Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutReso 54-1976 RESOLUTION NO. ''54-76 CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING APPLICATION TO THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR A GRADE CROSSING AT HASKINS WAY (CROSSING NO. E- 10.87- C). BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of South San Francisco that the Council having duly considered the Staff Report dated May 5, 1976, and the Application for Crossing at Grade, copies of which are attached hereto respectively as Exhibits "A" and "B", does hereby authorize filing of the Application with the Public Utilities Commission of the State of California, and execution there- of by the Mayor of said City and the attestation of the Mayor's signature by the City Clerk. I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was regularly introduced and adopted by the City Council of the City of South San Francisco at a regular meeting held on the 5th day of Maq , 1976, by the following vote' AYES, COUNC I LMEN Leo Padreddii, Emanuele N. Damonte, Terry J. Mirri, William A. Borba, Richard A. Battaglia NOES, None ABSENI, None City Clerk May 5, 1976 EXHIBIT "A" To: Honorable City Council Subject- Application to the State of California Public Utilities Commission for a Crossing at Grade at Haskins Way. ACTION- Resolution RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council adopt a resolution authorizing the Mayor to execute an application to the P.U.C. for a crossing at Grade at Haskins Way. DISCUSSION' In order to comply with the State of California Public Utilities Commission's regulations, the City must apply for a public crossing at the recently con- structed Haskins Way Railroad crossing. This crossing was approved by the City and the street right-of-way was dedicated by record map on the Bennett and Kahnweiler Industrial subdivision. Attached is a copy of the subject application which includes a location, map and a site map. Also attached is a copy of the Environmental Impact Report "Negative Declaration" prepared for this crossing. FUNDING- The total cost of this crossing is the responsibility of the Subdivider, Bennett and Kahnweiler, by the Subdivision Agreement. Edward G. Alario City Manager Director of Public Services FJA/RSY/cg Attch' Application EIR Report EI R . J)A'I'I!: April. 21, 1976 I,)NC, Hill: '!X~t~X)iX WAIVED ' NO. 76 "NEGATIVE DECLARATI'ON" The Planning Office of the City of South San Francisco, considered the followifig, proposed project, and has prepared the follo{'ing "Negative Declaration." · Proposed Projedt" Haskins .Way -- Opening of a public street at Grand -Avenue across an existing railroad crossing at grade. "Negative Declaration" Findings' The project will not have a significant effect on the environment' Reasons Supporting Findings' Opening of the crossing will allow for the installation of mechanical crossing protection devices, thereby enhancing public safety; the opening will provide more convenient public access 'to the Bay; the opening will have no significant effect on the environment. · .. · Initial' Study Prepared By' Ri'chard Harmon' · . · A copy of' the initial study may be bbt~ined at the Planning Office, City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue, South San Francisco, CA.,' 94080. · I, DaVid C. Hale , hereby certify that this-"Negative Declaration" was prepared in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act Of 1970, as 'amended, and appli'cable Stat-e and City Guidelines. · cc' City ~ianager : . City Clerk City Attorney. · ' Chief Building Inspector Proponent PS/P lO1 (2/7~) 200 City Planner (David C. Hale) . By' City ~lanager CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO PLANNING DIVISION INSTRUCTIONS: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT CHECKLIST The purpose of this checklist is .to determine if the Project will have a- significant or nonsignificant impact upon the environment. This question- naire, is in compliance with South San Francisco City Resolution No. 33-74, and the California En~vironmental Quality Act of 1970. Review of project plans will be expedited if all questions a~e answered accurately and completely. It is the applicant's responsibility to obtain whatever technical and professional assistance might be needed to provide this information. If the information is not sufficient for .the necessary evaluation, additional research may be required. . · · Please print or type' the. answer to each question in the space provided. Attach additional sheets if needed. Submit the completed form-to .the city official with whom you have made your permit application as quickly as possible. You will be notified within ten days after receipt of the .form whel~her a negative declaration or environmental impact report will be re- quired for the proposed project. · · Date: Name of Applicant: 'Department of Pub'lic Services, City of South 'San Francisco Address Of Applicant: ~--400 Grand Avenue,' South San Francisco -__ - .. Lot & Block No.: N.A'. Asses'sor's Parcel No.:- -'N.A, Type of Permit.: PUC Application ..i . · · Project Description: Openinq of a public street across an i~xistinq railroad crossing at grade. QUESTIONS . --- ,: : 1. How and to what degree will .the-earth be altered by any of the following means? £xplmin. ,. a. Change in topography including volume of earth to be moved, off- site haul_i~g, dust, smoke, or air pollutants generated during · construction. . None ,. · . b. Chemical ~tment None c. Change in structural composition of soil (as a result of com- pacting, tilling, shoring, etc.) · None' . d. What percentage Of the project'will involve construction on slopes of 30 percent or greater? None e. Change in moisture content None . f. Other (Explain) ~ · None,.all improvements are existing and have · been' installed in accordance with conditions imposed by City for ...the.Benn~t~and Kahnweiler Industrial Subdivision. , .. 2, In what ways will the project affect natural .drainage or. flooding? Compare existing flooding and drainage conditions with those that would exist after the project is completed .... No change 4. To what extent could the project result in the erosion of property both on and off the project site? No change 4. To what extent will the project affect the potential use;:extra~t~n, or conservation of the earth's resources {crops, minerals, ground water, etc.)? No change 5. How.. and to what extent will the project affect the quality and character- istics of soil, water, and air in the immediate proJe~c_t__ a.~ea and in the community? Include estimates of the amounts of sewage, ~drainage, air contaminants, and solid waste to be generated from the project, No c~,ange 6. DeScribe the plant and animal life presently existing on the site and indicate how and to what extent it will be affected by the project. · No: change 7. How and to what extent will the project affect wilderness, open space, landscape design and maintenance, and other aesthetic and recreational considerations? The crOssing will allow more convenient public access to the Bay shoreline. ~-- 8. Are any of the natural or man-made features in the project area unique; that is, not found in other parts of the city, county, state or nation? Explain. . . 9. What effect .will the project have upon the health and..Safety of people in the project"area and in the coninunity? .~-'-'~ '" ~'" : The crossing will allow installation of mecha~ii'~a~. ~ crossing protection devices, thereby improving public safety. lO. How much fresh water will be consumed as a result of the project and what will be the source of the. water? . None 11. How and to what extent will the project add to existing, noise levels on the site and in the community? . ' .. None -3- 12. How many additlcnal people wlll live in the project area?_ N/A 'How many additional people will work there? N/A How many will be displaced from the project area? N/A 13. How will the project add to, or subtract from, the availability of roads, high' ways, and other elements of the i~-ansportation system, or increase or decrease the burden upon such facilities? Include specific estimates of the traffic generation potential of the project. " ': · None .~ 14. Could the project serve to. encourage development of presently undeveloped areas, or intensify development of already developed areas? Explain. No 15. Will the project involve the application, use, or disposal of hazardous mat6rials? Explain. No ~ ~ 16. Will the project involve construction of facilities in the area of a known earthquake fault or area of soil instability (subsidence, ]landslide, or severe erosion)? No . .. 17. Does the proJeCt affect.a historically significant or archaeological site?' No 18. Ident'ify 'and 'describe any other significant environmental effects of 'the project, either positive or' negative: -- ' ' m ' ' ' ' None · ... ~' :-' -:- ..~--,, .-: ~ .. - - .o · · · I hereby declare, that to the best of my knowledge and ability, the above information accurately describes the environmental conditions existing on the site 'of the proposed project and the probable 'effects of the project upon the environment of the site and of the total commufli ty. · Applicant's Signature Address -4- EXH lB IT "B'" BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA Application of the City of South San ) Francisco, County of San Mateo, State ) of California for a crossing at grade of the tracks of the Southern Pacific Transportation Company at Haskins Way, South San Francisco, Calif. (crossing no. E-lO. 87-C) Appl i cati on No. APPLICATION FOR CROSSING AT GRADE ~he application of the City of South San Francisco, P.O. Box 711, South San Francisco, Calif. 94080; Telephone No. 873-8000 respectfully shows' .1. That applicant is a political subdivision of the State of California, having its City Hall at 400 Grand Avenue, South San Francisco in the County of San Mateo, State of California, and all correspondence and communications in regard to this application are to be addressed to Frank J. Addiego, Director of Public Services, City of South San Francisco City Hall, P.O. Box 711, South San Francisco, California 94080. The filing of this application was authorized by order of the South San Francisco City Council on lta~F 5, 1976 . 2. That the Southern Pacific Transportation Company is a Railroad Corp- oration doing business in the State of California having its office at i Market Street, San Francisco, California. 3. The proposed public crossing is described as follows' 'A strip of land 30 feet in width lying 15 feet on either side of the following described centerline. Commencing at a point on the centerline of the 30 foot wide right of way of the Southern Pacific Transportation Company, as said right of way was recorded in Book 6213 of Deeds at Page 33, San Mateo County Records, said point also being on the westerly line of Haskins Way as shown on the map of Bennett and Kahnweiler Industrial. Subdivision, recorded August 23, 197.2, in Volume 77 of subdivision maps at Pages 13 and 14; thence from said Point of Commencement along the center- line of the existing Southern Pacific tracks along a curve to the right havi.ng a radius of 397.25 feet, more or less, a distance of 115 fe.et, more or less. 4. That the crossing number of the nearest, public crossing to the west of.the p,roposed crossing is E-10.59-C; there is no public crossing to the east of the proposed crossing. That the prpposed crossing, is at station 1/+ + ?0~ (SPSR) and is numbered E-10.87-C. 5. That the nearest public crossing to the west is approXimately 0.25 mi 1 es. - 1- 6. That the public need for said proposed crossing is as follows: The proposed crossing will provide access to public streets within the Bennett and Kahnweiler Industrial subdivision and. other privately owned Bay-Front property proposed for development in the near 'future. This proposed Haskins Way crossing will provide an alternate.means of access to properties served by Swift Avenue, reducing the traffic on Kimball Way and providing emergency access should Kimball Way be blocked. 7. That the proposed crossing which is the subject of this application .is to be made at grade as shown on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part here of. Separation of grades at the proposed public crossing is not practicable due to the fact that the amount of travel on Haskins Way does not justify the costs of separation of'grades at the proposed crossing. 8. That there is presently no crossing protection installed at Haskins Way. It is proposed that crossing protection be prov.ided by installa- tion of two standard No. 8-A flashing light signals. The proposed -protection equals that recently installed at the Kimball Way Crossing 1300 feet to the west. 9. That a scale map showing the location of all streets, roads, and tracts in the immediate area of the proposed crossing, and a profile .chart of the elevation at the top of rails and for a specified distance on either side thereof are attached as Exhibit "A" hereto. 10. That a Scale map-showing-the'relation-of the .proposed .crossing ~i~o eXisting'roads 'in the'vicinity of'~the proposed crossing .is attached -as Exhibit -."B" 'hereto. 11. That there are no building structures or other obstructions to view either exi sting or proposed, i n the immedi ate vi cini ty of the pro- posed crossing which would constitute a hazard to traffic making use of the proposed crossing. 12. That this application is made pursuant to public Utilities Code Section 1201, ET: Seq. Wherefore, The Applicant Requests That: The commission make its order establishing a permanent public crossing at grade over the area described in this application fixing and determining the type of crossing and crossing protection to be installed, and for such other and further relief as may be deemed appropri ate. -2- Dated at South San Francisco, California, This May , 1976. I O*h Day of MAYOR City of South San Francisco Attest- ~~--C~~~ ' City Subscr,ibed and Sworn to before me this / 0 ~ Day of_ ~/~]~ ,1976 San Mate°]~ary Publ~,c ~a~;do~O~aT~oCr~:ty -.3- VERIFICATION STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN MATEO Leo Padredd) bei.ng first duly sworn, deposes and s.ays: That he is the Mayor of the City of South San Francisco. Applicant, herein, has read the foregoing request, and knows the contents thereof; that the same is true of his own knowledge except-as to matters stated on information or belief, and as to those matters he believes them to be true. I declare under penal.ty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on May 10',1976 at South San Francisco, California. City Clerk Mayor Subscribed and sworn to before me this ....... /'0 '~ day of' <~/J/~.~ .. Count~ of San Mateo, State of California , 1976. RAi L. ROAD STATIONS -- ~/~ LAN D.~CAPi N G ;~ ~N II I I I I II II III I I I I I I~-t.-t.~l I I I I I I II Ii I'llilililll o. 0 ~', I&-too -o.i% -o.~ 18+00 - o.~, · PR 0 F./LE..Z'AT__:.T_O .P_Z. OF :: RAIL ~ ..C..,~ - HORIZ..;_I°!=IC<2.~ = '~'-i=';'--VERT;: 1''- ~' - UN DEVELOPED LAN DS '" OF NORTON !~IMON,]NC. UN DEVELOPED . BENNETT :'AND 'KAHNWEILER U N- D EVE LO~ED 'INDUSTRIAL SUBDI.V/SION. E. AND$ OF NORTON SIMON)/'NC.. UNDEVELOPED SWIFT AV'EN UE POLE TJ".I'~ II, I FITI-il I i ili l t-IJIli I-IASKIN5 'WAY CROSSING-' SITE' MAP "SOUTH SAN FRANCJSCOj CALIFORNIA ,:SCALE= I''= IOO' EXHIBIT "A" /'~. ~ ... ~. ~ ,, ,, I~ ~ . ' ~' ,'1 ~ ~~ . ' ,'~ 4,/ ' ' ' ~1 : ~s. ~~ ~ - ~ · ~ .... ~ ...... , . FZ3 i' ':' · · /M r; _ ~~ .... ~,_~,~ ~ ~ ,_ · m ~/~ · , . ' I U ~ '. ii}. ! ~ '' ¢ ~-' '~-; --~--::-'.:=--'"---'. ~=_:_----..--:, .'~/ ~ I ~ _] / / ' ~' ~ ~ ~ ~ / ~ F~~ ~ ..... ::~_Z:':~: ~-' z ~-. ~ ~,~ · .~ ~ ~ ~ ~ z 1// .~ /., - / . . ...~ ~.~~, ///~/ ... I '~': I ~' ~ *~ ~'~ ~ ' '~ ~ ~' /I / -/ ~ ~ . ,~~ F ~:. ___ _. ....................... : ' ,~~~5~~~ /1 ~7.-~ . - ; ........... ,, ·