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