Loading...
2014/04/10 Planning Commission ResolutionPLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2014-14 A RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPTION OF A NEGATIVE DECLARATION, AND APPROVAL OF A RESOLUTION AMENDING SECTION 2.4 OF THE ROHNERT PARK GENERAL PLAN TO ADD POLICIES RELATED TO THE PROTECTION OF THE COMMERCIAL LAND SUPPLY WHEREAS, the City of Rohnert Park General Plan has land designated commercial and intends to protect the supply of commercial land for the purposes of job creation, retail sales and commercial services; and WHEREAS, the proposed amendments to Section 2.4 the Land Use Element of the General Plan would add policies relating to the importance of job creation, retail sales and commercial services as attached to this resolution (Exhibit A); and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the Initial Study / Negative Declaration (IS / ND); has published a Notice of Intent (NOI) in the Community Voice a minimum of 20 days prior to the first public hearing, and has otherwise carried out all requirements for the Project pursuant to CEQA; and WHEREAS, pursuant to California State Law and the RPMC, the public hearing was noticed in the Community Voice a minimum of 10 days prior to the meeting; and WHEREAS, on April 10, 2014, the Planning Commission held a public hearing at which time interested persons had an opportunity testify either in support or opposition to the proposal; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed and considered the information contained in the General Plan Amendment application. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of Rohnert Park makes the following findings and determinations with respect to the proposed General Plan Amendment: Section 1. The above recitations are true and correct. Section 2. The Planning Commission recommends City Council approval of the IS / ND (Exhibit B). Section 3. Findings related to the General Plan Amendments. The Planning Commission makes the following findings concerning the General Plan amendments proposed by Planning Application No. PLGP 2014-0003: 1. That the proposed General Plan amendments would be consistent with specific policies in the Land Use Element of the General Plan relative to the proposed development. Criteria Satisfied. The proposed amendments are consistent with and enhance the Land Use Element of the General Plan by adding policies relating to the importance of commercial land for job creation and retail purposes. The General Plan is current deficient in the respect. 2. That a duly noticed public hearing has been held to receive and consider public testimony regarding the proposed amendments to the General Plan. Criteria Satisfied. A duly noticed public hearing on the proposed General Plan Amendments was held on April 10, 2014 by the Planning Commission. 3. That the proposed Project with the proposed General Plan amendments is consistent with the General Plan. Criteria Satisfied. A specific development project is not related to these policy updates. As future projects are proposed they will be required to consider policies related to job creation, retail sales and the use of commercial land for commercial purposes 4. The General Plan Amendment approved for this Project will not cause the General Plan to become internally inconsistent. Criteria Satisfied. The General Plan General Plan Amendment is internally consistent with the remainder of the General Plan. The addition of policies to section 2.4 enhances the General Plan and does not replace any other language. S. That the City has considered and evaluated the goals, objectives and policies of the General Plan and finds that the proposed General Plan amendments are in compliance with the General Plan. The General Plan comprises many objectives, policies, principles, programs, standards, proposals and action plans (collectively, "policies"). The City recognizes that the policies necessarily compete with each other. The proposed policies will bolster the need to protect commercial land for commercial purposes and make it difficult for the limited land supply to be consumed by residential uses. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Planning Commission that it does hereby recommend that the City Council adopt the Findings hereinabove; adopt and amend the General Plan and approve Application No. PLGP 2014-0003 General Plan Text Amendments to Protect Commercial Land Supply as described in Exhibit A. DULY AND REGULARLY ADOPTED on this 10th day of April, 2014 by the City of Rohnert Park Planning Commission by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ,�' ABSTAIN: �";,Mt ADAMS BL �oSLv►� t BO BA GIUDICE HAYDON of Rohnert Park Planning Commission Attest: -,/ --.- F' usan Azevedo, Re6rding Secretary EXHIBIT A Proposed General Plan Amendments to Protect Commercial Land Supply 2.4 LAND USE GOALS AND POLICIES GOALS: LAND USE [no changes to this section] POLICIES: LAND USE [No changes from the beginning of this section through LU -6] LU -7A Encourage new neighborhood commercial facilities and supermarkets to be located to maximize accessibility to all residential areas. The intent is to ensure..... [no changes to the remainder of this paragraph] LU -713 Establish commercial uses that maximize onnortunities for additional sales tax revenue to help the City achieve fiscal sustainability. LU -7C Generate new emplo nentopportunities for City residents to help achieve a balance of jobs per employed resident ratio. LU -71) Retain existing commercial lands to provide jobs, goods, services, entertainment, and other amenities for the work force, residents, and visitors. LU -7E In order to attract shoWer_s_from throughout the region, encourage distinctive reaionaI-serving commercial uses on sites near the City's borders and at locations with good access to freeways and major arterials or near multimodal transit stations. LU -7F Encourage the maintenance, enhancement and redevelopment of older commercial districts, shopping cutters and corridors. [no changes from LU -8 to the end of the section] EXHIBIT B Initial Study & Negative Declaration Amendments to Protect Commercial Lands (GPA and Zoning Text Amendments) 19 QpKNERT app �ALIFORNI� 62 City of Rohnert Park Development Services INITIAL STUDY & NEGATIVE DECLARATION Amendments to Protect Commercial Lands (GPA and Zoning Text Amendments) Do not remove from public counter. Feel free to request electronic or hard copies of any of the documents. Keep available until April 11, 2014 19 QOKNERT PRP L1 FOR14}J.�► Gz INITIAL STUDY & NEGATIVE DECLARATION BACKGROUND 3. 4. Q 7. Project Title: Lead Agency Name and Address: Contact Person and Phone Number: Project Location: Project Sponsor's Name and Address: General Plan Designation: Zoning: Amendments to Protect Commercial Lands (GPA and Zoning Text Amendments) City of Rohnert Park Development Services 130 Avram Avenue Rohnert Park, CA 94928 Jeffrey S. Beiswenger Planner III City of Rohnert Park 707.588.2253 Applies to all commercial zoning districts City of Rohnert Park Development Services 130 Avram Avenue Rohnert Park, CA 94928 N/A N/A 8. Project Description Summary: The General Plan does not currently have any policy language that emphasizes the importance of commercially zoned property to the economic and fiscal health of the community (e.g. commercial development, job creation, fiscal stability, etc.). In addition, the zoning ordinance currently allows for mixed-use residential development within commercial zoning district which could reduce the land area available for new commercial development. New General Plan policies and zoning text amendments will be considered. 3 SOURCES The following documents are referenced information sources utilized by this analysis: N/A 2 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." A more detailed assessment may be found on the following pages. ❑ Aesthetics ❑ Biological Resources ❑ Greenhouse Gases ❑ Land Use & Planning ❑ Population & Housing ❑ Transportation & Circulation 1 DETERMINATION On the basis of this initial study: ❑ Agriculture ❑ Air Quality ❑ Cultural Resources ❑ Geology/Soils ❑ Hazards & Hazardous Materials ❑ Hydrology/Water Quality ❑ Energy & Mineral Resources ❑ Public Services ❑ Utilities/Service Systems ❑ Noise ❑ Recreation ❑ Mandatory Findings of Significance X I find that the Proposed Project COULD NOT has 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 because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the applicant. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the Proposed Project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" 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 General Plan EIR pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided 4 or mitigated pursuant to that earlier General Plan EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080(c)(2) and CEQA Guidelines Section 15168(c)(1), the City of Rohnert Park, as lead agency for the proposed project, has prepared an initial study to make the following findings: 1. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, the proposed activity is adequately described and is within the scope of the General Plan EIR. 2. There is no substantial evidence before the lead agency that the subsequent project may have a significant effect on the environment. 3. The analyses of cumulative impacts, growth inducing impacts, and irreversible significant effects on the environment contained in the General Plan EIR are adequate for this subsequent project. 4. Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21157.6(a), having reviewed the General Plan EIR, the City of Rohnert Park finds and determines that: Signature a. no substantial changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the General Plan EIR was certified, and b. that there is no new available information which was not and could not have been known at the time the General Plan EIR was certified. Date Jeffrey S. Beiswenger, AICP Planner III City of Rohnert Park Printed Name For 2 BACKGROUND AND INTRODUCTION The General Plan does not currently have any policy language that emphasizes the importance of commercially zoned property to the economic and fiscal health of the community (e.g. commercial development, job creation, fiscal stability, etc.). In addition, the zoning ordinance currently allows for mixed-use residential development within commercial zoning district which could reduce the land area available for new commercial development. New General Plan policies could include:. 3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION New General Plan policies that would emphasize the important of commercially zoned land to the fiscal and economic health of the community could include: • Policy LU -37. Establish commercial uses that maximize opportunities for additional sales tax revenue to help the City achieve fiscal sustainability. • Policy LU -38. Generate new employment opportunities for City residents to help achieve a balance of jobs per employed resident ratio. • Policy LU -38. Retain existing commercial lands to provide jobs, goods, services, entertainment, and other amenities for the work force, residents, and visitors. • Policy LU -39. In order to attract shoppers from throughout the region, encourage distinctive regional -serving commercial uses on sites near the City's borders and at locations with good access to freeways and major arterials or near multimodal transit stations. • Policy LU -40. Encourage the maintenance, enhancement and redevelopment of older commercial districts, shopping centers and corridors. A zoning text amendment may also be needed to implement the General Plan policies of protecting commercial land from residential development. Currently, within commercial zoning districts, a residential use could be permitted if it is part of a mixed use project, on the second level of a non-residential building and provided a CUP is issued. This residential option could be eliminated within commercial zoning districts. If this text amendment were to be approved, a mixed use zoning district would be required for this type of development. 4DISCRETIONARY ACTION Implementation of the proposed project would require the following discretionary actions by the City of Rohnert Park Planning Commission and City Council: Adoption of a resolution by the Planning Commission to recommend that the City Council adopt this negative declaration along with the General Plan amendments and zoning code text amendments; and • Adoption of this negative declaration by the City Council; and • Adoption of the new General Plan policy language 101 • Adoption of zoning code text amendments. The General Plan amendments and zoning text amendment are separate discretionary actions and could be adopted exclusive of one another. 5 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST The following section adapts and completes the environmental checklist form presented in Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. The checklist is used to describe the impacts of the proposed project. For this checklist, the following designations are used: Potentially Significant Impact: An impact that could be significant, and for which no mitigation has been identified. If any potentially significant impacts are identified, an EIR must be prepared. Potentially Significant With Mitigation Incorporated: An impact that requires mitigation to reduce the impact to a less -than -significant level. Less -Than -Significant Impact: Any impact that would not be considered significant under CEQA relative to existing standards. No Impact: The project would not have any impact. I. AESTHETICS Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant Less -Than - Significant With Mitigation Significant Issues Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact -------------- a. Have a substantial adverse effect x on a scenic vista? b. Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic El ❑ x buildings within a State scenic highway? c. Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the ❑ ❑ x site and its surroundings? d. Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would E x adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? 7 a -d The proposed changes would not have a direct impact on the aesthetics of the community. Any potential direct environmental impact from the construction of a new development may require an environmental evaluation prior to construction. II. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES 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 prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project: Potentially Significant Issues Impact a. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping Program of the California Resources Agency, to non- agricultural use? b. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? c. Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could individually or cumulatively result in loss of Farmland to non-agricultural use? Potentially Significant With Mitigation Incorporated ■❑ Ci Less -Than - Significant No Impact Impact a -c The proposed change would only apply to commercially zoning property within Rohnert Park. No agricultural resources would be impacted. III. AIR QUALITY Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant Less -Than - Significant With Mitigation Significant Issues Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact Issues Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less -Than - Significant Impact No Impact a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable ❑ ❑ x air quality plan? b. Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an, I:: ❑ L. existing or projected air quality x violation? c. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non -attainment under an applicable federal or D U x State ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant ❑ x concentrations? e. Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of ❑ F7 x people? a -e No direct impact to air quality is expected from changes to General Plan Policy language or from a zoning ordinance text amendment. Any impact from construction activity would be evaluated at the time of construction. IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Would the project: Issues a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)? Potentially Significant Potentially With Less -Than - Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact I a -f This amendment would apply to development with commercial zoning designations. Any impact from new construction would be evaluated separately from this proposal. V. CULTURAL RESOURCES Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant With Less -Than - Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as x defined in Section 15064.5? b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the x 10 Potentially Significant Potentially With Less -Than - Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues Impact Incorporated Impact Impact b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional El El plans, policies, or regulations or by the x California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? c. Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal x pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d. Interfere substantially with the movement of any resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established resident or x migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of wildlife nursery sites? e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or x ordinance? f. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Conservation Community Plan, or other x approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan? a -f This amendment would apply to development with commercial zoning designations. Any impact from new construction would be evaluated separately from this proposal. V. CULTURAL RESOURCES Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant With Less -Than - Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as x defined in Section 15064.5? b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the x 10 Issues Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less -Than - Significant No Impact Impact significance of a unique archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5? c. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource on site or unique C] ? I] x geologic features? d. Disturb any human remains, including ❑ ❑ x those interred outside of formal I x cemeteries? a -d This amendment would apply to development with commercial zoning designations. Any impact from new construction would be evaluated separately from this proposal. VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS Would the project: Issues Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less -Than - Significant No Impact Impact a. Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse 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 ❑ ❑ x Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? ii. Strong seismic ground shaking? ❑ J x iii. Seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction? ❑ X iv. Landslides? ❑ ❑ ❑ X b. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss ❑ ❑ of topsoil? x 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 ❑ ❑ U result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral X spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? 11 a -f This amendment would apply to development with commercial zoning designations. Any impact from new construction would be evaluated separately from this proposal. VII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS' Would the project: Issues a. Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the atmosphere? b. Conflict with any applicable plan, policy, or regulation of an agency adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? Potentially Significant Potentially With Less -Than - Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact ❑ 1.1 x ❑ U x Legislative Context California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB 32) In September 2006, the Governor signed AB 32, the California Global Warming Solutions Act (Health and Safety Code Section 38500 et. seq.). The Act codifies the executive order for reduction of statewide GHG emissions to 1990 levels by the year 2020. This change, which is 12 Potentially Significant Potentially With Less -Than - Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues Impact Incorporated Impact Impact e. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1B of the Uniform Building 0 1-' x Code? f. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems C P :.! x where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? a -f This amendment would apply to development with commercial zoning designations. Any impact from new construction would be evaluated separately from this proposal. VII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS' Would the project: Issues a. Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the atmosphere? b. Conflict with any applicable plan, policy, or regulation of an agency adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? Potentially Significant Potentially With Less -Than - Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact ❑ 1.1 x ❑ U x Legislative Context California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB 32) In September 2006, the Governor signed AB 32, the California Global Warming Solutions Act (Health and Safety Code Section 38500 et. seq.). The Act codifies the executive order for reduction of statewide GHG emissions to 1990 levels by the year 2020. This change, which is 12 estimated to be a 25 to 35 percent reduction from current emission levels, will be accomplished through an enforceable statewide cap on GHG emissions that was phased in starting in 2012. SB 375 On September 30, 2008, Governor Schwarzenegger signed Senate Bill (SB) 375 into law. This legislation links transportation and land use planning with the CEQA process to help achieve the GHG emission reduction targets set by AB 32. Even before the passage of AB32 and SB375, the City of Rohnert Park initiated actions to reduce GHG emissions and become more sustainable overall. These actions include: • California 2010 Building Code • Energy Efficiency Ordinance 2007-779. This ordinance also established Title 14- Sustainabilty, in the Municipal Code (March 2007) • City Council adopted resolution 2004-111, which set a goal for GHG reductions of 20 percent by the year 2010 for internal City operations (baseline year 2000) (May 2004) • City Council adopted resolution 2005-233, which sets a goal of green house gas reductions of 25 percent by the year 2015 for community -wide use, private and public (baseline year 1990) (July 2005) This project will not result in building construction that would generate GHG emissions and or covered under Cal Green. VIII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Would the project: Issues a. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the likely release of hazardous materials into the environment? c. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? Potentially Significant Potentially With Less -Than - Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact X X X 13 Issues d. Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code 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 been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? f. For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g. Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h. Expose people or structures to the risk of loss; injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? Potentially Significant Potentially With Less -Than - Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 11 1:1 11 x ❑ 10 ❑ x ❑ X x (1 ❑ ❑ x a -h This amendment would apply to development with commercial zoning designations. Any impact from new construction would be evaluated separately from this proposal. IX. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY Would the project: Issues a. Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? Potentially Significant Potentially With Less -Than - Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 14 ❑ ❑ x Issues Potentially Significant Potentially With Less -Than - Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact b. Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (i.e., the h ❑ ❑ x 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 off-site? 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 increase the rate or x amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? e. Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or ❑ ❑ ❑ x provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f. Otherwise substantially degrade water ❑ ❑6 quality? x g. Place housing within a 100 -year floodplain, as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or ❑ ❑ x other flood hazard delineation map? h. Place within a 100 -year floodplain structures x which would impede or redirect flood flows? i. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving x flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam. j. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving ❑ (_ x inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? a -j This amendment would apply to development with commercial zoning designations. Any impact from new construction would be evaluated separately from this proposal. 15 X. LAND USE AND PLANNING Would the project: Potentially Significant Potentially With Less -Than - Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Physically divide an established community? �` d x b. Conflict with any applicable land use plans, policies, or regulations of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning is �: ! _ 9 x ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating on environmental effect? c. Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community's Li ❑ Ll x conservation plan? a -c This amendment would apply to development with commercial zoning designations. Any impact from new construction would be evaluated separately from this proposal. XI. MINERAL RESOURCES Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant Less -Than - Significant With Mitigation Significant No Issues Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to x the region and the residents of the State? b. Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site El 11 x delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan? a -b This amendment would apply to development with commercial zoning designations. Any impact from new construction would be evaluated separately from this proposal. XII. NOISE Would the project result in: 16 Issues Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less -Than - Significant No Impact Impact a. Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in 1! ❑ �� the local general plan or noise ordinance, or X applicable standards of other agencies? b. Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or ❑ ❑ ❑ x groundborne noise levels? c. A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above ❑ ❑ ❑ X levels existing without the project? d. A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity ❑ ❑ ❑ X 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 L1 11 or public use airport, would the project x 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 r ❑ residing or working in the project area to X excessive noise levels? a -f This amendment would apply to development with commercial zoning designations. Any impact from new construction would be evaluated separately from this proposal. XIII. POPULATION AND HOUSING Would the project. Issues a. Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (e.g., through projects in an undeveloped area or extension of major infrastructure)? b. Displace substantial numbers of existing Potentially Significant Potentially With Less -Than - Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 17 L_l ❑J ❑ X ❑ ❑1 17 x a -c This amendment would apply to development with commercial zoning designations. Any impact from new construction would be evaluated separately from this proposal. XIV. PUBLIC SERVICES 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, 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: Potentially Potentially Significant Less -Than - Potentially With Less -Than - Issues Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues Impact Incorporated Impact Impact housing, necessitating the construction of ❑ ❑ ❑ x replacement housing elsewhere? ❑ ❑ ❑ x c. Displace substantial numbers of people, ❑ ❑ ❑ x necessitating the construction of ❑ ❑ D x replacement housing elsewhere? a -c This amendment would apply to development with commercial zoning designations. Any impact from new construction would be evaluated separately from this proposal. XIV. PUBLIC SERVICES 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, 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: a -d This amendment would apply to development with commercial zoning designations. Any impact from new construction would be evaluated separately from this proposal. XV. RECREATION Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant Less -Than - Significant With Mitigation Significant No Issues Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial C7 ❑ CI x physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? Potentially Potentially Significant With Less -Than - Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Fire protection? ❑ ❑ ❑ x b. Police protection? ❑ ❑ ❑ x c. Schools? ❑ ❑ ❑ x d. Parks? ❑ ❑ ❑ x a -d This amendment would apply to development with commercial zoning designations. Any impact from new construction would be evaluated separately from this proposal. XV. RECREATION Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant Less -Than - Significant With Mitigation Significant No Issues Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial C7 ❑ CI x physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? Issues b. Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Potentially Potentially Significant Significant With Mitigation Impact Incorporated Less -Than - Significant No Impact Impact X a -b This amendment would apply to development with commercial zoning designations. Any impact from new construction would be evaluated separately from this proposal. Overall less recreational use is required from commercial development versus residential development. XVI. TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION Would the project: Potentially Significant Issues Impact Potentially Significant With Less -Than - Mitigation Significant No Incorporated Impact Impact a. Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the x number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? b. Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the x county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c. Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or ❑ X a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d. Substantially increase hazards due to a design features (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous ❑ intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm X equipment)? e. Result in inadequate emergency access? © C3 ❑ x f. Result in inadequate parking capacity? Q ❑ ❑ x a. Conflicts with adopted policies ® Cl ❑ X supporting alternative transportation 19 Potentially Significant Potentially With Less -Than - Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues Impact Incorporated Impact Impact (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks) a -f This amendment would apply to development with commercial zoning designations. Any impact from new construction would be evaluated separately from this proposal. No significant change to vehicular travel is expected due to the amendments. XVII. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Would the project: Issues Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less -Than - Significant No Impact Impact a. Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality ❑ ❑ 1:1 x Control Board? b. Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the x construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c. Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of x which could cause significant environmental effects? d. Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements IJ ❑ 0 and resources, or are new or expanded x entitlements needed? e. Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to 0 F7 El serve the project's projected demand in x addition to the provider's existing commitments? f. Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the 1 i] [J x project's solid waste disposal needs? g. Comply with federal, State, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? x 20 a -g This amendment would apply to development with commercial zoning designations. Any impact from new construction would be evaluated separately from this proposal. XVIII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE Potentially Significant Issues Impact 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 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 of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? c. Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? d. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Potentially Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less -Than - Significant No Impact Impact X X X X a -d. This amendment would apply to development with commercial zoning designations. Any impact from new construction would be evaluated separately from this proposal. 21