Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutOrd 1988-2263 ORDINANCE NO. 2263 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AMENDING ZONING MAP OR MAPS ESTABLISHED BY SECTION 19.18.010 OF THE CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE REZONING 3.19 ACRES FROM R-3-G-D, C-T AND C-T-D TO C-T-P AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF BROADWAY AND "K" STREET The City Council of the City of Chula Vista finds as follows: That in accordance with the attached Negative Declaration, IS- 88-49 and the findings therein, the proposed rezoning will not have a significant impact upon the environment, and the City Council hereby certifies that the Negative Declaration was prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended. The City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby ordain as follows: SECTION I: That the Zoning Map or Maps established by Section 19.18.010 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code be hereby amended by adding thereto the following zoning changes: That that certain property consisting of 3.19 acres at the southeast corner of Broadway and "K" Street be, and the same is hereby rezoned from R-3-G-D, C-T and C-T-D to C-T-P in accordance with Planning Commission Resolution No. PCZ-88-I, adopted on the 9th day of March, 1988, pursuant to the provisions set forth in Section 19.12.020 governing the rezoning of property. SECTION II: That any and all ordinances heretofore adopted by the City Council of the City of Chula Vista concerning zoning of said property be, and the same are hereby rescinded insofar as the provisions therein conflict with this ordinance. SECTION III: This ordinance shall take effect and be in full force on the thirty-first day from and after its passage and approval. Presented by Approved as to form by .~ ~ ~{c. - ..Jrge )j;:em ,D¥r ctor of Planning ~- -------. FIRST READ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CI7 lF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA, HELD April 5 . 19~, AND FINALLY PASSED AND ADOPTED AT A REGULAR MEETING THEREOF HELD April 12 , 19~, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE, TO-WIT: AYES: Councilmen McCandliss, Nader, Malcolm, Cox. Moore NAYES: Councilmen None ABSTAIN: Councifmen None ABSENT: Councilmen None ~f '!C"{!,cCh'" V;", ""("~ ATTEST ~...;,-' ~ C)~~-- ç City Cle - STAI '" OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO ) ss. CITY OF CHULA VISTA ) I, JENNIE M. FULASZ, CMC, CITY CLERK of the City of Chula Vista, California, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the above and foregoing is a full, true and correct copy of ORDINANCE NO. 2263 ,and that the same has not been amended or repealed. DATED ~~~ ~ City Clerk ................................. --......- ClW OF CHURA VISTA CC-660 --- -.--- ------ ----------- \ \ \ \~\ .' K.EY .- - fIiI 0.29 AC.1<:é f'b.RC.EL - TO Co - T -.p z.~ AC. RE ~ -ro c,.- T - 'P -- ]/LOCATOR (SEC BROADWAY &"K" STS. PCZ-88-I NORTH [ EXHIBIT A ) ,-RENEAU -;". ;2. &3 . - --.-.,- ---- " f. . nega Ive declaration PROJECT NAME: Reneau Rezoning PROJECT LOCATION: 825 Broadway PROJECT APPLICANT: Travis A. Reneau 801 Broad\~ay Chula Vista, CA 92010 ---, CASE NO: 1S-88-49 DATE: February 23,1988 A. Project Setting The project site is 1 oca ted near the southeast corner of Broadway and "K" Street. This is within the urbanized area of Chula Vista. There are no rare or endangered species of pl ants or wil dl ife present. All urban services are present to serve the proposed project. There are no cultural or his tori c resources in the project vicinity which coul d be adversely affected by the proposal. Geological and soils conditions will not adversely impact the project to a significant degree. The' 0.29 acre site presently contains a single-family dwell ing, and constitutes a portion of a larger parcel which serves as employee parking for South Bay Chevrolet. The property is located behind a pizza restaurant and takes access off Broadway. The remaining 2.19 acres consists of a portion of the main South Bay Chevrolet complex, the pizza '- .Festaurant site, and the employee parking area described above. All of ~::;"'th~Sé properti es are owned by the appl i cant. ~~-_.-.__. "-, The City, with the applicant's concurrence, has included within the ',- request an adjoining 2.9 acres at the southeast corner of Broadway and "K" '~Street for consideration of rezoning from C-T and C-T-D to C-T-P. ~=~l~~_.adjoining 2.9 acres has been included in the proposal in order to clean-up the C-T zoning pa ttern on the balance of the applicant's holdings. The existing designations include the basic C-T, C-T with _c",,'odesigncontrol, and C-T-P. The rezoning would place all of the property within the C-T-P district. Any proposal for the 0.29 acre site or the balance of the property would, therefore, be subject to review and approval of a precise plan by the Design Review Committee. I ~(f?- I ::-~~ .1 '-- city of chula vista planning department ~ - CllY OF environmental review section CHUIA VISf¡ - .-"" "-,- ,-------.- ,.i-,> . . B. Project Description The project consists of a rezoning of the property from R-3-G-D to C-T-P to permi t the use of the property for automobil e storage in conjuncti on with South Bay Chevrolet. C. Compatibility with Zoning and Plans The General Pl an desi gnates these properti es for Thoroughfare Commerci al use. The proposed rezonings to C-T-P are consistent with this designation. D. Identification of Environmental Effects In accordance with the Initi al Study on thi s project there are no significant environmental effects. E. Findings of Insignificant Impact 1. The 0.29 acre site represents a logical extension of the South Bay Chevrolet facility, and the rezoning is consistent with the depth of the C-T zoning directly to the north. The site is also well separated from single family areas to the east by the existing plant nursery which is zoned for multiple-family development. The property is expected to be used to expand the adjoining employee parking area. 2. The project is very minor in nature and, therefore, will not have any . substantial cumulative impacts. 3. The project is consistent with the General Plan and, therefore, will not achieve any short-term goal to the disadvantage of long-term goals. 4. The property is well separated from residential properties, will conform to the City's performance standards and wi 11 not resul t in the emission of any substantial amount of poll utants which could adversely affect human beings. F. Consultation 1. Individuals and Organizations City of Chula Vista: Julie Schilling, Assistant Planner Roger Daoust, Senior Civil Engineer William Wheeler, Building and Housing Department Carol Gove, Fire Marshal Mike Donnelly, Associate Traffic Engineer :1 :2 (~--) .----. . . Applicant's Agent: Pa~ S. Manganelli 9903-B Businesspark Ave. San Diego, CA 92131 2. Documents Th~_Chula Vista General Plan The Chula Vista Municipal Code . - '" ... -_. ". . "-c,,,..--_cc.., --~-- . '-;=F¡e-ÍI1'i1:ial Study appl ication and evaluation forms documenting the findings of no significant impact are on file and available for public review at the Chula Vista Planning Department, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 92010. JÞ ¿¡f: Ø2. y ENVrRO~ NTAL REVIEW COORDINATOR :Rev, 5/85) ~(f? ~ city of chula vista planning department Cl1Y OF environmental review section CHUlA VI: ;' ~ /,-', .- --... i\-. . . FOR OFFICE USE . " Case No. /.5 -&'j'~-9? INITIAL STUDY Fee . 7)~ "/.y..y --;/"'0.""'" Recelpt No. <)'99/9 City of Chula Vista Oa te Rec' d 2 - )9-¿¡>/? Accepted by .:iJ Æ Application Form Project No.,->'9 .;:>~ A. BACKGROUND 1. PROJECT TITLE Reneau Rezone 2. PROJECT LOCATION (Street address or description) 82~Broadway, Chula Vista, CA 92012 Assessors Book, Page & Parcel No. 572-270-60 3. BRIEF PROJECT DESCRIPTION Rezone from R-3-G-D to C-T-P . 4. Name of Applicant Travis A. Reneau Address 801 Broadway Phone (619) 420-5900 City Chula Vista State CA Zip 92012 5. Name of Preparer/Agent Paul A. Manganelli Address 9903-B Businesspark Avenue Phone (619) 566-5128 . City State Zip San Diego CA 92131 Relation to Applicant Consultant 6. Indicate all permits or approvals and enclosures or documents required by the Environmental Review Coordinator. a. Permits or approvals required: General Pl an Revi si on Design Review Committee - Public Project x Rezoning/Prezoning - Tentative Subd. Map Annexation Preci se Pl an - Grading Permit - Desi gn Revi e~1 Board -,Specific Plan - Tentative Parcel Map = Redevelopment Agency - Condo Use Permit - Site Pl an & Arch. Revi e\~ - Vari ance Other - b. Enclosures or documents (as required by the Environmental Review Coordinator). x Location Map - Arch. Eleva~ons - Eng. Geology Reoort - Grading Plan Landscape Plans Hydrological Study X Si te Pl an - Photos of Site & - Biological Study - Parcel Map - Setting - Archaeological Survey - Precise Plan Tentative Subd. r.1ap - Noise Assessment - Specific Plan - Improvement Plans = Traffic Impact Report - Other Agency Permit or - Soils Report Other - Approvals Required - - Er: 2 (Re'l. 12/82) --, - . ~ " . . - 2 - - B. PROPOSED PROJ ECT 1. Land Area: sq. footage 12,500 or acreage If land area to be dedicated, state acreage and purpose. N/A 2. Complete this section if project is residential. a. Type development: Single family Two family Multi family Townhouse Condominium b. Number of structures and heights c. Number of Units: 1 bedroom 2 bedrooms 3 bedrooms 4 bedrooms Total units d. Gross density (DU/total acres) e. Net density (DU/total acres minus any dedication) f. Estimated project population g. Estimated sale or rental price range h. Square footage of floor area{s) i. Percent of lot coverage by buildings or structures - j. Number of on-site parking spaces to be provided k. Percent of site in road and paved surface 3. Complete this section if project is commercial or industrial. a. Type{s) of land use Automobile storage b. Floor area NIA Height of structure(s) N/A c. Type of construction used in the structure NIA d. Describe major access points to the structures and the orientation to adjoining properties and streets NIA e. Number of on-site parking spaces provided NIA f. Estimated number of employees per shift MIA ,Number of shifts Total g. Estimated number of customers (per day) and basis of estimate - ':I/A - ------,_.. .' . . - - 3 - h. Estimated range of service area and basis of estimate NfA i. Type/extent of operations not in enclosed buildings Open automobile storage j. Hours of operation N/A k. Type of exterior lighting NfA 4. If project is other than residential, commercial or industrial complete this section. a. Type of project b. Type of faci 1 i ti es provi ded c. Square feet of enclosed structures d. Height of structure(s) - maximum e. Ultimate occupancy load of project f. Number of on-site parking spaces to be provided -, g. Square feet of road and paved surfaces , C. PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS 1. If the project could result in the direct emission of any air pollutants, (hydrocarbons, sulfur, dust, etc.) identify them. None 2. Is any type of grading or excavation of the property anticipated No (If yes, complete the following:) - a. Excluding trenches to be backfilled, how many cubic yards of earth will be excavated? b. How many cubic yards of fill will be placed? c. How much area (sq. ft. or acres) will be graded? d. What will be the - Maximum depth of cut Average depth of cut Maxi~um depth of fill Average depth of fill .' --- " . . : - 4 - - 3. Describe all energy consuming devices which are part of the proposed project and the type of energy used (air conditioning, electrical appliance, heating equipment, etc.) None 4. Indicate the amount of natural open space that is part of the project (sq. ft. or acres) None 5. If the project will result in any employment opportunities describe the nature and type of these jobs. None 6. Ÿlill highly flammable or potentially explosive materials or substances be used or stored within the project site? No . 7. How many estimated automobile trips, per day, will be generated by the project? None 8. Describe (if any) off-site improvements necessary to implement the project, and their points of access or connection to the project site. Improvements include but not limited to the following: new streets; street widening; extension of gas, electric, and sewer - lines; cut and fill slopes; and pedestrian and bicycle facilities. N/A D. DESCRIPTION OF ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING 1. Geology Has a geology study been conducted on the property? No (If yes, please attach) Has a Soils Report on the project site been made? No (If yes, please attach) 2. Hydrology Are any of the following features present on or adjacent to the site? (If yes, please explain in detaiL) a. Is there any surface evidence of a shallow ground water tab 1 e? )10 b. Are there any watercourses or drainage improvements on or a~acent to the site? ':0 - _._'.- --..----.-'-.- . . - 5 - c. Does runoff from the project site drain directly into or to\~ard a domestic water supply, lake, reservoir or bay? No d. Could drainage from the site cause erosion or siltation to adj acent areas? No e. Descri be all dra i nage facil iti es to be provi ded and thei r location. None 3. No is e a. Will there be any noise generated from the proposed project site or from points of access which may impact the surrounding or adjacent land uses? No 4. Biology a. Is the project site in a natural or partially natural state? No b. Indicate type, size and quantity of trees on the site and which (if any) will be removed by the project. Three lS-24n Palms, one Sn California PeDDer, and one S" Eucalyptus 5. Past Use of the Land a. Are there any known historical resources located on or near the project site? No b. Have there been any hazardous materials disposed of or stored on or near the proj ect site? No 6. Current Land Use a. Describe all structures and land uses currently existing on the project site. Single family dwellin~ _. ~ -------.. .' . . - 6 - _. b. Describe all structures and land uses currently existing on adjacent property. North Automobile storage South Plant nUrserY East Plant nursery West Automobile parking 7. Social a. Are there any residents on site? (If so, how many?) 1 b. Are there any current employment opportunities on site? (I f so, hO\~ many and what type?) No Please provide any other information which could expedite the evaluation of the proposed proJect. - - ._-, ,.' . . . ';J - Case No. /~-¿2-'ff CITY DATA F. PLANNING DEPARTMENT 1. Current Zoning on site: (2-36- rp North C:-q-~ South ~ - - p East - p West í' - T Does the project conform to the current zoning? 2. General Plan land use ~ designation on site: ~~ .-.;.--1 d North I, I ~u~ I ; ~:~i 1i!JL1:z:r1-jj;~ ~!;/tfJ< -Is the project compatible with the General Plan Land Use Diagram? ~ Is the project area designated for conservation or open space or adjacent tó an area so designated? /Y-.(7 Is the project located adjacent to any scenic routes? ~ (If yes, describe the design techniques being used to protect or enhance - the scenic quality of Chula Vista.) ,,'. -.' -"~- How many acres of developed parkland are within the Park Service District of this project as shown in the Parks and Recreation Element of the 'eP'- General Plan? 4/'Ä . What is the current park acreage requirements in the Park Service .District? ~Ar- How many acres of parklan are necessary to serve the proposed project? (2AC/10OO pop.) Does the project site provide access to or have the potential to provide access to any mineral resource? (If so, describe in detail.) "zI'/j ,--- ---..-- , . . , ~.' 3. Schools - AlA-- - If the proposed project is residential, please complete the following: Current Current Students Generated Schoo 1 Attendance Capacity From Project Elementary Jr. High Sr. High 4. Aesthetics Does the project contain features which could be construed to be at a variance from nearby features due to bulk, form, texture or color? (If so, please describe.) 5. Energy Consumpti on - Provide the estimated consumption by the proposed project of the following sources: - Electricity (per year) ~ - - Natural Gas (per year) ~ Water (per day) - 6. Remarks: ~t :22 / <¡ ¡fs? Date / - ------.----- . . - February 18, 1988 File # YS-268 TO: Doug Reid, Environmental Review Coordinator FROM: Roger Daoust, Senior civil Engineer ~JJ{j SUBJECT: IS 88-49, 825 Broadway, Rezone from R-3-6-D to C-T-P for Use as Automobile Storage The Engineering Division has reviewed the subject study and submits the following comment: . Our records do not show that the subject lot has legal access. SMN:ljr/yc (L\MEMOS\IS88-49) ~ . - /-::: / ~j ""'- --.--, . 'IS -2.'" ~ . - 10 - - Case No. I:s 8ð-4c G. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 1. Drainage a. Is the project site within a flood plain? NO b. Will the project be subject to any existing flooding hazards? ~C) c. Will the project create any flooding hazards? NO d. What is the location and description of existing on-site drainage facil iti es? ~Y'I~ . e. Are they adequate to serve the project? Ñ, Þ. . f. What is the location and description of existing off-site drainage facilities? ~e. g. Are they adequate to serve the project? N . Þ.. . . 2. Transportation N. A. . a. What roads provide primary access to the project? b. What is the estimated number of one-way auto trips to be generated by the project (per day)? c. What is the ADT and estimated level of service before and after project completion? i Before After ¡ A.D. T. L.O. S. d. Are the primary access roads adequate to serve the project? If not, explain briefly. ------ e. Hill it be necessary that additional dedication, widening anòJ-..... improvement be made to existing streets? If so, specify the general nature of the necessary actlons. --= ---- ,~>' . . - 11 - Case No. 3. Geology N,þ.. a. Is the project site subject to: Known or suspected fault hazards? Liquefaction? Landslide or slippage? b. Is an engi neeri ng geology report necessary to eval uatethe proj ect? . 4. Soil s N.Þ>.. a. Are there any anticipated adverse soil conditions on the project site? b. If yes, what are these adverse soil conditions? ,-, c. Is a soils report necessary? . 5. Land Form a. What is the average natural slope of the site? ~ b. ,»5"7. What is the maximum natural slope of the si te? F=LÄ'Ï 6. Noise. ,.J. Þ, . Are thére any traffic-related noise levels impacting the site that are significant enough to justify that a noise analysis be required of the applicant? - ;2;) fe,:; ---. :.~1.~/\:,.,...-.f . (8 J!jJ» - 12 - - Case No. 7. Air Quality ~.þ..- If there is any direct or indirect automobile usage associated with this project, complete the following: Total Vehicle Trips Emission Grams of (per day) Factor Po 11 uti on CO X 118.3 = Hydrocarbons X 18.3 = IJOx (N02) X 20.0 = Particulates X 1.5 = Sul fur . X .78 = 8. Waste Generation N.Þr. Ho\i much solid and liquid (sewage) waste \'lill be generated by the proposed project per day? Sol id ? Liquid 1 What is the location and size of existing Se\1er lines on or adjar- to the site? B" ~ ~,,-<- Bcw; ~ 'SÐ""-\\.. ì... (" .,.J.o... ~ '\ ÛM4\u<h ~ a.... ~ B" fI~\J ~ -- :I <=..1+ . ¡ ... s;: \ <Lf'Þ.. ~ ~ oJ Are they adequate to serve the proposed project? \1 1'1 IF<.''¡Oc..'lo..\ 9. Public Facilities/Resources Impact If the,project could exceed the threshold of having any possible significant impact on the environment, please identify the public facilities/resources and/or hazards and describe the adverse impact. (Include any potential to attain and/or exceed the capacity of any public street, sewer, culvert, etc. serving the project area.) - Remarks/necessary mitigation measures j - DiJt e - --..---.- .' . . - 13 - Case No. /s--%g-~1'. H. FIRE DEPARTIIENT , 1. What is the distance to the nearest fire station and what is the Fire Depar ment'~ estimated reaction time? oÌ/L11t;j7p~ 2. Will the Fire Department be able to provide an adequate level of fire protection for the pr posed facility without an increase. in equipment or personnel? .. '. . '. 3. .i~!!fJJ,~~~ 1iI!!!1~ ~ ~ ~ -,;ý~ . - - .. .~ ~. " flre ¡.Iarshal . ate, _. . : .' ..', ,. .'- - . - "';. (- -'. '.'---'.'" /' , " . . .' EVALUATION OF POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS - CASE NO. 1~-gR~r 1. Analysis (Provide in Section J an explanation of mitigation proposed for all significant or potenti~ly ~gnificant impacts.) YES POTENTIAL NO 1. Geology a. Is the project site subject to any substantial hazards, such as earthquakes, landsliding, or ~ liquefaction? - - b. Could the project result in: . Significant unstable earth conditions or :L changes in geological substructure? - - A significant modification of any unique X geological features? - - Exposure of people or property to significant Y. geologic hazards? - - - 2. Soil s a. Does the project site contain any soils which. + are expansive, alluvial or highly erodible? - - b. Could the project result in: A significant increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off-site? - - ~ A significant amount of siltation? - - 1- 3. Ground Water a. Is the project site over or near any accessible ground water resources? - - 1- - ,-- " . . : - YES POTENTIAL NO b. Could the project result in: A significant change in quantity or quality of ground water? - - +- A significant alteration of direction or rate - - :þ of flow of ground water? Any other significant affect on ground water? - - +- 4. Drainage a. Is the project site subject to inundation? - - L b. Could the project result in: . A significant change in absorption rates, drainage patterns or the rate of amount of 4 surface runoff? - - Any increase in runoff beyond the capacity of any natural water-way or man-made facility 1- either on-site or downstream? - - - Alterations to the course or flow of flood - waters? +- - - Change in amount of surface water in any -X water body? - - Exposure of people or property to water -" related hazards such as, flooding or tidal $. ..".. waves? - - 5. Resources Could the project result in: .. _.- Limiting access to any significant mineral resources which can be Þ economically extracted? - - The significant reduction of currently or -Ä potentially productive agricultural lands? - - 6. Land Form Could the project result in a substantial change 1(. in topography or ground surface relief features? - - 7/) /, -_. " . . YES POTENTIAL ~ 7. Air Quality a. Is the project subject to an air quality impact from a nearby stationary or mobile source? - - f.- b. Could the project result in: A significant emission of odors, fumes, :t- or smoke? - - F~issions which could degrade the ambient -/0 .r quality? - - Exacerbation or a violation of any National + or State ambient air quality s~andard? - - Interference with the maintenance of ~. standard air quality? - - The substantial alteration of air movement, moisture or temperature, or any significant change in climate either locally or i: regi ona lly? - - A violation of the revised regional air quality strategies (RAQS)? - - T 8. Water Quality Could the project result in a detrimental effect on bay water quality, lake water f quality or public water supplies? - - 9. Noise a. Is the project site subject to any unacceptable noise impacts from nearby f mobile or stationary sources? - - b. Could the project directly or indirectly result in a significant increase in -:t ambient noise levels? - - - ,.. . . - YES POTENTIAL NO 10. Biology a. Could the project directly or indirectly affect a rare, endangered or endemic species of animal, plant or other wildlife; the habitat of such species; or cause interference with the movement of any resident or migratory :£ wil dl ife? - - b. Will the project introduce domestic or other animals into an area which could affect a -+ rare, endangered or endemi~ cies? - - ll. Cultural Resources a. Will the proposal result in the alteration of or the destruction of a prehistoric, historic, + archaeological or paleontological resource? - - b. Wi 11 the proposal result in adverse phys i ca 1 or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or f- historical building, structure, or object? - - c. Does the proposal have the potential to cause - a physical change which would affect unique f- ethnic or cultural values? - - d. Will the proposal restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the f potential impact area? - - 12. Land Use a. Is the project clearly inconsistent with the following elements of the General Plan? Land Use :£ - ~ Circulation - - Scenic Highways - - ¡ Conservation Housing - - Noi se - - Park and Recreation - - Open Space - - - - Sa fety - - Seismic Safety - - 2- Public Facilities - - J- ------- ,." . . YES POTENTIAL -- b. Is the project inconsistent with the -¥- Comprehensive Regional Plan? - - 13. Aesthetics a. Could the project result in: Degradation of community aesthetics by imposing structures, colors, forms or lights widely at variance with prevailing community 1- standards - - Obstruction of any scenic view or vista ~ open to the public? - - Will the proposal result in a new light source or glare? - - -'f 14. Soci a 1 a. Could the project result in: The displacement of residents or people employed at the site? - - ]L A significant change in density or growth -/ rate in the area? - - The substantial demand for add~tional housing -Ì- or affect existing housing? - - 15. Community Infrastructure a. Could the project inhibit the ability of the urban support system to provide adequate f support for the community or this project? - - b. Could the project result in a deterioration of any of the following services? Fire Protection X Police Protection - - í Schools - - Parks or Recreational Facilities - - Maintenance of Public Facilities - - Including Roads - - $ - . . - YES POTENTIAL NO 16. Energy Could the project result in: Wasteful, inefficient or unnecessary consumption 'l- of energy? - - A significant increase in demand on existing -+ sources of energy? - - A failure to conserve energy, water or other -f resources? - - 17. Utilities Could the project result in a need f~r new systems or alternatives to the following utilities: Power or natural gas - - $ Communications systems - - Water Sewer or septic tanks - - Solid waste & disposal - - - - - 18. Human Health Could the project result in the creation of any -,t health hazard or potential health hazard? - - 19. Transportati on/ Access Could the project result in: A significant change in existing traffic P- patterns? - - An increase in traffic that could substantially ~ lower the service level of any street or highway Ä- below an acceptable level? - - 20. Natural Resources Could the project result in a substantial depletion of non-renewable natural resources? - - P- :;:¿ ') /,~ ,,---_., ., . . .. ' YES POTENTIAL .IJ.() 21. Risk of Upset Will proposals involve: a. A risk of an explosion or the release of any hazardous substances (including, but not limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation) in the event of an accident or ~ upset condition? - - b. Possible interference with an emergency ~ plan or an emergency evacuation plan? - - 22. Growth Inducement Could the service requirements of the project result in secondary projects that would have a growth inducing influence and could have a cumulative effect of a significant level? - - f 23. Mandatory Findings of Significance a. Does the project have a potential to degrade the quality of the environment, or curtail - , the diversity of the environment? - - 7 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 the relatively brief, definitive period of time, while long-term impacts fL will endure well into the future.) - - c. Does the project have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively con- ~ siderable? (Cumulatively considerable means that the incremental effects of an individual project are considerable when viewed in connec- tion with the effects of past project, the effects of other current projects and the ì- effects of probable future projects.) - - d. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or --X i ndi rectly? - - - ---- .. ~ . - 21 - - J. PROJECT REVISIONS OR MITIGATION MEASURES The following project revisions or mitigation measures have been incorporated into the project and will be implemented during the design, construction or operation of the project: '. . ProJect Proponent Ða te J ' - ---,,_. .' . . K. DETERMINATION - On the basis of this initial study: ~ It is recommended that the decision making authority find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION is hereby forwarded to the decision making authority for consideration and adoption. - It is recommended that the decision making authority find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the MITIGATION MEASURES described above have been ADDED to the project and a MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLAR: -. . is hereby forwarded to the decision making authority for consideration and adoption. - It is found that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required to evaluate the issues identified in this Initial Study. It is found that further information will be necessary to - determine any environmental significance resulting from the project and the technical information listed below is required prior to any determination. - / ii, 23 / éÏ'd'6' Env Da te / WPC 0169P - -----