Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution 94-126 05/16/1994FZes®lution N®. 94-126 N C.S. 1 of the City of Petaluma, California 2 3 A RESOLUTION ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 4 PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) 5 AND CITY ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW GUIDELINES FOR AN AMENDMENT 6 TO THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE KINGSMILL RESIDENTIAL PUD TO 7 INCLUDE THE DEVELOPMENT OF THREE ADDITIONAL HOMES ON LOT 20 8 OF PHASE 6, A.P. No. 136-540-044 9 10 WHEREAS, an application was made by Mr. William Wilkinson to amend the PUD 11 Development Plan to allow the development of three additional, adjacent, two story homes 12 on Lot 20 of Phase 6; and 13 14 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider the project on 15 April 26, 1994, at which time the Commission recommended that the City Council adopt a 16 Mitigated Negative Declaration pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act 17 (CEQA) and City environmental review guidelines for an amendment to the Development 18 Plan for the Kingsmill residential PUD to include the development of three additional 19 homes on Lot 20 of Phase 6; 20 21 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Petaluma City Council, in reference to 22 the impacts and mitigations identified in the initial study and as reflected in the 23 Commission's recommendations hereby adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration for said 24 project based on the following findings, and subsequent to the following mitigation 25 measures: 26 27 Findings for a Mitigated Negative Declaration: 28 29 L An initial study has been prepared and proper notice provided in accordance with 30 CEQA and local guidelines. 31 32 2. Based upon the Initial Study and comments received, potential impacts could be 33 avoided or reduced to a level of insignificance by mitigation measures attached as 34 conditions of approval. There is no substantial evidence that the project, as 35 mitigated, would have a significant effect on the environment. 36 37 3. The project does not have potential to affect wildlife resources as defined in the 38 Fish and Game code, either individually or cumulatively and is exempt from Fish 39 and Game filing fees. 40 1 kty. ~~.....9.4-.1.26......... n~.cs. 1 Mitigation Measures (Note: the following mitigations shall be applicable to the Parcel Map 2 and subsequent development): 3 4 1. To mitigate the incremental demand for City services, the project proponent shall 5 pay a Community Facilities Development Fee. Said fee shall be calculated at time 6 of building permit issuance, and due and payable prior to issuance of a Certificate of 7 Occupancy. 8 9 2. To mitigate the incremental increase in storm water runoff, the project proponent 10 shall pay a Storm Drainage Impact fee. Said fee shall be calculated at time of 11 building permit issuance, and due and payable prior to issuance of a Certificate of 12 Occupancy. 13 14 3. To mitigate the incremental increase in demand for local school facilities, the 15 project proponent shall pay a School Facilities fee. Said fee shall be paid prior to 16 issuance of a building permit. 17 18 4. To mitigate the incremental demand on City transportation systems, the project 19 proponent shall pay a Traffic Mitigation fee. Said fee shall be calculated at time of 20 building permit issuance, and due and payable prior to issuance of a Certificate of 21 Occupancy. 22 23 5. To mitigate the incremental demand on the City's park and recreation facilities, the 24 project proponent shall pay a Park and Recreation Land Improvement fee. Said fee 25 shall be calculated at time of parcel Map approval and paid on a pro-rata basis prior 26 to issuance of a building permit for each house. 27 28 6. All grading and erosion control shall conform to the City's Erosion Control 29 Ordinance 15.76. 30 31 kingmit/hgll Under the power and authority conferred upon this Council by the Charter of said City. REFERENCE: I hereby certify the foregoing Resolution was introduced and adopted by the Approved as to ~._.. Council of the City of Petaluma at a (Regular) i'~ri€~)Xtit~l~ meeting rm on the .....1.~ tll..._....... day of .............~~......................................, 19.9 4.., by the following vote: ................~.............--•--....... City Attorney AYES: Sobel, Barlas, Shea, Vice Mayor Read, Mayor Hilligoss NOES: None / ~ / r ABSENT: Hamilton resigned 4/4/94) i - - ~ , ~ ----', ATTES'T': ................._............... .... ... ....~........................ ..... --=-•~•• - ----.........- ._.... ... ........... ...............---•--- ity Clerl. Mayor Council File .................°-•--.°.-°.... CA 10-85 Res. No..........9,4-126 N.C.S. 2