Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet - CC - 2017.05.15S k ) \ \ WE k ( § / � o ) k / \ \ / G § ) $ _ \ L ) 0 5 j k � 3 / 0 w § § ? 5 \ � k E } \ j \ « J .. \ \ \ ; C� w 4 � (6 e . a ( k ( / k / § 2 a § L) U) k b k § K ao ca ■ 2 \\\) \�_0 0 £ _ »q =o a) ® /»)g o 0 // CO E\k G D _ k§ §i - )E &E_Z)g \\a} `> \/\ `� .)) )_!` m,//) c0 /]@7 ~ )2 �`} oma .0 �\ ° °) § 0 ) § \ } /{§ 7 ] d 7 j \ k \) \ _ { J f u ! a : a ) A ( $ { \�\/co ___G \r/ \ ;r0 \E4! %.2 .Q //#)/! 7o22z$ ca ■ 2 2 U V R M vim.. C E U Q N w W S a 0 U e i (ni Q U � L aai U 3 v @ N C m o a F d p E p F _ a U O o o E r .2 U U � L I� Z aai U 3 E Zp ECl o W - p a _ U U O o o E r .2 U a) ° °I Z Z m a ZZ °a)a a ID d y y CD o n F a5 O .— a °c a) 'p d' O 0CL m m W W c U m 0 m c 2 ° Y o E U LLp J LL c Co 'c m c w ~ Q a U a a y = m a O rn � m U I� Z W 2 W U Z 7 O Z Z m a d G Z c � a °c y m Y O E IL a W � = m W U F � U y Q 0 Z a � E y w FC- O n w ~ Q Z W cC L O m W Q a LU J g 3 v Z 's 3 D O Z D�j U H tai Y a r N M r r r N 'a O a m c d U / ) ca , H ect Overview Background Public Outreach Efforts Design Options Summary of Public Feedback Findings City Council Questions and Feedback nd Increase of bicycle and motor vehicle traffic on California Drive ■ The City has installed various safety improvements over the last several years Additional improvements along this corridor will require significant changes City Council approved funding to undertake a feasibility study to implement a dedicated separated bicycle facility along the east side of California adjacent to the Caltrain right-of-way Public Outreach Efforts • Staff issued an RFP last year and selected ALTA Planning + Design a 15t public workshop in July 2016 Held a 2nd public workshop in January 2017 • Staff separately met with the members of the bicycle and pedestrian advisory group (formerly known as BPAC) • Held a 3rd public meeting in April 2017 as part of the TSPC • For each public meeting, over 550 individual notifications were sent out to community members living along and near California Drive Design Options Studied Option 1 ($10M) • Class I bicycle facility • Dedicated and separated bike track & pedestrian path • Shared 12 -foot wide pathway for both pedestrians and bicyclists Options 2A & 2B (2A - $1,150,000 & 2B -$500,000) • Class II bicycle facility • Consists of a striped 5 -foot wide dedicated bike lane on the roadway • Narrow traffic lanes for traffic calming • Change to Class III bicycle facility south of Mills Ave. (2A & 2B) Option 3 ($760,000) • Class III bike facility • Roadway is marked with sharrows, but is shared between bicycles and motorized vehicles • Traffic calming improvements Design Options Option 1(Separated Bike & Pedestrian Path) Design Option 1($10M) • Separated bicycle facility Shared 12 -foot wide path for both pedestrians and bicyclists Located on east side of California Drive adjacent to the railroad right-of-way Requires complete removal and re -planting of existing mature trees along the corridor • Requires relocation of major utilities 5/15/2017 0 �s — — — a 5/15/2017 0 5/15/2017 5 5/15/2017 Provides separated facility for bicyclists and Requires complete removal of existing mature pedestrians trees & shrubs, which provide screening along the corridor Provides safest facility for bicyclists and Significant opposition from residents along pedestrians California Drive Creates 'Parkway' like setting along the roadway corridor and increases potential for active Requires significant utility relocation transportation & recreation activities Improves aesthetics of the corridor upon full growth of trees Requires acquisition of ROW Maintains current configuration of roadway Maintains on -street parking Requires extensive engineering and environmental studies Requires coordination with Caltrain, High Speed Rail, and SFPUC Longer time line to implement this option Highest cost option ($10M( not Including the ROW acquisition _ - - ,,-,I l a®'�:3- I CONCH 2(01 uxe� I I mw�ie eaineenr .. .'. 5/15/2017 7 5/15/2017 D Design Options 26 (Variation of Option 2A from Mills to Lincoln Design Option 2B ($500,000) • Slight variation on Option 2A Class II bike lane on MOST of California Drive • Loss of 4 on -street parking spaces South of Mills, a Class III facility with an alternate Class III route to Laguna as Bike Boulevard (southbound only); no widening required Design Options 2B (Variation of Option 2A from Mills to .ave I mxcmriemr.�wau I j p I i i �I _ _ E @I I 5/15/2017 10 BU towe.am umn vinoom noeooa wan a rewrma me ciao a Dare .ave I mxcmriemr.�wau I j p I i i �I _ _ E @I I 5/15/2017 10 Provides dedicated bike facility for bicycle commuters Adds traffic aiming measures No impact to existing trees Provides continuous bike lane between Murchison Ave. and Broadway (Option 2A) Significantly Lower cost than Option 1(Option 2A= $1.150M & Option 2B= $500K) Increased safety with buffered bike lanes between Murchison and Trousdale Avenues Significantly shorter construction timeline than Option 1 Removes left -turn lanes at some locations Some roadway widening needed (Option 2A) but an be mitigated with Option 2B Removal of approximately 5 on -street parking spaces(2A) Removal of approximately 4 on -street parking spaces(2B) 5/15/2017 11 5/15/2017 12 le g e F _ 51®0 c�avl Gauq]19uMLmp1 I Lp LRLIF`OR�.IMORIVE I.��]_' 5/15/2017 12 I el DRW� .,OAU -"N� .. .. P.. 5/15/2017 13 I alta I I el DRW� .,OAU -"N� .. .. P.. 5/15/2017 13 Design Options Ption 3 (Shared Bike Route) - Benefits I Challenges Summary of Public Feedback Residents: Community members who reside along California Drive strongly opposed Option 1 due to the removal of the mature trees and loss of screening. However, they are supportive of Option 2B because of traffic calming improvements to the roadway. Bicycle & Pedestrian Community: While some members supported a "no build" option, most supported Option 2B with a hope that Option i could eventually be constructed in a long-term scenario. TSPC: TSPC also strongly supported Option 2B with a consideration to possible lighting improvements along the corridor and intersections. They also desired to see Option 1 developed in a longterm scenario. At all meetings there was less support for Option 3 (enhanced sharrows). Find Design Option 1 • Long-term option which will require additional community suppoi • Requires significant funding ($10 million) • Requires right-of-way acquisition and utilities relocation • Extensive design and environmental studies are required • Coordination with Caltrain, High Speed Rail and SFPUC is required Significant near-term impact to existing trees Design Option 2A • Significant impacts with roadway widening south of Mills • Can be implemented relatively soon • Lower cost than Option 1($1,150,000) • Will improve bicycle safety and traffic calm roadway • Requires removal of 5 on -street parking spaces • Some impacts to existing trees and utilities on west side of California Drive Findings Continued Design Option 2B • Will significantly improve bicycle safety and traffic calm roadway • Does not require roadway widening south of Mills • Can be implemented relatively soon • Lowest cost option at $500K Requires removal of 5 on -street parking spaces Does not impact existing trees or utilities Design Option 3 0 Not much public support 5/15/2017 Q 9 BURL_INGAME STAFF REPORT AGENDA NO: 8a MEETING DATE: May 15, 2017 To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Date: May 15, 2017 From: Syed Murtuza, Director of Public Works — (650) 558-7230 Subject: Adoption of a Resolution Awarding a Construction Contract to W.R. Forde Associates, Inc., for the Summit Drive Culvert Repair Project, City Project No. 84100 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached resolution awarding a construction contract to W.R. Forde, Inc., for the Summit Drive Culvert Repair Project in the amount of $177,000, and authorize the City Manager to execute the same. BACKGROUND The Summit Drive Culvert Repair Project involves the replacement of a 42 -inch wide by 25 -foot long corrugated metal pipe (CMP) culvert, which is located under Summit Drive between Hillside Circle and Canyon Road. The culvert, which serves the upper Easton Creek watershed, is vital to the conveyance of storm water downstream and protects upstream properties. The proposed improvements will prevent potential collapse of the roadway and upgrade the deteriorating storm drainage infrastructure. The project scope consists of installing a temporary bypass line to maintain storm water flows during the construction, replacing existing curb inlet, performing roadway excavation, removing existing CMPs, and installing new storm drain culvert. The project scope also includes re - vegetation of the impacted creek embankments and restoration of the roadway. The project required a Streambed Alteration Agreement (Agreement) with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife. The Agreement requires that the construction work be done only during the period of April 151" to October 31St, and requires biological monitoring, wildlife protection measures, flow diversion measures, erosion and sediment control, and reporting to the State. DISCUSSION Construction Contract: The project was advertised for bids in March 2017. The sealed bids were opened on April 27, 2017, and three bid proposals were received ranging from $127,000 to $178,000. Pleasanton Engineering Contractors, Inc., was the apparent low bidder with its bid amount of $127,000. However, after a close inspection of its bid proposal, it was discovered that 1 Construction Contract Award to W.R. Forde Associates, Inc. for the Summit Drive Culvert Repair Project May 15, 2017 the contractor had made a clerical error, and as a result, has requested withdrawal of its bid proposal. Therefore, the second low bidder, W.R. Forde Associates, Inc., has been selected as ` the most responsible bidder with a bid amount of $177,000. This amount is $47,000 above the engineer's estimate of $130,000 but within the available budget. Staff has reviewed W.R. Forde Associates' bid proposal and determined that the contractor has met all the project requirements, and has a successful history of performing similar work for the City and for other public agencies. As a result, staff recommends that the Council award the construction contract to W.R. Forde Associates, Inc. FISCAL IMPACT The following are the estimated project construction expenditures: Construction Contract $177,000 Construction Contingency 15% $26,550 Construction Inspection $8,450 Construction Engineering & Administration $18,000 Total $230,000 Funding Availability: There are adequate funds available in the Storm Drainage Capital Improvement Program. Exhibits: • Resolution • Bid Summary • Project Location Map • Construction Contract PAI RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME AWARDING A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO W.R. FORDE ASSOCIATES, INC., FOR THE SUMMIT DRIVE CULVERT REPAIR PROJECT, AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT CITY PROJECT NO. 84100 WHEREAS, on March 29, 2017, the City issued notice inviting bid proposals for the Summit Drive Culvert Repair Project, City Project No. 84100; and WHEREAS, on April 27, 2017, all proposals were received and opened before the City Clerk and representatives of the Public Works Department; and WHEREAS, Pleasanton Engineering Contractors, Inc., submitted the apparent low bid in the amount of $127,000; and WHEREAS, Pleasanton Engineering Contractors, Inc., requested withdrawal of its bid proposal due to a clerical error; and WHEREAS, after a comprehensive review of the withdrawal request from Pleasanton Engineering Contractors, Inc., the City staff agrees to grant the requested withdrawal of its bid; and WHEREAS, W. R. Forde Associates, Inc., is the second low bidder with its bid in the amount of $177,000; and WHEREAS, City staff reviewed the bid proposal of W. R. Forde Associates, and finds it to be responsive and in compliance with the projects requirements. NOW, THEREFORE, be it RESOLVED, and it is hereby ORDERED, that the Plans and Specifications, including all addenda, are approved and adopted; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the bid of W.R. Force Associates for said project in the amount of $177,000 is accepted; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a contract be entered into between the successful bidder and the City of Burlingame for the performance of said work, and that the City Manager is authorized on behalf of the City of Burlingame to execute said contract and to approve the faithful performance bond and the labor materials bond required to be furnished by the contractor. Mayor I, Meaghan Hassel -Shearer, 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 15T" day of May, 2017, and was adopted thereafter by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: City Clerk b b QPP Q6 Q�PPQCQ q q� q`MQ . ®®® OQ��'H g®9 PQ O op c quo e e a p q O c 'C oLj04 O PPQ `Pd aPQ gQ..gQqO e •e � B QQQ9p !/QPQPQ OOPQ. G0OQ ghlOgQo© Q P it Po Po �,-.-- b }\ q�0 q 906 ~e•e S® Bp gg b q q�G. qp 0�6 P eP - 5Sq 00 001-0 IlonaO0 i 9g Q`oQ�a o ooQ 46 LIQ Ga • a o / I ..� �' da r _ p D30II i .•^. e`/� g�ffi0 j' � � PLOP ©Oi'•3 534G3 LBGY3 L� O P osag G5 ¢ C/ c' �6p ED die a Df30g s j f \ n: vigg Poe nagWawa O %B qb eon\\ ®03AD 999 gill / BBB of ®®®�' �o a 0 p, AGREEMENT FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT SUMMIT DRIVE CULVERT REPAIR PROJECT CITY PROJECT NO. 84100 THIS AGREEMENT, made in duplicate and entered into in the City of Burlingame, County of San Mateo, State of California on , 2017 by and between the CITY OF BURLINGAME, a Municipal Corporation, hereinafter called "City", and W.R. Forde Associates, Inc., hereinafter called "Contractor." WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, City has taken appropriate proceedings to authorize construction of the public work and improvements herein provided for and to authorize execution of this Contract; and WHEREAS, pursuant to State law and City requirements, a notice was duly published for bids for the contract for the improvement hereinafter described; and WHEREAS, on May 15, 2017, after notice duly given, the City Council of Burlingame awarded the contract for the construction of the improvements hereinafter described to Contractor, which the Council found to be the lowest responsive, responsible bidder for these improvements; and WHEREAS, City and Contractor desire to enter into this Agreement for the construction of said improvements. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS AGREED by the parties hereto as follows: 1. Scope of work. Contractor shall perform the work described in those Contract Documents entitled: SUMMIT DRIVE CULVERT REPAIR PROJECT, CITY PROJECT NO. 84100. 2. The Contract Documents. The complete contract between City and Contractor consists of the following documents: this Agreement; Notice Inviting Sealed Bids, attached hereto as Exhibit A; AGREEMENT -1 the accepted Bid Proposal, attached hereto as Exhibit B; the specifications, provisions, addenda, complete plans, profiles, and detailed drawings contained in the bid documents titled "Summit Drive Culvert Repair Project, City Project No. 84100" attached as Exhibit C; the State of California Standard Specifications 2010, as promulgated by the California Department of Transportation; prevailing wage rates of the State of California applicable to this project by State law; and all bonds; which are collectively hereinafter referred to as the Contract Documents. All rights and obligations of City and Contractor are fully set forth and described in the Contract Documents, which are hereby incorporated as if fully set forth herein. All of the above described documents are intended to cooperate so that any work called for in one, and not mentioned in the other, or vice versa, is to be executed the same as if mentioned in all said documents. 3. Contract Price. The City shall pay, and the Contractor shall accept, in full, payment of the work above agreed to be done, the sum of One Hundred and Seventy -Seven Thousand dollars ($177,000 , called the "Contract Price". This price is determined by the lump sum and unit prices contained in Contractor's Bid. In the event authorized work is performed or materials furnished in addition to those set forth in Contractor's Bid and the Specifications, such work and materials will be paid for at the unit prices therein contained. Said amount shall be paid in progress payments as provided in the Contract Documents. 4. Termination At any time and with or without cause, the City may suspend the work or any portion of the work for a period of not more than 90 consecutive calendar days by notice in writing to Contractor that will fix the date on which work will be resumed. Contractor will be granted an adjustment to the Contract Price or an extension of the Time for Completion, or both, directly attributable to any such suspension if Contractor makes a claim therefor was provided in the Contract Documents. The occurrence of any one or more of the following events will justify termination of the contract by the City for cause: (1) Contractor's persistent failure to perform the I AGREEMENT -2 work in accordance with the Contract Documents; (2) Contractor's disregard of Laws or Regulations of any public body having jurisdiction; (3) Contractor's disregard of the authority of the Engineer; or (4) Contractor's violation in any substantial way of any provision of the Contract Documents. In the case of any one or more of these events, the City, after giving Contractor and Contractor's sureties seven calendar days written notice of the intent to terminate Contractor's services, may initiate termination procedures under the provisions of the Performance Bond. Such termination will not affect any rights or remedies of City against Contractor then existing or that accrue thereafter. Any retention or payment of moneys due Contractor will not release Contractor from liability. At the City's sole discretion, Contractor's services may not be terminated if Contractor begins, within seven calendar days of receipt of such notice of intent to terminate, to correct its failure to perform and proceeds diligently to cure such failure within no more than 30 calendar days of such notice. Upon seven calendar days written notice to Contractor, City may, without cause and without prejudice to any other right or remedy of City, terminate the Contract for City's convenience. In such case, Contractor will be paid for (1) work satisfactorily completed prior the effective date of such termination, (2) furnishing of labor, equipment, and materials in accordance with the Contract Documents in connection with uncompleted work, (3) reasonable expenses directly attributable to termination, and (4) fair and reasonable compensation for associated overhead and profit. No payment will be made on account of loss of anticipated profits or revenue or other economic loss arising out of or resulting from such termination. 5. Provisions Cumulative. The provisions of this Agreement are cumulative and in addition to and not in limitation of any other rights or remedies available to the City. 6. Notices. All notices shall be in writing and delivered in person or transmitted by certified mail, postage prepaid. AGREEMENT -3 Notices required to be given to the City shall be addressed as follows: Mr. Martin Quan, P.E. Senior Civil Engineer City of Burlingame 501 Primrose Road Burlingame, California 94010 Notices required to be given to Contractor shall be addressed as follows: Donald J Russell W.R. Forde Associates, Inc. 984 Hensley Street Richmond, CA 94801 7. Interpretation As used herein, any gender includes the other gender and the singular includes the plural and vice versa. 8. Waiver or Amendment. No modification, waiver, mutual termination, or amendment of this Agreement is effective unless made in writing and signed by the City and the Contractor. One or more waivers of any term, condition, or other provision of this Agreement by either party shall not be construed as a waiver of a subsequent breach of the same or any other provision. 9. Controlling Law. This Agreement is to be governed by and interpreted in accordance with the laws of the State of California. 10. Successors and Assignees. This Agreement is to be binding on the heirs, successors, and assigns of the parties hereto but may not be assigned by either party without first obtaining the written consent of the other party. AGREEMENT -4 11. Severabilitv. If any term or provision of this Agreement is deemed invalid, void, or unenforceable by any court of lawful jurisdiction, the remaining terms and provisions of the Agreement shall not be affected thereby and shall remain in full force and effect. 12. Contractor shall indemnify, defend, and hold the City, its directors, officers, employees, agents, and volunteers harmless from and against any and all liability, claims, suits, actions, damages, and causes of action arising out of, pertaining or relating to the actual or alleged negligence, recklessness or willful misconduct of Contractor, its employees, subcontractors, or agents, or on account of the performance or character of the services, except for any such claim arising out of the sole negligence or willful misconduct of the City, its officers, employees, agents, or volunteers. It is understood that the duty of Contractor to indemnify and hold harmless includes the duty to defend as set forth in section 2778 of the California Civil Code. Notwithstanding the foregoing, for any design professional services, the duty to defend and indemnify City shall be limited to that allowed by state law. Acceptance of insurance certificates and endorsements required under this Agreement does not relieve Contractor from liability under this indemnification and hold harmless clause. This indemnification and hold harmless clause shall apply whether or not such insurance policies shall have been determined to be applicable to any of such damages or claims for damages. AGREEMENT -5 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, two identical counterparts of this Agreement, consisting of five pages, including this page, each of which counterparts shall for all purposes be deemed an original of this Agreement, have been duly executed by the parties hereinabove named on the day and year first hereinabove written. CITY OF BURLINGAME, a Municipal Corporation Lisa K. Goldman, City Manager Approved as to form: Kathleen Kane, City Attorney ATTEST: Meaghan Hassel -Shearer, City Clerk AGREEMENT -6 "CONTRACTOR" Print Name: W.R. Forde Associates, Inc. a AGENDA NO: 8b STAFF REPORT MEETING DATE: May 15, 2017 To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Date: May 15, 2017 From: Syed Murtuza, Director of Public Works — (650) 558-7230 Subject: Adoption of Resolutions Awarding a Construction Contract to Ghilotti Construction Company Inc., for the Carolan Avenue Complete Streets Project, and Approving a Professional Services Agreement with The Hanna Group for Construction Management Services Related to the Project, and Authorizing the City Manager to Execute the Contracts RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached resolutions as follows: (1) Award a construction contract to Ghilotti Construction Company, Inc., for the Carolan Avenue Complete Streets Project in the amount of $1,530,174.50 and authorize the City Manager to execute the same; and (2) Approve a professional services agreement with The Hanna Group in the amount of $190,370 for construction management services related to the project, and authorize the City Manager to execute the same. BACKGROUND In December 2012, the City submitted an application for a One Bay Area Grant (OBAG) for design and construction of the Carolan Avenue Complete Streets Project. The application was submitted to and evaluated by the City/County Association of Governments (C/CAG) and the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC). In May 2013, the City of Burlingame was awarded $986,000 for the Carolan Avenue Complete Streets Project. The federal grant is administered through Caltrans District 4 Local Assistance. Over the last few years, staff has performed extensive community outreach and held several public meetings to receive input about the project. Additionally, staff has worked closely with the Traffic Safety and Parking Commission to develop the project. Because of the stringent and extensive Federal Grant requirements, the project has taken somewhat longer than anticipated for implementation. City staff and the project consultant team have worked hard to obtain the necessary approvals from regional, state and federal agencies to construct the project. The project consists of the following major design elements: Installation of dedicated Class II bike lanes for both northbound and southbound travel with the use of three feet wide striped "buffer zones' between bicyclists and motorists. 1 Construction Contract Award to Ghilotti Construction Company Inc., for the Carolan Avenue May 15, 2017 Complete Streets Project and Professional Services Agreement with The Hanna Group for the Project Construction Management Services Bike lanes will be between five feet and eight feet in width depending on design allowances, with "green bike boxes' in the lanes at driveways and intersections for additional safety highlights. • Lane reduction from the current four lanes to three lanes (two travel lanes, plus a central left -turn lane for all intersecting streets, North Park Apartment driveways, Summerhill complex driveways, and residential homes). • Bulb -outs at intersection corners for improved safety and reduced pedestrian exposure to vehicle traffic while crossing streets. • New ADA curb ramps at each intersection corner to bring all ramp crossings up to current safety standards. • Special landscaping within the new bulb -outs will feature "rain garden" landscaping to reduce overflow storm runoff along the curb areas in accordance with National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) best -practices and will utilize sustainable green landscape concepts, such as use of native plants and bio-swales. • Bicycle detection sensors at the signalized intersection of Broadway/Carolan Avenue for enhanced bike detection. • Improved pedestrian crosswalk at Morrell and Carolan Avenues, which includes new enhanced crosswalk markings with new Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon (RRFB) warning lights, new sidewalk -mounted pedestrian safety lighting at the crosswalk, and new ADA ramps; and • Complete street resurfacing of Carolan Avenue, between Broadway and Oak Grove Avenue. DISCUSSION Construction Contract: The project was advertised forbids beginning on April 6, 2017. The sealed bids were opened on May 2, 2017, and two bid proposals were received, with bids ranging from $1,530,174.50 to $1,983,224.85. Ghilotti Construction Company, Inc., is the lowest responsible bidder with its total bid amount of $1,530,174.50, which is approximately 6% above the engineer's estimate of $1,449,344, but within the available budget. Staff has reviewed the contractor's bid proposal, and believes the contractor has met all the project requirements and has a successful history of performing similar work for the City and other public agencies. Professional Services Agreement: The Hanna Group (THG) was selected through a competitive Request for Proposal (RFP) process to perform construction management services for the Carolan Avenue Complete Streets Project. THG has a solid track record and a history of successfully performing construction management services for the City of Burlingame and other public agencies. Staff has negotiated the following scope of professional services with THG in the amount of $190,370, which is detailed in Exhibit A of the attached agreement: • Perform daily construction inspection and provide construction management services for a period of 100 construction working days. 2 Construction Contract Award to Ghilotti Construction Company Inc., for the Carolan Avenue May 15, 2017 Complete Streets Project and Professional Services Agreement with The Hanna Group for the Project Construction Management Services • Prepare daily written construction reports, photographic records of the project, and OBAG funding paperwork, and manage project documentation. • Review submittals and perform labor compliance monitoring. • Attend and manage construction meetings between the City and Contractor. • Provide material testing and quality assurance services, including scheduling and performance of material testing, review of test reports, review of quality control plans and ensure that certificates of compliance or source release tags are furnished by the contractor. • Provide public outreach services for the project, and assist the City in responding to complaints. • Assist the City in negotiating claims, change orders, potential liquidated damages, and process payments; and • Perform project completion including project acceptance, develop final punch list and project closeout. The professional service fee amount represents approximately 12.5% of the construction cost. This amount is consistent with industry standards for construction management and inspection services based on the scope and complexity of the project involving various construction methods for a complete streets project. The project construction is anticipated to begin in July 2017 and be completed by November 2017. FISCAL IMPACT Estimated Project Expenditures: The following are the estimated project construction expenditures: Construction $1,530,174.50 Construction Management $190,370.00 Engineering administration $100,000.00 Contingencies (10%) $229,455.50 Total $2,050,000.00 Fundinn Availability: Gas Tax and Measure A funds, Project No. 83680 $490,000.00 Federal Grant from OBAG Funds $986,000.00 Available funds from FY2016-17 Street Resurfacing 84470 $154,000.00 Available funds from Street Resurfacing Project 84160 $420,000.00 Total $2,050,000.00 Exhibits: • Resolution Awarding Construction Contract • Resolution Approving Professional Services Agreement 3 Construction Contract Award to Ghilotti Construction Company Inc., for the Carolan Avenue May 15, 2017 Complete Streets Project and Professional Services Agreement with The Hanna Group for the Project Construction Management Services • Bid Summary • Project Location Map • Construction Contract Agreement • Professional Services Agreement RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME AWARDING A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO GHILOTTI CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC., FOR THE CAROLAN AVENUE COMPLETE STREETS PROJECT, AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE SUCH CONTRACT CITY PROJECT NO. 83680 WHEREAS, on May 15, 2017, the City issued notice inviting sealed bid proposals for the CAROLAN AVENUE COMPLETE STREETS PROJECT, CITY PROJECT NO. 83680; and WHEREAS, on May 2, 2017, two proposals were received and opened before the City Clerk and representatives of the Public Works Department; and WHEREAS, GHILOTTI CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC., submitted the lowest responsible bid for the project in the amount of $1,530,174.50. NOW, THEREFORE, be it RESOLVED, and it is hereby ORDERED, that the Plans and Specifications, including all addenda, are approved and adopted; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the bid of GHILOTTI CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC., for said project in the amount of $1,530,174.50, is accepted; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a contract be entered into between the successful bidder identified above and the City of Burlingame for the performance of such work, and that the City Manager is authorized on behalf of the City of Burlingame to execute said contract and to approve the faithful performance bond and the labor materials bond required to be furnished by the contractor. Mayor I, Meaghan Hassel Shearer, City Clerk of the City of Burlingame, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 15TH day of May, 2017, and was adopted thereafter by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: City Clerk RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME APPROVING A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH THE HANNA GROUP FOR CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT SERVICES RELATED TO THE CAROLAN AVENUE COMPLETE STREETS PROJECT, AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE AGREEMENT CITY PROJECT NO. 83680 RESOLVED, by the CITY COUNCIL of the City of Burlingame, California and this Council does hereby FIND, ORDER and DETERMINE AS FOLLOWS: The public interest and convenience require execution of the agreement cited in the title above. 2. The City Manager is authorized to sign said agreement for and on behalf of the City of Burlingame. 3. The City Clerk is hereby ordered and instructed to attest such signature. Mayor I, Meaghan Hassel Shearer, City Clerk of the City of Burlingame, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 15T" day of May, 2017 and was adopted thereafter by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: City Clerk LRRm y t Z � 8885$'8$8e888SS$$8888888e8S88$RSe 5888888 m88888888888888mm88S88 m Pp Y $8858$ m 888$8$888885�888S8S5 "BvRf N w < N M RRsRe a 8888855888 R$ a 8m 88888SS88m888e88eS88e mS8888S8888888 x8R8� R� emm$8S8S8888e$88858 mR$�gRR$82wxwNNww«NN»»Nw»NwwNNn»«wxn»»w«w«w«»««N m8E8Sm N»«ww»wNx«x rR8pS88 6 " pp8 3 » w ' RgRoo'oRea$ R$RRg88R = RmR 8$<8 � �6 mom ' $oo68RRS8�88R R 3 ops„asm _ s 5$N K o � a ywwN»w»wwNN»w»wwwxx»yNn»»»wNn»NywNnN»»wx»»x»wwN»n»NNywyx » m8m S88 $$8$888$ m8S8�S8 $FS 08$88 88$ 888$ $88888 885 oa'm' „$� 8R88 88a »NwNw»ywyNNNNyxwNnyww«»«w»w»»ny«»xyyyww»»»»yw»»»»»NNwN»y 8885 $'$8588$$8 S' 88888088880888888 $$$888$meeee RR88 88o 8< Bm PvR$5$v,SaRRFH 888 mmm e8: W a 55555nv55'r3�n v>S� vNrry� rv�im n:ui&m aiNe - � o � W WN W N N N N» N x y N N« N« N w N N x x N N x«» w N N N x x N x N N n n M N w N nN N w N» w N» w x 0 888mm8S 088885$8888888888 eRRohmmrR$ogyq"88800�mu;:r���rmm 8S8$8$888m8S888S8S0 8 88888$ z 80$8 m3R NNNn wwNNn»NwwN«aaQQ «wN xxx N4N11NxQ»<w<»xwQn ww mxw <nn Qy awwnNxn»wNnxywQw <N Qx <w lnt �� e $ R m - m WO F O U O V p g o E F i E @ o a K v _`� @ c c c c I C EE $ C C am K n- m^ U E E Jm E d m 3 u s$ a m n Y® 2 2 u o E E E z 2 `o o o a K 9 S a E o m m E>>> o E m€€ m° m Z 0 3 U V V U F G 2 2 22 f f O .N- N E K U m_ K 6 n KKK p L 6 M1 6 6 4 F F F K m 6 a R 2 0 6 N a§ n K 0 0 0 �- 6 E p 7 O s n'oi' n ,m.,A55 oSe 6&e CAROLAN AVENUE COMPLETE STREETS PROJECT CITY PROJECT NO. 83680 VICINITY MAP MS 1 AGREEMENT FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT CAROLAN AVENUE COMPLETE STREETS CITY PROJECT NO. 83680 THIS AGREEMENT, made in duplicate and entered into in the City of Burlingame, County of San Mateo, State of California on 2017 by and between the CITY OF BURLINGAME, a Municipal Corporation, hereinafter called "City", and Ghilotti Construction Company. Inc., a California [Corporation or other form of business], hereinafter called "Contractor." WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, City has taken appropriate proceedings to authorize construction of the public work and improvements herein provided for and to authorize execution of this Contract; and WHEREAS, pursuant to State law and City requirements, a notice was duly published for bids for the contract for the improvement hereinafter described; and WHEREAS, on May 15, 2017, after notice duly given, the City Council of Burlingame awarded the contract for the construction of the improvements hereinafter described to Contractor, which the Council found to be the lowest responsive, responsible bidder for these improvements; and WHEREAS, City and Contractor desire to enter into this Agreement for the construction of said improvements. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS AGREED by the parties hereto as follows: 1. Scope of work. Contractor shall perform the work described in those Contract Documents entitled: CAROLAN AVENUE COMPLETE STREETS PROJECT CITY PROJECT NO 83680, FEDERAL AID PROJECT NO: CML 5171(021). 2. The Contract Documents. The complete contract between City and Contractor consists of the following documents: this Agreement; Notice Inviting Sealed Bids, attached hereto as Exhibit A; the accepted Bid Proposal, attached hereto as Exhibit B; the specifications, provisions, addenda, complete plans, profiles, and detailed drawings contained in the bid AGREEMENT -1 documents titled "Carolan Avenue Complete Streets Project, City Project No. 83680, Federal Aid Project No: CML 5171(021)" attached as Exhibit C; the State of California Standard Specifications 2010, as promulgated by the California Department of Transportation; prevailing wage rates of the State of California applicable to this project by State law; and all bonds; which are collectively hereinafter referred to as the Contract Documents. All rights and obligations of City and Contractor are fully set forth and described in the Contract Documents, which are hereby incorporated as if fully set forth herein. All of the above described documents are intended to cooperate so that any work called for in one, and not mentioned in the other, or vice versa, is to be executed the same as if mentioned in all said documents. 3. Contract Price. The City shall pay, and the Contractor shall accept, in full, payment of the work above agreed to be done, the sum of one million, five -hundred thirty thousand, one - hundred seventy-four dollars and fifty cents ($1,530,174.50), called the "Contract Price". This price is determined by the lump sum and unit prices contained in Contractor's Bid. In the event authorized work is performed or materials furnished in addition to those set forth in Contractor's Bid and the Specifications, such work and materials will be paid for at the unit prices therein contained. Said amount shall be paid in progress payments as provided in the Contract Documents. 4. Termination At any time and with or without cause, the City may suspend the work or any portion of the work for a period of not more than 90 consecutive calendar days by notice in writing to Contractor that will fix the date on which work will be resumed. Contractor will be granted an adjustment to the Contract Price or an extension of the Time for Completion, or both, directly attributable to any such suspension if Contractor makes a claim therefor was provided in the Contract Documents. The occurrence of any one or more of the following events will justify termination of the contract by the City for cause: (1) Contractor's persistent failure to perform the work in accordance with the Contract Documents; (2) Contractor's disregard of Laws or Regulations of any public body having jurisdiction; (3) Contractor's disregard of the authority of the Engineer; or (4) Contractor's violation in any substantial way of any provision of the Contract Documents. In the case of any one or more of these events, the City, after giving Contractor and Contractor's sureties seven calendar days written notice of the intent to terminate Contractor's services, may initiate termination AGREEMENT -2 procedures under the provisions of the Performance Bond. Such termination will not affect any rights or remedies of City against Contractor then existing or that accrue thereafter. Any retention or payment of moneys due Contractor will not release Contractor from liability. At the City's sole discretion, Contractor's services may not be terminated if Contractor begins, within seven calendar days of receipt of such notice of intent to terminate, to correct its failure to perform and proceeds diligently to cure such failure within no more than 30 calendar days of such notice. Upon seven calendar days written notice to Contractor, City may, without cause and without prejudice to any other right or remedy of City, terminate the Contract for City's convenience. In such case, Contractor will be paid for (1) work satisfactorily completed prior the effective date of such termination, (2) furnishing of labor, equipment, and materials in accordance with the Contract Documents in connection with uncompleted work, (3) reasonable expenses directly attributable to termination, and (4) fair and reasonable compensation for associated overhead and profit. No payment will be made on account of loss of anticipated profits or revenue or other economic loss arising out of or resulting from such termination. 5. Provisions Cumulative. The provisions of this Agreement are cumulative and in addition to and not in limitation of any other rights or remedies available to the City. 6. Notices. All notices shall be in writing and delivered in person or transmitted by certified mail, postage prepaid. Notices required to be given to the City shall be addressed as follows: Mr. Kevin Okada, P.E. Senior Civil Engineer City of Burlingame 501 Primrose Road Burlingame, California 94010 Notices required to be given to Contractor shall be addressed as follows: Thomas Smith Ghilotti Construction Company, Inc. 246 Ghilotti Avenue Santa Rosa, California 95407 AGREEMENT -3 7. Interpretation As used herein, any gender includes the other gender and the singular includes the plural and vice versa. 8. Waiver or Amendment. No modification, waiver, mutual termination, or amendment of this Agreement is effective unless made in writing and signed by the City and the Contractor. One or more waivers of any term, condition, or other provision of this Agreement by either party shall not be construed as a waiver of a subsequent breach of the same or any other provision. 9. Controlling Law. This Agreement is to be governed by and interpreted in accordance with the laws of the State of California. 10. Successors and Assignees. This Agreement is to be binding on the heirs, successors, and assigns of the parties hereto but may not be assigned by either party without first obtaining the written consent of the other party. 11. Severability. If any term or provision of this Agreement is deemed invalid, void, or unenforceable by any court of lawful jurisdiction, the remaining terms and provisions of the Agreement shall not be affected thereby and shall remain in full force and effect. 12. Indemnification. Contractor shall indemnify, defend, and hold the City, its directors, officers, employees, agents, and volunteers harmless from and against any and all liability, claims, suits, actions, damages, and causes of action arising out of, pertaining or relating to the actual or alleged negligence, recklessness or willful misconduct of Contractor, its employees, subcontractors, or agents, or on account of the performance or character of the services, except for any such claim arising out of the sole negligence or willful misconduct of the City, its officers, employees, agents, or volunteers. It is understood that the duty of Contractor to indemnify and hold harmless includes the duty to defend as set forth in section 2778 of the California Civil Code. Notwithstanding the foregoing, for any design professional services, the duty to defend and indemnify City AGREEMENT -4 shall be limited to that allowed by state law. Acceptance of insurance certificates and endorsements required under this Agreement does not relieve Contractor from liability under this indemnification and hold harmless clause. This indemnification and hold harmless clause shall apply whether or not such insurance policies shall have been determined to be applicable to any of such damages or claims for damages. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, two identical counterparts of this Agreement, consisting of five pages, including this page, each of which counterparts shall for all purposes be deemed an original of this Agreement, have been duly executed by the parties hereinabove named on the day and year first hereinabove written. CITY OF BURLINGAME, a Municipal Corporation By Lisa K. Goldman, City Manager Approved as to form: Kathleen Kane, City Attorney ATTEST: Meaghan Hassel -Shearer, City Clerk "CONTRACTOR" By Print Name: Ghilotti Construction Company, Inc. AGREEMENT -5 AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING SERVICES WITH THE HANNA GROUP FOR CAROLAN AVENUE COMPLETE STREETS CITY PROJECT NO. 83680 THIS AGREEMENT is entered into this day of 2017, by and between the City of Burlingame, State of California, herein called the "City", and The Hanna Group engaged in providing PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING SERVICES herein called the "Consultant". RECITALS A. The City is considering conducting activities for the consultant engineering services for the Carolan Avenue Complete Streets Project. B. The City desires to engage a professional engineering consultant to provide construction management services because of Consultant's experience and qualifications to perform the desired work, described in Exhibit A. C. The Consultant represents and affirms that it is qualified and willing to perform the desired work pursuant to this Agreement. AGREEMENTS NOW, THEREFORE, THE PARTIES HERETO AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1. Scope of Services. The Consultant shall provide construction management services such as project document set up, construction observation, inspection, and coordination, recommend contract change orders, labor compliance monitoring, post construction activities and as detailed in "Scope of Work" of the attached Exhibit A of this agreement. 2. Time of Performance. The services of the Consultant are to commence upon the execution of this Agreement with completion of all work as set forth in Exhibit A. 3. Compliance with Laws. The Consultant shall comply with all applicable laws, codes, ordinances, and regulations of governing federal, state and local laws. Consultant represents and warrants to City that it has all licenses, permits, qualifications and approvals of whatsoever nature which are legally required for ` Page 1 of 8 Consultant to practice its profession. Consultant represents and warrants to City that Consultant shall, at its sole cost and expense, keep in effect or obtain at all times during the term of this Agreement any licenses, permits, and approvals which are legally required for Consultant to practice its profession. Consultant shall maintain a City of Burlingame business license. 4. Sole Responsibility. Consultant shall be responsible for employing or engaging all persons necessary to perform the services under this Agreement. 5. Information/Report Handling. All documents furnished to Consultant by the City and all reports and supportive data prepared by the Consultant under this Agreement are the City's property and shall be delivered to the City upon the completion of Consultant's services or at the City's written request. All reports, information, data, and exhibits prepared or assembled by Consultant in connection with the performance of its services pursuant to this Agreement are confidential until released by the City to the public, and the Consultant shall not make any of these documents or information available to any individual or organization not employed by the Consultant or the City without the written consent of the City before such release. The City acknowledges that the reports to be prepared by the Consultant pursuant to this Agreement are for the purpose of evaluating a defined project, and City's use of the information contained in the reports prepared by the Consultant in connection with other projects shall be solely at City's risk, unless Consultant expressly consents to such use in writing. City further agrees that it will not appropriate any methodology or technique of Consultant which is and has been confirmed in writing by Consultant to be a trade secret of Consultant. 6. Compensation. Compensation for Consultant's professional services shall not exceed $190,370.00; and payment shall be based upon City approval of each task. Billing shall include current period and cumulative expenditures to date and shall be accompanied by a detailed explanation of the work performed by whom at what rate and on what date. Also, plans, specifications, documents or other pertinent materials shall be submitted for City review, even if only in partial or draft form. 7. Availability of Records. Consultant shall maintain the records supporting this billing for not less than three (3) years following completion of the work under this Agreement. Consultant shall make these records available to authorized personnel of the City at the Consultant's offices during business hours upon written request of the City. Page 2 of 8 I 8. Project Manager. The Project Manager for the Consultant for the work under this Agreement shall be Nick Panayotou, Project Manager. 9. Assignability and Subcontracting. The services to be performed under this Agreement are unique and personal to the Consultant. No portion of these services shall be assigned or subcontracted without the written consent of the City. 10. Notices. Any notice required to be given shall be deemed to be duly and properly given if mailed postage prepaid, and addressed to: To City: Kevin Okada, Senior Engineer City of Burlingame 501 Primrose Road Burlingame, CA 94010 To Consultant: Nick Panayotou, Project Manager The Hanna Group PO Box 1201 Burlingame, CA 94011 or personally delivered to Consultant to such address or such other address as Consultant designates in writing to City. 11. Independent Contractor. It is understood that the Consultant, in the performance of the work and services agreed to be performed, shall act as and be an independent contractor and not an agent or employee of the City. As an independent contractor he/she shall not obtain any rights to retirement benefits or other benefits which accrue to City employee(s). With prior written consent, the Consultant may perform some obligations under this Agreement by subcontracting, but may not delegate ultimate responsibility for performance or assign or transfer interests under this Agreement. Consultant agrees to testify in any litigation brought regarding the subject of the work to be performed under this Agreement. Consultant shall be compensated for its costs and expenses in preparing for, traveling to, and testifying in such matters at its then current hourly rates of compensation, unless such litigation is brought by Consultant or is based on allegations of Consultant's negligent performance or wrongdoing. Page 3 of 8 12. Conflict of Interest. Consultant understands that its professional responsibilities is solely to the City. The Consultant has and shall not obtain any holding or interest within the City of Burlingame. Consultant has no business holdings or agreements with any individual member of the Staff or management of the City or its representatives nor shall it enter into any such holdings or agreements. In addition, Consultant warrants that it does not presently and shall not acquire any direct or indirect interest adverse to those of the City in the subject of this Agreement, and it shall immediately disassociate itself from such an interest should it discover it has done so and shall, at the City's sole discretion, divest itself of such interest. Consultant shall not knowingly and shall take reasonable steps to ensure that it does not employ a person having such an interest in this performance of this Agreement. If after employment of a person, Consultant discovers it has employed a person with a direct or indirect interest that would conflict with its performance of this Agreement, Consultant shall promptly notify City of this employment relationship, and shall, at the City's sole discretion, sever any such employment relationship. 13. Equal Employment Opportunity. Consultant warrants that it is an equal opportunity employer and shall comply with applicable regulations governing equal employment opportunity. Neither Consultant nor its subcontractors do and neither shall discriminate against persons employed or seeking employment with them on the basis of age, sex, color, race, marital status, sexual orientation, ancestry, physical or mental disability, national origin, religion, or medical condition, unless based upon a bona fide occupational qualification pursuant to the California Fair Employment & Housing Act. 14. Insurance. A. Minimum Scope of Insurance: Consultant agrees to have and maintain, for the duration of the contract, General Liability insurance policies insuring him/her and his/her firm to an amount not less than: One million dollars ($1,000,000) combined single limit per occurrence and two million dollars ($2,000,000) aggregate for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage in a form at least as broad as ISO Occurrence Form CG 0001. ii. Consultant agrees to have and maintain for the duration of the contract, an Automobile Liability insurance policy ensuring him/her Page 4 of 8 C and his/her staff to an amount not less than one million dollars ($1,000,000) combined single limit per accident for bodily injury and property damage. iii. Consultant agrees to have and maintain, for the duration of the contract, professional liability insurance in amounts not less than two million dollars ($2,000,000) each claim/aggregate sufficient to insure Consultantfor professional errors or omissions in the performance of the particular scope of work under this agreement. iv. Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the City. At the option of the City, either: the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self-insured retentions as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers; or the Contractor shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim administration, and defense expenses. B. General and Automobile Liability Policies: i. The City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers are to be covered as insured as respects: liability arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of the Consultant; products and completed operations of Consultant, premises owned or used by the Consultant. The endorsement providing this additional insured coverage shall be equal to or broader than ISO Form CG 20 10 1185 and must cover joint negligence, completed operations, and the acts of subcontractors. This requirement does not apply to the professional liability insurance required for professional errors and omissions. ii. The Consultant's insurance coverage shall be endorsed to be primary insurance as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers. Any insurance or self -insurances maintained by the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers shall be excess of the Consultant's insurance and shall not contribute with it. Page 5 of 8 iii. Any failure to comply with reporting provisions of the policies shall not affect coverage provided to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. iv. The Consultant's insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom a claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the limits of the insurer's liability. C. In addition to these policies, Consultant shall have and maintain Workers' Compensation insurance as required by California law. Further, Consultant shall ensure that all subcontractors employed by Consultant provide the required Workers' Compensation insurance for their respective employees. D. All Coverages: Each insurance policy required in this item shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be canceled except after thirty (30) days' prior written notice by mail, has been given to the City (10 days for non-payment of premium). Current certification of such insurance shall be kept on file at all times during the term of this agreement with the City Clerk. ( E. Acceptability of Insurers: Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a Best's rating of no less than A -:VII and authorized to do business in the State of California. F. Verification of Coverage: Upon execution of this Agreement, Contractor shall furnish the City with certificates of insurance and with original endorsements effecting coverage required by this clause. The certificates and endorsements for each insurance policy are to be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. The certificates and endorsements are to be on forms approved by the City. All certificates and endorsements are to be received and approved by the City before any work commences. The City reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, at any time. 15. Indemnification. To the fullest extent permitted by law, Consultant shall save, keep and hold harmless indemnify and defend the City, its officers, employees, authorized agents and volunteers from all damages, liabilities, penalties, costs, or expenses in law or equity, including but not limited to attorneys' fees, that may at any time arise, result from, relate to, or be set up because of damages to property or personal injury received by reason of, or in the course of performing work which Page 6 of 8 f arise out of, pertain to, or relate to, directly or indirectly, in whole or in part, the negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of Consultant, or any of the Consultant's officers, employees, or agents or any subconsultant. This provision shall not apply if the damage or injury is caused by the sole negligence, active negligence, or willful misconduct of the City, its officers, agents, employees, or volunteers. 16. Waiver. No failure on the part of either party to exercise any right or remedy hereunder shall operate as a waiver of any other right or remedy that party may have hereunder, nor does waiver of a breach or default under this Agreement constitute a continuing waiver of a subsequent breach of the same or any other provision of this Agreement. 17. Governing Law. This Agreement, regardless of where executed, shall be governed by and construed under the laws of the State of California. Venue for any action regarding this Agreement shall be in the Superior Court of the County of San Mateo. 18. Termination of Agreement. The City and the Consultant shall have the right to terminate this agreement with or without cause by giving not less than fifteen (15) days written notice of termination. In the event of termination, the Consultant shall deliver to the City all plans, files, documents, reports, performed to date by the Consultant. In the event of such termination, City shall pay Consultant an amount that bears the same ratio to the maximum contract price as the work delivered to the City bears to completed services contemplated under this Agreement, unless such termination is made for cause, in which event, compensation, if any, shall be adjusted in light of the particular facts and circumstances involved in such termination. 19. Amendment. No modification, waiver, mutual termination, or amendment of this Agreement is effective unless made in writing and signed by the City and the Consultant. 20. Disputes. In any dispute over any aspect of this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to reasonable attorney's fees, as well as costs not to exceed $7,500 in total. 21. Entire Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the complete and exclusive statement of the Agreement between the City and Consultant. No terms, conditions, understandings or agreements purporting to modify or vary this Page 7 of 8 Agreement, unless hereafter made in writing and signed by the party to be bound, shall be binding on either party. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City and Consultant have executed this Agreement as of the date indicated on page one (1). City of Burlingame "Consultant' By It& Lisa K. Goldman The Hanna Group City Manager Print Name: NCV ?0.p0A oi00 Title: vj c t ?mS iaani- Approved as to form: City Attorney — Kathleen Kane ATTEST: City Clerk — Meaghan Hassel -Shearer Page 8 of 8 EXHIBIT A PO Box 1201 Burlingame, CA 94011 Phone (650) 642-5299 Fax (650) 558-9308 January 9, 2017 Kevin Okada, P.E. Senior Civil Engineer City of Burlingame - Public Works Engineering Department 501 Primrose Road Burlingame, CA 94010 Subject: Proposal for Construction Management Services — CAROLAN AVENUE "COMPLETE STREETS" PROJECT — City Project #83680 Dear Mr. Okada, The Hanna Group (THG) is pleased to provide a proposal for Construction Management Services for the Carolan Avenue Complete Streets Project. We are confident that we bring the right mix of focused experience and are very interested in continuing to serve the City of Burlingame. The Hanna Group is a certified SBE firm specializing in providing construction management services in the State of California. To demonstrate our commitment to, and our eagerness to continue to work with the City of Burlingame, we are proposing our seasoned Construction Management team as follows: Nick Panayotou, P.E. QSDIQSP will be the Project Manager. Nick has managed and delivered projects in the Bay Area for the past 25 years. He has acted as the Resident Engineer on high profile projects such as the San Francisco Oakland Bay Bridge Project, Cypress Replacement Projects, and the Bay Bridge Projects. Nick has also acted as Project Manager and Resident Engineer for our recent Burlingame Avenue l Streetscape Project & Marsten Pump Station Rehabilitation Project in Burlingame. Nick will be the leader of the THG team and will be responsible for ensuring that the performance of our proposed personnel meets or exceeds the expectations of the City. Errol Thomason will act as the Project Inspector. Errol is experienced in many facets of construction and is able to manage or oversee all inspection aspects of this project. Errol has also acted as Project Inspector for our recent Burlingame Avenue Streetscape Project, Marsten Outfall Project and the Marsten Pump Station Rehabilitation Project. He has managed and delivered several roadway projects and is uniquely qualified to deliver this project for the City of Burlingame. Attached is the scope of services and cost proposal for this project which has an expected time from from January 2017 through mid 2018. If you have any questions pertaining to this proposal, please do not hesitate to contact me at (650) 642-5299 or at the address listed in the header portion of this letter. Sincerely, Nick Panayotou Project Manager PROGRAM AND CONSTRUCTION MANAGERS EXHIBIT A 4 SCOPE OF SERVICES Our project approach for the Carolan Avenue "Complete Streets' Project is developed to achieve project deliverywhile having the following goals in mind: • A quality project that meets all of the requirements of the contract documents • Ensure that the project is completed within the specified schedule and the allotted budget • Positive public perception for the project as well as for the City of Burlingame • A safely constructed project, with a "No injury" goal • Be flexible and responsive to the City, and any other stakeholders for issue resolution • Assist the Contractor to complete the project in the least amount of time possible • Manage changes to avoid Contractor claims and minimize costs • Complete the project to the satisfaction of the City Our approach to managing this project for the City of Burlingame will start with professionally staffing the project with qualified personnel as requested by the City. It is essential for the construction management team to have a thorough understanding of the project along with potential issues and challenges. Given our experience with similar projects, we have outlined our work plan giving due consideration to key issues and challenges. From the available information, we have a thorough understanding of the required expertise needed and the commitment necessary to help the City of Burlingame successfully deliver this program. In the successful delivery of a project, our services begin by providing the City expert staff support in the following two phases of the construction project delivery: • Phase 2— Construction Services • Phase 3 - Post -Construction Services In each phase, the project will be administered in accordance with City of Burlingame Procedures & Policies, the Contract Documents, and Caltrans Standard Plans and Standard Specifications. Our proposed Construction Manager and Project Inspection team have worked on numerous utility projects and have a wealth of local experience with sewer and water main projects. The following is a detailed outline with regards to THG's approach and procedures for maintaining project progress, schedule, documentation mandates and cost control. PHASE 2 — CONSTRUCTION SERVICES During the construction phase it is our goal to work as a team with the Contractor; to try to prevent him from running into problems and delays; and to make sure that each new construction process starts out in conformance with the project documents. This will ensure that rework is kept to a minimum and that the project stays on schedule and minimizes the issuance of "non-conformance" reports. The key attitude that allows us to work so effectively with the Contractor is that of being in "partnership" with him and his subcontractors, with a commitment to get the project completed on time and within budget, as opposed to an attitude of seeking out errors and mistakes. Communication/Coordination and Correspondence: Our project inspector will serve as the day-to-day focal point in the field for coordination among the Contractor, Plant Representatives, City Forces, Utility companies, BART, and other stakeholders. We will document all communications with the contractor in his daily diaries and ensure that all pertinent information (issues, concerns, changes) are brought to the City's CAROLAN AVENUE "COMPLETE STREETS" PROJECT City Project No. 83680 EXHIBIT A 4-D attention immediately. Preconstruction Meeting: Once the construction contract is bid and awarded, all appropriate parties will be invited to a preconstruction meeting, including the contractor and his assortment of subs, the City , utility companies appropriate regulatory representatives and any other stakeholders as deemed necessary by the City . In order to establish a successful project for all parties, this meeting will establish managerial and administrative procedures, working relationships, and outline the level of expectations. We will customize this agenda for the project and, upon the City's approval, distribute prior to the meeting. We will chair the meeting and provide minutes documenting all items discussed. Typical items of discussion include: • Jab -site safety • Points of contact and appropriate means of communication • Quality control and assurance responsibilities • Project schedule • Submittal, RFI, and change order processes • Breakdown of Schedule of Values for LS Items • Potential Claim Process • Time of work and limitations • Critical items of work • Long lead items (Prefabricated bridge & In Pavement Lighting) • Special inspection requirements (Prefabricated Bridge) • Erosion and sedimentation control (SWPPP and BMP implementation) • Laydown, storage, security, and site access Weekly Meetings: In order to facilitate effective communication among all parties associated with the contract, weekly meetings (day and time of the week established in the pre -construction meeting) will be held to discuss project progress and pending issues. Nick will coordinate and conduct weekly construction meetings with the contractor, the City's representative, and interested parties. In order to facilitate an orderly and efficient meeting, Nick will send an agenda to all appropriate attendees prior to the meetings. Some of the general items discussed will be safety, schedule, and status of RFIs, change orders, submittals, and new and old issues. Special meetings will be conducted, as necessary to resolve specific issues. The Assistant RE will prepare minutes of the meeting and distribute to respective attendees. Ourteam will make a point of setting up meetings on an "as -needed" basis with the "Owners" team members to discuss project issues. This approach of having a separate meeting with the Owner team prior to meeting with the contractor eliminates the potential of open disagreement amongst the team in front of the contractor. Local Business/Homeowner/Public Outreach and Information Lines: To maintain an effective relationship with the General Public, Homeowners, and Local Businesses, it is important to respond to inquiries/issues in a timely manner. The THG Team which is anchored by Nick Panayotou, PE, has extensive experience working on sensitive projects in the City of Burlingame and will use that experience to aid the City in reviewing and responding to all citizen and business issues during construction. Monitor Construction Schedule: We will review the contractor's weekly and monthly schedules and advise the City of any schedule delay with recommendations for schedule recovery. We will work with the contractor to eliminate and mitigate the impacts of any delays and as the work progresses, changes and weather will be evaluated for impact to the contractor's schedule. CAROLAN AVENUE "COMPLETE STREETS" PROJECT City Project No. 83680 EXHIBIT A BV�E Requests for Information (RFI) / Requests for Changes (RFC): Typical RFI and RFC process starts with a request forwarded from the contractor, which we can review and determine if we can provide an answer. If so, we will prepare a response and submit to the City for review. If unable to provide a response we will inform the City to take the next step and transmit design related RFI's to the designer. Upon receipt of an answer from the design team, we will verify that the question asked has been adequately answered, and if not, obtain additional information in orderto provide a full and complete answer to the contractor. Progress Payments: In order to process the payments for the contract items, We will continuously inspect the progress of the contract item work and perform quantity calculations for monthly partial payments. The quantity of each item will be field measured, if necessary, to prevent overpayment or underpayment. In order to aid in determining project item values, will request that the Contractor submit a schedule of values (if not already submitted) for the Lump -Sum items. Each month, We will provide accurate calculations for all items of work completed and accepted to allow for progress payment. Additionally, we will review the Contractor's progress pay estimate request and schedule of values for reasonableness and ease of monitoring, and will compare this information to the quantity records that we generated. Upon completion of progress payment verification, THG will provide the monthly payment recommendation to the City. THG will also prepare grantor reimbursement requests with backup documentation for the City. Changes Order Management: The goal of the THG team, through Nick, is to avoid all unnecessary Contract Change Orders. Change Order can be generated from a number of sources and reasons, including changes directed by the designer or the owner and field -originated changes arising from unforeseen site conditions. If Change Order is unavoidable, the THG team will provide estimating and effective cost management by properly monitoring and tracking contract change orders. Nick will evaluate all proposed change orders to determine need, merit, and project impact. The team will provide cost estimates and schedule impacts, and a rationale for approval or denial and with the concurrence from the City, Nick will negotiate change orders with contractor and prepare change order documentation for approval and signature by the City. Our team has a vast knowledge of initiating, reviewing, estimating, and writing complicated contract change orders, including Cost Reduction Incentive Proposals. They have expert knowledge in determining the appropriate types of payment and methods of performing cost analysis to apply to each specific contract change order. Duties will also include: • Prepare change orders related to construction issues based on drawings, specifications, and other design information from design engineer and City Project Manager. • Prepare recommendations to accompany change order documents and forward to City Project Manager for review and approval. • Perform change order administration, including obtaining City approval of change order requests, issuing proposed change orders to Contractor, maintaining logs of proposed change orders, receiving change order quotations from Contractor, negotiating change order costs and time extension, processing final negotiated change orders, and incorporating approved change orders into progress payment breakdown. • Perform quantity and cost analysis as required for negotiation of change orders. • Analyze additional compensation claims that are submitted during the construction period and prepare responses. Claims Avoidance and Mitigation: THG believes our investment in being proactive, performing proper documentation, and interacting with the contractor in a positive partnering manner can mitigate a substantial amount of claims that may arise during the course of construction. In the a construction claim is filed, our proposed Project Inspector has the claims experience necessary to interact with the contractor to negotiate and resolve this claim in an expeditious manner. CAROLAN AVENUE"COMPLETE STREETS" PROJECT City Project No. 83680 EXHIBIT A • Jobsite Safety: Personnel proposed on this project have the appropriate Hazardous Material Training and Annual Safety Training per Caltrans and Cal -OSHA. The training received by all team members includes the "safety first" mentality and the knowledge that the paramount item on every project is maintaining a safe construction project for all parties. Quality Assurance Inspection: The role of quality control inspection is much more than approving or rejecting work as it is completed. Our approach to quality assurance inspection, where we develop a trust with the contractor, whereby the contractor diligently works with the THG Team, and completes every task correctly and expeditiously the first time helps ensure a successful project. Cooperative solutions that are developed during the course of the project improve quality and minimize rework. When we identify problems in the field, the contractor is notified immediately and solutions are developed in collaboration with the design team and the City, if necessary, before work progresses. Specific elements of Quality Assurance Inspections include: • Assist the City with the pre -construction meetings • Coordinating with Local Utilities to ensure that the project schedule is not interrupted. • Providing continuous inspection to ensure that the contractors' work is in compliance with the contract documents and the designer's intent • Identifying actual and potential problems associated with the construction and providing solutions. • Providing constant communication and timely notification to the City, as required for relevant inspection elements. • Maintaining daily documentation including photographic and video documentation of project (special, sensitive, potential claim and milestone work). • Reviewing approved contractor prepared Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plans ` (SWPPP) and ensuring that the work is compliant with the approved plan. • Participating in Submittal Reviews and design inspections. • Certifying quantity calculations for progress pay estimates and changes. • Resolving issues by proposing field changes to facilitate construction & avoid delays. • Coordinating all design changes & change orders with the designer and City. • Identify Contractor Staging Areas and Parking and providing enforcement. • Providing material management to ensure that the materials are in compliance with the Plans and Specifications. • Reviewing of contractor submittals such as material submittals, mix designs, temporary work design, shop -drawings, schedule, certificates of compliance, progress payments, and extra work reports. • Ensuring that job site safety inspections are performed and that the safety of the jobsite and the traveling public is always maintained. • Coordinating Testing and Surveying during construction • Participate in On -Site Contractor Meetings. • Labor Compliance Documentation & Interviews. • Review and interpret materials testing results • Assist the City with Contract Change Order estimates • Assist the City with CCO Negotiation • Review Extra Work Bills • Conduct quantity calculations and prepare daily and monthly estimates • Prepare punch -lists Quality Assurance Materials Testing: The THG team will provide the following: CAROLAN AVENUE "COMPLETE STREETS" PROJECT City Project No. 83680 EXHIBIT A 0 OWFYw", 111111111111WIM11010 O • Schedule and perform quality assurance materials testing to verify compliance of the work with the contract documents including Source inspections and Materials acceptance • Review test reports submitted by others to substantiate contract compliance • Review, comment, and administer Quality Control Plans (Welding, Paint for prefab Bridge) • Ensure that Certificates of Compliance or source release tags are furnished by the contractor along with the applicable delivered materials at the Project site. PHASE 3 — POST- CONSTRUCTION SERVICES A project is only truly completed when all the construction is complete, including the punchlist items, the final payment is approved and accepted, and the project paperwork is completed and archived. In this final phase, the THG team will perform the following key activities to ensure that the construction is completed in compliance to the contract documents: • Develop "Punch List" items to be completed. • Ensuring that appropriate testing is performed for all items. • If the contractor's work or a designated portion thereof, is incomplete or noncompliant, THG will compile a list of incomplete or unsatisfactory items. THG will conduct final inspections and coordinate the correction and completion of the work. • Perform final job walk through with the contractor, the City, and the design team. • Coordinate the submittal and completion of Record Drawings. • Provide Construction Claims Support Mediation/Litigation (if necessary). • Recommend Acceptance of the project. The specific project closeout documents will include the following: • All approved shop drawings, submittals and manufacturers' literature maintained by THG during the construction project. • A complete set of project progress photographs and videotapes taken before, during, and after construction. • Project "As -Built" plans. • Final Detail Estimate and "As -Built" Cost. • The original set of all inspection reports, summaries, testing documents, meeting minutes, clarifications, schedules, correspondence and other documents related to the construction work as it was being installed. • Prepare all OBAG documents for Submittal to the City. CAROLAN AVENUE "COMPLETE STREETS" PROJECT City Project No. 83680 cn F W W d � E y mtM W C W J ma o V _T U W 7 Z W 7 Q Z g O Q U 6. "W6ZWW'd N N mN q wp mm Oma O O aawildwoo ioge'1 �� wwwmwwww� N r O V O o V O V 0 O o n m o».N- w n p m i41SUSalaM 16u31Uaplsa8'lssv w n www z "» w o' � a` qNst$ales Sn m�c�im�nno O1 rcl umi mn n m �aaulOU36u31uaplsay W Z � ma O mm b O m o N m O N o N O FFS b dm N V m •- JolmoW 0000aoo 0 A aauelldwoyogel y H v 'o �aau!6u3 0 o m m oQ o m a` luaplsaa 9ssy w` m 2 m N d' tm•1 N V P P m V �y m m O (p`1 iaaw6U31uapisa8 2 o x o d V yJol!uoyl a a o w aouepdwoo wqe1 C m O m �aaU!6u3 — N o o o N 0 7uap!saa'Issy w U N 0 a saaw6U31Uaplsay i m n z — N 1o11u°W �^ o maoue!Idwo3 Jogej N 0 laaul6u3 Q v n N lUaplsaa'Issy w` m c U Iaau!6u31uap!say mj N V t N V V V ry H z v V LV - — o N °o E a�E m 4 u a _ m v�OvE CJI c J N N q c �o n_comtia� o`oa �aagyy� g Ea vqa n9 ° u EO o B AOw V C W + V O E m LL w 0 o¢ u m s dU DK 60�a�tJ r%iF •1mo 11l� O p O,�Nm <Nf0,.1-m (j NNCIN Y Y Y Y Y s Y Y Y y� 41. sm.m� H H H. W 9 • .. �FFFF-Ff FFFFV� �FFF FFA V � N F N h` a ST A FF^Ep'y®^T AGENDANO: 8c J H R EPORT MEETING DATE: May 15, 2017 To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Date: May 15, 2017 From: Syed Murtuza, Director of Public Works — (650) 558-7230 Subject: Adoption of Resolutions Initiating Proceedings to Renew the Levy and Collection of Assessments for the Downtown Burlingame Avenue Streetscape Improvement Project for Fiscal Year 2017-18 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached resolutions to initiate proceedings to renew the levy and collection of assessments for the Downtown Burlingame Avenue Streetscape Improvement Assessment District No. 2012-1 for fiscal year 2017-18 as follows: a. Initiate proceedings for the levy and collection of assessments for fiscal year 2017-18; b. Approve the Annual Engineer's Report for fiscal year 2017-18; and c. Declare the intention to levy and collect assessments for fiscal year 2017-18. BACKGROUND At its April 2, 2012 meeting, the City Council initiated the proceedings to form the Downtown Burlingame Avenue Streetscape Improvement Assessment District No. 2012-1. The proceedings were conducted under the provisions of the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, Part 2, Division 15 of the California Streets and Highways Code (Act). Weighted ballots were sent via certified mail to the property owners on April 5, 2012. At the May 21, 2012 meeting, the City Council conducted a Public Hearing to tabulate ballots for the Assessment District. The results of the ballot showed no "majority protest", thereby allowing the City Council to order improvements, form the Assessment District, and levy assessments totaling $335,787 annually for 30 years to the downtown Burlingame Avenue property owners. Property owners were given the option to pre -pay their assessments to avoid paying annually. Five property owners have exercised this option. DISCUSSION The Engineer's Report is updated annually to reflect any changes that may have occurred to property configuration in the Assessment District. The Act requires an annual Public Hearing to confirm and levy the assessment. The Public Hearing will be held on June 5, 2017. 1 Levy and Collection of Assessments for the Downtown Burlingame Avenue May 15, 2017, Streetscape Improvement Project for Fiscal Year 2017-18 FISCAL IMPACT The total assessment for fiscal year 2017-18 is $310,156, which reflects pre -payments by property owners. There are no changes to the annual assessment from the last year. Funds collected through assessments will be used as part of debt payment for Burlingame Avenue Streetscape bonds. Exhibits: • Resolution Initiating Proceedings for Levy & Collections • Resolution Approving Annual Report FY 2017-18 • Resolution Declaring Intention to Levy & Collect Assessments • Updated Engineer's Report for FY2017-18 • Staff Report — April 2, 2012, Downtown Burlingame Avenue Streetscape Improvements — Assessment District 2012-1 • Staff Report — May 21, 2012, Public Hearing to Form Assessment District for Downtown Burlingame Avenue Streetscape Improvements 2 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA, INITIATING PROCEEDINGS FOR THE LEVY AND COLLECTION OF ASSESSMENTS FOR THE DOWNTOWN BURLINGAME AVENUE STREETSCAPE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2017-18 The City Council (the "Council") of the City of Burlingame (the "City") resolves as follows: WHEREAS, the Council previously completed its proceedings in accordance with the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, Part 2, Division 15 of the California Streets and Highways Code (commencing with Section 22500) (the "Act") to establish the City's Downtown Burlingame Avenue Streetscape Improvement Project (the "Assessment District"); and WHEREAS, the Engineer's Report is updated annually ("Annual Report") to reflect any changes that may have occurred to property configuration in the Assessment District. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, DETERMINED, AND ORDERED BY THE COUNCIL, AS FOLLOWS: 1. Annual Report: The Council hereby orders staff to prepare and file with the Clerk the Annual Report concerning the levy and collection of assessments within the Assessment District for the fiscal year commencing July 1, 2017 and ending June 30, 2018. 2. New Improvements or Changes to Existing Improvements: There are no changes to existing improvements nor are there any items being added to the list of improvements previously approved at the formation of the Assessment District. Ricardo Ortiz, Mayor I, Meaghan Hassel -Shearer, 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 15t' day of May, 2017 and was adopted thereafter by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Meaghan Hassel -Shearer, City Clerk RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE DOWNTOWN BURLINGAME AVENUE STREETSCAPE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2017-18 The City Council (the "Council") of the City of Burlingame (the "City") does resolve as follows: WHEREAS, the Council previously completed its proceedings in accordance with and pursuant to the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, Part 2, Division 15 of the California Streets and Highways Code (commencing with Section 22500) (the "Act") to establish the City's Downtown Burlingame Avenue Streetscape Improvement Project (the "Assessment District"); and WHEREAS, the Council has, by previous resolution, ordered staff to prepare and file the Annual Report concerning the levy and collection of assessments within the Assessment District; and WHEREAS, staff has prepared and filed such Annual Report with the Clerk; and WHEREAS, the Council has reviewed the Annual Report. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, DETERMINED, AND ORDERED BY THE COUNCIL, AS FOLLOWS: 1. Approval of Report: The Council hereby approves the Annual Report concerning the levy of assessments as submitted for the fiscal year commencing July 1, 2017 and ending June 30, 2018. Ricardo Ortiz, Mayor I, Meaghan Hassel -Shearer, 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 151 day of May, 2017 and was adopted thereafter by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Meaghan Hassel -Shearer, City Clerk RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO LEVY AND COLLECT ASSESSMENTS FOR THE DOWNTOWN BURLINGAME AVENUE STREETSCAPE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2017-18 The City Council (the "Council") of the City of Burlingame (the "City") resolves as follows: WHEREAS, the Council previously completed its proceedings in accordance with the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, Part 2, Division 15 of the California Streets and Highways Code (commencing with Section 22500) (the "Act") to establish the City's Downtown Burlingame Avenue Streetscape Improvement Project (the "Assessment District"); and WHEREAS, there have been no changes to the prior year Annual Report concerning the levy and collection of assessments within the Assessment District. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, DETERMINED, AND ORDERED BY THE COUNCIL, AS FOLLOWS: 1. Intention: The Council declares its intention to levy and collect assessments within the Assessment District to pay the costs of the Improvements for the fiscal year commencing July 1, 2017 and ending June 30, 2018. The Council finds that the public's best interest requires such action. 2. Improvements: The Improvements include, but are not limited to: streetscape items such as sidewalks, street and pedestrian lighting, trees and landscaping, seating, signage, kiosks, gateway treatments, site furnishings, and other parking improvements, appurtenant facilities, and soft costs. 3. Assessment District Boundaries: The boundaries of the Assessment District are as shown by the assessment diagram filed in the office of the City Clerk, which map is made a part hereof by this reference. 4. Annual Report: Reference is made to the Annual Report, on file with the Clerk, for a full and detailed description of the improvements, the boundaries of the Assessment District and the zones therein, and the proposed assessments upon assessable lots and parcels of land within the Assessment District. 5. Notice of Public Hearing: The Council hereby declares its intention to conduct a Public Hearing concerning the levy of assessments in accordance with Section 22629 of the Act. All objections to the assessment, if any, will be considered by the Council. The Public Hearing will be held on Monday June 5, 2017 at 7:00 pm or as soon thereafter as is feasible in the Council Chambers located at 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, CA 94010. The Council further orders the Clerk to publish notice of this resolution in accordance with Section 22626 of the Act. 6. Increase of Assessment: The maximum assessment is not proposed to increase from the previous year above that previously approved by the property owners (as "increased assessment' is defined in Section 54954.6 of the Government Code). Ricardo Ortiz, Mayor I, Meaghan Hassel -Shearer, 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 15th day of May, 2017 and was adopted thereafter by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Meaghan Hassel -Shearer, City Clerk City of Burlingame Assessment District No. 2012-1, Downtown Burlingame Avenue Streetscape Improvement Project Engineer's Report City of Burlingame Fiscal Year 2017118 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1-1 2. INTRODUCTION 2-1 2.1. Background of District..................................................................................2-1 2.2. Reason for the Assessment.............................................................. ............2-1 2.3. Establishment of the Assessment........................................................... ...... 2-1 3. PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS 3-1 3.1. Description of the Boundaries of the District.................................................3-1 3.2. Description of the District Improvement Project ....... ..................................... 3-1 3.3. Map of District Improvement Project.............................................................3-1 4. ESTIMATE OF COSTS 4-1 4.1. District Improvement Project Costs..............................................................4-1 5. SPECIAL AND GENERAL BENEFIT 5-1 5.1. Introduction...................................................................................................5-1 5.2. Identification of Benefit ......................... ........................................................ 5-1 5.3. Separation of General Benefit......................................................................5-3 5.4. Quantification of General Benefit..................................................................5-4 5.5. Apportioning of Special Benefit.....................................................................5-5 6. METHOD ASSESSMENT 6-1 6.1. Assessment Budget......................................................................................6-1 6.2. Method of Assessment Spread.....................................................................6-2 6.3. District Improvement Project Debt Financing................................................6-2 6.4. Assessment Prepayment Formula................................................................6-3 7. ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM 7-1 8. ASSESSMENT ROLL 8-1 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The City Council of the City of Burlingame ("City Council"), pursuant to the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, being Division 15, Part 2 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California ("1972 Act'), previously formed the assessment district known and designated as "Assessment District No. 2012-1, Downtown Burlingame Avenue Streetscape Improvement Project', (hereafter referred to as the "District"). The City Council has initiated proceedings directing the preparation and filing of a report for Fiscal Year 2017/18 presenting the improvements, an estimated cost, including debt financing, of the improvements, annual administrative costs, and a diagram showing the area and properties to be assessed. The following assessment is authorized in order to pay the estimated costs, including debt financing of the improvements and annual administrative costs to be paid by the assessable real property within the boundaries of the District in proportion to the special benefit received. The following table summarizes the assessment: Description Amount District Improvement Project Costs $11,227,015 Less: Allocation to General Benefit(1) (3,238,994) Subtotal: Allocation to Special Benefit $7,988,021 Less: Sewer and Water Enterprise Fund Contribution(2) ($922,000) Less: TLC Grant (301,000) Less: Additional Contribution from Parking Enterprise Fund (782,432) Less: Additional City Contribution (20,195) Total Amount to be Specially Assessed $5,962,394 Total Amount Pre -Paid During 30 Day Collection Period $341,582 Annual Assessable Budget: Average Annual Debt Service Payment(3) $310,156 Total Annual Assessable Budget $310,156 (1) See Section 5.4. (2) Contemporaneously with the District Improvement Project, the City, using sewer and water enterprise funds, replaced the sewer and water lines under Burlingame Avenue (the overall total cost for all projects is $15,443,660). A portion of the money for that project was allocated for patching the streets and sidewalks. Since the District Improvement Project eliminates the need for patching, the $922,000 is being contributed to the District Improvement Project. (3) See Section 6.3. This annual report represents no changes to the Fiscal Year 2016/17 annual report which was prepared by NBS. Art Morimoto Assistant Public Works Director City of Burlingame Assessment District No. 2012-1 — City of Burlingame 1-1 Fiscal Year 2017/18 2. INTRODUCTION 2.1. Background of District The City of Burlingame ("City') has completed, in coordination with planned utility improvements, the Downtown Burlingame Avenue Streetscape Improvement Project ("District Improvement Project"). The District Improvement Project provided an opportunity for community stakeholders to plan and implement streetscaping and sidewalk improvements that complement the evolving vision and needs of the Burlingame Avenue property owners, merchants and community. The District Improvement Project improves the public infrastructure that fronts property along Burlingame Avenue (and portions of certain side streets at intersections with Burlingame Avenue) between EI Camino Real and California Drive. Further, the District Improvement Project enhances the overall experience of merchants and visitors by creating a memorable Burlingame Avenue for shopping, dining, and strolling. 2.2. Reason for the Assessment The assessment covered by this Engineer's Report will generate the assessment revenue necessary to provide for a portion of the public improvements provided by the District Improvement Project and further described in Section 3.2 of this Engineer's Report. The District improvements may include but are not limited to, all of the following: streetscape improvements, sidewalk improvements, District financing costs, and administrative costs associated with the ongoing annual administration of the District. 2.3. Establishment of the Assessment The City formed the District and established assessments by complying with the procedures specified in Article XIIID and the Proposition 218 Omnibus Implementation Act ("Proposition 218"). In November 1996, the voters in the State of California added Article XIIID to the California Constitution imposing, among other requirements, the necessity for the City to conduct an assessment ballot procedure to enable the owners of each property on which assessments are proposed to be enacted, the opportunity to express their support for, or opposition to the proposed assessment. The basic steps of the assessment ballot procedure are outlined below. The City prepared a Notice of Public Hearing ("Notice"), which describes, along with other mandated information, the reason for the proposed assessments and provided a date, time, and location of a public hearing to be held on the matter. The City prepared an assessment ballot, which clearly gave the property owner the ability to sign and execute their assessment ballot either in favor of, or in opposition to, the assessment. The Notice and assessment ballots were mailed to each affected property owner within the District a minimum of 45 days prior to the public hearing date as shown in the Notice. The City held community meetings with the property owners to discuss the issues facing the District and to answer property owner questions directly. After the Notice and assessment ballots were mailed, property owners were given until the close of the public hearing, as stated in the Notice, to return their signed and executed assessment ballot. During the public hearing, property owners were given the opportunity to address the City Council and ask questions or voice their concerns. After the public hearing, the returned assessment ballots received prior to the close of the public hearing were tabulated, weighted by the proposed assessment amount on each property and the results were announced by the City Council. Article XIIID provides that if, as a result of the assessment ballot proceeding, a majority protest is found to exist, the City Council shall not have the authority to enact the assessments as proposed. A majority protest Assessment District No. 2012-1 — City of Burlingame 2-1 Fiscal Year 2017/18 exists if the assessments represented by ballots submitted in opposition exceed those submitted in favor of the assessment. All returned ballots were tabulated and weighted according to the financial obligation of each particular parcel. There wasn't a majority protest as described above and the City Council approved the District formation and assessments. The City Council will annually declare its intention to levy and collect the assessments within the District and hold a public hearing concerning such levy of assessments. At such time all interested persons shall be afforded the opportunity to hear and be heard. Assessment District No. 2012-1 — City of Burlingame 2.2 Fiscal Year 2017/18 3. PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS The District provides for various Burlingame Avenue streetscape and sidewalk improvements located within the public right-of-way and dedicated easements within the boundaries of the District. 3.1. Description of the Boundaries of the District The boundaries of the District include properties located along Burlingame Avenue within the City. The District runs along Burlingame Avenue and is bounded on the east by California Drive and on the west by EI Camino Real. The City will not provide public improvements from the District Improvement Project to any area located outside of the District boundaries. Section 7 of this Engineer's Report provides an assessment diagram that more fully provides a description of the District's boundaries and the parcels within those boundaries. 3.2. Description of the District Improvement Project The District Improvement Project includes streetscape items such as sidewalk, street and pedestrian lighting, trees and landscaping, seating, signage, kiosks, gateway treatments, site furnishings, and other parking improvements, appurtenant facilities, and soft costs. The District Improvement Project provides for public improvements to be distributed throughout the entire District, and as such, are of direct and special benefit to the parcels within the District. The District Improvement Project consists of a classic design style with touches of traditional and contemporary design. This desired design style creates a structured, timeless design with patterned, elegant materials consistent throughout the Burlingame Avenue area. Not only does the District Improvement Project provide necessary street improvements, but it allows for an increase in pedestrian space along Burlingame Avenue. To allow for this additional pedestrian space, parallel parking replaced the existing angled parking. The change from angled parking to parallel parking will allow for an expanded 16 foot width of sidewalk area on both sides of Burlingame Avenue. This additional sidewalk area can provide sufficient space for seating, art features, landscaping, and lighting. Burlingame Avenue will be maintained with two-way traffic and 10 foot wide travel lanes. The parallel parking stalls, with a parking assist zone, will have a width of nine feet. The parking assist zone allows for car door openings and limited bike through lanes along Burlingame Avenue. At the intersection corners along Burlingame Avenue bulb -outs are proposed to allow for additional pedestrian areas. In addition to providing an enhanced pedestrian area, the corner intersection bulb -outs will reduce pedestrian crossing distances. As an additional safety feature, the crosswalks will be of a different construction material than the street surface to provide a warning for traffic to slow down. The District Improvement Project includes asphalt paving in the roadway and colored concrete for the parking and parking assist zones. The sidewalks, corner intersection bulb -outs and cross walks will be constructed of concrete pavers. Trees, street lights with limited features, and other public furnishings are also included throughout the District. 3.3. Map of District Improvement Project The following map provides the approximate location (for reference only — may not include all) of the improvements provided by the District Improvement Project throughout the District. Assessment District No. 2012-1 — City of Burlingame 3-1 Fiscal Year 2017/18 -- `` _ � L R a a. u v, W C _ t�' S _ N t U E T co }y 4. ESTIMATE OF COSTS The estimated cost of the District Improvement Project as more fully described in Section 3 of this Engineer's Report is outlined below. 4.1. District Improvement Project Costs The following table provides the costs for the District Improvement Project. Refer to Section 6 for more detail on the financing plan and the annual assessment budget. Description Amount District Improvement Project Costs Construction $9,709,355 Construction Management 825,660 Construction Engineering 332,000 Engineering Administration 360,000 Total District Improvement Project Costs $11,227,015 Contemporaneously with the District Improvement Project, the City, using sewer and water enterprise funds, replaced the sewer and water lines under Burlingame Avenue (the overall total cost for all projects was $15,443,660). By completing the District Improvement Project in coordination with the utility improvements, it saved significant project costs and minimize the construction impacts to property and businesses along Burlingame Avenue. A portion of the planned utility improvement budget, $922,000, was allocated for patching the streets and sidewalks. Since the District Improvement Project eliminates that need for patching, the $922,000 is being contributed to the streetscape project from the sewer and water enterprise funds and thus will not be specially assessed. Thus, overall, the District Improvement Project was funded by state gas tax, Measure A funds, grant funds, sewer and water enterprise funds, the parking enterprise fund, and revenues from District special assessments. Assessment District No. 2012-1 — City of Burlingame 4-1 Fiscal Year 2017/18 5. SPECIAL AND GENERAL BENEFIT 5.1. Introduction Pursuant to Article XIIID, all parcels that receive a special benefit conferred upon them as a result of the improvements shall be identified, and the proportionate special benefit derived by each identified parcel shall be determined in relationship to the entire costs of the improvements. Division 12 of the Streets and Highways Code, the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, permits the establishment of assessment districts by local agencies forthe purpose of providing certain public improvements necessary or convenient for providing certain public services. Section 22573 of the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972 requires that assessments must be levied according to benefit rather than according to assessed value. This Section states: "The net amount to be assessed upon lands within an assessment district may be apportioned by any formula or method which fairly distributes the net amount among all assessable lots or parcels in proportion to the estimated benefit to be received by each such lot orparcel from the improvements." Article XIIID, Section 4(a) of the California Constitution limits the amount of any assessment to the proportional special benefit conferred on the property. Article XIIID also provides that publicly owned properties must be assessed unless there is clear and convincing evidence that those properties receive no special benefit from the assessment. Examples of parcels exempted from the assessment would be the areas of public streets, public avenues, public lanes, public roads, public drives, public courts, public alleys, public easements and rights -of -ways, public greenbelts, and public parkways. Furthermore, Proposition 218 requires that the City separate the general benefit from special benefit, so only special benefit may be assessed. 5.2. Identification of Benefit The District Improvement Project will provide benefits to both those properties within the District boundaries and to the community as a whole. The benefit conferred to property within the District can be grouped into three primary benefit categories; aesthetic benefit, safety benefit, and economic activity benefit. The three District benefit categories are further expanded upon in each section below. Aesthetic Benefit The aesthetic benefit relates to the increase in the overall aesthetics as a result of the District Improvement Project. The District Improvement Project will provide public street and sidewalk infrastructure beautification throughout the District, that will enhance the overall image and desirability of the properties within the District. Burlingame Avenue streetscape improvements within the District were last completed back in the early 1960s. Since that time, the public facilities have deteriorated. The following aesthetic benefits will be provided as a result of the District Improvement Project: • The District Improvement Project enhances the community identity of the Burlingame Avenue area, which will lead to a stronger and healthier street corridor. The image of the Burlingame Avenue area will be increased by correcting the visual clutter such as trash containers and news racks that currently encroach on the pedestrian area. • Uniform and up to date streetscape and sidewalk improvements creates cohesion throughout the District from EI Camino Real to California Drive. This District cohesion enhances the retail experience as well as encourage maximum use of space. Assessment District No. 2012-1 — City of Burlingame 5-1 Fiscal Year 2017/18 Upgraded streetscaping and sidewalk amenities provided by the District Improvement Project enhances the appearance, desirability, and "livability' of the property directly fronting the improvements provided throughout the District. As a result of the District Improvement Project, the overall "livability" of the District increases. "Livability" encompasses several qualities and characteristics that are unique to a specific area. The Victoria Transport Policy Institute (www.vtpi.org) expands on the concept of "livability" and the various benefits associated with that designation: "The livability of an area increases property desirability and business activity. Livability is largely affected by conditions in the public realm, places where people naturally interact with each other and their community, including streets, parks, transportation terminals and other public facilities. Livability also refers to the environmental and social quality of an area as perceived by employees, customers and visitors. This includes local environmental conditions, the quality of social interactions, opportunities for recreation and entertainment, aesthetics, and existence of unique cultural and environmental resources." Safety Benefit The District Improvement Project provides an increased level of safety to the property, businesses, and visitors to the District. Additionally, the District Improvement Project help mitigate potential criminal activity throughout the District area. The following safety benefits are provided as a result of the District Improvement Project: • The District Improvement Project repaired uneven and deteriorating sidewalks within the District. Improvements to the existing sidewalk infrastructure will reduce the number of future trip and fall occurrences potentially occurring in front of District property. • The District Improvement Project provides better lighting throughout the Burlingame Avenue area. The improved lighting ensures that sidewalks, streets, and property fronts are more visible. This increased level of visibility reduces the opportunities for vandalism to property within the District. • Wider sidewalks provide additional space between vehicle and property as well as vehicle and pedestrian, which provides a safety benefit for both property and pedestrian. • Traffic calming improvements can reduce automobile traffic and speeds, which in turn, increases the safety for vehicular passengers, pedestrians, and other non -motorized travels. The streetscaping strategies utilized in the development of the District Improvement Project provide numerous safety benefits to property and people throughout the District. Again, the Victoria Transport Policy Institute (www.vtpi.org) notes the safety benefit attributable to streetscaping improvements: "Several studies indicate that common streetscaping strategies, such as landscaping and narrowing traffic lanes, tend to increase traffic safety. Streetscaping that reduces traffic speeds and improves pedestrian crossing conditions can significantly reduce collisions. Research by the U.S. Highway Safety Research System concludes that road diets (arterial street traffic calming) typically reduce crash rates by 47% on major highways through small urban areas, by 19% on corridors in larger city suburban areas, and 29% overall." Assessment District No. 2012-1 — City of Burlingame 5-2 Fiscal Year 2017/18 Economic Activity Benefit The economic activity benefit relates to the increase in the District's economic activity and further potential as a result of the District Improvement Project. The economic activity for property within the District can best be described as the ability for the property within the District to develop and operate at the property's highest and best use. Properties within the District receive the following economic activity benefits as a result of the District Improvement Project: • The District Improvement Project revitalizes the Burlingame Avenue area. This revitalization will encourage new business development and existing business expansion which will reduce vacancy rates and increase lease rates for property within the District. • The streetscaping improvements encourages an increase in commerce throughout the District. The Burlingame Avenue area will become more pedestrian friendly, thus improving customer activity for stores and restaurants. The streetscaping improvements not only add economic value to property adjacent to the improvements, but the improvements make the property appear more stable and prosperous. The National Complete Streets Coalition (www.completestreets.org) notes that: "Street design that is inclusive of all modes of transportation, where appropriate, not only improves conditions for existing businesses, but also is a proven method for revitalizing an area and attracting new development. Washington, DC's Barracks Row was experiencing a steady decline of commercial activity due to uninviting sidewalks, lack of streetlights, and speeding traffic. After many design improvements, which included new patterned sidewalks, more efficient public parking, and new traffic signals, Barracks Row attracted 44 new businesses and 200 new jobs. Economic activity on this three-quarter mile strip (measured by sales, employees, and number of pedestrians) has more than tripled since the inception of the project" 5.3. Separation of General Benefit Section 4 of Article XI IID of the California Constitution provides that once a local agency which proposes to impose assessments on property has identified those parcels that will have special benefits conferred upon them and upon which an assessment will be imposed, the local agency must next "separate the general benefits from the special benefits conferred," and only the special benefits can be included in the amount of the assessments imposed. General benefit is an overall and similar benefit to the public at large resulting from the improvements to be provided by the assessments levied. The District improvements, which are more fully presented in Section 3.2 of this Engineer's Report, will be constructed and provided within the District boundaries only. There will be no improvements from the District Improvement Project constructed outside of the District boundaries. The District Improvement Project provide aesthetic, safety, and economic benefits to the property within the District, but it is recognized that the District Improvement Project also provides a level of benefitto some property and businesses within proximity to the District, as well as visitors and individuals passing through the District. Vehicular and pedestrian traffic from property within and outside of the District as well as individual passing through the downtown Burlingame Avenue area are able to utilize the improvements to not only access property and businesses located within a close proximityto the District, but also roadways located outside of the District. Therefore, the general benefit created as a result of the District Improvement Project has been considered. Assessment District No. 2012-1 — City of Burlingame 5-3 Fiscal Year 2017/18 5.4. Quantification of General Benefit In order for property within the District to be assessed only for that portion of special benefit received from the District Improvement Project, the general benefit provided by the District Improvement Project needs to be quantified. The amount of general benefit provided from the District Improvement Project can not be assessed to the benefitting properties within the District. To quantify the general benefit provided to the variety of traffic that passes through the District for the general benefit of enjoying the surrounding atmosphere, observing the level of economic activity, or accessing adjacent property or arterial streets in a more efficient and safe manner, both vehicular and pedestrian traffic flows have been incorporated in the quantification of general benefit. Vehicular Traffic Activity Access to the Burlingame Avenue commercial core area is provided by major north -south arterials. Those major arterials are EI Camino Real to the west of the District and California Drive to the east of the District. Collector streets feed traffic to these and other arterials throughout the City. As such, Burlingame Avenue is considered a collector street within the City. In 2010, the City adopted the Burlingame Downtown Specific Plan ("Specific Plan"). The Specific Plan included a Traffic Impact Analysis Technical Memorandum ("Traffic Analysis") prepared by Wilbur Smith Associates. This Traffic Analysis evaluated existing traffic conditions at various points throughout the project area. One point evaluated by the consultants was existing travel conditions at the intersection of Burlingame Avenue and Park Road. The Traffic Analysis evaluated, among other characteristics, traffic counts, turning movement data, vehicle delay, and level of service for each intersection. Existing conditions for the project area intersections, including the Burlingame Avenue intersection, were evaluated during a weekday, evening peak hour timeframe. There were 664 observed traffic counts at the intersection of Burlingame Avenue and Park Road. Park Road terminates at Burlingame Avenue requiring traffic to either turn left or right onto Burlingame Avenue. In addition to the Traffic Analysis, information related to vehicle trips by purpose was used from the Summary of Travel Trends 2009 National Household Travel Survey ("2009 NHTS") sponsored by the U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration. Of the observed 2,171 vehicle trips in the 2009 NHTS survey, 643 trips represented social, recreational and other travel purposes; the remaining 1,425 vehicle trips represented work, shopping and other errands. Applying this vehicle trip breakdown to the observed traffic counts at the intersection of Burlingame Avenue and Park Road, 207 of the traffic counts represent social, recreational, and other travel purposes not directly related to District activities but more likely utilizing Burlingame Avenue as a collector street to feed to one of the adjacent arterial streets. This non -District related traffic count represents approximately 31.20% of the total observed traffic counts and is considered to be general benefit from the District Improvement Project. Pedestrian Traffic Activity As result of the sidewalk improvements and beautification provided by the District Improvement Project, there is a level of benefit to those pedestrians not involved with any of the shopping, dining, or other commerce activities provided by the District properties. People walk for a variety of reasons; work, errands, shopping, recreation, health, and many others. Further, pedestrians will seek out and utilize sidewalk facilities that provide a safe placeto walk as well as an environmentthat provides a certain amount of visual interest. Again, the 2009 NHTS analyzed the annual number of walking trips and the purpose of the walking trips made by individuals surveyed. Of the annual total 40,962 (in millions) walking trips, 30,129 of those walking trips were for travel, work, shopping, errands, business obligations, and meals; the remaining 10,833 walking trips were for social, recreational, and other purposes. The social, recreational, and other purpose walking trips represented 26.5% of the total walking trips reported. Therefore, to account for that portion of the Burlingame Avenue pedestrian activity utilizing the improvements provided by the District Improvement Project for non -District related activities, 26.50% of pedestrian traffic activity is considered to be of general benefit. Since the District Improvement Project provides a blend of both vehicular and pedestrian activity the two categories must be addressed in a collective form rather than independently. Therefore, to appropriately quantifythe overall level of general benefit provided by the District Improvement Projectthe arithmetic mean Assessment District No. 2012-1 — City of Burlingame 5-4 Fiscal Year 2017/18 of the general benefit percentages from the vehicular traffic activity and the pedestrian traffic activity has been calculated. This general benefit result is provided in the table below. Description Percentage General Benefit 28.85% Accordingly, 71.15% of the benefits from the District Improvement Project are considered to provide special benefits to the properties within the District and thus could be subject to assessment therein. 5.5. Apportioning of Special Benefit As outlined above, each of the parcels within the District is deemed to receive special benefit from the District Improvement Project. Each parcel that has a special benefit conferred upon it as a result of the District Improvement Project is identified and the proportionate special benefit derived by each identified parcel is determined in relationship to the entire cost of the District Improvement Project. Benefit Point Assignment Aesthetic Benefit Points Aesthetic benefit points are assigned based upon not only the property's location to the District Improvement Project, but also the property's zoning designation. All District parcels are located within the Burlingame Avenue Commercial District, which has a commercial zoning designation. Additionally, since the District Improvement Project is provided uniformly throughout the District all properties within the District are within the same proximity to the location of the infrastructure provided by the District Improvement Project. Therefore, the aesthetic benefit to each parcel in the District is deemed to be the same. Each property within the District is assigned one (1.00) benefit point for the aesthetic benefits received from the District Improvement Project. Safety Benefit Points The safety benefit points are assigned based upon not only the property's location to the District Improvement Project, but also the property's zoning designation. All District parcels are located within the Burlingame Avenue Commercial District, which has a commercial zoning designation. Additionally, since the District Improvement Project is provided uniformly throughout the District all properties within the District are within the same proximity to the location of the infrastructure provided by the District Improvement Project. Therefore, the safety benefit to each parcel in the District is deemed to be the same. Each property within the District is assigned one (1.00) benefit point for the safety benefits received from the District Improvement Project. Economic Activity Benefit Points The economic activity benefit points are assigned based upon not only the property's location to the District Improvement Project, but also the property's zoning designation. All District parcels are located within the Burlingame Avenue Commercial District, which has a commercial zoning designation. Additionally, since the District Improvement Project is provided uniformly throughout the District all properties within the District are within the same proximity to the location of the infrastructure provided by the District Improvement Project. Therefore, the economic activity benefit to each parcel in the District is deemed to be the same. The Burlingame Avenue Commercial District is already a well-established commercial district with a strong economic activity presence. The Burlingame Avenue area features a mixture of restaurants, national retail stores, and many locally based retailers. Marketing and promotional efforts to increase the economic presence of an expanded area that includes the District boundaries is currently being funded by the Burlingame Avenue Downtown Business Improvement District ("DBID"). In an effort to increase the economic presence, business owners within the DBID pay an annual assessment to fund various activities that aid in the promotion, advertising and image building of the businesses within the DBID boundaries. Existing marketing and promotional activities throughout the District area have resulted in higher tenant lease rates. According to Loopnet.com on March 23, 2012, the average lease rate along Burlingame Assessment District No. 2012-1 — City of Burlingame 5-5 Fiscal Year 2017/18 Avenue was approximately 45% higher than the average lease rate along the City's Broadway Avenue, another commercial area. Retail sales are also strong within the District, according to City Economic Development data, with sales per square foot generally ranging from $300 to $800+ per square foot. Further, there were a few new buildings constructed in the downtown around the time of formation of the District and several major remodels of existing buildings to accommodate new retail uses generally limited to tenant improvements. Given this already existing strong economic activity presence throughout the District, as well as the potential for property to further develop and enhance their economic presence, each property within the District is assigned one-half (0.50) benefit point for the economic activity benefits received from the District Improvement Project. The following table provides a summary of the special benefit points assigned to each parcel within the District. Parcel Factors The method of apportioning the benefit to the parcels within the District reflects the proportional special benefit assigned to each property from the District Improvement Project based upon the various property characteristics for each parcel as compared to other properties within the District. As part of the special benefit analysis, various property characteristics were analyzed including parcel size, street frontage, building size, land use, trip generation etc. Given that the special benefits provided by the District Improvement Project focuses on aesthetic benefit, safety benefit, and economic activity benefits it was determined that linear frontage and lot square footage are the most appropriate parcel factors. Each parcel's linear frontage and lot square footage have been used as the primary assessment variables for the calculation and assignment of parcel factors. By adjusting the assigned special benefit points set forth above by parcel factors, a more complete picture of the proportional special benefits received by each parcel from the District Improvement Project is presented. Therefore, linear and lot parcel factors were calculated for each parcel in the District according to the formulas below: Linear Factor Pursuant to Section 25.32.050 of the City's Zoning Code for the Burlingame Avenue Commercial District, each lot shall have a street frontage of at least 50 feet. Utilizing the prescribed street frontage as set forth in the City's Zoning code, a linear factor is calculated for each parcel based upon the assigned linear frontage for the parcel divided by 50.00: Linear Factor Aesthetic Safety Economic Parcel Land Use Benefit Point Benefit Point Activity Benefit Classification Assignment Assignment Point Assi nment All District Parcels 1.00 1.00 0.50 Parcel Factors The method of apportioning the benefit to the parcels within the District reflects the proportional special benefit assigned to each property from the District Improvement Project based upon the various property characteristics for each parcel as compared to other properties within the District. As part of the special benefit analysis, various property characteristics were analyzed including parcel size, street frontage, building size, land use, trip generation etc. Given that the special benefits provided by the District Improvement Project focuses on aesthetic benefit, safety benefit, and economic activity benefits it was determined that linear frontage and lot square footage are the most appropriate parcel factors. Each parcel's linear frontage and lot square footage have been used as the primary assessment variables for the calculation and assignment of parcel factors. By adjusting the assigned special benefit points set forth above by parcel factors, a more complete picture of the proportional special benefits received by each parcel from the District Improvement Project is presented. Therefore, linear and lot parcel factors were calculated for each parcel in the District according to the formulas below: Linear Factor Pursuant to Section 25.32.050 of the City's Zoning Code for the Burlingame Avenue Commercial District, each lot shall have a street frontage of at least 50 feet. Utilizing the prescribed street frontage as set forth in the City's Zoning code, a linear factor is calculated for each parcel based upon the assigned linear frontage for the parcel divided by 50.00: Linear Factor = Parcel's Assigned / 50.00 Linear Street Frontage There are several parcels located at street intersections within the District. The District Improvement Project partially extends along the side streets at these intersections with Burlingame Avenue. To account for the partial extension of the District Improvement Project at each street intersection, the side street linear frontage of the improvement has been added to each corner parcel to account for this increased linear frontage adjacent to the District Improvement Project. r Assessment District No. 2012-1 — City of Burlingame 5-6 Fiscal Year 2017/18 Lot Factor Pursuant to Section 25.32.050 of the City's Zoning Code for the Burlingame Avenue Commercial District, each lot shall have an area of at least 5,000 square feet. Utilizing the prescribed lot square footage as set forth in the City's Zoning code, a lot factor is calculated for each parcel based upon the assigned lot square footage for the parcel divided by 5,000: Lot Factor = Parcel's Assigned / 5,000 + Parcel's Total Economic Lot Square Footage Tx Aesthetics Points Total Special Benefit Point Calculation Parcel's Total Special Benefit = parcel's Total + Parcel's Total + Parcel's Total Economic Points Tx Aesthetics Points Safety Points Activity Points Parcel's Total Aesthetic Points The District Improvement Project, as well as the store and property fronts that are adjacent to those linear improvements provide an enhanced level of interest and "curb appeal" that add to the overall experience along Burlingame Avenue. Since the improvements and furnishings are uniform throughout the District, the "curb appeal" is consistent for the front of each parcel located within the District. Additionally, the uniform landscaping aids in softening the surrounding edges of each parcel's front exposure to the District Improvement Project by adding life, color, and texture to the property's appearance, and overall pedestrian experience. Given the linear nature of the aesthetic benefits provided by the District Improvement Project, the aesthetic benefit that each property receives is also perceived on a linear basis. To appropriately quantify and assign the aesthetic benefit received by each parcel within the District, the aesthetic benefit point is further adjusted according to the formula below: Parcel's Total _ Aesthetic Benefit x Linear Factor Aesthetic Points _ Points Assigned Tx Linear Factor Parcel's Total Safety Points The District Improvement Project provides enhanced lines of travel and sight along Burlingame Avenue, which increases the level of safety by mitigating potential accidents and crime by having the additional exposure to property and traffic. The lighting improvements also increase the visual sight line by providing additional exposure to property fronts, especially during the evening hours. This additional exposure reduces the potential for crime and vandalism to the front of property throughout the District. Further, the sidewalk and parking zone along Burlingame Avenue provides a bufferfor traffic and the property frontage. Again, given the linear nature of the safety benefits provided by the District Improvement Project, the safety benefit that each property receives is also perceived on a linear basis. To appropriately quantify and assign the safety benefit received by each parcel within the District, the safety benefit point is further adjusted according to the formula below: Parcel's Total _ Safety Benefit x Linear Factor Safety Points Points Assigned Parcel's Total Economic Activity Points The District Improvement Project creates a more pedestrian friendly and inviting Burlingame Avenue environment that supports and encourages additional commerce activity throughout the District. The improvements allow parcels within the District to develop and redevelop to their highest and best use in accordance with City zoning and development regulations_ However, the one limiting property characteristic that constrains a parcel from developing to the highest and best use is the size of the parcel itself. The size of a parcel limits the amount of development and redevelopment that may occur on the footprint of the parcel. Larger parcels allow for greater area to develop and redevelop than do smaller Assessment District No. 2012-1 — City of Burlingame 5.7 Fiscal Year 2017/18 parcels, which corresponds to larger parcels receiving proportionally greater economic activity benefit when compared to smaller parcels within the District. Therefore, the economic activity benefit for parcels in the District is in direct proportion to the size of the parcel. Since the economic activity benefits are in direct relation to the size of a parcel, then the economic activity benefits provided by the District Improvement Project is also perceived on a parcel size basis. To appropriately quantify and assign the economic activity benefit received by each parcel within the District, the economic activity benefit point is further adjusted according to the formula below: Parcel's Total Economic = Economic Activity x Lot Factor Activity Points Benefit Points Assigned Data Considerations and Parcel Changes The use of the latest San Mateo County Assessor's Secured Roll information served as the basis in determining each parcel's linear frontage and lot square footage, unless better data was available to the City. In addition, if any parcel within the District is identified by the San Mateo County Auditor/Controller to be an invalid parcel number, the linear frontage and lot square footage of the subsequent valid parcel shall be the basis for assigning the future total special benefit points. If a single parcel subdivides into multiple parcels, the total special benefit points shall be apportioned based on the linear frontage and lot square footage of the newly created parcels. Total Special Benefit Points The total special benefit points assigned to the parcels at formation of the District were 183.28. The following table provides a breakdown of the total special benefit point assignment for each parcel in the District: Assessment District No. 2012-1 — City of Burlingame 5-8 Fiscal Year 2017118 0 Lh W E m m c E40 �,U d C MMMNMNMtM CV tONM.- thM MM NMI+I M W m V 06 V'N NNM e�NtM �° d •N •O ME 'rO 00 MW WC W0M VO WV- 10� WM MM OW NM NM IN� rIS q W WOn- WO �O O0O W0M M0W O NOOO OWN0 OW OWW 0MW 0c 0 0 0 O m C W w O a U Tw O� V O OOOOOOON O O O O O r O M V'00 0 W t O 00 N M NO M N M00000 W M N N O � O W 1 0 00 W O W F W 0 W 0 O 0 NO) f O O 00 W O N� 1 N +d+ 0 d C O C •O r �<V N+-O .-O� �N� �O�N� .--MN 00 N� m F'rnma U • 4+ N O V O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N M V 0 O W O N O N O M N M O N M W O M O N O N 0 O O O MIS W O O W W W 0 O 0 N I� 0 r O Il N C C — - N N � O .- � O .-- � fV r � O � (V � � M (V O 6 d O N .- O F-ama p N V W � W 0 W 0 0 0 V N W I W A I� M W M W �- O N 0 M W N W O V V 0 O 0 N 0 O W W N O � n � O n W I� I� O O O N N W W W O � O r W W O W M W M� W � O N V Jt1 ON N s-�-�-NN �-t7 N � O �.-�� ��.--.-�(j - 00(V �� N� � o O ON t7 00 N� d LL i p�' aWD 0f�mm N00 V i0NM 00 WO WON W rfWV W V OSOU N Io V N00 O NrW O d d rNr0 W W W I�Nr W W NN 00�O MSO �O 1�rMON W O W' rMO W O J O'� NOOmm W MO W W N�l1N W W 1� V W r W N aDMMO�(O V mOMMM W MM NIS NLL N O O V 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O O O N M V 0 O W- O O N O M N M O N M W O M 0 N 0 N 0 O O t0 M W I� f� .- 0 O W O 0.- W W 0 WON 0 0 1 0 .-- 0 O 0 lO O W N IS N C V N O A O .- (V .- O N M N O O [V r R J LL d 0 0 00'' 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N O W O O M O O O W O WOO 0 0 0 0 0 0 m0IU 00 W O t0000K1 ONM�OOOOOOOOM 0000 i0 yw Imp- 0000000W X00 W ISO to OW 0 NO+-�00 V �.-ap tn00 W V V O t0 W O MN t00 C CU 1� W N�� N 7 W� � V W N W W W W v W W O 1- 0 6 0 W O tO �O W W N O N N M W LL Yi S. N�NNNN�N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 S. ANN 0 0 0 �N 0 0 ON 0 0 u�N 0 0 �O-Sw 0 0 0 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 ON 0 0 O 0 0 0 W 0 O 0 W 0 W 0 O 0 W 0 N 0 N 0 O 0 ON 0 U C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 E�•o o5a c: w Wac d m T w d 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 in d a° m !? 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 y 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 d ML °' a ❑ � N M V ifl W i� W 0 0 .-- N M a{ N W I� W 0 0� N M V N W 1� W 0 p � N M V �O W 1� W 0 M M M M M M d 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 WN�Of�W.-ND0yNNNNNNM[hMOS.-OOOOO.rthMthMOOENNNNNNNN 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0000000 i N N �NNN�� NNN �O NNN tO �U NlO NNN �O �O NchM i0 W NWNNNONNNZNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN �.-c-�����-�.--ANNNa Oc.N- tNM.--.N— N. N. N. N N N N N N NNNN 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lh W E m m c E40 _ @� co vin N NSU N �n �n inrm co oro N C_��M(V m N[VNV �O cc T �V 'J U c0M 0.0 F mo O N 0 N_ Ul O I6 N L W mma C z E U y Mn - N y c m U a+ (O Vl[l y } CO In In N W Q ii V V' lD 'E N N V V l0 V V LO 0 N 0 V 0 LO 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C N r ODD G W ZX O • a 3Z v rQ Ti"w O tO O Nu'1O� O N O O W O ma0 a 0 M MO r N Meq 10 C C O O O O N N M n 0, O N O F'mma � • .� yN��n 000N000roMr o�mmm O mac 6 N y G L O O � � � 0 0 � N N N C6 0 O w C O �-amLL mrn n N WM C N V W O1e-0 Co M 0�� (O M c0O� JU 00OO� 00� •--O M� A LL d d O 0 0 0 N 0 � 0 oOp J Q Ana N N v_r V V u��ni i0 V V W N -v N V d'v �U N N LL N� O 000 �O �O �t1O�0) NOOON W cO M MOMYf r aD tO C 066 0 0 (V (V6 O .� A J LL W O)O O O OO (O V N O O O OOO O O O M M O OOH M ry� CONNr�0 NCO'6 uf � �O ON V V V O�Ot0� 0 tpM W A C JLL------------- �{N 0 0 NIt1 0 0 �U 0 lnN��Nu) 0 0 0 0 0 0 �O 0 U C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 yj E :x .O N o > n. C Y Q C IL m t, 000 00000 0000 +. � R y O N N C3 LL u„ 000000000000 L��000000000000 y C •p r o � ama ❑ O � N M V� O f O r c o m O —Va�vvavvvv�n y 0 M 0 VmmMvu�co 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 r. 0 -co 0 y N V d 0 N 0 N 0 N 0 N 0 0 0 V 0 N 'd' O N y — 0 iE 0 0 0 0 0 MAN, 0 0 V 0 0 r �� N N E N N N N N N N N N N N O 0a.z mmmmmmmmmmm�- Q N N N N N N N N N N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N E co m C m c �O cc T N 'J U a C N 0 N_ Ul O I6 N L O C z E U y Mn - N y c m y N N N � y } U y N N U p C N y — Q ii 6. METHOD ASSESSMENT 6.1. Assessment Budget In order to assess the parcels within the District for the special benefits received from the District Improvement Project, the general and special benefits must be separated. As previously quantified in Section 5.4 of this Engineer's Report, the general benefit received from the District Improvement Project is 28.85%. Accordingly, 71.15% of the benefits from the District Improvement Project are considered to provide special benefits to the properties within the District and thus could be subject to assessment therein. However, as shown below, because of contributions from various funds available to the City, including the sewer, water, and parking enterprise funds, Measure A funds, and grant funds, only 53.11% of the District Improvement Project costs are being specially assessed. Reducing the District Improvement Project costs by these contributions, the total District Improvement Project costs to be specially assessed areas follows: Description Amount Total Net District Improvement Project Costs $11,227,015 Less: General Benefit Contribution (28.85%) (3,238,994) Subtotal — Portion of Budget Assessable for Special Benefit $7,988,021 Less: Sewer and Water Enterprise Fund Contribution ($922,000) Less: TLC Grant (301,000) Less: Additional Contribution from Parking Enterprise Fund (782,432) Less: Additional City Contribution (20,195) Total District Improvement Project Costs Assessed for Special Benefit(1) $5,962,394 Total Amount Pre -Paid During 30 Day Collection Period $341,582 Annual Assessable Budget: Average Annual Debt Service Payment for District Improvement Project Costs $310,156 Total Annual Assessable Budget $310,156 (1) $5,620,812 of the District Improvement Project costs have been financed over a period of 30 years. The City issued bonds for the total District Improvement Project costs assessed for special benefit and will use the assessment revenues to repay the bonds, over a period of 30 years, for the District's portion of that cost, $5,620,812, plus the City's estimated financing and interest costs. Section 6.3 of this Engineer's Report provides the basis of the average annual debt service payment used to establish the annual assessments. Assessment Rate per Special Benefit Point The assessment rate per special benefit point is calculated by dividing the total annual assessable budget by the total special benefit points assigned to the parcels in the District. The following formula provides the assessment rate per special benefit point calculation: Assessment District No. 2012-1 — City of Burlingame 6-1 Fiscal Year 2017/18 Total Annual Assessable Budget / Total Special Benefit Points = Assessment Rate per Special Benefit Point $310,156 1169.29 = $1,832.10 The total amount of financed District Improvement Project costs, which has been determined to provide special benefit to parcels within the District, will be assessed over a period of 30 years. The individual assessments are shown on the assessment roll in Section 8 of this Engineer's Report. 6.2. Method of Assessment The method of assessment is based upon a formula that assigns the special benefit to each parcel, with special benefit points being adjusted by parcel linear and lot factors. The formulas below provide a summary of the annual assessment calculation for each parcel in the District. (A) Parcel's Parcel's Assigned Aesthetic Total Aesthetic = Benefit Points (1.00) Points (B) Parcel's Parcel's Assigned Total Safety = Safety Benefit Points (1.00) Points Parcel's Total Economic Parcel's Assigned Economic Activity Points Activity Benefit Points (0.50) (D) Parcel's Assigned Linear Factor Linear Frontage (E) Parcel's Assigned Lot Factor Lot Square Footage (F) Parcel's (A) (B) Total Special = Parcel's Total + Parcel's Total Benefit Points Aesthetics Points Safety Points Parcel's Annual _ Assessment Rate: X Assessment $1,832.10 X Linear Factor X Linear Factor X Lot(Factor / 50.00 / 5,000 (C) Parcel's Total Economic Activity Points (F) Parcel's Total Special Benefit Points 6.3. District Improvement Project Debt Financing The $5,620,812 portion of District Improvement Project costs assessed to property within the District has been financed over a period of 30 years. In addition to the amount of financed District Improvement Project costs, any financing costs related to the issuance of debt such as the cost of issuance, original issue discount, and contingencies were included as part of the total amount financed. The City has calculated the annual assessment based on its costs of financing the District's portion of the District Improvement Assessment District No. 2012-1 — City of Burlingame 6-2 Fiscal Year 2017/18 Project assessed for special benefit costs over a 30 year period, and has determined that it requires an annual assessment amount of $310,156 from the District. The difference between the original estimated financing costs and the actual financing costs will not affect the annual assessments shown in this Engineers Report. 6.4. Assessment Prepavment Formula Assessment Prepayment Formula During the 30 Days Following District Formation In the 30 days after the formation of the District, property owners had the option to prepay and permanently satisfy their portion of the total District Improvement Project costs assessed for special benefit, without interest, and without financing costs, according to the following formula: Parcel's 30 Day Total District Improvement Project Parcel's Total District's Total _ Prepayment Amount Costs Assessed for x Special - Special Special Benefit Benefit Points Benefit Points Parcel's 30 Day - $4,475,000 Parcel's Total x Special - 183.28 Prepayment Amount Benefit Points Assessment Prepayment Formula After the 30 Day Period Following District Formation Property owners within the District may prepay and permanently satisfy their entire portion (no partial prepayments) of the total annual assessment of an assessor's parcel, provided that a prepayment may be made only if there are no delinquent assessments with respect to such assessor's parcel at the time of prepayment. An owner of an assessor's parcel intending to prepay the ongoing annual assessment obligation shall provide the City with written notice of intent to prepay. Within 30 days of receipt of such written notice, the City shall notify such owner of the prepayment amount of such assessor's parcel. The assessment prepayment amount shall be calculated by the following steps: Step 1: Compute the special benefit points that could be assigned to the assessors parcel prepaying the annual assessment obligation in the fiscal year in which the prepayment would be received by the City. Step 2: Divide the special benefit points computed pursuant to Step 1 for such assessor's parcel by the total special benefit points that could be assigned in that fiscal year to property in the entire District. Step 3: Multiply the quotient computed pursuant to Step 2 by the total annual assessment to compute that portion of the total annual assessment to be prepaid ("Parcel's Annual Assessment Amount"). Step 4: Calculate the revenue stream produced by the Parcel's Annual Assessment Amount from the date of prepayment up to and including the maturity date of the District, June 30, 2042, except that this assumed final maturity date may be amended by the City no later than the time of the calculation of the prepayment. Step 5: Calculate the present value of the annual revenue stream determined in Step 4. The present value shall be calculated using that discount rate which, when the prepayment is invested in City approved available investments earning a rate of interest equal to the discount rate, would produce annual revenues equal to the amount calculated in Step 4. Assessment District No. 2012-1 - City of Burlingame 6-3 Fiscal Year 2017118 Step 6: Determine the prepayment amount by adding to the present value calculated in Step 5 any fees or expenses incurred by the City in connection with the prepayment calculation or the application of the proceeds of the prepayment. Assessment District No. 2012-1 — City of Burlingame 6-4 Fiscal Year 2017/18 7. ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM An Assessment Diagram for the District is shown on the following page. The lines and dimensions of each lot or parcel within the District are those lines and dimensions shown on the maps of the County Assessor of the County of San Mateo, at the time this report was prepared, and are incorporated by reference herein and made part of this Engineer's Report. Assessment District No. 2012-1 — City of Burlingame 7.1 Fiscal Year 2017118 ooh wo w" �-g o� Wowo "g3 rcr LLy 0 �a oo h og3a0,-- �N a ii�o oiio¢ z� v om�wLL¢g pE�z or ZO UN N rW pUNwWVa�(O Q Wry ZO ON UnnLLUWV p0 r¢�0 N¢W w W.za wK=r¢n WI aOn� �h£ ¢Z rOn 60 FwZ U a FW�NZN6 a ¢ `VF U a ZN �O Z bUE -O WWF Z F� Uw 2 NWLL Uy n On- tt O IO F O w0 w� O W.a On,�¢2� 0a LLWW NO �Q BOO wNa� V uZ N5U �.ow L�] UiriU WN WZ 6izLLK p LLy0j0 EF Ott O5� UmJ0 Wr FSU NZU N Ozw2 U'j Fm zZj UU Kj nK ux zo zowapw�w zo yy o—o I�TaT� oo par w3 Yj0 H. IR-WN WmW OF WjW NSFZZ yK pj ONQ �Z wmQ MZ=IN2NN Kw Zw6 FVJOU F N F w0 UOE — Nww¢ uLLO ox p0E WOFOu z www U 'm mum 'a mo�a'nar uuoi ¢o 'N oh LLouru W aWNa QZ U o Woo Q Z U F ¢arc \\ 0 JW 0.LLJ ¢o Z En LL (nF5W UUy QUU)W \ \� \ co i m \ \ z z \ �. O 0 �sss�ms�rsxe��zex�s�n,x evaees�m�ns� oxo„e�=s 4q _-2n pM^9 9 $�49S�n9mm999$399�9�ry9tl '�ppppA.�.pAppg6eF^”�pG,^�""�a��aoSSS'SZRR"rRryR�888 8_•- dAmaaoq-;Hs ffl imp ssso.s�ss��os�s�so��seemeos�� of 8. ASSESSMENT ROLL The assessment roll is a listing of the assessment apportioned to each lot or parcel, as shown on the last equalized roll of the Assessor of the County of San Mateo. The following table summarizes the assessments for the District for Fiscal Year 2017/18: The assessment roll is a listing of the District assessment apportioned to each lot or parcel, as shown on the last equalized roll of the Assessor of the County of San Mateo. The assessment roll for the District is listed on the following page. Assessment District No. 2012-1 — City of Burlingame 8-1 Fiscal Year 2017/18 Total Property Land Parcel Special Benefit Allowable Annual Total Annual Use Type Count Points Assessment Assessment All Parcels 45 169.29 $1,832.10 per special $310,156 benefit point Total 45 169.29 $310,156 The assessment roll is a listing of the District assessment apportioned to each lot or parcel, as shown on the last equalized roll of the Assessor of the County of San Mateo. The assessment roll for the District is listed on the following page. Assessment District No. 2012-1 — City of Burlingame 8-1 Fiscal Year 2017/18 City of Burlingame City of Burlingame Assessment District No. 2012-1 Downtown Burlingame Avenue Streetscape Improvement Project Fiscal Year 2017118 Assessment Roll Assessor's Parcel Assessment Total Special Annual Number ID Site Address Benefit Points Assessment(1) 029-122-220 2 1420 BURLINGAME AVE 3.10 $5,679.51 029-122-230 3 1426 BURLINGAME AVE 3.03 5,551.26 029-122-240 4 1436 BURLINGAME AVE 2.98 5,459.66 029-122-250 5 1442 BURLINGAME AVE 3.00 5,496.30 029-122-260 6 1448 BURLINGAME AVE 2.62 4,800.10 029-122-270 7 1460 BURLINGAME AVE 3.39 6,210.82 029-122-280 8 1462 BURLINGAME AVE 3.29 6,027.61 029-122-330 9 1408 BURLINGAME AVE 2.69 4,928.35 029-122-360 10 1490 BURLINGAME AVE 6.32 11,578.87 029-122-999 11 1476-80 BURLINGAME AVE 8.71 15,957.59 029-152-110 12 1200 BURLINGAME AVE 3.78 6,925.34 029-152-120 13 1208 BURLINGAME AVE 1.29 2,363.41 029-152-160 14 1232 BURLINGAME AVE 3.36 6,155.86 029-152-200 16 1316 BURLINGAME AVE 3.47 6,357.39 029-152-210 17 1348 BURLINGAME AVE 3.12 5,716.15 029-152-220 18 1354 BURLINGAME AVE 2.16 3,957.34 029-152-230 19 1380 BURLINGAME AVE 3.20 5,862.72 029-152-270 20 1300 BURLINGAME AVE 3.15 5,771.12 029-152-320 22 1218 BURLINGAME AVE 6.94 12,714.77 029-152-330 23 1210 BURLINGAME AVE 3.86 7,071.91 029-153-090 24 1100 BURLINGAME AVE 4.04 7,401.68 029-153-120 25 1150-60 BURLINGAME AVE 3.92 7,181.83 029-153-150 26 1108-18 BURLINGAME AVE 4.86 8,904.01 029-201-030 27 1471 BURLINGAME AVE 2.10 3,847.41 029-201-040 28 1461 BURLINGAME AVE 2.63 4,818.42 029-201-060 29 1435 BURLINGAME AVE 5.80 10,626.18 029-201-080 31 1423 BURLINGAME AVE 3.13 5,734.47 029-201-100 32 1407 BURLINGAME AVE 2.38 4,360.40 029-201-110 33 1401 BURLINGAME AVE 3.82 6,998.62 029-201-320 34 1479-91 BURLINGAME AVE 7.71 14,125.49 029-201-360 35 1417 BURLINGAME AVE 5.80 10,626.18 029-201-370 36 1453 BURLINGAME AVE 1.32 2,418.37 029-201-380 37 1451 BURLINGAME AVE 1.32 2,418.37 029-202-010 38 1375 BURLINGAME AVE 6.71 12,293.39 029-202-020 39 1325 BURLINGAME AVE 3.13 5,734.47 029-202-040 41 1315 BURLINGAME AVE 1.24 2,271.80 029-202-080 42 1301 BURLINGAME AVE 3.45 6,375.71 029-202-090 43 1309 BURLINGAME AVE 2.52 4,561.93 029-204-030 44 1221 BURLINGAME AVE 2.75 5,038.28 029-204-040 45 1213 BURLINGAME AVE 2.25 4,122.23 029-204-050 46 1207 BURLINGAME AVE 2.25 4,122.23 029-204-060 47 1205 BURLINGAME AVE 4.35 7,969.64 029-204-270 48 1227 BURLINGAME AVE 5.47 10,021.59 029-211-010 49 1101 BURLINGAME AVE 4.58 8,391.02 029-211-260 50 1111 BURLINGAME AVE 8.30 15,206.43 TOTALS: 169.29 $310,156.23 (1) Difference due to rounding. Page 1 of 1 TO; DATE: FROM: SUBJECT: Agenda Item # Meeting STAFF REPORT Date: April 2, 2012 SUBMITTEAB ° APPROVED HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL MARCH 26, 2012 PUBLIC WORKS DOWNTOWN BURLINGAME AVENUE STREETSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS - ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 2012-1. PURPOSE: It is recommended that Council take the following actions to initiate the formation of the Downtown Burlingame Avenue Streetscape Improvement Assessment District No. 2012-1. 1. Review and approve the final project concept plan. 2. Review and approve the following attached resolutions. a. Adopt the Downtown Burlingame Avenue Streetscape Improvement Project Assessment Ballot Procedures. b. Initiate proceedings for the proposed Assessment District. c. Approve the preliminary Engineers Report with proposed boundary of the Assessment District. d. Declare the intention to order the formation of the Assessment District. 3. Review and approve the sample public notice and ballot to be sent to each property owner within the district. BACKGROUND: At the January 17, 2012 meeting, the Council reviewed three options for the Burlingame Avenue Streetscape Improvements Project and directed staff to proceed with Alternative 1 for the project design. Since that time, staff and the consultant team have met with the stakeholder group to further develop the design and helda community workshop with the Council to obtain public input. In general, the recommended streetscape project concept includes 50% wider sidewalks with concrete pavers, parallel parking, intersection bulb -outs, and shorter crosswalks for pedestrian safety, site furnishings, new street lights, street trees, landscaping and new site furnishings. In addition, the project construction will also include utility replacements for water, sewer, and storm drain systems; asphalt roadway paving; concrete paving for the parking and intersection areas. Funding: The total overall estimated cost of the project (streetscape and utilities) is $15.9 M. Approximately $11.475 M would be contributed by the City using various funding sources including water and sewer enterprise funds; parking meter rate increases, storm drainage funds, state gas tax and Measure A Grant as well as existing funds in the streetscape CIP budget. The remaining $4.475M is proposed to be funded by the Burlingame Avenue property owners through an Assessment District. DISCUSSION: In order to initiate the formation of the Downtown Burlingame Avenue Streetscape Improvements Assessment District 2012-1, Council must review and approve the following. The Final Concept Plan: The following are the key elements of the final project concept plan (The project consultant RHAA will make the presentation at the meeting). • 16 foot wide sidewalk made of concrete pavers 10 foot wide asphalt concrete travel lanes ■ 8 foot wide concrete parallel parking stalls 2 feet of parking / assist area Accessible crosswalks of concrete pavers at all intersections ■ Pedestrian and roadway safety lighting ■ Hanging flower baskets with irrigation system Street furnishings including bicycle racks and benches Informational signage and kiosks ■ Replacement street trees and landscaping as well as Gateway entry columns. Assessment District Proceedings: In order to proceed with the formation of the Assessment District 2012-1, the Council should review and approve the attached resolutions for establishing protest hearing procedures: initiation of Assessment District proceedings; the Engineer's Report; and declaration of intention to form the Assessment District. The Assessment District comprises a total of 50 parcels fronting Burlingame Avenue between EI Camino Real and California Drive. The attached Engineers Report provides the Assessment District Boundary Map and details of the special and general benefits. The assessments to individual parcels are based on three factors - aesthetics, safety, and economic benefits. The aesthetic and safety factors use linear lot frontage while the economic factor uses the individual parcel's square footage. The total annual revenue from the proposed Assessment District 2012-1 is estimated at $335,787. The average annual assessment per parcel is $6,716. Actual annual assessment for a given parcel may vary depending on the actual linear frontage and square footage area of the parcel. The annual assessments will be for a period of 30 years. The property owner may pay off the annual assessments at any time during the 30 year period. Upon Council approval, the public notices and ballots will be sent via certified mailed to property owners within the proposed assessment district at least 45 days prior to the public hearing. The public hearing is set for May 21, 2012 at which the Council will hold the public hearing to receive protests and review the ballots received to determine the formation of an assessment district. The ballots are weighted by the proposed assessment amount on each property and the results announced by the City Council. If there is not a majority protest of the total ballots received prior to the close of the public hearing, the Council may proceed with the assessment district formation and pursue the project. BUDGET IMPACT: If approved, the Burlingame Streetscape Improvements project will be funded by a combination of City and Assessment District financing as described above in the staff report. EXHIBITS: Resolutions a. Assessment District Procedures b. Initiating proceedings for Assessment District No, 2012-1 c. Approve preliminary Engineers Report d. Declare intention to order the formation of the Assessment District No. 2012-1 Preliminary Engineer's Report with Assessment Boundary Map Sample Public Notice Sample Assessment Ballot Final Concept Plan (8 pages) I' J �' e Gomery — Progr Manager sAa public works directory\staff reports\81030 assessment district sr 3-26-12,docx TO: Agenda Item # Meeting Date: May 21 2012 SUBMITTED BY CL3 Yzf4-7�'g APPROVED BY HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL DATE: MAY 13, 2012 FROM: PUBLIC WORKS SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING TO FORM ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 2012-1 FOR DOWNTOWN BURLINGAME AVENUE STREETSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS. PURPOSE: It is recommended that Council take the following actions to review the ballots cast in the formation of the Downtown Burlingame Avenue Streetscape Improvement Assessment District No. 2012-1. 1. Hold a public hearing to: a. Hear all interested persons in the matter of the proposed assessment district and the amounts of the assessmentrs to be imposed; b. Hear all objections, protests, support or other written communications relative to the formation of the district or the amounts of the assessments from any person; c. Receive any remaining ballot submissions (must be submitted PRIOR to the conclusion of the public hearing). 2. At the conclusion of the public hearing, Council should continue the proceeding until later in the meeting and direct the City Clerk to review all the ballots and report back to the Council before the end of the meeting. 3. Once the ballots have been tabulated, the Council should then review the ballot results and do one of the following: a. If there is not a "majority protest" the Council may adopt the attached Resolution ordering improvements, ordering formation of the City of Burlingame Streetscape Improvement Assessment District No. 2012-1, confirming the assessment diagram, confirming and levying assessments, and authorizing necessary action; or b. If there is a "majority protest", then Council must abandon the creation of the district. BACKGROUND: At the April 2, 2012 meeting, Council initiated the proceedings to form the Downtown Burlingame Avenue Streetscape Improvement Assessment District No. 2012-1. Weighted ballots were sent via certified mail to all the property owners on April 5, 2012. Ballots are weighted based on the assessment amount calculated for each parcel. To date, of the fifty (50) ballots mailed to property owners, twenty-five (25) have been received by the City Clerk. DISCUSSION: In order to complete the formation of the Downtown Burlingame Avenue Streetscape Improvements Assessment District 2012-1, Council must review the ballots and determine if there is a "majority protest" vote. In the event that the weighted assessment ballots cast in opposition, exceed the weighted assessment ballots in support, there will be a majority protest' and the City Council will be precluded from proceeding with formation of the district. If a "majority protest" does not exist, Council may proceed with formation of the assessment district by adoption of the attached resolution. The City Clerk will review the validity of the ballots after the close of the public hearing, and report back to the Council before the end of the meeting. The ballot tabulations will be performed by the City Clerk with assistance from NBS Consultant and staff in Conference Room A at the City Hall, which will be open to the general public for observation. BUDGET IMPACT: If approved, the Burlingame Streetscape Improvements project will be -funded by a combination of City and Assessment District financing. EXHIBITS: Resolution ordering improvements and formation of assessment district 2012-1; Affidavit of mailing; Sample ballot; and Engineer's report. (ane Gom — Program Manager sAa public works directorylstaff reports\81030 assessment district ballot count staff report re-gg-5-11-12,docx a STAFF REPORT AGENDA NO: 8d MEETING DATE: May 15, 2017 To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Date: May 15, 2017 From: Lisa K. Goldman, City Manager — (650) 558-7243 Subject: Adoption of a Resolution Approving and Authorizing the City Manager to Execute an Agreement with the Burlingame Chamber of Commerce to Provide Information and Promotion Services in Fiscal Year 2017-2018 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached Resolution approving and authorizing the City Manager to execute the annual promotional activities agreement with the Burlingame Chamber of Commerce. BACKGROUND Each year, the City of Burlingame enters into an agreement with the Burlingame Chamber of Commerce in which the Chamber provides various promotional activities in exchange for City funding. DISCUSSION The City of Burlingame contracts with the Burlingame Chamber of Commerce to provide promotional and information services to businesses, visitors and residents. The services include: • Distribution of materials and information to businesses and residents about Burlingame programs, events and activities. • Referral services to businesses and residents about Burlingame City government. • Sponsorship and coordination of community events involving merchants, businesses and the public. • Promotion of business, community and economic development activities. During the 2016-17 fiscal year, the Chamber held Burlingame on the Avenue in August 2016, and included booths in which the City promoted Parks and Recreation Department programs and disseminated other information. The event will be held the weekend of August 19-20 this year. The Sunday Fresh Market is now held year-round. City/community booths are made available during the Fresh Market, including during the Streets Alive event in May. The Chamber also provides ongoing counseling services to businesses including marketing opportunities available at the Fresh Market. 1 Chamber of Commerce Agreement May 15, 2017 The Chamber assists with ribbon cuttings for new businesses and has numerous business -to - business groups promoting doing business locally. And, the Chamber provides communication services to businesses and worked with the City's Economic Development Specialist on issues of concern to Burlingame businesses. Earlier this fiscal year, the Chamber sponsored a "Raise Your Customer Focus, Raise Your Sales" seminar at the Library designed to help, inspire, and improve local small businesses. They also procured professional photos of Burlingame for use on the City's website. At the January annual meeting, the Mayor provided an update on the City for attendees, and the Chamber and City partnered to bestow the City's first green business awards to Putnam Automotive and Que SeRaw SeRaw. The Chamber also continues to include two City Councilmembers in their monthly Board meeting, which has proven to be an invaluable way to exchange information. Finally, in order to ensure that the business community's interests are represented during the General Plan update process, the Chamber's Chief Executive Officer and a Past Chair of the Board serve on the City's Envision Burlingame Community Advisory Committee. A complete listing of all services is included in the attached Agreement. FISCAL IMPACT The City Council's proposed FY 2017-18 budget contains $30,783 for the Chamber of Commerce. Exhibits: • Resolution • Agreement 2 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH THE BURLINGAME CHAMBER OF COMMERCE TO PROVIDE INFORMATION AND PROMOTION SERVICES IN FISCAL YEAR 2017-2018 WHEREAS, the Burlingame Chamber of Commerce assists the City of Burlingame by responding to inquiries from business, visitors, and residents about the public and private services available in the community; and WHEREAS, the Burlingame Chamber of Commerce also coordinates and promotes community events, such as Burlingame on the Avenue, the December Merchant Holiday Open House and Tree Lighting Ceremony, the Fresh Market, and the Broadway Holiday Cheer event; and WHEREAS, Government Code sections 40100 and following allow the City to appropriate money to publicize and advertise the City and its events and services; and WHEREAS, the Burlingame Chamber of Commerce has provided these services to the community on a timely, professional basis for many years; and WHEREAS, the Chamber has agreed to provide these activities and programs for the 2017-2018 fiscal year, NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: The City Council hereby approves the Agreement with the Burlingame Chamber of Commerce in the form attached hereto. 2. The City Council authorizes and directs the City Manager to execute the Agreement for and on behalf of the City. Ricardo Ortiz, Mayor I, Meaghan Hassel -Shearer, 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 15th day of May, 2017, and was adopted thereafter by the following vote: AYES: Councilmembers: NOES: Councilmembers: ABSENT: Councilmembers: Meaghan Hassel -Shearer, City Clerk AGREEMENT PROMOTIONAL ACTIVITIES — CHAMBER OF COMMERCE This Agreement is made and entered into as of the day of by and between the City of Burlingame, a municipal corporation of the State of California (hereinafter referred to as "City"), and the Burlingame Chamber of Commerce (hereinafter referred to as "Chamber"), with reference to the following Recitals: RECITALS: WHEREAS, City desires to promote its advantages as a business, educational, cultural, recreational and residential center, and to disseminate information relative thereto, and to properly respond to inquiries made from time to time relating to the various activities of City; NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereby agree as follows: AGREEMENT: 1. Duties of Chamber. In exchange for the consideration specified in paragraph 3 below, Chamber shall perform the following promotional activities on behalf of City: a. Distribute materials and information to those residents who opt in to receiving the information and businesses about Burlingame relating to the activities described in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. Access to resident information shall comply with all relevant law. b. Answer public inquiries about community facilities, events, organizations, businesses, and other community informational needs, through availability on a "walk-in" basis, as well as through mailings, telephone and e-mail. C. Provide referral services from citizens and businesses about appropriate City or government offices, including without limitation, the City Business License office (located in the Water Department), Recreation Department, Planning Department, Public Works Department, Police Department and Fire Department. d. Promote community events involving merchants and businesses requiring City services as needed. e. Sponsor/coordinate/advertise special events and activities involving businesses and the public, including the following: 1. Produce Burlingame on the Avenue 2. Promote the December Merchant Holiday Open House and Tree Lighting Ceremony 3. Conduct Sunday Fresh Market, which may be held year-round, and seasonal Thursday Fresh Market 4. Co-sponsor Broadway Holiday Cheer event f. Produce/distribute materials about Burlingame, as follows: 1. Burlingame/Hillsborough Street Map, including providing 300 copies to the City of Burlingame g. Promote business, community and economic development through the activities described in Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated by reference herein. h. Assist City with promotion of the currently operating commuter shuttle service between the Broadway Caltrain station and the business area east of the Bayshore Freeway. i. In conjunction with the City, promote the retention and relocation of businesses to Burlingame. j. Maintain and operate an office open to the general public for discharging the obligations of Chamber under the terms of this Agreement (including, without limitation, promoting the residential and business attributes of Burlingame to the public). k. Employ competent personnel to carry on the promotional activities enumerated herein. 1. Work to develop a partnership with the City of Burlingame's business improvement districts that includes the exploration of ongoing "Buy Burlingame" campaigns. 2. Certain Political Activities Prohibited. The Chamber shall not support, endorse or oppose any candidate for municipal, county or school elections in San Mateo County. The Chamber may conduct candidate debate forums or similar events of a public information nature. Further, Chamber shall not use any proceeds received from City pursuant to this agreement to support, endorse or oppose any measure or candidate. 2 3. Consideration. a. General Promotional Activities. City shall pay Chamber, in the manner specified below, the sum of Thirty Thousand, Seven Hundred and Eighty Three Dollars ($30,783) for general promotional services performed by Chamber hereunder for the period commencing July 1, 2017, and ending June 30, 2018. The foregoing sum shall be paid in twelve equal consecutive monthly installments commencing July 1, 2017. Chamber shall send to City on the first (1'� day of each month a written invoice describing in a summary manner the services for which Chamber is to be paid. Invoices dated the first day of each month shall be paid no later than the fifteenth day of each month. 4. Assignment. This Agreement shall not be assigned by Chamber without the written consent of City. 5. Notices. All written notices and demands which either party may serve on the other may, as an alternative to personal service, be served by registered or certified mail. Any such notice or demand so served shall be deposited in the United States mail with postage fully prepaid and addressed to the party at the address specified below: Com: City Manager City Hall 501 Primrose Avenue Burlingame, CA 94010 Chamber: President Burlingame Chamber of Commerce 417 California Drive Burlingame, CA 94010 Either party may change such address by notice in writing to the other party, and thereafter notices shall be addressed and transmitted to the new address. 6. Relationship of parties. It is agreed the Chamber is an independent contractor, and all persons working for or under the direction of Chamber or its agents, servants and employees are not agents or employees of City. 7. Termination. This Agreement shall commence on July 1, 2017 and shall terminate on June 30, 2018, unless extended by the parties in writing. 8. Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California. 9. Entire Agreement. The terms of this Agreement are intended by the parties as a final expression of their agreement and may not be contradicted by evidence of any prior or contemporaneous agreement. This Agreement constitutes the exclusive statement of its terms and no extrinsic evidence whatsoever may be introduced in any judicial proceedings involving this Agreement. 10. Attorneys' Fees. In the event of any litigation between the parties hereto to enforce any of the provisions of this Agreement, the unsuccessful parry to such litigation shall pay to the successful parry all costs and expenses, including reasonable attorneys' fees incurred by the successful party, all of which may be included as part of the judgment rendered in such litigation. 11. Severability. If any provision of this Agreement should be invalid or unenforceable the remaining provisions shall not be affected thereby, and every provision hereof shall be valid and enforceable to the fullest extent permitted by law. 12. Headings. The title and headings of the various sections hereof are included for purposes of reference only and are not intended to place any construction on the provisions hereof. IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties have executed this Agreement as of the date first set forth above. CITY OF BURLINGAME: By Lisa K. Goldman, City Manager Attested: Approved as to form: Kathleen Kane City Attorney CHAMBER OF COMMERCE: :A 0 Georgette Naylor, President 4 EXHIBIT A DISTRIBUTION OF MATERIALS AND INFORMATION 1. Burlingame demographics 2. Essential information for new Burlingame residents who opt in to receiving the information, including, without limitation, information materials for Burlingame Newcomers Club for all new Burlingame residents contacted by the club. 3. Community event information including: a. Broadway Festival (when applicable) b. Burlingame on the Avenue (formerly Artzfest) c. Concert in the Park Series d. Concerts at Kohl Mansion e. Public elementary school, public and private high school events f. Burlingame & Broadway Area Business Improvement Districts g. Merchant Sidewalk Sales h. December — Merchant Holiday Open House and Tree Lighting 4. Public transportation information (SamTrans, Caltrain, BART & Burlingame Trolley) 5. Historical information— Burlingame 6. Churches, parks and schools in Burlingame 7. Wedding/meeting sites information 8. Clubs and organizations information 9. Hotel and restaurant information 10. Realtor information 11. Burlingame business relocation assistance 12. Burlingame business economic profile 13. Publication handouts including a. Burlingame/Hillsborough Street Map, including 300 copies to the City b. San Mateo County Convention & Visitors Bureau County Image c. Burlingame Golf Center d. Burlingame Recreation Department Brochures (3 per year) e. Social service resources 14. Direction or resource information to meet unique or umcommon requests 5 ADDITIONAL RESPONSIBILITIES PROMOTING BUSINESS, COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 1. Promote special community meetings, seminars and special events 2. Promote community events and services and provide opportunity for City to promote its activities at the Fresh Market and Burlingame on the Avenue 3. Provide information to Burlingame elementary schools about Burlingame as requested 4. Use Chamber membership advertising and promotional budget to promote Burlingame in coordination with the Business Associations and Business Improvement Districts 5. Prepare publicity releases for community events 6. Engage in ongoing business economic development programs: a. Hotels b. Office Buildings c. Providing meeting space for SCORE counselor in Chamber office for business counseling as requested 7. Represent Chamber at San Mateo County PROGRESS SEMINAR to study regional issues 8. Respond to City of Burlingame requests regarding all business issues 9. Participate in meetings with stakeholders regarding Burlingame Trolley 10. Promote commercial recycling activities and programs among Chamber membership 0 STAFF REPORT onorable Mayor and City Council ay 15, 2017 AGENDA NO: Be MEETING DATE: May 15, 2017 isa K. Goldman, City Manager— (650) 558-7243 Subject: Adoption of a Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute an Agreement with the Peninsula Conflict Resolution Center for Dispute Resolution Services RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the City Council adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute an agreement with the Peninsula Conflict Resolution Center (PCRC) for dispute resolution services. BACKGROUND For the past 21 years, the City has contracted with PCRC to provide dispute resolution services to the City of Burlingame and its community members. The City is one of many in the County that contracts with PCRC to provide low-cost community mediation services. Some of the issues PCRC worked on in Burlingame in FY 2016-17 are: • A Burlingame Police Officer referred two neighbors for mediation to resolve noise concerns. • A tenant sought mediation services with his/her landlord regarding maintenance at the rental property. Under the proposed contract, which is attached, PCRC will provide the following services: • Unlimited, free information services • Mediation services for individuals • Additional conflict resolution services such as trainings, consultations, mediation of complex situations, and design and facilitation of community forums • Facilitation of one three-hour community meeting at the City's discretion FISCAL IMPACT The total cost of the contract in FY 2017-18 is $19,482, the same amount charged in FY 2016-17. Funds are included for this purpose in the proposed FY 2017-18 budget, in the City Council's account for contractual services. I PCRC Agreement Exhibits: • Resolution • Agreement • Mid -Year Summary of Mediation Programs: Cases Opened and Closed May 15, 2017 2 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH THE PENINSULA CONFLICT RESOLUTION CENTER FOR DISPUTE RESOLUTION SERVICES WHEREAS, for the last 21 years, the City has contracted with the Peninsula Conflict Resolution Center (PCRC) to provide dispute resolution services to the City of Burlingame and its community members; and WHEREAS, the City of Burlingame is one of many in the County that contracts with PCRC to provide low-cost community mediation services; and WHEREAS, under the proposed contract, PCRC will provide: unlimited, free information services; mediation services for individuals; additional conflict resolution services such as trainings, consultations, mediation of complex situation, and design and facilitation of community forums; and facilitation of one three-hour community meeting at the City's discretion; and WHEREAS, the contract cost is $19,482 for FY 2017-18; and WHEREAS, staff has included sufficient funding in the City Council's proposed budget for FY 2017-18 for this contract. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: The City Manager is authorized to execute an agreement with the Peninsula Conflict Resolution Center for dispute resolution services for a one-year term beginning July 1, 2017. Ricardo Ortiz, Mayor I, Meaghan Hassel -Shearer, 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 15'" day of May, 2017, and was adopted thereafter by the following vote: AYES: Councilmembers: NOES: Councilmembers: ABSENT: Councilmembers: Meaghan Hassel-Sheaerer, City Clerk 0:CR_) e—Vlivlst-tica Govlflict Resoltitiovl Ge�lteµ Empowaring panple. $nildinJ VCIl f oU Aips. Reducing violence. Agreement for the Provision of Community Mediation Services The Peninsula Conflict Resolution Center (PCRC), a 501(c)(3) public benefit corporation, wishes to provide conflict resolution services for the City of Burlingame (City). The Peninsula Conflict Resolution Center is an independent contractor, organized in accordance with the laws of California and is capable of performing the conflict resolution services described in this agreement. PCRC and Burlingame agree as follows: 1. SERVICES. The PCRC shall provide the services described in Exhibit A, attached to and made a part of this agreement. 2. FUNDING. Funding by the City shall be in advance and shall be $19,482. PCRC shall provide documentation to specify how the funds requested shall be spent; including such details as the City deems appropriate. Additional documentation may be requested by the City. 3. CONTRACT TERM. This contract shall commence on July 1, 2017 and shall terminate on June 30, 2018 unless terminated before that time, as described in Paragraph 6 of this agreement. 4. PROGRAM REPORTS. A performance report shall be submitted to the City biannually, at mid -year and year-end. This report shall include a description of all program activity related to this contract for the particular period. 5. BREACH OF CONTRACT. The City reserves the right to waive any and all breaches of this contract, any such waiver shall not be deemed a waiver of all previous or subsequent breaches. In the event the City chooses to waive a particular breach of this contract, it may condition said waiver on payment by PCRC of actual damages occasioned by such breach of contract. PCRC shall make every effort toxesolve the breach quickly and amicably. 6. TERMINATION. In the event the PCRC is unable to fulfill its responsibilities under this contract for any reason whatsoever, including circumstances beyond its control, the City may terminate this contract. Either party to this agreement may terminate this contract without cause by giving 10 days written notice to the other party. If the contract is terminated, PCRC shall return a prorated amount of funding to the City. 7. INTEREST OF PUBLIC OFFICIALS. No members, officer or employee or agents of the City, no member of the City Council, and no other public official exercising any function or responsibility with respect to this program during his/her tenure, shall have any interest, direct or indirect, in this contract or a related subcontract or the proceeds thereof. S. RELATIONSHIP OF PARTIES. It is expressly understood that PCRC is an independent contractor and that no agency, employee or other relationship is intended to be or is established by this contract. 9. INSPECTION OF PROGRAM. Itis understood that periodic review of PCRC's program may be necessary and the right to do so is reserved by the City. 10. ASSIGNABILITY. PCRC shall not assign in this agreement and shall not transfer any interest in the same, without the prior written consent of the City. 11. HOLD HARMLESS AND INSURANCE. PCRC agrees (1) to hold harmless and indemnify the City and its officers and employees from and against any and all claims, loss, liability, damage and expense arising from performance of this contract, including claims, loss, liability, damage and expense caused or claimed to be caused by passive negligence of the City or its officers or employees. (2) to defend (City), its officers or employees there-against; provided however that this provision does not apply to claims, loss, liability, damage or expense arising from (a) the sole negligence or willful misconduct of (City) or (b) the active negligence of (City). General liability and automobile liability insurance shall provide the following minimum benefits: (1) general liability, including comprehensive fonn, personal injury, broad form property damage, contractual and premises/operation in limits of $1,000,000, aggregate, bodily injury and property damage combined; (2) automobile liability in limits of $1,000,000, bodily injury and property damage combined. Additionally, workers compensation insurance in at least the minimum statutory amounts shall be maintained. All liability insurance policies shall specify (City), its elective and appointed boards, commissions, officers, agents and employees as additional insureds. A certificate of insurance shall be provided to (City) prior to performance pursuant to this contract. It shall include policy endorsement verifying City's additional insured status. Further, any changes in insurance, required herein must be approved in writing by the City Attorney's Office. 12. NONDISCRIMINATION. General: No person shall, on the basis of race, color, national origin, religious affiliation or non affiliation, marital status; medical condition, sex, age, handicap, sexual orientation or political affiliation be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits or be subjected to discrimination, under this agreement. Employment: PCRC shall ensure equal employment opportumity based on objective standards of recruitment, selection, promotion, classification, compensation, performance evaluation and management relations, for all employees under this agreement. PCRC's personnel policies shall be made available to the City upon request. 13. PROJECT REPRESENTATION. PCRC and the City hereby designate the following agents to act as project representatives and receive all notices in the matters dealing with the performance of work, under this agreement. PCRC: Michelle Vilchez, Executive Director CITY: Lisa Goldman, City Manager 14. DISPUTE RESOLUTION. In the event that differences relating to this contract, or to the relationship between the contracting parties, should arise during the term of this agreement, both parties will pursue resolution using an interest -based, non -adversarial approach and utilizing the services of a neutral third party mediator if direct negotiations are not successful. 15. ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS. Additional provisions, if any, are contained in Exhibit A, attached to this document. In witness thereof, this agreement has been duly executed by the parties named above. PENINSULA CONFLICT RESOLUTION CENTER 1660 South Amphlett BLy,&,te. 219 San Mate o� 2 / (650) 51 - 3 CITY OF Burlame Lisa Goldman, CIH5LAE 501 Primrose Road Burlingame, CA 94010 By Date EXHIBIT "A" What PCRC will provide Services to be provided to the City of Burlingame through this contract are described below. A. Information Services All of the services in this category are unlimited and free of charge. 1) Information and Referral: A resource person is available by telephone, to assist residents who have specific questions relating to a conflict. Through this conversation the resident may clarify issues of concern, be given specific information about common practices related to their issue of concern and receive a referral to an appropriate agency/resource. 2) Information and Assistance: A resource person assists the concerned caller to de- escalate feelings, clarify issues and underlying needs, develop possible solution options, and begin to design an approach to dispute resolution. 3) Promotion of Use of Conflict Resolution Services: PCRC staff and volunteers will make presentations and develop press releases and media coverage. PCRC will provide brochures and other printed materials to be kept in public areas where community members are likely to seek resource information. B. Mediation Services for Individuals Some services in this category have a modest fee (see below). 1) One Party Assistance: A resource person assists a party to a dispute to think through a conflict situation, including clarifying issues and interests of involved parties, exploring approaches to dealing with the situation and solution options and assisting with the selection of an approach to resolution. 2) Conciliation: Conciliation is the resolution of a conflict through the intervention of a neutral third party, without the disputing parties coming together in a face-to-face mediation. A case development process, involving contacts with both/all involved parties, is initiated and during that process, a resolution of concerns is achieved, to the satisfaction of the involved parties. 3) Mediation: Mediation through PCRC involves a face-to-face meeting between disputing parties. With the assistance of a panel of trained volunteer mediators, parties work through a non -adversarial problem solving process and attempt to develop a mutually acceptable resolution to the issues of concern. There is a two- fold focus: development of a satisfying and durable agreement and, when appropriate, the preservation of an effective relationship. If a mediation is scheduled, each party is asked to pay $30. Through this contract, the City is subsidizing the provision of private mediation services to those who reside or work in the City. These services assist with conflict situations between individuals. The types of conflicts may include: landlord/tenant disputes, issues between two neighbors (either owners or renters), consumer disputes, roommate problems, conflicts between friends, plus some domestic or family issues. PCRC also provides mediation services in more complex situations that involve multiple parties and/or multiple issues. For example: workplace disputes; intra- or extra - organizational conflicts, multi -neighbor disputes or public controversies. See C. Additional Conflict Resolution Services. C. Additional Conflict Resolution Services If the City, residents or local organizations use the services described below, this contract provides a 10% discotmt off of PCRC's standard fee schedule (available upon request). 1) Training: PCRC offers orientations to city staff about the mediation program and its services as part of the basic contract. In addition, PCRC can train groups in theory and practice of interest -based conflict management, negotiation, communication, and facilitation skills. Training session are tailored to the particular needs of the group and have proven useful to city departments heads, front-line staff, commission members, workplace teams, community service providers as well as other groups. 2) Conflict Assessment/Consultation: PCRC can assist cities, as well as local community organizations and other groups, to assess specific conflict situations, analyze concerns of stakeholders and develop strategies for pro -active and interest based conflict resolution. The conflict assessment process usually involves PCRC contacting stakeholders to gather input and provide information about conflict resolution options. An assessment report can be prepared and provided to the client. 3) Mediation Services for Complex Situations: PCRCs staff and volunteers provide the same high quality of mediation services in multi-party, multi -issue, complex disputes as we do for individual disputes. This requires a more advanced level of mediation training and experience and more a more intensive preparation process. Examples of complex mediation situations include: workplace conflict between supervisor and supervisee; workplace issues affecting a whole team; a neighborhood issue involving multiple households; a public controversy in which the City or other institution is involved. 4) Conflict Resolution System Design: PCRC assists organizations in building internal conflict resolution capacity, i.e. the development of policies and procedures for interest -based dispute prevention and early resolution. This service is tailored to the unique needs of the individual group, but is based on recognized and proven design principles. 5) Design and facilitation of Community Forams, Public Conversations, Dialogues: Working with local representatives, PCRC assists with the design and facilitation for a wide variety of group sessions in which members of the public are encouraged to participate in dialogue about issues that affect the health and well-being of the community. By stiecial agreement: Due to the recent low rate of referrals to mediation, and a commitment on the part of both the City and PCRC to maintain and grow our partnership, PCRC will provide one facilitated community meeting, at no charge. This would be a three-hour meeting, including up to six hours of preparation and follow-up. 6) Facilitation for Committees, Departments, Councils: PCRC will assist with the design and facilitation of all types of meetings for elected, appointed and civic groups. D. Administration of a Community Mediation Program: In collaboration with the contracting city, PCRC will administer a mediation program responsive to the needs of the community. PCRC may solicit input from city staff about unique areas of concern to a city and appropriate approaches to program implementation, improvement and promotion. E. Recruitment and training of community volunteers: PCRC will develop and maintain a pool of trained volunteer mediators, case developers and facilitators to serve the conflict resolution needs of the community. These residents of local communities will become skillful in the interest -based approach to conflict resolution. PCRC volunteers complete a minimum of 25 hours of training, according to regulations that govern programs receiving support from the California Dispute Resolution Trust Fund. PCRC also offers on-going skill development opportunities to volunteers to improve and enhance their conflict resolution skills. These volunteer will also serve as ambassadors in the community, promoting the ideas of interest -based conflict resolution. II. What the City of Burlingame will provide: A. Funding in the amount of $19,482 for Fiscal Year 2017-18. This fee is full payment for the services defined above. Payments will be made upon receipt of invoice. B. Support for the program from city officers and staff members, demonstrated through public statements, publicity, and referrals through city departments. C. At least one article or ad placed in a city run publication to promote the use of PCRC services among residents and businesses in the city. A PCRC staff person is available to work with a city contact person to develop this material. D. Assistance in scheduling appointments for PCRC representatives to make outreach presentations to groups of city staff, civic organizations and other relevant groups. E. No cost use of city -controlled public meeting space, as needed and as available, for training sessions, meetings and mediations. This use will be subject to the existing rules and regulations that govern the use of these spaces. III. Agreement by both parties, in concept: Both PCRC and the City recognize that this is an ongoing program. If the Community Mediation Program meets the terms of this agreement to the City's satisfaction, and in the absence of unexpected financial constraints; it is expected that the City will consider funding the Community Mediation Program, on an annual basis, as negotiated between the two parties. Peninsula Conflict Resolution Center 2016-2017 Mid -Year Mediation Report 2016-2017 Mediation Programs: Cases Opened BURLINGAME Types of Conflict Cases r 0 0v G d °v° G as Mv o G P. .� � s�'. m \1 N UX FS U O N r4 O -¢ CU d a � oo U Uq 90 U Z U U w 0 - Totals: Quarter 1 Totals: 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01 3 Totals: Quarter 2 0 1 0 01 01 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 Totals: Quarter 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Totals: Quarter 4 0 0 0 0 01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Totals to date 11 31 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 5 COUNTYWIDE Totals to date 101 221 61 41 11 51 111 81 391 41 01 110 Definition of Terms: Complex cases -Cases are designated as "Complex" when they involve multiple parties and/or require on-going service. Consultations - "Info and Referral' includes those calls that are referred to another resource or agency. "Info and Assistance" includes those calls that require more extensive assistance, such as research done on behalf of the caller or coaching. 2016-2017 Mediation Programs: Disposition of Closed Cases Peninsula Conflict Resolution Center 2016-2017 Mid -Year Mediation Report COUNTYWIDE (Totals to date 1 221 01 01 51 181 111 01 01 21 391 41 10111 71 101 111 1.591 Definition of Terms: Mediation - Parties have met face-to-face in the presence of mediators for at least one session. Conciliation - PCRC worked with parties individually, but the parties did not meet face to face. The n of the time these cases result in an agreement that resolves the situation. One Party Assist - If mediation or conciliation did not occur, but assistance was provided to one of the Sustained - If an agreement is reached, PCRC contacts the parties at a later date to determine whether the agreement was fully, partially, or not sustained. Not Appropriate - PCRC staff determines that mediation is not appropriate in this particular situation. Consultations - "Info and Referral' includes those calls that are referred to another resource or agency. "Info and Assistance" includes those calls that require more extensive assistance, such as research done on behalf c the caller or coaching. Conflict Case Outcomes Mediation Parties BURUNGAME Agreements cil v b 71 a cc 0 M uP- U0 v z �� v g v o o v 0 A 2 H w o 0 U O U g Z Z> q Uo UoA P Z � Totals: Quarter 1 01 01 0 01 21 01 01 0 0 0 0 2 01 01 0 4 Totals: Quarter 2 1 0 0 11 01 0 0 0 01 1 0 2 1" 0 01 2 Totals: Quarter 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01 0 0 0 0 0100 0 Totals: Quarter 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Totals to date 1 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 6 1 0 6 COUNTYWIDE (Totals to date 1 221 01 01 51 181 111 01 01 21 391 41 10111 71 101 111 1.591 Definition of Terms: Mediation - Parties have met face-to-face in the presence of mediators for at least one session. Conciliation - PCRC worked with parties individually, but the parties did not meet face to face. The n of the time these cases result in an agreement that resolves the situation. One Party Assist - If mediation or conciliation did not occur, but assistance was provided to one of the Sustained - If an agreement is reached, PCRC contacts the parties at a later date to determine whether the agreement was fully, partially, or not sustained. Not Appropriate - PCRC staff determines that mediation is not appropriate in this particular situation. Consultations - "Info and Referral' includes those calls that are referred to another resource or agency. "Info and Assistance" includes those calls that require more extensive assistance, such as research done on behalf c the caller or coaching. STAFF REPORT AGENDANO: 8f a MEETING DATE: May 15, 2017 To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Date: May 15, 2017 From: Carol Augustine, Finance Director—(650) 558-7222 Subject: Adoption of a Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute an Agreement with NexLevel Information Technology, Incorporated to Provide Finance System Replacement Project Management Services for the City of Staff recommends that the City Council authorize the City Manager to execute the agreement with NexLevel Information Technology, Inc. to provide project management services for the replacement of the City's finance system. BACKGROUND The City's finance system, Rocket's Universe Database Management System, was purchased in 1990 and has been utilized for budgeting, utility billing, business licenses, fixed assets, financials, payroll, and Human Resources. All development and support is currently performed in-house by Redwood City's IT staff under a joint service agreement. The development work is performed in PICK BASIC, an outdated software language that is becoming increasingly difficult to support. In addition, with the current system, both Redwood City and Burlingame are experiencing limitations in terms of financial reporting and human resources support. A more flexible and robust system is needed to accommodate new reporting requirements and a changing work environment. Replacing a large technology platform is a complex and difficult -to -manage undertaking, and professional project management services are needed to ensure a successful implementation. With this in mind, the Finance Department, in a joint effort with the City of Redwood City's Finance Department, issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) for Finance System Replacement Project Management Services in January. Seven consulting firms submitted qualified proposals in response to the Cities' RFP. Of these seven, three firms were selected for interviews, and references for the two most competitive firms were checked and evaluated. After a careful review and scoring of the responses and interview results, NexLevel Information Technology, Inc. was selected as the best qualified firm. NexLevel has 18 years of experience (founded in 1999) and has provided related IT management consulting services to more than 100 California state and local government agencies. 1 Finance System Replacement Project Management Services Agreement May 15, 2017 As the successful RFP responder, NexLevel will provide the following services: • A gap analysis by functional area • A budget estimate to replace the existing finance system • Development of one or more RFP's to engage vendors offering a replacement solution for the existing system • Evaluation of all RFP responses received based on the needs of the cities • Vendor selection support and contract negotiation • Implementation of the new software and comprehensive project management services FISCAL IMPACT The total cost of consulting services will be $364,100. The City's share of the cost will not exceed 45% of the total expense, or $163,845. Funding for this effort is included in the proposed FY 2017-18 CIP budget. Exhibits: • Resolution • Agreement C RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF BURLINGAME AND NEXLEVEL INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY, INCORPORATED FOR FINANCE SYSTEM REPLACEMENT PROJECT MANAGEMENT SERVICES WHEREAS, the City's current Finance System, which supports all finance and human resources functions, was purchased in 1990, utilizes an outdated software technology and is increasingly difficult to maintain; and WHEREAS, replacement of the City's Finance System with a new modern solution will allow for more robust financial reporting and support an evolving work environment; and WHEREAS, replacement of a large technology platform is a complex and difficult to manage undertaking, requiring professional project management services to ensure a successful implementation; and WHEREAS, through a joint effort with the City of Redwood City, the City issued a Request for Proposal for Finance System Replacement Project Management Services; and WHEREAS, seven firms submitted qualified proposals; three firms were selected for interviews; and after completion of the review process, the City selected NextLevel Information Technology Incorporated as the best qualified firm based on its 18 years of experience providing technical consulting services to over 100 California public agencies; and WHEREAS, NextLevel Information Technology Incorporated has agreed to perform Finance System Replacement Project Management Services for the City at a cost not to exceed $163,845 over a two-year period ending July 31, 2019. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: The City Council hereby approves, and authorizes the City Manager to execute, the Agreement with NextLevel Information Technology Incorporated perform Finance System Replacement Project Management Services for the City of Burlingame over a two year period ending July 31, 2019 in a form as attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit "A." Ricardo Ortiz, Mayor I, MEAGAN HASSEL-SHEARER, City Clerk of the City of Burlingame, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 15th day of May, 2017 and was adopted thereafter by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Meaghan Hassel -Shearer, City Clerk BUR AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES i BETWEEN THE CITY OF BURLINGAME AND NEXLEVEL INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY, INC. THIS AGREEMENT is by and between NexLevel Information Technology, Inc. ("Consultant") and the City of Burlingame, a public body of the State of California ("City"). Consultant and City agree: 1. Services. Consultant shall provide the consultant services for the City's Finance System Replacement Project Management Services, as described with further particularity in the City's Request for Proposal dated January 24, 2017, and Consultant's amended proposal dated April 19, 2017. The Consultant's proposal is provided as Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein. 2. Compensation. Notwithstanding the expenditure by Consultant of time and materials in excess of said Maximum compensation amount, Consultant agrees to perform all of the Scope of Services herein required of Consultant for $163,845, including all materials and other reimbursable amounts ("Maximum Compensation"). Invoices shall be paid within 30 days of approval. All bills submitted by Consultant shall contain sufficient information to'determine whether the amount deemed due and payable is accurate. Bills shall include a brief description of services performed, the date services were performed, the number of hours spent and by whom, a brief description of any costs incurred and the Consultant's signature. In no event shall City be obligated to pay late fees or interest, whether or not such requirements are contained in Consultant's invoice. 3. Term. This Agreement commences on full execution hereof and terminates on July 31, 2019 unless otherwise extended. However, at the sole option of the City, this Agreement may be extended for up to two additional years, or terminated pursuant to the provisions hereof. Consultant agrees to diligently prosecute the services to be provided under this Agreement to completion and in accordance with any schedules specified herein. In the performance of this Agreement, time is of the essence. Time extensions for delays beyond the Consultant's control, other than delays caused by the City, shall be requested in writing to the City's Contract Administrator prior to the expiration of the specified completion date. 4. Assignment and Subcontracting. A substantial inducement to City for entering into this Agreement is the professional reputation and competence of Consultant. Neither this Agreement nor any interest herein may be assigned or subcontracted by Consultant without the prior written approval of City. It is expressly understood and agreed by both parties that Consultant is an independent contractor and not an employee(s) of the City. 5. Insurance. Consultant, at its own cost and expense, shall carry, maintain for the duration of the Agreement, and provide proof thereof, acceptable to the City, the insurance coverages specified in Exhibit B, "City Insurance Requirements," attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. Consultant shall demonstrate proof of required insurance coverage prior to the commencement of services required under this Agreement, by delivery of Certificates of Insurance to City. 6. Indemnification. Consultant shall indemnify, defend, and hold City, its directors, officers, employees, agents, and volunteers harmless from and against any and all liability, claims, suits, actions, damages, and causes of action arising out of, pertaining or relating to the negligence, recklessness or willful misconduct of Consultant, its employees, subcontractors, or agents, or on account of the performance or character of the Services, except for any such claim arising out of the sole negligence or willful misconduct of the City, its officers, employees, agents, or volunteers. It is understood that the duty of Consultant to indemnify and hold harmless includes the duty to defend as set forth in section 2778 of the California Civil Code. Notwithstanding the foregoing, for any design professional services, the duty to defend and indemnify City shall be limited to that allowed pursuant to California Civil Code section 2782.8. Acceptance of insurance certificates and endorsements required under this Agreement does not relieve Consultant from liability under this indemnification and hold harmless clause. This indemnification and hold harmless clause shall apply whether or not such insurance policies shall have been determined to be applicable to any of such damages or claims for damages. 7. Termination and Abandonment. This Agreement may be cancelled at any time by City for its convenience upon written notice to Consultant. In the event of such termination, Consultant shall be entitled to pro -rated compensation for authorized Services performed prior to the effective date of termination provided however that City may condition payment of such compensation upon Consultant's delivery to City of any or all materials described herein. In the event the Consultant ceases performing services under this Agreement or otherwise abandons the project prior to completing all of the Services described in this Agreement, Consultant shall, without delay, deliver to City all materials and records prepared or obtained in the performance of this Agreement. Consultant shall be paid for the reasonable value of the authorized Services performed up to the time of Consultant's cessation or abandonment, less a deduction for any damages or additional expenses which City incurs as a result of such cessation or abandonment. 8. Ownership of Materials. All documents, materials, and records of a finished nature, including but not limited to final plans, specifications, video or audio tapes, photographs, computer data, software, reports, maps, electronic files and films, and any final revisions, prepared or obtained in the performance of this Agreement, shall be delivered to and become the property of City. All documents and materials of a preliminary nature, including but not limited to notes, sketches, preliminary plans, computations and other data, and any other material referenced in this Section, prepared or obtained in the performance of this Agreement, shall be made available, upon request, to City at no additional charge and without restriction or limitation on their use. Upon City's request, Consultant shall execute appropriate documents to assign to the City the copyright or trademark to work created pursuant to this Agreement. Consultant shall return all City property in Consultant's control or possession immediately upon termination. 9. Compliance with Laws. In the performance of this Agreement, Consultant shall abide by and conform to any and all applicable laws of the United States and the State of California, and all ordinances, regulations, and policies of the City. Consultant warrants that all work done under this Agreement will be in compliance with all applicable safety rules, laws, statutes, and practices, including but not limited to Cal/OSHA regulations. If a license or registration of any kind is required of Consultant, its employees, agents, or subcontractors by law, Consultant warrants that such license has been obtained, is valid and in good standing, and Consultant shall keep it in effect at all times during the term of this Agreement, and that any applicable bond shall be posted in accordance with all applicable laws and regulations. 10. Conflict of Interest. Consultant warrants and covenants that Consultant presently has no interest in, nor shall any interest be hereinafter acquired in, any matter which will render the services required under the provisions of this Agreement a violation of any applicable state, local, or federal law. In the event that any conflict of interest should nevertheless hereinafter arise, Consultant shall promptly notify City of the existence of such conflict of interest so that the City may determine whether to terminate this Agreement. Consultant further warrants its compliance with the Political Reform Act (Government Code § 81000 et seq.) respecting this Agreement. 11. Whole Agreement and Amendments. This Agreement constitutes the entire understanding and Agreement of the parties and integrates all of the terms and conditions mentioned herein or incidental hereto and supersedes all negotiations or any previous written or oral Agreements between the parties with respect to all or any part of the subject matter hereof. The parties intend not to create rights in, or to grant remedies to, any third party as a beneficiary of this Agreement or of any duty, covenant, obligation, or undertaking established herein. This Agreement may be amended only by a written document, executed by both Consultant and City's City Manager, and approved as to form by the City's City Attorney. Such document shall expressly state that it is intended by the parties to amend certain terms and conditions of this Agreement. The waiver by either party of a breach by the other of any provision of this Agreement shall not constitute a continuing waiver or a waiver of any subsequent breach of either the same or a different provision of this Agreement. Multiple copies of this Agreement may be executed but the parties agree that the Agreement on file in the office of City's City Clerk is the version of the Agreement that shall take precedence should any differences exist among counterparts of the document. This Agreement and all matters relating to it shall be governed by the laws of the State of California. 12. Capacity of Parties. Each signatory and parry hereto warrants and represents to the other party that it has all legal authority and capacity and direction from its principal to enter into this Agreement and that all necessary actions have been taken so as to enable it to enter into this Agreement. 13. Severability. Should any part of this Agreement be declared by a final decision by a court or tribunal of competent jurisdiction to be unconstitutional, invalid, or beyond the authority of either party to enter into or carry out, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remainder of this Agreement, which shall continue in full force and effect, provided that the remainder of this Agreement, absent the unexcised portion, can be reasonably interpreted to give effect to the intentions of the parties. 14. Notice. Any notice required or desired to be given under this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be personally served or, in lieu of personal service, may be given by (i) depositing such notice in the United States mail, registered or certified, return receipt requested, postage prepaid, addressed to a party at its address set forth in Exhibit A; (ii) transmitting such notice by means of Federal Express or similar overnight commercial courier ("Courier"), postage paid and addressed to the other at its street address set forth below; (iii) transmitting the same by facsimile, in which case notice shall be deemed delivered upon confirmation of receipt by the sending facsimile machine's acknowledgment of such with date and time printout; or (iv) by personal delivery. Any notice given by Courier shall be deemed given on the date shown on the receipt for acceptance or rejection of the notice. Either party may, by written notice, change the address to which notices addressed to it shall thereafter be sent. 15. Miscellaneous. Except to the extent that it provides a part of the definition of the term used herein, the captions used in this Agreement are for convenience only and shall not be considered in the construction of interpretation of any provision hereof, nor taken as a correct or complete segregation of the several units of materials and labor. Capitalized terms refer to the definition provide with its first usage in the Agreement. 3 When the context of this Agreement requires, the neuter gender includes the masculine, the feminine, a partnership or corporation, trust or joint venture, and the singular includes the plural. The terms "shall', "will', "must" and "agree" are mandatory. The term "may" is permissive. The waiver by either party of a breach by the other of any provision of this Agreement shall not constitute a continuing waiver or a waiver of any subsequent breach of either the same or a different provision of this Agreement. When a party is required to do something by this Agreement, it shall do so at its sole cost and expense without right to reimbursement from the other party unless specific provision is made otherwise. Where any parry is obligated not to perform any act, such party is also obligated to restrain any others within its control from performing such act, including its agents, invitees, contractors, subcontractors and employees. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Consultant and City execute this Agreement. CITY OF BURLINGAME CONSULTANT 501 Primrose Road Name Burlingame, CA 94010 Address Lisa K. Goldman City Manager Meaghan Hassel -Shearer City Clerk Approved as to form: Kathleen Kane City Attorney Attachments: Exhibit A Scope of Services Exhibit B City Insurance Provisions Federal Employer ID Number: License Number: Expiration Date: EXHIBIT A SCOPE OF WORK Comprehensive project management services supporting the replacement of the City of Burligame's Finance System are to be provided as described below. Project timelines and milestones, and the backgrounds and experience of consulting staff assigned are to be consistent with the information provided in the amended response to the RFP. Phase 1: Discovery The Discovery will include the following tasks • Facilitate and document discussions with City Management, Finance staff, and other key stakeholders throughout both cities. • Interview key Departmental staff. • Develop an understanding of processes and systems contained within the UDBMS. • Prepare an initial organization readiness report that evaluates each City's current resources and assesses our ability to migrate off the UDBMS, including recommendations for mitigating risk in the migration. • Identify and document required functions and processes. • Identify desired functions and processes. • Define security procedures and best practices for the implementation of a new system(s). • Identify applicable potential systems and vendors able to implement those systems. Deliverables: • Documentation containing an overview of current functions, processes, systems, and requirements • Organizational readiness assessment report. • Gap analysis report describing gaps in current operations compared against best practices • Qualified system and vendor lists who should receive RFP. Phase 2: Budget The Budget phase would include the following: • Develop a preliminary budget estimate. • Develop an estimated time line. Deliverables: • Budget estimate broken down by major system and/or function. • High level time line to complete the project broken down by subsystems if applicable. Phase 3: RFP The RFP phase would include the following: • Develop an RFP. • Distribute the RFP to qualified vendors. • Act as primary contact point for vendors. • Create criteria and an objective methodology for comparison of responses that will ensure that the final decision will meet required oversight requirements. • Organize vendor presentations and demos. • Evaluate responses. • Provide recommendations on vendor/solution suitability. Deliverables: • RFP • Response analysis report and recommendations comparing and contrasting responses based upon agreed functional criteria, overall compliance with RFP, and cost. Phase 4: System Implementation The System Implementation phase would include the following for both the overall project as well as for each system purchased - if more than one is required/desired to replace the existing systems. • Prepare and manage a master project plan with tasks, dependencies, resource allocation, and time requirements. • Facilitate solution installation, schedule, data migration, vendor relationship, contract compliance, and cutover. • Prepare and follow up on vendor punch list. • Facilitate the development of a test plan. Deliverables: • Overall project schedule. • Individual systems/functions project schedules. • Bi -weekly project status reports. • Vendor punch -list. • Test plan. INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS The City will require the successful firm to provide Certificates of Insurance evidencing required coverage types and the minimum limits as listed below. The firm shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by the firm, its agents, representatives or employees. Coverage shall be at least as broad as: 1. Commercial General Liability (CGL): Insurance Services Office Form CG 00 01 covering CGL on an "occurrence" basis for bodily injury and property damage, including products -completed operations, personal injury and advertising injury, with limits no less than $1,000,000 per occurrence. If a general aggregate limit applies, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this project/location or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit. 2. Automobile Liability: Insurance Services Office Form Number CA 0001 covering, Code 1 (any auto), or if Advisor has no owned autos, Code 8 (hired) and 9 (non -owned), with limit no less than $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage. 3. Workers' Compensation insurance as required by the State of California, with Statutory Limits, and Employer's Liability Insurance with limit of no less than $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury or disease. 4. Professional Liability (Errors and Omissions) Insurance appropriate to the Advisor's profession, with limit no less than $1,000,000 per occurrence or claim, $2,000,000 aggregate. If the firm maintains higher limits than the minimums shown above, the City requires and shall be entitled to coverage for the higher limits maintained by the Consultant. a STAFF REPORT AGENDA NO: 8g MEETING DATE: May 15, 2017 To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Date: May 15, 2017 From: William Meeker, Community Development Director— (650) 558-7255 Subject: Set Public Hearing Date for an Appeal of the Planning Commission's April 24, 2017 Action Certifying the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) and Approving Applications for Design Review, a Conditional Use Permit for Building Height, Front Setback Landscape Variance, a Parking Variance for Driveway Width, and a Tentative Parcel Map for a Lot Combination to Merge Two Existing Parcels for Construction of a New Five -Story, 27 -Unit Apartment Building at 1128-32 Douglas Avenue and Applications for Design Review and a Front Setback Variance to Demolish the Existing House At 524 Oak Grove Avenue and Replace It with the Existing Structure to be Moved from 1128 Douglas Avenue, including First and Second Story Additions and Construction of a Detached Garage RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council set the date of the public hearing on the appeal for June 5, 2017. BACKGROUND At its regular meeting of April 24, 2017, the Planning Commission approved requests related to the construction of a new 27 -unit apartment building at 1128-32 Douglas Avenue and relocation of the existing home located at 1128 Douglas Avenue to a new location at 524 Oak Grove Avenue. The appeal period following the Planning Commission's action ran until 5:00 p.m. on Thursday, May 4th. A timely appeal of the Commission's action was filed by Larry Stevenson on April 2611 (see attached letter). FISCAL IMPACT None. Exhibit: • Appeal Letter 1 This is an appeal to the city council of Burlingame to deny approval of the project at 1128 Douglas Ave. do to various variances granted to this project. Larry Stevenson 1124 Douglas Ave. Burlingame Calif. 94010 W�� REL. APR 2 6 C� OFEIRWNGAME RECEIVED APR 2 6 2011 CITY CLERK'S I3NQAMU ahSTAFF REPORT AGENDA NO: 8h MEETING DATE: May 15, 2017 To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Date: May 15, 2017 From: William Meeker, Community Development Director—(650) 558-7255 Subject: Withdrawal of an Appeal of the Planning Commission's Action Regarding Applications for Design Review and a Hillside Area Construction Permit for First- and Second -Story Additions to a Home Located at 1556 Alturas Drive The appellant (property owner) has withdrawn his appeal. The Mayor should announce to the public that the appeal has been withdrawn. No further action is required of the City Council. At its regular meeting of April 10, 2017, the Planning Commission approved requests related to the construction of first- and second -story additions onto an existing home located at 1556 Alturas Drive. The appeal period following the Planning Commission's action ran until 5:00 p.m. on Thursday, April 20th. A timely appeal of the Commission's action was filed by the property owner (Mark Wilson) on that date with the City Clerk's office. On May 3, 2017, the property owner withdrew his appeal (see attached letter). No further action is required of the Council on this matter. Because this matter was noticed for hearing prior to withdrawal of the appeal, staff recommends that the Mayor make a public announcement of the withdrawal for the benefit of any interested persons in attendance or watching the meeting via the City's broadcast. FISCAL IMPACT None. Exhibit: • Letter Withdrawing Appeal 1 Ja L � l' r a +� /✓i �� -RECEIVED-- � 2017 C[TYO @RK URL NGArCE ME 1 MAY 3 2017 Cl-l"" OF t3 -8j.l , r,aj,�fF CCD-PIt1�\��;IvG LRV. aurxL- ,�y�nME STAFF REPORT AGENDANO: 81 MEETING DATE: May 15, 2017 To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Date: May 15, 2017 From: Carol Augustine, Finance Director — (650) 558-7222 Subject: Quarterly Investment Report, Period Ending March 31, 2017 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council receive and approve the City's investment report through March 31. 2017. BACKGROUND This report represents the City's investment portfolio as of March 31, 2017. The report includes all invested City funds with the exception of bond proceeds. All investments are in compliance with the City's adopted Statement of Investment Policy. DISCUSSION The City's investments are guided by the Statement of Investment Policy (the "Policy"), which is reviewed and approved by the Council annually. The Policy was last approved by the City Council on July 5, 2016. The Policy directs that investment objectives, in order by priority, are safety, liquidity, and return. This conservative approach ensures assets are available for use while also allowing the City to earn additional resources on idle funds. The City utilizes a core portfolio of investments managed by the City's investment advisor, PFM Asset Management (PFM), and also maintains funds invested in the State's Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) to achieve its investment goals. As of March 1, 2017, all investments in the San Mateo County Pool were withdrawn, and the City's account with the San Mateo County Pool was closed. CURRENT MARKET CONDITIONS The "Trump trade" dominated markets for much of the first quarter, pushing interest rates and equity prices higher, as the Trump Administration and the Republican Party continued to push an agenda that promised new jobs _lower taxes, deregulation, and massive infrastructure spending. The actions of the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) also caught investors' attention as the Committee increased the federal funds target rate by 0.25% on March 15 to a new range of 0.75% to 1.00%. 1 Investment Report, March 31, 2017 May 15, 2017 Yields on short-term securities remained mostly range bound for most of the quarter, before increasing substantially in late February into March in anticipation of the expected Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) rate hike in mid-March. Although the Committee did indeed make good on its hints of a rate increase, yields actually retreated a bit in the days and weeks following the rate hike as the markets digested the implications of the statement released immediately following the FOMC meeting, in which Committee members reiterated expectations of gradual tightening. Also, the ability of the Trump Administration to enact bold, pro -growth policies came into question late in the quarter as the Administration and Congress publicly wrangled over healthcare reform, a key campaign promise. The U.S. Treasury yield curve flattened during the quarter as short-term yields, which are more closely tied to the federal funds target rate, increased slightly, while intermediate- and long-term yields decreased, reflecting subdued inflation expectations. The yield on the 2 -year U.S. Treasury increased by 7 basis points (0.07%) during the first quarter, ending the quarter at 1.27%, while the yield on the 10 -year Treasury fell 5 basis points to end the quarter at 2.40%. Yield Curve History The pace of U.S. economic expansion slowed a bit in the fourth quarter of 2016. However, the labor market remained strong, consumer confidence increased, business surveys picked up, and the housing market returned to near pre -crisis levels as the market continued to digest the size and scope of the Trump Administration's newly proposed policies. Specifically, U.S. GDP grew at a rate of 2.1% in the fourth quarter of 2016, a slowdown from the third quarter's pace of 3.5%. The deceleration reflected downturns in exports and federal government spending, and a deceleration in business investment. The core personal consumption expenditures price index, the Fed's preferred gauge of inflation, grew 1.8% year -over -year through February, inching closer to the Fed's 2% target. The labor market continues to perform well. In total, the U.S economy added over 500,000 jobs in the first quarter as the unemployment rate declined to a decade low of 4.5%, with the labor force participation rate rising to 63% for the first time in a year. Confidence among Americans grew, as the Conference Board's March reading increased to its highest level since the end of 2000. 2 —March 31, 2017 December 31, 2016 —March 31, 2016 consumption expenditures price index, the Fed's preferred gauge of inflation, grew 1.8% year -over -year through February, inching closer to the Fed's 2% target. The labor market continues to perform well. In total, the U.S economy added over 500,000 jobs in the first quarter as the unemployment rate declined to a decade low of 4.5%, with the labor force participation rate rising to 63% for the first time in a year. Confidence among Americans grew, as the Conference Board's March reading increased to its highest level since the end of 2000. 2 Investment Report, March 31, 2017 May 15, 2017 Most market experts expect the U.S. economy to continue to expand at a moderate pace in 2017, bolstered by gains in the job market and consumer spending. Improving corporate profits, as well as anticipated pro- business measures from the Trump Administration, form a favorable backdrop for businesses. Moreover, the promised fiscal stimulus plans and tax code changes of the Administration could further stimulate growth, but uncertainty looms large as it remains to be seen if the Administration will be able to effectively implement these promised changes. PORTFOLIO INFORMATION 1M 3/31/16 0.18% 12/31/16 0.44% 3/31/17 3M 0.21% 0.51% 0.76% 6M 0.39% 0.62% 0.91% 1Y 0.59% 0.85% 1.03% 2Y 0.73% 1.20% 1.27% 3Y 0.87% 1.47% 1.50% 5Y 1.21% 1.93% 1.93% 7Y 1.54% 1 2.25% 1 2.22% 10Y 1.78% 2.45% J 2.40% 30Y 2.61% 3.06% 3.02°/u;_ The City's cash, excluding bond proceeds, is pooled for investment purposes. As of March 31, 2017, invested funds totaled $140,605,294. These investments, which are assets of the City of Burlingame, include the General Fund, the enterprise funds (such as Water, Sewer, and Solid Waste), as well as various non -major funds. Note that the City's account with the California Employers' Retiree Benefit Trust Fund (CERBT), used to pre -fund the City's retiree medical obligations, is not included in this report. Main Investment Portfolio $ 85,855,728.73 Main Investment Portfolio - Cash Balance in Custody Account 380,197.84 Investment Portfolio B 999,891.00 LAT Balance ns :IFq A7R 7R 33 Given the market uncertainty during the quarter, PFM maintained a duration -neutral strategy for the City's main portfolio. At the end of the quarter, the main portfolio's duration was 2.57 years, conservatively short of the benchmark's duration of 2.63 years. Factoring in additional liquid investments, such as LAIF, the average effective duration of the City's aggregate investments was 1.57 years. Federal agency yield spreads remained historically tight throughout the quarter as demand continued to outpace supply. PFM evaluated agency spreads across the yield curve and took advantage of opportunities to swap out of expensive agency holdings into U.S. Treasuries at similar yields. PFM also remained diligent in seeking opportunities to purchase federal agency issues at attractive yields. Most often, these opportunities occurred in the new issue market. PFM took advantage of the attractive pricing available in the new issue market on February 24, when it sold $1 million of U.S. Treasury notes with approximately 3 years to maturity at an average yield to 1.36% and reinvested the proceeds in a new issue FNMA note with a similar maturity date at a yield of 1.52%, representing a yield pick-up of 16 basis points. 3 Investment Report, March 31, 2017 May 15, 2017 Corporate notes continued to perform well during the quarter as domestic economic conditions and the outlook for businesses improved. In fact, corporate notes outperformed similar -maturity U.S. Treasury notes for the sixth straight quarter. PFM continued to look for opportunities to purchase well -priced, high-quality corporate notes in the City's portfolio. On January 5, PFM sold shorter -dated federal agency and corporate securities and reinvested the proceeds in a Toyota Motor corporate note with 2 years to maturity at a yield of 1.63%. This represents a yield pick-up of approximately 47 basis points compared to similar -maturity U.S. Treasury notes.a Due to the significant money market fund reforms, which were enacted last October, yields on commercial paper (CP) and bank certificate of deposits (CDs) rose sharply in the second half of 2016. Although spreads narrowed somewhat recently, short-term credit instruments, like CP and CDs, continued to offer excellent incremental yield opportunities. PFM took advantage of this market phenomenon on February 8, when it purchased a $2 million negotiable CD with 2 years to maturity issued by the Chicago branch of the Bank of Montreal at a yield of 1.90%, which was 10 basis points higher than the then -current yield of the 5 -year U.S. Treasury note .° By quarter -end, the main portfolio's allocation to certificates of deposit had increased by 4% compared to the prior quarter. Please see below for a summary of transactions for the quarter ended March 31, 2017: Trade settlement Transaction CUSIP �- erm Da �.te 1/5/2017 1/10/2017 Sale' 30231GAL6 Exxon Mobil Notes 14 1.32% 940,000 1/5/2017 1/10/2017 Sale 3135GOYT4 FNMA Notes 23 1.19% 2,000,000 1/5/2017 1/10/2017 Sale 89233P7EO Toyota Motor Notes 12 1,44% 795,000 1/5/2017 1/10/2017 Purchase 89236TDM4 Toyota Motor Notes 24 1.63% 2,000,000 1/5/2017 1/10/2017 Purchase 91282BN48 U.S. Treasury Notes 48 1.70% 2,000,000 1/10/2017 1/12/2017 Sale 3135GOYT4 FNMA Notes 22 1.21% 1,000,000 1/10/2017 1/12/2017 Sale 912828WD8 U.S. Treasury Notes 22 1.15% 990,000 Svenska 1/10/2017 1/12/2017 Purchase 86958JHB8 Handelsbanken 24 1.91% 2,000,000 NY CD 2/8/2017 2/8/2017 Maturity 06538BP80 Bank of Tokyo Mitsubishi CP 0 - YTMIYT 1,500,000 1 Settlement. Transaction 11 CUSIP�Trade .. D. Date a At market close on January 5, 2017, the yield on the 2 -year U.S. Treasury note was 1.16%. Source: Bloomberg. b At market close on February 8, 2017, the yield on the 5 -year U.S. Treasury note was 1.80%. Source: Bloomberg. M Investment Report, March 31, 2017 May 15, 2017 2/8/2017 2/8/2017 Purchase 06538BV75 Bank of Tokyo 6 1.33% 1,500,000 Mitsubishi CP 2/6/2017 2/9/2017 Sale 3137EAED7 FHLMC Notes 20 1.12% 1,965,000 2/6/2017 2/9/2017 Purchase 459200JQ5 IBM Corporate 60 2.35% 2,000,000 Notes Bank of 2/8/2017 2/9/2017 Purchase 06427KRC3 Montreal 24 1.90% 2,000,000 Chicago CD 2/10/2017 2/13/2017 Purchase 3135GOS38 FNMA Notes 59 1.98% 2,500,000 2/10/2017 2/13/2017 Purchase 3137EAEE5 FHLMC Notes 35 1.54% 2,500,000 2/13/2017 2/13/2017 Maturity 22533TPD2 Credit Agricole 0 1,000,000 NY CP 2/13/2017 2/13/2017 Purchase 22533TVE3 Credit Agricole 6 1.25% 1,000,000 NY CP 2/16/2017 2/16/2017 Maturity 06538BPG2 Bank of Tokyo 0 - 1,150,000 Mitsubishi CP 2/16/2017 2/17/2017 Purchase 06538BVG5 Bank of Tokyo 6 1.35% 1,150,000 Mitsubishi CP 2/24/2017 2/28/2017 Sale 912828UB4 U.S. Treasury 33 1.36% 1,000,000 Notes 2/24/2017 2/28/2017 Purchase 3135GOT29 FNMA Notes 36 1.52% 1,060,000 Looking ahead, PFM's strategy continues to favor broad allocation to various credit sectors, including corporate notes, commercial paper, negotiable bank CDs, and asset-backed securities (ABS). Yields on commercial paper and negotiable CDs continue to offer significant yield pickup relative to short-term government securities. Federal agency yield spreads over Treasuries remain historically narrow. As a result, our strategy will generally favor U.S. Treasuries over agencies, unless specific issues offer identifiable value, which will most likely occur in the new -issue market. Although yield spreads on corporate securities drifted wider at the end of the first quarter, they remain near multi-year lows. Therefore, identifying incremental return potential in the corporate bond sector requires careful relative value analysis. Improving corporate profits, as well as anticipated pro-business measures from the Trump Aadministration, form a favorable backdrop for the credit sector. Staff will continue to monitor incoming economic data, Fed policy, and market relationships, adjusting the portfolio's duration as needed. This will include monitoring and assessing the impact of additional policies put forth by the Trump Administration. As noted in the pie charts below, the City's investment portfolio as of March 31, 2017 was heavily weighted towards the State Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) and high-quality (AA+ rated) federal agency and U.S. Treasury securities to maintain the focus on safety and liquidity. 5 Investment Report, March 31, 2017 Investments By Security Type As of March 31, 2017 Corporate Notes 16% Certificates of Deposit 6% Commercial 4% Federal 24% Local Agency Investment Fund BBB/A3 (F Insured) < Credit Quality of Investments As of March 31, 2017 Cash <1% May 15, 2017 DIC Insured) 1% rt -Term) VO As of March 31, 2017, 38% of the City's funds were invested in very short-term liquid investments, 20% of the funds were invested with maturities between one day and two years, and 42% of the investment portfolio had a maturity ranging from two to five years. This distribution gives the City the necessary liquidity to meet operational and emergency cash needs while maximizing returns on funds not needed in the immediate future. The City's aggregate GG Investment Report, March 31, 2017 May 15, 2017 investments maintain a weighted average maturity of 1.64 years and currently generate annual interest income of 1.24% before investment expenses. The City's funds are invested in high credit quality investments, and continue to meet the City's goals of safety, liquidity, and yield/return. 45% 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% Maturity Distribution As of March 31, 2017 Overnight One Day -6 6-12 Months 1-2 Years 2-3 Years 3-4 Years 4-5 Years Months As of March 31, 2017 the yield to maturity at cost on the main portfolio of securities was 1.54°/%. Including additional investments such as LAW and portfolio B, the average yield to maturity** on the City's aggregate investments was 1.24%. During the quarter, the main portfolio generated interest income and realized gains that totaled $313,606. City Investments Statistical Information ` _ _ Market Value $140,605,294.33 Weighted Average Maturity 1.64 Years Average Credit Quality* AA Yield To Maturity** 1.24°% uuya uy o,auuaiv a ruur s. average exciuces Nor Karea" secunues. **The yield to maturity was calculated using the quarterly apportionment rate for LAIF and the yield to maturity at cost for the City's managed portfolios. As noted in previous reports, staff had arranged for a gradual drawdown of the City's holdings in the San Mateo County Pool, as these funds are not as easily accessible as the City's other liquid holdings, and the yield on the County Pool is lower than that earned in the City's own investment portfolio. On March 1, 2017, all investments in the San Mateo County Pool were withdrawn, and the City's account with the San Mateo County Pool was closed. The accessibility of funds in the City's LAIF account will provide adequate liquidity and will allow staff to make as -needed withdrawal requests to meet operating and capital needs. 7 Investment Report, March 31, 2017 1.8% 1.5% 1.2% 0.9% 0.6% 0.3% 0.0% Yield History October 31, 2014 - March 31, 2017 May 15, 2017 'Q V' v �o 4 7 L(i In lU LO M LO U( > U C .0 r T C j O) d U> U C Q T C W �. U> U O Z pLL 2 Q ' Q CD Z 0� LL Q n� Q :n Z O LL - 1.53% 1.27% 1.02% 0.78% Below is a summary of cash and investment holdings held by each fund as of March 31, 2017, which includes invested funds, debt service reserves, amounts held in overnight (liquid) accounts, the City's main checking account and other operating funds: Cash holdings in the General Fund decreased slightly in the third quarter of the 2016-17 fiscal year, due largely to the transfer out of an additional $4.0 million to provide additional funding of the Renewal and Replacement Reserve (Capital Project Fund) as approved with the FY 2016-17 Mid -year report. (The increase in "Other Funds' is largely the result of this transfer.) In addition, there were no major property tax receipts in the quarter — these are received in December and April. C:3 Cash and Investments by Fund As of 03/31/17 As of 12/31/16 Change.$ General Fund $ 24,799,929 $ 26,354,090 $ (1,554,161) Internal Service Funds 18,035,104 17,822,625 212,479 Water Fund 15,802,045 16,749,429 (947,384) Sewer Fund 16,298,165 16,037,658 260,507 Solid Waste Fund 4,838,610 4,726,556 112,054 Parking Fund 6,482,488 5,922,577 559,912 Building Fund 6,424,092 6,576,092 (152,000) Landfill Fund 1,082,684 1,004,563 78,122 Subtotal, Operating Funds 93,763,118 95,193,590 (1,430,471) Other Funds 71,184,372 68,856,679 2,327,693 Total Cash and Investments $ 164,947,490 $ 164,050,269 $ 897,221 Cash holdings in the General Fund decreased slightly in the third quarter of the 2016-17 fiscal year, due largely to the transfer out of an additional $4.0 million to provide additional funding of the Renewal and Replacement Reserve (Capital Project Fund) as approved with the FY 2016-17 Mid -year report. (The increase in "Other Funds' is largely the result of this transfer.) In addition, there were no major property tax receipts in the quarter — these are received in December and April. C:3 Investment Report, March 31, 2017 Update On Wells Fargo Holdings May 15, 2017 As noted in the City's Quarterly Investment Report as of September 30, 2016, PFM has been closely monitoring the market impact of negative publicity surrounding operating practices of Wells Fargo, the third-largest bank in the nation. At the time, the City's portfolio included one Wells Fargo Company note in the amount of $1.77 million, and rating agencies had not altered the bank's A2/A/AA- ratings. The City continues to hold the note (which matures on January 15, 2019), but has not purchased further Wells Fargo instruments. On March 28, 2017, Wells Fargo announced that the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) gave the bank an overall Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) rating of "Needs to Improve." Based on discussions with the California Debt and Investment Advisory Commission (CDIAC) and consideration with PFM's compliance team, while awaiting additional official guidance, PFM has concluded that portfolio investments in Wells Fargo could be viewed as not meeting the CRA rating required in California. Pending further information, PFM has put purchases of Wells Fargo deposits and securities on hold for its clients. The California Government Code does not require divestment of existing holdings. Therefore, existing Wells Fargo deposits and investments may be held to maturity or sold through the course of normal trading activity. For additional context, included below is an excerpt from the California Government Code: Section 53635.2 'To be eligible to receive local agency money, a bank, savings association, federal association, or federally insured industrial loan company shall have received an overall rating of not less than "satisfactory" in its most recent evaluation by the appropriate federal financial supervisory agency of its record of meeting the credit needs of California's communities, including low- and moderate -income neighborhoods..." CONCLUSION All City funds are invested in accordance with the approved Statement of Investment Policy with an emphasis on safety, liquidity, and return (in that order). The City's investment strategy of balancing the investment portfolio between short-term investments (to meet cash flow needs) and longer-term maturities (to realize a higher rate of return) is appropriate given current market conditions. Due to the ease of access of the City's funds in overnight accounts such as IAIF, the City has more than sufficient funds available to meet its liquidity (expenditure) requirements for the next six months. Staff and the City's investment advisor will continue to closely monitor the City's investments to ensure the mitigation of risk and ability to meet the City's investment goals while being able to respond to changes in market conditions. we Investment Report, March 31, 2017 FISCAL IMPACT May 15, 2017 Quarterly reporting of the City's Investment Portfolio will not result in any direct impact on City resources. Exhibit: Portfolio Holdings as of March 31, 2017. 10 R 9 N N h O U c I V IMn, _- O n m J m O M O 10 O a O N O O m RI a- U O M o v V: 1� tp ey 1n p0'. of N �o 1 Y O W� R Itl N M b O Q O C o C7 a n �� n Z o O J N u a o y Y N [D a p r LL ~ d O N IIq ti m L_ Q R U U in c N V IMn, _- .No. n m _q m O M O 10 O M O N O ti m RI O O O M o v V: 1� tp ey 1n p0'. of N �o m m b Pl O M S. R Itl N M b O ,moi m o m m n rn m m N 0 r r� - t^O IIq ti n R V IR Imil 0 O n1 O O Im(1 N O R n W I� n M bV1 Vb1 N m I!1 m m IG q N N N N T N N N T N l V b Vin. n m m o C! o - C o. o c N V IMn, _- .No. n m _q m o m N b RI O O 0 M 1� tp vt N 'I(1 O N � M W of N t!1 N m m b Pl O M S. R Itl N M b O r ti H _ o 0 0 O n1 O O IG q N N N N T N N N T N N �. rn Cd H N- b b b 0 0 O ry b b 0 0 o ry ti QJ Q Op O p O O 0 o a o 0 0 0 0 0 0 o o 0 0 -.b v In o o:- v o ti o .moi C! o o m M O m m pI m U m m M m O N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N a o 0 0 0- VI N_ �1mW1 N Imp n {m1 O '�1m1 N IVyI N �1N1 IO1 V{1I N VI N �1tAJ I� � UI O t011 m O O O O O M O N -O Zti zti z�Zoz .mi:zti-zti z�-Z .u'. Z� zti z?; Z�-z •+' F- � o � o � o � o � o � o � ❑ � o � o � o � o � o � o � o a I T N -J ap Obi N V: m m- 10 W VI O ti O p o b p :m 1� m_ J W- I -ol vi H n O b W N O p O v t0 O p 1p p b V' p - O -- O a p VJ N H N m n m N N O n O d U W M Ill '1 M IV IO p n W ltl vi - -.o rn b (D ti In cQ G :M O Wm m Itf M C� 1 L N 41 m rn W C N W V O o Q C + h - m b Ol pl V W (7 O a a C Z � e W ri _ vl J y m m O n n d'LL o a lD - m b M m c O ti -p o F- m O 0 Y O 'Lr?I v '^, A o U u v v� ap Obi N V: m m- 10 W VI O ti p In Lq m- N p o b p :m 1� m_ p o V P W- I -ol vi H n O b W N -R n W M C- p O v t0 O p 1p p b V' p - O -- O O O O p VJ N H N m n m n N W n O V Cl W M Ill '1 M IV IO p n W ltl vi - -.o rn b (D ti In V Ill o :M O Wm m Itf M C� N V" ti- N D'1 V y. ry N 41 m rn M m V o o vl Cl m Y- N W V O o O O of rn O O - vl � h - m b Ol pl V W m Ol Y'1 M IO ti O Ill O o 1+1 CD OLll W b N vi O W ri _ vl C of Ol .Ni M lti n O lD m m O n n - n m - M n m M lD - m b M ♦p ' m Cl! o o o ti -p o m m m O W - � m- fNi O 'Lr?I v '^, O I^ o - p Iq .-I N 1p Ol Ill Ll ID N Ol N m :.n N V' b R -O " Ill ln- m OI O W W N Cl m I n le Ip le pl a w- N N- .o N le Ol o O to R N vi O vi P to ti lll. N lD l0 -m W Ol � O V N 1+1 t0 VI O O O O O O O oo 0 0 Ili vi rn v Ol .moi o n- - o o o vi 0 b o- o o: - 0 O o o o 0 O o o li N o o m N o ui m cl�---0 -0 o p 0 0 0 O I/t 0 0 0 o O 0 0 0 o O. 0 o - o oV' 11i In... n a p a o w - n 1pJ Ill a- o u] n ul n (09 In u� n l09 In (o'J In (pJ _ In O O p O O O O O O O O O O O ry- VM\l N n W Ol O r_O. N F ti `i -ti O o 0 o 1u O ��uu o O 0 -e 0 0 0 -o 1--.-o r o o Z o Z a zo Z'o o o Q O O t(1 Vl O -Vl O N O J O J- O O Z -n Z n 11E N Z N - N N w W Y W yl O W N W N Y 1� W U. O � O O F z- z� O� m o p o o [pppJJ']]]J PO U o U np 4 mo � mo ❑ o O o a ti Q o a o Q o. a o Z Q Q LL 5 I=L LL LL 0 LL LL D z 0 z O qCD W m N CL N O O 1�(1 111 111 -VU'1- - H eMi .Mi .M -i Mi .Mi eNi .M -i rMi N N N N N N N N o 0 - o o 0 m I o o o H o a - o O o N M M Y N N N IJ O �{M�11 N to N ll{LL/)�� ON 2 N �1�J N �1bw1 N 'WN1 N. W N IZL O LL D LL D LL D LL D LL❑ lZRL 0 LL D ry m u E O ry n W N F V vbi P N b > d -. ti M .O m n a, C O v y m O U h cs O O V H n- o o vrlt ry yM. o pbj n-" M -" O N N M i V 01 y � m VI 1�D V N W O hl N d d n 1� m m m -fir d� OJ Lq N V N N � _�. N_ U a V a c N O 01 _.N ' yl N m C I � a N (V N cm G : ry O J� O a Q 7 � U Z Q B, � « N N W : d O N MM rbi li In ZV O rl fi H J! W ri fi �1 ° d b d A n I(1 O O VOI LL. O ~ N O n O O n ri U= d fn N O O 1�(1 111 111 -VU'1- - H eMi .Mi .M -i Mi .Mi eNi .M -i rMi N N N N N N N N o 0 - o o 0 m I o o o H o a - o O o N M M Y N N N IJ O �{M�11 N to N ll{LL/)�� ON 2 N �1�J N �1bw1 N 'WN1 N. W N IZL O LL D LL D LL D LL D LL❑ lZRL 0 LL D ry m b T ry n W N o vbi P N b Lq -. ti M ePi b M m voi v m m h- m h cs O O M V IA LQ n- o o vrlt ry yM. o pbj n-" M -" O N N M - M 01 P VI 1�D V N IV hl N ry n 1� m m m -fir d� OJ Lq Lr! V N N - O _�. N_ N V VI O N N _.N ' yl N _ n Itl 41 N (V N ry N N - N MM rbi li In In CJ rl fi ri ri fi I I b M n I(1 O O VOI O O n O O n e - vi to _- LQ m .mi o O� . o'. M Iq di v -m -. O N N Itl N N Ibil LQ m o .y rn M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O o CD N M-. yoj N ^ n N N V h Iry N O O 1�(1 111 111 -VU'1- - H eMi .Mi .M -i Mi .Mi eNi .M -i rMi N N N N N N N N o 0 - o o 0 m I o o o H o a - o O o N M M Y N N N IJ O �{M�11 N to N ll{LL/)�� ON 2 N �1�J N �1bw1 N 'WN1 N. W N IZL O LL D LL D LL D LL D LL❑ lZRL 0 LL D v'I M N b b T N 'i W N o _ P N b M -. ti M ePi b M o N m ro h- m h cs O O M b b tom- ti O O O O ti N N N N M sLei zLfi z� y n 1� m m m -fir v'I M N b b T '1 H 'i W N o _ P N b M -. ti M ePi b M o N n _ ti 'j ti Yl O -ZO ti0-�0 ti b b tom- ti O O O O ti N N N ti sLei a O. o o z.�-r-O, Yl O -ZO ti0-�0 q e o a -C u o O z L'i sLei zLfi z� W Of O. N F N P O U a N Q Z N N \ N W N N U N F N N N d. N N FFU �1 z O Z Oo �uo rno o o D o a o o m o f o u 'o Z o o 0 U O w o F g .Ni O o_ Y m `6 n a voi of o" 2 m m C n O m N U ri U N O yWZe"�Jg.NN�Moi . KOpmOoQa'miN. U tmONO ¢JVNN.. LLJ Nf1 <NUe -m"U�Iamo1 NcOoo .- zZ F�:ZZm� -l�ooV O0N.N N 3 ON U faN a2i-i Qi` ° g 000 o MOCL ^NtiN\~o o o 3 a e 0 0 O IMl1 N O O J O O 0 O V O m m v O LQ M ea N O V: O N N d V M z_ m m ti O YY -n cQ n - m n LU LU 10 r ¢ Y (� O n a Z � � 0 J y U � o a n \ Y .Ni .Ni 6 D \N W LLm r 0 0'Ym O r 'u G u 0 W Of O. N F N P O U a N Q Z N N \ N W N N U N F N N N d. N N FFU �1 z O Z Oo �uo rno o o D o a o o m o f o u 'o Z o o 0 U O w o F g .Ni O o_ Y m `6 n a voi of o" 2 m m C n O m N U ri U N O yWZe"�Jg.NN�Moi . KOpmOoQa'miN. U tmONO ¢JVNN.. LLJ Nf1 <NUe -m"U�Iamo1 NcOoo .- zZ F�:ZZm� -l�ooV O0N.N N 3 ON U faN a2i-i Qi` ° g 000 o MOCL ^NtiN\~o o o 3 a e 0 0 IMl1 N O O Lr; O O W W W L/1 O V O m m v O LQ M ea N O V: I� N N O - m W M M m m ti O o -n o n - m n N O N W V W O W r N � o .Ni .Ni \N W 16 N O O O O M o" o 0 O V O] O 1D' tll 0 0 "m" m voi o ei N "... O O al O O W IOfI" b M Oi Ol M Is I o 1!1 p O M Q Q 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 6 0 0 cs N W O pp I(Wl N O. .O r1 V W Of O. N F N P O U a N Q Z N N \ N W N N U N F N N N d. N N FFU �1 z O Z Oo �uo rno o o D o a o o m o f o u 'o Z o o 0 U O w o F g .Ni O o_ Y m `6 n a voi of o" 2 m m C n O m N U ri U N O yWZe"�Jg.NN�Moi . KOpmOoQa'miN. U tmONO ¢JVNN.. LLJ Nf1 <NUe -m"U�Iamo1 NcOoo .- zZ F�:ZZm� -l�ooV O0N.N N 3 ON U faN a2i-i Qi` ° g 000 o MOCL ^NtiN\~o o o 3 a e 0 0 IMl1 N O O Lr; O M v1 N W W W L/1 " N N I m m v O LQ M ea N O N M Ili m O OI N W N W M M m m ti O IV n m n N O N W V W O W r N � W Of O. N F N P O U a N Q Z N N \ N W N N U N F N N N d. N N FFU �1 z O Z Oo �uo rno o o D o a o o m o f o u 'o Z o o 0 U O w o F g .Ni O o_ Y m `6 n a voi of o" 2 m m C n O m N U ri U N O yWZe"�Jg.NN�Moi . KOpmOoQa'miN. U tmONO ¢JVNN.. LLJ Nf1 <NUe -m"U�Iamo1 NcOoo .- zZ F�:ZZm� -l�ooV O0N.N N 3 ON U faN a2i-i Qi` ° g 000 o MOCL ^NtiN\~o o o 3 a e 0 0 O a N N LQ M O O N M O O M m O o .Ni .Ni \N W 16 N O O O O M o" o 0 0 0 0 0 0 "m" m voi o ei N W Of O. N F N P O U a N Q Z N N \ N W N N U N F N N N d. N N FFU �1 z O Z Oo �uo rno o o D o a o o m o f o u 'o Z o o 0 U O w o F g .Ni O o_ Y m `6 n a voi of o" 2 m m C n O m N U ri U N O yWZe"�Jg.NN�Moi . KOpmOoQa'miN. U tmONO ¢JVNN.. LLJ Nf1 <NUe -m"U�Iamo1 NcOoo .- zZ F�:ZZm� -l�ooV O0N.N N 3 ON U faN a2i-i Qi` ° g 000 o MOCL ^NtiN\~o o o 3 a e 0 0 O W Of O. N F N P O U a N Q Z N N \ N W N N U N F N N N d. N N FFU �1 z O Z Oo �uo rno o o D o a o o m o f o u 'o Z o o 0 U O w o F g .Ni O o_ Y m `6 n a voi of o" 2 m m C n O m N U ri U N O yWZe"�Jg.NN�Moi . KOpmOoQa'miN. U tmONO ¢JVNN.. LLJ Nf1 <NUe -m"U�Iamo1 NcOoo .- zZ F�:ZZm� -l�ooV O0N.N N 3 ON U faN a2i-i Qi` ° g 000 o MOCL ^NtiN\~o o o 3 a e 0 0 F N tq O m L d O � Y � U � 10 O M 4mll R N O N N_ m N a h ✓ ` �i F N N Y 0 O � N U � m h M M O N W pd ti O N N_ m N a h ✓ ` �i o O �o 'S 0 y v4'1 Q) •>- O v � o W W m O J -o m O VI VI V01 4!1 VI vt O �u1 � d u N N N f � m60 N ma0 C C C � O N 0 C ,y U o o 0 c Q 6 a mm m4y cp, m M Jqn N C N o' o oy1 -- 0 m 0 m � a m = i a -o a ti Z .4 Oi W J Q O LL � m � o. y .i 'i 4 O W p¢ d ' U z_ m.p..' Q c •` ' u 000 W A C t� �� Q O C L mo (,CLn n UD Z0 N V K o v m a p O.0 LL ~ a N !O rOr F U n F N N � O � N O � m h M M O ti W pd ti O N N_ g N N M M 4011 VOj h .� �i o O ii v4'1 M � o W W m O J -o m O VI VI V01 4!1 VI vt �u1 u ti .4 N m60 U-0 ma0 yOj N N n O N N O O O m h M M P N P N P N m N N N_ g N N M M 4011 VOj h 'o W U J m 0 LL_ h ¢ o 'o v4'1 M •-1 W W N O� VI VI V01 4!1 VI vt OI O u ti .4 N W U J m 0 LL_ h ¢ o 'o v4'1 M •-1 W W u ,y o. o o 0 6 m mm m4y cp, m titm Jqn -gn N o' o oy1 -- 0 0 0 m o a O -o a ti Z .4 W n Q � m .i 'i 4 YI W p¢ m.p..' fIl 000 50 - �� �0 mo U0:F UD Z0 M m Z z z ¢ m ¢ ¢ m 00 0 Co 00 o o -'. - o o o o C o 000. O � � _-o 4on N voi N N voi N N. - voi N voi N o Vl o V ri fl4 YI W U J m 0 LL_ h ¢ Q u O o -Ya Za ¢.2 6 m mm m4y cp, m titm Jqn -gn V: N O w a ti Z .4 W n Q y. m a N W p¢ m.p..' fIl 000 50 - �� �0 mo U0:F UD Z0 n w w C� M f > m N ti vi of m 07 s m o nj W n u1 DJ ul W O V Vf N L OJ Ill 1(1 � lO ry O W OJ C Gm tlF N C O a o o N W N M N M L C O O o O W W o o o O n n pV ¢ N N n N N N p) 1p W b W Y � O LL � b m d N o toll Yl O� N u el 0 G7 0 O] 0 ri Y A e{ ei Y O O O m M p o 0 o n n C H 0 o O o O G W ri P ri m u N N n UI m n n O 4J � W VI ❑ � ^I O O W — a d � F ❑ N CU O O 0 C m 0 y N M O Q Q O i UO a a c 47cm 0 0 0 0 0 A a0 0 0 = O o 0 0 0 R o 0 m o N v0 N n Ill Ill m N h O J p LL m N p M V m o HN a � O w � I Y O o r LLJ f O J N U O N C O OO Y J¢ K ❑ m o .�. m F a 6 O i Q N y O d S N m F a N W w > •�o �� o� �' m � d s o w Y o N wi A u z w a u o U w a n O 0 L m m a m w o N Oo O O O W N N Oo C O G L O o O O O O O O o0 0 0 0 � Q o 0 0 � L I O '- W N L9 b b b L L � h 1l1 1(1 d u � a 1!1 I(1 lfl H N a N a N a N N Y f O a Ob � o c o c 0 m 4 o O o Y c N o G G o G7 01 O 'C V o o O O O 0 0 0 0 N o 0 0 41 •L � M Y Y N w O M � m N m � A 0 m rn 3 p m a N o0 o O o rp o d o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 w ti 'i w m � 04 Ia H, VI 2 ; LL: V M m dI i W C� o 2': W �y 6 voi ~ V) iG Q U Y Y cc LL aSTAFF REPORT AGENDANO: 10a MEETING DATE: May 15, 2017 To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Date: May 15, 2017 From: Syed Murtuza, Director of Public Works — (650) 558-7230 Subject: Adoption of a Resolution Approving a Workplan for Developing a Green Infrastructure Plan (GIP) Related to Stormwater in Accordance with the Requirements of the Municipal Regional Permit from the San Francisco Bay Area Regional Water Quality Control Board RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached resolution approving the workplan for developing a Green Infrastructure Plan (GIP) for stormwater in accordance with the requirements of the Municipal Regional Permit from the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board. BACKGROUND As part of the Federal Clean Water Act, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) administers the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) stormwater permit program. In California, the State Water Resources Control Board implements the program on behalf of USEPA through its branches of regional water quality control boards. This program requires cities with a Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) to implement stormwater management programs in order to control and prevent harmful pollutants from being washed by stormwater runoff that leads into the storm drain system, and then discharged into local water bodies including the San Francisco Bay. The San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board has issued the Municipal Regional Stormwater NPDES Permit (MRP) to municipalities and agencies in the San Francisco Bay region. This MRP requires permittees that discharge stormwater into the San Francisco Bay or Pacific Ocean to comply with requirements to address the water quality and flow-related impacts of stormwater runoff. The MRP is a comprehensive permit with requirements related to construction sites, industrial sites, illegal discharges, new development, and municipal operations. The permit also requires a public education program, implementation of targeted pollutant reduction strategies, and monitoring programs to help characterize local water quality conditions and evaluate the overall effectiveness of the permit's implementation. In Provision C.3.j of the MRP, each jurisdiction must develop a GIP that demonstrates how each permittee will gradually shift from traditional "gray" storm drain infrastructure, which channels polluted runoff directly into receiving waters without treatment through pipes, tunnels, and pump stations, to a more resilient storm drain system comprised of "green" infrastructure, which 1 Resolution Approving the Workplan for Developing the Green Infrastructure Plan May 15, 2017 captures, stores and treats stormwater using specially designed landscape systems. In addition to managing runoff in a more sustainable fashion, the GIP must be designed to collectively achieve specific load reductions in mercury and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) in stormwater runoff by 2020, 2030, and 2040, per Provisions C.11 and C.12 in the MRP. The Green Infrastructure Plan must: • Include a mapping and prioritization mechanism to identify and prioritize both private and public green infrastructure project opportunities; • Identify locations and timeframes for implementing green infrastructure, including numeric targets for retrofitting impervious areas to achieve mandated pollutant load reductions; • Utilize a regionally consistent process for tracking and mapping completed projects to ensure progress towards meeting the pollutant load reduction targets; • Include and/or reference design and construction guidelines and standard specifications and details for green infrastructure to guide and enable the completion of projects; • Integrate with other planning efforts, including updating other relevant City of Burlingame planning documents, policies, codes, and ordinances to incorporate green infrastructure for stormwater management to support the implementation of project opportunities; • Evaluate long-term funding options, including for design, construction, and long-term operations and maintenance, from the City of Burlingame and other sources; • Incorporate any necessary legal mechanisms to enable implementation of the plan and projects within and by the City of Burlingame; and, • Include public outreach on development and implementation of the plan. The City's GIP must be developed and submitted to the Water Board by September 30, 2019. In advance of this deadline, each permittee's governing body must approve a workplan for developing the GIP by June 30, 2017. The City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County (C/CAG) has worked with its member agencies to develop model green infrastructure planning materials. The attached workplan includes an introduction describing what green infrastructure is, the regulatory requirements of the plan, and the various tasks necessary to create a Green Infrastructure Plan. The workplan also identifies various individual aspects of the GIP that will be undertaken by C/CAG and by the City. FISCAL IMPACT There are sufficient funds available in the Public Works department operations budget to prepare the GIP. It is important to note that while there are minor short-term costs involved to develop the GIP, the potential long-term costs to actually implement the green infrastructure at levels necessary to achieve the required pollutant load reductions may be significant. C/CAG is coordinating efforts at a countywide level to determine how much green infrastructure may be required and the associated costs. Staff will update the City Council on long-term implementation costs and funding options upon developing the plan. L 2 Resolution Approving the Workplan for Developing the Green Infrastructure Plan May 15, 2017 Exhibits: • Resolution • City of Burlingame Green Infrastructure Plan Workplan RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME APPROVING A WORKPLAN FOR DEVELOPING A GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE PLAN IN ACCORDANCE WITH REQUIREMENTS OF THE MUNICIPAL REGIONAL STORMWATER PERMIT The City Council of the City of Burlingame, California does resolve as follows: WHEREAS, the federal Clean Water Act created the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) stormwater permit program to prevent the discharge of pollutants into local water bodies; and WHEREAS, the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board has issued the Municipal Regional Stormwater NPDES Permit (MRP) to regulate stormwater discharges from municipal separate storm sewer systems and into the San Francisco Bay and Pacific Ocean; and WHEREAS, the MRP is a comprehensive permit with requirements related to construction sites, industrial sites, illegal discharges, new development, municipal operations, public outreach, targeted pollutant reduction strategies, and water quality monitoring programs; and WHEREAS, Provision C.3.j of the MRP requires each jurisdiction to develop a Green Infrastructure Plan that demonstrates how each permittee will gradually shift from traditional "gray" storm drain infrastructure—which channels polluted runoff directly into receiving waters without treatment through pipes, tunnels, and pump stations—to a more resilient storm drain system comprised of "green" infrastructure, which captures, stores and treats stormwater using specially designed landscape systems; and WHEREAS, the MRP also requires the Green Infrastructure Plan to collectively achieve specific load reductions in mercury and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) in stormwater runoff by 2020, 2030, and 2040 per Provisions C.11 and C.12; and WHEREAS, all permittees under the MRP are required to approve by June 30, 2017 a workplan for developing a Green Infrastructure Plan; and WHEREAS, the City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County (C/CAG) is working with its member agencies, including City of Burlingame staff, to develop model green infrastructure planning documents; and WHEREAS, the City of Burlingame's Green Infrastructure Plan Workplan details the tasks required to develop a Green Infrastructure Plan compliant with MRP requirements, including aspects to be implemented by C/CAG and local agencies. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME DOES HEREBY RESOLVE THAT: The City of Burlingame is hereby authorized and directed to approve the workplan for developing a Green Infrastructure Plan in accordance with the requirements of the San Francisco Bay Municipal Regional Stormwater Permit by the San Francisco Regional Water Quality Control Board. Ricardo Ortiz, Mayor I, Meaghan Hassel -Shearer, 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 15th day of May, 2017, and was adopted thereafter by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Meaghan Hassel -Shearer, City Clerk 0 BurlingameCity of Green Infrastructure Plan Workplan Submitted by: City of Burlingame 501 Primrose Road Burlingame, CA 94010 The City of Burlingame developed this document from a template that was prepared by the Santa Clara Valley Urban Runoff Pollution Prevention Program to assist jurisdictions in complying with requirements in Provision C.3 j.i.(1) of the Municipal Regional Stormwater NPDES Permit (MRP) to develop a workplan for preparing a Green Infrastructure Plan. The template was intended to provide jurisdictions with a format and suggested content for their Green infrastructure Plan Workplans. The workplan mustbe approved byJune 30, 2017and submitted to the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board by September 30, 2017. Table of Contents 1. Introduction..........................................................................................................................................1 I.I. What is Green Infrastructure?.....................................................................................................1 1.2. Stormwater Quality Regulatory Requirements...........................................................................1 1.3. Statement of Purpose of Green Infrastructure Plan and Workplan..........................................2 1.4. City of Burlingame Description and Background.......................................................................3 1.5. City of Burlingame Goals and Overall Approach........................................................................3 2. Green Infrastructure Plan Elements & Approach...............................................................................4 2.1. Summary of Required Elements.................................................................................................4 2.2. Approach to Completion of Required Elements.........................................................................4 2.2.1. Outreach and Education......................................................................................................5 2.2.2. Project Identification and Prioritization..............................................................................5 2.2.3. Prioritized Project Locations and Timeframes...................................................................6 2.2.4. Completed Project Tracking System...................................................................................7 2.2.5. Guidelines and Specifications.............................................................................................7 2.2.6. Integration with Other Municipal Plans..............................................................................7 2.2.7. Evaluation of Funding Options............................................................................................7 2.2.8. Adoption of Policies, Ordinances, and Other Legal Mechanisms .....................................7 2.2.9. Completion and Adoption of the GI Plan............................................................................7 Table 1. Green Infrastructure Workplan.....................................................................................................8 Table 2. Estimated Timeframe for Developing the Green Infrastructure Plan......................................15 Abbreviations BASMAA Bay Area Stormwater Management Agencies Association C/CAG City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County CIP Capital Improvement Projects City City of Burlingame FY Fiscal Year GI Green Infrastructure GI TAC Green Infrastructure Technical Advisory Committee GIS Geographic Information System LID Low Impact Development MRP Municipal Regional Stormwater NPDES Permit MS4 Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System PCBs Polychlorinated Biphenyls RAA Reasonable Assurance Analysis SMCWPPP San Mateo Countywide Water Pollution Prevention Program SRP Stormwater Resource Plan State Board State Water Resource Control Board TMDL Total Maximum Daily Load Water Board San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board 1. Introduction 1.1. What is Green Infrastructure? "Green Infrastructure" (GI) is infrastructure that uses vegetation, soils, and natural processes to manage water and create healthier urban environments. At the scale of a city or county, green infrastructure refers to the patchwork of natural areas that provides habitat, flood protection, cleaner air, and cleaner water. At the scale of a neighborhood or project site, green infrastructure refers to stormwater management systems and features that mimic nature by absorbing and storing water. GI are resilient, sustainable systems that slow, filter, harvest, infiltrate and/or evapotranspirate precipitation runoff. Examples of GI include bioswales, which are landscape -based stormwater "biotreatment" using soil and plants ranging in size from grasses to trees; pervious paving systems (e.g., interlocking concrete pavers, porous asphalt, and pervious concrete); rainwater harvesting systems (e.g., cisterns and rain barrels); and other methods to capture and treat stormwater. These practices are also known as Low Impact Development (LID) site design and treatment measures. GI roadway projects are typically called "Green Streets". Another term related to street design is "Complete Streets". This term comes from the transportation field and deals with the designing of streets that incorporate all modes of travel equally - in particular to increase safety and access for cyclists and pedestrians. The integration of the goals of both Complete Streets and Green Streets has coined several new terms such as "Living Streets", 'Better Streets", and "Sustainable Streets". This movement recognizes that environmentally and holistically designed streets achieve many benefits: increased multi -modal travel and safety; clean water and air; climate change resilience and mitigation; place making and community cohesion; habitat and energy savings; and higher property values. 1.2. Stormwater Quality Regulatory Requirements The City of Burlingame (City) is subjectto the requirements of the recently reissued Municipal Regional Stormwater National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permitfor Phase I municipalities and agencies in the San Francisco Bay area (Order R2-2015-0049), also known as the Municipal Regional Permit (MRP), which became effective on January 1, 2016. The MRP applies to 76 large, medium and small municipalities (cities, towns and counties) and flood control agencies that discharge stormwater to through Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems (MS4) and into San Francisco Bay. These municipalities are collectively referred to as Permittees. Over the last 13 years, under the MRP and previous permits, new development and redevelopment projects on private and public propertythat exceed certain size thresholds ("Regulated Projects") have been required to mitigate impacts on water quality by incorporating site design, pollutant source control, stormwater treatment and flow control measures as appropriate. LID treatment measures, such as rainwater harvesting and use, infiltration, and biotreatment, have been required on most Regulated Projects since December 2011. Construction of new roads is covered by these requirements, but projects related to existing roads and adjoining sidewalks and bike lanes are not regulated unless they include creation of an additional travel lane. A new section of the MRP requires Permittees to develop and implement long-term Green Infrastructure (GI) Plans for the inclusion of LID measures in storm drain infrastructure on public and private lands, including streets, roads, storm drains, parking lots, building roofs, and other elements. The GI Plan must be completed by September 30, 2019. As part of the GI planning process, the MRP requires Permittees to adopt a Green Infrastructure Workplan by June 30, 2017 and submit it to the 1 Regional Water Quality Control Board (Water Board) by September 30, 2017. The Workplan, a framework for completing the GI Plan, must at a minimum include a statement of purpose, tasks and timeframes to complete the required elements of the GI Plan. Other sections of the MRP include requirements for municipalities to control pollutants of concern to water quality in stormwater discharges, including polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), mercury, trash and pesticides. LID measures incorporated into green infrastructure can help remove these pollutants from stormwater runoff. For this reason, the MRP establishes a new linkage between public infrastructure retrofits and required reductions in discharges of certain pollutants, specifically PCBs and mercury. Over the next few decades, Permittees must reduce the loads of PCBs and mercury in stormwater discharges through various means, with a portion of these load reductions achieved through the installation of GI systems. Permittees in San Mateo County, collectively, must implement GI on public and private property to reduce mercury loading by 6 grams/year and PCB loading by 15 grams/year by 2020. The load reductions will continue in future permits. Therefore, these efforts will be integrated and coordinated countywide for the most effective program. Other pollutants, including trash and pesticides, should also be coordinated with the GI program since, when properly designed, constructed and maintained, biotreatment systems may also be credited towards trash and pesticide reduction goals. A key component of the GI definition in the MRP is the inclusion of both private and public property IocationsforGI systems. This has been done in orderto plan, analyze, implement and credit GI systems for pollutant load reductions on a watershed scale, as well as recognize all GI accomplishments within a municipality. However, the focus of the GI Plan and Workplan is the integration of GI systems into public right-of-way. The GI Plan is not intended to impose retrofit requirements on private property, outside the standard development application review process for projects already regulated by the MRP, but may provide incentives or opportunities for private property owners to add or contribute towards GI elements if desired. The City of Burlingame has developed this document to serve as the City's Green Infrastructure Plan Workplan with support and assistance from the City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County (C/CAG). 1.3. Statement of Purpose of Green Infrastructure Plan and Workplan The purpose of the City's Green Infrastructure Plan is to describe how the City will shift its impervious surfaces and storm drain infrastructure from "gray' to "green". That is, the GI Plan will describe how the City will shift from traditional storm drain infrastructure, where stormwater runoff flows directly from impervious surfaces into storm drains and receiving waters, to a more resilient, sustainable system that reduces and slows runoff by dispersing it to vegetated areas, promotes infiltration and evapotranspiration, collects runoff for non -potable uses, and treats stormwater runoff using bioretention and other green infrastructure practices. The Green Infrastructure Plan will also provide guidance to demonstrate the City of Burlingame's long- term commitment to implementing green infrastructure to help reduce pollutants of concern, particularly mercury and PCBs, from entering into the San Francisco Bay. Specifically, the GI Plan will provide a process for identifying, implementing, tracking, and reporting green infrastructure projects in order to provide reasonable assurance that urban runoff total maximum daily loads (TMDL) allocations for mercury and PCBs required in Provisions C.11 and C.12 of the MRP will be met. The GI Plan will also identify means and methods to prioritize particular areas within the City for implementation of green infrastructure projects. VA The purposes of this workplan are to: 1. Provide background on the MRP requirements for GI Planning; 2. Describe the purpose, goals, and tasks to develop the GI Plan; and 3. Outline the timeframes for the creation of the GI Plan and other GI tasks required in the MRP. 1.4. City of Burlingame Description and Background Incorporated in 1908, the City of Burlingame is located in San Mateo County and has a jurisdictional area of about 6 square miles. According to 2016 data from the California Department of Finance, it has a population of 29,724 people, with a population density of 4,954 people per square mile. The City is primarily comprised of the following land uses: commercial, industrial, residential, public facilities, and open space. The City's watershed contains natural creeks, impacted creeks (e.g., straightened or concrete channels), culverts (concrete tunnels under roads or bridges), and storm drain pipes. Stormwater runoff enters the City's storm drains and flows into the San Francisco Bay, untreated. The City is continuously working to update and maintain its separate storm sewer system, which includes storm drain inlets, gutters, pipes, and outfalls to creeks and the San Francisco Bay. In January 2009, the City Council authorized a voter -approved storm drain fee ballot measure to provide $39 million dollars' worth of infrastructure improvements to the City's aging system. The ballot measure specified thatthe storm drainage fees would be used to improve, upgrade, and maintain the storm drainage system. The Public Works Department has been focusing on funding areas throughout the City that have experienced flooding and public safety issues in the past. Projects funded by the storm drain fee are referred as Capital Improvement Projects (CIP), and include city-wide storm drain construction, channel rehabilitation, and pump station retrofits. Since green infrastructure is not considered as a storm drain system, fees from the ballot measure cannot be used to fund GI projects. 1.5. City of Burlingame Goals and Overall Approach The goal of the GI Plan is to strategize on how to incorporate green infrastructure in both private and public projects. C/CAG and its consultants are working with member agencies to develop projections of future development patterns to estimate how much green infrastructure will be implemented on private properties. Once these projections are known, the amount of additional public green infrastructure that would be needed to meet the pollutant load reduction requirements can be developed. This information will inform the development of the City's GI Plan. External collaboration: The San Mateo Countywide Water Pollution Prevention Program (SMCWPPP) is a partnership of C/CAG and each incorporated city and town in San Mateo County, and the County of San Mateo, which share a common NPDES permit. SMCWPPP coordinates the Green Infrastructure Technical Advisory Committee (GI TAC) and manages consultants that help cities in the development and implementation of their GI Plans. 2. Green Infrastructure Plan Elements & Approach 2.1. Summary of Required Elements To meet MRP requirements, the City's GI Plan will contain the following mandatory elements: • Project Identification and Prioritization Mechanism: The GI Plan must describe the mechanism by which the City will identify, prioritize, and map potential and planned projects that incorporate green infrastructure components in different drainage areas within the City. These include public and private projects that may be implemented over the long term, with milestones for implementation by 2020, 2030, and 2040. The mechanism must include the criteria for prioritization and outputs that can be incorporated into the City's long-term planning and capital improvement processes. • Prioritized Project Locations and Timeframes: The GI Plan must contain the outputs resulting from the identification and prioritization mechanism described above, such as lists and maps of prioritized projects and timeframes for implementation. The outputs must also include "targets" or estimates of how much impervious surface within the City will be converted or retrofitted to drain to a green infrastructure feature, such as a vegetated area or stormwater capture or treatment facility, by the 2020, 2030, and 2040 milestones. • Completed Project Tracking System: The GI Plan must describe the City's process for tracking and mapping completed public and private projects and making the information available to the public. • Guidelines and Specifications: The GI Plan must include general design and construction guidelines, standard specifications, and details (or references to those documents) for incorporating green infrastructure components into projects within the City. These guidelines and specifications should address the different street and project types within the City, as defined by its land use and transportation characteristics, and allow projects to provide a range of functions and benefits, such as stormwater management, bicycle and pedestrian mobility and safety, public green space, and urban forestry. • Integration with Other Plans: The GI Plan must describe its relationship to other planning documents and efforts within the City and how those planning documents have been updated or modified, if needed, to support and incorporate the green infrastructure requirements. If any necessary updates or modifications have not been accomplished bythe completion of the GI Plan, the GI Plan must include a workplan and schedule to complete them. • Evaluation of Funding Options: The GI Plan must include an evaluation of funding options for design, construction, and long-term maintenance of prioritized green infrastructure projects, considering local, state and federal funding sources. In addition, the City must adopt policies, ordinances, and/or other appropriate legal mechanisms to allow implementation of the GI Plan. The City must also conduct outreach and education to elected officials, department managers and staffs, developers and design professionals, and the general public as part of development and implementation of the GI Plan and implementation of specific projects within the GI Plan. 2.2. Approach to Completion of Required Elements The Cityof Burlingame is committed to workingwith staff from the Public Works Department, Planning Department, and Recreation and Park Departmentto developthe required GI Plan elements described in Section 2.1. In addition, the City will collaborate with SMCWPPP and other member agencies to ` 4 identify regional collaboration and approaches to green infrastructure. This section describes the City's approach to each required element. For a summary of this approach please see Table 1 which lists the MRP requirements, the City's tasks to achieve compliance, additional support from SMCWPPP, and timeframe for completion. Table 2 shows a visual representation of each task and the associated estimated timeframe for completion, including deadlines for key deliverables to the Water Board. 2.2.1. Outreach and Education As the GI Plan is developed, City department staff and elected officials will be educated about the purposes and goals of green infrastructure, the required elements of the GI Plan, and steps needed to develop and implement the GI Plan. It is important to receive comments and buy -in from all staff that have a role in the GI Plan since implementation will require their commitment to embracing a new approach to urban infrastructure. The City will also educate local community members and conduct stakeholder outreach to gain public support. The following education and outreach activities will be conducted as part of development of the GI Plan: • Hold interdepartment meetings to get input and share updates on the GI Plan. • Keep elected officials updated on GI Plan development and schedule for adoption. • Provide outreach to the local community and other stakeholders to get input and support for the GI Plan. • Provide outreach to the general public and development community in coordination with SMCWPPP. • Conduct internal training as needed and send staff to SMCWPPP trainings. • Participate in the GI Technical Advisory Committee. 2.2.2. Project Identification and Prioritization The Citywill use the following approaches to identify, prioritize, and map potential and planned projects that incorporate green infrastructure components in different drainage areas within the City: Development of GIS -based modeling tool for use in mapping, prioritizing, and phasing of potential and planned projects: On behalf of the Cityand other municipalities within San Mateo County, SMCWPPP developed the Stormwater Resource Plan (SRP) in December 2016. In February 2017, the SRP was approved under Resolution 17-04 by the C/CAG Board of Directors, adopted by the Bay Area Integrated Regional Watershed Management Plan Coordinating Committee, and submitted to the Water Board for certification. The SRP supports the development and implementation of GI Plans within the San Mateo County region through identification of local and regional opportunities for GI projects and development of modeling tools for estimating pollutant load reductions over future timeframes. The watershed -based approach for screening and prioritizing potential GI sites in the SRP will be used to create a further evolved methodology for planning and implementing GI projects according to the milestones in the MRP. The maps and tools will be available for local use by participating municipalities. Development of prioritization criteria for GI project opportunities: The SRP produced a list of prioritized GI projects eligible for future State implementation grant funds. Building on existing documents that describe the characteristics and water quality and quantity issues within the County, the SRP will identify and prioritize multi -benefit GI projects throughout the City, using a metrics -based approach for quantifying project benefits such as volume of stormwater infiltrated and/or treated and quantity of pollutants removed. The metrics -based analysis will be conducted using hydrologic/hydraulic and water quality models coupled with GIS resources and other tools. The methodology for prioritization for mapping private and public projects on a drainage -area -specific basis in the GI Plan will modify and expand on the methodology process in the SRP. • Developmentof mappingand associated databasecrf GI project opportunities with information needed to perform a prioritization assessment of the opportunities: One of the products of these analyses in the SRP will be a map of opportunity areas for GI projects throughout the watershed, an initial prioritized list of potential projects and strategies for implementation of these and future projects. As required bythe MRP, the City has begun to prepare and maintain a list of public and private GI projects that are planned for implementation during the permit term, and public projects that have potential for GI measures. Through SMCWPPP, estimates of new and redevelopment areas are currently underway and will be incorporated in the database. The Interim Accounting Methodology developed at the regional level through Bay Area Stormwater Management Agencies Association (BASMAA) for GI project tracking and load reduction accounting will be integrated with the longer-term C.3 development projections and associated GI assumptions being compiled for the reasonable assurance analysis (RAA) to demonstrate adequate load reductions via GI through 2040. The project database will likely be based on the BASMAA Interim Accounting Methodology for tracking load reductions for this permitterm and/or be an adaptation of the prioritized project list in the SRP. • Development of phasing plan for GI project opportunities: A phasing plan will be developed that is consistent with the timeframes required of mercury and PCB load reductions by 2020, 2030, and 2040. The SRP includes the development of a web -based GIS tool for the City to view and track existing and planned projects, as well as a stormwater capture model to easily assess load volume and associated load reduction potential from prioritized GI projects. These will both be integrated with the RAA. The RAA will also include a cost-effectiveness analysis of various scenarios for identifying the most cost-effective allocation of GI projects within the City and across the entire county, accounting for potential to shift land use -based yield categories for PCBs and mercury loading through retrofits, cost assumptions, and GI project types (such as green streets, LID, or regional projects). This work will also include establishing a schedule for project implementation consistent with the City's goals. • Development of a method for integrating the phasing plan Into the City's long-term planning and capital improvement plans: The method for integration will include projects that are intended to be implemented following the current permit term to achieve the 2030 and 2040 load reduction targets. An assessment of the alternate modeling scenarios in the model developed by SMCWPPP will assist the City in creating a phased implementation plan, which will include better alignment and integration with the City's Capital Improvement Projects. 2.2.3. Prioritized Project Locations and Timeframes The GI Plan will include the prioritized list of projects and map of locations within the City's jurisdiction resulting from Task 2.2.2 above, as well as timeframes for implementation. The outputs will also include "targets" or estimates of how much impervious surface within the City will be converted or retrofitted to drain to a green infrastructure feature, such as a vegetated area orstormwatertreatment facility, or converted to pervious surfaces, by the 2020, 2030, and 2040 milestones. Id 2.2.4. Completed Project Tracking System This section of the GI Plan will describe the City's process for tracking and mapping completed public and private projects and making the information available to the public. The City will work with SMCWPPP to develop a consistent countywide approach to tracking and mapping completed projects and estimating expected PCB and mercury load reductions resulting from these projects. 2.2.5. Guidelines and Specifications The City will support and participate in the SMCWPPP process to develop and adopt GI Design Guidelines and Specifications for streetscapes and other public infrastructure. A set of model Guidelines and Specifications will be developed at the countywide level which will be used as a reference by the City of Burlingame. The City will evaluate the model Guidelines and Specifications for consistency with its own local standards, and revise existing guidelines, standard specifications, design details, and department procedures as needed. The Guidelines and Specifications will also include the results of the regional analysis of alternative approaches to sizing GI facilities where project constraints (e.g., limited space in public right-of-way, utility conflicts, etc.) preclude fully meeting the permit -required sizing criteria for such facilities. 2.2.6. Integration with Other Municipal Plans The City has reviewed its existing municipal planning documents and will be incorporating the GI Plan in the General Plan update. The General Plan is currently undergoing a multi-year update process, which is scheduled to conclude by early 2018. 2.2.7. Evaluation of Funding Options In 2009, Burlingame City Council authorized a storm drain fee ballot measurethat provides $39 million dollars for storm drain infrastructure improvements. This measure funds Capital Improvement Projects for grey infrastructure (e.g., storm drains, culverts, and pipelines). Because this is a voter -approved ballot measure, there are stringent requirements on how this funding can and cannot be used, as a result these fees cannot fund voluntary green infrastructure public projects. However, the City is able to incorporate green infrastructure in projects that create 10,000 square feet or more of impervious surface since those are considered as "Regulated Projects" which are required to have stormwater treatment measures per Provision C.3.b of the MRP. The City will analyze additional funding options, such as grants, to raise revenue for the projects that will be included in the City's GI Plan. 2.2.8. Adoption of Policies, Ordinances, and Other Legal Mechanisms The City will review its existing policies, ordinances, and other legal mechanisms related to current planning procedures and implementation of stormwater NPDES permit requirements to identify which documents may need to be updated or modified to implement the GI Plan, and the timing for those actions. 2.2.9. Completion and Adoption of the GI Plan The City will draft its GI Plan to contain all of the elements described above, obtain reviews and approvals by various departments, governing bodies, and the public as needed, and submit the GI Plan to the Water Board by September 30, 2019. E v a r u N a s m V w c w t t o « °'.E v E w w 5' v 3 E � N y o u J m Y V L .E° > Y `M••' a¢ O y O a O£ M> v N S w L 2 U Y d v a N • a C= d D 6 0 .O v .E, C h« M V C O> pp °c n v n 3 o a J a c E d o v o N E O p d > p O LL -O N N N m C C N C C J E12 N 12 mo E a a o w o o P_' o m o c a a 3 on a v Y ¢ O m v m y o v d m $ v E N `v Y m m 6 u o.'c y w y o: N n v E v v E ,'C C X11 v m 0 3 $ _ u o vI� o 'o « o l >3 vmi Y d a= = C Y O N N y U C r J N O M «l O) m O O n m G 6 6 O 00 r o n `o y W J o o. >- > Jy Ys O OCO m O D2 y g J d d 6 'O m O 00 Y gym.. C � d C L y> 0 L « w u u''. `u m d c 12 N E _ N -° 1O o f v '.v-, w n« w m a c o s o v« a Q c .v v o .� o x¢ f c ° >• m w c n v r m w > m E u d W c m a ai v u N J ry m 101 '. N D O N d N a « M K 0 c�0 v w N N M 4 Mw d M C O M t M? p E Q rc Q o m Q E Q! Q G o Q m Yi Q m n Q Y Q ry Q. E v a r u N a s m V w c w t t o « °'.E v E w w 5' `w 3 E co E v N y o u J m Y V L .E° > `M••' a¢ O y O a O£ M> v N S w L 2 U Y d v a N • a C= d D 6 0 .O v .E, C h« M V C O> pp °c n v n 3 o a J a m a d c 5 W 'o c °° m C u o d t ` L v m= 6 V m o c E a u d d Y d c a 10 d-m 0 E n d c a Y O N d cc INj Q o m m d d F'tm 'O aCT --'Cm m _m C dnm `�' d C d a as6.2 d E o w 'n �`d,• u N er v o 3 m V m n a m J d o «cd v o E of m _« c E ti '^ 2 E E ry M o y C 0 O m m m L« m Y °° n" p u M> U d V N > > U O` L > O d O C O in d O « a> a C v o v 2 cm c m d V c � E d n LL m rY c r o U '1 v a c C 10 E EY tui Er�p O n cm .«- t ca I N r >, m `d A a c N« p R m V O TO N R (T Ey U 3 C y 0 a.9 m C d Y O d 0 0 O I� m L O : u i m e� m .-I u 'H d M - -d w a w z y ry ry ri Z C ` v a w V n a_ N n d 6 a g d d O C d u d m a m a o o A y ro o m s a n a m a a c o. E� P. m m a d« d« 3 n 9 d« E R a M c = E E v p a a E w m a d d o. m° m r n 3 v J `a m .Y c s a E Jo- >S L c J v m a o ti a n d y n_ vii a R y d m n E' m a d o v a E a C c C Y c o c c 3 E d c o> c d= m o L d 2 d p o o .>, m 3 a o d? o u •- a O. c d E n n c a y« O N s o '^ a E a E Ii m vJi m n E°.' z vJi m d R= ° o C o m m e m o c v c c o m y Y m y n c c c d m o m n 3 .o m:� -doh E yr me vyN°1n V y 6 d O E O j d O c .V c d 9 > c C c`o R i a C� a 6 -O d C 3 c m Y`o C d C N M R m- c R d O E „ 6 J y N c tf o r N c �'a a 9 m a m m d o 0 c c a? c O Y o a o « m v E Y 6 a n }-e d o v 3 m _R > a v� v ¢ m m e o n m '" '" ` n u 2 m N v m o o F E n p a a « u f c m s a dF y m a.-. Y J N l7= m a c a E a dcc E n e a m n u u E t7`E�m L- v o °' L u« a m J c 'm o d a m e vi W m 3 H N o w c u a c a n E v r E c z E a o. « w => E o '" Q a E .o o°. d c Ecma n c a c n a D c N „ `. a o z V' w n c C o n o « ami n .6 m w EL. m « '° m n m a m A 9d p L 1O E c c `m °° v 3 m m w E n d c'R .>. u u c a p 2 3 o E o m c d w Iti C L u E v mow, «_ E c d d c E g G E as E a v v c c c3 vii o« E$ E o m $ d d N `o d m m a v> Y m• a„ L "' N `a L m w e > a >. a . -Z m J M c m c « c 3 o N 3 v n-md, m C n d y £ o o> V w O d E c '� > s o c '= a ,d„ « d m N ,eii c J 3 0 d tmi c' `o d y d c d 2 0 -o a' c E w « « E �` .d. o n o m I ,m, v rv` 0 3 t n a ° � v' z z a c C 3� m M w a In n m m $, a ri G «: vio. v Q u m vi ,,. a Q F_ m .r m E 2 ry m d m ac E n ci In m c o v �' u m T m rt In a d c 5 W 'o c °° m C u o O L v m= 6 V m o c E a u d d Y d c a 10 d-m 0 wN n E f0 m E> d c a Y O N d cc INj Q o m m d d F'tm 'O aCT --'Cm m _m C dnm `�' d C d a as6.2 m mu Ma Oa Y R N � 3 m V m n a m c nw d `o 2 U C C o ti '^ 2 E M C U y C 0 O m m m L« m Y E M> U d V N > > U O` L > O d O C O in d O a � m a c v a o � � E o. 3 a p ry T F- d O N a °1 a a a m N N N N a N a ry p N a N v = r m m N M N N N C p a o N m 0 N n � a w `m v m c � v `w n E E E E o d w a E U m U Y a a `1 `m `o a Ll `m v S Y d v 0 T a E m o v= E m y '° o. o. ¢ c n c w o C C m U m U 8 •w a `m mh m> 'ao o n m E o c a a v m o. cm -° O O m o m N -m° > d > E m N •=3 w N o3 j C _ 2> nm n 3 V a u w V o N u w z a 39 Y oN v o'` n w E v na o a m_ A m mI E Em o N v m eE 5 u 0 N w m f3 o°oc a 'O a ° 'O Q a m .2 v v m N o ,X E c E �.- i- E E o f o f Q o -> E E a° E c« « n D ow w a E E d E a o. E a �.- a o m v o a N a' u v n y a « w a .a w- m a s 9 ° `m a o 3 c v a = O N 49 L r4 46 C N w N m W 3 Na`i 6 C UU UN a✓ a L 'o a v a n v °- m A to m E w % d�O N N U bWp d� c a u E m a m E E v M N N cc O W Y a am O �'i if 49 m e N N m E c w> E a T mum 9 0 0 n n a�E-E o a d`ovcm? mm ti k•'®* W O L O o E m a v J c L N VI L 0^ N O N tLi p, a ry n a m n � m ,_ oc w o Q o ° u u uu u E w mN> 5 E c v g ° m s a` c v m v u �¢ �`�° p� o '�° n n v v m y �' vt F vl F- Cl F- 1- in Y y E C m N N m til N m ¢ ¢ a a o c ¢ L ¢ t J 3 n C a v c a a a to m C > C 10 @ O 6 p 3 m o. 3 m a o« 01 ` o' a v a 0 E .. a v H o m F o m E j .' m u v o a E? E? C t r E °ca 5;E,X > E,K ac 'c T oac T nc T nc o o m w ° a u a ° n u a In m p. n a J 'u v In m vJi m vJi m «' v m n v c O W u C t H 3 • W d W m U U n N a 4i C +a" a c s J m o c E o E o� p A c o co' O c c O L OU E N m O d ry' a s s O_ w J V1 F V n a L a X T M o 0 C aL+ « ° C °s a1 N O m O ° W N a u� c -p « o. v w c E L = o'a M m a a E Y c '° m y v o v°- o v a m y w o in n Y E E v E '1Oc> o ° c E o E u n a v 1O N m o a m c o E<o?E� a J E E c .., o m v� v ° n v a `w o v '� O> a v r E a n c r v 'c m a n c .o « x> & E m n m a a H "x o o n m J o v `off. m a c o. d p m.c '^ m Q }o, 'o v a ?� v n Ea p p ya :p o E a c m n m a `o u o v v > +. m v a i a - u c `E A p a N c w J i v ¢ w E ¢ v N u 3 o I w o c E o' o °« a o w' ` m Y _ m v� 0 v E E mn 1O my a > E m d al E 4= m a c 'N N a m _ v c °1 a •a �° d .D '� t` o a m IE m m u v J ` a - v � v n' a v a' � a0+ „ N p olE w e •O v� m V°- 3 ° .p c> n w E c +J`• E a« c « Y a E "eo a v s w c m n o ¢ o u ¢ N o >> u '> 0° N O r -i D. F N 6 Q `.1 e•i .ti ei �-I v N fV al> N M1l Q al ry w m E. F- 0 w w m 4! w i m w w N m w m m w C I w v c r, vo c o v `v 3 eu -- E v w= a E `o m « v A 3 `w E '� r«= o w 30 ?� o 'o_ m m m .0 v c c m E c y ni c E M v `o c a v a u .o m y ° c u p '+• E o a v Z n_ T M v .-, `a m A n a a c LL N °- as v E. a v y u 1° > o m a N E n E y- n d t Mm v' u �= n u' E v `• `. `o a w> u o ? w m« c a c o �°, 1O « L `= « J J °' o N ¢ E a c E o m E H m o a' c a h v« L E E lc�a 'ca a n aLv. v E o = d -O. m 0 .,��- Jo =' .q •'v-" n v u v n ,Z, v Y, m °' a n d n 5 m v w c a v C V G W M a C N W W ZQ C O O. al = +dl.• LI E '� -O L% N J N G C _ •C al J> E t c a v` 1O m 1O O O m '- > `Z y o, C p U 'a N Q O C c v M m O m> d u �' Y M u O �' d C c C C L m G H a 1'll d W Ea T C N u v E c a w o c7 j c a °'� v u o v J m c v m E MY:. o, ,� c v° m a ua +• v a v la > a c a o c c"° o m Y,a=a.ia 3 v m ° �,'> ° o r o "° v 4 c 'N w a` n o o« v. u= Y 3„= a a a ;� v t p d c u J •� ., o t'i a w E o m" '_ w e u, y n � t p o o o c n o ai m p w Q o m n a w e `o " m c 'lat F o a m o m o J n n 3 c `` `o °u a E 3 L a` n J m 5 l7 v*i u"i a n E l7 « a m 3 v E m c n ti a v 2 3 E v o y l o c ° o a C N V t 00 o v E E LL a LL� w E a l u u o o O~ W H H N N U 1L �O C W O w 6 O O 0 Ql LL A tL O N C = m C C p C v a v y w S o c o> c a c a t o o a c o c c m S W m m O . U N O 6 m y m y C 6 N •00 N •� V !A a v Y d' G1 S N T+ N m aS+ 0] � � I� � N •N [}l C N' d r v I v `a o• � `w ' `o m n E m l E na f n w °-.v. m s v m N in m � ❑ in �o �n m m m �n n v 1- LL l7 F �n m n o u o c m Y a mm m p m ¢ c c C J O N N y N ¢ U -V O C O C W O cv c E v o m m d o 0 0 p °¢ 0 m v w o m v m c c aim c a ° c a o an E ov �� o w m n p �. v c O 6 m O c y c m r c o w v> u E v w '° n m O C m O a U V O u a a MW u L.c o°« >E m ap_ E z a o `^ n m « o v> ° c c o c m o• E N c 3«« E •E a N o v l= o v o c > o p. 0 m 3 m m m .v zr m m❑ c v m F m y v ❑ .� a N d` .a m fyjV o e V C C V Q v j L6 o c w c w m L.:u U Li V' ' V'� m l7 V' I l7 0 v m L � � c ° a o o i �c Ea > o c c •m c yE aww x a c o o• a c m= o « ti v o ,°. p c wm .. `v 3 a c o c c a E s o v - ¢ 9 v c; m o .nm`0 c���•� .o S, u E c = w E m v v o c v m= v v x o N C .N.. .• p m v- n� u¢ o v E u V A CO42w c= C W Q C t c W m m p m L N H a O a W Y- 9 a N o Et EM p,`o_ E m°r 0 a` $ n u° u a n v« Yn o 0 E c d a d w 0 O N ri a x� c � 00 — v � m O U m c a m mc m o n d U d v v d h •i 0 } c o m m m C t d E° E d v E E v t '•, T O n o c n JO N d V m d +L- d « O O L m S OI1 Joo Jo m c c m ypt2 G eo c c d 5 ti i C ti d u a �o 0 5 n E o c¢ 'm s m ¢ � m ¢ q c u o m c o m ..- c a� w •�°- c w Y a E a E E d d > u c ie d E d75. ° EEO '. m ° E E "O O v la- n 0 0 °U E C C C m W H d V m N d C c v W E vE c vE E o E m m O m e •c =: n w e J u r da 3 0 a 0 F d O V u a D H 4 v O t c ¢ L n ow o on o „ o y a ei m y E V C W E V C O d o. E u m c m d C m a 09 E E R eI nN oo N >� J N CS E a £ a E m m 6 C m m N ¢ a r > a > m r> m > nc ac o.c o c c a ry a d E a m o an IA T C Q d n to Y C RC d o o. E R .a E Y ry ry N� S O R mti m R E> oo. aN m E R c ry c NCT l7 �m >m a >J a c., R a N n N A E u a E J =' Em C m r1 m m En E a a E s O c c a o d d o a W U R VI U� C U O U c m d a E E E E E E E to E w E a £ a E m J J n J n J a ¢ a r > a > m r> m > nc ac o.c o c c a o � V1 d VI R Vf R IA T c m d a C to p O a m V d y m a o � 9 gD o O 0_ O Y C RC d o o. E n m O R d c J E E O c E o c E o. l U O g C V Q y q Q N C 3= o m' E c E °'@ a E" 3] d E a d a c N d Y a N n N A N d E Er c 0 E d 'E d 'E a> d w R a% n E v a c v c o c d v a ¢ o a � � E - c d d W G b'_ f F. 9 2E t °' $ i a8 i s ao G .��.�..�......_�.�m».a.®..^mom. �.v.e �3 z ------ ___--- ._._.._—_--_ &f 5 aW a G a� a$ S g�s I$ %e; � �c�➢ S I. $ i.a$$ d x le cag , ,_ la a Ef � la I�Fm -%�3 lad -tl $iCEI y C m 'a SOg ap$ G IE £ �'ffa°.€ '�$' E€li o •_ l 8Ek I 9 • iiE qqEf a ��}\\� � ;i ! R= � �!\� ��j}� ;g I «,� \Qu (�' / ( {.. H A N M M N M O O a �O N M M O O c) O � " �o co O N N N N M t- M M N >" O O O v C7, O n O O O CO 0 r N M O Cl h -- D; O O O, n M 00 � M T N O N .r 00 00 N 0� O N N O� M oo N T vii M O r O �D M x O O O 00 C O W M U �o H CD M Fo o z00 M O, CN pCD O p0 Cl O 00 C) O ON N � N N F U � LU U CLT C] cL O a U F F W 0 3 w d M ¢ a a x z z o 0 z z z w ° ° x x Ln 3��0� a a z z z zLLJ�� U H o M � is � O x rn r M 00 N o � W N � CDm O O 4l �Or 00 O O �p oo vi M M p � O� N N N V CN cli O N W o M � O x rn r O N o � r OO M � CDm vi q � �Or 00 O �p oo vi M M H � N N V CN 00 o O N W o x Z d o O o M M o W CDm vi q � �Or v M M H � F a 00 o O N F z � o H � F F wp z F U OC Q F+ m m