Item 7 - EA CUP 96-08 MDR 95-05 VAR 95-03 Chabad of Poway AG, NDA REPORT SUMi, tARY
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council ~
FROM: James L. Bowersox, City Man~
ReDa 1 a r Services~
DATE: April 18, 1995
SUBJECT: Environmental Assessment, Conditional Use Permit 86-08 Modification,
Oevelopment Review 95-05 and Variance 95-03, Chabad of Poway, Applicant
ABSTRACT
A request to construct a new religious complex consisting of a sanctuary, fellowship
hall, classrooms and offices, on a 1.1 acre parcel which presently houses a temporary
complex for the same purposes. The property is located at 16934 Old Espola Road, in the
RR-C zone.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
It is recommended that a Negative Declaration with Mitigation Measures be adopted;
FISCAL IMPACT
None.
ADDITIONAL PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AND CORRESPONDENCE
Public notice was published in the Poway News Chieftain and mailed to 105 property
owners with 500 feet of the project boundaries.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council issue a Negative Declaration with Mitigation
measures and approve CUP 86-08 Modification, DR 95-05 and VAR 95-03 subject to the
conditions contained in the attached proposed resolution.
ACTION
E: \C I TY \PLANN I NG\REPORT\CUP~O0. SUM
APR 18 1995 rrEM 7 "
i of 24
AGENDA REPORT '
CITY OF POWAY
TO: Honorable Mayor and Member s~f.~ City Council
FROM: James L. Bowersox, City Manac)~l~~'
INITIATED BY: ~ ~lF~C~a~ta~r~or~ager~'~
'g -q , ' Plan~ing Services
Marijo Van Dyke, Associate Planner
DATE: April 18, 1995
MANDATORY
ACTION DATE: May 9, 1995
SUBJECT: Environmental Assessment, Conditional Use Permit 86-08
Modification, Development Review 95-05 and Variance 95-03,
Chabad of Poway, Applicant: A request to construct a new
religious complex consisting of a sanctuary, fellowship hall,
classrooms and offices, on a 1.1 acre parcel which presently
houses a temporary complex for the same purposes. The
property is located at 16934 Old Espola Road, in the RR-C
zone.
APN: 273-820-15
BACKGROUND
On October 26, 1986 the Poway City Council approved Conditional Use Permit 86-08
and Development Review 86-15 which provided for the development of a two-phased
development plan for a temporary complex to house a synagogue and associated
part-time school on the subject property. A final phase would follow when the
congregation had grown to a sufficient size to warrant the construction of a
permanent religious complex.
FINDINGS
The complex of temporary structures has been utilized essentially in its present
form since 1989. The Chabad presently houses a synagogue, a kindergarten and
preschool, a senior nutrition program and administrative offices. The subject
project is the final phase of construction which will provide a permanent,
approximately 13,000 square foot facility, and an underground parking structure
for approximately 40 vehicles, with an additional seven spaces located on the
west side of the present parking lot.
ACTION:
2 of 24
APR 1 8 1995 ITEM 7
Agenda Report
- April 18, 1994
Page 2
When the design for the Chabad was first approved, there was discussion
concerning parking needs. It was argued then, that the congregation belongs to
a strict orthodox branch of Judaism which prohibits its adherents from driving
on the day of worship. Therefore, the parking needs for the main weekly worship
services are greatly reduced.
During the past six years, staff has had an opportunity to observe the parking
habits of the Chabad congregants and can verify that a growing number have indeed
moved close by and are walking to services. There are however, a considerable
number who drive, and park their cars along both sides of Old Espola Road, but
do not Qtilize the Chabad parking lot. This practice has caused complaints from
surrounding neighbors on Old Espola Road and adjoining streets from time to time.
It is also of concern to the Department of Safety Services, because through
access is considerably restricted. Staff recommends the elimination of parking
on at least one side of Old Espola Road in order to remedy the congestion. It
is staff's understanding that the Congregation Chabad and St. John of Damascus
Church are negotiating an agreement whereby each may utilize the other's excess
parking for "peak events", for example High Holy Days and New Year celebrations,
as well as Easter and Christmas. It appears that this arrangement is the most
practical long-term solution to parking issues.
The process of construction will necessitate the removal of the temporary
buildings. The congregation would like to retain the synagogue building on-site,
within what is presently the west one-half of the parking lot, outside of the
area to be graded. In order to make this a practical option, it will be
necessary for a construction fence to be erected and maintained between the
approach to the synagogue, the building itself, and the construction area. This
may prove to be a logistical challenge due to the small size of the site. The
congregation also seeks approval of a temporary use permit to locate the
classroom and administration trailers on a residential lot located at the north
terminus of Rock Road.
The synagogue is two stories in height, 35 feet to the top of the domed roof. It
seats 150 worshipers. The remainder of the complex is a combination of one and
two story buildings clustered at street level with Old Espola Road. A terrace
surrounds the buildings on the south and west sides.
The majority of required site improvements are in place, these include; a six
foot block wall along the west property line which adjoins residences in Rancho
Bernardo, installation of paved parking lot and landscaping, construction of
curb, gutter and sidewalk along both street frontages, and drainage improvements
adjoining the western boundary of the property. Following the new construction,
a children's playground will be installed where the southern one-half of the
parking lot now exists. Final landscaping improvements will also be completed.
The Rural Residential C zone requires a 40 foot front yard setback for all
structures. The southerly frontage of the complex, facing Espola Road, will
encroach 12 feet into the required minimum setback. Due to the unique triangular
3 of 24 APR 18 1995 I'rEM 7
Agenda Report
April 18, 1994
Page 3
shape and irregular topography of the site, a recommendation of approval of the
setback variance can be made, since the complex meets all other required
development standards.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
An environmental initial study has been completed on the project (attached} and
it has been determined that the project will not have a significant impact on the
environment. It is recommended that a Negative Declaration with Mitigation
Measures be adopted.
FISCAL IMPACT
None.
ADDITIONAL PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AND CORRESPONDENCF
Public notice was published in the Poway News Chieftain and mailed to 105
property owners within 500 feet of the project boundaries.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council issue a Negative Declaration with
Mitigation measures and approve CUP 86-08 Modification, DR 95-05 and VAR 95-03
subject to the conditions contained in the attached proposed resolution.
JLB:RWQ:MVD:kls
Attachments:
A. Proposed Resolution
B. Initial Study
C. Negative Declaration
D. Zoning and Location Map
E. Proposed Site Plan
F. Proposed Elevations
G. Proposed Elevations
H. Proposed Floor Plans and Parking Plan
APR 181995 r~EM ?
4 of 24
RESOLUTION NO. P-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF POWAY, CALIFORNIA
APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 86-08 MODIFICATION,
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 95-05 AND VARIANCE 95-03
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 273-820-15
WHEREAS, Conditional Use Permit 86-08 Modification, Development Review 95-
05 and Variance 95-03 submitted by the Congregation Chabad of Poway, Applicant,
for the purpose of constructing an approximately 13,000 square foot synagogue
complex to replace an existing complex consisting of portable structures, located
at 16934 Old Espola Road, in the RR-C zone; and
WHEREAS, the application requests a variance from the required front-yard
setback along Espola Road; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has read and considered the staff report and has
considered other evidence presented at the public hearing.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council does hereby resolve as follows:
Section 1: Environmental Findinqs:
The City Council finds that Conditional Use Permit 86-08M, Development
Review 95-05 and Variance 95-03 will not result in any significant impact
on the environment and hereby issues a Negative Declaration with
Mitigation Measures.
Section 2: Findinqs:
Conditional Use Permit 86-08 Modification
1. The approved project is consistent with the general plan in that
semi-public land uses such as synagogues, private schools and
churches are permitted within Rural Residential properties.
2. That the location, size, design and operating characteristics of the
project will be compatible with and will not adversely affect or be
materially detrimental to adjacent uses, residents, buildings,
structures, or natural resources, in that the site has been utilized
for the purpose stated above for more than six years and has proven
its compatibility with the neighborhood.
3. That the harmony in scale, bulk, coverage and density is compatible
with adjacent uses, in that two other churches front Espola Road
directly to the east of the subject property. Each contain
permanent sanctuaries plus a complex of support buildings to serve
their congregations, and at a similar density.
4. That there are available public facilities, services and utilities
for the project.
5. That there will not be a harmful effect upon desirable neighborhood
characteristics, in that the new upgraded facility will replace a
cluster of temporary, portable buildings.
APR 18 t995 ITEM 7
5 of 24
Resolution No. P-
Page 2
6. That the generation of traffic will not adversely impact surrounding
streets and/or the City's Circulation Element, in that an
underground parking structure, along with six at-grade spaces will
be provided to congregants. Parking on one side of Old Espola Road
will also serve to reduce congestion on that street. For "peak
events" the congregation will share parking with the neighboring
church, St. John of Damascus Orthodox Church.
7. That the site is suitable for the type and intensity of the use, in
that it front a major arterial at Poway's northwest entry. It is
located on a corner lot at the intersection of Espola Road and Old
Espola Road. The subject site is not suitable for a residence due
to significant traffic noise impacts.
8. That there will not be significant harmful effects upon
environmental quality and natural resources, in that the property is
and has been fully developed with the subject land use for a period
in excess of six years. It contains no natural plants or animals,
and has no streams within or adjacent.
9. That there are no other relevant negative impacts of the development
that cannot be mitigated, in that issues of parking, noise,
lighting, and hours of operation are controlled by the subject
conditional use permit, and are subject to annual review.
Development Review 95-05
1. The approved project is consistent with the general plan as stated
above.
2. That the approved project will not have an adverse aesthetic,
health, safety, or architecturally related impact upon adjoining
properties in that the adjoining uses to the east, which also front
a major arterial, are church complexes.
3. That the approved project encourages the orderly and harmonious
appearance of structures and property within the City in that it is
similar in size and scope to the adjoining church complexes to the
east.
Variance 95-03
1. The approved project is consistent with the general plan as stated
above.
2. That there are special circumstances applicable to the property, and
because of this, the strict application of the Zoning Ordinance
deprives the property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in
the vicinity under identical zoning classification.
The special circumstances are that the property is triangular in
shape, with two road frontages, and in addition is lower in the
center by as much as ten feet from the elevation at the street.
APR181995 Il'EM ?
6 of 24
Resolution No. P-
Page 3
3. The granting of the variance or its modification is necessary for
the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right
possessed by other property in the same vicinity and zoning for
which the variance is sought.
The variance will allow the applicants to site the building front
parallel to Espola Road and bring the building up to grade on the
Old Espola Road frontage, thereby improving the usability of the
site.
4. The granting of the variance or its modification will not be
materially detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, nor
injurious to the property or improvements in such a vicinity and
zone in which the property is located, in that the building will be
logically oriented to the both street frontages, presenting a
balanced and well designed appearance.
5. That the granting of this variance does not constitute a special
privilege inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in
the vicinity and zone in that, the adjoining church properties are
not so physically burdened as is the subject site, and these sites
as a result are fully developed.
6. That the granting of this variance does not allow a use or activity
which is not otherwise expressly authorized by the zoning
development regulations governing the parcel or property in that,
religious complexes are a type of semi-public use which is permitted
to be established in a rural residential area with benefit of a
conditional use permit.
Section 3: City Council Decision:
The City Council hereby approves CUP 86-08M, DR 95-05 and Variance 95-03,
subject to the following conditions:
Within 30 days of approval (1} the applicant shall submit in writing that
all conditions of approval have been read and understood; and {2) the
property owner shall execute a Covenant on Real Property.
The use conditionally granted by this permit shall not be conducted in
such a manner as to interfere with the reasonable use and enjoyment of
surrounding residential and commercial uses.
This conditional use permit shall be subject to annual review by the
Director of Planning Services for compliance with the conditions of
approval and to address concerns that may have occurred during the past
year. If the permit is not in compliance with the conditions of approval,
or the Planning Services Department has received complaints, the required
annual review shall be set for a public hearing before the City Council,
to consider modification or revocation of the use permit.
APR 18 1995 )I'I:M ?
7 of 24
Resolution No. P-
Page 4
COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS IS REQUIRED. COMPLIANCE SHALL BE
APPROVED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING SERVICES.
SITE DEVELOPMENT
1. Site shall be developed in accordance with the approved site plans on file
in the Planning Services Department and the conditions contained herein.
2. Revised site plans and building elevations incorporating all conditions of
approval shall be submitted to the Planning Services Department prior to
issuance of building permits.
3. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of
the Zoning Ordinance and all other applicable City Ordinances in effect at
the time of building permit issuance.
4. Trash receptacle shall be enclosed by a six foot high masonry wall with
view-obstructing gates pursuant to City standards. Location shall be
subject to approval by the Planning Services Department.
5. All roof appurtenances, including air conditioners, shall be
architecturally integrated, screened from view and sound buffered from
adjacent properties and streets as required by the Planning Services
Department.
6. Prior to any use of the project site or business activity being commenced
thereof, all conditions of approval contained herein shall be completed to
the satisfaction of the Director of Planning Services.
7. The applicant shall comply with the latest adopted Uniform Building Code,
Uniform Mechanical Code, Uniform Plumbing Code, National Electric Code,
Uniform Fire Code, and all other applicable codes and ordinances in effect
at the time of building permit issuance.
8. This approval shall become null and void if building permits are not
issued for this project within two years from the date of project
approval.
PARKING AND VEHICULAR ACCESS
1. All parking lot landscaping shall include a minimum of one 15 gallon size
tree for every three spaces. For parking lot islands, a minimum 12 inch
wide walk adjacent to parking stalls shall be provided and be separated
from vehicular areas by a six inch high, six inch wide portland concrete
cement curb.
2. Parking lot lights shall be low pressure sodium and have a maximum height
of 18 feet from the finished grade of the parking surface and be directed
away from all property lines, adjacent streets and residences.
3. All two-way traffic aisles shall be a minimum of 25 feet wide. A minimum
of 25 feet wide emergency access shall be provided, maintained free and
clear at all times during construction in accordance with Safety Services
Department requirements.
8 of 24 APR 18 1995 ITEM 7
Resolution No. P-
Page 5
-- 4. All parking spaces shall be double striped.
LANDSCAPE IMPROVENENTS
1. Complete landscape construction documents shall be submitted to and
approved by the Planning Services Department prior to the issuance of
building permits. Plans shall be prepared in accordance with City of
Poway Guide to Landscape Requirements (latest edition).
2. A Master Plan of the existing on-site trees shall be provided to the
Planning Services Department prior to the issuance of building permits and
prior to grading, to determine which trees shall be retained.
3. Existing on-site trees shall be retained wherever possible and shall be
maintained in a horticulturally acceptable manner. Dead, decaying, or
potentially dangerous trees shall be approved for removal at the
discretion of the Planning Services Department during the review of the
Master Plan of existing on-site trees. Living trees which are approved
for removal shall be replaced on a tree-for-tree basis as required by the
Planning Services Department.
4. Street trees, a minimum of 15 gallon size or larger, shall be installed in
accordance with the City of Poway Guide to Landscape Requirements and
shall be planted at an average of 30 feet on center spacing along all
streets.
5. Landscaped areas within the adjacent public right-of-way shall be
permanently and fully maintained by the owner.
6. All landsFaped areas shall be maintained in a healthy and thriving
condition, free from weeds, trash, and debris. The trees shall be
encouraged and allowed to retain a natural form. Pruning should be
restricted to maintain the health of the trees and to protect the public
safety. Unnatural or excessive pruning, including topping, is not
permitted.
SIGNS
Any signs proposed for this project shall be designed and approved in
conformance with the Sign Ordinance.
EXISTING STRUCTURES
1. Provide compliance with the Uniform Building Code for property line
clearances considering use, area, and fire-resistiveness of existing
buildings.
2. Existing building(s) shall be made to comply with current building and
zoning regulations for the intended use or the building shall be removed.
3. A fence shall be provided which will restrict access between the temporary
location of the synagogue trailer and the construction area.
APR 18 1995 ITEM 7
9 of 24
Resolution No. P-
Page 6
COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS IS REQUIRED. COMPLIANCE SHALL BE
APPROVED BY THE ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT.
GRADING
I. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the Uniform
Building Code, City Grading Ordinance, approved grading plan and
geotechnical report, and accepted grading practices.
2. A soils report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer licensed by the
State of California to perform such work and submitted at the time of
application for grading plan check.
3. The final grading plan, prepared on a standard sheet of mylar, shall be
subject to review and approval by the Planning and Engineering services
Departments and shall be completed prior to issuance of a grading permit.
4. All new slopes shall be a minimum of 2:1 {horizontal to vertical).
5. A final compaction report shall be submitted and approved prior to
issuance of building permits.
6. A certification of line and grade, prepared by the project civil engineer,
shall be submitted prior to issuance of building permits.
7. Buildings and parking lots shall be at least five feet from tops and toes
of slopes, unless waived by Planning and/or Engineering Services
Departments prior to grading permit issuance.
8. If pad elevation increase by greater than two feet in height from those
approved on the schematic grading plan used as a basis of approving the
project, City Council approval will be required prior to grading permit
issuance.
9. Non-supervised or non-engineered fill is specifically not allowed. Rock
disposal areas shall be graded in compliance with City-approved soils
investigations and recommendations and grading plans.
10. Erosion control, including but not limited to desiltation basins, shall be
installed and maintained from Oct. 15th to April 15th. An erosion control
plan shall be prepared by the project civil engineer and shall be
submitted as part of the grading plan. The developer shall make
provisions to insure the proper maintenance of all erosion control devices
throughout their intended life.
STREETS AND SIDEWALKS
1. All damaged off-site public works facilities, including parkway trees,
shall be repaired and replaced prior to exoneration of bonds and
improvements, to the satisfaction of the Director of Engineering Services.
2. Prior to any work performed in the public right-of-way or City-held
easements, a right-of-way permit shall be obtained from the Engineering
lo of 24 APR 18 1995 ITEM 7
Resolution No. P-
Page 7
Services Department and appropriate fees paid, in addition to any permits
required. Said work shall include, but is not limited to, construction of
a driveway approach, sewer lateral installation, water service line
installation, or street construction (including concrete curb, gutter, and
sidewalk).
DRAINAGE AND FLOOD CONTROL
1. Intersection drains shall be required at locations specified by the
Director of Engineering Services and in accordance with standard
engineering practices.
2. A drainage system capable of handling and disposing all surface water
originating within the project, and all surface waters that may flow onto
the project from adjacent lands, shall be required. Said drainage system
shall include any easements and structures as required by the Director of
Engineering Services to properly handle the drainage.
3. Portland cement concrete gutters shall be installed where water crosses
the roadways.
4. Concentrated flows across driveways and/or sidewalks shall not be
permitted.
COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS IS REQUIRED. COMPLIANCE SHALL BE
APPROVED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF SAFETY SERVICES.
1. The buildings shall display their numeric address in a manner visible from
the access street. Building addresses shall also be displayed on the roof
in a manner satisfactory to the Director of Safety Services. Minimum size
of building numbers is 18 inches on facade of building.
2. An additional fire hydrant shall be located at Old Espola Road and Espola
Road (northwest corner).
3. An approved automatic sprin~ler system shall be installed throughout the
building, including the underground parking garage.
4. A wet standpipe shall be required in the underground parking area with
access from the exterior.
5. The entire sprinkler system shall be monitored by a central monitoring
agency. A system post indicator valve with tamper switch shall be
installed prior to occupancy.
6. In the "Group E" areas {school), the activation of the sprinkler system
and or smoke detectors, shall automatically activate the school fire alarm
system, which shall include an alarm mounted on the exterior of the
building.
7. "Group A" occupancy shall be provided with a manual fire alarm system.
Activation of the manual fire alarm shall immediately initiate an approved
pre-recorded message announcement.
I1 of 24 APR 1 B 1995 I~=M 7
Resolution No. P-
Page 8
8. The building shall meet all the requirements of the current Uniform Fire
Code and Uniform Building Code.
APPROVED and ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Poway, State of
California, this 18th day of April, 1995.
Don Higginson, Mayor
ATTEST:
Marjorie K. Wahlsten, City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
) SS.
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO )
I, Marjorie K. Wahlsten, City Clerk of the City of Poway, do hereby
certify, under the penalty of perjury, that the foregoing Resolution, No.
, was duly adopted by the City Council at a meeting of said City Council
h-6"~-~-6~--~he day of , 1995, and that it was so adopted
by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
Marjorie K. Wahlsten, City Clerk
City of Poway
E:\CITY\PLANNING\REPORT\CUP8608M.RSO
APR 18 1995 ITEM 7
.2 of 24
CITY OF POWAY
INITIAL STUDY
ENV I ROI~ENTAL CHECKL. I ST
PATE:
PROJECT LOCATION: I~
I. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
(Fact-based explanations of all answers are required on attached sheets.)
YES MAYBE NO
1. Soils and Geology. Will the proposal have
significant impacts in:
a. Unstable ground conditions or in changes in
geologic relationships?
b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction, or
burial Of the soil? ~-~-~Jc
c. Change in topography or ground surface
contour intervals?
d. The destruction, covering, or modification
~ of any unique geologic or physical
features?
e. Any potential increase in wind or water
erosion of soils, affecting either on- or
off-site conditions?
f.Changes in erosion, siltation, or
deposition?
g. Exposure of people or property to geologic
hazards such as earthquakes, landslides,
mudslides, ground failure, or similar
hazards?
2. ~. Will the proposal have significant
impac[s in:
a. Changes in currents, or the course in
direction of flowing streams, rivers, or
ephemeral stream channels?
b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage
patterns, or the rate and amount of.
surface water runoff?
c. Alterations to the course or flow of
flood waters? v'
d. Change in the amount of surface water in
any body of water? ~'
e. Discharge into surface waters, or any alter-
action of surface water quality?
ATTACHHENT B
APR 1 8 1995 ITEM.. 7
L3 of 24
Environmental Study Checklist
Page 2
YES MAYBE NO
f. Alteration of groundwater
characteristics? ' '
g. Change In the quantity of groundwaters,
either through direct additions, or with-
drawals, or through interference with an
aquifer?
Quality?
Quantity?
h.The reduction in the amount of water otherwise
available for public water supplies?
i. Exposure of people or property to water
related hazards such as flooding or seiches?
3. Air Quality. Will the proposal have significant
impacts in:
a. Constant or periodic air emissions from
mobile or indirect sources?~x~ ~,~'~3~-J '-~ v
Sta_tionary sources?
b. Deterioration of ambient air quality and/or :
interference with the attainment of appli-
cable air quality standards? v
c. Alteration of local or regional climatic
conditions, affecting air movement moisture
or temperature?
4. Flora. Will.the proposal have significant
results in:
a. Change in the characteristics of species,
including diversity, distribution, or number
of endangered species of plants?
b,~ Reduction of the numbers of any unique,
rare, or endangered species of plants?
c.Introduction of new or disruptive species
of plants into an area?
d. Reduction in the potential for agricultural
production?
5. Fauna. Will the proposal have significant
results in:
a. Change in the characteristics of species,
including diversity, distribution, or
numbers of any species of animals? v
b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique,
rare, or endangered species of animals?
c. Introduction of new or disruptive species
of animals into an area, or result in a
barrier to the mitigation or movement of
animals?
d, Deterioration or removal of existing fish
14 of 24 or wildlife habitat? APR
Environmental Study Checklist
Page 3
YES MAYBE NO
6. Population. [Will the proposal] have significant
results in:
a. [Will the proposal] alter the location, distri-
bution, density, diversity, or growth rate of
the human population of an area? v
b. Will the proposal affect existing housing,
or create a demand for additiona.! housing? v
7. Socio-Economic Factors. Will the proposal have
significant results in:
a. Change in local or regional socio-economic
-characteristics, including economic or
commercial diversity, tax rate, and prop-
erty values? v~
b. Will project costs be equitably distri-
buted among project beneficiaries, i.e.,
buyers, taxpayers, or project users? v/
8. Land Use and Plannin~ Considerations. Will- the
proposal have significant results in:
a. A substantial alteration of the present or
planned land use of an area?
b. A conflict with any designations, objectives,
policies, or adopted plans of any govern-
mental entities? v'
c. An impact upon the quality or quantity of
existing consumptive or non-consumptive
recreational opportunities?
9.Transportation. Will the proposal have significant
results in:
a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular
movement?
b. Effects on existing streets, or demand for
new street construction?
c. Effect~ on existing parking facilities, or
demand for.new parking? . . v
d. Substantial~i~pac~ u~on existing transpor-
tation systems?
e. Alterations to present patterns of circu-
lation or movement of people and/or
goods? v
f. Alteration to or effects on present and
potential water-borne, rail, mass transit,
or air traffic?
g. increases in traffic hazards to motor
vehicles,~.~5~,blcycllsts, orpedestrlans?~.~_.~n~l, ~.g~. ~*~ o'~
L5 of 24 APR 1 8 1995 ITEM
Environmenta Study Checklist
Page 4
YES MAYBE NO
10. Cultural Resources. Will the proposal have
significant impacts in:
a. A disturbance to the integrity of archaeo-
logical, paleontological, and/or historical
resources?
11. Health, Safety, and Nuisance Factors. Wilt the
proposal have significant results in:
a. Creation of any health hazard or potential
health hazard?
b. Exposure of people to potential health
hazards?
c. A risk of explosion or release of hazardous
substances in the event of an accident?
d. An increase in the number of individuals or
species of vector or parthenogenic organisms
or the exposure of people to such organisms?
e. Increase in existing noise levels?
f. Exposure of people to potentially dangerous
noise levels?
g, The creation of objectionable odors?
h. An increase in light or glare?
12. Aesthetics. Will the proposal have significant
results in:
a. The obstruction or degradation of any scenic
vista or view?
b.The creation of an aesthetically offensive
site?
c. A conflict with the objective of designated
or potential scenic corridors?
13. Utilities and Pub'llc Services. Will the~roposal - -~'
have significant need for new systems, or alter-
ations to the following:
a. Electric power?
b. Natural or packaged gas?
c. Communications systems?
d. Water supply?
e, Wastewater facilities?
f. Flood control structures?
g. Solid waste facilities? v
h. Fire protection? ·
16 of 24 APR 18 1995 ITEM 7
Environmental Study Checklist
Page 5
YES MAYBE NO
i. Police protection?
j. Schools?
Parks or other recreational facilities?
Maintenance of public facilities, including
roads and flood control facilities?
m. Other governmental services?
14. Energy and Scarce Resources. Will the proposal
have significant impacts in:
a. Use of substantial or excessive fuel or
energy?
b, Substantial increase in demand upon existing
sources of energy? V/
c. An increase in the demand for development of
new sources of energy?
d. An increase or perpetuation of the consump-
tion of non-renewable forms of energy, when
feasible renewable sources of energy are
- available?
e. Substantial depletion of any nonrenewable
or scarce natural resources?
15, Mandatory Findings'of Significance.
a. Does th~'project have the potential to
degrade the quality of the environment,
substantially reduce the habitat of fish
or wildlife species, cause a fish or wild-
life population to drop below self-
sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate
a plant or animal community, reduce the
number of restrict the range of a rare or
endangered plant or animal, or eliminate
important examples of the major periods
of the California history or prehistory? ~'
b. Does the proJect have the potential to
achieve short-term, to the disadvantage 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.)
c. Does the project have Impacts which are
individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable? (Cumulatively considerable
means that the incremental effects of an
~- Individual project are considerable when
viewed in connection with the effect of
past projects, and probable future
projects.)
17 of 24 APR 18 1995 ITEM'-7 ,
Environmental Study Checklist
Page 6
d. Does the project have environmental
effects which will cause substantial
adverse effects on human beings, either
directly or indirectly? ~
II. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
(i,e., of affirmative answers to the above questions plus a discussion of
proposed mitigation measures,)
III.DETERMINATION
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
'~ project have a significant effect on
I
find
the
proposed
COULD
NOT
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 NEGATIVE
DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED.
] I find the proposed project MAY have
a
significant
effect
on
the
environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
FORM$\E I S. FRM
APR 1 8 1995 ITEM 7
18 of 24
--' POWA -
, ITY OF
DON HIGGINSON, Mayor
SUSAN CALLERY. Deputy Mayor
B EMERY, Councilmember
MICKEY CAFAGNA. Councilmember
BET'FY REXFORD. Councilrnember
CITY OF POWAY
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
1. Name and Address of Applicant: Chabad of Poway, 16934 Old Espola Road,
Pow~¥, CA 92064
2. Brief Description of Project: Environmental Assessment, Conditional Use Permit
86-08 Modification, Development Review 95-05, Variance 95.03, Chabad of Powa¥.
3. In accordance with Resolution 83-084 of the City of Poway, implementing the
California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, the City of Poway has determined that
the above project will not have a significant effect upon the environment. An
Environmental Impact Report will not be required.
4. Minutes of such decision and the Initial Study prepared by the City of Poway are on
file in the Department of Planning Services of the City of Poway.
5. This decision of the City Council of the City of Poway is final.
Contact Person: Marijo Van Dyke Phone: (619) 679-4294
Approved by: Date:
Reba Wright-Quastler, Ph.D., AICP
ATTACHMENT C
City Hall Located at 13325 Civic Center Drive
"ailin§ Address: P.O. Box 789, Powav, California 92074-0789 · (619) 748-6600, 695-1400~
I9 of 24 ~,~.~,:.,~,~, APR 1 8 1995 I'rEM
CITY OF POWAY iTEM'- ~ ~-o~{~/~ 9~-o.~
VAR 95-03
TITLE : ZONING & LOCATION MA
~ SCALE : NONE ATTACHMENT : D
20 of 24 'APR 1 8 1995 ITEM 7
ATTACHMENT F
APR 1 8 1995
22 of 24 CONGRIEG,,\TION CMA. BAD OF RANCHO BERNARDO CAL[FORNIA
WEST ELEVATION
CROSS SECTION
---:- '"F:l:i',l:l:l:l
.=-.-- '-
................... ~ .~! .~,~,,~
ATTACHMENT G
g3 0f 24 CONGREGATION CHABAD OF RANCHO BERNARDO CALIFORNL~
,h.T Tg.C Hiv~N T H
APR 1 8 1995
CONGREGATION CHABAD OF R?,NCHO BIERNARDO CALIFORNIA