Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - CC - 2018.01.27 Burlingame City Council January 27, 2018 Approved Minutes 1 BURLINGAME CITY COUNCIL Approved Minutes Goal Setting Session Saturday, January 27, 2018 1. WELCOME City Manager Goldman opened the annual goal setting session by welcoming the community. She explained that last year, the City Council established four main priorities: sustainability, transportation, housing and infrastructure. This year, the City Council would be using this meeting to focus on two of those priorities: infrastructure and housing. 2. DEPARTMENT HIGHLIGHTS City Manager Goldman asked each department head to list a few highlights from this past year. City Manager Goldman began by stating that one of the biggest accomplishments was the passage of Measure I. She discussed how Parks and Recreation Director Glomstad, DPW Murtuza, Police Chief Wollman, Finance Director Augustine, and herself met with different community groups to hear their concerns and gain an understanding of where funds needed to be spent. Additionally, she stated that she was proud of staff and appreciated their hardwork and dedication. Police Chief Wollman discussed two highlights from the Burlingame Police Department. The first highlight was the establishment of the community response team, composed of two officers who were assigned to quality of life issues. He explained that over the course of the year they had investigated 1750 incidents and made 106 arrests. Secondly, he discussed the implementation of body worn cameras and how footage from the cameras had shown the discipline of officers. Parks and Recreation Director Glomstad stated that her two highlights of the year were: 1) opening the first new playground in 15 years with another coming this year, and 2) creating a database that tracks the removal of trees by type, request made, address, and other categories. Mayor Brownrigg asked about the Parks Master Plan. Parks and Recreation Director Glomstad stated that the City is about start working on its first Parks Master Plan. The plan will assist staff in organizing information and prioritizing needs. DPW Murtuza discussed the completion of the Broadway Interchange Project. Additionally, he stated that he is proud to report that there are now less than five sewage overflows in the over 140 miles of sewer a year in the city. Burlingame City Council January 27, 2018 Approved Minutes 2 CDD Meeker discussed the City being awarded the Home for All grant to undertake a comprehensive community engagement project on affordable housing. Planning Manager Gardiner discussed the work that had been done in updating the City’s General Plan. City Librarian McCulley stated that one of his department’s highlights was that attendance for Children’s programming was over 39,000 this past year. Additionally, he discussed the collaborations his department had with other departments, like firefighters reading to children and the police department’s training on homelessness. City Clerk Hassel-Shearer discussed the City’s commitment to transparency and organization with the purchase of eComment and an electronic content management system. Additionally, she highlighted the videotaping of Traffic, Safety & Parking Commission meetings. CCFD Fire Chief Kammeyer discussed the accomplishments of his department by highlighting the unprecedented amount of out-of-county responses his staff had undertaken this year including North Bay fires and the hurricanes. He stated that he had been able to send out 12 personnel without compromising local service and with zero injuries to his staff. City Attorney Kane discussed the settlement of cases in the City’s favor and the addition of a risk management staff member to the City. HR Morrison discussed being able to establish collaborative and professional relationships with all of the City’s labor groups. Additionally, she discussed the informational talks that HR and Finance had conducted concerning the changes to the CalPERS discount rate. Finance Director Augustine thanked the Council for allowing staff to be proactive (for example, setting up the Pension Liability fund) instead of reactive. Additionally, she stated that staff is currently working on purchasing a new financial system. Assistant to the City Manager Blackburn discussed the City’s new website that was launched last week. 3. PUBLIC COMMENT Burlingame resident Jennifer Pfaff thanked Nil Blackburn for her work on the new website. She asked if the website could include a calendar listing all events in the City. Burlingame resident Adrienne Leigh from the Burlingame Pedestrian Advisory Committee (“BPAC”) asked Council for funding to support the committee’s goals of upgrading pedestrian walkways and creating end-to- end bike routes. Burlingame City Council January 27, 2018 Approved Minutes 3 4. MEASURE I DISCUSSION AND PUBLIC COMMENTS a. DISCUSSION OF MEASURE I EXPENDITURE PLAN City Manager Goldman began by explaining that last year, she and Parks and Recreation Director Glomstad, Police Chief Wollman, DPW Murtuza, and Finance Director Augustine met with 25 community groups to understand the priorities of the residents. Additionally, professional polls were conducted and surveys were available on the City’s website. She stated that from these meetings, polls and surveys, staff was able to prioritize community issues. Potholes, parks, and police were identified as the top three priorities in the community. City Manager Goldman explained that while it was originally estimated that Measure I would yield approximately $2 million a year, it is now expected to be closer to $1.75 million. She discussed staff’s proposed expenditure plan for the $1.75 million. Staff proposes putting a majority of the funds into building a community center. She explanted that the recreation center is outdated and has both seismic and HVAC issues. She explained that today’s discussion was not about the design of the community center but rather about establishing funds so that it could be built. She noted that she would talk to the Mayor about scheduling a study session on the design of the community center. City Manager Goldman stated that staff recommends putting $1 million of Measure I funds towards a bond for the community center. If the Council is amenable to this, then each year, $1 million would be put towards the bond. City Manager Goldman stated that staff is recommending putting $575,000 of Measure I funds towards streets and sidewalk repairs. She discussed the need of the City to make sidewalks ADA compliant with ramps and curb cuts. Lastly, City Manager Goldman stated that staff is recommending putting $200,000 of Measure I funds towards hiring a new police officer. Attached to the staff report is a memorandum from the Police Chief outlining why a new officer is needed. She highlighted the fact that in 2000, there were 50 officers and now there are 39. However, since 2000, the City’s population has increased, the police department’s overtime is large, and there has been an increase in property theft, particularly along the Bayfront. Accordingly, hiring a new officer would assist the community. Vice Mayor Colson asked how much money staff was recommending for the bond, how long it would take for the City to pay the bond, and what the interest rate would be. Finance Director Augustine replied that she had been talking with financial advisors who recommended a lease revenue bond where $1 million would generate $15 million in proceedings. She stated that this would be a 30-year bond with interest rates between 4 and 4.5%. She added that if the City contributed an additional $1 million from the General Fund, the bond would generate $30 million. City Manager Goldman asked how much the City had in the Capital Investment Reserve Fund. Finance Director Augustine replied that there was $23.5 million. Burlingame City Council January 27, 2018 Approved Minutes 4 Vice Mayor Colson discussed the cost of parking for the new community center. She stated that underground parking would cost more than expanding the parking lot. But expanding the parking lot would take away open space. She asked if the City could use funds from the Parking Reserve for these expenses. Finance Director Augustine replied in the negative stating that the Parking Enterprise Fund and the parking in-lieu fees are to be used for the downtown areas. Councilmember Keighran asked if the library bond was up soon. Finance Director Augustine replied that it had matured last year. Councilmember Beach asked about the City’s debt capacity and if the City could take on a new bond. Finance Director Augustine reviewed the City’s bonds that were retiring and stated that the City could take on this new bond. Councilmember Beach stated that this bond would not need to go to ballot. Finance Director Augustine replied in the affirmative. Mayor Brownrigg voiced his support for City Manager Goldman’s bond proposal. He stated that the City should expedite their decision on this matter as interest rates aren’t going to get any lower. Mayor Brownrigg asked when the City could go out for an RFP on the community center. City Manager Goldman stated as soon as possible. She explained that it would most likely happen in this calendar year. However, she noted that the City had to make a lot of decisions on what the building would look like and how to handle parking. Next, Mayor Brownrigg moved the discussion onto the City Manager’s recommendation concerning utilizing funds to hire a new officer. Councilmember Keighran agreed with the City Manager’s recommendation. She stated that after reading the Police Chief’s memo and learning about the 8% population increase since 2000, and the amount of development in the coming years, it was imperative that they hire a new officer. Councilmember Beach asked for confirmation that the Police Department had requested and been granted two new officers in the 2017/18 budget. Police Chief Wollman replied in the affirmative. Councilmember Beach explained that she was thankful for the measures the Police Department had taken to maintain excellent service and act efficiently with a reduced work force. However, she stated that the new developments mentioned in the staff report would not happen in the next few years. Mayor Brownrigg asked if Councilmember Beach was not in favor of the recommendation to use the funds to hire a new officer. Councilmember Beach stated that without a doubt the community is evolving and growth is on the horizon. She stated that the City will need more officers. But her question is whether now is the right time to do that when they just brought on two new officers this summer. She discussed the CalPERS discount rate and pension liabilities that the City is facing and wondered if this was a best use for the funds now. She stated that the funds could be used for additional training for the officers or for crime prevention programs. Burlingame City Council January 27, 2018 Approved Minutes 5 Mayor Brownrigg stated that it was a reasonable question. Councilmember Ortiz stated that hiring new officers was part of how Measure I was sold to the public. He discussed the fact that during the construction phase of the new developments they will need additional officers. Therefore, he stated he agreed with the City Manager’s recommendation. Mayor Brownrigg asked if the $200,000 included all costs of hiring a new officer: salary, benefits, and pension. City Manager Goldman replied in the affirmative. Vice Mayor Colson stated that the two officers the Police Department hired were straight out of the academy. She explained that it is important to understand that these new officers are under a lower pension formula, and therefore their pension costs are not equivalent to that of an officer who has been with the City for 20 years. Additionally, she discussed that a number of police officers are reaching retirement age. Therefore, she felt that this was a good time to hire new officers so that they could be trained by more senior officers before they retire. Councilmember Keighran reviewed the statistics that were in the Police Chief’s memorandum. She stated that in 2000, the Police had 30,000 calls for service, and in 2017 had 42,000. She asked what this increase was due to. Police Chief Wollman listed various reasons for this including: increased tourism, easy access off and on the freeway, and Proposition 47. He explained that Proposition 47 reduced crimes that had previously been felonies to misdemeanors. He stated that it is now only a misdemeanor if you steal less than $900 of property. Therefore, criminals are more willing to take the risk if they know they will only get a ticket if caught. Mayor Brownrigg thanked the Police Chief for his memorandum and for benchmarking the City against other cities in the area. He discussed that when advocating for Measure I, the City Council had made a commitment to the community that funds would be used to enhance safety. He stated that he felt comfortable with the City Manager’s recommendation and liked that the cost of the officer was tied to a constant source. Next, Mayor Brownrigg directed the City Council to discuss the City Manager’s recommendation of utilizing approximately $575,000 for streets and sidewalks. He asked if City Manager Goldman was recommending a certain percentage split between streets and sidewalks. City Manager Goldman stated that she would leave it up to the discretion of DPW Murtuza how the money was split between streets and sidewalks. City Attorney Kane stated that when it comes to sidewalk repairs, the City would be paying money out to either plaintiffs or to fix sidewalks. She stated that DPW Murtuza had been working to prioritize projects that would improve older infrastructure and make it accessible to as many as possible. Councilmember Ortiz asked if the way the City Manager’s recommendation worked was $1 million was fixed for the lease revenue bond, $200,000 was for an officer, and the remainder goes towards streets and sidewalks. City Manager Goldman replied in the affirmative. Burlingame City Council January 27, 2018 Approved Minutes 6 Vice Mayor Colson asked if the tax became effective on April 1, 2018. Finance Director Augustine replied in the affirmative. Vice Mayor Colson and Finance Director Augustine discussed how the funds would be handled between when the tax becomes effective and when the City has enough to hire an officer or bond for the community center. Councilmember Keighran asked if Public Works would create a master plan informing the public of the list of priorities for sidewalks and streets. Additionally, she asked if Measure I funds would be used to improve El Camino Real. DPW Murtuza stated that the City has a master plan and that currently there is a backlog of work that needs to be done on city streets. He stated that El Camino Real is owned by Caltrans and that the ECR task force is creating a plan with Caltrans on how to improve the street. Councilmember Keighran stated that she agreed with the City Manager’s recommendation for funds towards streets and sidewalks. She discussed the fact that Burlingame enjoys its status as a City of Trees, but that the trees are damaging sidewalks. Therefore, it is the City’s responsibility to address the damage that trees cause to the sidewalks. Councilmember Beach stated that she approved of spending money on infrastructure because it is an essential city service. She discussed how SB1 funds could potentially double what the City receives from the state to address street improvements. Councilmember Ortiz asked about the Oversight Committee. City Manager Goldman stated that the committee would have five members, and that applications were due on January 31, 2018. She stated that the committee is responsible for reviewing the audit and ensuring that the City is keeping its promise on how funds are spent. Mayor Brownrigg asked if establishing the expenditure plan now would lock them in for future years. City Manager Goldman stated that staff would be bringing the expenditure plan back to the City Council ever year for review. Councilmember Ortiz stated his approval to spend money to fix both the sidewalks and streets. Councilmember Keighran asked if SB1 funds could be used for sidewalks. DPW Murtuza stated that SB1 funds will only be for road improvements. Councilmember Keighran stated that she would leave it up to the discretion of DPW Murtuza to prioritize funds for sidewalks and streets. Councilmember Beach discussed the expense of bike paths and the need to address the funding that will be required to create paths. Mayor Brownrigg opened the item up for public comment. Brian from “Housing 4 All Burlingame” stated that Council should focus on affordable housing in Burlingame and not a new recreation center. Burlingame City Council January 27, 2018 Approved Minutes 7 Jennifer Pfaff discussed the high cost of creating an underground parking structure for a new community center and whether Council could use parking funds from the Lots F and N project towards the community center. Elana Lieberman from “Housing 4 All Burlingame” stated that the Council’s top priority should be affordable housing and discussed her review of the surveys. Mayor Brownrigg closed public comment. City Manager Goldman thanked the Council for direction and stated that the expenditure plan would be brought back to the City Council for adoption. 5. AFFORDABLE HOUSING DISCUSSION AND PUBLIC COMMENTS a. HOUSING GOALS DISCUSSION CDD Meeker thanked William Lowell from Home for All and Armando Sanchez from HEART for attending the meeting and stated that they would be available to answer questions. CDD Meeker stated that Burlingame is in the midst of strong economic growth. The growth has resulted in a sizable increase in new jobs, but communities throughout the area have had difficulty developing additional housing to keep pace with the growth. CDD Meeker stated that currently the jobs-housing gap ratio is 1 to 16. He explained that this situation is particularly challenging for those making lower wages. A significant number of new jobs pay lower income wages, including jobs generated by new development. Those in the low-wage workforce increasingly commute into the area from long distances, which results in increased traffic in the region and ultimately limits the pool of employees for local businesses. CDD Meeker continued by stating that the City has been proactive in addressing the supply aspect of the housing situation through the encouragement and approval of significant numbers of new housing units. He explained that 472 units have been approved, and an additional 334 units are currently being reviewed by the Planning Commission, for a total of 806 units. Of these, 178 would be priced below market rate for households in the moderate, median, low, or very low income categories. Additionally, approximately 500 units have been presented to the public in conceptual form, but either have not been formally submitted for review, or are part of master plans with development projects to be submitted at a later date. CDD Meeker stated that additional units have been discussed in conjunction with the update of the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance. CDD Meeker stated that on June 19, 2017, the City Council adopted an ordinance establishing commercial linkage fees for new commercial development in Burlingame. These fees will provide a dedicated source of funding for programs supporting workforce housing in Burlingame. Although no commercial linkage fees have been collected yet, there are currently two projects under review that would be subject to commercial linkage fees. It is estimated that the City will collect between $3.3 and $3.9 million from these projects. Burlingame City Council January 27, 2018 Approved Minutes 8 CDD Meeker stated that on October 16, 2017, the City Council discussed potential uses for the commercial linkage fees and housing impact fees. The City Council expressed interest in the following: 1. Housing Trust Funds-HEART of San Mateo – giving HEART a portion of the City’s linkage and impact fees to use towards projects that are ready for development throughout the County. The funds plus interest would be returned to the City when it is ready to deploy them locally. 2. Emergency Rent Assistance – allocating a portion of funds collected to emergency rent or assistance with utility bills. 3. Samaritan House – currently provides emergency rent and utility bill assistance for individuals and families facing unanticipated crises. 4. Retention and Rehabilitation of Existing Housing Stock – allocating funds for retention of existing housing stock 5. Rent Subsidies – provide rental assistance to lower-income households 6. Notice of Funding Availability – City issues notice to receive proposals for housing services 7. Housing Resources webpage – City maintains a web page devoted to affordable resources at: https://www.burlingame.org/departments/planning/affordable_housing.php. CDD Meeker discussed the Home for All Community Engagement Strategy. He stated that the first community engagement meeting is scheduled for Saturday, February 10, 2018 at 9 a.m. at the Lions Club. CDD Meeker reviewed the next steps. He stated that staff is looking to confirm Council’s interest in providing both short term and long term funding at a 25/75 ratio. Staff is also looking for direction on housing impact fees. He stated that the staff report contains a table summarizing the housing impact fees of other cities in San Mateo County. CDD Meeker stated that it is expected that the housing impact fees will collect $14-15 million. Lastly, he stated that there is state legislation that provides for additional funding sources. City Manager Goldman suggested that the first question that the City Council should focus on is how they think the housing impact and commercial linkage fees should be spent. If the City Council decides it wants to do both housing loans and emergency assistance, the Council should decide the ratio of funding. Councilmember Keighran asked if Accessory Dwelling Units (“ADUs”) are included in the new unit numbers. Planning Manager Gardiner replied in the negative, stating that it was hard to forecast ADUs. Councilmember Keighran asked that staff track ADUs. She stated that she had gone to a Home for All presentation on ADUs and it was noted that San Mateo County has the potential to add 14,000 ADUs in unincorporated. Mayor Brownrigg stated that he felt certain that based on the passage of recent state legislation, Council would need to create a subcommittee to help planning staff prioritize. Councilmember Beach raised the concern of the “missing middle”, those who make above 60% AMI (Area Median Income) but need assistance. She stated that the housing impact/commercial linkage fees might be best served focusing on those individuals. Burlingame City Council January 27, 2018 Approved Minutes 9 Home for All representative William Lowell stated that by limiting affordable housing to those below 60% AMI, new buildings would be able to apply for tax credits. Therefore, he explained that Councilmember Beach’s concern was valid and that most cities address this issue through inclusionary ordinances. Armando Sanchez from HEART discussed recent Council meetings in Palo Alto where the fact that most teachers fall into the missing middle was raised. He stated that there is a tremendous need to address this missing middle. Councilmember Ortiz asked given the limited resources what would Mr. Sanchez do. Mr. Sanchez stated that he believed the City was on the right track of thinking about immediate needs, long term solutions, and the missing middle. Mayor Brownrigg asked if there was a “per door cost” estimate for affordable housing. Mr. Lowell stated that it is rapidly increasing. He stated that it is $500,000 with land and $300,000 without land. He added that finding land and the cost of development are the two main impediments to creating affordable housing. Mr. Lowell stated that he was impressed that the City was dedicating its own land (Lots F and N) for affordable housing. He explained that it was the first time he had heard of this being done, outside of land from redevelopment agencies and federally funded projects. Mayor Brownrigg opened up the item for public comment. Planning Commissioner Terrones stated that he hears from developers that there are a number of hurdles they feel they have to go through in Burlingame that they don’t have to go through in other communities. He stated that part of the problem is the Planning Commission and added that he hopes the update to the General Plan helps solve some of the issues. “Housing 4 All Burlingame” representative Cynthia Cornell stated that renter protections are essential and that the City needs to adopt a just-cause eviction ordinance. “Housing 4 All Burlingame” representative Brian stated that the City shouldn’t offer rent subsidies as this was just redirecting money into the pockets of private developers. He urged the City to protect the renters in the community. Burlingame resident Mike McCord stated that the issue of affordable housing is a Peninsula-wide issue. He stated that he believes the City needs to be open to the idea of higher density. Former Mayor Terry Nagel thanked Council for addressing the issue and stated that the City Council should ensure that housing developments add a public benefit like gardens and playgrounds. She also asked the Council to consider restoring inclusionary housing and adopting an ordinance that requires safety inspections of multi-family dwellings. Burlingame resident Ross Bruce voiced his concern that if Measure T was repealed, the issue of housing might be politicized by future Councils. Additionally, he suggested that the City Council consider increasing density in the Broadway business district area. Burlingame City Council January 27, 2018 Approved Minutes 10 “Housing 4 All Burlingame” representative Elana Lieberman stated that the Council must prioritize building housing for the lowest income levels first, and Measure T must be amended or rescinded as it inhibits the City’s ability to address the housing crisis. Burlingame resident Steve Staluka stated that he was against the repeal of Measure T. Mayor Brownrigg closed the public comment. Mayor Brownrigg noted for the audience that the discussion was not about rent control but rather a conversation about how to create additional units. Vice Mayor Colson stated that this discussion was the Council’s most important issue for the year and that it would set up policy for the next 20 years. She stated that the challenge was to balance the impending needs of the diverse community with the love of maintaining the City’s charming quaint aesthetic. Vice Mayor Colson stated that she was in favor of putting 75-80% of the funds into a longer term strategy and the rest into immediate strategies like emergency rent assistance. She stated that if the City invested funds with HEART, the City would receive a 3-4% return which could be used to continue funding immediate needs. Then when the City has a long term project they can call back the loan from HEART. Mayor Brownrigg stated that he was in favor of allocating 25% to short term and 75% to long term. Councilmember Keighran said she was in agreement with this distribution. She stated that the City needed to figure out how best to partner with organizations like Mid-Peninsula Housing or HEART because they are the experts in this field. Councilmember Ortiz stated that he was struggling with this issue. He stated that that the missing middle that make above 60% of AMI concerns him. He explained that he thought the City should focus their efforts on the missing middle because there are a lot of resources and funding sources for those below 60% AMI. However, he stated that he didn’t feel that he had enough information to set allocations now. Councilmember Keighran stated that they needed to start somewhere and that this is new territory for the City Council. She stated that she believed that a majority of the funds should go into long-term solutions. Mayor Brownrigg concurred with Councilmember Keighran that while he too was struggling with this issue, the City Council should approve allocations for now that could be reviewed later. City Manager Goldman referred to page 6 of the staff report stating that based on City Council’s previous discussions, funds should be used for: 1. Investment in proposed projects to be built by non-profit affordable housing developers with a higher priority to funding projects to be built within Burlingame 2. Rent subsidies to assist existing residents who are vulnerable to loss of their homes for various reasons (e.g. health issues, divorce, job loss, etc.) with an emphasis on very low income individuals/families. 3. Rehabilitation of existing buildings in return for maintaining rents at an affordable level. Burlingame City Council January 27, 2018 Approved Minutes 11 Vice Mayor Colson stated that if the City choses to partner with HEART, HEART would use the money to build housing in or around Burlingame. She stated that this is one of the most expedient ways to help solve the issue on a countywide level. Additionally, she added that lending the money to HEART not only addresses housing issues on a countywide level, but it also gives the City time to raise funds and determine how best to use them in their own community. Councilmember Ortiz asked if the Vice Mayor’s suggestion was to use the long-term allocation as a loan to HEART, until the City had its own project. Vice Mayor Colson replied in the affirmative, stating that there could be shovel ready projects in East Palo Alto that would benefit from the loan, while the City looks at additional solutions. Councilmember Ortiz voiced his concern about using a bulk of the funds to promote affordable housing outside of Burlingame. Councilmember Keighran echoed his concerns. Councilmember Beach stated she supported the Vice Mayor’s suggestion. She stated that in the short term, the funds would help the County, but in the long term as the nest egg grew it would help the City. Additionally, she stated that the City should ensure that emergency subsidies include the missing middle. Councilmember Keighran stated that her concern with loaning funds to organizations like HEART is that she wants to ensure that Burlingame residents are assisted. Mayor Brownrigg stated that he understood the need for emergency rent subsidies. However, he explained that he had an aversion to subsidizing the private sector. Additionally, he stated that he would like more information on how this program would be carried out. City Manager Goldman stated that Samaritan House and United Way have programs in place for rent subsidies. Councilmember Ortiz stated that he believed that re-location assistance should be borne by the landlord and that emergency subsidies should be given to those who are in the midst of a crisis and need a little help. Mayor Brownrigg asked if using funds for emergency rent subsidies would require hiring another staff member. CDD Meeker stated that staff is pursuing different avenues for assistance, including consulting help. Councilmember Beach asked staff to engage with community stakeholders like Home for All and real estate professionals to garner a better understanding of emergency subsidies. Councilmember Ortiz suggested that the City partner with a non-profit that handles emergency subsidies. Vice Mayor Colson agreed with Councilmember Ortiz and stated that non-profit organizations have extensive expertise in this area. Burlingame City Council January 27, 2018 Approved Minutes 12 City Manager Goldman asked if the Council wanted to provide subsidies for landowners to rehabilitate their properties in exchange for maintaining affordable rents. Mayor Brownrigg asked if there was any estimate of how many units this would protect. Councilmember Keighran asked staff to look at what Redwood City had done in this area. She explained that she believed that Redwood City had lent money to property owners for upgrades in exchange for keeping rent at affordable prices. She asked staff to find out more about the program and whether it was successful and how it was implemented. At this point it was close to 11:45 am and the meeting was scheduled to end at noon, Mayor Brownrigg asked if they should extend the meeting as they had not yet discussed housing impact fees. Councilmember Keighran stated that there was a lot to discuss and she didn’t want to rush the conversation. Mayor Brownrigg concurred and asked that staff schedule a study session on housing impact fees. Councilmember Beach stated she was very much in support of incentives for safety improvements to buildings as she was especially concerned about seismic retrofits of older apartment buildings. Mayor Brownrigg discussed Planning Commissioner Terrones’ comments about the hurdles that developers face in Burlingame. He explained that with state legislation, affordable housing and the commercial linkage and housing impact fees, the Council should review how this will affect the planning staff. Mayor Brownrigg stated that he was proud of the Lot F and N project but that generally there is not City land available for projects. Instead, the City is going to have to get creative and look at other options. He explained that one of the reasons Burlingame has thrived is because it has a great school system. In order to maintain a great school system, the City must ensure that it has housing for teachers. He noted that he had recently had lunch with some of the hotel representatives and that they were concerned about Topgolf and the number of employees it would need. He stated that it is hard for the hotels to find staff that can afford to work in Burlingame and live in the area. Mayor Brownrigg stated that he believed the City needs to create inclusionary housing requirements. He explained that Measure T prohibits the Council from requiring developers to include affordable units. And while the Summerhill project did so on their own accord, this wouldn’t be standard. He discussed state legislation that ties the Council’s hands when it comes to approving new units. Additionally, he stated that he was disappointed with the hospital for building over 1200 units, none of which will be affordable. Mayor Brownrigg stated that he feels it is critical that the Council be able to require affordable units in bigger developments. Vice Mayor Colson and Mayor Brownrigg had a discussion about the state’s “by right” legislation and what type of development was applicable. CDD Meeker explained that the “by right” legislation applies to affordable housing that meets certain criteria. Burlingame City Council January 27, 2018 Approved Minutes 13 Vice Mayor Colson stated that she was concerned that if the City instated housing impact fees and required a certain amount of units be affordable, it would prevent development in the community. She stated that the City shouldn’t get bogged down in a conversation about the need to repeal Measure T when the City currently has tools in its tool box that can be used to assist in creating affordable housing. She asked if the City could offer developers the choice of housing impact fees or a certain number of affordable units. City Attorney Kane stated that she would need to further review the law on this matter. Mayor Brownrigg suggested that the Council further discuss housing impact fees and inclusionary housing in a study session. Councilmember Ortiz stated that he agreed with Vice Mayor Colson that the conversation should be combined to see if they could provide developers with the choice of a fee or require affordable units. Councilmember Beach stated that the Council should also consider the interplay between the BMR requirements, housing legislation, housing fees, and other fees that haven’t been updated since 2008. Mayor Brownrigg asked about parking ratios. CDD Meeker stated that it would be discussed as part of the zoning ordinance update. Vice Mayor Colson asked if the Council should have subcommittees to work separately on priorities for long-term and short-term uses of impact fees. Mayor Brownrigg stated that he saw there being two long-term questions: 1. how do you manage the money before you figure out how to spend it; and 2. what will the Council decide to ultimately spend the money on. Mayor Brownrigg asked when the City would receive the impact fees. Planning Manager Gardiner stated that the City is expected to obtain fees from the two large projects on the Bayfront in the next year or two. Mayor Brownrigg suggested that the City should put out a Notice of Funding Availability. He explained that HEART could be one of the proposals but that from these proposals the City could determine how best to utilize the funds. Vice Mayor Colson stated that Redwood City had also been awarded a grant from Home for All. Their grant was looking at how best to structure and spend housing linkage fees. She stated that this would be a great resource for the City. City Manager Goldman informed the public that on February 5, 2018, the City Council would be holding a study session to discuss the Village at Burlingame project on Lots F and N. Then on February 10, 2018, planning staff would be hosting an event called “Talking about Housing” at the Lions Hall at 9am. Councilmember Keighran asked that when the study session on housing impact fees is scheduled that she would like to see a list of all the fees a developer currently pays in Burlingame. Burlingame City Council January 27, 2018 Approved Minutes 14 6. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Brownrigg adjourned the meeting at 12:15 p.m. Respectfully submitted, /s/ Meaghan Hassel-Shearer City Clerk