Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutReso - CC - 047-1991RESOLUTION NO. 47-91 RESOLUTION APPROVING NEGATIVE DECLARATION RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Burlingame, California that: WHEREAS, a Negative Declaration has been proposed for a tentative parcel map for the subdivision of a 24,287 SF parcel with frontage on Hillside Drive and Summit Drive into two parcels (APN 027-104-020), (property owners: Robert H. & Jo Ann O'Connor, 1815 E1 Camino Real), and WHEREAS, it is the intention of this Council to approve said Negative Declaration as set forth hereinafter; NOW, THEREFORE, it is FOUND, ORDERED and DETERMINED that: On the basis of the Initial Study and any comments received it is hereby found that there is no substantial evidence that the project set forth above will have a significant effect on the environment, that the mitigations will be implemented and monitored through the conditions on the project and required review and through issuance of required city permits, and Negative Declaration ND -443P is hereby approved. MAYOR I, JUDITH A. MALFATTI , City Clerk of the City of Burlingame, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 6th day of May 1991 , and adopted thereafter by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN: NOES: COUNCILMEN: ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: BARTON, HARRISON, O'MAHONY, PAGLIARO LEMBI NONE Gtr/CITY CLERK CITY OF BURLINGAME NEGATIVE DECLARATION File No. ND -443-P The City of Burlingame by Frank C. Erbacher, City Engineer on April 23, 1991 completed a review of the proposed project and -deter- mined that: ( X ) It will not have a significant effect on the environment. ( X ) No Environmental Impact Report is required. Reasons for Conclusion: Initial study indicated that no significant effects were found that could not be reduced with recommended mitigations, for reasons stated, to a level acceptable to the Community. (See attached sheet) Because the site is in an essentially developed area and the development is infill, the other items listed in the initial study were determined not to have a significant effect. /11 ignature of Processing Official CitV Engineer Title z! 9 Da a Signed STAFF REVIEW OF APPLICATION TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION I. Project Address: 2811 Hillside Drive; 2108 Summit Drive II. Project Description and Permits Requested: A Tentative Map for the subdivision of a 24,287 S.F. parcel with frontage on Hillside Drive and Summit Drive into two parcels of 11,526 S.F. & 12,761 S.F. (minimum required 10,000 S.F.). Two single family residences are located on the site each with street frontage. No changes to the residences are proposed. The new lot lines would allow for one residence on each lot. III. Property Identification: Assessor's Parcel Number(s): 027-104-020 Lot No: "Margaret Dakin" Block No: 2 Subdivision: Burlingame Hills No. 2 Lot Size: 24,287 Sq.Ft. Zoning: R-1 General Plan Designation: Low Density Residential IV. Existing Site Conditions and Adjacent Land Uses: This lot was annexed to the City on August 15, 1990. the use of the lot is non -conforming because two separate residences exist on the lot, zoned R-1. To the west and north are unincorporated lands of San Mateo County. To the east are lands zones R-1. V. CEQA Status: See Negative Declaration attached - NC -443-P VI. Project Data: Proposed lot sizes: Parcel A, 11,526+ SF; Parcel B, 12,761+ SF Proposed New Construction: None. Proposed Percent Increase in Area: 0%. RESPONSES TO IDENTIFIED ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS: Item Questions: lg. Average slope on parcel to be divided exceeds 20% (25+%). Slope stability may be a question in one area of the site (slope steeper than 2 to 1 (50%). 13f. The slope of the existing driveway exceeds that which the City considers safe. 18. No covered parking is provided at 2811 Hillside. Parking is provided in the front setback and the side yard. The residence at 2108 Summit exceeds the City's maximum height limit. Response• lg. Applicant has submitted an amended soils report addressing slope stability and containing recommendations for erosion protection along the creek. These recommendations will be required as conditions of map approval. Applicant to pay for a review by City's consultant of the amended soils report and all recommendations if deemed necessary by the City Engineer, any improvements needed shall be to the approval of the City Engineer and constructed by the applicant. 13f. To address safety issues: Reconstruct the driveway and the garage as necessary at 2108 Summit to provide driveway with transitions at the top and bottom and a maximum slope of 20%. 18. To address aesthetic issues: Provide two covered parking spaces at 2811 Hillside Drive to Zoning Code requirements. Remove the asphalt -paved circular driveway in front setback at 2811 Hillside Drive and restore curb cuts to standard 6" curb. this will remove the parking in the front setback which is not allowed in this zone. Reduce the height of 2108 Summit Drive residence by 31- 2" to meet code requirement of 301- 0" for height, a mass and bulk regulation and issue, was determined not to be significant because of the impact on the appearance of the structure and the topography and placement on the site. With these mitigation measures required as conditions of the tentative map to be met before a final map approval, all effects will be reduced to a level acceptable to the community. C` hf (giflz JafA3UrCilrJ=V CITY HALL -501 PRIMROSE ROAD PLANNING DEPARTMENT BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA 94010 (415) 342-8625 1. Name of Proponent Robert O'Connor 2. Address and Phone Number of Proponent 2811 Hillside Drive (415) 692-2293 3. Date of Checklist Submitted 4-17-91 4. Agency Requiring Checklist City of Burlingame 5. Name of Proposal, if applicable Tentative Parcel Map; Lands of O'Connor II. Environmental Impacts (Explanations of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are required on attached sheets.) Yes Maybe No 1. Earth. Will the proposal result in: a. Unstable earth conditions or in chnnges in geologic substructures? X b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction or overcovering of the soil? X c. Change in topography or ground surface relief features? X d. The destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical features? e. Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the site? f. Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands, or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? X g. Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mudslides, ground failure, or similar hazards? x 2. Air. Will the proposal result in: a. Substantial air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? b. The creation of objectionable odors? c. Alteration of air movement, moisture, or . temperature, or any change in climate, either locally or regionally? 3. Water. Will the proposal result in: a. Changes in currents, or the course of di- rection of water movements, in either marine or fresh waters? b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage pat- terns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff? C. Alterations to the course or low of flood waters? d. Change in the amount of surface water in any water body? e. Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration of surface water quality, in- cluding but not limited to temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? f. Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground waters? g. Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or with- drawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? h. Substantial reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies? i. Exposure of people or property to water re- lated hazards such as flooding or tidal waves? 4. Plant Life. Will the proposal result in: a. Change in the diversity of species, or num- ber of any species of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass, crops, and aquatic plants)? Yes Maybe No K IVA Ki Al C 6. Noise. Will the proposal result in: Yes Maybe No b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare 7. or endangered species of plants? c. Introduction of new species of plants into an { S. area, or in a barrier to the normal replenish- ment of existing species? d. Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? _ 5. Animal Life. Will the proposal result in: Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in: a. Change in the diversity of species, or num- a. Increase in the rate of use of any natural bers of any species of animals (birds, land resources? { animals including reptiles, fish and shell- Risk of Upset. Will the proposal involve: fish, benthic organisms or insects)? X b.. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, hazardous substances (including, but not rare or endangered species of animals? _ X c. Introduction of new species of animals into radiation) in the event of an accident or an area, or result in a barrier to the migra- upset conditions? tion or movement of animals? _ X d. Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? 6. Noise. Will the proposal result in: a. Increases in existing noise levels? b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels? 7. Light and Glare. Will the proposal produce new light or glare? { S. Land Use. Will the proposal result in a sub- stantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? 9. Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in: a. Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? { 10. Risk of Upset. Will the proposal involve: a. A risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset conditions? b. Possible interference with an emergency response plan or an emergency evacuation plan? 11. Population. Will the proposal alter the location, distribution, density, or.growth rate of the human population of an area? 12. Housing. Will the proposal affect existing hous- ing, or create a demand for additional housing? 13. Transportation/Circulation. Will the proposal result in: a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement? b. Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new parking? c. Substantial impact upon existing transpor- tation ransportation systems? d. Alterations to present patterns of circula- tion or movement of people and/or goods? e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? 14. public Services. Will the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered gov- ernmental services in any of the following areas: a. Fire protection? b. Police protection? c. Schools? d. Parks or other recreational facilities? e. Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? f. Other governmental services? 15. Energy. Will the proposal result in: a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? Yes Maybe No — X X X X X X Yes Maybe No b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources or energy, or require the development, of new sources of energy? 16. Utilities. Will the proposal result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations to the following utilities: _ X 17. Human Health. Will the proposal result in: a. Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding mental health)? b. Exposure of people to potential health hazards? 18. Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in the obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public, or will the proposal result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public vied? 19. Recreation. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? 20. Cultural Resources. a. Will the proposal result in the alteration of or the destruction of a prehistoric or historic archaeological site? b. Will the proposal result in adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or historic building, structdre, or object? c. Does the proposal have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? d. Will the proposal restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? 21. Mandatory Findings of Significance. a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially .reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal comunity, re- duce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate Yes Maybe No important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? X b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short -tern, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? -(A short-term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a rela- tively brief, definitive period of time while long-term impacts will endure well into the future.) ✓ C. Does the project have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively con- siderable? (A project may impact on two or more separate resources where the impact on each resource is relatively small, but where the effect of the total of those impacts on the environment is significant.) d. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? III. Discussion of Environmental Evaluation (Narrative description of environmental impacts.) IV. Determination (To be completed by the -Lead Agency.) On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project OoaJID NOT have a significant effect on the'environment, and a NE3ATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A NE3ATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED. I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is requir . 4/17/91 Date Jg4nat4lre For Citv of Burlinaame RESOLUTION NO. 46-91 DECLARATION OF DECREASED WATER EMERGENCY AND ESTABLISHING REVISED RULES AND REGULATIONS WHEREAS, the rain and snowfall is below normal for the fifth con- secutive year in the areas supplying water to the San Francisco Water System; and WHEREAS, the San Francisco Public Utility Commission had declared an Extreme Water Shortage Emergency and has rationed water to the City of Burlingame which receives all of its water from the San Francisco system; and WHEREAS, the current Rules and Regulations were adopted to meet the increased rationing requirements of San Francisco and WHEREAS, the San Francisco Public Utility Commission has increased the amount of water allocated to the City of Burlingame because of in- creased water supply; NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved that the City Council hereby de- clares a decrease in the Water Shortage Emergency; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the revised water rationing plan de- scribed in Exhibit "A" is hereby adopted and is retroactive to April 1, 1991; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT Resolution 38-91 is hereby repealed. MW MAYOR I, JUDITH A. MALFATTI, City Clerk of the City of Burlingame, certify that the foregoing Resolution was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 6th day of May , 1991 and was adopted thereafter by the following vote: AYES: BARTON, HARRISON, LEMBI, O-MAHONY, PAGLIARO NOES: NONE /f!� ABSENT: NONE CITY CLERK EXHIBIT A WATER RATIONING PLAN RESOLUTION NO. 46-91 I. ALLOCATIONS A. Allocations of water during the water shortage emergency will be a per capita allocation for residential accounts and a percentage reduction of 1987 usage for commercial accounts and multifamily dwellings. Single Family and Duplex First Person 100 gallons/day 2nd -4th Persons 70 gallons/day for each person 5 or more persons 50 gallons/day for each person Landscape Allocation (May 1 - December 31) Lot Size Extra Allocation Less than 10,000 Sq.Ft. 50 gallons/day 10,000+ sq. ft. 150 gallons/day B. Allocations for new accounts will be based on the number of occupants of residential units and by considering similar use data for commercial/industrial accounts. C. A change in use will be reason to adjust the existing allocation. D. Limited banking is permitted. Accounts with existing unused allocation may retain up to 10,000 gallons from the 1990-91 rationing program. Beginning with meter readings on or after June 1, 1991, an additional 10,000 gallons may be banked, up to a maximum bank of 20,000 gallons. Jun 1 - Nov 30 Dec 1 - May 31 Multi -Family and Food Related 20% Reduction loo Reduction Commercial, Industry & Hotels w/food 25% " 150 If Irrigation/Parks 50% " 50% " Government, schools, hospitals, churches 25% " 25% B. Allocations for new accounts will be based on the number of occupants of residential units and by considering similar use data for commercial/industrial accounts. C. A change in use will be reason to adjust the existing allocation. D. Limited banking is permitted. Accounts with existing unused allocation may retain up to 10,000 gallons from the 1990-91 rationing program. Beginning with meter readings on or after June 1, 1991, an additional 10,000 gallons may be banked, up to a maximum bank of 20,000 gallons. E. Residents who have not previously notified the City regarding the number of residents in the dwelling unit will receive an allocation for one person until the information is received. All landscape allocations will be established at less than 10,000 square feet lot size for City residents and 10,000+ square feet for Burlingame Hills (unincorporated) area. II. WATER USE REGULATIONS AND RESTRICTIONS A. Water waste, flooding or runoff into the street or gutters is prohibited. B. Hoses cannot be used to clean hard surface areas (sidewalks, driveways, roofs, awnings, etc.) C. Hoses used for any purpose must have positive shutoff valves. D. Restaurants or hotel banquets can serve water only upon request. E. Potable water cannot be used to clean, fill or maintain levels in decorative fountains. The use of groundwater is permitted. F. Additional water allocations will not be allowed for new landscaping or expansion of existing landscaping. Low water use landscaping designs and irrigation systems must be employed for new or renovated landscaping. G. Water service connections for new construction will only be granted if water -saving fixtures or devices are incorporated into the plumbing system. H. Use of potable water for consolidation of backfill, dust control or other non-essential construction purposes is prohibited. The use of groundwater and/or reclaimed water is permitted when approved by the Department of Health. I. Verified water waste as determined by the City will serve as prima facie evidence that the allocation assigned to the water account is excessive. The allocation will then be subject to review and possible reduction, including termination of service. J. Water used for all cooling purposes must be K. The use of groundwater and/or reclaimed water encouraged when approved by the Department o the following uses: 1. Irrigation of turf areas. 2. Irrigation of median strips. 3. Street or parking lot sweepers/washers. L. Use of reduced water flow equipment for the fleet or dealer vehicles is strongly Positive shutoff valves must be used. M. Broken or defective plumbing, sprinklers, systems which permit the escape or leakage be immediately repaired. recycled. is strongly f Health for washing of encouraged. or irrigation of water must III. WATER USE IN EXCESS OF ALLOCATION A. Penalties. 1) Excess water consumption is all billing units over allocation. 2) Charges for excess water use shall be two times the regular unit charge for each unit in excess of allocation up to 110% of allocation. The charge for excess water use shall be three times the regular unit charge for each unit over 110% of allocation up to 120% of allocation. The charge for excess water use shall be five times the regular unit charge for each unit over 120% of allocation. 3) No excess use charge shall be applied to any customer using less than 7,500 gallons per month. B. Flow Restricting Devices. The City Manager may, direct the installation of a flow - restricting device under the following conditions: 1) The customer has been mailed or personally served at least one written warning of being fifty percent (50%) or more over allocation for a billing period or has had at least two (2) written warnings of violations of the use restrictions. 2) The restricting device shall be removed only after a minimum 3 -day period has elapsed and only upon payment of the appropriate installation and removal charges. 3) After one removal of a restricting device, if the customer is again fifty percent (50%) or more over allocation for a billing period or receives another violation notice of the use restrictions, the City may install a flow -restricting device which shall remain in place until this water rationing plan shall terminate and the appropriate charge for removal is paid. 4) No restrictor shall be placed on a customer using less than 7,500 gallons per month. 5) Restriction devices may be installed or water service discontinued if a customer fails to repair broken or defective plumbing within five (5) days after receipt of notice of the need for repairs. C. Discontinuance of Water Service. The City Manager may direct that water service be discontinued for repeated violations of water use restrictions under the following circumstances: 1) Notice of intention to terminate service shall be delivered by certified mail or personal service. It shall state that a hearing will be held before the City Manager and shall direct the customer to show cause why his service should not be terminated. The notice shall be served at least five (5) days before said hearing. 2) At the hearing the City Manager shall determine whether or not the customer's service shall be restricted, terminated or such other remedy as may be appropriate. His decision may be appealed to the City Council which may affirm, reverse or modify his decision. D. Charges for installation and removal of flow -restricting devices are as follows: Meter Size Installation Cost Removal Cost 5/8" to 1" $ 50.00 $25.00 1-1/2" to 2" 100.00 50.00 3" and larger Actual Cost Actual Cost First installation to be a minimum of three days; second and last installation ten days minimum. Actual cost shall include all material, labor, equipment and overhead charges. The charge for discontinuance of water services shall be twenty-five dollars ($25.00) and shall be paid prior to reactivating the service. IV. EXCEPTIONS A. When considering exceptions for allocations based on 1987 usage, the Director of Finance may use the Calendar Year 1986 if the water use records show that the customer clearly conserved water in 1987 compared to 1986. B. If a customer does not have a 1987 record, then the amount of the allocation shall be established by considering similar uses and/or standard usage data for commercial usage, and a per capita standard shall be used for residential accounts. C. For special circumstances, the Director of Finance may use comparable usage data from water records or publications. V. IMPLEMENTATION A. This plan shall become effective upon adoption by the City Council except as follows: 1. Allocations shall be effective retroactively to April 1, 1991. 2. Excess use charges shall be effective on bills issued on and after June 1, 1991.