Loading...
Res P-14-17RESOLUTION NO. P -14 -17 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF POWAY, CALIFORNIA ADOPTING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 14 -005, MINOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION 14 -025, AND VARIANCE 14 -009 WHEREAS, the City Council considered Conditional Use Permit (CUP) 14 -005, Minor Development Review Application (MDRA) 14 -025, and Variance (VAR) 14 -009; a request to allow The Paw Pad to operate an animal day care and overnight kennel at 12255 Poway Road; and WHEREAS, on December 2, 2014, the City Council held a duly advertised public hearing to receive testimony from the public, both for and against, relative to this matter. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Poway as follows: Section 1: In accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) an Environmental Initial Study (EIS) and a proposed Negative Declaration (ND) have been prepared for CUP 14 -005, MDRA 14 -025, and VAR 14 -009. The City Council has considered the EIS and ND, and public comments received on the EIS and ND. The subject EIS and ND documentation are fully incorporated herein by this reference. The City Council finds, on the basis of the whole record before it, that there is no substantial evidence the project will have a significant impact on the environment. The City Council hereby adopts the ND attached to this Resolution as Exhibit A. PASSED, ADOPTED AND APPROVED by the City Council of the City of Poway at a regular meeting this 2nd day of December 2014. Don Higginson, Mayor ATTEST: Sheila R. Cobian, CMC, City Clerk Resolution No. P -14 -17 Page 2 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ss.. COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO ) I, Sheila R. Cobian, City Clerk, of the City of Poway, do hereby certify under penalty of perjury that the foregoing Resolution No. P -14 -17 was duly adopted by the City Council at a meeting of said City Council held on the 2nd day of December 2014, and that it was so adopted by the following vote: AYES: CUNNINGHAM, VAUS, MULLIN, GROSCH, HIGGINSON NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE DISQUALIFIED: NONE Sheila R. Cobian, CIVIC, City Clerk City of Poway EXHIBIT A CITY OF POWAY NEGATIVE DECLARATION Resolution No. P -14 -17 Page 3 1. Name and Address of Applicant: Gunner Milo Inc. PO Box 60506 San Diego, CA 92166 2. Project Name and Brief Description of Project: Environmental Assessment, Conditional Use Permit (CUP) 14 -005, Minor Development Review Application (MDRA) 14 -025, and Variance (VAR) 14 -009; Morningstar Real Estate Services, Applicant: A request for approval to establish an animal kennel and day care business, which includes a request for a Variance to City noise standards, on a developed commerical site located at 12255 Poway Road, in the Community Business zone. 3. In accordance with Resolution 83 -084 of the City of Poway, implementing the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, the City of Poway City Council has found that the above project will not have a significant effect upon the environment and has approved a Negative Declaration. An Environmental Impact Report will not be required. 4. This Negative Declaration is comprised of this form along with the Environmental Initial Study that includes the Initial Study and Checklist for this project. 5. The decision of the City Council of the City of Poway is final. Contact Person: Scott Nespor Phone: (858) 668 -4656 Approved by: Robert J. Manis Director of Development Services Attachments: Environmental Initial Study Date: December 2, 2014 CITY OF POWAY ENVIRONMENTAL INITIAL STUDY AND CHECKLIST A. INTRODUCTION Resolution No. P -14 -17 Page 4 This Environmental Initial Study and Checklist, along with information contained in the public record, comprise the environmental documentation for the proposed project as described below pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Based upon the information contained herein and in the public record, the City of Poway has prepared a Negative Declaration for the proposed project. B. PROJECT INFORMATION Project Title: Conditional Use Permit (CUP) 14 -005, Minor Development Review Application (MDRA) 14 -025, and Variance (VAR) 14 -009 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Poway, Development Services 13325 Civic Center Drive, Poway, CA 92064 3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Jason Martin, Senior Planner, (858) 668 -4658 4. Project Location: 12255 Poway Road 5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Gunner Milo Inc. P.O. Box 60506, San Diego CA 92166 General Plan Designation: Community Business (CB) Description of Project: (Describe the whole action involved, including, but not limited to, later phases of the project, and any secondary, support, or offsite features necessary for its implementation. Attach additional sheets if necessary). The project is a request to establish an animal kennel and day care business on a developed, currently vacant commercial site. The site consists of an approximate 5,400- square -foot building, landscape areas, vehicle parking and circulation areas, and other open paved surface areas. The business would provide 24 -hour kenneling, daytime dog day care, and ancillary activities such as grooming, obedience training and wellness training for dogs. The project includes the establishment of two separate outdoor dog activity areas that are enclosed within a fence and include covers over these areas for shade, which total approximately 8,500 square feet in area. The project also involves a request for a Variance to exceed the City noise standard relating to barking dogs. 8. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: The project site is located within an area that can be characterized as urbanized. Poway Road, which is a major commercial corridor, is along the north side of the site and developed commercial uses exist on the north side of Poway Road. The site abuts developed commercial uses to the west. A creek, which is a United States Geological Survey (USGS) mapped "blue line" creek and contains some flood control' improvements such as rip rap ", abuts the site to the southeast and developed commercial uses are beyond the creek. EIS and Checklist CUP 14 -005, MDRA 14 -025, and VAR 14 -009 Resolution No. P -14 -17 EXHIBIT A Page 5 9. Other agencies whose approval is required (e.g. permits, financing approval, or participation agreement): None Environmental Factors Potentially Affected: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact' as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. ❑ Land Use and Planning ❑ Transportation/Traffic ❑ Public Services ❑ Population and Housing ❑ Biological Resource ❑ Utilities and Service ❑ Geology /Soils ❑ Mineral Resources Systems ® Hydrology / Water Quality ❑ Hazards /Hazardous Materials ❑ Aesthetics ® Air Quality ® Noise ❑ Cultural Resources ❑ Agricultural /Forestry ® Greenhouse Gas Emissions ❑ Recreation Resources Determination (To be completed by the Lead Agency): On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, ❑ there will not be a significant effect in this case as revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent and /or mitigation has been agreed to. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an Lo ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that the proposed MAY have a "potentially significant impact' or "potentially ❑ significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, ❑ because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. City of Poway 2 Date EIS and Checklist CUP 14 -005, MDRA 14 -025, and VAR 14 -009 EXHIBIT A C. EIS and Checklist Resolution No. P -14 -17 Page 6 POTENTIALLY ISSUE POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT UNLESS SIGNIFICANT NOIMPACT IMPACT MITIGATION IMPACT INCORPORATED a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a X scenic vista? b. Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not X limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c. Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of X the site and its surroundinas? d. Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or X nighttime views in the area? In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including 3 EIS and Checklist CUP 14 -005, MDRA 14 -025, and VAR 14 -009 Resolution No. P -14 -17 EXHIBIT A Page 7 POTENTIALLY ISSUE POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT UNLESS SIGNIFICANT NOIMPACT IMPACT MITIGATION IMPACT INCORPORATED timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state's inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project; and forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board. Would the project: a. Convert prime farmland, unique farmland, or farmland of statewide importance (farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to X the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non- agricultural use? b. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural X use, or a Williamson Act contract? c. Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code X section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned EIS and Checklist CUP 14 -005, MDRA 14 -025, and VAR 14 -009 EXHIBIT A Resolution No. P -14 -17 Page 8 POTENTIALLY ISSUE POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT UNLESS SIGNIFICANT NOIMPACT IMPACT MITIGATION IMPACT INCORPORATED Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g))? d. Result in the loss of forestland or conversion of X forestland to non - forest land? e. Involve other changes in the existing environment that, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of farmland X to non - agricultural use or conversion of forestland to non - forest use? a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the X applicable air quality Ian? b. Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an X existing or projected air quality violation? c. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the X project region is non - attainment under an applicable federal or 61 EIS and Checklist CUP 14 -005, MDRA 14 -025, and VAR 14 -009 EXHIBIT A Resolution No. P -14 -17 Page 9 POTENTIALLY ISSUE POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT UNLESS SIGNIFICANT NOIMPACT IMPACT MITIGATION IMPACT INCORPORATED state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions that exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial X pollutant concentrations? e. Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of X people? a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species X in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, X policies, regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? c. Have a substantial adverse effect on X federally protected 9 EIS and Checklist CUP 14 -005, MDRA 14 -025, and VAR 14 -009 EXHIBIT A Resolution No. P -14 -17 Page 10 POTENTIALLY ISSUE POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT UNLESS SIGNIFICANT NOIMPACT IMPACT MITIGATION IMPACT INCORPORATED wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filing, hydrological interruption, or other means? d. Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native X resident migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological X resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community X Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional or state habitat conservation plan? a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5? 7 In EIS and Checklist CUP 14 -005, MDRA 14 -025, and VAR 14 -009 EXHIBIT A Resolution No. P -14 -17 Page 11 POTENTIALLY ISSUE POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT UNLESS SIGNIFICANT NOIMPACT IMPACT MITIGATION IMPACT INCORPORATED b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5? c. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? d. Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside X of formal cemeteries? a. Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse X effects, including the risk of loss, injury or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist - Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for X the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic round shaking? X iii) Seismic - related ground failure, X including liquefaction? iv) Landslides? FN EIS and Checklist CUP 14 -005, MDRA 14 -025, and VAR 14 -009 Resolution No. P -14 -17 EXHIBIT A Page 12 POTENTIALLY ISSUE POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT UNLESS SIGNIFICANT NOIMPACT IMPACT MITIGATION IMPACT INCORPORATED b. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss X of topsoil? c. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially X result in on- or offsite landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18 -1 -B of the Uniform Building X Code (1994), creating substantial risk to life or property? e. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal X systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? a. Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a X significant impact on the environment? b. Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of X reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? D EIS and Checklist CUP 14 -005, MDRA 14 -025, and VAR 14 -009 EXHIBIT A Resolution No. P -14 -17 Page 13 POTENTIALLY ISSUE POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT UNLESS SIGNIFICANT NOIMPACT IMPACT MITIGATION IMPACT INCORPORATED a. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? Q b. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonable foreseeable upset and X accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances or waste X within one - quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d. Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code X Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not X been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use 10 EIS and Checklist CUP 14 -005, MDRA 14 -025, and VAR 14 -009 EXHIBIT A Resolution No. P -14 -17 Page 14 POTENTIALLY ISSUE POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT UNLESS SIGNIFICANT NOIMPACT IMPACT MITIGATION IMPACT INCORPORATED airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working within the project area f. For a project in the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for X people residing or working in the project area? g. Impair implementation of, or physically interfere with, an adopted emergency X response plan or emergency evacuation Ian? h. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildland areas X adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? a. Violate any water quality standards or X waste discharge requirements? b. Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with X groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in 11 EIS and Checklist CUP 14 -005, MDRA 14 -025, and VAR 14 -009 Resolution No. P -14 -17 EXHIBIT A Page 15 12 POTENTIALLY ISSUE POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT UNLESS SIGNIFICANT NOIMPACT IMPACT MITIGATION IMPACT INCORPORATED aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table lever (e.g., the production rate of pre- existing nearby wells would drop to a level, which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted. c. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or X river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or offsite? d. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially X increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or offsite? e. Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater X drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of pollute runoff? f. Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? X 12 EIS and Checklist CUP 14 -005, MDRA 14 -025, and VAR 14 -009 EXHIBIT A Resolution No. P -14 -17 Page 16 POTENTIALLY ISSUE POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT UNLESS SIGNIFICANT NOIMPACT IMPACT MITIGATION IMPACT INCORPORATED g. Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area as mapped on a Federal Flood Hazard X boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h. Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area structures which would X impede or redirect flood flows? i. Exposing people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, X including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j. Inundation by seiche, X tsunami, or mudflow? a. Physically divide an established X community? b. Conflict with applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to, the general X plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c. Conflict with any applicable habitat X 13 EIS and Checklist CUP 14 -005, MDRA 14 -025, and VAR 14 -009 EXHIBIT A Resolution No. P -14 -17 Page 17 POTENTIALLY ISSUE POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT UNLESS SIGNIFICANT NOIMPACT IMPACT MITIGATION IMPACT INCORPORATED conservation plan or natural community conservation plan. a. Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of future X value to the region and the residents of the State? b. Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site X delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? a. Exposure of persons to, or generation of, noise levels in excess of standards established in the local X general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b. Exposure of persons to, or generation of, excessive ground borne vibration or X ground borne noise levels? c. A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in X the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d. A substantial temporary X or periodic increase in 14 EIS and Checklist CUP 14 -005, MDRA 14 -025, and VAR 14 -009 EXHIBIT A Resolution No. P -14 -17 Page 18 POTENTIALLY ISSUE POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT UNLESS SIGNIFICANT NOIMPACT IMPACT MITIGATION IMPACT INCORPORATED ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? e. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use X airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f. For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people X residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? a. Induce substantial growth in an area either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or X indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b. Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of X replacement housing elsewhere? c. Displace substantial numbers of people, X necessitating the 15 EIS and Checklist CUP 14 -005, MDRA 14 -025, and VAR 14 -009 EXHIBIT A Resolution No. P -14 -17 Page 19 POTENTIALLY ISSUE POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT UNLESS SIGNIFICANT NOIMPACT IMPACT MITIGATION IMPACT INCORPORATED construction of replacement housing elsewhere? a. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, X the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services. i. Fire protection? X ii. Police protection? X iii. Schools? X iv. Parks? X v. Other public facilities? X a. Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational X facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b. Does the project include recreational facilities or require the X construction or expansion of 16 EIS and Checklist CUP 14 -005, MDRA 14 -025, and VAR 14 -009 EXHIBIT A Resolution No. P -14 -17 Page 20 POTENTIALLY ISSUE POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT UNLESS SIGNIFICANT NOIMPACT IMPACT MITIGATION IMPACT INCORPORATED recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? a. Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation, including mass transit X and non - motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including, but not limited to, intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit? b. Conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including, but not limited to, level of service standards and travel demand X measures, or other standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c. Result in a change in air traffic patterns, X including either an HIM EIS and Checklist CUP 14 -005, MDRA 14 -025, and VAR 14 -009 EXHIBIT A Resolution No. P -14 -17 Page 21 POTENTIALLY ISSUE POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT UNLESS SIGNIFICANT NOIMPACT IMPACT MITIGATION IMPACT INCORPORATED increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d. Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous X intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e. Result in inadequate emergency access? X f. Conflict with adopted policies, plans or programs regarding public transit, bicycle or X pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities? a. Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable X Regional Water Quality Control Board? b. Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing X facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c. Require or result in the construction of new stormwater drainage X facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the EIS and Checklist CUP 14 -005, MDRA 14 -025, and VAR 14 -009 EXHIBIT A Resolution No. P -14 -17 Page 22 POTENTIALLY ISSUE POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT UNLESS SIGNIFICANT NOIMPACT IMPACT MITIGATION IMPACT INCORPORATED construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d. Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements X and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e. Result in the determination by the wastewater treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project, that it has X adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? f. Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the X project's solid waste disposal needs? g. Comply with federal, state and local statutes X and regulations related to solid waste? a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to 19 X EIS and Checklist CUP 14 -005, MDRA 14 -025, and VAR 14 -009 EXHIBIT A Resolution No. P -14 -17 Page 23 D. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION Please refer to the Environmental Initial Study Checklist Form above when reading the following evaluation. AESTHETICS: a. No impact. The site is fully developed with a commercial building and paved areas and is surrounded by developed commercial properties which are along a major commercial corridor. Establishment of fenced areas with shade covers are in keeping with the surrounding developed commercial areas. No impact will occur. O POTENTIALLY ISSUE POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT UNLESS SIGNIFICANT NOIMPACT IMPACT MITIGATION IMPACT INCORPORATED eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples or the major periods of California history or prehistory? b. Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ( "Cumulative considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are X considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects. c. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial X adverse effects on human beings either directly or indirectly? D. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION Please refer to the Environmental Initial Study Checklist Form above when reading the following evaluation. AESTHETICS: a. No impact. The site is fully developed with a commercial building and paved areas and is surrounded by developed commercial properties which are along a major commercial corridor. Establishment of fenced areas with shade covers are in keeping with the surrounding developed commercial areas. No impact will occur. O EIS and Checklist CUP 14 -005, MDRA 14 -025, and VAR 14 -009 Resolution No. P -14 -17 EXHIBIT A Page 24 b. No impact. See response I.a. c. No impact. See response I.a. d. No impact. Exterior lighting similar to that currently utilized in the surrounding developed commercial area will be utilized. No impact will occur. AGRICULTURAL AND FORESTRY RESOURCES: a) No Impact. The project site is fully developed with a building and paved areas for commercial use and is located within a developed commercial area with no farmland uses in the vicinity. Thus, the project would not result in the conversion of Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland or Farm -land of Statewide Importance to non - agricultural uses. No impact would occur. b) No Impact. The project site is not currently zoned for agricultural use and does not contain Williamson Act contract land. No impact would occur. c) No Impact. The project site does not contain, and is not zoned for, forest land, timberland or timberland zoned Timberland Production. No impact would occur. d) No Impact. As stated in response Il.c, the project site is not located in an area containing forest land. Accordingly, the project would not convert any forest land to non - forest use, and no impact would occur. e) No Impact. The project would not directly impact agriculture or forest lands, nor introduce new elements into the landscape that would contribute to future conversion of agricultural use to non - agricultural use or forest land to non - forest use. No impact would occur. III. AIR QUALITY: a. No impact. The City of Poway is part of the San Diego Air Basin and air quality in the area is administered by the San Diego County Air Pollution Control District (APCD). An Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) describes air pollution control strategies to be taken by a City, County or region classified as a non - attainment area to meet the Clean Air Act (CAA) requirements. The main purpose of an AQMP is to bring the area into compliance with the requirements of federal and state air quality standards, and to coordinate regional and local governmental agencies to achieve air quality improvement goals. A San Diego Regional Air Quality Strategies Plan — 1994 (jointly developed by the APCD and the San Diego Association of Govern ments- SANDAG) exists for the San Diego area and provides strategies for pollution control to improve air quality in the region. Land use plans and build out projections of the General Plans of jurisdictions within the San Diego area were considered in establishing the strategies of the Regional Air Quality Strategies Plan. The Poway General Plan includes strategies that are directed toward reducing air emissions through land use patterns, transportation planning, regional agency cooperation, energy conservation, and construction. The project will not have a significant adverse impact on air quality in the area. The zoning and General Plan designation for the site envision potential establishment of dog kennels. The use, therefore, will not have an impact and conflict with implementation the Regional Air Quality Strategies Plan. b. No impact. See response Ill.a. c. No impact. See response Ill.a. 21 EIS and Checklist CUP 14 -005, MDRA 14 -025, and VAR 14 -009 Resolution No. P -14 -17 EXHIBIT A Page 25 d. No impact. See response Ill.a. e. Less than significant impact. The project involves establishment of a dog kennel and day care business and, therefore, dog wastes will be generated on the site with the potential for odor. The business operations plan stipulates that dog solid waste will be picked up frequently and disposed of in a waste collection area that will be situated towards the interior of the site and more than 50 feet from any adjacent commercial building and removed from the site regularly. Additionally, the outdoor dog activity areas will be washed down daily. Impacts will be less than significant. IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES: a. No impact. The site is fully developed with a building and paved areas. No removal of natural vegetation will occur. No impact would occur. b. No impact. The project site is located within an area that can be characterized as urbanized. Poway Road, which is a major commercial corridor, is along the north side of the site and developed commercial uses exist on the north side of Poway Road. The site abuts developed commercial uses to the west. A creek, which is a United States Geological Survey (USGS) mapped "blue line" creek and contains some flood control improvements such as "rip rap ", abuts the site to the southeast and developed commercial uses are beyond the creek. The creek contains a high degree of invasive type vegetation and is the subject of regular flood control maintenance activity. The project will not result in the removal of vegetation in the creek. The site will be developed with Low Impact Development (LID) features to minimize polluted storm water run -off associated with pet wastes into the creek (See discussion Hydrology and Water Quality). No impact will occur. c. No impact. See responses IV.a and b. d. No impact. See response IV.a and b. e. No impact. No natural vegetation, or any onsite tree, is proposed to be removed. No impact will occur. f. No impact. See response IV.a and b. V. CULTURAL RESOURCES: a. No impact. According to the Prehistoric and Historic Resources Element of the Poway General Plan, the project site is located in an area with a high probability that archeological resources are present. The site was graded and developed over 25 years ago. Only minimal earth disturbing activities associated with digging holes for new fence supports will occur No impact will occur. b. No impact. See response V.a. c. No impact. See response V.a. d. No impact. See response V.a. VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS: a.i No impact. The site is fully developed with a building and paved areas. Only minimal earth disturbing activities will occur associated with digging holes for new fence supports. Other activity involves perforating paving for drainage and removal of a section of currently paved area to establish an LID feature to minimize polluted storm water runoff from the site, which will have negligible if any effect on soil. No impacts would occur. a.ii No impact. See response Vl.a.i. a.iii No impact. See response Vl.a.i. 22 EIS and Checklist CUP 14 -005, MDRA 14 -025, and VAR 14 -009 Resolution No. P -14 -17 EXHIBIT A Page 26 a.iv No impact. See response VI.a.i. b. No impact. See response VI.a.i. c. No impact. See response VI.a.i. VII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS: a. Less than significant impact. Greenhouse gases allow solar radiation (sunlight) into the Earth's atmosphere, but prevent radiative heat from escaping; thereby warming the Earth's atmosphere. Greenhouse gases are emitted by both natural processes and human activities. The accumulation of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere affects the Earth's temperature. Emissions of greenhouse gases in excess of natural ambient levels are thought to be responsible for the increase of the "greenhouse" effect and contribute to what is called "global warming ". The State of California's Climate Change Scoping Plan aims to reduce state and local greenhouse gas emissions by primarily targeting the largest emitters of greenhouse gases — transportation, including emissions from vehicles, and energy sectors. Item XVI.a below concludes that the project is not anticipated to result in a substantial number of new vehicle trips on roads, particularly since the site has been developed and used for commercial uses for over 25 years. Impacts would be less than significant. b. No impact. See response Vll.a. VIII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS: a. No impact. The project involves the establishment of a dog kennel and day care use on a developed site that will not involve the use of hazardous materials or otherwise result in any public hazards. No impact will occur. b. No impact. See response Vlll.a. c. No impact. See response Vlll.a. d. No impact. The site is not on the established lists of hazardous wastes sites. No impact would occur. e. No impact. The closest airport to the project site is the Marine Corps Air Station at Miramar military base, which is approximately 7.5 miles away. The project does not involve habitable structures that would result in exposure of people to safety hazards. Therefore, the project would not result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area. No impact would occur. f. No impact. See response Vlll.e. The project site is not within the vicinity of a private airstrip. Therefore, the project would not result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area. No impact would occur. g. No impact. See response Vlll.a. h. No impact. According to the Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones map for Poway, the project site is not located within a Very High Fire Hazard designated area. Additionally, the project site is within an urbanized and developed area, and not located adjacent to any large expanse of wildlands. The project, therefore, would not expose people .or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires. No impact will occur. IX. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY: a. Less than significant. The project involves establishment of a dog kennel and day care business on a developed commercial site which is adjacent to a creek and is also otherwise served by the City -wide storm water conveyance system. The 23 EIS and Checklist CUP 14 -005, MDRA 14 -025, and VAR 14 -009 Resolution No. P -14 -17 EXHIBIT A Page 27 project proposes two separate outdoor activity areas where dog waste will primarily be generated. These outdoor areas will be on existing paved areas that will be fenced, surfaced with artificial turf, and covered for shade. LID design features and business operation procedures will be implemented with the project to minimize polluted storm water runoff; and include keeping the dogs within a confined area, covering the area to minimized rainfall (and runoff) from the areas, perforating the pavement underneath the artificial turf to enable waste to infiltrate into the soil when the areas are washed down on a daily basis, picking up solid waste frequently, and the establishment of a depressed area in the ground along the rear property line. This area is located above and adjacent to the creek that is located to the southeast of the project site and will capture any runoff that results in the outdoor activity area before reaching the creek. As a result, impacts will be less than significant. b. No impact. The project involves establishment of a dog kennel and day care business on a developed commercial site which will rely on the City potable water system, not groundwater. No impact will occur. c. No impact.. See response IX.b d. No impact. The project would not alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner that would result in substantial erosion or siltation on or offsite. No impact would occur. e. No impact. The project would not alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on or offsite. No impact would occur. f. Less than significant. See response IX.a g. No impact. The project does not involve the placement of housing for humans on the project site. No impact will occur. h. No impact. A small southeasterly portion of the site is located within the delineated Floodplain and a smaller portion in the Floodway. No improvements are proposed within the Floodway. A portion of the outdoor activity area proposed in the rear of the site is within the Floodplain. Accordingly, that improvement will require the processing and approval of a Flood Plain Development Permit where compliance with City requirements will be ensured. No impacts will occur. i. No impact. The project would not result in exposing people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam. See response IX.g. No impact would occur. j. No impact. The project would not result in inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow. The project site is not located within or adjacent to any mapped dam inundation areas. Ramona Dam is the closest dam to the project site. See response IX.g. No impact would occur. X. LAND USE AND PLANNING: a. No impact. The project site is developed for commercial use, has been used for commercial uses for over 25 years, is along a major commercial corridor, and in an area that is developed with commercial uses. No impact will occur. b. No impact. See response X,a.. c. No impact. The Poway Subarea Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) serves as the planning document for the preservation and management of sensitive biological habitat areas in the City of Poway. The HCP is consistent with the regional and sub - regional planning efforts within San Diego County pursuant to the State of California's Natural Community Conservation Plan act of 1991. The project is not 24 EIS and Checklist CUP 14 -005, MDRA 14 -025, and VAR 14 -009 Resolution No. P -14 -17 EXHIBIT A Page 28 located within the HCP Mitigation Area. Additionally, no natural vegetation removal will occur as a result of the project. No impact would occur. XI. MINERAL RESOURCES: a. No impact. According to the mineral resource, as recognized Division of Mines and Geology, i the South Poway area of the City would occur to mineral resources. b. No impact. See response XI.a. XII. NOISE: Poway General Plan, the only known valuable by the California Department of Conservation, s construction quality sand and gravel located in f. The project site is not in this area. No impact a. Less than significant impact. The project involves establishment of a dog kennel and day care business, which includes two outdoor daytime activity areas. One outdoor activity area is in the front of the site along Poway Road and one is located in the rear portion of the site. Some dogs will only stay during the day, others will be kept overnight. Accordingly, there will be noise associated with barking dogs both during the day and nighttime hours. A Noise Study was prepared for the project by Investigative Science and Engineering Inc. The study reports that noise during the nighttime hours, when up to 60 dogs would be kenneled indoors, will be between 43 and 48 decibels (dBA), and that noise during daytime hours, when up to 75 dogs will be using the outdoor activity areas, will be 65.1 dBA. The Poway Municipal Code (PMC) has two separate noise standards applicable to the project. The noise standard contained in PMC 17.34.040 relates to the dog kennel use specifically and relates to the existing, ambient noise levels in the area. The PMC stipulates that noise associated with a kennel must be within the ambient noise levels for the area. The study determined the ambient noise level in the front portion of the site is between 44 and 82 dBA, and in the rear portion of the site to be between 44 to 68 dBA. Since the projected noise during the nighttime hours is between 43 to 48 dBA and the projected noise level during the daytime is 65.1 dBA, which are both within the ambient levels, the project complies with the ambient noise standard. The PMC stipulates another noise standard applicable to the project which is based on the project site's underlying Community Business (CB) zoning classification. The noise standard contained in PMC 8.08.04 stipulates that noise generated from any use in the CB zone cannot be more than 55 dBA during nighttime hours and no more than 60 dBA during daytime hours. The study reported that nighttime noise would be between 43 and 48 dBA. The project complies with the nighttime standard for the CB zone. The study reported however that daytime noise associated with the outdoor activity areas would be 65.1, which is slightly more than 5 dBA over the day time standard for the CB zone. PMC 8.08.220 contains a provision for variances to noise standards. The project involves a request for a variance pertaining to the exceedance of the 60 dBA daytime standard for the CB zone. The project site is located within a fully developed commercial area along a major commercial corridor. The projected noise is within the ambient levels in the area. It is also important to note that a similar dog kennel and day care business exists in the immediate vicinity and that 25 EIS and Checklist CUP 14 -005, MDRA 14 -025, and VAR 14 -009 Resolution No. P -14 -17 EXHIBIT A Page 29 there are minimal residential uses nearby that are more than 400 feet from the project site. Project noise impacts will be less than significant. b. No impact. The project will not cause any ground vibrations. No impacts will occur. c. No impact. See response Xll.a on ambient noise discussion. d. No impact. See response Xll.a on ambient noise discussion. e. No impact. The closest airport to the project site is the Marine Corps Air Station at Miramar military base, approximately 7.5 miles to the southwest. The project does not involve, nor does it propose habitable structures that would result in exposure of people to excessive noise levels. Therefore, the project would not result in excessive noise levels for people residing or working in the project area and no impact would occur. f. No impact. The project site is not within the vicinity of a private airstrip. Therefore, the project would not result in excessive noise levels for people residing or working in the project area and no impact would occur. XIII. POPULATION AND HOUSING: a. No impact. The project involves the establishment of a dog kennel and day care business on a developed commercial site. Therefore, the project would not induce substantial direct or indirect population growth in the surrounding area. No impact would occur. b. No impact. See response Xlll.a. c. No impact. See response Xlll.a. XIV. PUBLIC SERVICES: a. No impact. The project involves the establishment of a dog kennel and day care business on a developed commercial site. The site is adequately served by all public services. No impact would occur. a.i No impact. See response XIV.a. a.ii.No impact. See response XIV.a. a.iii.No impact. See response XIV.a. a.iv.No impact. See response XIV.a. a.v. No impact. See response XIV.a. XV. RECREATION: a. No impact. The project involves the establishment of a dog kennel and day care business on a developed commercial site. The business will not result in a demand for park or recreation services. No impact would occur. b. No impact. See response XV.a. XVI. TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC: a. No impact. The project involves establishment of dog kennel and day care business on a developed commercial lot which is currently vacant. Where the traffic generated by the new business will add traffic to the transportation system, since it is currently vacant, the added traffic is consistent with that which was previously generated by the prior business and the existing transportation system is designed to accommodate such traffic. No impact will occur. 26 EIS and Checklist CUP 14 -005, MDRA 14 -025, and VAR 14 -009 Resolution No. P -14 -17 EXHIBIT A Page 30 b. No impact. See response XVI.a. c. No impact. The project does not involve air traffic. No impact will occur. d. No impact. The project does not involve any alteration of existing transportation design features, and is not located within an area with existing hazardous transportation design features. No impact will occur. e. No impact. The project involves establishment of dog kennel and day care business on a developed commercial lot which is currently designed for adequate emergency vehicle access. No impact will occur. f. No impact. The project involves establishment of dog kennel and day care business on a developed commercial lot and will not conflict with conflict with, or otherwise impact transit, bicycle, or pedestrian systems. No impact will occur. XVII. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS: a. No impact. The project involves establishment of dog kennel and day care business on a developed commercial lot which is adequately served by existing utility and service systems. No impact will occur. b. No impact. See response XVll.a. c. No impact. See response XVI.a. d. No impact. See response XVI.a. e. No impact. See response XVI.a. f. No impact. See response XVI.a. g. No impact. See response XVI.a. XVIII. MANDATORY FINDING OF SIGNIFICANCE: a. No impact. See responses IV a and IV.b. b. Less than significant impact. See responses Ill.e, Vll.a, IX.a, and Xll.a. c. Less than significant impact. See responses !II.e and Vll.a 1►X1