HomeMy WebLinkAboutReso - PC - 016-2000 RECORDING REQUESTED BY:
Planning Department - - -- - ---- - --
City of Burlingame DOC Is 2 0 0 0—0 2@-3@ Z
02/17/2000 03:16P RI Fee:NC
WHEN RECORDED MAIL,TO: Page 1 of 7
Recorded in Official Records
PLANNING DEPARTMENT County of San Mateo
CITY OF BURLINGAME Warren Slocum
501 PRIMROSE ROAD Assessor-County Clerk-Recorder
BURLINGAME,CA 94010 Recorded By BURLINGAME CITY PLANNING DEPT
il. I
VIII
III II
II
IIII
I
_ III
II
III
- II
_ III
I
I I
Resolution No. 16-2000
301 AIRPORT BOULEVARD; APN: 026-350-070 AND 027-350-090
TITLE OF DOCUMENT
I hereby certify this to be a full,true
and correct copy of the document it purports
to be,the original of which is on file in
my office.
Date: 01.19.00
Mb(hflj6A�)v&
Margaret Monroe, City Planner
I RESOLUTION NO. 16-2000
2 RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME
CERTIFYING THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (FEIR) FOR
3 PHASED CONSTRUCTION OF AN OFFICE COMPLEX
AT 301 AIRPORT BOULEVARD
4 ZONE C-4
PROPERTY OWNER: GLENBOROUGH PARTNERS
5
APNS 026-350-070 AND 026-350-090
6
7 RESOLVED by the PLANNING COMMISSION of the CITY of BURLINGAME that:
8 WHEREAS, Glenborough Partners applied for various planning approvals in 1998; and
9 WHEREAS, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City of
10 Burlingame conducted an Initial Study and determined that possibly significant, adverse
11 environmental impacts might result from the proposed project so a focused Environmental Impact
12 Report (EIR) analyzing those possible effects was needed; and
13 WHEREAS, on April 21, 1998, following dispatch of the Notice of Preparation of an EIR
14 regarding the project to the California Office of Planning & Research (OPR), OPR notified State
15 agencies of the preparation of the EIR and directed that they promptly make comments on the
16 proposed project; and
17 WHEREAS, the City retained an independent consultant to prepare an EIR; and
18 WHEREAS, on September 14, 1998, as revised on September 15, 1998, following staff
19 review and comment on the Administrative Draft of the EIR,the City duly noticed the availability and
20 completion of the Draft EIR(DEIR) and the public comment period on the DEIR; and
21 WHEREAS, a public comment period of forty-five(45) days was opened from September
22 14 to October 28, 1998, during which all written public comments were welcomed; and
23 WHEREAS, during the public comment period, this Planning Commission held a public
24 hearing on October 14, 1998, to receive any oral or written comments that the public might wish to
25 offer on the DEIR; and
26 WHEREAS, during the public comment period, the City received comments from the City
27 of San Mateo and various interested citizens that identified two possibly significant environmental
28 impacts that had not been directly addressed in the DEIR: traffic at five intersections in the City of
111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111120002 0020307
I San Mateo and wind effects on the Coyote Point windsurfing area;and
2 WHEREAS,in response to those comments,the City consultant prepared responses to each
3 of the comments made;and
4 WHEREAS, in response to the comments regarding San Mateo traffic concerns and
5 windsurfing effects,the City determined that the appropriate approach was to prepare a full analysis
6 of these two issues and prepare and circulate a recirculated DEIR presenting this analysis;and
7 WHEREAS,on January 21, 1999,the City noticed the availability and completion of the
8 recirculated DEIR and the public comment period on the Recirculated DEIR;and
9 WHEREAS,the public comment period on the Recirculated DEIR was for 45 days from
10 January 21, 1999,to March 8, 1999,during which time all written comments were welcomed;and
11 WHEREAS, this Planning Commission held a noticed, public hearing during this public
12 comment period on February 22,1999,to receive any oral or written comments on the Recirculated
13 DEIR;and
14 WHEREAS, the City's consultant prepared written responses to each of the comments
15 received during the public comment period on the recirculated DEIR;and
16 WHEREAS,on April 15,1999,the Response to Comments Document on the DEIR and the
17 Recirculated DEIR was made available to the public;and
18 WHEREAS,this Planning Commission received testimony on the DEIR,the Recirculated
19 DEIR,and the Response to Comments Document at duly noticed public hearings on April 26 and
20 May 10, 1999;and
21 WHEREAS,on May 24, 1999,the Planning Commission studied the proposed project and
22 received public comments on the project;and
23 WHEREAS, on June 14, 1999,following an extensive, duly noticed public hearing,this
24 Planning Commission denied the project without prejudice without taking further action on or
25 certifying a Final EIR;and
26 WHEREAS,the Planning Commission then conducted two duly noticed study sessions to
27 discuss concerns with the applicant and the public;and
28 WHEREAS,the applicant then redesigned the project by reducing its overall size and filed
2
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIVIIIIIIIIIIVIIIIIIVIIIIIIIIIII 207003 0020307
I a new planning application (Revised Project); and
2 WHEREAS,the City then prepared an Addendum/Supplement to theResponseto Comments
3 Document to analyze the Revised Project as an additional alternative and made this Document
4 available to the public on November 12, 1999; and
5 WHEREAS, the analysis of the Revised Project contained in the Addendum/Supplement to
6 the Response to Comments Document demonstrated that recirculation of the Recirculated DEIR is
7 not appropriate because the Revised Project would lessen the severity of environmental impacts
8 identified in the DEIR and the Recirculated DEIR; there was no new information presented that
9 showed any new, significant environmental impacts would result from the Revised Project; and there
10 have been no other changes in the Revised Project or the surrounding circumstances nor new
11 information that indicates that any increased severity of environmental impacts from the Revised
12 Project or feasibility of any further mitigation measures that would reduced significant environmental
13 impacts identified in the DEIR and the Recirculated DEIR; and
14 WHEREAS, on November 22, 1999, this Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed
15 study session on the Final EIR(FEIR),consisting of the DEIR, the Recirculated DEIR,the Response
16 to Comments Document, and the Addendum/ Supplement to the Response to Comments, and
17 received public testimony from both the public and the applicant on the Revised Project and the FEIR
18 during that meeting; and
19 WHEREAS, on December 13, 1999, this Planning Commission held a public hearing on the
20 certification of the FEIR and received testimony from all interested persons regarding that
21 certification; and
22 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has considered and discussed the extensive
23 documentation submitted by the applicant, the general public, and the City of San Mateo, as well as
24 the documents comprising the Final EIR; and
25 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has also considered and discussed the extensive
26 testimony presented by the applicant, the general public, the City of San Mateo, the City consultants
27 who prepared the Final EIR, and City staff at the ten meetings that the Planning Commission has held
28 on this property in the past 15 months; and
3
IIIIIII IIVIII IIIIII IIIIIIIIIIVIIIIIIVIIIIIII II 20004 03 16P
020307
I WHEREAS, the Final EIR clearly presents the issues involved in the development of this
2 property and identifies appropriate alternatives as required by CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines(Title
3 14, Chapter 13 of the California Code of Regulations); and
4 WHEREAS, the extensive public participation in the development of this Final EIR has
5 provided valuable information and analysis; and
6 WHEREAS, the Final EIR identifies and analyzes six significant and unavoidable adverse
7 environmental impacts that would probably occur from development of the Revised Project, as
8 outlined in Exhibit A to this Resolution; and
9 WHEREAS, Table 4 attached to this Resolution as Exhibit B identifies and compares the
10 environmental effects of the project originally analyzed under the EIR and the Revised Project that
11 was reviewed as an alternative; and
12 WHEREAS, the Final EIR, consisting of the DEIR, the Recirculated DEIR, the Response
13 to Comments Document, and the Addendum/ Supplement to the Response to Comments, provides
14 this Commission, the City, and the public with sufficient and thorough information regarding the
15 potential significant environmental impacts of both the original project and the Revised Project; and
16 WHEREAS, the Final ETR has been prepared and considered in conformance with CEQA
17 and the CEQA Guidelines,with independent preparation by a City-retained consultant and application
18 of the independent comment and judgment of both City staff and this Commission; and
19 WHEREAS,this Planning Commissionisthe decision-making body forthisproposed project,
20 and the Planning Commission has considered this Final EIR in evaluating and reviewing both the
21 original project, the Revised Project, and public testimony and will continue to do so; and
22 WHEREAS, certification of this Final EIR shall not in any way be construed or interpreted
23 as the adoption of a City policy, standard, or threshold for evaluating the effect of any other project
24 on ambient wind conditions on San Francisco Bay or elsewhere and shall not constitute precedent of
25 any kind for any evaluation or action on any other project wherever located; and
26 WHEREAS, the evaluation of effects of a specific project on ambient wind conditions both
27 under CEQA and the Burlingame Municipal Code shall be done on a specific-project basis, including
28 any relevant revisions to the Revised Project or another project proposed for the property for which
4
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIVIIIIIIIIIIVIIIIIIVIIIIIIIIIII 2Page 5 0
0000 3 16P
I this EIR was prepared; and
2 WHEREAS, the certification of this Final EIR shall not in any way bind or commit this
3 Commission or the City to any particular course of action on the Revised Project itself or any other
4 project, except to apply the Final EIR as required by CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines; and
5 WHEREAS, in considering any approval of the Revised Project itself, the mitigation
6 measures and monitoring program required by the Final EIR as well as additional conditions pursuant
7 to the Burlingame Zoning Code shall be applied to the Revised Project; and
8 WHEREAS,the Planning Commission recognizes and affirms that before the Revised Project
9 could be approved by the Commission, the Commission would have to determine that there are
10 overriding concerns and benefits pursuant to CEQA Guidelines sections 15092 and 15093 with regard
11 to each unavoidable, significant adverse environmental impact as identified in Exhibit A, and this
12 consideration will occur if and when the Revised Project itself is presented for hearing and decision,
13
14 NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby resolved as follows:
15 1. The Final Environmental Report, consisting of the Draft EIR, the Recirculated Draft EIR,
16 the Response to Comments Document, and the Addendum/ Supplement to the Response to
17 Comments Document, is certified as complete pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15090.
18
19 This decision is not subject to appeal until such time as a project that relies upon this Final
20 EIR is approved. The Planning Commission is the decision-making body for the Revised Project
21 under the Burlingame Municipal Code. The Commission's decision on a project on the property
22 together with its action on this Final EIR would be appealable to the City Council pursuant to the
23 Burlingame Municipal Code and CEQA. Anyone wishing to challenge the certification of this FEIR
24 in a court of competent jurisdiction must first file such an appeal to the City Council and following
25 the decision of the Council must file any action challenging the decision on the Final EIR in a court
26 of competent jurisdiction within the time limits set forth in the California Environmental Quality Act
27 and the provisions of the CEQA Guidelines as adopted by the State of California (Title 4, Chapter
28 3 of the California Code of Regulations).
5
IIIIIIIIIIIVIII II III VIIIA IIIIIIIIIVIIIII IIII 20006 03 16P
I This Resolution was adopted by the following vote of the City of Burlingame Planning
2 Commission at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission on January 10, 2000:
3 AYES: Bojues, Deal, Dreiling, Vistica, and Luzuriaga
4 NOES: None
5 ABSENT: Keighran
6 /
Comsio ecretary
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
6
IIIIII�IIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
R1 Page:02/ 17/200
of 7