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.