HomeMy WebLinkAbout33-Planning
Clt~f' OF SAN BERNARD~"~O - REQUF~T FOR COUNCIL AC~ON
From:
R. Ann Siracusa
Director of Planning
Subject: Finding of Consistency with
General Plan for Public Works 87-12
Dept: Planning
Date:
November 2, 1987
Mayor and Common Council Meeting
November 16, 1987 at 2:00 p.m.
Synopsis of Previous Council action:
rrfo/
Findings of Health and Safety adopted by Mayor and Common Council on
July 20, 1987.
Recommended motion:
Adopt a Finding of consistency with the General Plan. Adopt a
Negative Declaration.
"
r !
\ \
\
\ '
, ~
1V'~
R. Ann Siracusa
Contact person:
R. Ann Siracusa
Phone:
384-5357
Supporting data attached:
Staff Report
Ward:
6
FUNDING REOUIREMENTS:
Amount:
Source:
Finance:
Council Notes:
75-0262
csj
Agenda Item No. 3-:>'.
CrcV OF SAN BERNAR~O - REQU,,",T FOR COUNCIL A~ION
'<<".0" '<.",'
STAFF REPORT
Subject: Public Works No. 87-12
Mayor & Council Meeting November 16, 1987
DESCRIPTION
This proposal is to install traffic signal equipment includ-
~ng poles, pull boxes, conduit, controller cabinet and
service cabinet at the intersection of University and Hall-
mark Parkways, (See Exhibit "B" - Location Map).
The work will be done in one phase. The hours of construc-
tion shall be conducted during 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m., (the
site is not located near residential development).
GENERAL P1bR CONFORMITY
The State College Area General Plan designates University
parkway as a "Major Highway," Hallmark Parkway is not delim-
ited on said instrument. Project is consistent with the
goals and objectives to said General Plan.
~BYJBQ~M~~TA1_~LEARANCE
An initial study was prepared by Planning staff, reviewed by
the Environmental Review Committee, and was posted for public
viewing. No comment has been received. The Environmental
Review Committee recommended at their regularly scheduled
meeting of August 20, 1987 that a Negative Declaration be
adopted. (See Exhibit "A" - Initial Study)
PREYroUS ACTION
Due to the State of California - Office of Planning and
Research (O.P.R.) and court restrictions on public works
projects, the City Attorney has suggested that all public
works projects be viewed by the Environmental Review Com-
mittee (E.R.C.) prior to City Council's review and action.
Action on the required Health and Safety findings was taken
July 20, 1987.
Prepared by:
Michael Norton, Associate Planner,
Planning Department
Attachments:
Exhibit A - Initial Study
Exhibit B - Location Map
75-0264
csj
11/2/87
DOCUMENT:MISCELLANEOUS
PW8712STAFFRPT
"'....
'"'""'
.'.....'-
)
Planning Department
City of San Bernardino
INITIAL STUDY
Public Works Project No. 87-12
to
Install traffic signal equipment
including poles, conduit, pull
boxes, controller cabinet and
service cabinet
at
the intersection of University Parkway
and Hallmark Parkway
October 22, 19B7
Prepared by Michael Norton
Planning Department
300 North "D" Street
San Bernardino, CA 92418
Prepared for
Department of Public Works
Exhibit "A"
;i"'~"" !"~' , , :)
~ ......, 'v/
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Page
1.0 Introduction 1-1
2.0 Executive Summary 2-1
2.1 Proposed Project 2-1
2.2 Project Impacts 2-1
3.0 Project Description 3-1
3.1 Location 3-1
3.2 Site and Project Characteristics 3-1
3.2.1 Existing Conditions 3-1
3.2.2 Project Characteristics 3-1
4.0 Envi ronmenta I Assessment 4-1
4.2 Environmental Effects 4-1
5.0 References 5-1
6.0 Exhi bi t "A" - Envi ronmenta I 1 mpact 6-1
6.0 Exhibit "B" - Location Map 6-4
~,
~~
"
,
,J
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This report is provided by the City of San Bernardino as an Initial Study for
the installation of a traffic signal with poles, pull boxes, controller cabinet
and service cabinet at the intersection of University and Hallmark Parkways.
As stated in Section 15063 of the State of California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) Guidelines, the purposes of an Initial Study are to:
1. Provide the Lead Agency with information to use as the basis for
deciding whether to prepare an EIR or a Negative Declaration;
2. Enable an applicant or lead Agency to modify a project, mitigating
adverse impacts before an EIR is prepared, thereby, enabling the pro-
ject to qualify for a Negative Declaration;
3. Assist the preparation of an EIR, if one is required by:
a. Focusing the EIR on the effects determined to be significant,
b. Identifying the effects determined not to be significant,
c. Explaining the reasons for determining that potentially signifi-
cant effects would not be significant.
4. Facilitate environmental assessment early in the design of a project;
5. Provide documentation of the factual basis for the finding in a
Negative Declaration that a project will not have a significant effect
on the environment;
6. Eliminate unnecessary EIR's;
7. Determine whether a previously prepared EIR could be used with the
project.
1-1
c
,~-"-...
,_..0.....
,
~
..J
-
Initial Study - Public Works Project No. 87-12
Installation of traffic lights, etc. - University and Hallmark Parkways
October 8, 1987
2.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
2.1 Proposed Project
The request is for approval under authority of Section 19.78.020.06 to instal]
traffic signal equipment including poles, conduit, pull boxes, controller cabi-
net and service cabinet at the intersection of University and Hallmark Parkways.
2.2 Project Impacts
Inpacts identified in the attached checklist include:
2. The possibility of increased noise levels during the construction pro-
cess.
6. The possibility of traffic hazards or congestion during the construc-
tion process.
2-1
\......
"-
Initial Study - Public Works Project
Installation of traffic lights, etc.
October 8, 1987
,
,
~
No. 87-12
- Uni vers ity
,)
and Hallmark Parkways
3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
3.1 Location
The proposed Public Works project is to be located at the intersection of
University and Hallmark Parkways, (See Location Map, Exhibit "B").
3.2 Site and Project Characteristics
3.2.1 Existing Conditions
The area is currently being developed at the northwest corner of the above
referenced intersection as a gasoline service station/minimarket/car wash
complex while the southwest corner of said intersection is undeveloped. A motel
and restaurant are in place on the easterly side of University Parkway, to the
immediate east of Hallmark Parkway. Zoning is as follows: to the north, C-3A,
Limited General Commercial, to the east and west, C-M, Commercial-Manufacturing,
to the south, "0", Open Space.
3.2.2 Project Characteristics, (See 3.2.1 above).
3-1
c
-
",",,"
,)
Initial Study - Public Works Project No. 87-12
Installation of traffic lights, etc. - University and Hallmark Parkways
October 8, 1987
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
4.1 Environmental Setting
The subject site is at the intersection of University and Hallmark Parkways.
Uni versity Parkway is cl assifi ed as a "Major Hi ghway" on the State College Area
General Plan; (Hallmark Parkway is not delimited on said General Plan). As men-
tioned in 3.2.1 the area is rapidly developing with a service station/mini-
market/carwash under construction at the northwest corner of said intersection,
while the southwest remains vacant. To the east a restaurant and motel are evi-
denced.
4.2 Environmental Effects
The Environmental Impact Checklist identifies two areas of minor concern
regarding the project:
Increased noise levels resulting from the construction process.
Minor traffic congestion caused by the construction process.
The Envi ronmenta I Impact Check list is attached in Exhi bit "A" of thi s report.
Each item noted on the checklist is identified below, followed by the recom-
mended mitigation measures.
2. Would significant increases in noise levels, dust, odors, fumes, vibra-
tion, or radiation be generated from the project area, either during
construction or from the completed project other than those resulting from
normal construction activity?
The project must conform to the City of San Bernardino Municipal Code and
the "Work Area Traffic Control Handbook". One requirement of the project
is that construction shall only be carried out between the hours of
7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. (the site is not located near any residential
development).
6. Could the project create traffic or congestion?
It was determined by the Engineering Department that little traffic
congestion will be created by the construction project since the City will
fo 11 ow the stri ct standards documented by the "Work Area Traffi c Control
Handbook", which the City has adopted. --
Signal, barricades, flag person(s) will be used as mitigating measures.
4-1
,
\......
Initial Study -
Installation of
October 8, 1987
5.0 REFERENCES
Persons contacted:
-
Public Works Project No. 87-12
traffic lights, etc. - University and Hallmark Parkways
Mr. Michael Grubbs, Senior Civil Engineer
KIS-PW87-12Pl-6
5-1
,I"
'--
'-'
EXHIBIT "A"" "
........
....;
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT CHECKLIST
Ilo..
~ ""'l
A. BACKGROUND
1- Case Number (s) : PIlBllC WOR~S PRn.l.rT NO R7-1? Date: 10-02-87
2. Project Description: TO TNSTAII TRAFFTC STGNAI FQUTPMENT INCLUDING
POI Fe;, CONntlTT . PIli I BOXES. CONTROLLED CABINET AND SERVICE CABINET
AT THF TNTFRSFCTION OF UNIVERSITY AND HALLMARK PARKWAYS.
3. General Location: TW~ PRO.IFCT TS LOCATED AT THE INTERSECTION OF
"NIIf,RSITV ( STAT. rOil mF ) PARKWAY AND HALLMARK PARKWAY.
B. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
YES MAYBE NO
- -
1- Could project change proposed uses of land, as indi-
cated on the General Plan, either on project site or
within general area? - - ..x..
2. Would significant increases in either noise levels,
dust odors, fumes, vibration or radiation be gener-
ated from project area, either during construction
or from completed project other than those result-
ing from normal construction activity? (SEE "Ctt & "nit) - ..x..
3. Will project involve application, use or disposal
of hazardous or toxic materials? ~
- -
4. Will any deviation from any established environ-
mental standards (air, water, noise, light, etc.)
and/or adopted plans be requested 1.n connection
with project? - - ~
5. Will the proj ect require the use of significant
amounts of energy which could be reduced by the
use of appropriate mitigation measures? - - -X.
6. Could the project create a traffic hazard or
congestion? (SEE "e" & "D") - - -X-
7. Could project result in any substantial change in
quality, quantity, or accessibility of any portion
of region's air or surface and ground water re-
sources? X
- - -
....
MAY '81
E.R.C. FORM A
PAGE I OF 3
6-1
c
.
r
...
MAY '81
!"'.. ~
i....J
c)
8. Will project involve construction of facilities in
an area which could be flooded during an inter-
mediate regional or localized flood?
9. Will project involve construction of facilities or
services beyond those presently available or pro-
posed in near future?
10. Could the project result in the displacement of
community residents?
11. Are there any natural or man-made features in pro-
ject area unique or rare (i.e. not normally
found in other parts of country or regions)?
12. Are there any known historical or archaelogical
sites in vicinity of project area which could be
affected by project?
13. Could the project affect the use of a recrea-
tional area or area of important aesthetic value
or reduce or restrict access to public lands or
parks?
14. Are there any known rare or endangered plant
species in the project area?
15. Does project area serve as habitat, food source,
nesting place, source of water, migratory path,
etc., for any rare or endangered wildlife or fish
species?
16. Will project be located in immediate area of any
adverse geologic nature such as slide prone areas,
highly erosible soils, earthquake faults, etc.?
17. Could project substantially affect potential use
or conservation of a non-renewable natural
resource?
18. Will any grading or excavation be required in
connection with project which could alter any
existing prominent surface land form, i.e., hill-
side, canyons, drainage courses, etc?
19. Will any effects of the subject project together
or in conjunction with effects of other projects
cause a cumulative significant adverse impact on
the environment?
6-2
~
PW NO. 87-12
~
)
~
NO
x
.x.
.x.
.x.
.x
x
...K
x
x
-1.C
x
.x.
E.Re. FORM A
PAGE 2 OF 3
.
,!",'"''''
[j
( )
PW NO. 87-1 ~-\
'-
~-::":~~:' ,:~ ':~::::":"" :":'::~' :,::,.~::::':"".~:",.,,, "'~ ,~:~"'" "'~'" , l
clarification of potential impact shall be incluued as well as a discussi()o
of any cumulative effects (attach additional sheets if needed).
_2..- NOTSE LEVELS WTT.T. BE INCREASED DURING CONSTRUCTION PROCESS.
6. TRAFFIC CONGESTION MAY BE WITNESSED BRIEFLY DURING CON-
STRUCTION PROCESS.
.
D. MITIGATION MEASURES
Describe type and anticipated p[fect or ilny mensurcs proposed to mitigate or
eliminate potentially significant adverse environmental impacts:
2. CONSTRUCTION PER W.A.T.C.H. STANDARDS
6. CONSTRUCTION PER W.A.T.C.H. STANDARDS
E. DETERMINATION
On the has is of this initiill cvaJuatic)n,
OWl' find the proposC'd projecl COULD NOT have ;1 signi f icant effect on the
l'llvironment and il NECAT1VE DECLARATI.ON wi II be prL\p:lr(ld.
OWl..' [ind that although thl' proposed projl'ct could htlv(' a significant
(,rr('{'l Oil till' l'llvironment, there will not hl' a signific~Hlt effect in
this case because lIle mit 19atio!1 measures <it'scribed on an attached sheet
have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED.
[] We find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environ-
ment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL ItWACT REPORT is required.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA
(Secretary)
IwrE:
~ ~
6-3
ERe. FORM A
PAGE :5 OF :5
MAY 81
(.,
,
l
EXHIBIT "B"
/c-""'.
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
-
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
AGENDA
ITEM #
LOCATION
CASE Public Works Proiect
No. 87-12
HEARING DATE 11-16 87
:~
,
. '.
.....;.~
J~
) ~. .:\.,.a
":< '\ .
... ~
.' .....,~
'or .\0
6-4