Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutReso - CC - 025-1990RESOLUTION NO. 25-90 RESOLUTION APPROVING NEGATIVE DECLARATION - ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING STANDARDS AND PROCEDURES FOR STRUCTURES AND IMPROVEMENTS IN VICINITY OF CREEKS AND FOR SUBDIVISION OF PARCELS CONTAINING CREEKS RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Burlingame, California that: WHEREAS, a Negative Declaration has been proposed regarding proposed Ordinance No. 1407 described in the title hereof, 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, the documents submitted and reviewed, and comments received and addressed by the Planning Commission and this Council, it is hereby found that there is no substantial evidence that the project set forth above will have a significant effect on the environment, and Negative Declaration ND -430P 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 21st day of February . 1990, and adopted thereafter by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: BARTON, HARRISON, LEMBI, O'MAHONY, PAGLIARO NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: NO City Clerk EXHIBIT C - INITIAL STUDY �-CITY 6URllNGAME TO: STATE CLEARINGHOUSE 1400 - 10th Street ......•' Sacramento, CA. 95814 CREEK AREAS OF CITY OF BURLINGAME Project Address or Location File No. -ND -430P Project Title: Ordinance Establishing Standards and Procedures for Structures and Type of Permit: Improvements in Vicinity of Creeks and for Subdivision of Parcels Containing Creeks. Amendment to Municipal Code and Subdivision Regulations Legal Description: Creeks as described in 1989 Drainage Study by Wilsey & Ham Property Owner: Zone: Applicant: Name: City of Burli Address: Address: 501 Primrose Road Burlingame, CA 94010 Contact Person: Contact Person: Meq Monroe Area Code: Phone: Area Code: 415 Phone: 342-8625 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Ordinance prohibiting development within an over 100 year flood flow elevation of creeks located in the City of Burlingame as defined by the 1989 Drainage Study by Wilsey & Ham and shown on the summary maps attached. Ordinance would also require setbacks from 100 ' year flood flow elevation of 15 feet where generalized top of bank is 15 feet or less above 100 year flood flow elevation and 20 feet or five feet landward of the top of bank whichever is greater in areas where generalized top of bank is 20 feet or more above 100 year flood flow elevation. The ordinance would also amend the city's subdivision, and tentative and final map regulations in order to require all lots with creeks or creek setbacks on them to have 60 percent of the lot area outside of the creek and/or creek setback area and contiguous to a public street. - The purpose of the study and ordinance based on it is to preserve the current creek capacity and flow, provide opportunity to correct past improvements which now restrict capacity and/or flow and conserve the existing bank stabilizing vegetation by keeping new construction from occurring over the creek or too close to its banks. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING: The 1989 Drainage Study identified and mapped all the creeks within the City of Burlingame and serves as the basis for the ordinance. The study provides a generalized creek profile for each city block defined as the area between the points where streets intersect each creek. However, the primary focus of the study was hydrologic. The capacity of the creek for each block was evaluated including structures or other impediments to creek capacity and/or flow. Burlingame is crossed by seven creeks, E1 Portal, Mills Creek, Easton Creek, Sanchez Creek, Terrace Creek, Ralston Creek, Burlingame Creek, which carry water from the steeper upland area across the flatlands to San Francisco Bay. The only source of water in these creeks is runoff from storm activity so the flows are highly seasonal. The flood potential occurs during the winter wet weather season. The last major flood was in 1982 when the various creeks overflowed at a number of locations and the city and its residents became increasingly aware of the runoff effects of division of larger lots next to creeks and the expansion of development on existing lots which was causing the removal of stabilizing creek bank vegetation and lot coverage resulting in an increasing number of downstream flow and capacity problems. -2 - Generally speaking these creeks traverse developed areas. Creekside vegetation is exotic and year round creek flows too low to support any kind of fishery. Below the headwaters of the north and south branch of Mills Creek, Easton Creek and Ralston Creek almost all the creek channels have experienced some kind of improvement, from being placed in a culvert to construction of low structures to protect banks from eroding. Many of these partial improvements have not been engineered. ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF PROJECT: (Explanations of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are provided at the conclusion of this section.) Yes Maybe No 1. EARTH. Will the proposal result in: a. Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic substructures? b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction or overcovering of the soil? 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 inwind 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? g. Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, � mudslides, ground failure, or similar — _ hazards? 2. AIR. Will the proposal result in: a. Substantial air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? x — b. The creation of objectionable odors? _Y c. Alteration of air movement, moisture or temperature, or any change in climate, X either locally or regionally? —_ - 3. WATER. Will the proposal result in: a. Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements, in either X marine or fresh waters? — b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns or the rate and amount of surface �( water runoff? — _ 4 5. R 7 L•' -3- Yes Maybe No c. Alterations to the course or flow 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, including but not limited to temperature, 1— 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 withdrawals, or through interception — of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? h. Substantial reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public X water supplies? — i. Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding or tidal waves? —_(X PLANT LIFE. Will the proposal result in: a. Change in the diversity of species, or number of any species of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass, crops, and aquatic plants)? b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of plants? — c. Introduction of new species of plants into an area, or in a barrier to the X_ normal replenishment of existing species? — d. Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? ANIMAL LIFE. Will the proposal result in: a. Change. in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of animals (birds, Tand animals including reptiles, fish and — shellfish, benthic organisms or insects)? b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, =- rare or endangered species of animals? c. Introduction of new species of animals into an area, or result in a barrier to K the migration or movement of animals? — d. Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? —�— NOISE. Will the proposal result in: a. Increases in existing noise levels? _X b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels? X_. LIGHT AND GLARE. Will the proposal produce new light or glare? LAND USE. Will the proposal result in a substantial alteration of the present or planned use of an area? —' -4 - Yes Maybe No 9. - NATURAL RESOURCES. Will the proposal result in: a. Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? — b. Substantial depletion of any nonrenewable natural resource? --X- 10. RISK OF UPSET. Does the proposal involve a risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals or X radiation) in the event of an accident or upset conditions? 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 housing, 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 transportation systems? —A d. Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people X 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 governmental services in any of the following areas: a. Fire protection? b. Police protection? c. Schools? X d. Parks or other recreational facilities? 21 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? —X b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of 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 fallowing utilities: a. Power or natural gas? _� -5 - Yes Maybe No b. Communications systems? c. Water? X d. Sewer or septic tanks? cL e. Storm water drainage? _ X f. Solid waste and disposal? 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? _L 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 X site open to public view? — 19. RECREATION. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of y existing recreational opportunities? - 20. ARCHEOLOGICAL/HISTORICAL. Will the proposal result in an alteration of a significant archeological or historical site, structure, �C object or building? _ 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 wild- life population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples _ CL of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? (A short-term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively 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 considerable? (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? — - RESPONSES TO IDENTIFIED EVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS: The purpose of an environmental document is to identify the known or possible negative effects of a proposed project on the existing environmental condition. The purpose of the proposed ordinance amendment is to preserve and protect existing creek capacity, flow levels and bank stabilizing vegetation, and, where possible when presently privately owned obstructions are in need of replacement, requiring their design to include maintenance of currently needed creek capacity and flows. Since the purpose is one of preservation and improvement of capacities and flows and since these creeks generally traverse areas which have been fully developed for 30 to 80 years, the regulations are not expected to have a negative effect on the environment. Future site specific construction projects which encroach on the 100 year flood flow elevation or on the setback area or represent replacements of existing structures in the regulated area will require a variance in order to proceed and Will be evaluated at that time on the individual environmental impacts. Based on the above there are no negative effects identified to be caused by the project for earth, air, water, plant life, animal life, noise, light and glare, land use, natural resources, risk of upset, population, housing, transportation/circulation, public services, energy, utilities, human health, aesthetics, recreation, archeological/ historical, and mandatory findings of significance since the ordinance will not promote any change to the existing creeks and their environment and in fact will protect these areas from further development. -7 - DETERMINATION: On the basis of this initial evaluation: ( ?�) I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE 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 of the mitigation measures which have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED. ( ) I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. Date : nL1 A,5) 22. � lf(l7 Signature) For CITY OF BURLINGAME