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