1990-14 �f
RESOLUTION NO. 9 0- 14
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA,
RECOMMENDING DENIAL OF TTM-90-04 (TENTATIVE TRACT 14868)
AND ITS ASSOCIATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO THE
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
WHEREAS, the Applicant, Mr. Tony Petta has applied for approval of.a tentative
tract map (Exhibit A) subdividing 3.17 acres into 11 residential lots located at the northwest
comer of Victoria Avenue and Barton Road (APN# 276-411-02).
WHEREAS, a Negative Declaration has been prepared for this project per Article
6 of the California Environmental Quality Act (Exhibit B) and said Negative Declaration
has been considered by the Planning Commission per Section 15074(a) of the California
- . Environmental Quality Act.
WHEREAS, a properly noticed public hearing was held by the Planning Commission
on November 6, 1990 regarding this application; and continued indefinitely
WHEREAS, the applicant in compliance with Section 66452.1. of the Subdivision
Map Act waived the fifty (50) day period requiring action by the appropriate advisory
agency, and ;
WHEREAS, a properly noticed public hearing was held by the Planning Commission
on December 4, 1990, regarding this application; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City
of Grand Terrace, California, that the following finding has been made:
1. That the site is not physically suitable for the proposed density of
development. The subdivision as proposed creates a situation where
individually proposed lots negatively impact adjacent proposed lots, mainly
- lots 7, 8, 10 and 11.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Planning Commission of the City.of Grand Terrace,
California, at a regular meeting held the 04th day of December, 1990 by the following vote:
AYES: 5 - Chairman Hawkinson, Commissioners Hargrave, Van Gelder,
Munson and Buchanan
NOES: 0
ABSENT: 1 - Commissioner Sims
ABSTAIN: 0
,,//71er" a kinson, Chairperson
P&iffiing Commission
ATTEST:
h� 7
Brenda-Stanfill, Deputyltity Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
John Harper, Cit� At�orney
fit. •
cOIrr
A:l-
r/ Planning
AND TEaizticr Department
NOTICE OF FILING NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, a Negative Declaration is hereby
filed on the below referenced project, on the basis that said project will not have a
significant effect on the environment.
DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT:
TTM-90-04,a Tentative Tract Map 14868,and E-90-07(Environmental Review)subdividing
3.17 acres into 11 residential lots of 10,000 square foot minimum in a R1-10 zone district
and Agricultural Overlay Zone. This project is within the General Plan's Low Density
Residential landuse designation.
APPLICANT:
Tony Petta
LOCATION:
N.W. Comer of Victoria Avenue and Barton Road (APN# 276-411-02)
Copies of the Negative Declaration and Initial Study for this project are available for review
at the City of Grand Terrace Planning Department, 22795 Barton Road, Grand Terrace
(714-824-6621). Anyone wishing to comment on this project may do so prior to September
26, 1990 . All comments should be directed to David Sawyer, Community Development
Director.
CIO
David R. Sawyer, Date
Community.Development Director
City of Grand Terrace
`.�XHI FBI T .
22795 Barton Road Grand Terrace,California 92324-5295 . (714) 824-6621
Planning
AD TERRAK
Department
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, a Negative Declaration is hereby
filed on the below referenced project, on the basis that said project will not have a
significant effect on the environment.
DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT
TI'M-90-04,a Tentative Tract Map 14868,and E-90-07(Environmental Review)subdividing
3.17 acres into 11 residential lots of 10,000 square foot minimum in a R1-10 Zone District
and Agricultural Overlay Zone. This project is within the General Plan's Low Density
Residential landuse designation.
APPLICANT:
Tony Petta
LOCATION:
N.W. Corner of Victoria Avenue and Barton Road (APN# 276-411-02)
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT EFFECT:
Based upon the atached Initial Study, there is no substantial evidence that the project will
have a significant effect on the environment.
�ko -50
David Sawyer, Date
Community Development Director
City of Grand Terrace
mcm/
22795 Barton Road Grand Terrace,.California.92324-5295 (714) 824-6621
_
CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
INITIAL ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY
I. Background
1 . Name of Proponent: City of Grand Terrace
2. Address and Phone Number of Proponent: City of Grand Terrace
22795 Barton Road, Grand Terrace, CA 92324-5295
Attention: David Sawyer, Planning Director
3. 'Date of Environmental Assessment:
4. Agency Requiring Assessment City .of Grand Terrace
70/v y PE-iTA
5. Name of Proposal, if applicable
6. Location of Proposal: Al, W. 604M, 9 OF VICVC)RIA
� AAI D -1- A(e W _STi-G&
II Environmental Impacts
(Explanations of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are provided on
attached sheets.)
Yes Maybe No
1 . Earth. Will the proposal result in:
a. Unstable earth conditions- or in
changes in geologic substructures?
b. Disruptions, displacements,. compac-
tion or overcovering of the soil? 1�
c. Substantial change in topography or
ground surface relief features?
d. The destruction, covering or modi-
fication of any unique geologic or
physical features?
e. Any substantial increase in wind or
water erosion of soils, either on or
or off site?
Yes Maybe No
f. Changes in deposition or- erosion of
beach sands, or changes in siltation,
deposition or erosion .which may modify
the channel of a river or stream or
the bed of the 'ocean or any bay,
inlet or lake? x
g. Exposure of people or property
to geologic hazards such as earth
quakes, landslides, mudslides, ground
failure, or similar hazards?
2. ' Air. Will the proposal result in:
a. Substantial air emissions or deterior-
ation of ambient air quality?
b. The creation of objectionable odors?
c. Alteration of air movement, moisture;
or temperature, or any change in \�
climate, whether locally or regionally? 1`
3. Water. Will the proposal result in:
a. Substantial changes -in currents-, or the
course or direction :of water movements,
in either marine or 'fresh waters?
b. Substantial changes in absorption rates,
drainage .patterns, or the rate and
amount of surface runoff?
c. Alterations to the course or flow
of flood waters?
d. Change in the amount of -surface water
in any water body?
e. -Discharge into surface waters, or in
any alteration of surface water qual-
ity, including, but not limited to,
temperature, dissolved oxygen or \�
turbidity? 1`
f. Alteration of the direction or rate
of flow of .ground waters?
Yes Maybe No
} g. Change in the quantity of .ground
waters, either through direct addi-
tions or withdrawals, or through inter-
ception of.an aquifer by cuts or
excavations? X
h. Substantial reduction in the. amount
of water otherwise available for
public water supplies? X
i. Exposure of people or property to
water related hazards such as flood-
ing or tidal waves? x
4. Plant Life. Will the proposal result in:
a. Change in the diversity of species,
or number of any native species of plants
(inclu-din.g trees, shrubs, grass,
crops, and aquatic plants)? X
b. Reduction of the numbers, of any
unique, rare, or endangered -species
of plants?
c. Introduction of new species -of plants
into an .area of native vegetation, or
in a barrier to the normal replenish-
ment of existing species? X
d. Substantial reduction in. acreage of
any agricultural crop?
S. Animal Life. Will the proposal result in:
a. Change in the diversity of species, or
numbers of -any species of animals
(birds, land animals including rep-
tiles, fish and shellfish, benthic
organisms or-insects)? k
b: Reduction of the numbers of any unique_ ,
rare or endangered species of animals?
c. Deterioration to existing fish or
wildlife habitat?
t
-
/r"'R�
`�" _ ;: .- -- ._._...:.-��-�._. _ _.a ... ems_ ..._ _•_.�� - ... - _�_ - r. - _ - -rim
Yes Maybe No
6. Noise. Will the proposal result in:
l` a. Increases in existing noise levels?
b. Exposure of -people to severe noise
levels?
7. Light and Glare. 'Will the proposal produce
substantial new light or glare?
8. Land Use. Will the proposal result in a
substantial alteration of the present or
planned land use of an area?
9. Natural Resources. Will the proposal
result in:
a. Substantial increase in the rate of use
of any natural resources?
b. Substantial depletion of any non-
renewable natural resource?
10. Risk -of Upset. .Will the proposal involve:
a. A risk of an explosion or the release
of hazardous substances ('including,
but not limited to, oi1, pesticides,
chemicals or radiation) in the event
of an accident or upset conditions? x
b. Possible 'interference with an emerg-
ency response plan or an emergency
evacuation plan?
11 . Population. Will the .proposal alter the
location, distribution, density., or growth
rate of the human population 'of an area?
12. Housing. Will the proposal affect existing
housing or create a demand for additional
housing?
13. Transportation/Circulation. Will the pro-
proposal result in:
a. Generation of substantial additional
vehicular movement?
i
Yes Maybe- 'No
b. Effects on -existing parking facili-
ties, or 'demand for new parking? �(
c. Substantial impact upon existing
transportation systems?
d. Alterations to present patterns of
circulation or movement of people
and/or, goods?
e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or
air traffic?
f. Increase in traffic hazards to-motor
vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? x
14. Public Services. Will the proposal have
-substantial effect upon, .or result in a need
for new or altered governmental services in
any of the following areas:
a. Fire protection?
b. Police protection?
C. Schools?
d. Parks or other recreational faci-
lities?
e. Maintenance of public facilities, k
including roads?
f. 'Other governmental services?
15. Energy. Will the proposal result -in:
a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel
or energy? �(
b. -Substantial 'increase in demand upon
existing sources of energy, or re-
quire the development of new sources
of energy?
16. Utilities. Will the proposal result in a
need for new -systems, or substantial
alterations to the following utilities:
a. Power or natural gas?
3df4N.�+�H'' 'r .xs=• _..�. -'. „�—` ..w 'yueus �°'1 +.�'
- ------. . __.—�--- . -- Yes .Maybe No _- -
r -
b. Communications systems?
c. Water? .
A. Sewer or septic tanks? x
e-. Storm water drainage?
f. Solid waste and disposal?
17. Human Health. Will the proposal result
in:
a. Creation of any health hazard or
potential health hazard (excluding —
mental health)?
b. Exposure of people to -potential
health hazards?
18. Aesthetics. Will the .proposal result
in -the obstruction of any scenic vista
or view open to the public, or will the
proposal result in the creation of an
aesthetically offensive site -open to
public.view?
19. Recreation. Will the proposal -result in
an impact upon the quality or quantity
of.-existing recreational opportunities?
20. Cultural Resources.
a. Will the proposal result in the
alteration of or the destruction of
a prehistoric or historic archaeo-
logical site?.
b. Will the proposal result in adverse
physical or aesthetic effects to a
prehistoric or historic building,
structure, or object?
' c. Does the proposal have the potential
to cause a physical change which
would affect unique ethnic cultural
values?
Yes Maybe No .
d. Will the proposal restrict existing
religious or sacred uses within the'
potential impact area?
21 . Mandatory rindings of Significance.
a. Does the project have the potential
to degrade the quality of the environ-
ment, substantially reduce the habitat
of a fish or wildlife species, -cause
a' fish or wildlife population to drop
below self sustaining levels, threaten
Ao eliminate a 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 dis-
advantage of long-term, environ-
mental goals.? (A short-term impact
on the environment is one which oc-
curs .in_.a relatively brief, definitive
period .of time while long-term impacts
will endure well into the future.)
c. Does the project have impacts which
`-' are individually limited, but cumu-
latively considerable? (A project's
impact on .two or more separate
resources may be 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 substan-
tial adverse effects -on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the. proposed project COULD NOT have a significant
effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be
prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a signi-
ficant effect on the environment, there will not be -.a signi-
ficant effect in this case because the mitigation .measures
described on attached sheets have been added to the
project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED.
l find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on'
the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT -REPORT is
requ i red.
David Sawyer
Planning D r-ector
- -2-
Date Signature /
�- For .City of Grand Terrace
i f
III. DISCUSSION OF THE
ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
1. b, 3. b The development of this currently. vacant site will result in the
overcovering of a certain percentage of the soil. This impact will be
mitigated by utilizing proper drainage methods which will be reviewed
and approved by the Building and Engineering Department.
6. a There may be an increase of noise level during development to a site
that is currently vacant. This impact will be within the allowable levels,
as set in the Master Environmental Analysis for the General Plan.
8. The existing land use will change from vacant land to low density
residential uses in accordance with the adopted General Plan.
13. a The future development of 11 residential lots .may result in the
increase of additional vehicular movement. This impact will be within
the allowable limits set in the Traffic Circulation Element of the
General Plan.
a