HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-Public Works
o'
o
o 0
- REQuE~t ~ol.. ~bUNCIL ACTION
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
From: ROGER G. HARDGRAVE
Subject:
Approval of Plans & Authorization
to Advertise for Bids --Construc-
tion of a culvert on 48th Street,
at Devil 's Canyon Diversion
Channel, per Pl an No, 7443--
Adoption of Negative Declaration
Dept: Pu b 1 i c Works/Eng i neeri ng
Dete: 3-31-88
~
Synopsis of Previous Council action:
02-17-87 --- Resolution No. 87-53 adopted authorizing the execution
of an A~reement with the Redevelopment Agency relating
to street construction services in the State College
Project Area,
09-08-87 --- Resolution No. 87-310 adopted authorizing execution of
an Agreement with Joseph E. Bonadiman & Associates re-
lating to the design of a dip crossing at 48th Street
and Devil 's Canyon Diversion Channel,
03-07-88 --- Finding made of need for health and safety reasons.
~
Recommended motion:
1, That the Negative Declaration for construction of a
cul vert on 48th Street, at Devi l' s Canyon Channel,
be adopted,
2. That the plans for construction of a culvert on 48th
Street, at Devil's Canyon Diversion Channel, in accor-
dance with Plan No, 7443, be approved; and the Director
of Public Works/City Engineer authorized to a ertise
for bids,
cc: Ray Schweitzer
Warren Knudson
Glenda Saul
Supportingdataatta~hed: Staff Report & Initial St~gY'Ward:
5025
i
, 5
Contact person:
Roger G. Hardgrave
Phone:
FUNDING REQUIREMENTS:
Amount: $ 236.800
Source: (Acct. No.!
001-999-59850
Culvert
(Acct. Description) 48th Street @ Devil' s Creek
Finance:-1J V----" f1 ~
Pl~~~
Council Notes:
75-0262
Agenda Item No
I
1/,
-
-
J::,.
~1..:9'OF SAN BERNARDI-'O - REQUE~ FOR COUNCIL AC~N
STAFF REPORT
Plans for construction of a dip crossing on 48th Street
have been prepared by a Consulting Civil Engineer, and the project
is ready to be advertised for bids, The project consists of in-
stalling either a series of 5 pipes, or a reinforced concrete box
culvert, to eliminate the present dip crossing.
Listed below is an estimate of the total project cost:
Construction Contract
Consulting Engineer's Fee
Construction Engineering (W,O, #1799)
Sub-Total
Contingencies (5%)t
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST
$ 205,500
8,100
11,900
$ 225,500
11,300
$ 236,800
~
The Agreement with the Redevelopment provides for the
City to be reimbursed up to $220,000 for costs incurred on this
project,
At their meeting of 2-11-88, the City's Environmental
Review Committee recommended adoption of a negative declaration.
We recommend that this Negative Declaration be adopted,
We recommend that the plans be approved and authorization
granted to proceed, and any necessary supplemental funds pro-
vided after the low bid price is known.
3-31-88
75-0264
....
Cl
'0
o
o
t
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
Initial Study
for .
Environmental Review
,
PUBLIC WORKS NO. 88-4
To replace an existing dip crossing
with a box culvert and construct
600 feet of new street at
48th Street between Kendall Drive
and Little Mountain Drive
March 10, 1988
Prepared by:
Scott Wright
Planning Department
300 North "D" Street
San Bernardino, CA 92418
(714) 384-5057
i
Prepared for:
Department of Public Works
300 North "D" Street
San Bernardino, CA 92418
J
O'
o
o
o
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 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENTS . . . . . 4-1
4.1 Environmental Setting . . 4-1
4.2 Environmental Effects . . 4-1
4.2.1 Development Within a High Wind Hazard
Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-1
4.2.2 Increase in Existing Noise Levels . . 4-1
4.2.3 Alteration of Present Patterns of
Circulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-1
4.2.4 Exposure of People to Potential Safety
Hazards . . . . . . 4-2
5.0 REFERENCES . . . . . . 5-1
6.0 APPENDICES . . . . . . . . . 6-1
Appendix - Environmental Impact
Checklist . . . 6-2
Exhibit - Location Map . . . . . . . 6-10
i
o
1
,
1.0
o
INTRODUCTION
o
o
This report is provided by the City of San Bernardino
as an Initial Study for a public works project to
replace an existing dip in 48th Street between
Kendall Drive and Little Mountain Drive with a box
culvert, fill the dip, and construct 600 feet of new
street, curbs, and gutters.
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 project
to qualify for a Negative Declaration.
3. Assist the preparation of an EIR, if one is re-
quired 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 significant 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
o
o
o
CITY OF
INITIAL
Replace
Between
SAN BERNARDINO - PLANNING DEPARTMENT
STUDY - Public Works No. 88-4
Dip With Box Culvert - 48th Street
Xendall Dr. & Little Mountain Dr.
]0
2.1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Proposed Project
The Department of Public Works proposes to replace an
existing dip in 48th Street between Xendall Drive and
Little Mountain Drive with a box culvert, fill the
dip, and construct 600 feet of new street, curbs, and
gutters.
2.1 Project Impacts
The following items were checked RyesR on the
attached Environmental Impact Checklist:
2.c. Development within a high wind hazard area.
5.a. An increase in existing noise levels.
9.d. An alteration
circulation.
of
present
patterns
of
The following item was checked RmaybeR on the
attached Environmental Impact Checklist:
7.c. Exposure of people to potential safety hazards.
2-1
. .
O'
CITY OF
INITIAL
Replace
Between
3.0
3.1
3.2
3.2.1
3.2.2
o
o
SAN BERNARDINO - PLANNING DEPARTMENT
STUDY - Public Works No. 88-4
Dip With Box Culvert - 48th Street
Kendall Dr. & Little Mountain Dr.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Location
The site of the proposed culvert
curb, and gutter construction is
Street between Kendall Drive and
Drive where 48th Street crosses
Channel (See Location Map).
Site and Project Characteristics
Existing Conditions
o
and new street,
located on 48th
Little Mountain
the Devil Creek
At present 48th Street
rather than over, the
Channel. During heavy
section of 48th Street
impassable.
dips as it crosses through,
Devil Creek Flood Control
runoff conditions, this
could become dangerous or
Project Characteristics
For a description
Proposed Project,
Summary.
of project characteristics, see
Section 2.1 of the Executive
3-1
.
o
o
o
o
:~
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO - PLANNING DEPARTMENT
INITIAL STUDY - Public Works No. 88-4
Replace Dip With Box Culvert - 48th Street
Between Kendall Dr. & Little Mountain Dr.
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
4.1 Environmental Setting
The land east and west of the site is public right of
way on 48th Street. The land north of the site is
zoned R-1-7200, Single Family Residential and PRD-14
dulac, Planned Residential Development and contains
single family residences.. The land south of the site
is zoned PRD-14 dulac and R-3-3000, MUltiple Family
Residential, and contains apartments. The State
College Area General Plan designates Kendall Drive as
a Major Divided Highway, Little Mountain Drive as a
Major Highway, and 48th Street as a Secondary
Highway.
4.2 Environmental Effects
The items checked "yes" on the Environmental Impact
Checklist are discussed below.
4.2.1
Will the proposal result in development within a high
wind hazard area?
High winds will have no impact on the culvert and new
street, curb, and gutter construction. Fugitive dust
during construction will be mitigated by sprinkling
the site.
4.2.2
Could the proposal result in increases in existing
noise levels?
Noise levels will increase temporarily during the
construction phase of the project. Work hours will
normally be limited to between 7:00 a.m. and 3:30
p.m. and will in no case last later than 6:00 p.m.
Construction is expected to last about one month.
4.2.3
Could the proposal result in alteration of present
patterns of circulation?
Present patterns of circulation will be altered
temporarily during the work on 48th Street. The
street will be blocked and traffic will be rerouted
onto other streets. This situation will last
approximately one month.
4-1
o
o
o
o
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO - PLANNING DEPARTMENT
INITIAL STUDY - Public Works No. 88-4
Replace Dip With Box Culvert - 48th Street
Between Kendall Dr. & Little Mountain Dr.
The item checked -maybe- on the Environmental Impact
Checklist is discussed below.
4.2.4
Will the project expose people to potential safety
hazards?
Potential safety hazards to traffic and pedestrians
caused by the trenching which will temporarily
interrupt 48th Street will be mitigated by blocking
off the street and reroriting.the traffic onto other
streets.
4-2
o'
CITY OF
INITIAL
Replace
Between
5.0
o
o
o
SAN BERNARDINO - PLANNING DEPARTMENT
STUDY - Public Works No. 88-4
Dip With Box Culvert - 48th Street
Kendall Dr. & Little Mountain Dr.
REFERENCES
Michael Grubbs, Senior Civil Engineer,
Department of Public Works
5-1
o
I
CITY OF
INITIAL
Replace
Between
6.0
csj/3-3-88
DOC:MISC
ISPW884
J
J. h
o 0
SAN BERNARDINO - PLANNING DEPARTMENT
STUDY - Public Works No. 88-4
Dip With Box Culvert - 48th Street
Kendall Dr. & Little Mountain Dr.
APPENDIX
Appendix A - Environmental Impact Checklist
Exhibit B - Location Map
6-1
IL
o
t1l.
0"
. 0 APPENDIX
o
o
r
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
"
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT CHECKLIST
~
"
BACKGROmm
Application Number:
Pllhl;~ WnTk~ Nn RA_4
Project Description: To remove an existina die crossing,
replace it with a box culvert. fill the dip. and ",nn",t-r",..t- n"w
street. ~l1rhg .::Inn gl1Tt'~TCl
Location: The die crossing on 48th Str~~t h"t-w""n W"nn~" nr
=anA T;~~'~ MOnnT.1;n nriup
Environmental Constraints Areas:
General Plan Designation: R/W
Zoning,Designation: R/W
B. ~~IEONM~NTAL IMPACTS Explain answers, where appropriate, on a
separate attached sheet.
1. Ea~th Resources Will the proposal result in:
Yes
No
Maybe
a.
Earth
fill)
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
csj
PAGE 1 OF 8
6-2
JU
H
1
w
0'
o
o
PW 88-4
o
~
""'Ill
Yes
No
Maybe
e. Soil erosion on or off the
project site?
f. Modification of a channel,
creek or river?
x
x
I
1
g.
Development
subject
mudslides,
other similar
within an area
to landslides,
liquefaction or
hazards?
x
h. Other?
2. ~IR RESQYRCES: Will the proposal
result in:
x
a.
air
upon
emissions or
ambient air
x
Substantial
an effect
quality?
b. The creation of objectionable
odors?
x
c. Development within a high wind
hazard area? X
3.
WATES RESOURCES:
proposal result in:
will
the
a. Changes in absorption rates,
drainage patterns, or the rate
and amount of surface runoff
due to impermeable surfaces?
b. Changes in the course or flow
of flood waters?
x
x
c. Discharge into surface waters
or any alteration of surface
water quality?
x
d. Change in the quantity or
quality of ground waters?
e. Exposure of people or property
to flood hazards?
f. Other?
x
x
x
lio....
~
REVISED 12/87
PAGE 2 OF 8
O'
~
o
o
PW 88-4
o
Yes
No
Maybe
'"II
4.
BIOLOGICA~~URCES:
proposal result i~:
Could the
a.
Change
unique,
species
habitat
trees?
in the number of any
rare or endangered
of plants or their
including stands of
x
b.
Change
unique,
species
habitat?
in the number of any
rare or endangered
of animals or their
x
c. Other?
x
5. NOISE: Could the proposal result
in:
a. Increases in existing noise
levels?
x
b.
Exposure of people to
noise levels over 65
interior noise levels
dB?
exterior
dB or
over 45
x
c. Other?
x
6.
LAND USE:
result in:
Will the
proposal
a. A change in the land use as
designated on the General
Plan?
x
b. Development within an Airport
District?
x
c. Development within "Greenbelt"
Zone A,B, or C?
x
d. Development within a high fire
hazard zone?
x
e. Other?
x
~
lio..
REVISED 10/87
PAGE 3 OF 8
O'
,.
n
t"\
7.
MAN-MADE HAJ~Nl~:
project:
Will
the
a. Use, store, transport or
dispose of hazardous or toxic
materials (including but not
limited to oil, pesticides,
chemicals or radiation)?
. b. Involve the release
hazardous substances?
of
c, Expose people to the potential
health/safety hazards?
d. Other?
8. HOU~: Will the proposal:
a. Remove existing housing or
create a demand for additional
housing?
b. Other?
9. ~RANS~QBTATIQN/CI~ATION: Could
the proposal 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 faci1ities/
structures?
c. Impact upon existing public
transportation systems?
d. Alteration of present patterns
of circulation?
e. Impact to rail or air traffic?
f. Increased safety hazards to
vehicles, bicyclists or
pedestrians?
\..
REVISED 10/87
Yes
x
PW 88-4
No Maybe
r-\
"'IIIl
x
x
x
v
v
-:-
x
x
.
x
x
x
x
.J
PAGE 4 OF 8
g.
h.
A disjointed pattern
roadway improvements?
Other?
of
10. f~C SERVICES Will the proposal
impact the following beyond the
capability to provide adequate
levels of service?
a.
b.
c.
Fire protection?
Police protection?
Schools (i.e. attendance,
boundaries, overload, etc.)?
d.
Parks or other recreational
facilities?
e.
Medical aid?
f.
Solid waste?
11. UTILITIES: Will the proposal:
g.
Other?
REVISED 10/87
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?
5. Other?
b.
Result in a
pattern of
extensions?
disjointed
utility
c.
Require the construction of
new facilities?
Yes
No
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
PW 88-4
Maybe
x
x
x
x
x
x
PAGE 5 OF 8
0'
o
o
. PW 88-4
o
,
Yes
No
Maybe
......
12. AESTHETI~:
a. Could the proposal result in
the obstruction of any scenic
view?
x
b. will the visual impact of the
project be detrimental to the
surrounding area?
x
c. Other?
x
13.
~g~~URA~~ESQURCES:
proposal result in:
a. The alteration or destruction
of a prehistoric or historic
archaeological site?
Could the
x
.
Adverse
impacts
historic
object?
c. Other?
b.
physical or aesthetic
to a prehistoric or
site, structure or
x
x
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.
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 e1i~inate a plant
or animal community, reduce
the number or restrict the
range of a rare or endangered
plant or animal or eliminate
..J
REVISED 10/87
PAGE 6 OF 8
0'
o
o
PW88-4
Yes
No
Maybe
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. )
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?
x
x
C. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION AND MITIGATION MEASURES
(Attach sheets as necessary.)
REVISED 10/87
PAGE 7 OF 8
-
O'
o
.
o
PW 88-4
l"'\
""
,
D. DETERMINA~lON
On the basis of this initial study,
o
The proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the
environment and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION 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.
o
o
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
Name and Title
Signature
Date:
\..
~
PAGE 8 OF 8
REVISED 12/87
o
o
o
o
r
EXHIBIT
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO 'PlANNING DEPARTMENT
r
AGENDA
ITEM#:
LOCATION
CASE
HEARING DATE
PW 88-4
'"
\
R-I
NORTH ~.A. IL
R-I
R-I
IfOltT'f
,.....
PRO
Ilu/oc
..
C.l.lOH
I4IG" SCHOGL
I
..
..
PRO
lIu/ac
.
.(
.
~
-I
I
I
L
~
R-'
R -, ..
.. "taM SCHOOL
PRO
R -I 30u/ac
PRO
18u/ae
PRO
rule
R-I
PRO
ZOuA
IS_.I
6-10