The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCC RES 92-008RESOLUTION N0. ~I-3 A RE ,UTIOIV OF THE CITY COUNCi �F THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, CERTIFYING A IvEGATIVE DECLARATION OF EI�IVIRONMENTAL IMPACT FOR THE CITY OF PALM DESERT SOURCE REDUCTION AND RECYCLING ELEMENT AND HOUSEHOLD HAZARDOUS WASTE ELEMENT AS REQUIRED BY CALIFORNIA WASTE MANAGEMENT ACT OF 1989 AS MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT OF 1970 AS AMENDED. WHEREAS, the City of Palm Desert has, in cooperation with the member agencies of the Coachella Valley Association of Governments, developed a Source Reduction and Recycling Element, as well as a Household Hazardous Waste Element as required by the California Waste Act of 1989; and WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on these elements by the Palm Desert City Council on January 23, 1992; and WHEREAS, an initial study and testimony received at said hearing has determined that the project, defined herein as these elements and their adoption, would not have a significant adverse impact on the environment. NOW, THEREFORE, HE IT RESOLVED that the City Cot�ncil of the City of Palm Desert, California, certifies that a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact (attached hereto as Exhibit A) meets the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 as amended in reviewing said project. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert City Council, held on this 13th , day of Februarv, 1992, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: AHSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: B�NSON, :dONE NOVE NONE y�c.Ct.�� SHEILA R. GI LIG14 City of Palm Dese CRITES, S*iYD�R, WILSON, KELLY C RICHA S. KELLY, ayor ity Clerk California ,�`. `., R�SULUTION NO. _-- EXHIBIT A Pursuant to Title 14, Division 6, Article 7, Section 15083, of the California Administrative Code. NEGATIVE DECLARATZON CASE: City of Palm Desert Source Reduction and Recycling Element and Household Hazardous Waste Element APPLICANT/PROJECT SPONSOR: City of Palm Desert PROJECT DESCRIPTION/LOCATION: A Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact for the City of Palm Desert Source Reduction and Recycling Element and Household Hazardous Waste Element as required by California Waste Management Act of 1989 as meeting the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 as amended. The Director of the Department of Community Development, City of Palm Desert, California, has found that the described project will not have a significant effect on the environment. A copy of the Initial Study has been attached to document the reasons in support of this finding. _ Mitigation measures, if any, included in the project to avoid potentially significant effects, may also be found attached. / / , 7` M0� A. DIAZ DATE DIRECTOR OF CO ITY DEVELOPMENT /tm � 0 �� .., __.. _ -- _ , � ��' � ... J _ l � .� ... .. _ _ .. _ _ � _"-'J � = y^r J . r'3.5,� FP.GD'.';AP.I�;G �?.I', =, ��.L'.1 rt��P.T, C�L(FOP�11A ?22�0 � �EL.��HC�1E ��9�?aE _�>> L*JITII'�L S"IVCY E:.'IPt7i•'EII't'1L C��S�Q,IST :_�. . ��i� �� • 1. 2. Cate 12 � 1 �'j — 9� Case �lo, � �^-+'� 3. Applicant �Pp1i� ,��,��, �� II. ffiviroaom9ntal Imp�acts (FScplanations of all "yes" and "maybe" ausavers are required on attached sheets.) Yes !�aybe "io 1. Barth. Ai11 the proposal result in: a. Unstable eartl� conditions or in changes in geologic substructures7 b. Disruptions� displacenents� canpeiction or overcovering oi the soil? c. Change in topography oc ground surtace relie! features? d. The destruction, coverin� or modilication ot any unique gcol�gic or pl�ysical felt��res? e. Att increase �n alnd or ur�ter eroslon of aoils, either on or of! the site? !. Q�snge,s ifl deposition or erosion of beach sands� or changes tn siltation, deposition or erosion ahich may madity the channel oi a river oc streain or the be�i oi the ocean or any bay� inlet or lake? g. F�cposure of people oc property to geologic hazacds such as �rthqua kes, landslides, mticislides, grou�x� f1ll��e, or sl�nttar ha�.lr�is? k � � X X k � .t.�... .i... . . � J_� _� J • . _ - ) ?. Air. �Pt:l *:�e pr�posal r�ssl� L�: a. subetant!al air �issi��ns or �eterior3tion ot ambient air �.lality? �. �e C:'a3t1�� ot �bjec�icrable odors? _. a:'a:�t1�n of air �venent, �mistsre, or t.��r3C11I'?, or any ^!zange in cl Lraate, ei�her locally or regionall�? 3. Tater. Will the proposal resuit in: a. �hanges in currents, or the course or di- rectfon oP aPater roovgnents, in either rmrine or fresh waters? b. Q�anges iu absorption rates, drainage pat- terns, or the rate and a�ount ot swctace runoPP? c. Alteratioas to the course or low oi flood ava t e cs? d. Change in the arnount of surface avater in any 9vater bod�? e. Discharge into suriace araters� or in any alteration o! suriace aater quality� in- cluding but not limited to tenperature� dissolveri oxygen or turbidit�t P. Alteration o! the direction or rate o! Ploa of ground waters? g. Change in the quantity o! ground waters� either through direct additions or with- draarals, oc through interception o! an aquiler by cuts or excavations? h. Subetanti3l reduction in the arnount of �rater otherwise available for public water supplies? i. Eaposure o! people or property to avater re- lated hazards such a,s tlooding or tidal avaves? 4. Plaat Liie. will the proposal result in: a. G�anBe in the diversity o! species� or nuo-- ber of any species oL plants (including trees, shrubs� �rass� crops� and aquatic plants)? : � �y ".' �P �a� � � � X X � X k x X � � ��':TI'J`I `�0. -�_ 3 b. Reduction o! the n�rnbers of 3ny �.uiique, �e or endangered species oi pla.nts? c. Introductioa of aeav species ot plsnts into an area, or in a barrier to the no �al replenish- ment oi etisting species? d. Reduction in acreage oP �n;� agricultuz�l crop? 5. Aaimdl Lile. Will the proposal result in: a. C�ange in the diversity of species, or n�- bers of aap species oP ani�ls (birds, land animals including reptiles, fish a.nd shell- fish, benthic organisns or insects)? b. Reduction oi the n�nbers ot a.ny unique� rare or eada.ngered species of animals? c. Introduction oi neW species of ani.r�als into an area, or result in a barrier to the migra- tion or mov�eat o! anim�ls? d. Deterioration to existing fish or a*ildlife habitat? 6. lioise. 71111 the proposal result in: a. Increases in existiag noise levele? b. F�posure o1 people to severe noise levels? ?. Light aad Glare. 11111 the proposal produce ne�r ligtit or glare? 8. I,tad Oee. 11111 the proposal result in a sutt- staatial alteratioa o! the preseat or planned land use oi aa �rea? g. liatt�ssl R�ources. Aill the pcoposal result in: a. I�crhse in the rate of use oi aay natural t�ourCe�? 10. Aist oi Qp�et. 11111 the proposal involve: a. A risk of an eaploeion or the release oi haardpu� subetances (iaclucling, but aot li�nited to� oil, pesticides� chemicals or ra,diation) io the event oi an accident or upset conditioae? •��9 443 . 'p `..� � � � � � � � � � � � � � b. �saible-inrerPereace �i�ti an gne;-gency :�sponse plan �r 3n �ergeacy e�ac�.iation rlan? !�. pr�pulstion. �Pill �he rmposal 31ter the :xation, i�;�ribution, :e,�sity, �r gr�art`� r3te of t�e h�aa x'C'��3r1J❑ ��° 3ri 3T'eS? 12. Sousing. '�i:1 the pr�posal 3P°?Ct e�isting hous- L:.g, or :;reste a d�and ?or a.dditional !:ousing? 13. Tra.asportation/Circulation. �ill t!�e pr000,9a1 result in: a. Gener3tion of suhstanti3l a.dditional vehicular �nov�ent? b. EfEects on existing parl�ng f3cilities, or daBand for neav parl�ng? c. Substantial itnpact upon existing transpo� tation systa�s? d. 9lterations to present patterns of circula- tion or rn�venent ot people and/or goods? e. Alterations to avaterborne, rail or air trailic? f. Increase in tra2fic hazards to motor ve�icles� bicyclists or pedestrians? 14. Public 3ervices. Will the proposal !zave an etfect upon� or result in a need for new or altered gov- ernmeatal services in any of the Polloaring areas: �. Fire protection? b. Police protection? c. Schools? d. Parlas or other recreatioQal facilities? e. Me�inteaance o! public facilities, including roads? : �s � . �e X � � !. Other governmental services? 15. �ergy. 1Pi11 the pmposal result in: a. Use oi subetantial amounts of fuel or energ�t � � X � � � � x � � � � � =��J�J:� � L ll�.v �vl� . 1 _ - , b. Slibstantial increase i❑ demand upoa exieting source9 or energy, or require the develop�ent oi new sources of energy? 15. Qtilitiee. �ill the proposal result in a need Por new systeatg, or substantial alteratioas to the Pol:owing utilities: 17. Hi.�n ftealth. Will the proposal result in: a. C�eation oP a.ny tiealth �azard or potential health hazard (excluding mental health)? b. 6tposure ot people to potential health hazards? ?� �$" �1P �if1 '� � � � 18. Aeethetics. Will the proposal result in the obstruction oi a.ny sceaic vista or view open to the public, or avill the proposal result in the creation o! an aesthetically ol2ensive site open � to public viea? 19. R�ecreation. �Ai11 the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or quantity oi existing recreatioaal opportuaities? 20 . C� 1 tur�e� 1 R�,eo�urc ee . a. Will the proposal result in the alteration o! or the destruction oi a: prehistoric or historic archaeological site? b. c. � wi11 the proposal result in adverse physical or aesthetic eitect� to a prehistoric or historic building� structure, or object? Doe� the proposal have the potential to cause a phqsicsl change which �vuuld atlect unique ethnic cultural values? !!11 the propoeal restrict existing religious ot aacred uee� arithin the potentie�l impsct ar+�a? 21. Ifaadstor� Findin�a oi 8lgniiicaace. , a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality oi the environment, subetsnttally .reduce the hsbitat of a Iish or wildlife species. cause a lisb or wildlife populatioa to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal catmunity, r� duce the nunber or re9trict the raa�e oi a nre or eadangered plaat or aaimal or eliminste � � � � � ��oor�a�,t �«,�pl� oP rne �najor periods of �aiii�cnia histor� or prehistor;'? b. Joes the pr��ec� �.ave ��e potential shor•_-ter.n, ro the �iisad�anta.ge oP Anvir�runental goals? �; � s�or*-ter^� ``:e �nvir�nrsent is one �i�h xc�lrs ��:e1� �r:eP, �iePi�i�i�•e �riod of :^ng-�ern L�pacts �ri11 endure �re11 Puture. ) t� achieve long-ter.n, L�p�act on in a rela- t i�^.�e art7 L 1 e iato the c. fb�s the project have i.rnpacts ��trich are individually li.cnited, but cumulatively con- siderable? (A project may ia�pe,ct on ta� or more separate resources avhere ttie i.apact on eacti resource is relatively �all, but where the eifect o! the total of those ilnp�cts on ttie envirooment is significant.) : �s � •- -�a X � � d. Does the project have environmental efiects which will cause substantial adverse ePtects '/ oa human beings, either directly or indirectl}� �( III� D9terminatiOn On ttie basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project C�QJLD NOT have a signiticant elfect on the environment, a.nd a?1F�ATIVE DDCirARr1TI0N a�ill be prepared. � I find that although the proposed project could have a significant eifect on the eavirornaent, there avill not be a signilicant ei2'ect in this case because the mitigation me�asures described oa aa attached sheet have beea added to the project. A^iF�ATIVE DE7CLAfZATION FIILL BE PF�F.PAFtID . � I tind the pr�poeed pmject MAY have a significant elfect on the envi roaflen t, aad an F�N IFifJNI�.'`iT�►L 1�ACT REPORT is requi red . � � � Date ture For