HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolutions 85-292 N.C.S. 09/03/1985l~esolu~ion No.85-292 N. C. S.
of the City of Petaluma, CaTifornia
A RESOLUTION APPROVING ISSUANCE OF A NEG'ATIVE DECLARATION
PURSUANT TO CEQA FOR THE REVISION OF THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN
OF PARK PLACE VI AND VII SU.BI~'IVISTONS LOCATED AT
PROF:ESSIONAL DRIVE AND MARIA DRIVE
{AP NO's 136-:111-28, 29, 30, 3'1 and 32)
WHEREAS, the Planning :Commission has recommended: issuance of a Negative
Declaration pursuant to the Califorizia Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for
the following project: ~
A proposal to remove 12 one-bedroom units and a carport from Park
Place VI, Phase 6; insfall 6 additional two bedroom units; and remove
the eucalyptus trees fr.om Park Place VI and VII.
WHEREAS, an initial study lias been prepared for the area and has been
reviewed by the Community Development and Planning Department and the
Planning Commission; and,
WHEREAS, the results of this study have determined that approval of this
project as conditionally approved will not trigger any significant adverse
environmerital impacts; and,
WHEREAS, staff and the Planning Commission have recommended that a
negative deelaration be issued on the above project;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the. issuance of said Negative
Declaration pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act is hereby
approyed, based upon the. following findings:
Findings.
1. The projeet does not have the potential to degrade the quality of the
environment, sub.stantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife
species, cause a fish or wildlife populat'ion to drop below
self-su~s'.taining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal
RESO NO 85-292 N.C.S.
community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or
endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of major
periods of California history or prehistory.
2. The project does not have the potential to achieve short term to the
disadvantage of long term environmental goals.
3. The project does not have impacts which are individually limited but
cumulatively considerable.
4. The project as conditionally approved, does not have environmental
effects which will cause substantial adv.erse effects in human beings
either directly or indirectly.
5. The project is subject to site plan and architectural review pursuant to
Petaluma Zoning Ordinance section 26-41 et al.
6. Adequate provisioris have been made for the retention of significant
vegetation or its gradual replacement.
reso. park. place. vi. vii. neg. dec
reso4
Unde; the power and_ suthority conferred upon-this Council by the Charter of said City:
, I hereby certify~the foregoing' Resolntion was int;ocluced and adopted by the Ap rove s to
Council of•the City of;Petaluma at a(Regular) (~,j6~r~i~~~~p~~aiaff) meeting ~. -
on the --•-•-•••- 3rd...... day• of .._.... September :.............•----=-•--. 1s__8 5; by the
following vote:
._...:_ ...----•-•--•---••-••--
• ---• Attorney
AYES: Bond/Cavanagh/Davis/Woolsey/Tencer/V,Nt. Balshaw/Mayo Mattei
_ ~
NOES: None ~
ABSENT: None ~
,r
~'~.• .
• ••-••--•- --••.. ...-•-•• •• • •_•••••• -•._.. ... •••-••-•-••_-•--•••..... .•----•-•••••••• --- ._
ATTEST• . •••-••-•-•••••••••-•••-••-•- --•°•-•...:
•-•---•--•-• .............•----•-•
- , .
--(
,. Ci -1erk ~ Mayor
•' w Counczl Fila...._..........._.......-_......
Form CA 2 7/81 Res. No.......... 8.r~... w~ 9~ N. C. S.