HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-Public Works
'CITY OF SAN BERtOtDINO - REQUEST NOR 'COUNCIL ACTION
Synopsis of Previous Council action:
11-07-88 -- Authorization
to proceed
Adoption of Negative Declaration
& Finding of Consistency with
Interim Policy Document ----
Vacation of an Alley located
between Wall Avenue & Sepulveda
Avenue, approx. 150' South of
Baseline Street -- Public worCfbks
Project No. 89-2
and plan approval.
From:
ROGER G. HARDGRAVE REC+O.~ACMltt Ift{dct:
b1' /. IlIlllLu10 I~ ~.M e 3S
Pu 1C Works Eng1neer~~n~ y
3-13-89
Dept:
Date:
Recommended motion:
1. That the Negative Declaration for Public Works Project No. 89-2,
Vacation of an alley located between Wall Avenue and Sepulveda
Avenue. approximately 150' south of Baseline Street, be adopted.
2. That a finding be made that the vacation of an alley located be-
tween Wall Avenue and Sepulveda Avenue approximately 150' south
of Baseline Street, is consistent with the Interim Policy Document.
cc: Jim Robbins
Jim Richardson
Supporting data attached:
Roqer G. Hardqrave
Memo, Staff Report
& Neqative Declaration
Phone:
';02';
Contact person:
Ward:
:2
FUNDING REQUIREMENTS:
Amount: Waqes on W.O. 01266
Source: (Acct. No.! 001-302-53157
(Acct. Descriotionl
Street Vacation Proceedings
Finance: 77 ;2 - - ;/
Council Notes:
Aaenda Item No
-~
'CITY'OF SAN BERNCtDINO - REQUEST FCR COUNCIL ACTION
STAFF REPORT
The Negative Declaration for Public Works Project No.
89-2 was recommended for adoption by the Environmental Re-
view Committee at its meeting of 3-02-89.
A l4-day public review period was afforded from 3-
9-89 to 3-22-89. No comments were received.
We recommend that the Negative Declaration be adopted
and a finding made that the project is consistent with the
Interim Policy Document.
3-14-89
75-0264
..
o
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
o ;::;tlFM?/5:Jo-
MEMORANDUM 27L
-
To Gene Klatt
Assistant City Engineer
Subject Environmental Review of Public Works Projects
From Ann Larson-Perbix
Senior Planner
Date March 6, 1989
Approved
Date
At its meeting of March 2, '1989, the Environmental Review Committee recommeded
adoption of a Negative Declaration for the following Public Works projects:
~ PUBLIC WORKS PROJECT NO. 89-2 - To vacate an existing alley located
~ween Wall Avenue and Sepulveda Avenue, approximately 150 feet south
of Baseline Street.
2. PUBLIC WORKS PROJECT NO. 89-3 - To vacate a 370 foot long unnamed
frontage street, located on the south side of Highland Avenue, east of
Elmwood Road.
3. PUBLIC WORKS PROJECT NO. 89-4 - To vacate a 270 foot long section of
"J" Street, located between Oak Street and Lytle Creek Flood Control
Channe 1 .
4. PUBLIC WORKS PROJECT NO. 89-6 - To vacate a 299 foot long section of
Lugo Avenue, north of 4th Street and east of Sierra Way.
These Initial Studies (see attached) will receive a 14 day public review from
March 9, 1989 to Marc~ 22, 1989. Any comments received during the review
period will be addres~ed by the Planning Department and the comments and
responses will be sent to you within a week of the close of the public review
period. After that, you must schedule the projects before the Mayor and
Common Council for adoption of the Negative Declaration. Please include the
Initial Study with your request for Council Action form. The Planning
Department will file the Notice of Determination after adoption of the
Negative Declaration and a copy of the Notice will be sent to you.
')~ '.
{;/y,/vV .UA ~./}, I - fI.Jd'} ~/}t-
nn Larson- er61x
Seni or Pl anner
cp
C3 MEMOPWP32
~
. ;;',)>:"-", /../<'..,
";';
"
,'11
-.
:'R,rE t
4/N PP"CRE'"''
, , ,\., '.~, -~...,
~..A
o 0
CIlY OF SAN BERNARtllHO
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
INITIAL STUDY
.
.
PUBLIC WORKS 89-2
Ir!".
.''- . 1/;/ ,., ';
p, (j"
\
" \
TO VACATE AN EXISTING ALLEY LOCATED BETWEEN
WALL AVENUE AND SEPULVEDA AVENUE, 15!;t' FEET
SOUTH OF BASELINE STREET
MARCH 2, 1989
PREPARED FOR:
Department of Public Works
City of San Bernardino
Real Property Division
300 North "0" Street
San Bernardino, CA 92418
PREPARED BY:
Martin E. Wilkins
P1anninq Department
300 North "0" Street
San Bernardino, CA 92418
,
.
:~
. .
"
"J'
~
.
>
.
o
o
en f OF SAN BERNARD.NO
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
INITIAL STUDY
PUBLIC WORKS 89-2
The applicants request environmental clearance to vacate a 300
foot section of a 16.5 foot-wide alley located between Wall and
Sepulveda Avenues. The alley is located 150 feet to the south
of Baseline Street. The alley currently provides rear access
for lots facing Baseline Road. The alley also provides side
yard access to adjacent lots facing Wall and Sepulevda. The
purpose of the alley vacation is to make it,a private roadway
for the contiquous properties that use it.
The alley is paved and is surrounded by commercial to the
north, with a mixture of single and multiple-family residential
to the south. The properties to the east and to the west have
a mixture of residental and commercial uses. The site is
relatively level and is located within a liquefaction zone.
"
,
o
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
o
"""
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT CHECKLIST
~ ~
, ~
A. BACKGROY~
Application Number:
Project Description: To vacate 300 feet of an alley and making it
Public Works 89-2
into a private street for use by adiacent properties.
Location:
.
150 feet south of Baseline Road located between
Sepulveda and Wall.
Environmental Constraints Areas: Liquefaction
General Plan Designation: Alley h~s no specific d~siqn~tinnr hnw-
;~:r~n;;~t;~~ig~ o~~:t~:~r~;~a~~~~~h;~ (~~~~;c~~~r~eneral) to
Z . D i ti. Alley has no specific zoning, however, center-
on1ng es gna on:
line separates C-3, General Commercial, along Baseline and T,
T~~nQ~Q~inn~l ~nnin9 ~n ~~A i~,~h
B. ~~E~~~-1MPACTS Explain answers, where appropriate, on a
separate attached sheet.
1. ~I.~h Resources Will the proposal result in:
Yes
No
Maybe
a.
Earth
filll
more?
movement (cut and/or
of 10,000 cubic yards or
x
b. Development and/or grading on
a slope greater than 15\
natural grade?
x
c.
Development
Alquist-Priolo
Zone?
within the
Special Studies
x
d. Modification of any unique
geologic or physical feature?
x
~
REVISED 12/87
~
PAGE 1 OF 8
o
o
r
Yes
No
Maybe
'"
e. Soil erosion on or off the
project site?
f. Modification of a channel,
creek or river?
x
x
g.
Development
subject
mudslides,
other similar
within an area
to landslides,
liquefaction or
hazards?
x
x
h. Other?
2. ~IB-RESOURCES: Will the proposal
result in:
Substantial
an effect
quality?
b. The creation of objectionable
odors?
air
upon
emissions or
ambient air
x
a.
x
c. Development within a high wind
hazard area?
x
3.
W~B___RESOURCES:
proposal result in:
a. Changes in absorption rates,
drainage patterns, or the rate
and amount of surface runoff
due to impermeable surfaces?
Will
the
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 or
quality of ground waters?
e. Exposure of people or property
to flood hazards?
f. Other?
x
x
x
x
~ ~
REVISED 12187 PAGE 2 OF 8
,
o
o
Yes
No
Maybe
""IIIl
4. BIOf.OGICauJ:SOURCE~: Could the
proposal result in:
a. Change in the number of any
unique; rare or endangered
species of plants or their
habitat including stands of
trees? x
b. Change in the number of any
unique, rare or endangered
species of animals or their x
habitat?
, x
.
c. Other? i
5. NOISE: Could the proposal result i
r
in: I
i
a. Increases in existing noise x i
levels?
,
b. Exposure of people to exterior i
noise levels over 65 dB or I
I
interior noise levels ovt:r 45 x
dB? I
x i
c. Other? I
6. ~-~: Will the proposal I
,
result in:
I'
a. A change in the land use as x
designated on the General
Plan?
b. Development within an Airport x
District?
,
c. Development within "Greenbelt" x . t
Zone A,B, or C? ,.
d. Development within a high fire x
hazard zone?
x
e. Other?
lo..
~
REVISEO 10/07
PAGE 3 OF 8
i
.
,
I
0 (1 I
.
r """ ,
Yes No Maybe
.j
,
7.
MAN-MADE HAn~j;:
project:
Will
the
a.
Ose, 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?
x
,
,
j
I
I
!
i
.,
c.
Expose people to the potential
health/safety hazards?
x
x
d. Other?
8. HQY~: Will the proposal:
,,!
a. Remove existing housing or
create a demand for additional
housing?
x
x
b. Other?
.
9. ~BAmQFl'ATIQ~~ATION: Could
the proposal result in:
a. An increase in traffic that is
greater than the land use
designated on the General
Plan?
x
b. Ose of existing, or demand for
new, parking facilitiesl
structures?
x
c. Impact upon existing public
transpolt~tionsystems?
d. Alteration of present patterns
of circulation?
x .
x
e. Impact to rail or air traffic?
f. Increased safety hazards to
vehicles, bicyclists or
pedestrians?
x
.
x
REVISED 10/87
~
PAGE 4 OF 8
110...
. .
o
Maybe
'"
.
,
g. -A disjointed pattern
roadway improvements?
h. Other?
of
10. iYDL1~ SERVICES Will the proposal
impact the following beyond the
capability to provide adequate
levels of service?
a. Pire protection?
b.
Police protection?
c. Schools <i.e. attendance,
boundaries, overload, etc.)?
d.
Parks or other recreational
facilities?
e.
Medical aid?
f.
g.
Solid waste?
Other?
11. UTILITIES: Will the proposal:
a. Impact the following beyoRd
the capability to provide
adequate levels of service or
require the construction of
new facilities?
1. Natural gas?
2. Electricity?
3. Water?
4. Sewer?
5. Other?
b.
Resul t in a
pattern of
extensions?
disjointed
utility
c.
Require the construction of
new facilities?
,
...
AEVlSED 10/87
o
Yes
.
.
No
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
.
x
x
x
x
~
PAGE 5 OF 8
o
o
r
Maybe
....,
12. AESTHETI~;
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.
~P~~~~--F~QURCES:
proposal result in:
a. The alteration or destruction
of a prehistoric or historic
archaeological site?
Could the
Adverse
impacts
historic
object?
c. Other?
b.
. physical or aesthetic
to a prehistoric or
site, structure or
14. Mandatory Findings of Significance
eSecUon 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.
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
REVISED 10/87
Yes
No
x
x
x
x
x
x
.
~
PAGE 6 OF 8
o
o
".
Yes
No
Maybe
"'"
impOTtant : 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.)
x
.'
x
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 directly or indirectly?
DISCUSSION or ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION AND MITIGATION MEASURES
(Attach sheets as necessary.)
x
x
C.
~
""
REVISED lO/a7
PAGE 7 OF 8
,.
~
1.
j
i
I
I
\
,.
I
.. .
o
o
D. DETERMIB6~lQF
On the basis of this initial study,
o
.
The proposed prDject COULD NOT have a significant effect on tbe
environment and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
The proposed project could have a significant effect on tbe
environment, although there will not be a significant effect in
this case because the mitigation measures described above bave
been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION .will. be
p repa red .
The proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the
environment, and an ENVIRONMENrAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
I
i
I
!
l
I
I
I
I
!
i
,
I
.
!
fJ
o
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA
LtM J (Vl~t'l'l-Oz,\h'lr ~""liM. PbVlVlfl,\
. J
Name and Tltle
(l WVL.-' ?i:JA4hJ- P~lJ..1~Y-
Signature
Date: 1J!a.1~. ~,f{j<::l
l
. I
I
I
I
.
.
\..
~
REVISED 12/87
PAGE' OF .
A
. - .
f
I
,
ENVIRONMENTAL evALUATION AND MITIGATION MEAMES
-I
!
I
.
,
I
I
1.g. ZARTR RESOURCES:
The alley is located in a liquefaction aone. Liquefaction
studies are required only when projects involve structures for
human occupany. Since the project doe.' not involve any
structures, no study is required.
9.d. TRANSPORTATrON/crRctJLATrON:
The Engineering/Public Works Department has deterained that the
alley meets state criteria/quidelines for vaca~ion, in that the
current - level. of service, the circulation aeeds of the area
and the City'S streets and Hiqhway. Masterplan would perait the
reversion of the riqht-of-way to the adjacent parcel. and will
not create any significant health/safety impacts with the
following mitiqation:
I
f
I
~
I
I
I
f
I
I.
i
t
t
i
I
I
. I
,
1.
All exi.tinq eas..ents
re.erved.
for utilities mu.t be
10. PUBLrc SERvrCES
The lot. adjacent to the alley qain access from the front of
their lou, which face either Ba.eline, Wall or Sepulveda.
Adjustment. II&Y be required by the provider. of public service.
to use the front of the lot. for access and service prupose.,
instead of the alley. In order to li.it potential impacta to
acce.. for e.ergency service and refu.e vehicle., the following
.itiqation i. required:
1. Acce.. easement. shall be provided to' the
.atisfaction of the City Engineer.
PCAGENDA:PW89.2
.
.
. - . 0
0 I
i
I
I. L I.
I .
,
,
.....
,
BASELINE ' STREET
r=
5r 5r 5r II' - II' 5r
I
t&I I
:::I I '-U
Z ~ 1 S :::I
~ 1 J I i 5 6 - ~
< I
I -<
Ot I
..
- ,
!
,
ALLEY
TO BE I J
.
,-
VACA TED 5 I
6
8 I
I 1
< 9 1 10
Q
~ -------- ---- ---
..J -- - ..oJ
~ 1 1 J I 5 6 ..oJ
.. ~ <
~
11th
STREET
.-
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
PUBLIC ICIAKS DEPARTMENT
Er--IEERJNG DIVISION
. NiM. ""OIIERTV SECTION
. DIR.CTOR 0' PUILIC WORKS ICITV .MlINIIR
,...p....~ tI,. L. P0GA88V III t
CII.ck.~ tI~ I ..
DjIlTI . I of I
jIlR.A vjIlCATlD IHOWN THUS
1/1/1 I 1"/ I
---
STRliliT I ALLEY YACM'IDN .
ALLEY SOUTH DF BASELINE,BETWEEN
SEPULVEDA AVENUE AND WALL AVENUE
?,.~I:t 'A)orlt< iQ-..:l