Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution 9132 N.C.S. 04/20/1981'r r' 1:, - f. , `~. ~ ~ . . , . ~, , ~ PLK:ad 4-13-81 ~JEGATIVE ~DECLARATION Resolution No. 9132 _ N. C. S. of the City of Petaluma, Ca~lifornia A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE IS5'UANCE OF A NEGATIUE DECLARA,TION PURSUANT TO TNE . CALIFORi~IA E(~VIRONF1ENT,~L QUALITY ACT FJR OAKMEAD- NORTH BAY PARK WHEREAS, the Planning Director has recommended the issuance of a Negative Declaration pursuant to the California Envir~nmental Quality Act (CEQA) for the following project (s): - , OAKMEAD - NORTH.BY PARK TENTATIVE ~1AP FOR SUBDIVISION NOl~1, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the issuance of said Negative Declaration pursaant to CEQA is fiere6y approved, b~ased upon the following findings: 1. The City Council has considered any comm~nts reeeived pertaining to issu- ance of said.yegative Declaration:, and finds the responses thereto to be adequate. 2. No significant adverse environmental effects will result from the proj.ect a's .proposed, or any potentially significant effect will 5e mitigated by the proposed .design and execution of the proj~ect. - Additional. findings listed in: exhibit, A Under the.,pocver and authority conferred upon this Gouncil by the Chatter of said Ciry. .. • I hereby certify the foregoin; Resolution wa"s: introduce'd and adopted by the , Council of .the Gity of Petaluma at a Regular (~(~~~c~k(~~~ meeting ~PProved as to form o„~ che .2_Q:tI~.........._. day.of •-••-•...~p.C.l:~.:••••.......-- •••....., 19_~~, by the following vote: • ...........••••-••••-•••••...•-•-•••.......... ' City Attorney AYES: Counc i lmen Pe v, Ha rbers;on, Gavanagh, 1~i ce~ Mavo r Battag 1 i a, - Ma r `Matte' ~ ~ . rroES: B~nd, Ba ~~ ~ , - ~ ~ . ABSENT: y N0 .-r ; ~ . _ ~ : ~~ : i .... ..:. ._ -- ~ ~~~G~ ~-`=~'.~ ~~ + . .A'I"I'EST: ....: --~-- --~ ...••••---•••y•• •-•- ••••• -. .......... .......... i City Clerk Ma or ........•••• •--••••- - ~ . . ~ . '. . ' ~ COU.NCIL FILE_.~ ~ - ~ ~ , FO~r:,:Cq , 7./EO R.~s i.:,-• . .. .. . . . .. . ,. ,~f EXHIBIT A Findings Continued: 3. No indications of a~r-chaeological resources are present,on site . _ Mitigating measures for potential future finds will be required as a ~__ ~__._.~_. condition of Tentative Map approval. 4. No earthquake fauTts are .tielieVed to be active at the site. 5~. Additional air polTution generated by the project is not expected to exceed permissable standards. 6. Proposed development is not expected to have a significant impact on the adjacent marsh wild-life habitat. The required maintenance of the row of existing evergreen trees which separates the site from the marsh will provide a buffer. 7. Additional demand for:,p.ublic services will be~compensated for by anticipated pro,perty tax revenues and required impact fees. 8. Projected traffic generation is not expected to impact neighboring streets beyond their planned capacity. ~ ~~H~~~~' ~ to Reso, ~9132 OakMead-Northba.v