HomeMy WebLinkAbout10- Public Works CITY OF SAN BERNAf LINO - REQUEST FOr COUNCIL ACTION
File No. 1.839
Adoption of Negative Declaration
From: ROGER G. HARDGRAVE Subject: & Finding of Consistency with the
Circulation Element of the General
Dept: Public Works/Engineering Plan - Widen Bridges on Kendall
Drive & Cajon Boulevard over
Date: March 11 , 1993 Devil Creek -
Public Works Project No 92-03
Synopsis of Previous Council action:
June, 1991 - Allocation of $200, 000 approved in 1991-92 Measure "I"
1/2-Cent Sales Tax Budget.
04-06-92 -- Resolution No. 92-121 adopted authorizing execution
of Agreement with ASL Consulting Engineers for Profes-
sional Design Services .
Recommended motion:
1. That the Negative Declaration for Public Works Project No. 92-
03 , for the widening of bridges on Kendall Drive and Cajon
Boulevard be adopted.
2. That a finding be made that the widening of bridges on Kendall
Drive and Cajon Boulevard over Devil Creek is consistent with
the circulation element of the General Plan.
cc: Shauna Clark (Z X�_
Signature
Contact person: Roger G. Hardgrave Phone: 5025
Staff Report, Notice of Preparation,
Supporting data attached:_ Init. Study,Neg. Dec. , Map Ward: 5 & 6
FUNDING REQUIREMENTS: Amount:. N/A
Source: (Acct. No.)
1Acct. Description)
Finance:
Council Notes:
75-0262 Agenda Item No. Za
CITY OF SAN BERNAR- INO - REQUEST FOF AWOUNCIL ACTION
STAFF REPORT
The Negative Declaration for Public Works Project No.
92-03 was recommended for adoption by the Environmental Review
Committee at its meeting of February 4 , 1993 .
A 21-day public review period was afforded from February
11, 1993, through March 2 , 1993 . No comments were received.
We recommend that the Negative Declaration be adopted
and a finding made that the project is consistent with the Cir-
culation element of the General Plan.
3-11-93
-0264
M"bWm for fli tp stamp wwy)
Proof of Publication
- - - - r
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
PLANNING DIVISION - ` ' `
o�—
STATE OF CALIFORNIA, } u• or
County of San Bernardino, t= Jff
TM ary or SAM 1wit-
The undersigned hereby certifies as follows: NARDINO Proposes to
adopt a Negative DaGara-
tkm for the foilowfm Pro-
I am a citizen of the United States, over the age of twenty-one years, and not a p�ita� The environmental
Rlwew Committee found
party to nor interested in the above-entitled matter; I am the principal clerk of the h�a t the n rYit"'e iH i not
printer of a newspaper, to wit, The Sun; the same was at all times herein mentioned a the environment on the
basis of the initial Study
newspaper of general circulation printed and published daily,including Sunday,in the and mitigation —sures
a
City of San Bernardino, in the County of San Bernardino, State of California; said pl1�L1CWQ�f��
newspaper is so published every day of the year as and under the name of The Sun,said ro widen iwo exi n+a
bridges to their uitMlMte
newspaper has been adjudged a newspaper of general circulation by the Superior width Four lane' �abr
Arleria ):r Kendall tve
Court of the State of California, in and for the County of San Bernardino, by a judg- at Devil C7eek and ion
Bouleyerd at DrA C IDWk-
ment of said Superior Court duly made, filed and entered on June 20, 1952, in the /�'~CreW_. - ?- -
records and files of said Superior Court in that certain proceeding entitled In the Mat- Copes 1D��
ter of the Ascertainment and Establishment of The Sun as a Newspaper of General Cfr-
tars a at A no and
_
culation, numbered 73084 in the records of civil proceedings in said Superior Court .-
and by judgment modifying the same,also made,filed and entered in said proceeding; ra`y s5 es�t th
the notice or other process or document hereinafter mentioned was set, printed and ��0!►ny "'I'm
it
published in type not smaller than nonpareil and was preceded with words printed in In ) sroa°in
black face type not smaller than nonpareil describing and expressing in general terms >ait you
the purport or character of the notice intended to be given; and the
NOTICE OF PREPARATION OF NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF s°
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
ENVIROMIENTAL IMPACT 92-03
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
of which the annexed is a true printed copy,was published in each edition and issue of
said newspaper of general circulation, and not in any supplement thereof, on each of
the following dates, to wit:
FEBRUARY 11, 1993
I certify under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . � !" `! . .�?4 1*, ��. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
11 FEBRUARY 93
Executed on the . . . . . . . . . . day of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 19 . . . . . . . . ., at
San Bernardino, in said County and State. NO.3
05=4iai
INITIAL STUDY FOR $NVIRONMBNTAL IMPACT
FOR
PUBLIC WORKS PROJECT - PW 92-03
Project Description/Location: A Public Works project to
widen bridges at two locations to their ultimate Right-of-Way
of four lanes/major arterial . The bridges are located at the
Kendall Way over-crossing of Devil Creek, and the Cajon
Boulevard over-crossing at the junction of Devil Creek and
Cable Creek.
Date: January 29, 1993
Prepared for:
City of San Bernardino
Public Works Department
300 North "D" Street
San Bernardino, CA 92418
Prepared by:
Jeffery S. Adams
Assistant Planner
City of San Bernardino
Planning and Building Services
300 North "D" Street
San Bernardino, CA 92418
INITIAL STUDY FOR
PUBLIC WORKS 92-03
Introduction
This Initial Study is provided by the City of San Bernardino for
Public Works 92-03 . It contains an evaluation of potential adverse
impacts that can occur if the proposed bridge widening is
established.
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires the
preparation of an Initial Study when 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 92-03 :
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
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
A Public Works project to widen bridges at two locations, to their
ultimate Right-of-Way of four lanes/major arterial. The bridges
are located at the Kendall Way over-crossing of Devil Creek, and
the Cajon Boulevard over-crossing at the junction of Devil Creek
and Cable Creek. The Kendall site is in the RU, and RS land use
designations while the Cajon Boulevard site is designated IH, and
IL (See Attachment A) .
SITE AND AREA CHARACTERISTICS
Both locations are existing street over-crossings of Devil Creek
and devil-Cable Creeks. The creek channels are both fully improved
with concrete.
The areas surrounding the Kendall site are residential and some
vacant land. The Cajon Boulevard site is adjacent to industrial
uses and vacant land.
INITIAL STUDY
PW 92-03
1/29/93
Page 2
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Both sites are located in the high wind area, and the Cajon
crossing is adjacent to the Biological Overlay as identified by the
General Plan. There are no other significant environmental
concerns or special districts at either of the projects' locations.
DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION AND MITIGATION MEASURES
1. Earth Resources:
e. The project site is within the boundaries of the wind erosion
area as shown in the City's General Plan. The bridge exist
and will be modified allowing no possibility for wind caused
erosion.
a-d, f-h There will be no impacts to the existing landform. The
Channel is fully concreted and will not be modified.
2 . Air Resources; 3. Water Resources:
Due to the nature of the project, there will not be any
impacts to air or water resources.
4. Biological Resources;
The project site is adjacent to, but not within the boundaries
of the Biological Resources Management Overlay, as identified
in Section 10. 0 - Natural Resources, Figure 41, of the City's
General Plan, nor will it impact any biological resources.
5. Noise:
a & b The project will not create any noise after the
construction phase and is therefore not considered to be
significant.
6. Land Use:
a. The proposed project will not alter the current land use
designations.
7 . Man-Made Hazards:
a. The project will not use, store, transport or dispose of any
hazardous or toxic materials.
b. The project will not release any hazardous or toxic materials.
INITIAL STUDY
PW 92-03
1/29/93
Page 3
c. The project will not expose people to potential health or
safety hazards. The project will adhere to the CAL-OSHA
requirements of the State of California which are required by
state law.
S. Housing:
a. The project will not have any impact on housing due to its
nature.
9. Transportation/Circulation:
c. Due to the nature of the project, there will not be any
significant impacts to the public transportation system.
There will be a positive effect at the completion of the
project due the increased capacity of both bridges.
a,b,d-i There will be no other impacts to transportation or
circulation created by this project.
10. Public Services:
a-f. The project will not have a significant impact on any public
service due to its nature.
11. utilities:
a-c The project addresses current and future requirements for
utilities through its design. No other impacts are
anticipated.
12. Aesthetics:
a-b The bridge design is consistent with the existing
structure.
13. Cultural Resources:
a-b The project is to modify an existing structure, and as
such will have no impacts on cultural or historic
resources.
AzW-P°L— T4AaIM 10 1 zL
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING.AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT CHECKLIST
A. BACKGROUND / \
Application Number: - �'J�iG, ���Tf �S -art r-1- (File 1. 8 3ff ) PJidje- (,clfclevll►�5
Project Description: F-2-X'd1G Wi8eyll✓1gs crl- / Dc"n Creek
Ca ion /pevl L Clef, F=oyr l_.a�e. /weal c�✓-'
Location: Dom_ ► � DFV�!1. �'1? -y �Qp� ��
Dew L - c cis. _ G{zt r
Environmental Constraints Areas:
General Plan Designation: WIL, l� LOTU'1�1. --
(-� T At Dty11--c &e, C0,6bCZ4A1zv✓ 6i.✓.P
Zoning Designation: _ -5pfm L
B. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT'S Explain answers,where appropriate,on a separate attached sheet.
1. Earth Resources Will the proposal result in: Yes No Maybe
a. Earth movement(cut andbr fill)of 10,000 cubic x
yards or more?
b. Development and/or grading on a slope greater
than 15%natural grade?
c. Development within the Alquist-Prlolo Special
Studies Zone as defined in Section 12.0-Geologic
&Seismic, Figure 47,of the City's General Plan?
d. Modification of any unique geologic or physical
feature?
e. Development within areas defined for high potential for
water or wind erosion as identified in Section 12.0-
Geologic& Seismic, Figure 53,of the City's General
Plan?
f. Modification of a channel,creek or river?
an ar
CO 20MOM PLAN-9-06 PAGE 1 OF_ (11-90)
g. Development within an area subject to landslides, Yes No Maybe
mudslides, liquefaction or other similar hazards as
identified in Section 12.0-Geologic& Seismic,
Figures 48,52 and 53 of the City's General Plan?
h. Other? 2
2. Air Resources: Will the proposal result in:
a. Substantial air emissions or an effect upon ambient
air quality as defined by AOMD? X
b. The creation of objectionable odors? �C
c. Development within a high wind hazard area as identified
in Section 15.0-Wind& Fire, Figure 59, of the City's
General Plan?
3. Water Resources: Will the proposal result in:
a. Changes in absorption rates,drainage patterns,or the
rate and amount of surface runoff due to
impermeable surfaces? X
b. Changes in the course or flow of flood waters? _X
c. Discharge into surface waters or any alteration _
of surface water quality?
d. Change in the quantity of quality of ground water? )_
e. Exposure of people or property to flood hazards as
identified in the Federal Emergency Management
Agency's Flood Insurance Rate Map, Community Panel
Number 060281 CM - A ,and Section 16.0-
Flooding, Figure 62,of the City's General Plan? X
f. Other? X
4. Biological Resources: Could the proposal result in:
a. Development within the Biological Resources
Management Overlay, as identified in Section 10.0
-Natural Resources, Figure 41,of the City's v
General Plan?
b. Change in the number of any unique,rare or
endangered species of plants or their habitat including
stands of trees?
c. Change in the number of any unique,rare or X
endangered species of animals or their habitat?
d. Removal of viable, mature trees?(6"or greater)
e. Other?
S. Noise: Could the proposal result in:
a. Development of housing, health care facilities,schools,
libraries, religious facilities or other"noise"sensitive uses
in areas where existing or future noise levels exceed an
Ldn of 65 dB(A)exterior and an Ldn of 45 dB(A)interior
as identified in Sedan 14.0-Noise, Figures 14-6 and
14-13 of the City's General Plan?
XI-
CrrV
wwm`PpewnMOswom PLAN-9.06 PAGE20F_
b. Development of new or expansion of existing industrial, Yes No Maybe
commercial or other uses which generate noise levels on
areas containing housing, schools, health care facilities
or other sensitive uses above an Ldn of 65 dB(A)exterior
or an Ldn of 45 dB(A) interior? X
c. Other?
6. Land Use: Will the proposal result in:
a. A change in the land use as designated on the
General Plan?
b. Development within an Airport District as identif ied in the
Air Installation Compatible Use Zone(AICUZ)Report and
the Land Use Zoning District Map?
c. Development within Foothill Fire Zones A&B,or C as
identified on the Land Use Zoning District Map? X
d. Other? X _
7. Man-Made Hazards: Will the project:
a. Use,store,transport or dispose of hazardous or
toxic materials(including but not limited to oil,
pesticides,chemicals or radiation)? X, _
b. Involve the release of hazardous substances? Z_
c. Expose people to the potential health/safety hazards? X_
d. Other?
S. Housing: Will the proposal:
a. Remove existing housing or create a demand
for additional housing?
b. Other? !�
9. Transportation/Circulation: Could the proposal, in
comparison with the Circulation Plan as identified in Section
6.0-Circulation of the City's General Plan, result in:
a. An increase in traffic that is greater than the land
use designated on the General Plan?
b. Use of existing,or demand for new,parking
facilities/structures? _X
c. Impact upon existing public transportation systems? X
-rrc " ,<. d. Alteration of present patterns of circulation? �(
e. Impact to rail or air traffic?
f. Increased safety hazards to vehicles,bicyclists or v
pedestrians? ✓1
g. A disjointed pattern of roadway improvements? X
h. Signif icant increase in traffic volumes on the roadways
or intersections?
X-
i. Other? p(
Of1V OF MM eMWlOO
C NTPAL MMIMO B11Q1
PLAN-9D6 PAGE 7 OF_
10. Public Services: Will the proposal impact the following Yes No Maybe
beyond the capability to provide adequate levels of service?
a. Fire protection?
b. Police protection? x
c. Schools (i.e., attendance, boundaries, overload, etc.)? X
d. Parks or other recreational facilities?
e. Medical aid?
f. Solid Waste? v
g. Other?
11. Utilities: Will the proposal:
a. Impact the following beyond the capability to
provide adequate levels of service or require the
construction of new facilities?
1. Natural gas?
2. Electricity? _ -
3. Water?
4. Sewer? X
5. Other?
b. Result in a disjointed pattern of utility extensions? �(
c. Require the construction of new facilities? _
12. Aesthetics:
a. Could the proposal result in the obstruction of any
scenic view?
b. Will the visual impact of the project be detrimental
to the surrounding area?
C. Other?
13. Cultural Resources: Could the proposal result in:
a. The alteration or destruction of a prehistoric or
historic archaeological site by development within an
archaeological sensitive area as identified in Section
3.0-Historical,Figure 8,of the City's General Plan?
b. Alteration or destruction of a historical site,structure
or object as listed in the City's Historic Resources
Reconnaissance Survey?
c. Other?
CM S .µ
OWMAL
PLAN-9.06 PAGE40F_
14. Mandatory Findings of Significance (Section 15065)
The California Environmental Quality Act states that if any of the following can be answered yes or
maybe, the project may have a significant effect on the environment and an Environmental Impact
Report shall be prepared.
Yes No Maybe
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?(A short-term impact on the environment is one
which occurs in a relatively brief,definitive period
of time while long-term impacts will endure well into \ /
the future.) n
c. Does the project have impacts which are individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable? (A project may -
impact on two or more separate resources where the
impact on each resource is relatively small,but where
the effect of the total of those impacts on the
environment is significant.)
d. Does the project have environmental effects which will
cause substantial adverse effects on human beings,
either direly or indirectly?
C. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION AND MITIGATION MEASURES
(Attach sheets as necessary.)
PLAN-9.M PAGE50F_ (tt•90)
ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION AND MITIGATION MEASURES DISCUSSION-CONTINUED
MY .µ
crrrn...wWnwaEw.+= PLAN 9.06 PAGE_OF_ (t i.90)
D. DETERMINATION
On the basis of this initial study,
The proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment and a NEGATIVE DECLARA-
TION will be prepared.
The proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,although there will not be a significant
effect in this case because the mitigation measures described above have been added to the project. A
NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
The proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
REPORT is required.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA
SII�A �Au�SrAl 5�10lZ �LfkIUA�El2-
Name and Title
Signiftwg
Date: d 4113
T
UTV 6 M" WRNMOIIO
C*"T"JI4 Pvv °SERVICES PLAN-OAS PAGE_OF
i
Y
_ i +
Z V �
00 IAJ
n
i�.(. -�
ZL
p 3 co
Ir J
O t F = YU Z
+ > ! W
RZ ��+ nw i o� zZ
of)
WJ ! o F-'
�N
L�
---- -- -
X3 1N30 Got . Cr•�' N +. .
! (*AAVN JO
IV
T
' - ----- -------- - --
mC40 j
0 I }
AV
It
-
�'
} -
R 1 w
{}- T -
1.
W W
I
W
i
J �
\ i �
W
Z � i
cc
_ a OD W -
n
U N p N�(
O i + U
W �.U-) ODIJ
LL
J o a -
N O —
O
Z uj
IAJ O
v4 I
3NNV -40 of �Z) a
ni frLL O
2 fir, wZ
+ } zo U
W W
%J G V <
Z J
3 i °D N� F s
X <
O Z v 4J � s
W
W O p
w (� a �
z
U W� Z
Fla. �W