The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About145 Crescent Avenue - Environmental DocumentCounty of San Mateo Assessor-County Clerk-Recorder Mark Church 555 C�unty Center Redwood City� CA, 94063 Finalization 2013053640 6/27/1311:33 am 021 36 Item Title ------------------------------ 1 EIRA EIR Administrative Fee Document ID Amount ------------------------------ DOC# 2013-000138 50.00 Time Recorded 11:33 am ------------------------------ Total 50.00 Payment Type Amount ------------------------------ Check tendered 50.00 # 2700 Amount Due 0.00 THANK YOU PLEASE RETAIN THIS RECEIPT FOR YOUR RECORDS NOTICE OF DETERMINATION T0: ❑ Office of Planning and Research FROM: CITY OF BURLINGAME P.O Box 3044 Community Development Dept. Sacramento, California 95812-30 ENDORSED Planning Division �I�.�D INTHEOFFICEOFT}� 501 Primrose Road. CC�L"a ^! CLERK RECORDER�?Fs � �ar�ocouN�,cau� gurlingame, CA 94010 � County Clerk j�� 2°7 2013 County of San Mateo 401 County Center, Sixth Floor N9��n�y Clerk Redwood City, California 940�i' DEPJTY CLEEZK SUB7ECT: Filing of Notice of Determination in compliance with Section 21152 of the Public Resources Code. ND-562-P — 145 Crescent Avenue — New Singte Family Dwelling and Detached Garage Project Title William Meeker (650) 558-7250 State Clearinghouse Number Contact Person Area Code/Telephone (Ifsubmitted to Clearinghouse) 145 Crescent Avenue, Citv of Burlinaame, San Mateo County Project Location (include County) Project Description: The proposal is to demolish an existing single-story house over a raised basement and detached garage to build a new, two-story single family dwelling and a detached two-car garage. The proposed house and detached garage will have a total floor area of 3,839 SF (0.52 FAR) where 3,884 SF (0.52 FAR) is the maximum allowed. There would be two covered parking spaces in the detached garage and one uncovered parking space provided on-site for the proposed five bedroom house. The applicant has applied for Design Review for a new, two-story single family dwelling and detached garage. This project is subject to CEQA because on September 25, 2009, the City of Burlingame Planning Division received documentation from a Burlingame citizen that indicated that the entire subdivision within which this property is located (Burlingame Heights) may have historical characteristics that would indicate that properties within this area could be potentially eligible for listing on the National or California Register of Historical Places. An historic survey has been completed for the existing house on the property, and it has been determined that although the building retains historic integrity, it is not eligible for individual listing on the California Register of Historical Resources. Also, because the City of Burlingame does not maintain a local historic register, the building was not evaluated for potential eligibility as a local historic resource. This is to advise that the City of Burlingame, the Lead Agency, has approved the above-described project on September 12� 2012 and has made the following determinations regarding the above described project: 1. The project [Owill � will not] have a significant effect on the environment. 2. ❑ An Environmental Impact Report was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. � A Negative Declaration was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. The EIR or Negative Declaration and record of project approval may be examined at: Citv of Burlin4ame, Community Development Department, Planning Division, 501 Primrose Roadt Burlingame CA 94010. 3. Mitigation measures [�were � were not] made a condition of approval of the project. 4. A statement of Overriding Considerations [❑was �was not] adopted for this project. 5. Findings (� were ❑ were not) made pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. This is to certify that the final EIR or Negative Declaration with comments and responses and record of project approval is available to the General Public at: City of Burlingame, Community Development Department Planning Division, 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, CA 94010. �/��- m�k+le�r, Community Development Director � Date N�ural Resources Agency State of Califomia CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME , No Effect Determination Request � �.��,' � ;� This form may be used to request a"No Effect" DeteRninatio� (NED} from the Califomia Department of F�h and Game (Department) pursuant to Title 14 Section 753.5(c}(1)(A) of the Califomia Code of Regulations (CCR). When using this form, please submit it along with aerial photographs (if available) or topographic and/or planimetric maps and an electronic or paper copy of the environmental document and attachments to the DepartmenYs Regional Office which serves your projecYs location. A list of contacts for submittat of the NED request forms can be found at the following website: www.dfa.ca.aov/habconlCEQA. The use of this forrn is optional. Any written request containing the information specified in 14 CCR § 753.5(c)(1)(A) may be used to request a NEO. Applicant Name and Address: Date Submi ed: L�� F.3�ol.� � /3 � 2 �uO�( j,�(� Phone Number: ��iA-� �{— 4��/D — �33 — l �'� Email: ��/�(,(�'��,�( j� � ��(,�, Fax Number: -- Contact Person and Address: CEQA Lead Agency: ��" �� # i� 3�� 2 " � � �'fl/� Phone Number: ',! � � r ��[t�J. � - D �- Email: �� .�¢�,�p�,n�5/�/,�j�j Fax Number: �� 3 �'� 2Z Project Name: /� ��,��;,�� . �. _ ! SCH Number andlor Local Agency ID number: CEQA Document Type: Negative DeclaraUon C�D -� �pZ�P Project Location: (InGude street address, city, county, latllong, range/township/section, or otherdescription that clearly indicetes the IocaUon of the project site.) f�/� y A,�' �u�� _// �{�.,�� / L�� ,/J,�� `p' l f.� y� Nc��v/ 7 /Y� G4U�'Y� G�-L!�/1svi� Use "Comment" section on next a e if more room is needed. oorowl Brief Project Description: (Include details on Ihe type of project; e.g_ new construdion [with square footageJ, demolition of exfsting buildings, adaptive reuse of existing buildings, zaning emendments, general plan amendments, conditional use tor sale of alcoholic beverages, etc.) �,,,/ �� _y� l'l`J � �Dl.i�/�'!,V �.E,Is.Y�6 �liij/ ��..� -7 f,� ��o� � o ��•�� 5f�i� �� 7� •� r1�l� �t�t�-� 1�� 7� �idr.1� �k ��'�,/, Z-Sj�'��-Y S�nlG-�.'� f�//�-t� �•'�tE �t//��~�� 2 ��1G Gq�� 2o,c�� % �� -� ��r��r��" �� Us��o�m' e Y' se�o ��nex�Za �i�ore'room i�ee� �°° T° P2 �� .IUStIfICAtl011 Of NO Eff@Ct DBte�lTllnBtlOt1 [Explain how the proposed project has no effect on fish and wildlife onsistent with 14 CCR § 753.5(d)1:��1 �"'l �y GO�t,%�S /�✓ s{7✓ DG�d �✓'�?1��'�2�2� .� �s ��✓b q-kt �l�'l�/� 5fi��'�' � � f�� C-s .✓07" ��7' �� 1��-b G�� A-�� 1 ��5, Gt2'�� 'l�. Use "Comment" section on next a e if more room is needed. ��O'�� Environmental Review and Permitting 1418 Ninth SVeet, Suite 12� Sacramento, Califomia 95814 FG CEQA 8b6 (Rev 12/Q4/10) STATE OF CALIFORNIA - THE NATURAL RESOURCES AGENCY EDMUND G. BROWN JR., Governor DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE Bay Delta Region �"� 7329 Silverado Trail ' Napa, Califomia 94558 (707) 944-5500 CEQA Filing Fee No Effect Determination Form Date Submitted: September 13, 2012 Applicant Name: Greg Gambrioli Applicant Address: Post Office Box 1396, Burlingame, CA 94010 Project Name: 145 Crescent Avenue CEQA Lead Agency: City of Burlingame CEQA Document Type: Negative Declaration SCH Number and/or local agency ID Number: 800-3755-9 Project Location: 145 Crescent Avenue, City of Burlingame, San Mateo County Brief Project Description: The proposal is to demolish an existing single-story house over a raised basement and detached garage to build a new two-story single-family home with detached, two-stall, garage zoned R-1. The proposed structure would cover 2,365 square feet of the 7,450-square-foot lot. Describe clearly why the project has no effect on fish and wildlife: This lot is loca�ed in an old neighborhood and is replacing an existing structure. Also, the home does not abut any wildlife areas, rivers, creeks, etc. Determination: Based on a review of the Project as proposed, the California Department of Fish and Wildlife has determined that for purposes of the assessment of CEQA filing fees [F&G Code 711.4(c)] the project has no potential effect on fish, wildlife and habitat and the project as described does not require payment of a CEQA filing fee. This determination does not in any way imply that the project is exempt from CEQA and does not determine the significance of any potential project effects evaluated pursuant to CEQA. Please retain this original determination for your records; you are required to file a copy of this determination with the County Glerk after your project is approved and at the time of filing of the CEQA lead agency's Notice of Determination (NOD). If you do not file a copy of this determination with the County Clerk at the time of filing of the NOD, the appropriate CEQA filing fee will be due and payable. Without a valid No Effect Determination Form or proof of fee payment, the project will not be operative, vested, or final, and any local permits issued for the project will be invalid, pursuant to Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(c)(3). CDFW Approval By: ��G�%�'� "—" Date: Scott Wilson Acting Regional Manager Bay Delta Region June 12, 2013 ��'�` ��e a � E s:� Y. 4 � � ' �� 11:�r± � � ��;;`:, �:I sV G� L..+ a�i�i!'vc�,=�`,I�i� i;i.`,G-P!J�:�•��J1:�lG Di�l.. . CITY OF BURLINGAME COMMUNITYDEVELOPMENTDEPARTMENT 6V R LI NGAME Planning Division City Hall — 501 Primrose Road � PH: (650) 558-725c,� Burlingame, California 9401�-3997 FAX: (650) 696-37�X � C E i V E D NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATIOD�UC� � 1 2OjZ To: Interested Individuals From: Citv of Burlinqame ��u� � v��'�� County Clerk of San Mateo Communitv Development Department Planninq Division 501 Primrose Road Burlingame, CA 94010 Subject: Notice of Intent to Adopt a Negative Declaration (ND-562-P) Project Title: 145 Crescent Avenue, New Single Family Dwelling and Detached Garage to replace existing single family dwelling and detached garage on the site. Project Location: 145 Crescent Avenue, Burlingame, CA 94010 Project Description: The proposal is to demolish an existing single-story house over a raised basement and detached garage to build a new, two-story single family dwelling and a detached two-car garage at 145 Crescent Avenue, zoned R-1. The proposed structures would cover 31.7% (2,365 SF) of the 7,450 SF lot, where 40% (2,980 SF) is the maximum lot coverage allowed. The proposed house and detached garage would have a total floor area of 3,839 SF (0.52 FAR) where 3,884 SF (0.52 FAR) is the maximum allowed. There would be two covered parking spaces in the detached garage and one uncovered parking space provided on-site for the proposed five bedroom house. The applicant has applied for Design Review, for a new, two-story single family dwelling and detached garage. This project is subject to CEQA because on September 25, 2009, the City of Burlingame Planning Division received documentation from a Burlingame citizen that indicated that the entire subdivision within which this property is located (Burlingame Park No. 2) may have historical characteristics that would indicate that properties within this area could be potentially eligible for listing on the National or California Register of Historical Places. An historic sunrey has been completed for the existing house on the property, and it has been determined that the building retains sufficient historic integrity to be considered a contributing resource to a potential historic district, but it is not eligible for individual listing on the California Register of Historical Resources. Also, because the City of Burlingame does not maintain a local historic register, the building was not evaluated for potential eligibility as a local historic resource. In accordance with Section 15072(a) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, notice is hereby given of the City's intent to adopt a Negative Declaration for the project listed above. A negative declaration is prepared for a project when the initial study has identified no potentially significant effect on the environment, and there is no substantial evidence in the light of the whole record before the public agency that the project may have a significant effect on the environment. The City of Burlingame has completed a review of the proposed project, and on the basis of an Initial Study, finds that the project will not have a significant effect upon the environment. The City has prepared a Negative Declaration and Initial Study that are available for public review at City Hall, 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, California, 94010. As mandated by State Law, the minimum comment period for this document is 20 (twenty) days and begins on August 1, 2012. Comments may be submitted during the review period and up to the tentatively scheduled public hearing on Auqust 27, 2012. Persons having comments concerning this project, including objections to the basis of determination set forth in the Initial Study/Negative Declaration, are invited to furnish their comments summarizing the specific and factual basis for their comments, in writing to: City of Burlingame Community Development Department — Planning Division. Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21177, any legal challenge to the adoption of the proposed Initial Study/Negative Declaration will be limited to those issues presented to the City during the public comment period described above. PUBLIC HEARING: The Planning Commission hearing to review the proposed Design Review for a new, two- story single family dwelling and detached garage at 145 Crescent Avenue, and the Negative Declaration and Initial Study for this project has been tentatively scheduled for Auqust 27, 2012 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, California. Posted: Aupust 1, 2012 INITIAL STUDY SUMMARY - ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2 3. G� 5 � 7 Project Title: Lead Agency Name and Address: Contact Person and Phone Number: Project Location: Project Sponsor's Name and Address: General Plan Designation: Zoning: R-1 145 Crescent Avenue, New Single Family Dwelling to replace existing single family dwelling on the site. City of Burlingame, Planning Division 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, CA 94010 William Meeker, Community Development Director (650) 558-7250 145 Crescent Avenue Burlingame, California 94010 Greg Gambrioli 2415 Summit Drive Hillsborough, CA 94010 Low-Density Residential APN: 028-293-030 8. Description of the Project: The proposal is to demolish an existing single-story house over a raised basement and detached garage to build a new, finro-story single family dwelling and a detached two-car garage at 145 Crescent Avenue, zoned R-1. The proposed structures would cover 31.7% (2,365 SF) of the 7,450 SF lot, where 40% (2,980 SF) is the maximum lot coverage allowed. The proposed house and detached garage would have a total floor area of 3,839 SF (0.52 FAR) where 3,884 SF (0.52 FAR) is the maximum allowed. There would be twa covered parking spaces in the detached garage and one uncovered parking space provided on-site for the proposed five bedroom house. The applicant has applied for Design Review, for a new, two-story single family dwelling and detached garage. This project is subject to CEQA because on September 25, 2009, the City of Burlingame Planning Division received documentation from a Burlingame citizen that indicated that the entire subdivision within which this property is located (Burlingame Park No. Z) may have historical characteristics that would indicate that properties within this area could be potentially eligible for listing on the National or California Register of Historical Places. An historic survey has been completed for the existing house on the property, and it has been determined that the building retains sufficient historic integrity to be considered a contributing resource to a potential historic district, but it is not eligible for individual listing on the California Register of Historical Resources. Also, because the City of Burlingame does not maintain a local historic register, the building was not evaluated for potential eligibility as a local historic resource. 9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: The property is located in the Burlingame Park No. 2 Subdivision, in the southern portion of Burlingame west of EI Camino Real. The parcel is located on the west side of Crescent Avenue between Howard and Barroilhet Avenues. Pershing Park is located across the street. The original house on the parcel (built in 1920) and the garage remain on the properly today. All of the properties in this subdivision, as well as neighboring subdivisions were included in the original official incorporation of Burlingame in 1908. This area is made up entirely of single family residential properties. The Town of Hillsborough lies four blocks to the west of the subject property; the City of San Mateo lies one block to the south of the subject property; and the Downtown Burlingame Commercial Area lies one block to the east of the subject property. 10. Other public agencies whose approval is required: There are no permits required from other public agencies. However, San Mateo County is a responsible agency. A building permit is required from the Burlingame Community Development Department, Building Division. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a"Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. Land Use and Planning Biological Resources Aesthetics Population and Housing Mineral Resources X Cultural Resources Geology and Soils Hazards & Hazardous Recreation Materials Hydrology & Water Noise Agricultural Resources Quality Air Quality Public Services Mandatory Findings of Significance Transportation/TrafFic Utilities and Service Systems DETERMINATION: (To be completed by the Lead Agency). On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE X 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 revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that the proposed project MAY have a" potentially significant impact" or" potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect (1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and (2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (1) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, and (2) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. ��'� ; ', . � � William eeker, Community Development Director Dat Issues and Supporting Information Sources Sources Potentially Potentialiy Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated 1. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? 1,2 X b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or 1,2 X regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan 1,2 X or natural community conservation plan? 2. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, 1,3 X either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, 3 X necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, 3 X necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? 3. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial 5,6,7 X adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated 5,6,7 X on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? 5,6,7 X iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including 5,6,7 X liquefaction? iv) Landslides? 6 X b) Result in substantial soil erosion or loss of topsoil? 5 X c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, 5,6 7 X or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18- 5,6 X 1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the 5 X use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? -3- issues and Supporting Information Sources Sources Potentially Potentially �ess Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated 4. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste 1,15 X discharge requirements? b) Substantially deplete groundwafer supplies or 1 X intertere substantially with groundwater recharge such that tl�ere would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the 1,15 X site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off- site? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the 1,15, X site or area, including through the alteration of the 19 course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? e) Create or contribute runoff water which would 1,15, X exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm 19 water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? fl Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? 1,4,15, X 19 g) Place housing within a 100-year f�ood hazard area as 8 X mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures 8 X which would impede or redirect flood flows? i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of 1,8,14 X loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? 1,6 X 5. AIR QUALITY. Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the 1,9 X applicable air quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an 1,9 X existing or projected air quality violation? c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of 1,9 X any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? -4- issues and Supporting Information Sources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact issues Unless Impact Mitigation incorporated d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant 1,9 X concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial 1,9 X number of people? 6. TRANSPORTATIONITRAFFIC. Would the project: a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substar�tial in 1,2,14 X relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of 1,2,14 X service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c) Result in a change in air tra�c patterns, including 1,13 X either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design 14, 15 X feature (e.g. sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? 14,16, X 18 fl Result in inadequate parking capacity? 2,14 X g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs 1 X supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? 7. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Vl/ould the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or 1,11 X through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial or adverse effect on any riparian 1,11 X habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, and regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally 1,11 X protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) InterFere substantially with the movement of any 1,11 X native or resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? -5- Issues and Supporting Information Sources Sources Potentially Potentially �ess Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Issues Unless impact Mitigation Incorporated e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances 1,17 X protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? fl Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat 1,11 X Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional; or state habitat conservation plan? 8. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral 1 X resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important 1 X mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? 9. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the 1,12 X environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the 1,2,12 X environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or 1,12 X acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of 12 X hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan 1, 12, X or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within 13 two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? fl For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, 1 X would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with 1,10 X an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of 1,18 X loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? � Issues and Supporting Information Sources Sources Potentialiy Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated 10. NOISE. Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels 1,2 X in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive 1,2 X groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise 1 X fevels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in 1,2 X ambient noise fevels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan 1,2 X or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within finro miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? fl For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, 1 X would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? 11. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered government facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other pertormance objectives for any of the public services: a) Fire protection? �, � g X b) Police protection? 1 X c) Schools? 1 X d) Parks? 1 X e) Other public facilities? 1 X 12. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the 1,15, X applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? 19 b) Require or result in the construction of new water or 1,15, X wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of 19 existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new storm 1,15, X water drainage facilities or expansion of existing 19 facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the 1,15, X project from existing entitlements and resources, or 19 are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater 1,15, X treatment provider which serves or may senre the 19 project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? -7- Issues and Supporting Information Sources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated fl Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted 1,15 X capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and 1,15 X regulations related to solid waste? 13. AESTHETICS. Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? 1,2,14 X b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, 1,14 X but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or 1,2, X quality of the site and its surroundings? 14,20 d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare 1,14 X which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? 14. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Create a substantial adverse change in the 1,14, X significance of a historical resource as defined in 20 ' 15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the 1,14, X significance of an archaeological resource pursuant 20 to ' 15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological 1,14 X resource or site or unique geological feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred 1,14 X outside of formal cemeteries? 15. RECREATION. a) Would the project increase the use of existing 1,4 X neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Does the project include recreational facilities or 1,4 X require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? 16. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES. In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland or 1 X Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a 1 X Williamson Act contract? � Issues and Supporting Information Sources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated c) Involve other changes in the existing environment 1 X which, due to their location or nature, couid result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? 17. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the 1,20 X 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 community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually 1 X limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? c) Does the project have environmental effects which will 1 X cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? � Initial Study Summary 18. SOURCE REFERENCES 145 Crescent Avenue 1 The City of Burlingame Genera/ Plan, Burlingame, California, 2002, 1985 and 1984 amendments. 2 City of Burlingame, Municipal Code, Title 25 - Zoning, Burlingame, California, 2011 edition. 3 City of Burlingame City Council, 2009-2014 Housing Element, City of Burlingame, Burlingame, California. 4 2010 Census 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey, San Francisco Bay Region, Sheet 3, 1:125,000, 1981. E. Brabb, E. Pampeyan, and M. Bonilla, Landslide Susceptibility in San Mateo County, San Mateo County, California, 1972. Perkins, Jeanne, Maps Showing Cumulative Damage Potential from Earfhquake Ground Shaking, U.S.G.S. Map MF, San Mateo County: California, 1987. Map ofApproximafe Locations of 100-yearFlood Areas, from the National Flood Insurance Program Flood Insurance Maps, September 16, 1981 BAAQMD CEQA GUIDELINES, Assessing the Air Quality Impacts of Projects and Plans, May, 2011 San Mateo County Congestion Management Program, 2011 Map of Areas of Special8iological Importance, San Francisco and San Mateo Couniies, California, State Department of Fish and Game State of California Hazardous Waste and Substances Sites List, April 1998 San Mateo County Comprehensive Airport Land Use Program, San Francisco International Airport, February, 2012 Project plans date stamped July 3, 2012 City of Burlingame, Engineering Memo dated June 14, 2012 City of Burlingame, Building Department Memo dated June 8, 2012 City of Burlingame, Parks Supervisor Memo dated June 4, 2012 City of Burlingame, Fire Department Memo dated June 5, 2012 City of Burlingame, NPDES Memo dated June 4, 2012 145 Crescent Avenue Historic Resource Analysis, prepared by Page & Turnbull, Inc., March 21, 2012 -10- Initial Study Summary 145 Crescent Avenue Land use and Planning Summary: No Impact. The subject property is currently occupied by a single-story house over a raised basement and detached garage. The Zoning Code requires a minimum lot size of 5,000 SF fior lots in this area, based on City of Burlingame Ordinance No. 712, and this lot is 7,450 square feet in area. The Zoning Code allows one residential unit per lot in this area. The project is subject to single famify residential Design Review. The general plan would allow a density of 8 units to the acres and the application is for one replacement unit on 0.2 acres, a density of 5 units per acre. Therefore, this proposal is consistent with the General Plan and zoning requirements. The subject property is within the Burlingame Park Subdivision No. 2, which abuts the Town of Hillsborough to the west and the City of San Mateo to the soutf�, and which was included in the original official incorporation of Burlingame in 1908. The surrounding properties are developed with single family residences, all of which a�e within the City of Burlingame city limits. The proposed residence conforms to all measurable requirements of the zoning code. The Planning Commission will review the project and determine compliance with Design Review criteria. Population and Housing Summary: No Impact. This site and the surrounding area are planned for low- density residential uses. The proposed redevelopment of an existing single family dwelling to replace an existing residence on the site conforms to the City of Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Code regulations and does not represent any alteration to the planned land use in the area. The project is consistent with the City's Housing Element. The proposed project will not create any more housing because it is replacing an existing single family dwelling on the same parcel. Geologic Summary: No Impacf. The site is flat and located in a semi-urban setting which has been developed with single family residential dwellings for the last 100 years, with most of the lots in vicinity over 6,000 SF in area. There will be less seismic exposure to people and equipment than at present, since the new single family residence will comply with current California Building Code seismic standards. The site is approximately two miles from the San Andreas Fault. The project will be required to meet all the requirements, including seismic standards, of the California Building and Fire Codes, 2010 Edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame, for structural stability. Water Summary: No Impact. This is a redevelopment project to replace an existing residence on a currently occupied parcel. The subject property is not adjacent to a waterway. The project site is located in Flood Zone B, which is outside the 100-year flood zone. The site ties into an existing 12-inch water line along Crescent Avenue and storm water collection distribution lines which have adequate capacity to serve the existing building. All of the surface water will be required to drain to the street where it will flow to a catch basin on Howard Avenue. There will be an insignificant increase to the amount of impervious surface area due to the increase in the footprint of the proposed structures and driveway width. This added impervious surFace will cause a slight increase in storm water runoff, but is considered insignificant given the size of the lot and the remaining pervious areas. Since the site is less than 5 acres, the project is not subject to the state-mandated water conservation program; although water conservation measures as required by the City will be met. Air Quality Summary: No Impact. The proposed application is for a new single family dwelling to replace an existing residence on an existing developed site. While this project will accommodate a larger dwelling unit for habitation, the change in emissions is insignificant. The subject property is zoned for low-density residential development and with proper adherence to regional air quality requirements during construction; the proposed project will not create any deterioration in the air quality or climate, locally or regionally. Demolition or removal of the existing structures and any grading or earth moving on the site shall be required to comply with all the regulations of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District. -11- Initial Sfudy Summary 145 Crescent Avenue Transportation/Circulation Summary: No Impact. The site is on Crescent Avenue, a local street that provides access to Barroilhet Avenue, which connects to EI Camino Real, a regional arterial. This project will not create an increase in the traffic generation in the area. All arterial, collector, and local roadway syst�ms in the City have the capacity to accommodate any temporary incremental increase to traffic or trip generation produced by the temporary construction activities. The proposed single-family dv►eelling meets the on-site parking requirement established in the zonin� code. Biological Resources Summary: No Impact. The site currently contains an existing single family residence and detached garage. There are no existing protected size landscape trees on the property. In accordance with the City's Reforestation Ordinance, each lot developed with a single-family residence is required to provide a minimum of one, 24-inch box-size minimum, non-fruit tree, for every 1,000 SF of living space. The proposed landscape plan for the project complies with the reforestation requirements. The landscape plan indicates that that a total of thirteen (13) 24" box size trees will be planted throughout where a minimum of 4, 24-inch box size trees are required. Energy and Mineral Resources Summary: No Impact. All gas and eleetric services are in place for service to the homes in this area, with capacity to handle the redevelopment of an existing single-family residence proposed with the current application. It is likely that there will be no incremental increase to the use of energy because the new residence will comply with current Title 24 requirements, which requires energy efficient construction. Hazards Summary: No Impact This project has been designed to comply with all applicable zoning regulations. By its residential nature, this project will not be releasing any hazardous materials into the environment and will not interFere with any emergency response or evacuation plans the City of Burlingame may need to implement. There are no known health hazards on the site. Compliance with the California Building and Fire Code requirements as amended by the City of Burlingame will ensure that people in the new structure are not exposed to health hazards or potential health hazards. NPDES Best Management Practices are required to ensure that runoff from the site does not contribute to pollution of adjacent waterways. Noise Summary: No /mpact. The site has been occupied by a single famify dwelling for many years. With the development of a new single family dwelling there will be no increase to the noise in the area. The noise in the area will be general residential noise such as vehicles coming to and from the house, sounds from the residents when using the backyard and noises from putting out garbage cans. The new structure will be compliant with current construction standards, including increased insulation, which also provides for noise attenuation. All construction must abide by the construction hours established in the municipal code, which limits construction hours to 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Monday through Friday and 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Saturdays and 10:00 a. m. to 6:00 p.m. on Sundays and holidays. Public Services Summary: No Impact. The project is not expected to have a significant impact on the provisions of other public services, since this is an urbanized area with adequately sized existing public facilities in place. All existing public and governmental services in the area have capacities that can accommodate the proposed use. Utilities and Service Systems Summary: No /mpact. The subject property contains an existing single family dwelling and therefore has all necessary utilities on-site. To prevent wastewater from contaminating the water supply, a backflow prevention device is required to be installed as per Ordinance Number 1710, effective June 18, 2003. The current solid waste service provider is Recology San Mateo County, which sends solid waste collected in Burlingame to the Shoreway Environmental Center and Ox Mountain Landfill. Construction activities would generate waste during the construction phase. The general contractor will be required to recycle and to reduce the waste stream by transporting the construction waste separately. Solid waste generated during operation of the project would be typical for residential use, and would not be considered substantial. -12- lnitial Study Summary 145 CrescentAvenue The City of Burlingame has also adopted an ordinance requiring recycling of construction waste and demolition debris. The ordinance requires that 60 percent of the total waste tonnage generated from project construction shall be diverted from the waste stream. The applicant is required to complete a Recycling and Waste Reduction Form to be reviewed and approved by the Chief Building Official. It is required that records shall be kept and submitted to the City prior to the final inspection of the project. Aesthetics Summary: No Impacf. The site currently contains a smaller single-story house over a raised basement, and #he proposed larger, two-story house may have a visual impact on the existing streetscape. The project is subject to residential Design Review to be reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission. The proposed house will cover 31.7% of the lot and will be 3,839 SF in area. The height, as measured from average top of curb, will be 30'-0" and will be setback 25'-10" from the street. Exterior materials on the single family dwelling will consist of narrow 3-inch lap siding on the ground floor and �edar shingles and cedar board and batten on the second floor, wood columns, wood paneling and asphalt shingle roofing. The detached two-car garage will also consist of narrow 3-inch lap siding, cedar shingles and cedar board and batten and asphalt shingle roofing. The windows will be wood framed with simulated true divided lites and wood trim. Exterior lighting provided on the lot will be required to conform to the City's Illumination Ordinance (1477), which requires all illumination to be directed onto the site. With the proposed building placement and landscape plan, views from surrounding properties will be minimally impacted. The most apparent visual change will be from Crescent Avenue where the existing house will be replaced with a iwo-story facade. However, the design of the second floor is such that it is incorporated within large sloping roofs which extend to the ground floor. The neighborhood consists of a variety of styles, with a r�ix of one and two-story dwellings. The subject property will be consistent with the development in this area. Cultural Resources Summary: Less Than Significantlmpact. The existing house on the propertywas built in 1920. Based upon documents that were submitted to the Planning Division by a Burlingame Citizen on September 25, 2009, it was indicated that the entire subdivision within which this property is located (Burlingame Park No. 2) may have historical characteristics that would indicate that properties within this area could be potentially eligible for listing on the National or California Register of Historical Places. An Historic Resource Evaluation was completed by Page & Turnbull, Inc. in March, 2012, which concluded that based upon the State of California Resource Agency's four Criterion for a Historical Resource, the residence at 145 Crescent Avenue retains sufficient historic integrity to be considered a contributing resource to a potential historic district, but it is not eligible for individual listing on the California Register of Historical Resources. Those four criterion include: Events for local significance as a resource; Persons as a resource associated with the lives of persons important to local history; Architecture that "embodies the distinctive characteristics of a time and period"; and Information Potential. The following is an excerpt from the Historic Resource Evaluation that was conducted by Page & Turnbull, Inc.: "The house at 145 Crescent Avenue is not currently listed in the National Register of Historic Places (National Register) or the California Register of Historical Resources (California Register). The building does not appear in the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS), indicating that no record of previous survey or evaluation is on file with the California Office of Historic Preservation (OHF). The City of Burlingame does not currently have a register of historic properties, and therefore the property is not listed locally. Constructed in 1920, the house at 145 CrescentAvenue does not appear to be individuallyeligible for listing in the National or California Registers under Criterion A/1 (Events) for its association with any events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of local or regional history, or the cultural heritage of California or the United States. The house does convey contextual significance as a single-family residence associated with the development of Burlingame Park, but it is not among the oldest homes in the neighborhood, nor does it appear -13- Initial Study Summary 145 Crescent Avenue influential in the development of the neighborhood. Rather, it appears to be one of many residences constructed during the 1920s-1930s building boom in this area, and is not individually significant within this historic context. Therefore, the property does not appear to be individually eligible for listing under Criterion A/1. The house at 145 Crescent Avenue does not appear to be individually eligible for listing in the National or California Registers under Criterion B/2 (Persons). Research has not revealed any association with people significant in local, state or national history. The original owner is unknown, but it is likely that Edward T. Dower, who owned 145 Crescent Avenue from at least 1925 until 1940, was the original owner. Dower was a real estate agent who bought and sold numerous properties in Burlingame during his career. He was a member of the Burlingame Masonic Lodge No. 400, Free and Accepted Masons, and lived in Burlingame for 36years, although it appears that he never lived at 145 CrescentAvenue. Subsequent owners include the managerof a Safeway store and an insurance salesman, and the occupation of the current owner is unknown. Former occupants include an engineer, salesmen, and an importer. Little information was found about any of the owners or occupants. The house at 145 Crescent Avenue does not appear to be individually eligible for listing in the National or California Registers under Criterion C/3 (Architecture) as a building that embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction. The building is a typical example of the residences constructed in the Burlingame Park neighborhood in the 1920s and displays architectural features identified with the Craftsman style, but it is not a distinctive or prominent example of the style. The building has undergone a series of alterations and additions and does not appear to be an influential or noteworthy example of residential construction in the neighborhood. The architect is unknown, and the first known owner who was possibly the builder is not recognized as a master. Therefore, the property is not individually significant for its architectural merit and does not appear eligible for listing in under Criterion C/3. This property was not assessed for its potential to yield information important in prehistory or history, per National Register and Califomia Register Criterion D/4 (Information Potential). This Criterion is typically reserved for archeological resources. The analysis of the house at 145 CrescentAvenue foreligibility under California Register Criterion 4(Information Potential) is beyond the scope of this report. The house at 145 Crescent Avenue retains integrity of location and setting. It is situated on its original lot, and the surrounding Burlingame Park neighborhood remains a residential area characterized by single-family houses. The property has undergone major alterations since its construction, including a reduction in size of the entry porch, installation of aluminum siding on all farades, irregular stone veneer on part of the primary fa�ade, construction that filled in the rear porch, construction of a flat-roofed rear addition, and replacement of most windows with aluminum sliders. Therefore, integrity of design, materials, and workmanship has been significantly diminished. It remains in use as a residence associated with the early twentieth-century residential development of the Burlingame Park neighborhood, and therefore retains integrity of feeling and association. Overall the property does not retain sufFicient integrity to convey its historic significance. 145 Crescent Avenue does not appear to be individually eligible for listing in the National or California Registers under any criteria. The California Historical Resource Status Code (CHRSC) of "6Z" has been assigned to 145 Crescent Avenue, meaning that it was "found ineligible for National Register, California Register or Local designation through survey evaluation." This designation is based on the property's lack of significance under the California Register eligibility criteria. Based on other construction activity in the area, it is unlikely that any historical relics will be encountered during construction. Should any archeological or historic, cultural, or ethnic resources be discovered during construction, work will be halted until they are fully investigated. Recreation Summary: No Impact. The proposed project does not replace or destroy any existing recreational facilities, nor does it displace any proposed or planned recreational opportunities forthe City of Burlingame. The site involved in this project is not presently zoned or used for recreational uses. -14-