|
| Burnham Strip project postponed because of sewer snafu By Jeanine Gore--Half Moon Bay Review Published/Last Modified on Thursday, February 26, 2004 4:24 PM PST After six years of trying to get the controversial plan approved, the single-story home slated for the southern portion of the Burhnam Strip in El Granada has hit a roadblock once again. This time the impediment is none other than the Granada Sanitary District. Originally, the project was to be reviewed and possibly even approved by the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors Tuesday. But the board never weighed in on the matter. That's because early Monday the issue was pulled from the agenda, leaving the home in limbo once again. The project was yanked from the docket after the county learned that the builder no longer had a wastewater connection permit. GSD chose not to extend the permit in May 2002. "When it came up for renewal, basically the board decided not to renew it," said GSD board member Leonard Woren. "That's totally discretionary," he added. On Feb. 16, after receiving a report about the project which stated "The applicants have a sewer connection to the Granada Sanitary District," GSD sent a letter to Marcia Raines, director of county environmental services, informing her of the lack of a sewer connection permit or sewer connection, according to the GSD letter, written by Gina Holmes, GSD district administrator. That presented a problem for the builder. Because he has no permit, the project's negative declaration, an environmental document to be presented to supervisors, is inaccurate. Before the project can be brought back to the supervisors, the matter must be resolved, explained David Byers, an attorney representing the landowner Robert Russi. "It's kind of a big deal, yeah," said Byers. "We have to have an accurate negative (declaration) for them to approve." The landowner and builder now must revisit the issue. Byers said he was confident they would resolve the issue and obtain the permit. "We're going to get that permit from GSD," he said. In the meantime, the lack of a sewer connection works as a frustrating Catch-22 for the builder, Wayne Impink, explained his real estate agent Judy Taylor. That's because GSD policy mandates that, as a qualification for a sewer connection permit, the builder must present a county-approved project plan, which is one of the first steps in the process. But the county will not approve a project plan without a sewer connection permit, she said. "GSD has us between a rock and a hard place," she said. So, determining whether GSD has a right to deny the permit - which GSD says it does - may be something the attorney will address. For Ric Lohman, one of the original appellants to the project, the fact that it was again postponed does little to address what he considers the out- standing issue: the project's lack of an environmental impact report. For years, the Burnham Strip has been fiercely protected by open space advocates. Under the Local Coastal Program, it is designated as community open space conservation, meaning allowable uses include agricultural-related and recreational uses. But the land is privately owned and LCP also allows for a single-family residence, up to 16-feet-tall, which is what the landowner and builder intend to construct. Taylor, the real estate agent for both Russi and Impink, said while the landowner would be willing to sell the property as open-space, no offers have been made - only discussion from open-space advocates of one day purchasing the strip of land though the money has not been secured, she said. Because the LCP allows for a single-family residence, a deal has been struck between the landowners and a builder, who want to develop it as such. Opponents of the project have advocated for a zoning change that would prohibit future construction of single-family residences in the strip. Taylor said despite the fact that some people may not agree with their project, her clients are working within the parameters of the law. While the Planning Commis-sion has not disputed that Impink has a right to build on the property, it has found that construction would pose "significant adverse impacts in land use," mainly because it is being constructed in Burhnam Strip, which acts as the county scenic corridor. The Planning Commission ordered the builder to compete an Environmental Impact Report. The order was appealed to the board of supervisors. Instead of an E.I.R., Impink has completed a negative declaration, meaning he finds the project poses no significant environmental impact. Lohman disagrees. "I don't know how they can say they're going to do a project in the middle of the view corridor and there'd be no aesthetic effect," he said. "We're just saying do an E.I.R.," he said. |