HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-Public Works
CI.TY OF SAN BERN~DINO -
REQUEST FOI COUNCIL ACTION
File No. 1. 899
, Adoption of Negative Declaration &
Subject: Finding of Consistency with the
Circulation Element of the General
Plan -- Construction of Triple Box
Culvert in Devil Canyon Diversion
Channel l! "U" St., north of Kendall
n,..;vp
From: ROGER G. HARDGRAVE
Dept: Public Works/Engineering
Date: 5-10-94
Synopsis of Previous Council action:
--Public Works Project No. 94-01
;.,; l,... Ut.' ~ ~:'~
u;.'( ;1 1i: 2 1
None.
Recommended motion:
1. That the Negative Declaration for Public Works Project No. 94-
01, construction of a triple box culvert at "H" Street, north
of Kendall Drive, be adopted.
2. That a finding be made that the construction of a triple box
culvert at "H" Street, north of Kendall Drive, is consistent
with the circulation element of the General Plan.
cc: Shauna Clark
Contact person:
Roqer
Staff
Init.
G. Hardqrave
Report, Notice of
Study, Neq.Dec.,
Phone:
Preparation,
Map Ward:
5025
Supporting data attached:
5
FUNDING REQUIREMENTS:
Amount:
N/A
Source: (Acct. No.! N/A
/Acct, DescriDtion) N/A
Finance:
Council Notes:
75.0262
Agenda Item NO.JJ
CI!Y OF SAN BERN~DINO - REQUEST F~ COUNCIL ACTION
STAFF REPORT
The Negative Declaration for Public Works Project No. 94-
01 was recommended for adoption by the Environmental Review Com-
mittee at its meeting of 3-17-94.
A 21-day public review period was afforded from 3-24-94
to 4-13-94. No comments were received.
We recommend that the Negative Declaration be adopted and
a finding made that the project is consistent with the Circula-
tion element of the General Plan.
5-10-94
5-0264
o
o
ProofofPubllcaaon
---.....-...,.,
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
DEPT. OF PLANNING/BUILDING SERVICES
r-:-,
. ,~j -: -
. . ,,' :; .
/ .' ~ ' .::.:
~- L..
I1A,? 2 3
... '::i.,.\, ,...
"'"':.:0: '_~"1-.:~::4-'
.~ '_~~'" :e,~.
,:.. ~
-.~ ...
, -.,
, ,
'/
,-
,; Gl
"'w7
i .. j
-......
'.
". ~..;
-' ~
srATE OF CALIFORNIA, }..
County of Sa 1Ier1tudI....
TIle lIlIIlorRpooI hoIeby ..ufiII . fallows:
I .. . _ of tile Uaited Steta. .... tile ... of 1-...1,- ,....., and II\It .
party ID _ l.- . in tile .~tJad ...-; I ... tile prinl:Ipal clark of ilia
~ of. .-paper. to wit. TIw SlII:: \he__ .1 aD tl.-...... ....lIioaaoI.
-.paper of ..,...s ~ prilll8d.... """,w-I daiIy.lndudillcSuada)'.1a ilia
City of Sa &.nwdiDo. in \he County of s... IIamudIao, State of Caltfonda: said
-.apar... publllMd.." cia" of \he,.............. the _of T1w.... said
........ .... baaD adjudpd . _-I' , of..,...r ............. by tile S"-r-*
Court of tIJa Stale of CalifanJ1a. In and kIr tIJa COIJI/l)' of s............... by . ,.....
_ of said Su. ... Court duI" I/ID, IIW aDd __ ... J- ... 1111. Ia ilia
-.II .... filii of said Suparior Court Ia tIIat..... .. ".._dad ID the.....
...ofllla.. ,,,_....Er.h1I...-of71odll...No._ J'p""ofC .sa.
-1-1Ioa. -.-' ..d T30IC ill the..... of civil.. .... ia IUd 5.. ... c..t
.... by I.... 1-1IIOIIifyinc ilia...... .......IIW.... -.d Ia said.. " ill
lite _ or.......,... or JJ . -".... I ...., 'I > - at. pdIIIad....
pub'~' 'Ia type _....... thaD ftllllPU-'laad _.. . >wltII........1a
IIIaak fa. type _....... thaD -,...u' A I.. aad -4 '...I...,...r -
lite purplIIt or c:ar- of I" _ , . 'tD" __ aadllla
, , , ,NO+lCE. GF, PREPARATION. OF, PROPOSED' ffF.GATIY!'1)!Cl:ARATION
.. ..93..,20..,9.4.,.01" ",..'""". ". -, ,....' "....'",. -,. ",.,.... ..,
of wbII:h lite -----' II. _ priJltad...". _ ro.... L -'In.... adItian ...._of
oatd_""'p""of~~-'''''-Ia'''''lUff' ,.~....""of
Iba..... ......... ID ..,
MARCH 24. 1994
I ~ uador penalty of perjury that \he fanaaiac . true .ad cornat.
..,.", -.."..,... .\::-L2,J.-, ,..".~.~."",..".,
~tad... tha .. 25.. .. cia" of... MARCH.... ........19. 94.,.... at
Su 1Ier1tudI..... in said eau.ty and Stale.
-' -,
":'
:
- IIDTlCII Of'
........TION OP ,.,
. _ - NeGATIY&
-~.~~
. -.cT
n<E"gn. ~ll&R-
tlJ' S
ADOl'T " PRO os.I8
.-oA nVE DECLARA-
nON FOR THE FOL-
LOWI~PROJECTS-
THE.1 OPMENTI
ENVR NTAL. RE-
EW C MMITTEE
'lHAT THE PRO-
NOT HAVE '"
NT EFFECT
_NT
OF THE
NIT'~ U Y AND
=c-.
.. A..... fa
----
... --- ""'P'~~
~~-
...~~~
iP.n"::'-=
.-#-"1:.=:r.,;
__c:o....
- ~-
..... ,..,.. of Ken-
-
A,." of _...... StudY is
-u~~
l__~ .s..
rdIIto. .Utorni.
...... ,..ad\It..Ifl,
!:::~~ ~" west ,4tn
. ~ BemarCllno.
IUty envirDn-
......... commen'. YOU
--"-"'
....1IIfIfa...........oI:OIt
...... .......13.1.... If.you
. _..-.. in writin9.
... .. -.me w.I VOU
.... no ...... .,.,.
~=-~R,..n.onea:::
...... ... ,..,... c:arn.
::-r.iI .~!_~.=::
. _ DI I ._,~IIIin-
A__.__..... Com-I
_..-.r. at ..,..;114.
:Jl:4 1m -I
....
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
INITIAL STUDY
,...
~
Initial Study for Environmental Impact
For Public Works Project No. 94-01
Project Description/Location: To construct a triple box culvert in Devils Canyon Diversion
Channel, and install storm drain and street improvements in "H" Street at the intersection of
Devils Canyon Diversion Channel and "W Street, north of Kendall Drive.
Date: March 9, 1994
Prepared for:
City of San Bernardino
Department of Public Works
300 North "0" Street
San Bernardino, CA 92418
Prepared by:
Michael R. Finn
Associate Planner
City of San Bernardino
Planning and Building Services
300 North "0" Street
San Bernardino, CA 92418
...
CllYOI''''~
---
PLAN-8.07 PAGE 1 OF 1 (44J)
o
o
INITIAL STUDY FOR
PUBLIC WORKS PROJECT NO. 94-01
March 9,1994
Page 2
Introduction
This Initial Study is provided by the City of San Bernardino for Public Works Project No. 94-
01. It contains an evaluation of potential adverse impacts that can occur if the proposed
improvements to Devils Canyon Diversion Channel and "H" Street are approved and
constructed.
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires the preparation of an Initial Study
any time a proposal must obtain discretionary approval from a governmental agency and is not
exempt from CEQA. The purpose of the Initial Study is to determine whether or not a proposal,
not exempt from CEQA, qualifies for a Negative Declaration or whether or . not an
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) must be prepared.
The following components constitute the Initial Study for Public Works Project No. 94-01:
1. Project Description
2. Site and Area Characteristics
3. Environmental Setting
4. Environmental Impact Checklist
5. Discussion of Environmental Evaluation and Mitigation Measures
6. Conclusion/Environmental Determination
Combined, these components constitute the complete Initial Study for Public Works Project No.
94-01.
o
o
INITIAL STUDY FOR
PUBLIC WORKS PROJECT NO. 94-01
March 9,1994
Page 3
1. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Public Works Project No. 94-01 is a proposal to widen "H" Street at the Devils Canyon
Diversion Channel from its present paved width of 30 feet to a width of approximately 52 feet.
The project involves the acquisition of 5,000+ square feet of right-of-way easement at the
northwest corner of Kendall and "H", the installation of a three-celled box culvert in the
diversion channel at the crossing of "H" Street, and the installation of a storm drain, new curbs
and gutters, and asphaltic-concrete paving along "H" Street at the diversion channel and Kendall
Drive. The storm drain is to outlet into the diversion channel at the box culvert.
2. SITE AND AREA CHARACTERISTICS
The project is located at the intersection of "W Street and the Devils Creek Diversion Channel,
north of Kendall Drive. "H" Street does not have any improved crossing at the Devils Canyon
Diversion Channel and dips into the channel at the point of crossing.
Surrounding land uses include an apartment complex on the north side of the channel and east
of "H" Street, an auto repair facility on the south side of the channel and east of "H" Street, a
restaurant/cocktail lounge on the west side of "H" and south of the channel, and vacant
residentially designated land on the north side of the channel and west of "H" Street.
3. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The site is located within the High Wind Hazard Area.
o
o
4. Enviromnent Impact Checklist
d
n
o
~
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
...
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT CHECKLIST
~
,..
A. BACKGROUND
Application Number: "t'l>..o\..\f \))OR.~<; .,\l.O-'1'Cf" ~o.q~-ol
Project Description: ,0 r N~ ~,)c..""' .4 .R.. ;:"L~ \!,OX r: UL#N.T IN Ut:1/u...s. Q'tJ'I~.J
I' 1\ ..
IN 1+ slQlt /i.1.
\)\"f~~lc~,,~ CH--ANNlU- AN)--, \N.t:.:-!Ai~l~ GT4~ "t-~A;N i..tf.iV~;n<'-4! '/.It~'t-.j~II<' r.~
" "
..tIV'D l-/ c;r"O'\~T t;!lI<TH Co':' K~Mu- DR! I/{
,
Location: ,4T Tlii- IN'i?.-'ORcnO,J 0>= \)(;V;l-~ c4NYclW hlV'iI2S'O.J C.f+,4~I'I~'-
EnvironmenmlConstraintsAr_: HI&1ot WIN\) ~Al.~\) AQfA
CG--\
Cu'Y'''N\~{.2c.;~ Uo!N~P""c...
General Plan Designation: RM - Rf<;.,/wl,'....._ f"'t-b'l.AM ~b
c..&--{ - C. /JY)\M1i2c,A-c.. C-4yo/tifA.c...
Zoning Designation: ~ fv\ - R.~S(f)<;,.wTI,f-t. M<;.}),t.I"... IfwO
B. ENVIRONMENTAL 'MPACTS Explain _IS. where 8PIJIllIlriaIe. on a l8p8rlIIe alIached shHl.
No Maybe
1. Earth Re-.fllft Will the prapoeaJ NSul in: Y..
a. Earth movement (CUllllldlor fill) 0/10.000 cubic:
yards Dr more? _000 c.~. c....,. (, fll.L,.
b, Develapment lIIldIor grading on a slope g_r
than 15% natural grade?
c. Develapment within the A1qulat.priolo SpecIel
SlucIiea Zone as defined In Section 12.0. Geologic
& Seismic. FllIure 47. of the City's General Plan?
d. MocIilcation of any unique geologic Dr phyalca/
feature?
e. Develapment within __ defined for high polential for
waIlIr or wind eroaion as identified in Section 12.0-
Geologic & Seismic. FllIure 53, of the CMy's General
Plan?
f, MocIilcation of a channel, creek Dr river? 'X
....
:.::-.=......
x
)(
x
x
x
PLAN-I.D8 PMlEtOF_ ("-10)
n
. , "'I
g. Development within an area subject to landslides, Yes No Maybe
mudslides, liquefaction or olher similar hazatlls as
identified in Section 12.0 . Geologic & Saismic, X.
Figuras 48, 52 and 53 of the City's General Plan?
h. 0lIIer? X.
2. Air RNOUn:as: Wd/lhe proposal ..suit in:
a. Subslanlial air emissions or an effect upon ambient X
air quality as defined by AQMD?
b. The creation of objectionable odors? X
c. Development within a high wind hazatll area as identified
in Saclion 15.0. Wind & Fire, FIgUI1l511, of lhe City's X
General Plan?
3. W..r R_n:as: WUlthe proposalresutt in:
a. Changes in absorption rates. drainage patIems. or lhe
rate and amount of surfaoe nmoff due to )(
impenneable surfaces?
b. Changes in lhe COUIlI8 or flow of flood watars? X
c. DIscharge Into surfaoe waters or any aheration X
of surfaoe water quality?
d. Change in lhe quantity of quality of ground water? X
e. Exposure of people or property to flood hazards as
_ dIied in lhe Federal EmeIgency M8II8ll8II*lI
~s Flood 1_ Rate Map. Community....
Number 080281 00. 0 . ~ , and Saclion 18.0 . ><
FloodIng. Fill'" 62.'OIlhe City's General Plan?
f. Olher? X
4. Biological "--: Could lhe proposal result in:
a. Devekllln*1t within lhe ~ Rasounles
MBrIlIgtIIMl'IOvwtay, as _1Ilfied in Saclion 10.0
. Natural ~, FIgure 41. of lhe City's X
General Plan?
b. Change In lhe number of any unique. ,.,. or
endangered specilIs of pIanls or lheir habitat including X
stands of .....?
c. Change In lhe number of any unique, ,.,. or X
endangered species of animals or lheir habItet?
d. R-.J of viable. mature .....? (8" or ~ '/...
e. Olher? X
5. NoiM: Could lhe pnlpCII8l result In:
a. Development of housing, heaIIh ... .....,IChooIs.
IIInrleI, religious faclllllll or lIlher "nolle' ..... _
in __ wi-. exIsling or fuIIn nolle ..".....l1li
Ldn of es cfB(A~lar and l1li Ldn of 45 d~ InWior
as idehllliood in 14.0 . Noiae. Figures and X.
58 of lhe City's General Plan?
... ~
=-=,~~...-:Ia" PLM4JII I'MEZlIl'_ 0'''''
1"\
b. Development of naw or axpan.lon of axisting industrial. Yes No Maybe
commarcial or other uses which ganarBla noise levels on
a..... containing hou.ing. schools. heallll care facilities
or othar ..naitive u_ abova an leIn of 65 dB(A) axtarior X
or an leIn of 4S dB{A) intarior?
c, Other? X
6. Land Uae: Willtha propo.al ....uit in:
L A changa in tha land use 81 da.ignated on tha X
Genaral Plan?
b. Developmant within an Airport District a idantffied in tha
Air Installation Compalibla Use Zona (A1CUZ) Report and 'X.
the Land Use Zoning Diatrict Map?
c. Development within Foothill Fira Zonas A & B, or C a X
identified on the Land U.. Zoning Dillricl Map?
d. Other? X.
7. u.n ..... Haze"': Will the projact:
L U... 110.... transport or diapoae 01 hazardous or
loxic materiala (including but not Hmited to oi~ X.
paaticid... chemicals or radiation)?
b. Involve the ...Iaaa of hazardousaubatancaa? X.
c. Expose people to tha poIantial heallhlaafaly hazard.? ~
d. Other? x..
8. HouaIng: WiD the /lRlIlllI8I:
L Remove axlIling houalng or CINI8 a demand
for addllonal housing? X.
b. Other? X.
t. TranaportatIon I CIrlluIltlon: Could the pIIlp08aI. in
CllIlII*laon with the CIrculation Plan _Identifiad In Saction
6.0 - ClIcuIatIon of the Clty'. Ganatal Plan. rauit in:
L An incra_ In traffic that Is ~r than the land ><
use dealgnatact on the ~ral Plan?
b. Use of existing. or demand for _. parking
facllltinlltrucluras? )<.
c, Impact upon existing pubIlc transportation systems? )(
d. AIlaration of pre..nt patIama of circulation? X
a. Impact to rail or air lraffic? )(
f. Increaad safety hazanIa to VlIhiclaa. bicycliata or
padaatriana? )(
g. A disjointed pattern of roadway illlplllVllmanll? X
h. Signlicant incre_ in tqdfic volumes on the roadways X
or intaraacliona?
L Other? X
lo.
~&I' PLNH.GI 'NIUOl' (11-SIOI
1:L
-^-
-
10. Public Serv'-: Will the proposal impact the following
beyond the c.plIbiJlty to provide adequat.levels of s.rvice?
L Fir. protection?
b. Police protection?
c, Schools (i.... att.ndance. boundaries. overload. etc.)?
d. Parks or othar recreationallacll~ies?
a. Medical aid?
I. Solid Waste?
g. Other?
11. Utll""a: Will the proposal:
L Impact the folowing bayond the capability to
IWYlde adaquale lavals of service or require the
c:onshuCtion III new lacilities?
,. Nalural gu?
2. Elac:lrIcIIy?
3. Wat.r?
... Sewer?
5, Other?
b. Rasub In a dlsjointad pattem III utIIIIy extensions?
c. Raqun the c:onstruclion of new facillIias?
12. Aeathatlca:
L Could the fIIIlIIClS8I raub in the obnucllon of any
scenic view? '
b. WiD the vIsuaJ Impact of the plIljac:I be lIelrimantal
to the surrounding _?
c. Other?
13. Cultural "-aaufOh: Could the proposal raub in:
L The all......, or daslruclion of a prahillOric 01'
hislDric an:haaoIogical de by dwalopmant within an
archaeological aanaIIln __ uldantifl8d In Sac:lion
3.0 . HIstDricaI, Fig... 8, of the cay's General Plan?
b. Alteration or dutruction of a hiltorical site. Ilrucl...
or objac:l u lislad In the ClIy'. HIsIDric Raaourcea
Rac:onnaiaaanoa Survey?
c. Other?
...
==. C= j
Y.s
No
x
~
)(
)(
X
x:
X
x.
X
X
X
X
X
X
x
X
X
x
x
X
Maybe .
PLM-I.aI ~_"OF_ (1,.
-
-
"
-
-
"""II
14. MIIndetory FlncIlnga of Slgnlflcllnce (Section 15065)
The Call1omlaEnvironmental Quality Ad states that K any of the following can be answered yes or
maybe, the project may ~ a signKicant effect on the environment and an Environmental Impact
Report shall be prepared.
Yes
No
Maybe
L Does the project have the potential to degrade the
quality of the environment, subslantialty reduce the
hablIat of a fish or wildlHe species, cause a fish or
wiId.e populalion to drop below se. sustaining levels.
thrlllllen to eliminale a plant or animal oommunlty,
reduce the /MImber or NStricl the range of a rare or
endangered plant or animal or eiminaIAI important
examples of the major periods CIf Callfamla history
or Ifthistory?
b. Does the project have the potenMI to achieve sholl-
term, to the disadvantage CIf long-term, environmental
goats? (A sholl-term impact on the environment is one.
which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period
of time while long-term impacts will endure wen into
the tuture.)
)(
x
c. Does the project have impacts which are individually
Imnad, but cumulativwly oonsldlIrable? (A project may
impact on two or lIIOI8 separate resources where the
impact on each _ is relativwly small, but where
the efIec:l of the lOlal of those impacts on the
environment is signlicant.)
d. Does the project have environmental effecls which will
cause substantiaI-'- effecls on human beings,
enher direc:lly or Indlreclly?
)(
v...
C. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION AND IoITIGATlON MEASURES
(Attach shHIs. _Iary.)
" U" Ai'f/t(Il~.
.
::..:....-
...
PUIIoUI PNlEIOF_ (11-1l1)
o
S. Discussion of Environmental
Evaluation and Mitigation Measures
o
-----.-.--.
o
o
INITIAL STUDY FOR
PUBLIC WORKS PROJECT NO. 94-01
March 9, 1994
Page 6
C. DISCUSSION OF ENVffiONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
1. Earth Resources
a. The project will involve the movement of approximately 2,000 cubic yards of cut and
fill. Potential minor impacts on the physical environment (drainage, erosion, etc.) and
on the community (dust, noise, etc.) may be expected. Compliance of all grading and
excavation activities with Section 7012(c) of the Uniform Building Code will reduce
potential impacts to a level of insignificance.
b. The proposal will not result in development or grading on a slope greater than 15%
natural grade in that the property is relatively flat with the exception of the channel
which is approximately 6.5 feet lower in elevation than the surrounding area.
d. The proposal will not result in the modification of any unique geologic or physical
feature in that no such unique features exist on the site.
f. The proposal will result in modification of the Devils Canyon Diversion channel in the
vicinity of "H" Street. However, the modification is not expected to reduce, restrict or
hinder the flow of waters to downstream areas. Modification to the creek channel to
accommodate the box culvert will be subject to review by the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (COE) under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and by the California
Department ofFish and Game (CDFG) under Chapter 6, Sections 1601-3 of the Fish and
Game Code.
2. Air Resources
a. The proposal will not result in any substantial air emissions or an effect upon ambient
air quality as defined by AQMD in that the proposal does not meet the minimum criteria
for general development project review as defined in the Southern California Association
of Governments Guidance for Implementation of Conformity Procedures handbook.
b. The proposal does not include any uses that will generate any objectionable odors.
c. The proposal is located within the City's High Wind Hazard Area. However, street
improvements are not normally affected by winds, and the box culvert is to be placed in
Devils Canyon Diversion Channel, where it will be unaffected by winds. Potential
impacts are insignificant.
o
o
INITIAL STUDY FOR
PUBLIC WORKS PROJECT NO. 94-01
March 9, 1994
Page 7
C. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONML1'IJTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
3. Water Resources
a. The widening of "H" Street will increase the area of impermeable surfaces in the area,
altering drainage patterns, and increasing the amount of surface runoff from "H" Street.
However, the storm drain to be installed in "W Street will direct these flows to the
diversion channel. Potential impacts are insignificant.
b. The proposal will alter the flow of flood water by routing it through a three-celled box
culvert placed within the diversion channel. The box culvert will allow flow of flood
water beneath "H" Street, providing all weather access. As noted previously,
modification to the creek channel to accommodate the box culvert will be subject to
review by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and by the California Department of Fish
and Game. Potential impacts are not significant.
c. &d.
The proposal will not result in any discharge into surface waters or change in ground
water quality. However, the collection of exhaust particulates, other emission solids,
engine fluids, residue from automotive tires, and other chemical pollutants may occur on
the improved portions of "H" Street. During periods of rain, these surface pollutants
will be washed into the storm drain on "H" Street and into the Diversion Channel. Over
time, such pollutants can change the quality of ground waters. The quantity of ground
water can also be affected because impermeable surfaces change water absorption rates.
The individual impact of this project is sufficiently small, however, as to not have a
perceptible effect on the quality and quantity of the ground water supplies.
e. The project lies within Flood Zones" AE" and "X". There will be no significant impacts
since the project will improve drainage along "W Street and provide improved all
weather access across Devils Canyon Diversion Channel at "H" Street.
4. Biological Resources
b. The proposal will not result in any change in the number of any unique, rare or
endangered species of plants or their habitat including trees in that the project site is not
located within the Biological Resources Management Area (BRM), an overlay established
by the General Plan and defined as those areas of the City having a potential for rare or
endangered species of plants or animals.
o
o
C. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURFS
INITIAL STUDY FOR
PUBLIC WORKS PROJECT NO. 94-01
March 9, 1994
Page 8
c. The proposal will not result in any change in the number of any unique, rare or
endangered species of animals or their habitat in that the project is not located within the
BRM as outlined in 4.b. above.
d. The project will result in the removal or relocation of approximately 1 I trees. Removal
or relocation of the trees will be done under the supervision of the City Arborist and
project Field Engineer. Removed trees that are not transplanted/relocated shall be
replaced on a ratio of one-to-one. Type, size and location of replacement trees will be
determined by the City Arborist and Field Engineer.
s. Noise
b. The proposal will not result in the establishment of a use which generates noise levels
impacting any noise sensitive uses. Potential impacts are not significant.
6. Land Use
a. The project does not include any proposals to change the General Plan Land Use
Designation.
7. Man-Made Hazards
a., b, &c.
The project does not propose any use involving hazardous or toxic materials.
8. Housing
a. The project will not result in the removal of any existing housing and will not create a
significant demand for additiOnal housing.
9. Transportation/Circulation
d. There could be temporary alterations of present traffic circulation on "H" Street during
construction. During the excavation phase, portions of the street may have to be torn up.
This impact will be mitigated by proper traffic control such as barricades, flagmen and
detours as required by San Bernardino Municipal Code Section 12.04.
-
o
o
INITIAL STUDY FOR
PUBLIC WORKS PROJECT NO. 94-01
March 9, 1994
Page 9
C. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
10. Public Services
a. through f.
The proposal is not of a nature as to require any public services. Potential impacts are
not significant.
11. Utilities
The proposal is not of a nature that will require any utility services.
12. Aesthetics
a. The site will be minimally altered and will not impact any scenic views.
b. The proposal will be developed according City standards and will not have any
detrimental. impact on the surrounding area.
14. Mandatory Findings of Significance
a. through d.
The response to the checklist questions above indicate that the proposed facility will not
result in any significant impacts. No cumulative impacts resulting from the proposal
have been identified.
o
o
6. Conclusion
~ AGENDA -...
ITEM #
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING
AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
CASE
LOCATION
HEARING DATE
....
...j
.r ."01. .. -.:::."-'.... nUU~L
r :.. ~ ; ~ ... ~r= ;:::: c::
U81J.i ~I! '. ;c ~IPF ~l
r p ~ .~..- ~ j
._ T fl I ' ~I I~ I
4 1 !U~!==,- =~
~::.. : I~, .... :" ~ ~
JI 1 ~,-" :I~ ~ 1~
~ i~il 'I I :
! ~-1! :' ! IIiiiL
'-;:n,__. _: ~ ~
, :::::::J ~r ~
N ." loA V S\TE ~~ '
: /' ,(VC:t'-~;..: f'pc, I '1 ut~.. r
~ T,~., ~ 1]./Jj '- & .
" \. -/ ..,.., '~" ~I#ltl:tlf~ Cjl\\ i
// 5H~O ~t/ iltt ~ ~WjfMf/il'l i'~ ~
. 11' '1/7 'jT.i:T n~ I!' IIIQ r~ '
J II r. ~.... f _
1/ I/~... r!T/~ 1/ ~ ~...- ClOt>! DO D[
I I / !/~~/. ~ :~; __I! ;!:: ~
T7 r J ~~ f 1/ :. r T '1Illfj D.. b _ I
ill /fii./...., 'J! rrl! ""'" J
r; rill.,. ~ · ~ ~ xL.-, N
r/~J_~:,nPl = I; -:1 i neli i
....
-
L.
._~I~
P;;;;;;~rs::i
~~
PLAN-B.ll PAGE 1 OF 1 l.c-fiIOI
D. DETERMINATION
On the basis of this inftia' study.
ill The proposed project COULD NOT have a signWicant e"ect on the environment and a NEGATIVE DECLARA.
TION will be prepared, .
O The proposed project could have a aignWicant elfect on the environment, afthough thare will not be a aignWicant
elfact in this caae becauaa the mftigation measures described above have been added to the project, A
NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared,
o The proposed project MAY heve a aignWicant affect on the environment. and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
REPORT is raquired.
ENVIRONMENTAl REVIEW COMMITTEE
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CAlIFORNIA
Sandra Paulsen, Senior Planner
Name and Trtle
. ..s:" ~~ - (jL~___
SIlln e
Data:
March 17, 1994
:.-=-====r
PUllf.UI'_ OF
(114))