11<l use of nn nrca? ·': j .-. I / i j / ! ' ' ... ✓. .. / ---J /. / ' ...... . .. • ·- I 9. • Natural Resources. l\Till the pro- posal have significant results in: a. Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? b. Dcplctidn of any nonrenewable natural resource? 10. Risk of Upset. Does the proposal involve a significant risk of an explosion or the release of haz- ardous substances (including, but not ljmitcd to, oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset conditions? 11. P?plllation. Will the proposal significantly alter the location., distributjon, density, or growth 1·a.te of thp human population of an area? 12. Housing. Will t11e proposal signi- Iicantfy affect existing housing, or create a demand for additio11ql· • housing? 13 .• "ftansr>ortation/Citculation. Will° the proposal have significant re- sults in: • a. Generation of additional vc11icular movement? b, Effects on existing parking facilities, ·or dem~md for new parking? c, Impact upon cxisti~1g trans .. portation systems? d, Alterations to present patterns of c.irculation or move .. ,11cnt o;f pcopl c .ind/or gooLls? c, AJ:tcraHons to waterborne, rail or air tra..Cf:ic? f., Inc1.·<.~ase jn h·nfCk haz.ards to motor vch:ic.lcs, bicyclists or podcstrinns? Yes Maybe No ... /. .... / _ .... / ···✓ __ _,. .... / -- .... / ... • ·-.... .• ... / " 14. Public Services. Will the pro- posal have a sjgnificant effect upon, or h~ve significant results in the need for new or altered governmental sen.rices in any of the following area~: a. Fire protection? b. Police protection? c·. Schools? d. Parks or other recreational :facilities? e. 1'-iaintenance of public facili- ties, including roads? f .. Other governmental services? 15. Energy. Will the proposal have significant results in: 16 .• a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? t>, Demand upoll existing sources of cnci-gy, or require the develop- ment of 11cw sources of energy? Uti1 ities. Will ·the proposal have. significant results in the need for new systems, or alterations to the followj_ng utilities: a. Power or natural gasJ b-. Communications systems? c. Water? d. Sewer or septic tanks? e,. Storm water drainngc?. f. SoUd wnstc nnd disposal 7 17,.. lluman llenHh. Will the proposal OOV<.~--;;rj:ii1ij~Tcmt T{'Slll t~ in the crcntjon o.( m1y health haznnl or pott'nt i.il hc,1 l th ha;~:inl (cxclud.ing ,nent:.tl health); -s- Yes Maybe No .---✓ / ·/ ✓ ~ ·--/·· ... I .... / .. 7 .. 7 • .... / .. 7 . ... 7 .... / ..... ··, ..... ' \ ' - 18. Acsthctjcs. Will the proposal have si.g1-1ificai1t results in the obstruc- tion of any scenic vista or view open to·thc publlc, or will the pro- posal result in tlie creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public vim~? 19. Recreation. Will the proposal have significant results in the impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? 20. Archcological/Historical. Will the 'proposal have significant results in the alteration of a significant archeological or historic<1l site, • structure, object or building? 21. AlW..YZP VIABL'E ALTERi\lATJVES TO TI-IE PROPOSED PRO..JF:CT SUCH AS: a) Pl·IASElIT.fE\:1::LOJ;f\-JIXI' OF THE PROJECT; b) AL'!l:!P•:A'it SITE DESIGNS; c) AL112R\JJ\TE SCALE OF DEVELOPHf.NT; d) ALTERi\li\TE USES FOR -111E SITE; e) DEVELOPl\lE\'1' AT SQ\m HfTIJRE TIME Rl\'lB~ "flt!\.~ NOW; £) ALTERNATE SITES fOR 111E PROPOSED USE; g) NO PROJECT J\LTE!~'\ATIVE. , . • -6- / . ... 22. MI\NDATORY FINDINGS OP SIGNIPICANCE. a) DOES 11m PROJECT IIAVE 1l!E POTEN-· TI.AL TO DEGRADE Trm QUALITY OF TI-IE ENVJP.ONMENT, OR CURTAIL 11IE DIVERSI'lY IN Tl IE ENVIRON'>lCNT? b) DOES 'IJ-JE PROJECT 11'\VE TI-IE POTEN- TIAI., TO ACHIEVE SIIORT-TERM, TO 'IHE DISATNAi\ffAGE OF LONG-TERM, ENVIR01"\11•,il:NTJ\L GOALS? (A SIIORT- •mRM IMPACT ON 11-IE ENVIRONMENT IS ONE l\TllCH OCCURS IN A RE- LATIVELY BRIEF, DEFINITIVE PERIOD OF TIME 1\1-IILE LONG-TERM IMPACTS WILL EI\~JURE WELL IN1.D TI-ill RJ'lURE. ) c) DOES TI-IE PROJECT J IA VE TivfPACTS WHICH AP£ INDIVIDUALLY LIMITED, BUT rurrJLATIVELY CONSIDERABLE? (A PROJECT :/IL'\Y: IMPACT ON ·mo OR MORE SEPARATE RESOURCES · l\1-!ERE ·nrn HlPACT ON EACH RE- SOURCE IS REL'\.TIVEL Y s:,1..\LL, BlTT' WI JERE TI-IE EFFECT OF THE 'IDTAL OF THOSE IMP.ACTS ON Tiffi • ENVIRONMENT-IS SIGNif I CANT.) d) DOES TI-IE PROJECT HAVE ENVIRON- MENTAI., EFFECTS l\}IICH NILL CAUSE SUBS1N~TIAL ADVERSE EFFECTS ON HW,L'\.N BEINGS , EI'I1lliR DIRECTLY OR JNDJ.RECTLY? III.· Ii!SCUSSION OF ENVIR0;\1t\1ENTJ\L EVJ\LUTION Yes Maybe No / i .. !; OF THE {12roj~, /oJI) TJl.f:. F"At.--r ntA-r i""r w I t-t..-. oklLJ1 ! I· J. ~ 1/J ~to u • 4 Mo~n¼ 5 IF E.Ac...t½ vt £=.A.~ A~b_-_··_J • . I' 4-l:> MS A W"EE.I<.. (.. TihJ P.~~Avt. .'lll-(2.v SU tJ [)A\1) 1 511\ fF !! ~A.s iJ IJ A i3L.£ 1'.°-_ 7_ MA~ ~J£c-TI«>us CDIJ ('.£12/J~ ·1 TRAFF1 c... .. ~EaAl,otJ. 1}ft/2EFci2E. · T»E AfPu~ il . I ... ~~~ I ' • ♦ DIS(.l!S~ION OF rnvrnoNMLN , ~" J J\ 0 -• • ~ ""fAl 1-:v:~11111.TION (Contjnued) !I-As l>r&.~ I() I-\Av£ A · 11J.A-fft(--IM~.~ ; : i I '! PRE~'1-E.b-i3"1 • A ~~AT'E.. ffl-A-f:,::r c. LOµSV,1.--'IAµ'f.; . · i • ' . ! 11-1 Is i2~j2.:r Is ~ l,l) 'SI!¼~ . (}p.,:pAP-El) At.JI> I,() 11--l- .• . • l3i'.-• A rJ Al '-A ~1.,,€.. t»1 Of;uM l3t:S2.. Z "Ti l&f fh, . A IJ 11 . . . . . . -ro _(21:,bvCE• IT2A-FF1l-lMPAG.T5 MAt-1 gE AfrltED .: As U>tJbtT [fl)J.) S · oP APPl«JvAL, 1o TffE:-·R2ojl=cf -\ I : L I -- • I IV. DE113RMTN/\TION. (TO BE CO!vfl1LE'ruD BY '11 IE PLANNING DEPARTMENT) ------,-, ,, On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find the proposed proj cct COULD NOT have a s:i r,nifi cant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE D.ECI.ARATION will be prepared. I find that al though the proposed project qmld have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in th.is ·case because the mitigation measures described on an attached. sheet have been added to the project. A conditional negative declaration will will be prepared. l find the proposed project MAY have a significan~ effect on th~ environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL L'.JPACT REPORT is required. V. MITIGATING MEASURES (Irf APPLICABLE) •' rt> ·Be... IMPA~, .~e,-.. -~SfqL.. Z~., /Cteo . • . .. . .. MITIC'J\TlNG J\fEASURES (Continued) .. VI "APPLICA1'\IT ·coNOJRREi\JCE WITH MITIG.I\TING MEASURES TI-HS IS TO CERTIFf' 1H/\T I HAVE REVIEWED 1HE ABOVE MITIGl\.TlONG MEA- SURES AND CONCUR l'iT.iH TI-IE ADDITION OF TI-IESE MEA JRES TO TIIB PROJECT. Date: __ ~--~-~----'.·--=· -.::·~/_1.,,._~ _l_'Jl_rJ_ Jl -10- .. • FEE: .as-a. oo ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM Receipt No //z'!ft7 pJJ(.. 5"b EIA NO. __ . ri-J," • Date: Noy.·26, 1980 N~me of Applicant: Sun Faire, a fesivaJ of Nations • Address: 692 Orchid Lane, Del Mar QA 92014 {7J 4) 4SJ-J 036 )), OJ") tE' /1/(.f/JJ/;c:,c : ~--~ ·-• Permit App 1 i e d For: __ • ____ • _ __,... __ ....;.._ ___________ _ Case Nos.: ___________________________ _ Location of Proposed Activity: East end area of Carlsbad Raceway BACKGROUND INFORMATION· 1.~ Gfve a brfef description of the proposed activity (attach any preliminary development p1ans). Sun Faire, a Fe-stival of Nations, is a combination of a cultural event and a County fair, in which various regions of the w9rld are rep- . resented through lively entertainment, colorful costumes, authentic art, unique crafts, epicurean delights, and spirited games. 2. Describe the activity-area, including distinguishing natural and manmade characteristics; also provide precise slope analysis when appropriate. . This is an open grassy area. that was developed into a ska1ieboard park, and then converted to an aquatic.fishing pond. There are three existing buildings on the property, a mechanical fun slide, and a six th.ousand gallon septic system •. Parking areas are lighted and graded. • 3. Describe energy" conservation measures ~ncorporated into the design and/or operation of the project. ·sun Faire is predominantly a dey-time event. Energy usage is pro- jected to be minimal. FORM ~, _Page l of 4 .PLANNING . . •. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM II. EnvirOTh»ental Impact Analysis Answer·the following questions by-placing a check in. the appropriate space. 1. ·could the project significantly change present land uses in the vicinity of the activity? • 2. • Could the activity affect the use of a recreational area, or area of jmportant aesthetic valu~? 3. ·could the activity affect tAe functioning of an established community or neighborhood? 4. Could the activity result in.the displacement of . co111Runity .residents? .. • 5. • Are any of the natural or man-made features in the activity , area unique, that is, not ·found in other parts of the • • County, State, or nation? 6 .. Could the activity significantly affect a historical or archaelogical site or its setting? . . . , 7• Could the activity significantly affect. the potential use,·extract1on, or conservation of a scarce natural res- ource? • 8. Does the activity area serve as a habitat, food source nesting place, source of water, etc. for-rare or endangered wildlife on fish species? • • . . 9. Could the· activity significantly affect fish,1wildlife or plant 1 ife? . ·10. Are there any rare or endangered plant species -in the activity .area? . 11 .. Could the activity change existi-ng features of any.of the city's lagoons. bays, or tidelandsi • 12. Could the activity change existing features of any of t~e City's ·beaches? • • 13. Could the activity result in the erosion or elimination -of .agricultural lands? • . \ . 14~ Could the activity serve to encourage ~evelopmcot of .presently undeveloped areas or intensify development of already developed ar~as? • FORM 44, ·Page 2 of· 4. • . _.,. No X X X X X x . ·X X I X X _:_x X .. . . . . - . . ,. -: 15. Will the activity require.a variance from established environmental standard-s (air, water, noise, etc)? • . • . . . 16. Will the ac.tivity require certification, authorizati'on or issuance of a pennit by any_ local, State or Federal environmental ·control agency? • • l7. · Will the activity require issuance of a varia·nc·e or c·onditiorial use permit by the City? . 18~ Will the activity involve the application, use, or disposal of potentially hazardous· materials? • 19. Hill the activity involve construction of facilities in a fJood ·plain? • 20. Will the activity involve construction of facilities on a slope of 25 percent or greater? • __ 21. · Will the activity involve construction of faciliti~s in the area of an active fault?. 22. Could the activity result in the generation of significant amounts of noise? • . . • 23. Could. the activity result in the generation _of ·significant amounts of dust? • • • 24. •Will the activity involve the burning of-brush, trees, or • • other materi.a ls? . • • . . . 25. Could the activity result in a significant change. in the . ·quality of any portion of.the region's 4ir or·water resources? . . (Should note surface, ground water, off-shore). -. 26_. Will :there be a' significant change to exist.ing land form? (a). indicate esti~ated g~ading·to be done in_ cubic yards. minimal • • (b) percentage of alteration to the present la!]d form. 0 % {c) maximum height of cut or fill slopes. .. l-2 ·feet . 27. Will the activity result ·in substantial increases in the use of utilities, sewers, drains or streets? III. State of No Significant Environmental Effects . . If. you have answered yes to one or more of the questions in Section II but you think the activity will have no significant environmental effects, indicate your reasons below: • . .. • . . . .. . : . . FORM 44, Page 3 of 4 ... . . • • N . ...Q. X ·x X X X X X x . . ·x X X , . . . .... ~ -.. - IV: Coll'III\ents or Elabor.ations to Any of the Questions in Section II. DATE (If additional space additional sheets a is needed for answering· any questions, a.ttach ay be needed.). Signature ___ -k.,,....~~-...,L,;.~::::;_,,.~•..,....,,--:....:...:~::::::!::::x~---___,;------Person completing Date Signed: ~.1._/4 /20 ---_-7--7.,.__ ______________ _ Conclusions (To be completed by the Plannipg Director). Place-a check in the appropriate box. Further information is required. 112Affi<-f WlAc\a' ~ · It has been determined that the project will not have significant environmental effects. ( ) ·You must submit a preliminary environmental impact statement by the following date. ----=------·c } You should make an appointment with the Planning Director _ to discuss further processing of your project, in accordance with •• ' .. Chapter 19. 04 of the Municipal Code. RECEIVED:~~ ,g 1 ('i& BY -\ . Revised December 22, 1978 i 'SOUTH FIH!:RICf\ THE" ORIEtlT \7 ARK\NG MeRR'i OLPE ENuL1\HO EXH\\)\T A (;./<OVP G-fl 11 E fl(Uifl " NY"""'"T " ~,~' Ci .... ·_ §tlW/ FASil~JE A Fes1i,·a1--;;'r ?\atio11S ___,-/ ,--·. -·--. ·5 -. tJ -~.l'lml$ ... \llCINIT'{ MAP ---- . '