Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout111392 PRC Agenda AGENDA TEMECULA PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION ADJOURNED SPECIAL MEETING TO BE HELD AT TEMECULA CITY HALL NOVEMBER 13, 1992 6:00 PM CALL TO ORDER: Flag Salute Chairman Harker ROLL CALL: Herker, Hillin, Miller, Nimeshein, Walker PUBLIC COMMENTS: A total of 15 minutes is provided so members of the public can address the Commissioners on items that are not listed on the Agenda. Speakers are limited to three (3) minutes each. If you desire to speak to the Commissioners about an item not listed on the Agenda, a green-"Request to Speak" form should be filled out and filed with the Commission Secretary. When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name and address. For all other agenda items, a "Request to Speak" form must be filed with the Parks and Recreation Secretary before the item is addressed by the Commission. There is a three (3) minute time limit for individual speakers. NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC All matters listed under Consent Calendar are considered to be routine and all will be enacted by one roll call vote. There will be no discussion of these items unless members of the Commission request specific items be removed from the Consent Calendar for separate action. 111092 Master Plan for Pala Road Park Site RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Approve the master plan for the Pala Road Park Site. COMMUNITY SERVICES DIRECTOR REPORT PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION REPORTS ADJOURNMENT Next regular meeting, December 14, 1992, 6:00 p.m., City of Temecula, City Hall, 43174 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California, 92590. 111392.agn 111092 2 ITEM NO. 1 TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT AGENDA REPORT TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION SHAWN D. NELSON NOVEMBER 13, 1992 MASTER PLAN FOR PALA ROAD PARK SITE RECOMMENDATION: That the Parks and Recreation Commission: Approve the master plan for the Pala Road Park Site. DISCUSSION: A Project Committee comprised of members from the City Council (Ron Parks and Peg Moore); Parks and Recreation Commission (Dee Hillin and Jeff Nemishein); and representatives from the Sports Council was formed to provide a recommendation concerning the schematic design of the Pala Road Park Site. Four (4) Project Committee meetings have been held to receive input concerning the design of this park site. As a result of these meetings, the components of this park site include four (4) lighted ballfields with soccer overlays; two (2) tot lots; two (2) tennis courts; two (2) restroom/snack bar facilities; one (1) basketball court with two (2) half court extensions; riparian habitat area for nature and equestrian trails; and 170 parking spaces. If the master plan is approved, it will be forwarded to the Board of Directors (City Council) for final approval. The next step will be the development of construction documents for the public bid process. It is anticipated that ground breaking for this park site could occur in June, 1993. A presentation will be given by Pat Caughey from Wimmer Yamada Associates concerning the master plan of the Pala Road Park Site. Attached are copies of the proposed budget and the environmental assessment of the park site for your review. Nove~uher 3, 1992 PALA ~OAD PARK FIUlLIMINAR~ ASb'lll~fiO8 OF FPaBABt~ CO~ The foliovie& cos= analyale is based on ~he pre-flnal pe=k master plau categories bate been established =o i~nt~y k~ 2roups o~ ite~ as ~hcy per=ale ~o s~cific area~ of developant. 1. Utilities - On-site. Sewer connection, $ 100,000.00 meters, connection tees 2. On-Site Improvements: G=adine, $ 260,000.00 dra~nate systems, tieerie2, 2ru~bing, d~oli=ion, sc~kp~le topsoil, ripra~ ch~n~s 3. Herdscape: Pa~i~g, walls, trails $ 315,000.00 ~. Recr~atlon Jac~Zit~.Qs $ 130,000,00 Ballfield backstops, tennis courts, etc. Buildln2s/e=ber-' Concession etarid, $ 320,000.00 Restroom, picnic e~ruc=u=es * Option - Future 2~d bu~.lding and use ~re~abrlcated picnic sh~ters. Deduct 8100.000.00 Site smenitiea= S~nage, drink~n8 $ 50,000.00 {ou~ta~nsm benches. fencing, trash conta~nersm etc. 7. Landscape - Main perk= So~.1 amend~n8, $ 290,000,00 trees, shrubs, grOundCower and turf 8. ~audscape- Riparian area: Tce~s, $ 30,000.00 shrubs and ~y~.~seed PeSe Two Pala Roa~ ~relin~nar~ Ass~pt~on o~ ~obabl~ Costs November 3, 1992 10. irr~Za~ion - l(a~.n Fark Tur~ spray, drip Irr~6aCion - ~det!anda Fark PlaySround Area: Structures, .qi=e liShtin8 * Option - Eliminate one lilhted s~ccer field. Deduct: 850,000.00 210,000.00 GO,000.00 55,000.00 360,000.00 $2, t80,000.00 10% CONTINGENCY: TOTAL: ACCESS ROAD OF~-S~TB %VZILITZ COSTS AS FER 10/7/92 $ 218,000.00 $2,389,000.00 $ 195,000.00 TOTAt FOT~qTIAL 10% DISCOIINT AVERAGE: * Based on current econamic tTends ~OSSIBLE REI.MBURS~NT ON CeFF-SITE IMPROVEIdBN~S NET TOTAL: $2,593,100.00 $ 259,300.00 $2,333,700,00 $ 154,045.00 82.179,655.00 City of Temecula Planning Department Notice of Proposed Negative Declaration PROJECT: APPLICANT: LOCATION: DESCRIFrION: Rawhide Park CPala Road Park Site) Improvement. Temecuh Community Services District. FASt Of Pala Road and south of Temecula Creek; approximately 1/2 mile southeast of the intersection of Pah Road and SR-79 (South) in the City of Temecula. The construction of a 16 acre community park facility, including lighted multiple use play fields, play areas, group picnic areas, equestrian and hiking trails, rest rooms and rehted maintenance and parking facffi~es; and the permanent dedication of six acres for wild!ire habitat along the southern margin of the creek channel on a 22 acre site. The City of Temecula hitends to adopt a Negative Declaration for the project described above. Based upon the information contained in the attached Initial Environmental Study and pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CF. QA); it has been determined that this project as proposed, revised or mitigated will not have a significant impact upon the environment. As a result, the City Council intends to adopt a Negative Declaration for this project. The measures required to reduce or mitigate the impacts of this project on the environment will be included in the project design and will be incorporated into the Negative Declaration. The Comment Period for this proposed Negative Declaration is November 6, 1992 to December 8, 1992. Written comments and responses to this notice should be addressed to the contact person listed below at the following address: City of Temecula, 43174 Business Park Drive, Temecula, CA 92590. The public notice of the intent to adopt this Negative Declaration is provided through: · X The Local Newspaper. _ Posting the Site. _ Notice to Adjacent Property Owners. If you need additional information or have any questions concerning this project, please contact Gary L. King, Develo merit Servi Administrator at (714) 694-6480. (Signature) ~ (Name and Ti~e) C~QA~EA20.PND City of Temecula Planning Department Initial Environmental Study H I BACKGROUND 1. Name of Project: Rawhide Park (Pala Road Park Site) Improvement. 2. Case Numbers: Environmental Assessment (EA) No. 20. 3. Location of Project: East of the Extension of Pala Road and south of Temecula Creek; approximately 1/2 mile southeast of the intersection of Pala Road and State Highway 79 (South) in the City of Temeeula. 4. Description of Project: The construction of a 16 acre community park facility, including lighted multiple use play fields, play areas, group picnic areas, equestrian and hikingtrails, rest rooms and related maintenance and parking facilities; and the permanent dedication of six acres for wildlife habitat along the southern margin of the creek channel on a. 22 acre site. 5. Date of Assessment: November 3, 1992 6. Name of Proponent: Temecula Community Senices District Address and Phone Number of Proponent: 43174 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 (714) 694-1999 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS (Explanations to all the answers are provided in Section HI) 1. Earth. Will the proposal result in: Ye~ Maybe N._Qo Unstable earth conditions or in changes geologic substructures? Disruptions, displacements, compaction, or overcovering of the soil? X Change in topography or ground surface relief features? X The destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical features? Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the site? X S\CEQA\EA20,1ES I Changes in siltation, deposition or erosion? The modification of any wash, channel, ,creek, river, or lake? Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mudslides, ground failure, liquefaction, or similar hazards? Any development within an Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone? Will the proposal result in: Air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? The creation of objectionable odors? Alteration of air movement, temperature, or moisture or any change in climate, whether locally or regionally? Water. Will .the proposal result in: a. Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements, in either marine or fresh waters? b. 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 waterbody? e. Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration of surface water quality, including but not limited to, temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? f. Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground waters? g. Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions, 'withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? Ye.__~s Maybe N.~o X X X X X X mc~^xs~o,ms 2 h. Reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies? i. Exposure of people or properly to water related hazards such as flooding? 4. Plant Life. Will the proposal result in: a. Change in the diversity of species,or number of any native species of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass, crops, and aquatic plants)? b. Reduction of the nuntbers of any unique, rare, threatened, or endangered species of plants? c. Introduction of new species of plants into an area of naive vegetation, or in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? d. Reduction in the acreage of any agricultural crop? 5. Animal Life. Will the proposal result in: a. Change in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of animals (animals includes all land animals, birds, reptiles, amphibians, fish, shellfish, benthie organisms, and/or insects)? b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare, threatened, or endangered species of animals7 c. The introduction of new wildlife species into an area? d. A barrier to the migration or movement of animals? e. Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? 6. Noise. Will the proposal result in: a. Increases in existing noise levels7 b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels? c. Exposure of people to severe vibrations? Yes Maybe X X X X 7. Light and Glare. Will the proposal produce or result in new light or glare? 8. Land Use. Will the proposal result in: a. Alteration of the present land use of an area? b. Alteration to the future planned land use of an area as described in a community or general plan? 9. Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in: a. An increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? b. The depletion of any nonrenewable natural resource? 10. Risk of Upset. Will the proposal result in: a. A risk of an explosion or the release of any hazardous substances in the event of an accident or upset conditions (hazardous substances includes, but is not limited to, oil, pesticicles, chemicals or radiation)? b. The use, storage, transport or disposal of any toxic or hazardous materials (including, but not limited to oil, pesticides, chemicals, or radiation)? c. Possible interference with an emergency re.spouse 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. Homing. Will the proposal affect existing housing or create a demand for additional housing? 13. Transportatinn/Circulatinn. Will the proposal result in: a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement? b. Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new parking? Yes Maybe X X X X N__o X X X c. Substantial impact upon existing transportation systems, including public transportation? 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 mowr vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? 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 facilities? e. Maintenance of public facilities, 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 require the development of new sources of energy? 16. Utilities. Will the proposal result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations to any of the following utilities: a. Power or natural gas? b. Communications systems? c. Water systems? d. Sanitary sewer systems or septic tanks? e. Storm water drainage systems? Yes Maybe N._qo .X X X X X X sxcr~Axr~a~.tss 5 f. Solid waste disposal systems? Will the proposal result in a disjointed or inefficient pattern of utility delivery system improvements for any of the above? 17. Human Health. Will the proposal result in: The creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard? The exposure of people to potential health hazards, including the exposure of sensitive receptors (such as schools and hospitals) to toxic pollutant emissions? 18. Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in: 19. The obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public? The creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? c. Detrimental visual impacts on the surrounding area? · Recreation. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational resources or opportunities7 20. Cultural Resources. Will the proposal result in: The altoration or destruction of any paleontologic, prehistoric, archaeological or historic site? Adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or historic building, structure, or object? Any potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? Restrictions to existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? Yes Maybe No _ _ x 'X X s',cr~z~^',n,**2o.ms 6 HI DISCUSSION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Earth 1.a,d,h,i. No. The project will not result in unstable earth conditions, changes to unique geologic or physical features, the exposure of people or property to geologic hazards, or any construction in an Alquist- Priolo Special Studies Zone. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 1 .b,c. Yes. The construction of a community park and recreation facility will result in the disruption, displacement, overcovering and compaction of soils, and a change in surface topography. Development on the site will require some grading, compaction, and overcovering of soil. However, because the site is naturally level, the mount of grading is expected to be minimal. The majority of the site will be soddad over and not built on. In addition, approximately six of the 22 acres will be left in a natural condition. As a result, no significant impacts are anticipated of this project. -. 1 .e,f. Yes. Some short-term and construction related wind and water erosion and deposition could result from project construction. The City will require the use of appropriate best management practices to reduce and mitigate onsite erosion and offsite deposition. Long-term erosion and deposition. from the project site is expected to decrease as a result of the project because of the required paving and landscaping. As a result, no significant impacts are anticipated from of this project. 1.g Yes. The project is located south of the channel for Temeoula Creek approximately 1.2 mile east of the Pala 'Road bridge. The project will alter, through' sodding and leveling approximately 12.5 acres. About six of the 22 acres will remain undisturbed floodplain. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. Air Yes. The construction of a 22 acre park and recreation facility could result in some short-ten, construction related increases in air emissions and may result in the local deterioration of air quality. In addition, some long-ten air pollutant emissions from increased auwmobile usage could occur as a result of the public's use of the proposed facility. However, locating a community park · in this area will reduce the trip. length for local recreation facility users by four to six miles one- way. At this time local residents drive between five and seven miles to the Sports Park, As a result, no significant impacts are anticipated from this project, 2.c. No. No long-term changes in air quality, creation of odors, or alteration to the local or regional climate are expected to occur as a result of this project. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. Water 3.a,c,d,e, No. No measurable changes or alterations in the course or direction of flood flows, the direction h,i. of ground water flows, discharges to surface waters, reduction of public water supplies, or exposure of people or property to flooding are expected to occur as a result of this project. The project will not alter the existing Temecula Creek channel or overall drainage pattern in the area. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 3.b. Yes. Some minor changes to site absorption rates and onsite drainage patterns may occur as a result of this project. The construction of a park on this site is expected to slightly increase the volume of storm runoff induced runoff. Surface drainage will be altered from sheet flow to channelized runoff which will enter the creek channel through one or more storm drains. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 3.f,g. Yes. The park site is located adjacent to the channel of Temecuta Creek. Since the earlier environmental evaluation was undertaken for Tract Map 21067, the creek channel has moved to the north, away from the site. This project may result in some minor changes in the flow, quantity and quality of ground water may occur as a result of this project. The irrigation of the proposed park is expected to somewhat increase the volume of ground water recharge in the vicinity of the park site. As a result, no significant impacts are anticipated from this project. Plant Life 4.a,c. Yes. The majority of the site is occupied by grass and weed species which commonly inhabit discontinued agricultural areas, a small area of the property contains a small amount of native riparian vegetation along Temecula Creek. The City has entered into a stream alteration agreement with the Depaxhnent of Fish and Game to revegetate and restore approximately six acres of riparian vegetation along the southern edge of Temecula Creek. Although the stream bed alteration agreement authorizes the City to modify the stream bed of Temecula Creek, the project does not include the ~teration of the stream bed. The permanent preservation and revegetation of riparian habitat along the creek will reduce and mitigate any adverse effects and' constitute a beneficial impact on the environment. As a result, no significant impacts are anticipated from this project. 4.b. No. The project will not result in the reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or threatened species of plants. No significant impacts are anticipated from this project. 4.d. No. The project site does not contain prime agricultural land and has currently not been used for agricultural purposes for about five years. No significant impacts are anticipated from this project. Animal Life Yes. The construction of this project will change the diversity of the animal species and may reduce the amount of wildlife habitat on the project site. The majority of the site is presently occupied by animals which commonly use fallow or discontinued agricultural lands. Limited populations of common small rodents, reptiles, insects, and birds are believed to use portions of the site for either habitat, food, and/or water. The City has entered into a stream alteration agreement with the Department of Fish and Game to revegetate and restore approximately six acres along the southern edge of Temecula Creek. Although the stream bed alteration agreement authorizes the City to modify the stream bed of Temecula Creek, the project does not include the alteration of the stream bed. The permanent preservation and revegetation of riparian habitat along the creek will improve the wildlife value of the site and is expected to constitute a beneficial impact on the environment. As a result, no significant impacts are anticipated from this project. 5.b. Maybe. The project may result in impacts to a unique, rare, threatened, or endangered species. The project site is located within the Stephen's Kangaroo Rat (SKR) Habitat Conservation Area. A study to determine the presence of SKR will be done prior to site development. If SKR occupy S~CEQA~EA20.1B 8 any portion of the site, a take permit can be issued in accordance with the Short-term Habitat Conservation Plan. As a result, no significant impacts are anticipated from this project. 5.c,d. No. The project will not result in the introduction of new species or result in barriers to migration. No significant impacts are anticipated'as a result of this project. Noise Yes. Some increase in noise levels will occur as a result of this project. The increases in short- term noise levels will result from the construction of the Community Recreation Center. Because the short-term construction related noise will be of limited duration during daylight hours and will not require unusual construction practices, the short-term impacts are not expected to be significant. The long-term noise impacts could occur as a result of this project. The lighted multi-purpose fields, play areas, and recreation center will generate additional noise. Any additional noise would be most noticeable during the weekday evenings and on weekends and could be loud enough to be noticeable to adjacent residents. The project design will include measures to mitigate any possible noise impacts on adjacent residents. Because of this mitigation measure, no significant impacts are expected to occur as a result of this project. 6.b.c No. The project will not cause people to be exposed to severe vibration or noise levels. The use of the athletic fields and recreation facilities could generate additional noise levels. The noise levels could include the sound of children and adults playing games, talking and yelling. While some impact is possible in areas inlmediately adjacent to the project, however these sounds will be of generally limited duration and time periods. As a result, no significant impacts are expected to occur from this project. Li2ht and Glare Yes. Additional light and glare will result from this project. The project is located within the Mount Palomar Observatory Special Lighting District. The lighting standards within this district require that only low pressure sodium street and security lights be installed to reduce the glare in the night sky near the observatory. The impact of the additional athletic field lights will be mitigated by compliance with the standards contained in th~ Mount Palomar Observatory Special Lighting District (Ordinance No. 655) and by aiming the lights onto the fields and by the. installation of shielding to ~significan~y reduce off-site illumination. Because of this mitigation measure, no significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. Land Use Yes. The project site is consists of fallow agricultural land, vacant floodway and intermittent channel. The project site will result in the construction of a 16 acre park and recreational facility. The site is located in a partially urbanized area in the City of Temecula in area planned for community recreational facilities. AS a result, no significant adverse impacts are anticipated from this project. 8.b. No. The project is consistent with the draft City County General Plan for this area. As a result, no significant impacts are anticipated from this project. ~c~^xF~o.~r~ 9 Natural Resources 9.a,b. Yes. Construction of a park and recreational facility will result in a minor incremental increase in the use of natural and nonrenewable resources such as construction aggregate and petroleum producE. The project does not require the development of new sources for these materials. If this project were not undertaken, the existing aggregate and petroleum resources would be used for other development and construction activities. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. Risk of Upset 10.a,b,c. No. The project will not result in a risk of explosion, the release of hazardous substance, or any interference with an emergency response plan. As a result, no significant impam are anticipated from this project. Pooulation '11. No. A park and recreational facility in this location will not alter the location, distribution, or growth rate of population of this area. This project is a partial response to the previously unmitigated development in the area. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. Housins, 12. No. The construction of the project in this location will not have an adverse impact on housing in this area. The probable result will be the improvement of the liveability of housingin the area by providing badly needed park and recreational facilities. As a result, no significant impacts are expected. Transportation/Circulation 13.a,b. Yes. The construction of this project will generate additional vehicular traffic and additional demand for new parking in this area.. Preliminary traffic modeling prepared for the draft General Pl'an indicates anticipated that some traffic congestii3n may result from build out of the General Plan at the intersection of State Highway 79 and Pala Road. The park is expected to generate approximately 80 vehicle trips per day. This represents about 0.2% of the total.trips on Pala Road and 0. 1% of the total trips on South 79. In addition, the facility will include adequate onsite parking to accommodate the projected demand. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 13 .c,d,e,f No. The project will not alter rail or air traffic, alter the existing pattern of circulation, or increase traffic hazards in the City of Temecula. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. Public Services 14.a,b,c. No. The project will not create a need for, or result in any alterations to, fire, police, or school services, as a result no significant impacts are anticipated. ~c~^x~2~.ms 10 14.d,e. Yes. This project will require the additional expenditure of future City funds to cover the cost of providing additional recreational programs and for maintaining public facilities. However the impact of these costs on the City's budget are not expected to be significant. (Park and recreation services are a high priority for the City of Temecula given the historic shortage of these facilities in the Temecula Valley.) As a result, no significant impacts are anticipated this project. Energy 15.a,b. No. The construction of a park and recreation facility will not result in the use of substantial mounts of fuel or energy, or result in a substantial increase in the demand for existing sources of energy. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. Utilities 16.all. No. The construction of this project will not result in a need for new utility delivery systems, or require substantial alteration of the gas, electric, communication, water, sewer, atom drain, or solid waste disposal utilities or services. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. Human Health 17.a,b. No. Construction of the project will not result in the creation of a health heard, or result in the additional exposure of people to any human health hazards. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. Aesthetics 18.a,b,c. No. A community park on this site will not result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive view, the obstruction of any scenic view or vista, or have a detrimental visual impact on the surrounding area. The view of the area will be different than the current view, but it is not likely to be considered aesthetically offensive or unpleasant. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. Recreation 19. Yes. The construction of the project will provide additional recreational opportunities and amenities in this area. The recreational facilities included in the project area. expected to have a beneficial impact. No adverse significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. Cultural Resources 20.a,b; c,d. No. The Master Environmental Assessment for the City General Plan did not identify this area of High Sensitivity for Paleontological Resources. The soils in the project site consist of primarily recent alluvial deposit which are not generally fossiliferous. Also an Archaeologic Study was prepared for the site in February, 1990. No significant archaeologic resources were located on the site, as a result, no significant impacts are anticipated from this project. sxcr~^xuao. ms 11 IV MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE Does the project have the potential to either: degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish, wildlife or bird species, cause a fish, wildlife or bird population to drop below self SUSminlng levels, threaten to eliminate a plant, bird or animal species, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? Yes Maybe No X 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 ~mpacts will endure well into the future.) X Does the project have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively 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.) X Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? X V DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME "DE MINIMUS" FINDINGS Does the project have the potential to cause any adverse effect, either individually or cumulatively, on fish and wildlife resources? Wildlife is defined as "all wild animals, birds, plants, fish, amphibians, and related ecological communities, including the habitat upon which the wildlife depends on for it's continued viability" (Section 711.2, Fish and Game Code). Yes X ~Cr~A~S~.~S 12 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 significant effect on the environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because the Mitigation Measures described on the attached sheets and in the Conditions of Approval that have been added to the project will mitigate any potentially significant impacts to a level of insignificance, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find the proposed project MAY have a significant ~ffect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. Prepared by: David W. Hogan. Associate Planner Name and Title November 3. 1992 Date S\CEQA\EA20.1ES 13