Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Agenda Packet - CC - 2006.05.15
BURLINGAME CITY COUNCIL AGENDA City of Burlingame ftfi Regular Meeting–Monday,May 15,2006 501 Primrose Road Burlingame,CA 94010 r Page 1 of 3 650 558-7200 STUDY SESSION 6:15 p.m. Council Chambers a. Study Session on Water, Sewer and Parks Capital Improvement Projects 1. CALL TO ORDER 7:00 p.m. Council Chambers 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG 3. ROLL CALL 4. MINUTES —Regular Council Meeting of May 1, 2006 Approve 5. PRESENTATION a. Management Academy 6. PUBLIC HEARING The Mayor may limit speakers to three minutes each. a. Appeal of Planning Commission's approval of Design Hearing/Action Review and special permits for height and declining height envelope for a new two-story single family dwelling and detached garage at 1416 Balboa Avenue (Continued from May 1, 2006) b. Adopt Ordinance to change and increase cost for annual Hearing/Adopt overnight public street parking permits c. Adopt Ordinance establishing water rates for Fiscal Years Hearing/Adopt 2006-07, 2007-08 and 2008-09 d. Adopt Ordinance establishing sewer rates for Fiscal Years Hearing/Adopt 2006-07, 2007-08, and 2008-09 e. Adopt Ordinance amending fees and penalties associated Hearing/Adopt with the Industrial Waste Discharge Program for 2006- 2007, 2007-2008 and 2008-2009 f. Adopt Ordinance for a stop sign at Cortez Avenue and Hearing/Adopt Sherman Avenue 7. PUBLIC COMMENTS — At this time,persons in the audience may speak on any item on the agenda or any other matter within the jurisdiction of the Council. The Ralph M.Brown Act(the State local agency open meeting law)prohibits Council from acting on any matter that is not on the agenda. Speakers are requested to fill out a"request to speak"card located on the table by the door and hand it to staff. The Mayor may limit speakers to three minutes each. BURLINGAME CITY COUNCIL AGENDA City of Burlingame ` BUNi RLINGAB Regular Meeting—Monday,May 15,2006 501 Primrose Road Burlingame,CA 94010 Page 2 of 3 650 558-7200 8. STAFF REPORTS AND COMMUNICATIONS a. Update on the long range plans for the reforestation of Update Easton Drive b. Introduce Ordinance for proposed zoning for the Rollins Introduce Road Zoning District to implement the North Burlingame/Rollins Road Specific Plan adopted September, 2004 c. Introduce Ordinance to amend the Municipal Code zoning Introduce maps by reclassifying the M-IDistrict to Rollins Road(RR) District and establishing the automobile sales and service overlay area and the Southern Gateway entrance overlay area in the Rollins Road area to implement the North Burlingame/Rollins Road Specific Plan adopted September, 2004 d. Introduce Ordinance to modify sanitary sewer use Introduce regulations 9. CONSENT CALENDAR Approve a. Adopt an Ordinance to follow on the urgency Ordinance adopted on May 1, 2006 allowing the Planning Commission to approve extended hours for construction of the parking garage for Peninsula Hospital b. Tentative and final parcel map for lot combination of portions of Lots D & E, Block 11, Burlingame Land Company Map No. 2 Subdivision, 1427 Chapin Avenue c. Request for approval for Out of State training for Fleet Mechanic d. Resolution authorizing the appropriation and expenditure of$89,500 from the Contingency Reserve for modular office space for Fire Department e. Warrants and Payroll 10. COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS BURLINGAME CITY COUNCIL AGENDA City of Burlingame 1N" E Regular Meeting—Monday,May 15,2006 501 Primrose Road Burlingame,CA 94010 a Page 3 of 3 650 558-7200 11. PUBLIC COMMENTS-At this time,persons in the audience may speak on any item on the agenda or any other matter within the jurisdiction of the Council. The Ralph M.Brown Act(the State local agency open meeting law)prohibits council from acting on any matter that is not on the agenda. Speakers are requested to fill out a"request to speak"card located on the table by the door and hand it to staff. The Mayor may limit speakers to three minutes each. 12. OLD BUSINESS 13. NEW BUSINESS 14. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS a. Commission Minutes: Parks &Recreation April 20, 2006; Planning, May 8, 2006 b. Department Reports: Building, April, 2006; Police, April, 2006; Finance, April, 2006 c. Three letters from Comcast concerning programming and rate adjustments 15. ADJOURNMENT Notice: Any attendees wishing accommodations for disabilities please contact the City Clerk at 650 558-7203 at least 24 hours before the meeting. A copy of the Agenda Packet is available for public review at the City Clerk's office,City Hall 501 Primrose Road,from 8:00 a.m.to 5:00 p.m.before the meeting and at the meeting. Visit the City's website at www.burlineame.ore. Agendas and minutes are available at this site. NEXT MEETING—May 18,2006 S1S0O Wb21J021d 1N3W3A021dW1 l`dlldVO IItf213A0 ° S103f021d aNfl-A 3SRId2131N3 a3M3S S103fObd dNfl=l 3SRId2131N3 2l31tJM S1N3W3n021dW1 E)NI)RI`dd SloRllSla NMO1NM04 S103f 02id dNfl:J 3SRid2131N3 JNIN21`dd N011b'321O32! oNtf S}laVd S3111110V-A ONldllfl8 lOb1N0o dOOI=i S133a1S S103f 021d d 321f1St/3W/Xb'1 St/J - aNfl:j -lb213N30 WVN9uAm" Nd SJLN3W3AONdWi IVJLIdVO STREETS Estimated cost in PROJECTS thousands of dollars a. STUDIES a-1 Traffic Signal Maintenance Program (9916-1) $207 a-2 Traffic Control Device Inventory (9916-2) $96 a-3 Traffic&Truck Count Program (9916-3) $30 a-4 Millbrae Border Parking Survey (9916-4) $40 •a-5 Traffic Signal Equipment Upgrade (9916-5) $47 a-6 Traffic Calming $400 SUBTOTAL: $420 b. PAVING/RECONSTRUCTION b-1 Airport Blvd.resurfacing Program(81120) $450 b-2 Annual Street Resurfacing Program $13,290 b-4 Street Resurfacing Program 2006(81550) $1,140 b-5 Federal Grant Resurf.Program 2007(81580) $350 b-8 Pavement Management system (81160) $82 b-9 Burlinghome Subdivision Street Resurfacing(81570) $300 b-10 Street Monumentation Establishment(81400) $673 b-11 EI Camino Median and Linear Park $1,950 b.12 Rollins Road Gateway $150 SUBTOTAL: $19,185 c. TRAFFIC SIGNALS c-1 City Wide Traffic Signal $2,800 c-2 Bike,&Pedestrain Signage(81540) $416 c-3 Lighted Cross Walk at Morrell&Carolan (81530) $50 c-4 Countdown Non-audiable Ped.Signal(81520) �4p SUBTOTAL: 3806 d. RAILROAD IMPROVEMENTS d-1 Bayswater Ave,North Lane Crossing(9935)" $125 SUBTOTAL: $125 f. BIKE PATHS f-1 Bayshore Beautification Project $1,200 SUBTOTAL: $1,200 g. LIGHTING/POLES g-1 Howard Ave (9936) $18 g-2 South Lane & S.P. Depot (81630) $40 g-3 Primrose Road $400 g-4 Chapin Ave $400 g-5 East Lane $200 g-6 Airport Boulevard Undergrounding` $3,000 g- Lorton Ave & Park Road $200 g-8 Miscellaneous Street Light Replacements/ Masterplan $2,000 SUBTOTAL: $6,258 h. SIDEWALKS / CURB & GUTTERS h-1 06/07 Sidewalk Program (81460) $250 h-2 06/07 Annual Curb & Gutter (81460) $300 h-3 06/07 Annual Handicap Ramp Program (81460) $200 h-5 Citywide sidewalk $10,400 h-6 Citywide curb & gutter $8,600 h-7 Citywide handicap ramp $5,100 SUBTOTAL: $24,850 L BRIDGES i-2 Airport Blvd. Bridge Widening (9719) $807 i-3 Other Bridges $1,000 SUBTOTAL: $1,807 j. PROPERTY PURCHASES j-1 S.F. Water Right of Way (9902) $10,000 SUBTOTAL FOR STREETS $'67161 FLOOD CONTROL Estimated cost in PROJECTS thousands of dollars a. STUDIES a.1 Administrative Services (80710) $166 a-2 Continued Citywide Master Plan & Utility Development Study (9851) $319 a-3 Storm Drain and Bridge Facilities Inspect $342 SUBTOTAL: $827 b. CAPACITY IMPROVEMENTS-EASTON CREEK b-1 Marsten Pump Station Improvements $4,694 b-2 Outfall Pipeline, Marsten PS to SF Bay (80520) $1,117 SUBTOTAL: $5,811 c. CAPACITY IMPROVEMENTS-MILLS CREEK c-1 Mills Creek rehab from Bay to ECR $773 c-2 Mills Creek Box Culverts $884 SUBTOTAL: $1,657 d. CAPACITY IMPROVEMENTS-BURLINGAME CREEK d-1 Safeway -ECR-Howard crossing area $331 d-2 72" pipe, Howard, Bloomfield, under Fwy 101 to bay $8,835 SUBTOTAL: $9,167 e. CAPACITY IMPROVEMENTS-RALSTON CREEK e-1 60" pipe, Bellevue - Douglas to Blgm. Channel $1,546 SUBTOTAL: $1,104 f. LOCAL IMPROVEMENTS f-1 EI Portal, Gilbreth, Trsdale Crks lining replace (9941) $552 f-2 Miscellaneous SD Improvements (9938) $1,877 f-3 Cabrillo/Broadway/Cortez SD Improvements (81640) $221 f-4 Chula Vista storm drain system (80570) $170 f-5 Safety & Maintenance Improvements (81620) $93 SUBTOTAL: $2,913 g. CAPACITY IMPROVEMENTS-SANCHEZ CREEK AREA g-1 Laguna Area SD Improve (80880+ 80900) $116 g-2 Laguna Pump Station $11 ,044 SUBTOTAL: $11,160 h. PIPELINE REPLACEMENT h-1 Replace corrugated and other pipelines (79390) $1,985 SUBTOTAL: $1,985 L PUMP STATIONS •i-1 Pump Station Upgrades $2,452 i-2 SCADA system (9940) $1 ,202 SUBTOTAL: $3,653 j. CREEK CLEANING / REPAIR j-1 Easton Creek (79410) $370 j-2 Mills Creek (78520) $148 j-3 Burlingame Creek (80620) $106 SUBTOTAL: $624 SUBTOTAL FOR FLOOD CONTROL $38,900 BUILDING FACILITIES Estimated cost in PROJECTS thousands of dollars a. IMPROVEMENTS a-1 P.W. Corporation Yard Parking Lot (81600) $105 a-2 City Hall Project $7,600 a-3 Police Building $1,600 a-4 Community Center $41,000 a-4 Fire Department $2,900 a-5 Park Corporation Yard $3,400 a-6 Aquatic Center $250 a-7 Citywide Facility Master Plan (80760) $57 a-8 Citywide Minor Building Facilities (80790) $1;695 SUBTOTAL: $58,607 SUBTOTAL FOR BUILDING FACILITIES $58,607 PARKING ENTERPRISE FUND Estimated cost in PROJECTS thousands of dollars a. PARKING IMPROVEMENTS a-1 Burlingame Ave Parking Study (9908) $274 a-3 Burl. Av. District Parking Structure(80460) $12,000 a-4 Burlingame Ave. District parking lots(80470) $243 SUBTOTAL: $12,517 `b. METERS b-1 Burlingame Ave District Meter Replacement(80480) $269 e. DOWNTOWN IMPROVEMENTS e-1 Burlingame Ave Streetscape Improvements $27,965 SUBTOTAL: $27,965 SUBTOTAL FOR PARKING ENTERPRISE FUND $40,751 OVERALL CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT COSTS STREETS $ �5 FLOOD CONTROL $38,900 BUILDING FACILITIES $58,607 PARKS AND RECREATION $3,500 PARKING ENTERPRISE FUND $40,751 SEWER PROJECTS $104,000 WATER PROJECTS $97,000 TOTAL 4.449,11309 City of Burlingame - Parks & Recreation Dept. �u�:,r,��,,,� asp Parks & Recreation CIP Plan - April 10, 2006 0"PE CITY CIP PLAN - "B" CATEGORY Project Balance Funds From Proposed UNFUNDED Number PROJECT DESCRIPTION Available Projects Funded PROJECTS 10/31/05 '05'06 '06-'07 '07-'08 '08-'09 Details 1 76350 Eucalyptus Tree Management 85,171 - 50,000 55,000 55,000 2 77290 Parks Division Yard/Office 15,537 Close-transfer to B10 81090 3 77370 Wash Park Tennis Court Resurface 10,000 4 78490 Special Landscaping Improvements 50,965 50,000 55,000 55,000 5 79300 BART Visual Wall Landscaping - Waiting for reimbursement from BART 6 80970 Washington Park Playground Rehal 6,725 Close-transfer to B7 81060 7 81060 Bayside Park Main Diamond Lights 89,103 61,725 from B6 80970 + $55,000 from BHS 80530 8 81070 Pershing Park Playground Rehab 23,897 9 81080 Cuernavaca Playground 258,392 10 81090 Bayside Restroom/Snack Shack 265,748 15,537 from B2 77290 11 81100 Washington Park Irrigation 52,076 50,000 Central Controller 12 Village Park Restroom� 150,000 Funds moved from 06-07 to 07-08 13 Laguna Tennis Court Repairs 10,000 14 Lower Bayside Park Improvements 400,000 600,000 15 Village Park Picnic/Court 20,000 16 Resilient surface at Village 60,000 17 Resilient surface at Ray Park 60,000 18 Resilient surface at Paloma 40,000 19 Resilient surface at Laguna 40,000 20 Resilient surface at J Lot 40,000 80530 BHS Football Field Contribution 55,000 Transfer to 137 81060 Funding available through Prop. 40 296,903 Transfer$220,000 to 139; $76,903 to B10 Total 77,262 270,000 710,000 1 810,000 (Note: This plan does not include any funds for the B.I.S. tennis courts; a project that the City will split with the BSD when District funds are available) Parks& Recreation's Capital Improvement Items May 14,2006 MAJOR PARKS Washington Park Lower Bayside Park Murray Field Ballfield Lights(25) Field#1 Lights(25) Ballfield Lights(25) Fencing(15) Fencing(15) Fencing(15) Basketball Courts(35) Bleachers(40) Bleachers(20) Resurfacing(7) Field#2 Lights(25) Path Lights(30) Grandstands(40) Fencing(15) Play Structure(15) Repainting(5) Bleachers(30) Resilient Surface(10) Irrigation(40) Field#3 Lights(25) Path Lights(30) Fencing(15) Golf Center Play Structure(15) Bleachers(30) Ballfield Lights(25) Fencing(20) Field#4 Fencing(15) Path Lights(30) Resilient Surface(10) Synthetic Turf(10) Teaching Station(40) Restrooms(25) Drainage(40) Tennis Courts(25) Scorer's Booth(40) Dog Park Fencing(15) Path Lights(30) Path Lights(30) Resurfacing(5) Restroom/Snack Shack(25) Fencing(15) Tennis Lights(30) MINOR PARKS Cuernavaca Park Pershing Park Victoria Park Basketball Courts(35) Basketball Courts(40) Basketball Courts(35) Resurfacing(20) Fencing(15) Resurfacing(10) Bleachers(20) Resurfacing(10) Fencing(15) Play Structure(15) Play Structure(15) Path Lights(30) Resilient Surface(10) Resilient Surface(10) Play Structure(15) Ballfield Fencing(15) Resilient Surface(10) Restrooms(25) Ray Park Basketball Courts(35) Village Park Laguna Park Resurfacing(10) Basketball Courts(35) Play Structure(15) Fencing(15) Resurfacing(7) Resilient Surface(10) Bleachers(20) Fencing(15) Fencing(20) Fencing(15) Cottage(Building)(50) Tennis Courts(25) Path Lights(30) Path Lights(30) Resurfacing(5) Play Structure(15) Play Structure(15) Fencing(15) Resilient Surface(10) Resilient Surface(10) Restrooms(25) Restrooms(25) Tennis Courts(25) Resurfacing(5) TOT LOTS OTHER CIP NEEDS Alpine Playground Paloma Playground Community Center Play Structure(15) Play Structure(15) Aquatic Center Fencing(20) Fencing(20) Golf Center Depot J Lot Playground Trenton Playground Eucalyptus Management(1) Play Structure(15) Play Structure(15) Special Landscape(1) Resilient Surface(10) Resilient Surface(10) Tree Replacement Fund(1) Fencing(20) Fencing(20) Mills Canyon City of Burlingame-Parks& Recreation Dept. Long-Term CIP Replacement Plan Ufa I MeW.I Laid I Appmx$l 2000 1 2007 1 2008 1 2009 2010 2011 2012 1 2013 1 2074 1 2074 1 2016 2017 1 2018 2018 2020 2021 1 2022 1 2023 1 2021 2024 1 2026 2027 2028 1 2829 1 2090 1 2031 2032 203$ 1 20M 1 2038 1 2098 1 2037 MAJOR PARKS Wash619lan Park 1 Ba08eld Ugrds 25 2000 1 $170,000 1 1 318,2601 1 2 Fencing 15 $ 75,000 80,000 124,637 3 Basketball Casts 35 2001 50,000 128,754 4 Resurfacing 7 2001 7,500 8,500 10,382 12,768 15,703 19,313 5 Grandstands, 40 1994 350,000 6 Repetnttig 5 2003 4,000 4,700 5,219 6,050 7,014 8,131 9,428 7 Irrigation 40 50,000 50,000 8 Path Ughts 30 0 9 Play Structure 15 2104 240,000 373,912 10 Fencing 20 1 5,0001 1 9,301 11 Reallent Surface 10 40,00D 98,795 88,114 88,852 12 Restrooms 25 1998 58,159 98,475 13 Terns Cants 25 1995 50,000 80,235 14 Fencing 75 15 Resurfacing 5 2000 10.020 11,248 15,778 20,314 23,550 27,301 16 Tennis Ughts 30 40,000 55,389 Lower Bayside Park 11 Field 01 UgMs 25 2004 170,000 355,942 18 Fencing 15 19 Field 02 Lights 25 2000 150,000 279,044 20 Fencing 15 21 Field#3 Ughts 25 1998 250,000 465,074 22 Fencing 15 23 Field 04 Fencing 15 24 Synthetic Turf 10 yrs surface:40 yrs drainage 400,000 800,000 400,000 25 Bleachers#1 40 1987 1 25,000 30,000 26 Bleachers02 30 2000r3020,000 8,000 17,253 21 Bleachers 03 30 2000 ,000 8,170 A Scasfs Booth 40 20000,000 29 Pant Lights 30 0 36 RestroonJSnack Sh 25 2008 555,322 Murray Field 31 SayBelo Lights 25 2000 200,000 372,059 32 Fencing 15 33 Bleachers 20 2000 8,000 12,838 M Path UgMs 30 2000 35 Play Structure 15 2000 80,000 110,738 172.527 36 Resilient Slatece 40,000 58,741 78,943 !1E 108,093 Goff Corder 37 Settleld Ughts 25 2000 0 38 Path Ughts 30 2000 0 39 ITeachingStation 1 40 1 1 2001 1 121,000 ON Park 40 Pent UgMs30 2000 01 1 41 Fencing 15 MINOR PARKS Cuernavaca Park 42 Basiretbal Casts 35 1990 50,000 93,015 43 Resurfacing 20 1990 7,500 8,955 16,174 44 Bbachera 20 1990 8,000 9,552 17,253 EJE 45 Play Skuature 15 1988 180,000 288,847 450,014 46 Resilient Surface 10 40,000 58,741 78,943 108,093 M 47 Baeld Fencing 15 48 Restrocns 25 2003 128,000 260,198 Laguna Park 49 Play Structure 15 1999 91,000 122,296 190,534 50 Resilient Surface 10 40,000 40,000 57,030 78,841 103,003 51 Fencing 20 52 Ter"s Carts 25 2001 50,000 85,805 53 Resurfacing 5 2001 1 10,000 10,000 12,289 14,258 18,528 22,273 25,751 5< Fencing 15 Pershing Park 55 Basketball Carts 40 7087 50,000 98,6791 1 5a Fencing 15 51 Resurfacing 10 1987 7,500 8,500 77,014 14,802 79,893 58 Play Stnmture 15 2005 1 90,0001 1 1 1144,424 1 1 1 1 1 1 225,007 59 ResitleM Surfan 10 1 40,000 I I I I I I 1 155,360174,412 100,003 | § HIM K ( mtj | Hill $ q ■ #, ! B «§ g | \ %/ | k # § § « | ■# kk ! | | i ■ ! \ i kk# | § £ - � | 7 *191 11111 $ f $ §|[ | | 2 R B $E¥ | e § = k ■ ; . | § ■ & $& $ $ \ $ ` | B -i ! ■ || E k | t - - | ■ ■ n 2 9#® | - � ! F s R | k ■F® K # ; ■� !/ I k , " ! | ■ ■ ■ § ! 2 ■■� | ((§ | | + # N #§ ! ! | | »# ■ | | § \ ! ■ | | || \ � { kk k | § § § §§ § § ■ #! ` # § § # # § # # ## # # ■§ § # | „ !! ■ � . ; n ; � e - §■ ■ » ! , � e s 9 ■ , s ¥ ■ , | | ` ! | | \ N | ! ! ! ! ! § ! r ■ � , lenn , R , e , e ■ m , e ; , � = e � = , n , , , . _ � _ _ � | � | - � ` ` � ` , � � k �� ` � ` � ` ` � -� | | • � | | � f! I� � k � ! | ! � I| � !| � | ! | � ! | � { | � ! ■ 2! | ! | ■ | !■ ! ! !� | ■ ! !� �■ I � z §�� . � � | � � � !� § !� | & ! | � ; | . ; . . . . . . . . .. . . . � .. , . r . p . . , 2 . , 2 a9 8 , . « | . _ . , , , ; , § | Survey of Indoor Recreation Facilities -January 2005 City Age of Newest Teens Seniors City Gym School Other Communit Ctr Facilities Cities with all threespecial com onents Berkeley newest-1976 yes yes-3 yes-2 yes Cupertino late 60's yes yes yes yes Jr College- YMCA Foster City 7 years yes yes yes yes Gilroy early 1940's yes yes yes yes Jr College Livermore New-February yes yes yes,double yes 2005 Milpitas 20 years yes yes yes yes Mountain View 1964 yes yes yes-2 yes Newark 5 years yes yes yes yes Redwood City 1997 yes yes yes yes San Carlos 2000 yes yes yes yes Sunnyvale 35 years,new yes yes yes yes Senior Center Cities with two of the threespecial]com onents Alameda 1970's yes yes no yes Albany 11-12 years yes and childcare yes-2 no yes center Belmont 1968 yes yes no yes Campbell 1928 no,skate park yes yes-2 no Colma 2003 no yes yes yes Daly City 1960's no yes yes yes East Palo Alto late 60's no yes yes yes Haywand 1989 6 total no yes-2 yes yes Los Altos 50 years yes yes no yes Menlo Park 45 years no yes yes-2 yes Palo Alto 46 years yes yes no no Pittsburg ? no yes yes yes Pleasant Hill 1973 yes yes no yes Pleasanton 6 different sites no yes yes-3 yes San Bruno no yes yes no San Mateo 30-35 years no yes yes yes San Ramon 1989 yes yes no yes Santa Clara 30 years,teen yes yes no yes center-2 years Saratoga late 60's yes yes no yes Community College South San 1998 no yes-3 yes yes Francisco Walnut Creek 27 years old no yes yes-2 yes City Age of Newest Teens Seniors City Gym School Other Community Ctr I I I I Facilities Cities with one of the threespecial com onents Brisbane yes no no yes Concord newest - 10 years no yes no yes Dublin 1989 no yes no yes Half Moon Bay 19 years no yes no yes Martinez no community no yes no yes center Millbrae 40 years no yes no yes Orinda 1972, renovated no no yes yes Pacifica 20 years no yes no yes San Pablo no community no yes -2 no yes center Cities with none of the threespecial components Atherton Pavillion - 1972 no no no no Burlingame 1948 no no no yes Mora a 1930's no no no yes Piedmont 60 years old no no no yes San Leandro 10 years old no, shared no, but no yes approved plans City of Burlingame - Parks & Recreation Dept. 850 Burlingame Ave., Burlingame, CA 94010 AMN k1\ phone: (650) 558-7300 fax: (650) 696-7216ME M1 BURLINGAME recreationgburlingame.org MEMORANDUM a �e'2Yare o Lrv,q\ To: City Council Parks & Recreation Commissioners From: Randy Schwartz Date: May 14, 2006 Re: FACILITY MASTERPLAN ANALYSIS OF RECREATION CENTER In 2004, the City hired a consultant to complete a Facilities Masterplan to identify opportunities and solutions related to facilities. The results are being used to guide the City's use and development of its facilities. Three Parks & Recreation Department facilities were listed in the report: Aquatic Center, Parks Yard and Recreation Center. An essential improvement listed in the report is the need to expand the shower facilities at the Aquatic Center. The Parks Yard has no essential improvements listed, but improved access, building locker facilities for women employees, ADA restrooms and MVAC upgrades are all listed as required items. The report states that the Recreation Center is "a hodgepodge of materials, systems, and uses as a result of numerous renovations and additions over the last 55 years. It is not up to building code standards." Seismic issues associated with the facility that also serves as an emergency shelter are described as: • Substantial structural damage, partial collapse likely in the auditorium • Extensive non-structural damage • Repair may not be cost effective • Risk to Life: Substantial Less drastic points listed in the report are the Recreation Center lacks adequate program facilities, i.e. gymnasium, dedicated senior facilities and teen space; the number of bathroom fixtures needs to be more than doubled; the Center is not fully ADA accessible; there is not general public parking; office space is very cramped; the kitchen is not functional; and the Center does not have adequate storage space. As an example, Occupant Density is used to measure appropriate office space for staff. The Recreation Center has the lowest space to staff ratio in the City; less than 50% of the benchmark used by the consultants. The report lists two scenarios: one a "Pragmatic Scenario" and the second a "Visionary Scenario". Both scenarios call for a new Community Center on a newly acquired site. At the March 2002 Parks & Recreation Commission Meeting, staff was asked to compile information regarding a potential location for a new Community Center facility. Our committee identified nearly 20 locations and examined several criteria, including size, other on-site potential activities, parking, impact on the neighborhood, access, desirability and other users. Of those 20 locations, only the site at 270 East Lane received consensus approval. CITY C BURLJNGAME m �Nai[o�uN[6• BURLINGAME CITY COUNCIL Unapproved Minutes Regular Meeting of May 1, 2006 1. CALL TO ORDER A duly noticed regular meeting of the Burlingame City Council was held on the above date in the City Hall Council Chambers. Mayor Cathy Baylock called the meeting to order at 7:04 p.m. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG Led by Rudy Horak. 3. ROLL CALL COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT: Baylock, Cohen, Keighran, Nagel, O'Mahony COUNCILMEMBERS ABSENT: None 4. MINUTES One correction was made to the minutes of the April 17, 2006 regular Council meeting: Add to Item 12.b.: Councilwoman O'Mahony also stated that due to the continuing economic squeeze, Council was unable to have the City cover the cost of sidewalk work again this year; and that, regrettably, it was a broken campaign promise on her part. Councilwoman O'Mahony made a motion to approve the amended minutes of the April 17, 2006 regular Council meeting; seconded by Vice Mayor Nagel. The motion was approved by voice vote, 4-0-1 (Keighran abstained). 5. PRESENTATION a. FEEDBACK ON TRAINING EXPERIENCE OF CITY PERSONNEL AT EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT INSTITUTE IN EMMITSBURG, MD Fire Chief Reilly introduced Police Sergeant Jim Ford who provided a brief presentation on the emergency training of City personnel at the Emergency Management Institute. There were 72 key representatives from throughout the county who attended this training, which was specifically designed for a San Mateo County- wide disaster. Fire Chief Reilly stated that this class was evaluated and received a very high rating. The Fire Department will provide disaster-preparedness information to the public at their annual pancake breakfast in June. A free training class is available to the public entitled, Preparing for Emergencies, on July 20, 7-9 p.m., at the Recreation Center. 6. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1 Burlingame City Council May 1,2006 Unapproved Minutes a. (i) CONSIDER ADOPTION OF URGENCY ORDINANCE NO. 1781 TO ALLOW PLANNING COMMISSION TO APPROVE EXTENSION OF CONSTRUCTION HOURS FOR PARKING GARAGE CONSTRUCTION AT PENINSULA HOSPITAL SITE THROUGH SEPTEMBER 2006 AND (ii) CONSIDER INTRODUCTION OF AN ORDINANCE TO FOLLOW ON THE URGENCY ORDINANCE Mayor Baylock recognized the applicant, Hospital Replacement Project Manager Oren Reinbolt, who stated that the current construction schedule is about two months behind due to the rains this year and requested approval to extend construction hours temporarily for the parking garage to 9 p.m. weekdays, an earlier start time of 8 a.m. on Saturdays, and to allow construction on Sundays through September, 2006. Mayor Baylock opened the public hearing. The following citizens spoke: Victor Richmond, 1653 Balboa Avenue; Steve Dambrosio, 1504 Davis Drive; Kevin Nelson, 1654 Albemarle Way; Cristo Daskalakis, 836 Fairfield Road; Kathy Smith, 1811 Davis Drive; Terry Huebner, 1708 Davis Drive; and Pat Giorni, 1445 Balboa Avenue. Mr. Reinbolt responded to citizen comments and advised residents to report violations by calling his office at 696-5424 or Police Dispatch at 777-4100, and for after-hours, the hospital at 696-5400 and ask for Administrator on call. There were no further comments from the floor, and the hearing was closed. Council expressed concern that citizen complaints are not receiving adequate responses and requested the hospital publicize telephone numbers to report problems. Since this project is a community-wide benefit, Council suggested the following items that the Planning Commission might want to consider to decide what hours would be amended to the conditions of approval for the project: allow current construction hours on weekdays except for a two-hour extension to 9 p.m. one or two days a week, use current hours on Sundays, and on Saturdays extend the hours to begin at 8 a.m., require monthly reviews on progress/complaints, impose fines for violations, and allow the extension of construction hours until September 1, 2006. Councilman Cohen expressed his disappointment that the Mitigation Panel did not address this issue and was concerned that a request for extension of construction hours is being made at the beginning of a project, which would set a dangerous precedent; therefore, he would not support this request. Mayor Baylock requested CC Mortensen read the title of the proposed urgency ordinance to adopt an interim amendment to the hours of construction allowed by Section 18.07.110 to allow the Planning Commission approval of extended hours for the construction of the parking garage for Peninsula Hospital. Councilwoman O'Mahony made a motion to waive further reading of the proposed urgency ordinance; seconded by Vice Mayor Nagel. The motion was approved by voice vote, 4-1 (Cohen dissented). Mayor Baylock made a motion to adopt Urgency Ordinance No. 1781, amended to include a monthly review by the Planning Commission, and to allow extension of construction hours until September 1, 2006; seconded by Vice Mayor Nagel. The motion was approved by voice vote, 4-1 (Cohen dissented). Mayor Baylock directed CC Mortensen to publish a summary of the ordinance within 15 days of adoption. Mayor Baylock requested CC Mortensen read the title of the proposed ordinance to follow on Urgency Ordinance No. 1781 adopting an interim amendment to the hours of construction to allow the Planning Commission approval to extend hours for the construction of the parking garage for Peninsula Hospital. Councilwoman O'Mahony made a motion to waive further reading of the proposed ordinance; seconded by Councilwoman Keighran. The motion was approved unanimously by voice vote, 5-0. 2 Burlingame City Council May 1, 2006 Unapproved Minutes Vice Mayor Nagel made a motion to introduce the proposed ordinance; seconded by Councilwoman O'Mahony. The motion was approved by voice vote, 4-1 (Cohen dissented). Mayor Baylock requested CC Mortensen publish a summary of the proposed ordinance at least five days before proposed adoption. b. APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION'S APPROVAL OF DESIGN REVIEW AND SPECIAL PERMITS FOR HEIGHT AND DECLINING HEIGHT ENVELOPE FOR A NEW TWO-STORY SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING AND DETACHED GARAGE AT 1416 BALBOA AVENUE CP Monroe reviewed the staff report and requested Council hold a public hearing and consider the appeal of Planning Commission's approval of the design review and special permits for height and declining height envelope for a new two-story single family dwelling and detached garage at 1416 Balboa Avenue. CP Monroe read Condition No. 1 and the amended Condition No. 4. Councilwoman Keighran stated that although she was a Planning Commissioner at the time this item was being considered by the Planning Commission, she did not participate in the final vote process; therefore, she is able to participate in the appeal process for this item. After some discussion, Council expressed specific interest in protection of the privacy tree and its roots, requiring the repair and maintenance of the retaining wall, and adding a condition for the salvaging of architectural details on the original house. Mayor Baylock opened the public hearing. The applicant was not present. The following citizens allotted their comment time to Pat Giorni: Diana Mason, 1451 Balboa; John Fallon, 1412 Balboa; Ray Mason, 1451 Balboa; and Bob Giorni, 1445 Balboa. Pat Giorni, 1445 Balboa Avenue, requested the addition of several conditions. There were no further comments; and the hearing was closed. After Council discussion, Councilwoman Keighran requested this item be continued to the next regular Council meeting since the applicant was not present. Vice Mayor Nagel made a motion to continue this item to the next regular Council meeting; seconded by Councilwoman O'Mahony. The motion was approved by voice vote, 4-1 (Baylock dissented). Mayor Baylock declared a five-minute intermission at 9:55 p.m.; then reconvened the meeting at 10:00 p.m. C. RESOLUTION NO. 27-2006 APPROVING THE FY 2006-07 MASTER FEE SCHEDULE FOR CITY SERVICES FinDir Nava reviewed the staff report and requested Council hold a public hearing and approve a resolution approving the FY 2006-07 Master Fee Schedule for City services. Vice Mayor Nagel stated her approval of the reduced Block Party Permit fee. Councilman Cohen requested consideration of adding a film production fee. FinDir Nava advised we currently issue a Special Event Permit for film production. For future consideration, we would confer with the San Mateo County Convention and Visitors Bureau since they recruit film companies to this area. 3 Burlingame City Council May 1,2006 Unapproved Minutes Mayor Baylock opened the public hearing. There were no comments from the floor, and the hearing was closed. Councilwoman O'Mahony made a motion to approve Resolution No. 27-2006, approving 2006 Master Fee Schedule for City services; seconded by Councilwoman Keighran. The motion was approved unanimously by voice vote, 5-0. 7. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no comments from the floor. Councilwoman Keighran encouraged Peninsula Hospital neighbors to document any complaint calls they make and to bring the information to any meetings they attend on hospital construction. 8. STAFF REPORTS AND COMMUNICATIONS a. CONSIDER APPOINTMENT TO PLANNING COMMISSION Councilwoman O'Mahony made a motion to reappoint Stanley Vistica as Planning Commissioner; seconded by Councilwoman Keighran. The motion was unanimously approved by voice vote, 5-0. Councilwoman Keighran had worked with Commissioner Vistica as a Planning Commissioner and commended him on his diligence and diplomacy. b. INTRODUCE ORDINANCE FOR AMENDING FEES AND PENALTIES ASSOCIATED WITH THE INDUSTRIAL WASTE DISCHARGE PROGRAM FOR 2006-07, 2007-08 AND 2008-09 DPW Bagdon reviewed the staff report and requested Council introduce an ordinance amending fees and penalties associated with the Industrial Waste Discharge Program for 2006-07, 2007-08, and 2008-09. Mayor Baylock requested CC Mortensen read the title of the proposed ordinance amending fees and establishing penalties associated with the Industrial Waste Discharge Program for 2006-07, 2007-08 and 2008-09. Councilwoman Keighran made a motion to waive further reading of the proposed ordinance; seconded by Councilwoman O'Mahony. The motion was approved unanimously by voice vote, 5-0. Councilwoman O'Mahony made a motion to introduce the proposed ordinance; seconded by Vice Mayor Nagel. The motion was approved unanimously by voice vote, 5-0. Mayor Baylock requested CC Mortensen publish a summary of the proposed ordinance at least five days before proposed adoption. C. INTRODUCE ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING WATER RATES FOR FISCAL YEARS 2006- 07, 2007-08 AND 2008-09 DPW Bagdon reviewed the staff report and requested Council introduce an ordinance establishing water rates for FY 2006-07, 2007-08, and 2008-09. 4 Burlingame City Council May 1,2006 Unapproved Minutes Mayor Baylock requested CC Mortensen read the title of the ordinance adopting revisions to rates and fees for water service. Councilwoman O'Mahony made a motion to waive further reading of the proposed ordinance; seconded by Vice Mayor Nagel. The motion was approved unanimously by voice vote, 5-0. Vice Mayor Nagel made a motion to introduce the proposed ordinance; seconded by Councilwoman O'Mahony. The motion was approved unanimously by voice vote, 5-0. Mayor Baylock requested CC Mortensen publish a summary of the proposed ordinance at least five days before proposed adoption. d. INTRODUCE ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING SEWER RATES FOR FISCAL YEARS 2006- 07, 2007-08 AND 2008-09 DPW Bagdon reviewed the staff report and requested Council introduce an ordinance establishing sewer rates for FY 2006-07, 2007-08, and 2008-09. Mayor Baylock requested CC Mortensen read the title of the ordinance amending Chapter 15.08 establishing wastewater collection rates and charges. Councilwoman O'Mahony made a motion to waive further reading of the proposed ordinance; seconded by Councilman Cohen. The motion was approved unanimously by voice vote, 5-0. Councilwoman Keighran made a motion to introduce the proposed ordinance; seconded by Councilwoman O'Mahony. The motion was approved unanimously by voice vote, 5-0. Mayor Baylock requested CC Mortensen publish a summary of the proposed ordinance at least five days before proposed adoption. e. INTRODUCE STOP SIGN ORDINANCE FOR CORTEZ AVENUE AND SHERMAN AVENUE DPW Bagdon reviewed the staff report and requested Council introduce an ordinance to install stop signs at Cortez and Sherman Avenues. Mayor Baylock requested CC Mortensen read the title of the ordinance amending Section 13.20.010 for installation of stop signs at the intersection of Cortez Avenue and Sherman Avenue. Councilwoman O'Mahony made a motion to waive further reading of the proposed ordinance; seconded by Councilman Cohen. The motion was approved unanimously by voice vote, 5-0. Councilwoman Keighran made a motion to introduce the proposed ordinance; seconded by Councilwoman O'Mahony. The motion was approved unanimously by voice vote, 5-0. Mayor Baylock requested CC Mortensen publish a summary of the proposed ordinance at least five days before proposed adoption. L INTRODUCE ORDINANCE TO CHANGE AND INCREASE THE COST FOR THE ANNUAL OVERNIGHT PUBLIC STREET PARKING PERMITS COP Van Etten reviewed the staff report and requested Council introduce an ordinance to change and increase the cost for the annual overnight public street Parking Permits from $4 to $10. 5 Burlingame City Council May 1,2006 Unapproved Minutes Mayor Baylock requested CC Mortensen read the title of the ordinance amending Section 13.32.080 to increase the annual fee for overnight parking permits. Councilwoman O'Mahony made a motion to waive further reading of the proposed ordinance; seconded by Councilman Cohen. The motion was approved unanimously by voice vote, 5-0. Vice Mayor Nagel made a motion to introduce the proposed ordinance; seconded by Councilwoman O'Mahony. The motion was approved unanimously by voice vote, 5-0. Mayor Baylock requested CC Mortensen publish a summary of the proposed ordinance at least five days before proposed adoption. g. APPROVE RESOLUTION NO. 28-2006 TO CHANGE THE EXISTING FEES ASSOCIATED WITH THE ANNUAL ALARM PERMIT AND FALSE ALARMS COP Van Etten reviewed the staff report and requested Council approve a resolution to change the existing fees associated with the Annual Alarm Permit and False Alarms. Vice Mayor Nagel made a motion to make no changes to the existing fees; seconded by Councilwoman O'Mahony. Councilman Cohen suggested a tiered fee schedule where businesses paid a higher fee to offset some of the costs. Mayor Baylock suggested the motion be amended to set a fee for false alarms with no permit at $150. Councilwoman Keighran would not support the motion since citizens already pay for alarm installation and a monitoring fee to their security system. Vice Mayor Nagel amended the motion to approve Resolution No. 28-2006 to make no changes to the existing fees, except to amend the fee to be charged for false alarms with no permit at $150; seconded by Councilwoman O'Mahony. The motion was approved by voice vote 3-2 (Cohen and Keighran dissented). 9. CONSENT CALENDAR Councilwoman O'Mahony requested removal of Item d. from the Consent Calendar for further discussion. a. ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 1782 TO AMEND THE CONTRACT FOR POLICE EMPLOYEES WITH THE CALIFORNIA PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM (CalPERS) AND THE CITY OF BURLINGAME HRD Dolan requested Council hold a public hearing on the adoption of Ordinance No. 1782 amending the contract between the City of Burlingame and Ca1PERS to provide Section 21362.2 benefits (3% at 50 full formula) to local Police members. There were no comments from the floor. CC Mortensen will publish a summary of the ordinance within 15 days of adoption. b. RESOLUTION NO. 29-2006 APPROVING THE PURCHASE OF A PORTION OF THE FRANKLIN SCHOOL PROPERTY FOR THE TROUSDALE PUMP STATION AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO SIGN A SALE AND PURCHASE AGREEMENT TO EXECUTE ESCROW INSTRUCTIONS AND TO ACCEPT THE DEED FROM THE BURLINGAME ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT; AND APPROVING MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. ND-540-P 6 Burlingame City Council May 1, 2006 Unapproved Minutes DPW Bagdon requested Council approve Resolution No. 29-2006 approving Negative Declaration and the purchase and sale agreement between the City and the Burlingame Elementary School district and to accept Grant Deed for property to construct new potable water pump station at 2385 Trousdale Drive. C. RESOLUTION NO. 30-2006 APPROVING PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH OLIVIA CHEN CONSULTANTS FOR THE DESIGN OF THE TROUSDALE PUMP STATION AND TROUSDALE TRANSMISSION MAIN DPW Bagdon requested Council approve Resolution No. 30-2006 authorizing execution of professional services agreement with Olivia Chen Consultants for the design of Trousdale Pump Station and Trousdale Transmission Main. e. REQUEST TO ATTEND OUT OF STATE CONFERENCE Lib Escoffier requested Council approve out of state attendance at Innovative Users Group in Denver, Colorado for Library personnel. Councilman Cohen made a motion to approve Items a., b., c., and e. of the Consent Calendar; seconded by Councilwoman O'Mahony. Approved unanimously by voice vote, 5-0. d. RESOLUTION NO. 31-2006 APPROVING AGREEMENT AMENDMENT NO. 3 WITH PARKING COMPANY OF AMERICA FOR SHUTTLE SERVICES Councilwoman O'Mahony expressed concern about the 7.2% decrease in ridership since last year on the North Burlingame Shuttle as reported recently by the Peninsula Congestion Relief Traffic Alliance. Councilman Cohen stated that the cost per passenger rate on all of the shuttles is exorbitant. He attended a recent Alliance meeting where they discussed creating an aggressive marketing plan designed to increase ridership targeting seniors and youths. Councilwoman O'Mahony made a motion to approve Resolution No. 31-2006, Agreement Amendment No. 3 to agreement with Parking Company of America; seconded by Vice Mayor Nagel. Approved unanimously by voice vote, 5-0. 10. COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS Council reported on various events and committee meetings each of them attended on behalf of the City. 11. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no comments from the floor. 12. OLD BUSINESS Vice Mayor Nagel asked for the status of the 30 mph speed limit signs on California Drive, Rollins Road, and Airport Boulevard. DPW Bagdon stated that the Traffic, Safety and Parking Commission would be reviewing the accident history for those streets to determine if the 30 mph speed limit would be appropriate. COP Van Etten stated that in the meantime, the police would continue to enforce the 35 mph speed limit. 7 Burlingame City Council May 1,2006 Unapproved Minutes 13. NEW BUSINESS Councilman Cohen stated that a recent house demolition occurred without a permit; and the penalty was about $188, which reinforced the need to examine our demolition policy and penalties as mentioned at Council's Goal Setting session. DPW Bagdon advised that a Planning Commission subcommittee would be evaluating this policy with Planning and Public Works. CP Monroe advised that there would be a presentation of the Downtown Economic Study Findings to be held on May 24th at 6:30 p.m. in the Lane Room. The findings also would be presented to Council at their regular meeting on June 5th 14. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS a. Commission Minutes: Beautification, April 6, 2006; Library, March 28, 2006; Planning, April 24, 2006 b. Letter from Burlingame Chamber of Commerce concerning zoning changes 15. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Baylock adjourned the meeting at 11:30 p.m. in memory of Rabbi Raiskin, founder of Peninsula Temple Sholom, Fatih Kuc, son of Sabite and Ali Kuc, and Susan Hoeck, mother of Jeff and Ken Hoeck. Respectfully submitted, Doris J. Mortensen City Clerk 8 Burlingame City Council May 1,2006 Unapproved Minutes CITY o� STAFF REPORT BURUNGAME AGENDA 6a ITEM# DATE 5.15.06 °RATED JUNE 4 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL SUBMITTE BY DATE: MAY 9, 2006 APPROVED FROM: CITY PLANNER BY SUBJECT: APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S APP VAL OF DESIGN REVIEW AND SPECIAL PERMITS FOR HEIGHT AN D DECLINING HEIGHT ENVELOPE FOR A NEW TWO-STORY SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING AND DETACHED GARAGE AT 1416 BALBOA AVENUE, ZONED R-1 (Continued from May 1, 2006) Recommendation: City Council should hold a public hearing and take action. Affirmative action to approve the applicant's request should include findings for each of the requests made: for residential design review and special permits for height and declining height envelope. The Council action should be taken by resolution. The reasons for any action should be stated clearly for the record. City Council has three action alternatives: a. to uphold the Planning Commission and approve the application with conditions by resolution; b. to reverse the Planning Commission and deny the application by resolution; or c. to deny the request without prejudice and return it to the Planning Commission with comments for further consideration should the applicant choose to resubmit the project with revisions. The criteria for findings for design review and special permits are included at the end of the staff report. Notice of the public hearing on this item was mailed to all property owners within 300 feet of the project as required by law. The notice was mailed on April 21, 2006. Since the City Council continued this item at the May 1, 2006, meeting to the May 15, 2006, meeting, additional mailed notice is not required. Conditions on the project approved by the Planning Commission: 1. that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department date stamped March 13, 2006, sheets A-1,A-2, A-6 and A-8, and date stamped February 13, 2006, sheets A- 3, A-4, A-5, A-7 and T-1; with wood windows with simulated true divided lites, including an encroachment into the left side declining height envelope of 2'-6" x 19'-6" (49 SF) and a building height of 33'-2" as measured from the average top of curb elevation (24.07'), and that any changes to the footprint or floor area of the building shall require an amendment to this permit; 2. that the tree protection measures noted in the July 28, 2005 arborist report by Mayne Tree Expert Company shall be installed and inspected by the City Arborist prior to commencing demolition or construction on the subject property and that should any existing side property line fence(s) be damaged during construction on the property at 1416 Balboa Avenue, the fences) shall be repaired or replaced as necessary in the same style and height as the existing fence(s) by the property owner at 1416 Balboa Avenue; APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S APPROVAL OFA DESIGN REVIEW AND SPECIAL PERMITS FOR HEIC UT AND DECLINING HEIGHT ENVELOPE FOR ANEW TWO-STORY SINGLE FAMIL YD WELLING AND DETACHED GARAGE AT 1416 BALBOA AVENUE,ZONED R-1. May 1,2006 3. that all of the proposed skylights shall be tinted; 4. that the existing hedge and retaining wall along the driveway side property line between 1412 and 1416 Balboa Avenue shall be retained and protected by orange mesh fencing offset by 2 feet from the face of the property line wall on the1416 Balboa side of the wall and extending 30 feet along the entire length of the side property line wall during construction; and that the new driveway shall be a minimum of 9'-6" in width as measured from the face to the existing retaining wall along the property line; and should obtaining the minimum width of 9'-6" require replacing the retaining wall on the inboard side (1416 Balboa side) of the driveway, that replacement or its equivalent shall be required to stabilize the front yard at 1416 Balboa; and any new planting along the property line edge between the driveway and the new house at 1416 Balboa shall be limited to ground cover; 5. that any changes to the size or envelope of the first or second floors, which would include adding or enlarging a dormer(s), moving or changing windows and architectural features or changing the roof height or pitch, shall be subject to design review; 6. that prior to scheduling the framing inspection, the project architect, engineer or other licensed professional shall provide architectural certification that the architectural details such as window locations and bays are built as shown on the approved plans; if there is no licensed professional involved in the project, the property owner or contractor shall provide the certification under penalty of perjury; certifications shall be submitted to the Building Department; 7. that prior to final inspection, Planning Department staff will inspect and note compliance of the architectural details (trim materials, window type, etc.) to verify that the project has been built according to the approved Planning and Building plans; all new windows shall be true divided light wood windows and shall contain a wood stucco-mould trim to match the existing trim as close as possible; 8. that all air ducts, plumbing vents, and flues shall be combined, where possible, to a single termination and installed on the portions of the roof not visible from the street; and that these venting details shall be included and approved in the construction plans before a Building permit is issued; 9. that prior to scheduling the roof deck inspection, a licensed surveyor shall shoot the height of the roof ridge (33'-2" as measured from the average top of curb elevation of+24.07') and provide certification of that height to the Building Department; 10.that prior to scheduling the foundation inspection a licensed surveyor shall locate the property corners and set the building footprint; I 1.that prior to underfloor frame inspection the surveyor shall certify the first floor elevation of the new structure(s) and the various surveys shall be accepted by the City Engineer; 12. that during demolition of the existing residence, site preparation and construction of the new residence, the applicant shall use all applicable "best management practices" as identified in Burlingame's Storm Water Ordinance, to prevent erosion and off-site sedimentation of storm water runoff; 13. that demolition for removal of the existing structures and any grading or earth moving on the site shall not occur until a building permit has been issued and such site work shall be required to comply with all -2- APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S APPROVAL OF A DESIGN REVIEW AND SPECIAL PERMITS FOR HEIGTIT AND DECLINING HEIGHT ENVELOPE FOR ANEW TWO-STORY SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING AND DETACHED GARAGE AT 1416 BALBOA AVENUE,ZONED R-1. May 1,2006 the regulations of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District; 14. that the conditions of the City Arborist, City Engineer, Recycling Specialist, Chief Building Official, NPDES Coordinator and Fire Marshal's August 2, 2005 memos shall be met; 15. that the project shall comply with the Construction and Demolition Debris Recycling Ordinance which requires affected demolition, new construction and alteration projects to submit a Waste Reduction Plan and meet recycling requirements; any partial or full demolition of a structure, interior or exterior, shall require a demolition permit; 16.that the applicant shall comply with Ordinance 1503, the City of Burlingame Storm Water Management and Discharge Control Ordinance; and 17. that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building Code and California Fire Code, 2001 edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame. Planning Commission Action: At their meeting on March 27, 2006, the Planning Commission held a public hearing and voted 4-1-0-2 (C. Brownrigg dissenting and Cers. Osterling and Terrones absent) on a voice vote to approve the applicant's request for design review and special permits for height and declining height envelope to build a new two- story house and detached garage at 1416 Balboa Avenue. In their action the Commissioners noted that a condition should be added: that the property line retaining wall and vegetation it supports shall be protected and the driveway shall be a minimum of 9'-6" in width as measured from the face of the existing property line retaining wall. In their findings the Commissioners noted: that the property line appears to be at the center of the retaining wall so it should not be removed, in addition the vines and shrubs along this property line are on the neighbor's property and should not be damaged during construction, conditions should be amended to address this; this is a new house, the driveway widths should be a minimum of 9'-6" which is what the zoning code requires, there is a retaining wall on both sides of the driveway at the front, if the distance between these existing walls is 10 feet then that distance should be retained, if necessary the retaining wall on the interior side of the driveway may need to be moved to create a 9'-6" width at the entrance. The special permit for height was approved on the basis that the height is necessary for the Tudor style proposed to work, it was also noted that the house is well designed,may be large but has benefited by the work with the design review consultant. Commissioner in opposition noted that he was not comfortable with a minimum width driveway (9'-6") for a five bedroom house, with that many bedrooms need adequate access, need more work on the driveway to be sure that it is useable, since the other side setback is fixed at the minimum allowed, widening the driveway could affect the width of the house and require the applicant to return to the Commission for a substantial revision to the design, height is not a problem because the proposed structure is not too tall for this architectural style which requires a pitched roof City Council Meeting, May 1, 2006 At the Council meeting on May 1, 2006, the City Council held a public hearing and voted 5-0 to continue this project to the Council meeting of May 15, 2006, so that the applicant could be present. At the May 1, meeting the Council held a public hearing at which members of the public ex] ' ressed concerns about the width of the existing and proposed driveway and the impact of the existing property line wall on the driveway width, suggested that the house be scaled back with deeper right and left side setbacks and reduced in size (FAR) so -3- APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S APPROVAL OFA DESIGN REVIEW AND SPECIAL PERMITS FOR HEIGHT AND DECLINING HEIGHT ENVELOPE FOR ANEW TWO-STORY SINGLE FAMIL YD WELLING AND DETACHED GARAGE AT 1416 BALBOA AVENUE,ZONED R-1. May 1,2006 that it is compatible with older houses in the neighborhood, would like; surveyors markers at the corners of the lot at the front so there is no doubt about location, 7 feet taller than the neighboring house, with present plan cannot add landscaping along driveway side, want to see drainage completely addressed on planning plans, not left to building permit, since this is a new house should have no exceptions, the driveway is not user friendly should be 10 feet wide with a 12 foot curb cut, concerned about lead paint contamination when structure is demolish. In Council discussion it was noted that the applicant is not present so cannot answer questions, when looking at a change in conditions good to have the applicant input; if continue should include revised condition 4, concerned about the trimming which was done to the neighbor's hedge today, requested the applicant attend the May 15, 2006, meeting. BACKGROUND: The applicant/architect, Catherine Anderson, and property owners, Clement and Eva Hung, are proposing to demolish the existing one-story single family dwelling and build a new two story single family dwelling with detached two car garage at 1416 Balboa Avenue, zoned R-1. The house being removed has a floor area ratio of 0.30 (2,859 SF), the proposed house will have an floor area ratio of 0.527 (3, 692 SF) where 0.53 (3,740 SF) is the maximum floor area ratio allowed. For the proposed project the applicant is requesting the following: ■ Design review for a new two-story single family dwelling(CS 25.57.010); and ■ Special permit for height (33'-2" proposed where 30' is the maximum height allowed without a special permit (CS 25.28.060 (a) (1)) ■ Special permit for declining height envelope (2'-6" x 19'-6" (49 SF) encroachment into the declining height envelope on the left side) (CS 25.28.035 (c)) Summary of Project Review This project was first heard by the Planning Commission as a Design Review Study Item on August 8, 2005, and was referred to a design review consultant. It was then brought to the Planning Commission as an action item on February 27, 2006 and was continued for clarification of the landscape plan. The Planning Commission heard the project for action on March 27, 2006. A number of issues were identified on the August 8, 2006, plans as needing revision and refinement (See attached Planning Commission staff report, March 27, 2006, page 3 -4). The property owners and architect worked with the design reviewer and resubmitted the revised project with a positive design reviewer recommendation. In his comments on the plans as they were revised, the design reviewer noted that the house massing and scale sits back from the street and is broken up by dormers and varied roof shapes and elevation treatment, the style is compatible with the surrounding area, and the detached garage is compatible with the rear parking pattern that exists in the area. He notes that the roof lines have been improved and corrected. The roof shape, previously truncated and sliced off at 6 inches below the maximum height in an attempt to avoid applying for a special permit for height has been changed. The new roof is higher by three feet, but only at the peak, and a height exception is now required. He believes this change to the roof is a real improvement over pervious "sliced-off' design and he fully supports the special permit allowing slightly greater height above the 30 foot -4- APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S APPROVAL OFA DESIGN REVIEW AND SPECIAL PERMITS FOR HEIGUT AND DECLINING HEIGHT ENVELOPE FOR ANEW TWO-STORY SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING AND DETACHED GARAGE AT 1416 BALBOA AVENUE,ZONED R-1. May 1,2006 maximum. (Planning Staff would note that the declining height envelope exception on the second floor is virtually the same so was not affected by completing the roof to a ridge/peak.) At the February 27, 2006, meeting the Commissioners felt that the landscape plan was confusing, that the landscaping proposed does not do the best job of screening the new house. Commissioners recommended that the action on the project be continued to have the noted landscape changes incorporated into the plans and for submittal as a revised landscape plan. In the discussion the Commissioners did note that the project is very much better, design review has worked, that the special permit for height is appropriate because this property is located at the crest of the block, actual house is not over 30 feet tall as measured from adjacent grade, and the height is appropriate to the proposed Tudor style, there are no view blockage issues so story poles are not required. At the March 27, 2006, meeting the Commission reviewed the landscape plan along with the proposed project plans, and voted to approve the project based on the plans which resulted from the design reviewer and with the revised landscape plan. Commissioners comments are summarized in the Planning Commission's Action above. Amendment to Condition 4: Conservation of the property line wall and adjacent vegetation Following site visits before the May 1, 2006, meeting, Council members expressed concern about insuring that the existing wall originally built about 1913 along property line between the properties at 1412 and 1416 Balboa should be protected during construction including the established vegetation along the neighbor's side of the property line wall. It was noted that tree protection measures are required for the tree at the rear of the house, so the same protection measures could be established along the wall which would protect during construction, both the wall and any roots of the neighbor's hedge which might be under the wall. The suggestion was that the same orange web fencing used for tree protection be placed on the site at 1416 Balboa, 2 feet from the wall. Concern was also expressed about any future vegetation competing with the neighbors existing hedge next to the wall, so any new planting along the wall oil the 1416 Balboa side of the wall was limited to ground cover or flowers which would not compete with the hedge or limit the use of the driveway. The 9.5 foot minimum driveway width required for single family residential uses, is measured edge of pavement to edge of pavement, so if a planter strip were to be provided between the wall and the driveway, it would have to be in addition to the 9.5 foot wide paved surface. Presently, and as proposed, the driveway is measured to the face of the wall. The wall does not extend the entire length of the side property line, a fence separates the properties at the rear. The wall and fence are shown on the survey included with the project plans. Council suggested a number of revisions to condition 4 as recommended by the Planning Commission. The proposed changes are shown in italics below: 4. that the existing hedge and retaining wall along the driveway side property line between 1412 and 1416 Balboa Avenue shall be retained and protected by orange meshfencing,off set by 2 feet from the face of the property line wall on the1416 Balboa side of the wall and extending 30 feet along the entire length of the side property line wall during construction; and that the new driveway shall be a minimum of 9'-6" in width as measured from the face to the existing retaining wall along the property,line; and should obtaining the minimum width of 9'-6" require replacing the retaining wall on the inboard side (1416 Balboa side) of the driveway, that replacement or its equivalent shall be required to stabilize the front yard at 1416 Balboa; and any new planting along the property line edge between the driveway and the new house at 1416 Balboa shall be limited to ground cover; -5- APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S APPROVAL OFA DESIGN REVIEW AND SPECIAL PERMITS FOR HEIGHT AND DECLINING HEIGHT ENVELOPE FOR ANEW TWO-STORYSINGLE FAMIL YD WELLING AND DETACHED GARAGE AT 1416 BALBOA AVENUE,ZONED R-1. May 1,2006 The revised condition 4 has been included in the proposed conditions for the project listed at the beginning of this staff report. Exhibit A attached to the resolution which will be recorded with the property at the county recorder's office, if the project is approved, also includes the revised condition 4. Also submitted at the Council meeting on May 1, 2006, was a letter from John and Anne Fallon at 1416 Balboa Avenue requesting that the City Council add conditions to: ■ Protect the retaining wall and hedge between the properties at 1416 and 1412 Balboa (addressed in the revised condition 4); ■ Protect and leave in place the tree, bushes and their root systems adjacent to the left side of the house at 1412 Balboa(see conditions 2 and 4 above); and ■ Protect and leave in place the existing fence which extends from the left side of the house at 1412 Balboa to the rear property line (see condition 2 above). The survey shows that the fence along the back portion of the side property line is located on property line. A condition could be added that should the existing fence be damaged during construction on the property at 1416 Balboa Avenue, it would be repaired or replaced as necessary by the property owner at 1416 Balboa Avenue. Condition number 2 was amended (see italics above) to address the protection of the existing side property line fences during construction. Future maintenance of such 'shared' fences is usually resolved by the two property owners at the time it is needed. Neighbor Comments at the Planning Commission Public Hearing There were no neighbor comments at the August 8, 2005, design review public comment on this project. At the February 27, 2006, meeting neighbors noted: that the existing driveway is narrow and steep, concerned if the new driveway is the same because current residents don't use the existing driveway because of its design and their cars are parked on the street, parking on Balboa is a problem because the street is narrow, virtually one way. Concerned with the height of the building, this is a large house, does not fit in the neighborhood, should not grant exception for height or declining height envelope, submitted photos, proposed roof line is complicated and problematic, concerned with flat roof at the top of a Tudor style house, this house will be 3 feet taller than the house on the right and 7 feet taller than the house on the left, concerned with the mass and bulk of the building; house will be 4 feet from the 7 foot property line fence, will be hard to clean gutters and without gutters working properly will drain on to the neighbors property; would like to see wood windows used; would like to have story poles installed to show the envelope of the building; do not agree with the design review analysis, the house is more attractive now but does not: belong on this small lot; the fabric of this block has changed from all the new construction, for example, the house at 1453 Balboa Avenue which is too big; this project should be sent back to the design reviewer or denied without prejudice because of the site conditions. Designer of the project noted that the driveway width and slope is about the same, but it widens at the rear to 10'-6" so it will be easier to use. At the March 27, 2006, meeting the public comments included: measured the driveway, neighbors have invested a lot of time, and the applicant money, in this process do not want to be back with amendments after have begun construction, this should be treated as a new lot; should look at the right side of the lot as if it were a corner lot because a third of this side is exposed to view from the street, ridge of the new house is 7 feet taller than the existing so the first thing you will see is the full extension of that wall; there is no softening of this side by landscaping since the driveway takes up the entire side yard, the new plans do not address this; the new plans do not address the fact that there are retaining walls on either side of the driveway, the wall on the left holds up the front yard; the wall on the right is on property line, it is 33 inches high and 30 feet long, there is a privet on the neighbor's side of the wall. The property line wall was built in 1914, bricks have been -6- APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S APPROVAL OFA DESIGN REVIEW AND SPECIAL PERMITS FOR HEIGHT AND DECLINING HEIGHT ENVELOPE FOR ANEW TWO-STORY SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING AND DETACHED GARAGE AT 1416 BALBOA AVENUE,ZONED R-1. May 1,2006 added later along with trees on my property, do not want property lint; wall or hedge removed and would like 10 feet between the wall and the new house; this house will be 17.5% larger than my house and there are houses on the block smaller than my house; opposed to the height exception, this house will be an anomaly on the street, this lot should be surveyed and markers left so that everyone knows where the property line is. Commissioner noted that Charles Kavanaugh did a survey which was included in the plans and the property line is down the center of the wall. Staff Comments Comments from Building, Fire, Public Works, and Planning staff regarding this proposed project are included in the March 27, 2006, Planning Commission Staff Report which is attached in its entirety at the end of the Council staff report. Also included at the end of the staff report, following the Planning Commission packet, are the pictures which were submitted by the public during the Commission's public hearings. Environmental Review Status The proposed project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act. CEQA Article 19. Categorically Exempt per Section: 15303, Class 3 — (a) construction of a limited number of new, small facilities or structures including (a) one single family residence or a second dwelling unit in a residential zone. In urbanized areas, up to three single-family residences maybe constructed or converted under this exemption. ATTACHMENTS: Criteria for Design Review and a Special Permit John and Anne Fallon letter, April 26, 2006, to City Council Planning Commission Minutes, March 27, 2006 Planning Commission Staff Report, 1416 Balboa Avenue, March 27, 2006 with attachments Photographs submitted by the public at the public hearings Resolution with amended Exhibit A Notice of Public Hearing for Appeal, mailed April 21, 2006 (since the Council continued the item to a date certain, May 15, 2006, a second mailed public notice is not required) -7- 1416 Balboa Avenue CS 25.57.030 (e) Design Review criteria (e) A design review application in an R-1 district shall be reviewed by the planning commission for the following considerations: (1) Compatibility of the architectural style with that of the existing character of the neighborhood; (2) Respect forth parking and garage patterns in the neighborhood; (3) Architectural style and consistency and mass and bulk of structures, including accessory structures; (4) Interface of the proposed structure with structures on adjacent properties; (5) Landscaping and its proportion to mass and bulk of structural components; and (6) In the case of an additon, compatibility with the architectural style and character of the existing structure as remodeled. CS 25.51 .020 Findings and Conditions for a Special Permit The planning commission may grant a special permit in accord with this title if, form the applicant and the facts presented at the public hearing, it finds: (a) The blend of mass, scale and dominant structural characteristics of the new construction or additon are consistent with the exiting structure's design and with the existing street and neighborhood; (b) The variety of roof line, fagade, exterior finish materials and elevations of the proposed new structure or addition are consistent with the existing structure, street and neighborhood; (c) The proposed project is consistent with the residential design guidelines adopted by the city; and (d) Removal of any trees located within the footprint of any new structure or addition is necessary and is consistent with the city's reforestation requirements, and the mitigation for the removal that is proposed is appropriate. 1412 Balboa Ave. Burlingame, California 94010 April 26th 2006 City of Burlingame, City Council, 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, California, 94010. Dear Council Members, Ref: Site 1416 Balboa Avenue,. Burlingame. John and Anne Fallon would like council to add a condition to the building permit, a requirement for the proposed project at 1416. Balboa Avenue, Burlingame, that the builder / owner will exercise all due diligence to: Protect and ;leave in place the retaining wall and hedge between the properties at1412 and 1416 Balboa, adjacent to the driveway of 1416 Balboa Protect and leave in place the privacy tree and bushes.and.their root structure, adjacent to the left side of the house at 1412 Balboa. Protect and leave in place, the existing fence which extends from the left side of the house at 1412 Balboa, to the rear of the property. Thank you. John Fallon Anne Fallon City of Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes March 27, 2006 environmental impact studies still apply to this action. Staff noted that they did. There were no other questions of staff. Commissioners comment: no change from original approval; usually hold condominium development to a higher standard than rental, troubled by request may not have granted variances if knew it was to be a condominium; would the Bayfront Development Fee be different if this had been originally submitted as a commercial condominium? Staff responded no, the Bayfront and other development fees are the same. Does the condominium map entitle the city to more improvements? CA noted that Commission could request a wider sidewalk at the front to comply with design guideline standards in the area, for example. Seems the question revolves around the existing building, and the variances granted originally were based on the retention of that building. How would parking be assigned for the condominium use because for the rental it would be common/shared. How is it insured that the landscaping will be maintained? Owners are aware of zoning but buyers may not be. Questions for findings seem to imply residential conversions not commercial. Sidewalk width for Bayfront should be 8 feet, same as existing, revised plans show 5 feet. Think need incubator space, appropriate for consent; not difficult, like to see on action to hear answers on how transition from rental to ownership is being handled. Understand transition, CC and R's handle a lot of those things, they are recorded with the property, so issues addressed. Do not do many condominium conversions, good for the commission to look at one closely, like to hear from applicant. Request revisions: ■ Sidewalks at the front of the site along the public right-of-way shall be 8 feet wide with improvements consistent with the Bayfront Design guidelines for the Inner Bayshore area, to be installed by the property owner; ■ Provide information on how the on-site parking spaces will be allocated among the ownerships; and Nft .. ■ Provide information on how the property and landscaping will be maintained among the ownerships. This item was set for the regular action calendar when all the information has been submitted and reviewed by the Planning Department. This item concluded at 7:45 p.m. VII. ACTION ITEMS Consent Calendar - Items on the consent calendar are considered to be routine. They are acted on simultaneously unless separate discussion and/or action is requested by the applicant, a member of the public or a commissioner prior to the time the commission votes on the motion to adopt. Chair Auran noted that he had written requests to remove items 5A, 1416 Balboa Avenue, and 5B, 1456 Bernal Avenue, from the consent calendar. He directed that the two items be moved to the action calendar for public hearing. VIII. REGULAR ACTION ITEMS 5A. 1416 BALBOA AVENUE, ZONED R-1 — APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW AND SPECIAL PERMITS FOR HEIGHT AND DECLINING HEIGHT ENVELOPE FOR A NEW, TWO-STORY SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING AND DETACHED GARAGE (CATHERINE ANDERSON, APPLICANT AND DESIGNER; CLEMENT & EVA HUNG PROPERTY OWNERS) (66 NOTICED) PROJECT PLANNER: MAUREEN BROOKS (CONTINUED FROM FEBRUARY 27, 2006 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING) 3 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes March 27, 2006 Reference staff report March 27, 2007, with attachments. CP Monroe presented the report, reviewed criteria and staff comments. Seventeen conditions were suggested for consideration. CP noted that there is a retaining wall at the front of this property and that the proposed driveway on the plans is 10 feet wide as measured from the face of the retaining wall. Suggested that condition 4 be amended to add wording that the width of the driveway shall be 10 feet as measured from the face of the retaining wall along the side property line. Commissioner asked if staff knew whose property the hedge was on. CP responded no. There were no further questions of staff. Chair Auran opened the public hearing. Catherine Anderson, architect, 650 Loma Verde Avenue, Palo Alto, represented the project. John Fulton 1412 Balboa; John Gardner, 1421 Balboa; Pat Giomi, 1445 Balboa, spoke. Applicant noted that there is no intention of removing the retaining wall along property line, and they will also retain the vines and hedge which are of concern to the neighbor. Commissioner noted that there appears to be 9 feet plus 1 .6 feet or 10.6 feet of space for the driveway. Applicant noted that the revised plans show a 10 foot driveway, what is there, and was measured from the face of the retaining wall. Comments from the public: measured the driveway myself, neighbors have invested a lot of time and the applicant money in this process, do not want to be back with amendments after have begun construction, this should be treated as a new lot; look at the right side of the property as if it were on a corner lot because a third of it is exposed to view from the street, the ridge of the new house is 7 feet taller than the existing so the first thing you will see is the whole length of the wall, this side has never been softened by landscaping because the width of the driveway does not allow it; the proposed plans do not address the existing condition; presently there are retaining walls on either side of the driveway, 9 feet wide at a height of up to 6 feet for 48 feet in length; the wall on the left holds up the front yard, the right wall is on property line, its 33 inches high and 30 feet long, there is a picket fence at the end; there is a privet along the retaining wall on the neighbor's side; would request that the driveway be 10.5 feet with the measurement taken from the face of the retaining wall. If necessary reduce the face of the front of the building, scale down the house to accommodate. Has a contractor been selected for this construction? Wall was built in 1914, added bricks on top and trees behind on my property, the picket fence is one foot inside the property line, there for dog; do not want the wall or hedge removed and want 10 feet between the wall and the house; this house will be 175% larger than my house and there are other houses on the block smaller than my house; there should be no variance or exception for declining height. Live across the street since 1960 before the present house on this lot was built, concerned about the size of this house; opposed to the height exception, this house would be an anomaly on the street, been to the Commission's past two meetings on this item, am disgusted. Is it possible to have this lot surveyed and retain the survey markers so everyone knows where the property line is? Commissioner noted that Charles Kavanaugh did a survey which was included in the plans, and the property line is down the center of the wall. There were no further comments. The public hearing was closed. Commission discussion: appears from the survey map that the property line is in the middle of the retaining wall and the wall should stay, should amend the condition as suggested by staff to keep the retaining wall and that the plant material will be protected; driveway width should be a minimum of 9-6" which is what the code requires, but must meet 10 feet at the front if that is what the existing wall on the inside defines, it could be that the existing wall on the interior of the lot may need to be moved to attain 9'-6". C. Deal moved to approve the project by resolution on the basis that the special permit for height is �-- necessary for the Tudor design to work, the house is well designed, may be large but has benefited by the work with the design review consultant, with the revisions to condition 4 to retain the hedge along the 4 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes March 27, 2006 driveway and that the driveway width shall be a minimum of 9'-6" as measured from the face of the retaining wall along the property, even if this means that the inboard retaining wall must be replaced and with the following amended conditions in the staff report: 1) that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department date stamped March 13, 2006, sheets A-1 ,A-2, A-6 and A-8, and date stamped February 13, 2006, sheets A-3, A-4, A-5, A-7 and T-1 ; with wood windows with simulated true divided lites, including an encroachment into the left side declining height envelope of 2'-6" x 19'-6" (49 SF) and a building height of 33'-2" as measured from the average top of curb elevation (24.07), and that any changes to the footprint or floor area of the building shall require an amendment to this permit; 2) that the tree protection measures noted in the July 28, 2005 arborist report by Mayne Tree Expert Company shall be installed and inspected by the City Arborist prior to commencing demolition or construction on the subject property; 3) that all of the proposed skylights shall be tinted; 4) that the existing hedge and retaining wall along the driveway side property line shall be retained and protected during construction and that the new driveway shall be a minimum of 9'-6" in width as measured from the face of the existing retaining wall along the adjacent property line, and should obtaining the minimum width of 9'-6" require replacing the retaining wall on the inboard side of the driveway, that replacement or its equivalent shall be required to stabilize the front yard; and planting along the property line edge between the driveway and the house shall be limited to ground cover; 5) that any changes to the size or envelope of the first or second floors, which would include adding or enlarging a dormer(s), moving or changing windows and architectural features or changing the roof height or pitch, shall be subject to design review; 6) that prior to scheduling the framing inspection, the project architect, engineer or other licensed professional shall provide architectural certification that the architectural details such as window locations and bays are built as shown on the approved plans; if there is no licensed professional involved in the project, the property owner or contractor shall provide the certification under penalty of perjury; certifications shall be submitted to the Building Department; 7) that prior to final inspection, Planning Department staff will inspect and note compliance of the architectural details (trim materials, window type, etc.) to verify that the project has been built according to the approved Planning and Building plans; all new windows shall be true divided light wood windows and shall contain a wood stucco-mould trim to match the existing trim as close as possible; 8) that all air ducts, plumbing vents, and flues shall be combined, where possible, to a single termination and installed on the portions of the roof not visible from the street; and that these venting details shall be included and approved in the construction plans before a Building permit is issued; 9) that prior to scheduling the roof deck inspection, a licensed surveyor shall shoot the height of the roof ridge (33'-2" as measured from the average top of curb elevation of+24.07') and provide certification of that height to the Building Department; 10) that prior to scheduling the foundation inspection a licensed surveyor shall locate the property corners and set the building footprint; 11) that prior to underfloor frame inspection the surveyor shall certify the first floor elevation of the new structure(s) and the various surveys shall be accepted by the City Engineer; 12) that during demolition of the existing residence, site preparation and construction of the new residence, the applicant shall use all applicable "best management practices" as identified in Burlingame's Storm Water Ordinance, to prevent erosion and off-site sedimentation of storm water runoff; 13) that demolition for removal of the existing structures and any grading or earth moving on the site shall not occur until a building permit has been issued and such site work shall be required to comply with all the regulations of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District; 14) that the conditions of the City Arborist, City Engineer, Recycling Specialist, Chief Building Official, NPDES Coordinator and Fire Marshal's August 2, 2005 memos shall be met; 15) that the project shall comply with the Construction and Demolition Debris Recycling Ordinance which requires affected demolition, new construction and alteration projects to submit a Waste Reduction Plan and meet recycling requirements; any partial or full demolition of a structure, interior or exterior, shall require a demolition permit; 16) that the applicant shall comply with Ordinance 4 1503, the City of Burlingame Storm Water Management and Discharge Control Ordinance; and 17) that the 5 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes March 27, 2006 project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building Code and California Fire Code, 2001 edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame. The motion was seconded by C. Vistica. Comment on the motion: opposed, not comfortable with a minimum width driveway for a 5 bedroom house, need adequate access; height not too tall for this style, needs a pitched roof, at the joint meeting the City Council and Planning Commission discussed height and other issues for design review, so will be discussing this allowance more in the future; in this case need to do more work on the driveway to be sure it is useable; the motion is based on a 9'-6" width from the face of the retaining wall, since the other side setback is fixed, could affect the width of the house, so they may be back before the Commission. Chair Auran called for a roll call vote on the motion to approve this project with the amended condition that the property line retaining wall and vegetation it supports be protected and the driveway be a minimum of 9'- 611 '-6" in width as measured from the face of the existing property line retaining wall. The motion passed on a 4-1 -0-2 (C. Brownrigg dissenting and C. Osterling and Terrones absent). Appeal procedures were advised. This item concluded at 8: 15 p.m. 5B. 1456 BERNAL AVENUE, ZONED R-1 — APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW FOR A NEW TWO- STORY SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING AND DETACHED GARAGE. (TONY LEUNG, APPLICANT AND PROPERTY OWNER; AND JAMES CHU, DESIGNER) ( 66 NOTICED) PROJECT PLANNER: ERICA STROHMEIER Reference staff report March 27, 2006, with attachments. Plr Hurin presented the report, reviewed criteria and staff comments. Fifteen conditions were suggested for consideration. CP Monroe received clarification from the designer noting that the roof over the bay window at the living room will be copper, condition #1 will be amended to reflect this clarification. Chair Auran opened the public hearing. Tony Leung, applicant and property owner, was available to answer questions. Mary Frances Nappi, 1452 Bernal Avenue, noted that she met with the applicant to discuss the issues listed in her letter dated March 27, 2006, feel that the issues about retaining and protecting the existing hedge and ivy at the property line can be worked out with the applicant; there is no agreement about the proposed balcony at the rear of the house, would like to see a decorative wrought iron balcony off the master bedroom instead of a full balcony, feel privacy will be lost with a full balcony, will leave it up to the Commission for direction on the balcony. Applicant noted that he would like to have the balcony as proposed since it will add value to the property. Commission noted that the freestanding trellises, as requested by the neighbor, would help to provide privacy to the neighbor's rear yard and pool. There were no further comments and the public hearing was closed. Commission discussion: Commission should not get involved with the trellises, this should be worked out between the applicant and neighbor, concern about drainage will be addressed by the Public Works Department at time of building permit submittal, should add a condition for protection of the existing hedge and ivy in the neighbor's yard. C. Deal moved to approve the application, by resolution, with the following amended conditions: 1) that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department date stamped March 7, 2006, sheets A. I through A.7, Ll and Boundary and Topographic Survey, and that the roof material above the bay window in the living room shall be copper; and that any changes to the footprint or floor area of the 6 Item �I1 Consentn1 ar < % ^� � h��b ti �• // y a �. ° w ♦ r,�r�� � h k j'y1 . 0 PROJECT , 1 Balboa Ave1 City of Burlingame Item # 5a Design Review and Special Permits for Height and Declining Height Action Calendar Envelope for a New Single Family Dwelling Address: 1416 Balboa Avenue Meeting Date: 3/27/06 Request: Design review and special permits for height and declining height envelope for a new two-story single family dwelling with a detached garage. Applicant/Designer: Catherine Anderson APN: 026-013-220 Property Owner: Clement and Eva Hung Lot Area: 7,000 SF General Plan Designation: Low Density Residential Zoning: R-1 CEQA Status: Article 19. Categorically Exempt per Section: 15303, Class 3 — (a) construction of a limited number of new, small facilities or structures including (a) one single family residence or a second dwelling unit in a residential zone. In urbanized areas, up to three single-family residences maybe constructed or converted under this exemption. History: September 26, 2005 Planning Commission Meeting: On September 26, 2005, the Planning Commission considered this project on its regular action calendar. At the conclusion of the hearing, the Planning Commission referred this application back to a design review consultant with additional direction given (see attached 9/26/05 Planning Commission minutes). The Commission noted that the following items were to be addressed: concerned about the amount of flat roof on the Tudor style building; there are discrepancies between the floor plans, roof plans and elevations; need more delineation on the building elevations to see the details of the building; consider a varied plate height to reduce the mass of the second floor and be more consistent with an authentic English Tudor style; and while the front and rear elevations work well, the side elevations are too massive. The applicant has been working with a design review consultant and has submitted revised plans date tamped February 13, 2006. The design review consultant's recommendation is attached. February 27, 2006 Planning Commission Meeting: On February 27, 2006, the Planning Commission considered a revised proposal for this project as recommended by the design review consultant (refer to attached 2/27/06 Planning Commission minutes). At the conclusion of the hearing, the Planning Commission, by a 7-0 voice vote, continued the hearing on this item and asked the applicant to address the following issues. The item was set to return on the consent calendar when the requested changes had been made and plan checked. • Details of the second floor dormer with the window on the right elevation needs to be refined, the layout of the trim boards should be consistent with the other dormers; • Consider shifting the detached garage to the right by 2'-0", this would help increase the useable rear yard space; • Suggest using London Plane trees rather than English Plain trees at the front, this species would be a better compliment to the Tudor style; • The garage vocabulary with the arched roof over the round top vent does not match the vocabulary of the house, roof element and vent should be eliminated; • Skylights need to be tinted; • Like the leaded glass window above the dining room window, would be nice for the dining room window to be leaded glass, will leave up to designer and property owners to decide if it can be incorporated into the design; • Applicant needs to address the concerns noted with the driveway width and slope; there appears to be a discrepancy on the plans regarding the driveway width, 10'-6" between house and property line shown on the site plan, 10'-0" shown on building elevations; clarify driveway location, width and slope, there appears to be 18 inches between the edge of the driveway and the side property line, should increase driveway width by 6 inches `' towards the property line to make it easier and safer for the residents to use. Design Review and Special Permits for Height and Declining Height Envelope 1416 Balboa Avenue Current Proposed Revisions - Plans date stamped March 13, 2006: The applicant has submitted revised sheets A- 1 , Site Plan, A-2, landscape plan, A-6, side elevations, and A-8, garage plan and elevations, with revisions to address the above concerns. The following revisions were made to these plans: • Details of second floor dormer have been refined (refer to Sheet A-6, side elevation); • Detached garage shifted so that the right side setback is now 2' rather than 4' (refer to Sheet A-1 , site plan); • Trees called out as London Plane trees (refer to Sheet A-2, landscape plan); • Dormer window removed from garage on front elevation (refer to Sheet A-8, garage plan and elevations); • Driveway width clarified to be 10', with no planter strip (refer to Sheet A-1 , Site Plan).; The requirement for tinted skylights has been added as a condition of approval. The applicant and property owner decided not to add another leaded glass window on the front elevation at the dining room. Summary: The proposal is to demolish the existing one-story single family dwelling and construct a new two-story single family dwelling with a detached garage at 1416 Balboa Avenue, zoned R- 1 (adjusted to include March 2006 proposed revisions). The proposed house will have a total floor area of 3,692 SF (0.527 FAR), where the maximum floor area allowed is 3,740 SF (0.53 FAR). The proposal is 48 SF under the maximum floor area allowed on this lot. The lot coverage will be reduced with this proposal because the existing house has a deck over 30 inches above grade at the rear which will be removed. Since the deck is counted toward the lot coverage the current total is 40.8% (2,859 SF). With the new proposal, the proposed lot coverage will be 36.2% (2,536 SF) where 40% (2,800 SF) is the maximum allowed. As proposed 49 SF on the left side of the house encroaches into the declining height envelope and will require a special permit. The proposed height is 33'-2" where 30' is the maximum height allowed without a special permit, therefore the proposal will also require a special permit for height. 'here will be two covered parking spaces provided for this five-bedroom house in the detached garage (21 '-6" x 21 '- 6") located at the rear of the lot. One uncovered space (9' x 20') is provided in the driveway. The applicant is requesting the following: • Design review for a new two-story single family dwelling; • Special permit for height (33'-2" proposed where 30' is the maximum height allowed without a special permit); and • Special permit for declining height envelope (2'-6" x 19'-6" (49 SF) encroachment into declining height envelope on the left side.). Lot Area: 7,000 SF Existing Revised Proposal I Previous Proposal ` Allowed/Required Plans of 3/13/06 Plans of 2/13/06 SETBACKS - -...._.._....._...._........._........... Front (1 st flr): 1618" 20'-6" 15' (20'-7" block avg) (2nd flr): N/A No Change 31 -10" 20' Side (left): 5' 44' No Change (right): 10' 10' 4' _.._._...__......................... - - --._.._.._........_._...... .......- -. --- -- ...- ..... ----.,_ ..--- -- - --- .._._..-----..__ ...---- -- - ..._._.__._._..... - _.........._._..... _......-- ._..._._._._.........- Rear (I st flr): 75 ' 50' 15 ' (2nd flr): N/A No Change 53'-6" 20' _ _ ....- - -- -...- _... - -.... - --,...- - - -- ----._....... - - - .. ..._..---- -- -._......._.... -- ._..._............. --...-._...--- Lot Coverage: 2,859 SF 2536 SF 2 800 SF 40.8% No Change 36.2% 40% -- ..__._.....__....._....--- ......_......-----._..._......_...._._._...._._....._.... -- ._..._.._.. - -... FAR: 2 859 SF 3692 SF 3 740 SF 0.30 FAR E No Change 0.527 FAR 0.53 FAR -2- Design Review and Special Permits for Height and Declining Height Envelope 1416 Balboa Avenue Existing Revised Proposal Previous Proposal Allowed/Required a Plans of 3/13/06 Plans of 2/13/06 # of bedrooms.- N/A 5 5 .............. ........................------- ................. ............................................................................ ....................................................................... ........... ..................................................... .......................- ........................ Parking: 2 covered 2 covered N/A No Change (20' x 20') (20' x 20') I uncovered I uncovered (9' x 20') (9' x 20') .............................................. ...................------- .......... ........... -- . ---- ........ . ............................... .......................................... I Height: N/A 331-211 33'-2 v 30 .............................. . ..... ................................................................. ............ ......—.......................... ........ ...................................................... ................ ............................................ DHEnvelope: N/A Special Permit Special Permit Required2 Required See code 1 Special Pen-nit for height (33'-2" proposed where 30' is the maximum height allowed without a special permit). 2 Special Permit for declining height envelope on left side (49 SF, 2'-6" x 19'-6" = 49 SF), along the left side extends beyond the declining height envelope). Staff Comments: See attached. An arborist report has been provided for the trees located at the rear of the subject property. The report recommends removal of one tree only, the pine tree located at the rear of the proposed garage. The City Arborist concurs with the report; however, a tree removal pen-nit is still required. A tree removal permit was issued by the Parks Department on August 24, 2005 . Tree protection measures are included for all of the other trees on this site. Please see attached report and comments. Planning staff would note that on the revised plans date stamped February 13, 2006, the applicant did not correctly depict the declining height envelope or residence height. The plans have been revised by hand to properly document he average top of curb measurement for height as well as the point of departure for the declining height envelope so 'that the encroachment into the declining height envelope can be accurately documented. This is necessary for the issuance of the building permit where the construction drawings must match the plans approved by the Planning Commission. Planning staff would also note that a letter has been submitted from a former tenant residing at 1416 Balboa regarding the existing driveway conditions (see attached letter from Paul and Karen Lynch date stamped March 20, 2006). The letter describes the difficulty of using the existing driveway. It appears that there is a hedge along the right side property line that narrows the effective width of the driveway. A condition of approval has been added which requires that the hedge be removed and that only groundcover may be planted along the right side property line. August 8, 2005 Design Review Study Meeting: At the August 8, 2005, design review study meeting the Planning Commission voted to send this project to a design review consultant. The Planning Commission identified the following concerns with the project: • Half-timber on sides of house is too much, building looks a bit overdone, reduce the amount of half-timber boards along the sides of the house; • Have trouble following the plans, floor plans, building elevations and roof plan do not agree with each other, building elevations do not portray what is shown on the floor plans, elements seem to be missing on the plans, it appears that what is drawn can-not be built; go through all of the plans so that they coordinate with each other; • Clarify plate heights (finished floor to top of plate) on first and second floors, provide dimensions on building elevations; and 6 There appears to be errors and omissions on the landscape plan, please carefully review landscape plan and clarify; automatic irrigation should be incorporated. -3- Design Review and Special Permits for Height and Declining Height Envelope 1416 Balboa Avenue Analysis and Recommendation by Design Reviewer (dated February 15, 2006): The design reviewer met with the applicant to discuss the Planning Commission's additional concerns with the project. In a letter dated February 15, 2006, the reviewer notes that through a series of meetings and faxes, he has reviewed numerous changes and revised ....1 gets of plans from September 2005, to the present. These comments reflect the plans date stamped February 13, 2006. The design reviewer comments that the house massing and scale sits back from the street and is broken up by dormers and varied roof shapes and elevation treatment. He notes that the style is compatible with the surrounding area and the new design with a detached garage is compatible with the rear parking pattern that exists throughout the neighborhood. The design reviewer notes that through a series of resubmittals, the revised plans have been corrected and clarified to communicate the design much better than the original confusing plans. Many design changes have happened over a period of months to respond the comments; the design has been improved and made more consistent. The massing and bulk of the structure is in keeping with other new structures in the neighborhood and is broken up with gables and off-sets. The steep English style roof is pleasing and has been improved with less flat roof and a more authentic look. Intricate and interesting half timber detailing on the elevations adds to the authentic look and the windows and detailing have been improved. The elevations are now more consistent and nicely detailed on all sides. In addition, he notes that the roof lines have been improved and corrected, windows and trims clarified, and the half- timbering has been reduced somewhat on the sides. The roof shape, previously truncated and sliced off at 6 inches below the maximum height in an attempt to avoid applying for a special permit for height have been changed. The new roof is higher by three feet, but only at the peak, and a height exception is now required. He believes this is a real improvement over previous "sliced-off' design and he fully supports the special permit allowing slightly greater eight above the 30' maximum. (Planning staff would note that the declining height envelope exception on the second ,----iloor is virtually the same so was not affected by increasing the height of the roof.) In summary, the designer reviewer notes that the designer has made many changes to respond to comment of the Commission and suggestions of the design review consultant. The design and the drawing have been corrected and improved dramatically since the first submittal many months ago. He recommends approval of the resubmitted design and support for the special permit for height. Design Review Criteria: The criteria for design review as established in Ordinance No. 1591 adopted by the Council on April 20, 1998 are outlined as follows: 1 . Compatibility of the architectural style with that of the existing character of the neighborhood; 2. Respect for the parking and garage patterns in the neighborhood; 3. Architectural style and mass and bulk of structure; 4. Interface of the proposed structure with the structures on adjacent properties; and 5. Landscaping and its proportion to mass and bulk of structural components. Findings: Based on the findings stated in the attached minutes of the Planning Commission's February 27, 2006, action meeting, that the with the suggested changes, the proposed new two-story house with detached garage is well- designed and will improve the character of the block and enhance the design of the community, the project is found to be compatible with the requirements of the City's five design review guidelines. Findings for a Special Permit: In order to grant a special permit for building height and declining height envelope, the Planning Commission must find that the following conditions exist on the property (Code Section 25.51 .020 a-d): -4- Design Review and Special Permits for Height and Declining Height Envelope 1416 Balboa Avenue (a) The blend of mass, scale and dominant structural characteristics of the new construction or addition are consistent with the existing structure's design and with the existing street and neighborhood; (b) The variety of roof line, facade, exterior finish materials and elevations of the proposed new structure or addition are consistent with the existing structure, street and neighborhood; (c) The proposed project is consistent with the residential design guidelines adopted by the city; and (d) Removal of any trees located within the footprint of any new structure or addition is necessary and is consistent with the city's reforestation requirements, and the mitigation for the removal that is proposed is appropriate. Special Permit Findings for Building Height: Based on the findings stated in the attached minutes of the Planning Commission's February 27, 2006, public meeting, that the proposed 33'-2" roof height enhances the Tudor style of the building, the plate heights have been reduced to reduce the project's mass and bulk, and that the area exceeding 30'-0" in height measures 217 SF in area at the center of the roof, the project is found to be compatible with the special permit criteria listed above. Special Permit Findings for Declining Height Envelope: Based on the findings stated in the attached minutes of the Planning Commissions February 27, 2006 action meeting, that only 49 SF (2'-6" x 19'-6" extends beyond the declining height envelope second story setback on the left side of the proposed structure, and the articulation provided by the encroachment enhances the design of the building, the project is found to be compatible with the special permit criteria listed above. Planning Commission Action: The Planning Commission should hold a public hearing. Affirmative action should be by resolution and include findings made for design review and special permits, and the reasons for any action should be clearly stated. At the public hearing the following conditions should be considered: 1 . that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department date stamped March 13, 2006, sheets A-1 ,A-2, A-6 and A-8, and date stamped February 13, 2006, sheets A-3, A-4, A-5, A-7 and T- 1 ; with wood windows with simulated true divided lites, including an encroachment into the left side declining height envelope of 2'-6" x 19'-6" (49 SF) and a building height of 33'-2" as measured from the average top of curb elevation (24.07'), and that any changes to the footprint or floor area of the building shall require an amendment to this permit; 2. that the tree protection measures noted in the July 28, 2005 arborist report by Mayne Tree Expert Company shall be installed and inspected by the City Arborist prior to commencing demolition or construction on the subject property; 3. that all of the proposed skylights shall be tinted; 4. that the existing hedge along the driveway side property line shall be removed; and planting along the property line edge between the driveway and the house shall be limited to ground cover. 5. that any changes to the size or envelope of the first or second floors, which would include adding or enlarging a dormer(s), moving or changing windows and architectural features or changing the roof height or pitch, shall be subject to design review; '*`b. that prior to scheduling the framing inspection, the project architect, engineer or other licensed professional shall provide architectural certification that the architectural details such as window locations and bays are -5- Design Review and Special Permits for Height and Declining Height Envelope 1416 Balboa Avenue built as shown on the approved plans; if there is no licensed professional involved in the project, the property owner or contractor shall provide the certification under penalty of perjury; certifications shall be submitted to the Building Department; 7. that prior to final inspection, Planning Department staff will inspect and note compliance of the architectural details (trim materials, window type, etc.) to verify that the project has been built according to the approved Planning and Building plans; all new windows shall be true divided light wood windows and shall contain a wood stucco-mould trim to match the existing trim as close as possible; 8. that all air ducts, plumbing vents, and flues shall be combined, where possible, to a single termination and installed on the portions of the roof not visible from the street; and that these venting details shall be included and approved in the construction plans before a Building permit is issued; 9. that prior to scheduling the roof deck inspection, a licensed surveyor shall shoot the height of the roof ridge (33'-2" as measured from the average top of curb elevation of+24.07') and provide certification of that height to the Building Department; 10. that prior to scheduling the foundation inspection a licensed surveyor shall locate the property corners and set the building footprint; 11 . that prior to underfloor frame inspection the surveyor shall certify the first floor elevation of the new structure(s) and the various surveys shall be accepted by the City Engineer; 12. that during demolition of the existing residence, site preparation and construction of the new residence, the applicant shall use all applicable "best management practices" as identified in Burlingame's Storm Water �- Ordinance, to prevent erosion and off-site sedimentation of storm water runoff; 13. that demolition for removal of the existing structures and any grading or earth moving on the site shall not occur until a building permit has been issued and such site work shall be required to comply with all the regulations of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District; 14. that the conditions of the City Arborist, City Engineer, Recycling Specialist, Chief Building Official, NPDES Coordinator and Fire Marshal's August 2, 2005 memos shall be met; 15. that the project shall comply with the Construction and Demolition Debris Recycling Ordinance which requires affected demolition, new construction and alteration projects to submit a Waste Reduction Plan and meet recycling requirements; any partial or full demolition of a structure, interior or exterior, shall require a demolition permit; 16. that the applicant shall comply with Ordinance 1503, the City of Burlingame Storm Water Management and Discharge Control Ordinance; and 17. that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building Code and California Fire Code, 2001 edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame. Maureen Brooks ,nior Planner c: Catherine Anderson, applicant and designer -6- LYNCH 2845 CANYON ROAD,BURLINGAME,CA 94010 March 20,2006 RECEIVED Planning Commission MAR 2 0 2006 Burlingame City Hall 501 Primrose Road Burlingame,CA 94010 CITYBURLINGAME PLAN NING DEPT. RE: 1416 Balboa Avenue—Parking VIA Email Dear Planning Commission, My husband Paul and I rented 1416 Balboa Avenue from April 22,2005—December 31, 2005 while we underwent construction on our home. I am writing this letter to address the concerns of the off-street parking and driveway conditions at this residence. While the residence boasts a two car garage,during our tenancy,we were unable to park our vehicles in the garage. The driveway was too narrow for my company car (2001 Ford Taurus), and for our SUV (1998 Chevrolet Tahoe) as the side mirrors hit the side of the house and the adjoining hedge on the south side of the property. The width of each vehicle,from side mirror to side mirror on each vehicle is as follows: 1998 Chevy Tahoe—7 ft, 9 inches,2001 Ford Taurus: 6 ft, 8 inches, and 2003 Chevy Silverado —7 ft, 9 inches; I believe the width of the driveway is 10 feet. 1 did manage to pull the SUV completely into the driveway once, but I had,to pull both side mirrors in toward the vehicle so that I could clear the retaining wall, the house and hedge. It was extremely difficult to back out of the driveway as I was unable to use the side mirrors to guide me and had to rely on the rearview mirror. My husband was able to pull his company truck(2003 Chevrolet Silverado) into the driveway, but again, had to pull in both side mirrors completely and rely solely on the rearview mirror as well. Parking in the driveway was extremely tricky, so we parked two (2) cars directly in front of the house, and Paul's company truck in the driveway (sloped portion). When the driveway gate was closed, there was not enough room to open the vehicle doors so that one could get out of the vehicle and open the gate. The overflow of parking from the apartment buildings located on EI Camino Real continuously spilled onto the 1400 block of Balboa. Many cars parked on the lip of the driveway, which made pulling out of the driveway more difficult due to maneuvering around these parked vehicles, as well as limited visibility of cars traveling north and south along Balboa Avenue. On numerous occasions there was not enough street parking and I would have to pull (partially)into the driveway—the car blocking park of the sidewalk as the car doors on both the Taurus and Tahoe could not be opened without hitting the retaining wall (driver's side) and exit from the passenger side was impossible. On the occasions where I pulled in so the car was off the driveway, I would have to climb up onto the retaining wall. Both cars have dent damage on the driver's side door from opening against the retaining wall. Balboa Avenue is a lovely street, but it is too narrow, and there is a high volume of cars that use it as an alternative to EI Camino Real. We were the victims of a hit-and-run on October 10, 2005 when another vehicle came too close to our parked vehicle and ripped the driver's side view mirror off. I feel the planning commission needs to take a good look at the current driveway situation at 1416 Balboa and determine the best solution to ensure that the driveway in the proposed new construction will be put to good use. Thank you, Paul and Karen Lynch _ "Wzylk5 /fIr- RECEIVED MAR 13 2006 6so 650March 13, 2006 CITY OF BURUNGAME LOMApLANNING DEPT. VERDE PALO ALTO Maureen Brooks CA 94306 City of Burlingame Planning Division 501 Primrose Road P: Burlingame, CA 650 424 8570 f: Dear Maureen, 650 424 The following are corrections on action items addressed in the City Council 1901 Meeting Monday, March 1 , 2006. e-mail: -ounjwL 1 . Driveway width clarification ; See A-1 , A-5 Acom 2. Driveway material and landscape tree alternate, See A-2 3. Exterior wood treatment at 2nd floor gable roof at Bath; See A- 6 4. Removal of dormer window on garage elevation; See A-8 5. Garage location moved to right setback by 2' -0": See A-1 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes August 8, 2005 CA Anderson noted that the applicant sells a wide variety of goods that can be advertised in this space, such as the Wall Street Journal, and could meet with the Planning Department to discuss opportunities. �rX. DESIGN REVIEW STUDY ITEMS 9. 1416 BALBOA AVENUE, ZONED R-1 — APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW, SPECIAL PERMIT FOR BUILDING HEIGHT AND DECLINING HEIGHT ENVELOPE FOR A NEW, TWO-STORY SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING AND DETACHED GARAGE (CATHERINE ANDERSON, APPLICANT AND DESIGNER; CLEMENT & EVA HUNG, PROPERTY OWNERS) (67 NOTICED) PROJECT PLANNER: CATHERINE BARBER Plr Hurin briefly presented the project description. There were no questions of staff. Chair Auran opened the public comment. Catherine Anderson, designer, 650 Loma Verde Avenue, Palo Alto, was available to answer questions. Commissioners noted that the proposed design is charming and heading in the right direction, like the half-timbered look; special permits for building height and declining height envelope are acceptable because this is a sloping lot and it allows the design to be enhanced. Commissioners made the following comments: • Half-timber on sides of house is too much, building looks a bit overdone, reduce the amount of half- timber boards along the sides of the house; • Have trouble following the plans, floor plans, building elevations and roof plan do not agree with each other, building elevations do not portray what is shown on the floor plans, elements seem to be missing on the plans, it appears that what is drawn cannot be built; go through all of the plans so that they coordinate with each other; • Clarify plate heights (finished floor to top of plate) on first and second floors, provide dimensions on building elevations; and • There appears to be errors and omissions on the landscape plan, please carefully review landscape plan and clarify; automatic irrigation should be incorporated. Commission noted that this project is headed in the right direction, but feel this project is a good candidate for a design review consultant to help with the inconsistencies and specifics of the project. There were no other comments from the floor and the public hearing was closed. C. Deal made a motion to send this project to a design reviewer with the comments made. This motion was seconded by C. Keighran. Chair Auran called for a vote on the motion to refer this item to a design review consultant with direction and comment provided. The motion passed on a voice vote 5-0-2 (Cers. Brownrigg and Vistica absent). The Planning Commission's action is advisory and not appealable. This item concluded at 9:05 p.m. 9 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes February 27, 2006 VII. ACTION ITEMS Consent Calendar - Items on the consent calendar are considered to be routine. They are acted on simultaneously unless separate discussion and/or action is requested by the applicant, a member of the public or a commissioner prior to the time the commission votes on the motion to adopt. There are no consent calendar items. VIII. REGULAR ACTION ITEM 3. 1416 BALBOA AVENUE, ZONED R-1 - APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW AND SPECIAL PERMITS FOR HEIGHT AND DECLINING HEIGHT ENVELOPE FOR A NEW, TWO-STORY SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING AND DETACHED GARAGE (CATHERINE ANDERSON, APPLICANT AND DESIGNER; CLEMENT & EVA HUNG PROPERTY OWNERS) (67 NOTICED) PROJECT PLANNER: MAUREEN BROOKS Reference staff report February 27, 2006, with attachments. CP Monroe presented the report, reviewed criteria and staff comments. Fifteen conditions were suggested for consideration. Chair Auran opened the public hearing. Catherine Anderson, designer, 650 Loma Verde Avenue, Palo Alto, was available to answer questions. Commission noted that this is a much improved project, the design review process worked well for this project; want to make sure that the termination at the top of the roof where the roof ridge meets the flat portion of the roof does not contain a curb, need a ridge shingle along the edge of the flat roof. Commission asked why the detached garage was setback 4'-0" from the rear and side property lines; designer noted that the garage was set back from the rear property line in order to protect �- existing trees and their root systems. Commission noted that the proposed English Plain trees proposed at the front of the property are too close together, in addition the landscape plans are difficult to understand, the flagstone and concrete is too busy, what is happening with the paving at the front? The designer commented that the English Plain tree is similar to a Sycamore, if manicured and controlled well it can be a nice small shade tree in keeping with the Tudor style, have seen this species in several gardens spaced 6 to 10 feet apart. Commission noted that this style typically generates a stoop at the front of the house and looses the porch element, the design guidelines encourage porches in the design, this design makes the house inward looking, style does not speak to the street with a small porch, however am not requiring the porch to be revised with this project. Commission asked the designer to clarify the type of window proposed; designer noted that simulated true divided light wood windows with metal cladding on the exterior will be used. Commission asked the designer to clarify the vent on the front elevation; designer noted that the vent will be metal with a wood lentil above and stone below, the buildings' exterior will be stucco with stone showing through. Ignac and Edith Sperman, 1417 Balboa Avenue; Pat Giorni, 1445 Balboa Avenue and with a letter submitted from John and Anne Fallon, 1412 Balboa Avenue; noted the following concerns with the project: the existing driveway is narrow and steep, will the new driveway be the same size and slope, current residents don't use the driveway because it is so narrow and steep, as a result cars are parked on the street, current residents have three big vehicles, two of their cars are parked in the street, concern is that if the proposed driveway is the same width and slope it will not get used, street is narrow and essentially a one-way street, parking on Balboa Avenue is a problem,; concerned with the height of the building, 32'-2" previously proposed, now 33'-2" is proposed, house got taller; this is a large house and does not fit into the neighborhood, no exceptions to building height or declining height envelope should be granted, submitted photographs of the existing site, prepared a model of the original and revised designs, the roofline is 3 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes February 27, 2006 complicated and problematic; concerned with having a flat roof on a Tudor style house, the September 26, 2005, Planning Commission Minutes note that the Commission was concerned with the amount of flat roof on this project, don't see significant changes made to the flat roof; the propose house will be 3' taller than the house on the right and T taller than the house on the left, concerned with the mass and bulk of the building; concerned with the two tall black acacia trees at the rear of the lot, these trees shed a lot and cause problems with clogging gutters and drainage, without gutters working property water will drain to the neighbors, proposed house will be 4' from the T tall fence, will be hard to clean gutters; plans say wood windows will be used, but designer noted that metal clad windows are proposed, would like to see wood windows used; would like to see story poles installed to show the envelope of the building; do not agree with the design review analysis, the house is more attractive now, however it does not belong on this small lot; the fabric of this block has changed significantly because of several construction projects, the new house recently built at 1453 Balboa Avenue is too big, during the review of that project the Commission noted that the neighbors would have to see this house for the rest of their lives so it should be better integrated into the neighborhood; this project should be sent back to the design review consultant or deny it without prejudice because of the site conditions. Design noted that the driveway width and slope is approximately the same as existing, however the driveway widens towards the rear of the lot because the house steps back, driveway will be 10'-6" in width and wide enough to use, will be able to park three cars on the property. Commission noted that it appears that the current residents do not find the driveway convenient to use because it is steep, a wider driveway will encourage use. Commission asked how the flat roof will be drained; designer noted that the details have not yet been worked out, however the flat roof will have a slight pitch so that water is directed to a drain at the rear. Commission noted that the flat roof could have been avoided by reducing the pitch, the change in pitch would not be that visible, flat roof design will be more costly to build and may cause the roof to leak; designer noted that she came up with several roof designs, including a reduced pitch, but the design review consultant recommended against it because a reduced pitch would not be as consistent with the Tudor style. Clement Hung, property owner, noted that he heard the neighbors concerns with the height, asked the designer to reduce the overall building height to 30', but design review consultant recommended against it, based on his recommendation the height was increased. There were no further comments and the public hearing was closed. C. Deal noted that the project has come a long way, the design review process worked well for this project, special permit for height is appropriate because this property is located at the crest of the block, actual house is not over 30' tall as measured from adjacent grade, there are valid findings for the special permit because of the architectural style of the house, do not need to see story poles for this house because there are no view blockage issues, and for these reasons moved to approve the application, by resolution with conditions. The motion was seconded by C. Cauchi. Comment on the motion: still concerned about the landscaping, landscape plan is confusing, proposed landscaping does not do the best job to screen the new house, would like to see project continued to have noted changes incorporated and a revised landscape plan. Maker of the motion and second agreed to continue the project as along as there are no new issues raised. C. Deal made a motion to continue this item on the consent calendar to a time when the following revisions have been made and plan checked. This motion was seconded by C. Osterling. 4 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes February 27, 2006 ■ details of the second floor dormer with the window on the right elevation needs to be refined, the layout of the trim boards should be consistent with the other dormers; ■ consider shifting the detached garage to the right by T-0", this would help increase the useable rear yard space; ■ suggest using London Plane trees rather than English Plain trees at the front, this species would be a better compliment to the Tudor style; ■ the garage vocabulary with the arched roof over the round top vent does not match the vocabulary of the house, roof element and vent should be eliminated; ■ skylights need to be tinted; ■ like the leaded glass window above the dining room window, would be nice for the dining room window to be leaded glass, will leave up to designer and property owners to decide if it can be incorporated into the design; ■ applicant needs to address the concerns noted with the driveway width and slope; there appears to be a discrepancy on the plans regarding the driveway width, 10'-6" between house and property line shown on the site plan, 10'-0" shown on building elevations; clarify driveway location, width and slope, there appears to be 18 inches between the edge of the driveway and the side property line, should increase driveway width by 6 inches towards the property line to make it easier and safer for the residents to use. Chair Auran called for a voice vote on the motion to continue this item on the consent calendar to a time when the revisions as directed have been made and plan checked and there is space on the agenda. The motion passed on a 7-0 voice vote. The Planning Commission's action is advisory and not appealable. This item concluded at 8 : 10 p.m. 11'., 4. 1329 DE SOTO AV\APPRVED D R-1 — APPLICATION F DESIGN REVIEW AMENDMENT TO A PREVIOUSLY PROJECT FOR A NEW S GLE FAMILYDWELLING AND DETACHED GAROSNAN, APPLICANT AND P OPERTY OWNER; AND MARK %C�ir BERTSON DESOTICED PROJECT PLANNER: RICA STROHMEIER Auran and C. Osterling recused mselves from this item because the ive within 500 feet of the prop . They stepped down from the da and left the chambers. Referenc staff report February 27, 2006, with att hments. Plr Hurin presented the rep , reviewed criteria and staff co ents. Fifteen conditions were sugge ed for consideration. Vice-chair Bro gg opened the public hearing. The licant was not present to answer estions. Commission note at photographs indicate that the design o the porch columns were changed from urnL columns (originally a roved) to square columns, however the vised plans do not reflect this chang . addition, landscaping at e front of the lot is also being revised to * clude more turf, but this change is n noted in the application. N d further clarification from the applican egarding several issues. There were no further comments and the blic hearing was closed. Vice-chair Brownrigg noted that be use further clarification is needed from t applicant, he made a motion to move this item to the end of the ag da to follow Item #10 when the appli nt might be present. The motion was seconded by C. Cauchi. Comment on the motion: if this project is continued, do not want to see it bum another application off the p J p pp next agenda. 5 1412 Balboa Ave. Burlingame Calif 94010 2-27-2006 City of Burlingame, Planning Department 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, Calif. 94010 Dear Planning Commission, Ref. Site: 1416 Balboa Avenue Anne and I have lived at 1412 Balboa Ave for the past 36 years. We are on the south side of the existing single story house at 1416 Balboa. Our request of the Planning Commission is that no variances of overall height and declining height envelope be allowed for the new dwelling atl416 Balboa Ave. This monster house belongs on a Golf course with plenty of space around it. It does not fit in on Balboa Avenue. Please deliver a copy of this letter to each Planning Commissioner prior to the Planning Meeting on Monday, 2-27-2006. Sincerely, John G. Fallon Anne M. Fallon ------- --- -- -- ----- ==-- WINGES ' ARCHITECTS — MEMO: Date: 2-15-2006 Planning Commission City of Burlingame 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, CA 94010 Re: 1416 Balboa Ave. — Hung Residence I have visited the site, the street and the surrounding neighborhood and reviewed the initial plans. I have had meetings, faxes and have reviewed numerous changes and revised sets of plans from Sept 2005 to the present. The following comments pertain to the latest revised set stamped Feb. 13, 2006. 1 . Compatibility of the architectural style with that of the existing neighborhood: • The neighborhood and street are a collection of eclectic styles. • The house massing and scale sits back from street and is broken up by dormers and varied roof shapes and elevation treatment. • This new house will replace the current unattractive conditions and will improve the neighborhood appearance and quality. • The style is compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. 2. Respect the Parking and Garage Patterns in the Neighborhood: • The existing attached garage is being replaced with a new 2 car free standing garage at the rear of the property. The parking pattern in this neighborhood is a mix of front and rear garages. • The new design is compatible with the rear parking pattern that exists throughout the neighborhood. 3. Architectural Style Mass and Bulk of the Structure and Internal Consistency of the Design. • Through a series of many re-submittals, the revised plans have been corrected, clarified and communicate the design much better than the original confusing plans. Many design changes have happened over a period of months to respond to the comments. The design has been improved and made more consistent. • The massing and bulk of the structure is in keeping with other new structures in the neighborhood. The massing is broken up with gables and off-sets. The steep English style roof design is pleasing and has been improved with less flat roof and a more authentic look. Intricate and interesting half timber detailing on the elevations adds to the design. Windows and detailing have been improved. • The plan is efficient and functional with minimal circulation space and ample rooms. • The elevations are now more consistent and nicely detailed on all sides. • The roof lines have been improved and corrected, windows and trims have been clarified, and the half-timbering has been somewhat reduced on the sides. I believe the amount of half timbering shown is appropriate to the overall design. WINGES ARCHITECTS, INC 1290 HOWARD AVE SUITE 311, BURLINGAME, CA 94010 / FAX (650) 3431291 / inlo@wingesaia.crom / TEL,(650) 3431101 ARCHITECTURE / MASTER PLANNING / INTERIOR ARCHITECTURE / SPACE PLANNING / DESIGN COUNSELING WINGES 2 ARCHITECTS • Roof plan now coordinates with the elevations and drafting has been improved and corrected. The roof shape, previously truncated and sliced off at 6" below the maximum height limit in attempt to avoid applying for a special height permit, has been changed. The new roof is higher by 2 feet, but only at the peak. I believe this is a real improvement over previous "sliced off" designs and I fully support the special permit allowing slightly greater height above the 30' maximum. 4. Interface of the Proposed Structure with the Adjacent Structures to Each Side: • The main ridges and form of the building run parallel to the long site dimension, allowing for less bulk and height at the sides. • There will be some impacts to the neighboring properties for sun and the change in mass from the existing conditions, due to the higher and larger structure; however the design is within the spirit of the design guidelines. • The building is set back appropriately and highest mass is at the center of the property. 5. Landscaping and Its Proportion to the Mass and Bulk of Structural Components: • Landscaping and site plan have been re-labeled and corrected. • Drafting corrections and clarification of what happens at the entries has been added. • The use of high quality paving materials, steps, and the curving informal front walkways are compatible with the style of the house. • Location of planting and overall site plan design seem well handled and appropriate. Summary: The designer and applicant have made many changes to respond to comments of the Commission and suggestions of the design review. The design and the drawings have been corrected and improved dramatically since the first submittal many months ago. I recommend approval of the re-submitted design and support the special height permit. Jerry L. Winges, AIA Principal WINGES ARCHITECTS, INC. 1290 HOWARD AVE. SUITE 311, BURLINGAME, CA 94010 / FAX. (650) 343-1291 / info@wingesaia-com / TEL: (650) 343-1101 ARCHITECTURE / MASTER PLANNING / INTERIOR ARCHITECTURE / SPACE PLANNING / DESIGN COUNSELING City of Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes September 26, 2005 4. 1416 BALBOA AVENUE, ZONED R-1 — APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW AND SPECIAL PERMITS FOR HEIGHT AND DECLINING HEIGHT ENVELOPE FOR A NEW, TWO-STORY SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING AND DETACHED GARAGE (CATHERINE ANDERSON, APPLICANT AND DESIGNER; CLEMENT & EVA HUNG PROPERTY OWNERS) (67 NOTICED) PROJECT PLANNER: MAUREEN BROOKS Reference staff report September 26, 2005, with attachments. Plr Hurin presented the report, reviewed criteria and staff comments. Fifteen conditions were suggested for consideration. Commission asked staff to clarify the proposed building height, is it 32'-2" or 31 '-11 "? Staff verified that with the revised plans, the proposed height is 32'-2". There were no further questions of staff. Chair Auran opened the public hearing. Catherine Anderson, designer, was available to answer questions. Commission noted that the project has improved, overall design concept has always been good, but that there are several concerns which still need to be addressed. Pat Giorni, 1445 Balboa Avenue, Mrs. Sperman, 1417 Balboa Avenue and Mrs. Leri, 2701 Hillside Drive, expressed concerns with the project; there are a number of neighbors here tonight that are concerned with the proposed height of the building, read and submitted letter expressing concerns from Donna Cerna, 1457 Balboa Avenue, concerned about new development changing the face of Burlingame, urge Commission not to approve special permit for height, proposed house is located on the highest point of Balboa Avenue, discussed the project with a friend who is a contractor and felt that the house will be massive, concerned with drainage from the increase in amount of roof area, most of the flat roof is over a hallway and laundry room, don't think a 12'-0" high ceiling is needed above these areas, roof looks like it was chopped off, proposed house is three times as large as the existing house; concerned that many new houses being built are not owner occupied but rather proposed by developers, would like to see story poles installed showing the envelope of the building, this is a modest block, the street is narrow and therefore the houses appear closer to each other, this street is a Fire Department emergency route but is rarely used because the street is so narrow; would like to see the second floor pushed further back despite its' 20' front setback, complicated roof pattern and rolling roof at front of house will be in your face, could move bulk of second floor towards the rear since there is more open space at the rear of the lot; house is so tall and will be close to side property line there is not enough room to use a ladder to clean gutters; look at all other Tudor style houses in the neighborhood and none of them had this much roof area; live across the street from this house, this block has changed dramatically with all of the recent construction, feel like we have been living on a construction site for the last 2-3 years, houses in Burlingame are getting bigger and taller, new houses are not compatible with the existing houses; developers are building big massive houses, living in a building bonanza, seems to be construction on every block in the city, houses being built are too big for the lots, there should be a moratorium on building new houses to stop and evaluate what is going on, it is getting out of hand; the 1400 block of Balboa has a potential of four houses to be built at the same time, this should be taken into consideration; talked to the property owners about the project, would not object to the project if no exceptions to the code were requested. There were no further comments and the public hearing was closed. Commission noted the following items to be addressed: • concerned about the amount of flat roof on the building, there is something wrong when there are so many flat roofs on a Tudor style; • there are still discrepancies between the floor plans, for example at staircase with windows, check �-- roof plans and building elevations, need to review all plans again to make sure all inconsistencies are corrected; 4 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes September 26, 2005 - shading technique on building elevations hides the details in the design, there is a lack of information, can't see the details on the exterior of the building, need more delineation; • concerned with having a consistent plate height in an English Tudor style, makes the second floor appear more massive, should consider varying the plate height for a more authentic look; - height, mass and bulk can be diminished by reducing some plate heights; and front and rear elevations work well, but side elevations are too massive. Commission comment: noted that the same set of rules apply to a property owner or developer, cannot differentiate between the two; we have special permits for building height for situations where the lot slopes upward, it is appropriate in this case, the architectural style of the house could be negatively impacted if this house were to be restricted to 30' in height. C. Deal made a motion to send this project back to a design review consultant with direction provided. The motion was seconded by C. Vistica. Chair Auran called for a voice vote on the motion to refer this project to a design review consultant. The motion passed on a 5-0-2 (Cers. Brownrigg and Osterling absent). Appeal procedures were advised. This item concluded at 8: 15 p.m. C. Vistica thanked the neighborhood residents for coming to the public hearing and for being involved in the process. IX. DESIGN REVIEW STUDY ITEMS 5. 1461 BE AVENUE, ZONED R-1 — PLICATION FOR DESIGN IEW AND SPECIAL PERMITS FOR EIGHT AND FOR AN ATTA ED GARAGE FORA NEW, T O-STORY SINGLE FAMILY DWELL (JERRY WINGES, APPLIC AND ARCHITECT, MARK KA HOSKING, PROPERTY OWNER 65 NOTICED PROJECT CT R: MAUREEN BROOK P Brooks briefly presented th roject description. TherXi estions of staff. Chair uran opened the public comme . Mark Hosking, per, and Jerry Winges, architect, ere available answer questions, property o ner noted that he has been a urlingame resident since 19 , would like t uild a new house and maintai arge rear yard for his childr would also like to preserve trees on site, a etached garage would reduce a rear yard space and wou eliminate several trees. Architect provide handout with neighborhood in rmation, summarized how project complies with the five aspects of the sidential design guidelines, fe design is compatible with t neighborhood and fits in well, footprint is aller than other houses on th lock, proposing smaller fo rint to preserve eenery on site, giving up 0 SF with this project because etached garage is not propo d, using steep ofs with dormers to get more ' t and air, this is an eclectic n ' borhood, using varying pl heights to ke the scale and mass down, usi true divided light windows t ughout; requesting a specia enmit to prese a the steep roof design, feel t t the proposed landscape desi enhances the property, the r yard landsca . g was designed around the isting oak tree; property own would like to have an atta ed garage, atta ed garage will have two sep to carriage style wooden door , each door is slightly different in style and are fset by 3'-6", plate height at a garage is brought down to duce impact of the attached garage, left side f house is set back further t educe impact on that neighbo driveway on the adjacent property to the righ rovides separation between e houses, noted that there is a neighborhood pattern of 8 foot separation betty n houses. 5 RECEIVED CpAIMUNICATION CEIYI D ITER MPA"TION SEP 2 2 2005 1412 Balboa Ave. OF STAFPWORr Burlingame CITY OF BURLWC"E Calif. 94010 PLANNING DEPT. September 19 2005 City of Burlingame, Planning Department 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, Calif. 94010 Dear Planning Commission, Ref. Site: 1416 Balboa Avenue Anne and I have lived at 1412 Balboa Ave for the past 36 years. We are on the south side of the existing single story house at 1416 Balboa. We enjoy the evening sun, which shines over the roof the present single story house. 1 . Our request of the Planning Commission is that no variances of overall height and declining height design be allowed for the new dwelling at1416 Balboa Ave. 2. That when work begins on the new house the Construction Company is aware that neighbors have to be able to access their driveways. In the past during construction in the area we have often been unable to get out our driveway or park in front of our residence. Please deliver a copy of this letter to each Planning Commissioner prior to the Planning Meeting on Monday, September 26, 2005. Sincerely, John G. Fallon Anne M. Fallon - ----- ---------------------- - September 26, 2005 Planning Commission City of Burlingame City Hall 501 Primrose Burlingame, CA 94010 Re: Meeting of September 26, 2005 - MONSTER Homes Dear Planning Commission: I had planned on being here this evening but woke up ill. I am truly concerned about the changing face of the Burlingame I have lived in all my life. I am in favor of improvement and realize change is inevitable, but I strongly feel that the Commission has a responsibility to see that it is-done properly and tastefully. If the new homes that are being proposed were scaled back somewhat - not so high, etc., they would not seem so super-sized and out of place in our existing neighborhoods. If all the new homes are being buil(rtotally within the codes - then let's get going and change the codes before the charm of Burlingame is completely gone. Thank you. Respectfully, Donna Cema 1457 Balboa Avenue Burlingame, CA 94010 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes August 8, 2005 IX. DESIGN REVIEW STUDY ITEMS 9. 1416 BALBOA AVENUE, ZONED R-1 — APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW, SPECIAL PERMIT FOR BUILDING HEIGHT AND DECLINING HEIGHT ENVELOPE FOR A NEW, TWO-STORY SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING AND DETACHED GARAGE (CATHERINE ANDERSON, APPLICANT AND DESIGNER; CLEMENT & EVA HUNG, PROPERTY OWNERS) (67 NOTICED) PROJECT PLANNER: CATHERINE BARBER Plr Hurin briefly presented the project description. There were no questions of staff. Chair Auran opened the public comment. Catherine Anderson, designer, 650 Loma Verde Avenue, Palo Alto, was available to answer questions. Commissioners noted that the proposed design is charming and heading in the right direction, like the half-timbered look; special permits for building height and declining height envelope are acceptable because this is a sloping lot and it allows the design to be enhanced. Commissioners made the following comments: • Half-timber on sides of house is too much, building looks a bit overdone, reduce the amount of half- timber boards along the sides of the house; • Have trouble following the plans, floor plans, building elevations and roof plan do not agree with each other, building elevations do not portray what is shown on the floor plans, elements seem to be missing on the plans, it appears that what is drawn cannot be built; go through all of the plans so that they coordinate with each other; • Clarify plate heights (finished floor to top of plate) on first and second floors, provide dimensions on building elevations; and • There appears to be errors and omissions on the landscape plan, please carefully review landscape plan and clarify; automatic irrigation should be incorporated. Commission noted that this project is headed in the right direction, but feel this project is a good candidate for a design review consultant to help with the inconsistencies and specifics of the project. There were no other comments from the floor and the public hearing was closed. C. Deal made a motion to send this project to a design reviewer with the comments made. This motion was seconded by C. Keighran. Chair Auran called for a vote on the motion to refer this item to a design review consultant with direction and comment provided. The motion passed on a voice vote 5-0-2 (Cers. Brownrigg and Vistica absent). The Planning Commission's action is advisory and not appealable. This item concluded at 9:05 p.m. 10 07/29/05 FRI 16 : 45 FAX 6505934443 IWAYNE TREE EXPERTS CO 1?002 I L Mayne Tree Expert Company, Inc. ES rAF9,ISHFD 1931 STATE CONTRACTOR"S LICENSE NO. 276793 GF ADUATE FORESTER CERTIFIED AR60RISTS PEST CONTROL ADVISORS AND OPERATORS KICHARD L. I II.NTINGTON 535 0PAGATO ROAD, STE.A PRESIDENT 3uly 28, 2005 SAN CARLO.S, CA 94070-6228 KEVIN R. KILL FY TELEPHONE: (650) 593.4400 OPERATIONS WNAOER FACSIMILE. (650) 5934443 EMAIL: info®mayaclrcc.com aa Hung fln Vanda Construction RECEIVED 419 Montera Avenue Burlingame, CA 94010 AUG - 1 2005 Re: 1416 Balboa Avenue, Burlingame CITY OF LAMLINGAME PLANN!NG DEPT. ')ear Mr. Hung: 1)n July 26, 2005, we met at the above referenced site to inspect trees with circum- erences of 48 inches and larger. A Removal Permit is required b) remove a Heritage 'free and if it is retained it requires protection. 'there are only 4 Heritage Trees at the site (see Site Plan). Tree No's. 1 and 3 were not :ouched as they are outside the fence line. However, their diameters were estimated. _ach tree was assigned a number which corresponds to the num ger on the site plan. =aCh tree was given a Condition percent from 1 to 100, which is a combination of 3eneral tree health and structure. There are remarks to explain the Condition and/or -ecommendations to mitigate problems. Tree Protection is also addressed as related to )roposed construction, Only one Heritage Tree is recommended for removal, No. 5. rree Protection needs to be installed on only one side as all trees are on the perimeter. Tnee Number 1, black acacia with a 63 inch estimated circumference: All of the, foliar crown/canopy is on the westerly side. A 50 percent condition rating is assigned to this tree. The comer of the proposed house appears to be 4 1/2 feet away and will impact less than 25 percent of the roots. Install protective fencing 3 feet from the trunk. Minor clearance pruning may be needed. arae Number 2, black acacia 51.3 inches in circumference: All of the foliar crown/canopy is on the southerly side. I have assigned a 60 percent condition rating to this tree. The tree will overhang the proposed lawn and barbl.que area. Minor impact is expected from landscape installation. Tree protection lencing should stay 5 feet away. 07/29/05 FRI 16:45 FAX 6505934443 MAYNE TREE EXPERTS CO 16003 Ilanda Construction/Hung 7-29-05, Pg. 2 Trcm Number 3, two-trunked Monterey cypress with an a pUrnated circum- Verence of 94 inches for each trunk. The tree forks at one foot, with the east trunk depressing utility lines. The tree has been routinely topped for line clearance and it has 160 percent condition rating. There are no impacts expected from the proposed construction as it will be about 20 feet away. Fence the tree off :`rom construction at 15 Feet, I recommend pruning and clearing wires and installing ij wii inch diameter ,:aide between the trunks. 'rr(-e Number 4, a Monterey pine 44.5 inches in circumference: This is not a ieftage Tree, but is included for reference. rnhe Number S. a Monterey pine 84.15 inches in circurnhirence: This tree has )een routinely topped for line clearance and now all growth is on the south and west Acrr s. Limbs are heavy, but pruning back for clearance of the proposed garage would ;tress the tree. The tree has pine pitch canker which is a slow rr oving disease. I •ecommend removal of this tree. Free Number 6, a catalpa on the street Fence off along the sidewalk and curb. Vo construction impacts are expected, but fencing should help reduce trunk impacts To n trucks and/or equipment entering the lot. In conclusion, I recommend inspection of the Tree Protection Fencing and all excavation Mthin the driplines of the Heritage Trees. I do not think any of the Heritage Trees wil oe significantly impacted. I think this report is accurate and based on sound irtoricultural principles and practices. Sincerely, <,OGVETY Opq Richard L. Huntington Certified Arborist WE #0119A ,� + Certified Forester #1925 C��RFD PRgO��S� RL-I:dcr City of Burlingame Planning Department 501 Primrose Road P(650) 558-7250 F(650) 696-3790 www.buraiggamz.org W�a om APPLICATION TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION WW-0 Type of application: Design Review_) Conditional Use Permit Variance Special Permit Other Parcel Number:QZr, ©1 7� 4! .ZS.--25 Project address: -- PR RTY OWNER P66 NT 47 Name: ame: �� - -- Address dress: 12�o2 �' City/State/Zip: 1 Cicy/State/Zip: C' . qy ( ): `t? ����6 �L} hone (w� IS 7� Sa---- Phone w (h): ch): l (fl r017 C3a — ©3 � ARCHITE T/D S GN R Name: (,c,3 `` D02�0 Address: Gi _ City/State/Zip: Please indicate with an asterisk Phone (w): the contact person for this i�knLNLTIZD ch)= 2 �- � JUN 2 3 2005 CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING DEPT. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: 1/4 1upo ��Kl AFFADAVIT/SIGNATURE: I hereby certify under penalty of perjury that the information given herein is true and correct to the best of knowledge and belief. Applicant's signature: Date_ I know about the proposed application and hereby authorize the above applicant to submit this application to the Planning Commission. Property owner's signature: - .7v., Date:_ Date submitted: PCAMFRM City of Burlingame Planning Department 501 Primrose Road P(650) 558-7250 F(650) 696-3790 www.burlin ag me.org CITY , CITY OF BURLINGAME E SPECIAL PERMIT APPLICATION The Planning Commission is required by law to make findings as defined by the City's Ordinance (Code Section 25.50). Your answers to the following questions can assist the Planning Commission in making the decision as to whether the findings can be made for your request. Please type or write neatly in ink. Refer to the back of this form for assistance with these questions. 1. Explain why the blend of mass, scale and dominant structural characteristics of the new construction or addition are consistent with the existing structure's design and with the existing street and neighborhood Ht H�F�r7 Af4D ,P(T?�x'7C M 74436U l fiAH-7C -CLQ l [S G( 2. Explain how the variety of roof line, facade, exterior finish ma erials and elevations of the proposed new structure or addition are consistent with the existing structure, street and neighborhood. WE W6E ��_ 'V(Vo /� -W VA-17> J7 3. How will the proposed project be consistent with the residential design guidelines adopted by the city (C.S. 25.57)? S16r - � P Npiss JZ, 4. Explain ho the removal of any trees located within the footprint of any new structure or addition is necessary and is consistent with the city's reforestation requirements. What mitigation is prop ed or the removalany Explain why this mitigation is appropriate. ' -14�' /�`���J SPECPERMT V z tgAT -tp4<rz--, tL Ge6Z9144,5 AT- SCMF�Wy Wim) SZP-FrI LAH0H T-T,7/-)r, kt-I 6 y OPI Ptnkf- 77-1)q--7--O�l qWS Ci�y of - - l lf•• �5�71' d a •�iJ(��:�y,i�•��� im'.��,. . . .m�+. ► ,� 0V , The Planning Commission is required bylaw to make findings as efined by the City's ordinance(Code Section 25.50). your answers to the following qucstions can assist the Planning Commission in tnaking the decision as to whether the findings can be made for your request. Please type or write neatly in ink. Refer to the back of this form for assistance with these questions. 1. Explain why the blend of mass, scale and dominant structural characteristics of the new construction or addition are consistent with the twisting structure's design and with the existing street and neighborhood arm f f Wish ateriais and elevations of 1. n how the v o roo ling facady exteriorfi ,n the proposed now structure or addition are consistent with the existing structum street and neighborhood 3. How will the proposed project be consistent with the residential design guidelines adopted by the city (GS. 25.57)? RECEIVE® JUL 1 F 2005 CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING DEPT. 4. Explain how the r emon l of wW trees located within (ke footprint of any new structure or addition is necessary and is Consistent with the city's reformsion requirements. What midgwion is proposed for the removal of any trees? Explain why this mitigation is appropride. 1 . Careful evaluation of the existing neighboring properties became the basis for initial design. The neighboring homes contain diversity and charm, consisting primarily of two stories, characterized with borrowed elements of period architecture. Scale was considered with primary (living area) and secondary (entrance) rooflines. Mass was addressed by pulling the house back from the existing property line, and gaining interior volume with high ceilings and lower plate lines. Landscaping enhanced the design with plant material and hardscape consistent with the Architecture; Subtle pathways served to divide the Garden Rooms and soften the structure as a whole. 2. Many of the neighboring homes reflect Tudor Style Architecture. Creating a residence influenced by Jacobean Style seemed appropriate. Earmarked with the use of plaster, stone and decorative wood elements, this home contains visual interest appropriate with existing properties, yet the scale not overwhelming to its neighbors. 3. This residence is composed of an articulation of forms, enhanced with decorative wood and stone elements appropriate with the architecture. The subtle arrangements of windows are important features of this design. An example can be seen in the large picture window in front with smaller leaded glass decorative window above clearly balanced by the windows to the right of the entrance. Rooflines reflect variety yet contain consistent _ slopes. Overall height blends with neighboring properties. Locating the garage in the rear reduces mass and scale, yet careful consideration was given to develop character in keeping with the main facade. Landscaping contributes to the design by separating yards, softening the structures and enhancing the property with scale, selection and treatment of plants throughout. 4. In the rear yard there are several spindly pine and acacia trimmed beyond cultivation. They are to be replaced with Car olina Laurel, forming a thick tall evergreen hedge giving privacy to both sides. This treatment is used again in boundaries separating neighboring properties. In addition three English Plain trees are used in front and side to separate driveway from front yard. By controlling the growth with seasonal trimming, the trees develop thick trunks and the limbs can be pleached together to create an arbor effect. Finally a decorative Magnolia places in the front lawn adds neighborhood beauty and further privacy to this residence. RECEIVED JUL 1 8 2005 CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING DEPT Project Comments Date: 08/2/05 To: ❑ City Engineer ❑ Recycling Specialist ❑ Chi Building Official ❑ Fire Marshal ity Arborist ❑ NPDES Coordinator ❑ City Attorney From: Planning Staff Subject: Request for design review and special permits for height and declining height envelope for a new two-story single family dwelling at 1416 Balboa Avenue, zoned R-1, APN: 026-013-220 Staff Review: T E t✓P !/ i3� G/LA.�.ri� ,� �tsrovG.y T.tf 6 .2G� �R L l�+bRns."t PGLocESS A, -036 /L6Q�. tC�p /26.(,. j�ptf.�Tvayr �o /t �d/s!r/L -tYt.�i S /JPB�.o65 Reviewed by`_�/ O Date: Project Comments Date: 06/28/2005 To: ❑ City Engineer X Recycling Specialist ❑ Chief Building Official ❑ Fire Marshal ❑ City Arborist ❑ NPDES Coordinator ❑ City Attorney From: Planning Staff Subject: Request for design review and special permit for height for a new two-story single family dwelling and detached garage at 1416 Balboa Avenue, zoned R-1, APN: 026-013-220 Staff Review: 07/05/2005 Applicant shall submit for approval a Waste Reduction Plan and recycling deposit for this and all covered projects prior to construction or permitting. Reviewed by: G/ .9 Date: -7- 6 — <D5 .. . . Project Comments 771 -- Date: 06/28/2005 To: City Engineer Recycling Specialist Chief Building Official Fire Marshal ® City Arborist ✓ NPDES Coordinator ® City Attorney From: Planning Staff Subject: Request for design review and special permit for height for a new two-story single family dwelling and detached garage at 1416 Balboa Avenue, zoned R-1 , APN : 026-013-220 Staff Review: 07/05/2005 Any construction project in the City, regardless of size, shall comply with the City NPDES permit requirement to prevent stormwater pollution including but not limited tc ensuring that all contractors implement construction Best Management Practices (BMPs) and erosion and sediment control measures during ALL phases of the construction project (including demolition) . Ensure that sufficient amount of erosion and sediment control measures are available on site at all times. The pubiic right of way/easement shall not be used as a construction staging and/or storage area and shall be free of construction debris at all times. Brochures and literatures on stormwater pollution prevention and BMPs are available for your review at the Planning and Building departments. Distribute to all project proponents. For additional assistance, contact Eva J . at 650/342-3727 . Date: 07/05/05 Reviewed by: �',, � � , Project Comments Date: 06/28/2005 To: W City Engineer ❑ Recycling Specialist ❑ Chief Building Official ❑ Fire Marshal ❑ City Arborist ❑ NPDES Coordinator ❑ City Attorney From : Planning Staff Subject: Request for design review and special permit for height for a new two-story single family dwelling and detached garage at 1416 Balboa Avenue, zoned R-1 , APN : 026-013-220 Staff Review: 07/05/2005 1 . See attached . 2 . Sewer backwater protection certification is required . Contact Public Works — Engineering Division at (650) 558-7230 for additional information . Reviewed by: V V Date: 7/05/2005 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT ENGINEERING DIVISION PLANNING REVIEW COMMENTS 06V — Slws�/ . Project Name 5mXW Jwvqtt pt%�,wj Project Address: u The following requirements apply to the project 1 _ A property boundary survey shall be preformed by a licensed land surveyor. The survey shall show all property lines, property corners, easements, topographical features and utilities. (Required prior to the building permit issuance.) 5�,44Y 5`hkvt, U -N-'m-oro 9-( 'W tA4eUJtW WUan 2 The site and roof drainage shall be shown on plans and should be made to drain towards the Frontage Street. (Required prior to the building permit issuance.) 3. The applicant shall submit project grading and drainage plans for approval prior to the issuance of a Building permit. 4 The project site is in a flood zone, the project shall comply with the City's flood zone requirements. 5 _ A sanitary sewer lateral iW is required for the project in accordance with the City's standards. (Required prior to the building permit issuance.) 6. The project plans shall show the required Bayfront Bike/Pedestrian trail and necessary public access improvements as required by San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission. 7. Sanitary sewer analysis is required for the project. The sewer analysis shall identify the project's impact to the City's sewer system and any sewer pump stations and identify mitigation measures. 8 Submit traffic trip generation analysis for the project. 9. Submit a traffic impact study for the project. The traffic study should identify the project generated impacts and recommend mitigation measures to be adopted by the project to be approved by the City Engineer. 10. The project shall file a parcel map with the Public Works Engineering Division. The parcel map shall show all existing property lines, easements, monuments, and new property and lot lines proposed by the map. Page ] of 3 UAprivate developmentTLANNING REVIEW COMMENTS.doc PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT ENGINEERING DIVISION H. A latest preliminary title report of the subject parcel of land shall be submitted to the Public Works Engineering Division with the parcel map for reviews. 12 Map closure/lot closure calculations shall be submitted with the parcel map. 13 The project shall submit a condominium map to the Engineering Divisions in accordance with the requirements of the Subdivision Map Act. 14 'Be project shall, at its own cost, design and construct frontage public improvements including curb, gutter, sidewalk and other necessary appurtenant work. 15 The project shall, at its own cost, design and construct frontage streetscape improvements including sidewalk, curb, gutters, parking meters and poles, trees, and streetlights in accordance with streetscape master plan. 16 By the preliminary review of plans, it appears that the project may cause adverse impacts during construction to vehicular traffic, pedestrian traffic and public on street parking. The project shall identify these impacts and provide mitigation measure acceptable to the City. 17 The project shall submit hydrologic calculations from a registered civil engineer for the proposed creek enclosure. The hydraulic calculations must show that the proposed creek enclosure doesn't cause any adverse impact to both upstream and downstream properties. The hydrologic calculations shall accompany a site map showing the area of the 100-year flood and existing improvements with proposed improvements. 18 Any work within the drainage area, creek, or creek banks requires a State Department of Fish and Game Permit and Army Corps of Engineers Permits. 19 No construction debris shall be allowed into the creek. 20 The project shall comply with the City's NPDES permit requirement to prevent storm water pollution. 21 The project does not show the dimensions of existing driveways, re- submit plans with driveway dimensions. Also clarify if the project is proposing to widen the driveway. Any widening of the driveway is subject to City Engineer's approval. 22 The plans do not indicate the slope of the driveway, re-submit plans showing the driveway profile with elevations Page 2 of 3 IJAprivate development\PLANNING REVIEW CONMENTS.doc PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT ENGINEERING DIVISION 23 The back of the driveway/sidewalk approach shall be at least 12" above the flow line of the frontage curb in the street to prevent overflow of storm water from the street into private property. 24. For the takeout service, a garbage receptacle shall be placed in front. The sidewalk fronting the store shall be kept clean 20' from each side of the property. 25. For commercial projects a designated garbage bin space and clearing area shall be located inside the building. A drain connecting the garbage area to the Sanitary Sewer System is required. Page 3 of 3 UAprivate developmentTLANNING REVIEW COMMENTS.doc Project Comments Date: 06/28/2005 To: ❑ City Engineer ❑ Recycling Specialist ❑ Chief Building Official ® Fire Marshal ❑ City Arborist ❑ NPDES Coordinator ❑ City Attorney From : Planning Staff Subject: Request for design review and special permit for height for a new two-story single family dwelling and detached garage at 1416 Balboa Avenue, zoned R-1 , APN : 026-013-220 Staff Review: 07/05/2005 Provide a residential fire sprinkler throughout the residence. 1 . Provide a minimum 1 inch water meter. 2. Provide double backflow prevention . 3 . Drawings submitted to Building Department for review and approval shall �. clearly indicate Fire Sprinklers shall be installed and shop drawings shall be approved by the Fire Department prior to installation . Reviewed by: Project Comments Date: 06/28/2005 To: ❑ City Engineer ❑ Recycling Specialist X Chief Building Official ❑ Fire Marshal ❑ City Arborist ❑ NPDES Coordinator ❑ City Attorney From: Planning Staff Subject: Request for design review and special permit for height for a new two-story single family dwelling and detached garage at 1416 Balboa Avenue, zoned R-1 , APN : 026-013-220 Staff Review: 07/05/2005 1 ) All construction must comply with the 2001 California Building Codes (CBC), the Burlingame Municipal and Zoning Codes, and all other State and Federal requirements. 2) Provide fully dimensioned plans. 3) Provide existing and proposed elevations. 4) Provide a legend that indicates the existing walls, walls to be demolished, and new walls. 5) Obtain a survey of the property lines for any structure within one foot of the property line. 6) Roof eaves must not project within two feet of the property line. 7) Exterior bearing walls less than three feet from the property line must be constructed of one-hour fire-rated construction and no openings are allowed. 8) Rooms that can be used for sleeping purposes must have at least one window or door that complies with the egress requirements. 9) Provide guardrails at all landings. 10) Provide handrails at all stairs where there are more than four risers. 11 ) Provide lighting at all exterior landings. 12)The fireplace chimney must terminate at least two feet above any roof surface within ten feet. Reviewe Date: �� �� RESOLUTION APPROVING CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION, DESIGN REVIEW AND SPECIAL PERMITS RESOLVED, by the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame that: WHEREAS, a categorical exemption has been proposed and application has been made for design review and special permits for height and declining height envelope for a new single family dwelling with a new detachedag_rage at 1416 Balboa Avenue, zoned R- 1 , Clement and Eva Hung,property owner, APN: 026-013-220; WHEREAS, said matters were heard by the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame on March 27, 2006, at which time it reviewed and considered the staff report and all other written materials and testimony presented at said hearing; NOW, THEREFORE, it is RESOLVED and DETERMINED by this Planning Commission that: 1 . On the basis of the Initial Study and the documents submitted and reviewed, and comments received and addressed by this commission, it is hereby found that there is no substantial evidence that the project set forth above will have a significant effect on the environment, and categorical exemption, per CEQA Article 19. Section: 15303, Class 3 — (a) construction of a limited number of new, small facilities or structures including (a) one single family residence or a second dwelling unit in a residential zone. In urbanized areas, up to three single-family residences maybe constructed or converted under this exemption. 2. Said design review and special permits are approved, subject to the conditions set forth in Exhibit "A" attached hereto. Findings for design review and special permits are as set forth in the minutes and recording of said meeting. 3. It is further directed that a certified copy of this resolution be recorded in the official records of the County of San Mateo. CHAIRMAN I, , Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was introduced and adopted at a regular meeting the Planning Commission held on the 27th day of March, 2006, by the following vote: SECRETARY EXHIBIT "A" Conditions of approval for categorical exemption, design review and special permits 1416 Balboa Avenue Effective April 6, 2006 1 . that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department date stamped March 13, 2006, sheets A- 1 ,A-2, A-6 and A-8, and date stamped February 13, 2006, sheets A-3, A-4, A-5, A-7 and T- 1 ; with wood windows with simulated true divided lites, including an encroachment into the left side declining height envelope of 2'-6" x 19'-6" (49 SF) and a building height of 33'-2" as measured from the average top of curb elevation (24.07'), and that any changes to the footprint or floor area of the building shall require an amendment to this permit; 2. that the tree protection measures noted in the July 28, 2005 arborist report by Mayne Tree Expert Company shall be installed and inspected by the City Arborist prior to commencing demolition or construction on the subject property; 3. that all of the proposed skylights shall be tinted; 4. that the existing hedge along the driveway side property line shall be removed; and planting along the property line edge between the driveway and the house shall be limited to ground cover. 5. that any changes to the size or envelope of the first or second floors, which would include adding or enlarging a dormer(s), moving or changing windows and architectural features or changing the roof height or pitch, shall be subject to design review; 6. that prior to scheduling the framing inspection, the project architect, engineer or other licensed professional shall provide architectural certification that the architectural details such as window locations and bays are built as shown on the approved plans; if there is no licensed professional involved in the project, the property owner or contractor shall provide the certification under penalty of perjury; certifications shall be submitted to the Building Department; 7. that prior to final inspection, Planning Department staff will inspect and note compliance of the architectural details (trim materials, window type, etc.) to verify that the project has been built according to the approved Planning and Building plans; all new windows shall be true divided light wood windows and shall contain a wood stucco-mould trim to match the existing trim as close as possible; 8. that all air ducts, plumbing vents, and flues shall be combined, where possible, to a single termination and installed on the portions of the roof not visible from the street; and that these venting details shall be included and approved in the construction plans before a Building permit is issued; 9. that prior to scheduling the roof deck inspection, a licensed surveyor shall shoot the height of the roof ridge (33'-2" as measured from the average top of curb elevation of +24.07') and provide certification of that height to the Building Department; -2- EXHIBIT "A" Conditions of approval for categorical exemption, design review and special permits 1416 Balboa Avenue Effective April 6, 2006 10. that prior to scheduling the foundation inspection a licensed surveyor shall locate the property corners and set the building footprint; 11 . that prior to underfloor frame inspection the surveyor shall certify the first floor elevation of the new structure(s) and the various surveys shall be accepted by the City Engineer; 12. that during demolition of the existing residence, site preparation and construction of the new residence, the applicant shall use all applicable "best management practices" as identified in Burlingame's Storm Water Ordinance, to prevent erosion and off-site sedimentation of storm water runoff, 13 . that demolition for removal of the existing structures and any grading or earth moving on the site shall not occur until a building permit has been issued and such site work shall be required to comply with all the regulations of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District; 14. that the conditions of the City Arborist, City Engineer, Recycling Specialist, Chief Building Official, NPDES Coordinator and Fire Marshal's August 2, 2005 memos shall be met; 15 . that the project shall comply with the Construction and Demolition Debris Recycling Ordinance which requires affected demolition, new construction and alteration projects to submit a Waste Reduction Plan and meet recycling requirements; any partial or full demolition of a structure, interior or exterior, shall require a demolition permit; 16. that the applicant shall comply with Ordinance 1503, the City of Burlingame Storm Water Management and Discharge Control Ordinance; and 17. that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building Code and California Fire Code, 2001 edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame. -3- - " ✓", ,. ,, e,�.�z'.' � �, as _ ',. - ^ ,-,., �tkJy �• / � lY q �' a � �' �� ��� e 'p ��i � �� � � � fin.- f�T. ✓ !� � �,'• A n tz Y Nog r .r . � t 4 *'Mt � �+ ' `g ,� • h"" H � � � b�#M � �, ,e .:.. (� V f� ::. F� ', f w QHS: • .. ` f F i w , yy vIl oil cb ryam V R J n w L r! t,.. `:i � `�" .. A 1 mak, $ ���'• t( .,\ 4.. � �.'� A� �" � a xi ^: �•+... � ,a 5. - rte_ . �,-�' ^� � b + "n' .'Mp. 1, '1 .kC .SPY^•♦ A F+ + ^ y.; hlb Of- I 'P t a iA" A CITY 0 CITY( OF BURLINGAME PLANNING DEPARTMENT BU"gAME 501 PRIMROSE ROAD 0161-116504325 BURLINGAME, CA 94010 TEL: (650) 558-7250 • FAX: (650) 696-379 � .L � �"1 0 www.burlingame.org _ *At . 1 Site: 1416 BALBOA AVENUE m Mailed From 94010 j US POSTAGE Application for design review and speci permits for height and declining height PUBLIC HEARING j envelope for a new, two-story single family dwelling and detached garage at: NOTICE 1416 BALBOA AVENUE, zoned R-1. - (APN: 026-013-220), = 4 4 The City of Burlingame Planning Commission µ } announces the following public hearing ^. . on Monday, March 27, 2006 at 7:00 P.M. r in the City Hall Council Chambers located at 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, California. i... s MaNed: March 17, 2006 ...:� I�1' IIIIIII'IIIIIIII'�'1111�11"Ilt�ll'Iilllll'II11�1'IIIIIII' i j (Please refer to other side) CITY OF BURLINGAME A copy of the applicf an reviewed prior to the meeting 300 . b $z Primrose Road, Burlingame, CafiZ f If you challe �e th�u e` - , you ma) be limited to raising only t c a thid�, blic hearing, described in h e �_ rite . e Irveed to the city at or prior to the pu> tc ,paring Property ow 6rsr e responable ,i or informing o al infor` ati4n, lease call their tenantsbou ;� i t � � , � p (650) 55 w $$ } a� s q ` Margaret Monik s City Planner - 9 PU xTICE (Please refer to other side) • • r t, F ,a. Re hJ.. •a A"'j'.:�t"afiLw F ;�` yl;.F: ha ..z 'i 6w r? ,. di�'` 1 , �,` i re �•�.ud� � .. - ^"" '�,.�, w� � 7 r` :" ti n sP �� '.' ���p, � °� �a_ ii h ti(r/i"' n�.�i`�� t � 3 041 lit !� t '�= a ."' •rnw� ..r ' w � C� i i� �� i ;. "# '; .�. .^y� .,. n +' �r x to �� � '1r 'ut} %.. �j,�"rp'a ��.~�y"°� i 7tl. I � A r l • ��r_ y pra�'zr ,�^� �� •.� t n . „� - ..,a _ i z��'4 'F �-m k'# ` � a p ;!'"�t � .° A r �(V r a ';I� R ti'"%�i '�y � S � ry,r ,�?v>• Yw qAp 1 AyrmE y r ) f -, Sal^ 9 ''OWNx 3r � 3 i t � " � a � •a'z � i ' $- } lip » yY � �A 'h i��norwr✓A1i V WON, ol IN :• yy , N 9 g � ' r I iY( V 1111 r . ii .otx ""` 'f'jb` ow p°�& �x4^�¢ C� A f1� ePaz� uk'st�. CM;, aY t F gYq �M , UR pew >S.F " "��aayY.Tepi� � t q rx �n �i a � ro � ' 1. . rte ae. u w nw! `C@kik J a Is ROW, X ks r t �i. Isla Ay ,iV (T ov p i, r z, ,k..�. '� n s �s' � g' �,e i � C"✓,ac` aJ�s'll.a`�r C Y y y r k E xA �P A ,.;It ! > cele x cov a e +'.,; y I y yyy�y '�fi S r y y� wM '"' ➢Fi>�4 Aa� Y '' r r i�r..w r .�Fx:: = ♦ M :. ' . 1 �' d . AW. { „ � � AL IN 6 ISM 1. r II iii s � rY�� • � � !� www..»—: f M f x � ♦ � `r V"� # `'lila'T , , xx ' F o r k e Av t �. a 7 tK* :xr + m ' z v a' �Y {`ss Y F r y. wt a<gs z{�ti' 'i ` Pc Kar +� e l �Q �FFF � •�F � r mv s . R44k sR ti. ' `Stq �qK In xa • ta, . � 1 t. i�`t' �'�M. 2 SIF �� ✓'', �F �' .� ` ° � r.e n dlll� v E�1�✓eC b _ . '' u - f ohm °VFj�di �+ 0 1 � 1 ' v r ♦ : � ��! �l�g� s° r !,}��t ter. All ol py t Y 1 �:, �\'1yv�., 1 . „,,°. 'Ys3r yz41L�3y�1 �joY,21`��A , rte; "�.� < j � 1 �}x •�yof � T I 01,N r r v WWv tt LS t nk z f r ' ..ate'"iai.' �A . i p Yrl.�,•` E �hY � i 1 _ q.+.o. _ P 'kn ti'�� `YMM1In YY Y4 - J r S i A �,� fiMfy�,+i yNk� a t MW ^ t" IT W, NOW 4 r.. f i ds g 4 s 1 I c I yy i ft��ti �"^ �$:•a s `� �p ��a'�„^�� t- I � � '�.'. � ,e ,y s. wn * 7qxrri :h J r } ��<'%. , �-,1 t �¢ i x�l p n I IN IWho— n � � 7` �t�l Asa , siAY t "r , a x2 a a "A r l f�1 s t d I I� .. I 1• 8 '.4...` � 4� hY n � ,+d � Y.a * �� .r .,7,y w WAR, ....t . p ¢ fn m. ° .fi '•M ' `M,. .p ;aw X.,. '"ri d ,F{ts "' 1 �,t 1 '3�,.,.> �pd fi l�' t W, C �'*,.�' ,r� �: .,§ 1 ¢ M '-sack s 4 .Y 6 � ,•� :s% .� '!v Yi s�^-' �a-� •.iw•�.� t f �•�• nt�.0 '3 �.qt: 41— 'v.., oil-wpm a �'iA 'i �a � T 4✓�,., +., i .., .� ', tic nt 'k v ,vJ MINE�+ n`' vi." p'a4a Y' l� ia>^ �. 4b.. "'"� 5 'g�. n/' .o-� a� a 1. a `a i'sa. '� v t�si ,�rb ay�,� i� •"` C it � � � �� a•.r �•�.j� '"S"'• h � yam. `' j` � '. s ® 9 �-xs I Tog Fwji'�t to If k," 'a� F ✓s' r` �� s��Jl � ✓ !Q1 � ��� `a' yv.' �?� ..h�a ✓,i 4 � l.� ,� T,,t ;'mom ,,� i ( �tit� '�f q � a „tea �r ., � �"`��� s 2i 's � ���� ♦ 4 � 1P'� �� .. tt.,. . .Sv r,j'u aS X ` ya d, e , _- ,>� t 4�, 'G .� F- ��; + i�.ai$+��.��i*� '$ut t !yk w . y► li �sl a� I}, `#x�: k . �.'"� - $;:1. � .a � 1 °4�qt•T`�,�'�.5��} '`�}�Sr �'�� .; a��" y <L "� * ra,,,.� w, � «��'jr � ,r ,�diytFr ,1 ?F�S'�' , '��'i r i� �u 7 llX ,. p ,:x i ♦ a � �< w �`'i w zf s'� *s. xx�h .S "" sm 4, >r°:S� �A � t. ♦ �p! � +fin �'+�wY �� � " * sx •.`� J.�k�• ` +¢t' s- R �,•,�. ,� t,t2A in in in nits At* Pi} S. r` d�Fi`t+ , 1 ' � x:. $°xx r o-d. F # et ",✓V� i } f tks 4 �,{tWa� x�t j+t4R �'���� ; �. .✓ :�� _ • •' �' � �, Md ,st,k Y n� x � ?NSn✓ n~ b� w<Ali 4 K .m* •'�^• 'F \ �.: �y� i ' I �µ M 5 a �� rr a il 2INS l�Owl 5; 06 i ,+cm5'.+�,w�w%.*x"^' •.�^y:' ry �� _ i 4tl g-Y x n 4610. � ) 8 0 y _ �" {�� qty�1�a .i . ui � .1� '"Y,i"`K yy �:x,�', b > „3, � i A� "• S+ F �� �'. n � P � x .Ti, t 1 s tPF„v S " '.tn °�' "r a. px.`n tr . •'�y.� pa v �t " J . �.. . '}� y. f ,,a, x �jc �' �, �"�t, � 1F� � x,�" 3 .*'3•••.^�" � '� vxv ki,' + .m" � v. . � �4A. i ,t'� n 7 � � s tl : j . { u...�. " J�MOVA9i et > e +o , t one - )0 y i y � .x h. 'p.'$.nK,� ✓�r Y t�a73'a.^ f Tk- l� a5 y»: Q .}y Fy k6r py r t � Y Its . - "Y Ftp Ytl i �VYM At b t i i tE,Rrwk 'Poo' ry`'u �3gaias t o a ,not 4-w ' gyp ^ , n _ j= ca ice '? a x RESOLUTION APPROVING CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION, DESIGN REVIEW AND SPECIAL PERMITS RESOLVED, by the CITY COUNCIL of the City of Burlingame that: WHEREAS, a categorical exemption has been proposed and application has been made for design review and special permits for height and declining height envelope for a new single family dwelling with a new detached garage at 1416 Balboa Avenue, zoned R-1 , Clement and Eva Hung, property owner, APN: 026-013-220; WHEREAS, said matters were heard by the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame on March 27, 2006, at which time it reviewed and considered the staff report and all other written materials and testimony presented at said hearing; NOW, THEREFORE, it is RESOLVED and DETERMINED by this Planning Commission that: 1 . On the basis of the Initial Study and the documents submitted and reviewed, and comments received and addressed by this commission, it is hereby found that there is no substantial evidence that the project set forth above will have a significant effect on the environment, and categorical exemption, per CEQA Article 19. Section: 15303, Class 3 — (a) construction of a limited number of new, small facilities or structures including (a) one single family residence or a second dwelling unit in a residential zone. In urbanized areas, up to three single-family residences maybe constructed or converted under this exemption. 2. Said design review and special permits are approved, subject to the conditions set forth in Exhibit "A" attached hereto. Findings for design review and special permits are as set forth in the minutes and recording of said meeting. 3. It is further directed that a certified copy of this resolution be recorded in the official records of the County of San Mateo. MAYOR I, DORIS MORTENSEN, 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 1st day of May, 2006, and adopted thereafter by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: CITY CLERK Exhibit "A" Conditions of approval for categorical exemption, design review and special permits 1416 Balboa Avenue Effective May 15, 2006 1. that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department date stamped March 13, 2006, sheets A-1,A-2, A-6 and A-8, and date stamped February 13, 2006, sheets A-3, A-4, A-5, A-7 and T-1; with wood windows with simulated true divided lites, including an encroachment into the left side declining height envelope of 2'-6" x 19'-6" (49 SF) and a building height of 33'-2" as measured from the average top of curb elevation (24.07'), and that any changes to the footprint or floor area of the building shall require an amendment to this permit; 2. that the tree protection measures noted in the July 28, 2005 arborist report by Mayne Tree Expert Company shall be installed and inspected by the City Arborist prior to commencing demolition or construction on the subject property and that should any existing sude property line fence(s) be damaged during construction on the property at 1416 Balboa Avenue, the fence(s) shall be repaired or replaced as necessary in the same style and height as the existing fence(s) by the property owner at 1416 Balboa Avenue; 3. that all of the proposed skylights shall be tinted; 4. that the existing hedge and retaining wall along the driveway side property line between 1412 and 1416 Balboa Avenue shall be retained and protected by orange mesh fencing off set by 2 feet from the face of the property line wall on the1416 Balboa side of the wall and extending 30 feet along the entire length of the side property line wall during construction; and that the new driveway shall be a minimum of 9'-6" in width as measured from the face to the existing retaining wall along the property line; and should obtaining the minimum width of 9'-6" require replacing the retaining wall on the inboard side (1416 Balboa side) of the driveway, that replacement or its equivalent shall be required to stabilize the front yard at 1416 Balboa; and any new planting along the property line edge between the driveway and the new house at 1416 Balboa shall be limited to ground cover; 5. that any changes to the size or envelope of the first or second floors, which would include adding or enlarging a dormer(s), moving or changing windows and architectural features or changing the roof height or pitch, shall be subject to design review; 6. that prior to scheduling the framing inspection, the project architect, engineer or other licensed professional shall provide architectural certification that the architectural details such as window locations and bays are built as shown on the approved plans; if there is no licensed professional involved in the project, the property owner or contractor shall provide the certification under penalty of perjury; certifications shall be submitted to the Building Department; 7. that prior to final inspection, Planning Department staff will inspect and note compliance of the architectural details (trim materials, window type, etc.) to verify that the project has been built according to the approved Planning and Building plans; all new windows shall be true divided light wood windows and shall contain a wood stucco-mould trim to match the existing trim as close as possible; Exhibit "A" Conditions of approval for categorical exemption, design review and special permits 1416 Balboa Avenue Effective May 15, 2006 8. that all air ducts, plumbing vents, and flues shall be combined, where possible, to a single termination and installed on the portions of the roof not visible from the street; and that these venting details shall be included and approved in the construction plans before a Building permit is issued; 9. that prior to scheduling the roof deck inspection, a licensed surveyor shall shoot the height of the roof ridge (33'-2" as measured from the average top of curb elevation of +24.07') and provide certification of that height to the Building Department; 10.that prior to scheduling the foundation inspection a licensed surveyor shall locate the property corners and set the building footprint; 1 l.that prior to underfloor frame inspection the surveyor shall certify the first floor elevation of the new structure(s) and the various surveys shall be accepted by the City Engineer; 12. that during demolition of the existing residence, site preparation and construction of the new residence, the applicant shall use all applicable "best management practices" as identified in Burlingame's Storm Water Ordinance, to prevent erosion and off-site sedimentation of storm water runoff, 13. that demolition for removal of the existing structures and any grading or earth moving on the site shall not occur until a building permit has been issued and such site work shall be required to comply with all the regulations of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District; 14. that the conditions of the City Arborist, City Engineer, Recycling Specialist, Chief Building Official, NPDES Coordinator and Fire Marshal's August 2, 2005 memos shall be met; 15. that the project shall comply with the Construction and Demolition Debris Recycling Ordinance which requires affected demolition, new construction and alteration projects to submit a Waste Reduction Plan and meet recycling requirements; any partial or full demolition of a structure, interior or exterior, shall require a demolition permit; 16.that the applicant shall comply with Ordinance 1503, the City of Burlingame Storm Water Management and Discharge Control Ordinance; and 17. that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building Code and California Fire Code, 2001 edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame. CITY 0 CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING DEPARTMENT BURLJNGAME 501 PRIMROSE ROAD BURLINGAME,CA 94010 • TEL:(650)558-7250 • FAX:(650)696-379 0161-116504325 •,m,.�••• www.burlingame.org i $00.240 Site: 1416 BALBOA AVENUE R MailedFrom 94010 Appeal of the Planning Commission action on an US POSTAGE application for design review and special permits PUBLIC for height and declining envelope for a new, two- HEARING story single family dwelling and detached garage NOTICE at: 1416 BALBOA AVENUE, zoned R-1. (APN:026-013-220). The City of Burlingame City Council announces the following public hearing on Monday, MAY 1, 2006 at � r 7:00 P.M. in the City Hall Council Chambers located f i at 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, California. I_ Mailed:April 21,2006 I ; (Please refer to other side) CITY OF BURLINGAME f A copy of the applic dla' y be reviewed prior 4 to the meeting atila ?- -~ Primrose Road, Burlingame, Caiffo-. i If you challenge e ,Y m be limited to raising only thme, ucs4 ' blic hearing, described in Jhe b7� 'v`kef n e ~ e ed to the city I at or prior to thepul 9C earn$ F H x A Property ow # rs v�ho re`'�i e respon ble r informing their tenants bou Titer _ fio al info ati , please call (650) 558-7 0 Margaret Mon . City Planner ._ � cE (Please refer to other side) AGENDA bb ITEM # --- CITY c MTG. 1 �n . 15 76 STAFF REPORT DATE „ .�� ,--00 BURLI14 E b” b 4 �9sTeo JVN 'b SUBMITTED TO: -10n0rable mayarand-GitvBY i 011 DATE: -Iay_4.20DB- APPROVED ✓ BY FROM:__Jac _Van._Etten.P --— SUBJECT: Public Hearing to amend the existing Burlingame City Orthnance parkng perm its. 2 080) and to change and increase the fee for annual overnight public street RECC)MMENDATION : The City Council should hold a public hearing and take nd increon to ase the nnduahcostlfofr ng o ernlig9t publ ht Ordinance (section 13.32.080) which will change parking permits. BACKGROUND: With a few exceptions, existing city ordinance section 13.32.080 requires that the public obtain a permit to parka vehicle overnight on a public street from the hours of 2:00 am to 6:00 am. The police department has been enforcing this ordinance by citizen complaint for a number of years. Citizens who receive a citation in violation of this section can either pay the $10.00 fine or come to the police department and apply for an annual overnight parking permit. Once the application for the annual overnight parking permit is accepted and approved (conditional upon review with a site and area visit) , the $10.00 citation is voided. The current overnight parking permit cost of $4.00 for the calendar year has not increased since the 19701s. With increased operating costs over several decades, staff recommends that council change the existing ordinance to increase the cost for an annual overnight parking permit to $10.00. Additionally, staff recommends that the overnight parking permits be available only on an annual (calendar) basis. This increase will help off-set some of the increased costs for personnel and operation of this program. During the regularly scheduled city council meeting of May 1 , 2006, the city council introduced the amendment to change and increase the annual overnight public street parking permit fee. FISCAL IMPACT: Since the city approves approximately 100 to 150 annual overnight public street parking permits per year, this change will result in a very small increase in city revenue (approximately $600.00 to $900.00 per year). ATTACHMENTS: Proposed change to Burlingame City Ordinance 13.32.080. I ORDINANCE No. 2 ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME AMENDING SECTION 13.32.080 TO INCREASE THE ANNUAL FEE 3 FOR OVERNIGHT PARKING PERMITS 4 5 The CITY COUNCIL of the CITY OF BURLINGAME does hereby ordain as follows: 6 Section 1 . Chapter 13.32 requires persons to obtain a parking permit from the Burlingame 7 Police Department in order to leave a vehicle on a public street between the hours of 2:00 a.m. and 8 6:00 p.m. The current fee was adopted in Ordinance No. 1136 in 1978. Costs of issuance have 9 risen and an adjustment at this time is appropriate. 10 I I Section 2. Section 13.32.080 is amended to read as follows: 12 13.32.080 Overnight parking. 13 (a) Permit Required. It is unlawful for the owner or driver of any vehicle to park such 14 vehicle upon any street or alley in the city between the hours of two a.m. and six a.m. without a 15 permit therefor. 16 (b) Issuance of Permit. In cases of hardship where the owners of vehicles cannot obtain 17 suitable storage or parking facilities, permits for parking between two a.m. (2 a.m.) and six a.m. 18 (6 a.m.) may be issued by the chief of police. The application for a permit shall be signed by the 19 applicant, shall state the make, model and license number of the vehicle and shall contain a 20 statement of the necessity and reasons for the permit. If, upon investigation, it is found that the 21 necessity exists therefor and that the applicant has no reasonable means for night storage of the 22 vehicle during the above-stated hours, the chief of police shall issue the permit for an annual or 23 semiannual period, as the applicant may request, based upon a calendar year. The fee for such 24 permit shall be ten dollars ($ 10) payable annually in advance to the chief of police. 25 The permit shall not be transferable and shall be displayed on the left side window to the 26 rear of the driver of the vehicle for which it is issued at all times during which the vehicle is parked 27 upon the street between the hours of two a.m. (2 a.m.) and six a.m. (6 a.m.). The chief of police 28 shall revoke the permit when the necessity under which it was issued and the reasons therefor cease to exist, or may renew such permit if the hardship still exists. I (c)Exemptions. The provisions of this section shall not apply to a commercial vehicle of 2 any regularly licensed business in a commercial or industrial zone or to public utility vehicles while 3 on service or emergency calls, or to vehicles of any regularly licensed physician when actually 4 engaged in making professional calls. 5 6 Section 3. This ordinance shall be published as required by law. 7 8 Mayor 9 I,DORIS MORTENSEN, City Clerk of the City of Burlingame,do hereby certify that the 10 foregoing ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 1 S`day of May, 2006, and adopted thereafter at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the day 1 1 of , 2006, by the following vote: 12 AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: 13 NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: 14 15 City Clerk 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Agenda Item # 6c Meeting BURLINGAME STAFF REPORT Date: May 15, 2006 C w 1 { O P N 1 1'I SUBMITTED BY APPROVED BY / > TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL DATE : MAY 272006 FROM : PUBLIC WORKS SUBJECT: ADOPT AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING WATER RATES FOR FISCAL YEARS 2006-07 , 2007-08 , AND 2008-09 RECOMMENDATION : It is recommended that City Council hold a public hearing to: 1 . Adopt the proposed ordinance . 2 . Direct the City Clerk to publish a summary of the ordinance within 15 days of adoption . BACKGROUND: Burlingame maintains and operates a 100 mile water pipe distribution system and seven water storage reservoirs. A majority of the system was installed over 70 years ago and has served its intended life . The old pipes are corroded and undersized which makes it difficult to deliver sufficient water volume and pressure to customers. In 2003 , Council approved rate increases to fund an aggressive capital improvement program . As a result, seven miles of deteriorated pipeline was replaced with newer and larger pipelines and 700 new water services were installed over the last three years. It is essential that the City continue funding the capital improvement program in order to serve the community with high quality of water as well as remain in compliance with State and Federal regulations. Burlingame purchases it's water from the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC) , which is the only water supply for Burlingame and most cities on the Peninsula . Effective July 1 , 2006 , the SFPUC has proposed a rate increase of 13 .7% . In addition , the SFPUC is proposing rate increases of up to 60% over the next five years to fund the capital improvements to the Hetch Hetchy (regional) water system . DISCUSSION : With the assistance of Hilton and Farnkopf Consultants, a firm specialized in analyzing water and sewer rates, staff developed a long term financing model to identify the rate increases necessary to fund the much needed capital improvement program as well as to evaluate the impacts of further SFPUC rate increases. Based on Council's direction at the February 22 , 2006 study session , staff is proposing a 12% rate increase for each of the next three years. This increase will fund water purchases from the SFPUC and an average annual $4 , 500, 000 capital improvement program to replace aging infrastructure. SAA Public Works Directory\Staff Reports\Ordinance 2006\Adopt water rates for 2006 through 2008.doc Following are the three-year rate recommendations: Three Year Water Rate Schedule-Consumption Charge and Base Service Charge 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 Rates per 1,000 gallons Actual Proposed Proposed Proposed City Rate 4.19 4.69 5.25 5.88 Burlingame Hills 4.66 5.22 5.85 6.55 Base Charge(Monthly) 5/8-3/4"Meter 19.23 21.54 24.12 27.01 1"Meter 32.70 36.62 41.01 45.93 1%"Meter 63.47 71.09 79.62 89.17 2"Meter 101.93 114.16 127.86 143.20 3"Meter 192.33 215.41 241.26 270.21 4"Meter 321.19 359.73 402.90 451.25 6"Meter 640.45 717.30 803.38 899.78 8"Meter 1,025.11 1148.12 1285.89 1440.20 By approving a three year rate schedule, the City will also be able to demonstrate to bond rating agencies that adequate financing is available, producing the lowest possible interest rate for the City. If approved, the average monthly water bill for single family residents will increase by approximately $6 from $51 to $57 for FY 2006-07. A customer's actual increase may vary from this amount depending on their monthly water consumption. PUBLIC OUTREACH: On March 24, 2006 staff scheduled a press conference to educate the local media about the proposed rate changes. Although media representatives did not attend the conference, staff sent the information packets to the local newspapers which resulted in several articles. Staff also sent notices of the public hearing and educational brochures to customers as well as advertised in the local newspapers. In addition, staff held a public meeting on April 26, 2006 to educate the customers of the need for the proposed rate changes. BUDGET IMPACT: It is estimated that the proposed rate changes will generate approximately $1,050,000 in Water Enterprise Funds of which 34% would go towards the purchase of water from the SFPUC, 35% would go towards the operations and maintenance of the system and 31%would go towards the debt service for the capital improvements program. :EX IBITS: Ordinance, Public Notification and Education Brochure. Sye Murta, P., / Assistant ublic Wo s Director CC: City Manager, Finance Director, Public Works Director and City Attorney SAA Public Works Directory\Staff Reports\Ordinance 2006\Hdopt water rates for 2006 through 2008.doc 1 ORDINANCE No. 2 ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME ADOPTING REVISIONS TO RATES AND FEES FOR WATER SERVICE 3 4 The CITY COUNCIL of the CITY OF BURLINGAME does hereby ordain as follows: 5 6 Section 1 . The existing water rates and connection fees were established by Ordinance 7 No. 1715 adopted July 7, 2003, and amended by Ordinance No. 1754 adopted June 6, 2005. 8 Notice of proposed revisions to the water rates and connection fees and of the public hearing on 9 the rates and fees was mailed to each ratepayer in the City and duly published in a newspaper of 10 general circulation in the City. The City Council, after public hearing and due study and 11 deliberation, has determined that the price of water to consumers supplied through the city's 12 distributing system must be increased to balance increased costs. These rates and fees will 13 provide financial support to the immense needs for reconstruction of the water system. The rates 14 are also intended to meet the currently projected increases in the wholesale cost of water 15 provided by the City & County of San Francisco, which is undertaking a reconstruction of the 16 water supply system to the San Francisco Bay Area. In the construction and maintenance of the 17 City water system, the City general fund has contributed significant amounts of money to build, 18 maintain, and operate the water system. The rates and fees adopted in this ordinance are not 19 discriminatory or excessive. 20 21 Section 2. The rates for 2006-2007 are as follows: 22 (a) Effective for all meter readings and billings on and after July 1 , 2006, the fixed 23 monthly charge based on meter size shall be as follows, and for residential services only, such 24 service charge shall include the first 1,000 gallons of water per month: 25 Monthly Service Charge 26 5/8" and 3/4" meters .................................................................. $ 21 .54 27 1 " meters .................................................................................... $36.62 28 1-1/21t meters .............................................................................. $71 .09 5/1/2006 1 1 2" meters .................................................................................. $114.16 2 3" meters .................................................................................. $215.41 3 4" meters .................................................................................. $359.73 4 6" meters .................................................................................. $717.30 5 8" meters ............................................................................... $1,148.12 6 (b) Effective for all meter readings and billings on and after July 1, 2006, the rate for 7 water consumed within the city shall be $4.69 per thousand gallons and for water consumed 8 outside the city shall be $5.22 per thousand gallons. The normal turn-on fee schedule for new 9 accounts shall be Monday through Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 3:15 p.m., no charge; 3:16 p.m. to 3:30 10 p.m., $20; 3:31 p.m. to 7:59 a.m., $60; Saturday/Sunday/holidays, $60. 11 12 Section 3. The rates for 2007-2008 are as follows: 13 (a) Effective for all meter readings and billings on and after July 1, 2007,the fixed 14 monthly charge based on meter size shall be as follows, and for residential services only, such 15 service charge shall include the first 1,000 gallons of water per month: 16 Monthly Service Charge 17 5/8" and 3/4" meters ................................................................... $24.12 18 1" meters .................................................................................... $41.01 19 1-1/2" meters .............................................................................. $79.62 20 2" meters .................................................................................. $127.86 21 3" meters .................................................................................. $241.26 22 4" meters .................................................................................. $402.90 23 6" meters .................................................................................. $803.38 24 8" meters ............................................................................... $1,285.89 25 (b) Effective for all meter readings and billings on and after July 1, 2007,the rate for 26 water consumed within the city shall be $5.25 per thousand gallons and for water consumed 27 outside the city shall be $5.85 per thousand gallons. The normal turn-on fee schedule for new 28 accounts shall be Monday through Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 3:15 p.m., no charge; 3:16 p.m. to 3:30 5/1/2006 2 I p.m., $20; 3:31 p.m. to 7:59 a.m., $60; Saturday/Sunday/holidays, $60. 2 3 Section 4. The rates for 2008-2009 are as follows: 4 (a) Effective for all meter readings and billings on and after July 1, 2008, the fixed 5 monthly charge based on meter size shall be as follows, and for residential services only, such 6 service charge shall include the first 1,000 gallons of water per month: 7 Monthly Service Charge 8 5/8" and 3/4" meters ................................................................... $27.01 9 1" meters .................................................................................... $45.93 10 1-1/2" meters .............................................................................. $89.17 11 2" meters .................................................................................. $143.20 12 3" meters .................................................................................. $270.21 13 4" meters .................................................................................. $451.25 14 6" meters .................................................................................. $899.78 15 8" meters ............................................................................... $1,440.20 16 (b) Effective for all meter readings and billings on and after July 1, 2008, the rate for 17 water consumed within the city shall be $5.88 per thousand gallons and for water consumed 18 outside the city shall be $6.55 per thousand gallons. The normal turn-on fee schedule for new 19 accounts shall be Monday through Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 3:15 p.m., no charge; 3:16 p.m. to 3:30 20 p.m., $20; 3:31 p.m. to 7:59 a.m., $60; Saturday/Sunday/holidays, $60. 21 22 Section 5. Fees and charges. The following fees and charges currently exist and will 23 continue: 24 (a) Payment of all charges for water furnished by the municipal water department of the 25 city must be made forthwith, and, if not paid within thirty(30) days after the date on which 26 billed, shall be assessed a 1-1/2%penalty charge. In addition, the service may be discontinued 27 and will not be renewed unless a fee for renewal service and all outstanding bills are paid. The 28 fee for renewal shall be for service Monday through Friday during the hours of 8:00 a.m. to 3:15 5/1/2006 3 I p.m., $35; from 3:16 p.m. to 3:30 p.m., $45; and from 3:31 p.m. to 4:50 p.m., $60. After 4:50 2 p.m., service will not be renewed until the next working day. 3 (b) In the event of an underground leak on the customer's service which cannot be easily 4 detected or a similar occurrence, the director of public works or the finance director may adjust 5 the resulting water charges if they deem an adjustment is warranted. If an adjustment is made, 6 the resulting charge shall not be less than the amount paid for the purchase of the water lost due 7 to the leak. The director of public works or the finance director may request documentation 8 evidencing the existence and repair of the leak as part of the review process. 9 (c) Fire service charge for maintaining water in a fire protection system shall be $1 per 10 month per inch of pipe diameter for the service connection, with a$2 per month minimum 11 charge. Water delivered at a fire service shall be charged at the regular rates for domestic 12 service, except that there shall be no charge for water used in a fire call emergency. 13 (d) When a flow test is requested by a customer, a fee shall first be paid to the city 14 according to the size of the service as follows: 15 5/8" through 1" ........................................................................... $50 16 11/2"/2" and 2" ............................................................................... $80 17 Over 2" .................................................................... $100 minimum 18 In the event that the meter was recording higher than actual flow, the city shall refund the 19 testing fee and make adjustments in the billing for water consumed during the two (2) calendar 20 months preceding the date of the request for a test. 21 In the event the meter was recording accurately, the fee shall be retained. On services 22 over two inches (2"), an additional fee shall be billed if the cost of testing plus fifteen percent 23 (15%) for overhead should exceed the $100 fee. 24 (e) Temporary water service will be provided at a city fire hydrant, after the approval of 25 the location by the city engineer or the engineer's authorized representative, upon deposit of 26 $750. The fixed service charges for the temporary meter shall be $43.00 per month for one-inch 27 meters, and $85.00 per month for three-inch meters. Charges for the water consumed shall be as 28 stated in Subsections 2(b), 3(b), or 4(b) above, as applicable to period of consumption. 5/1/2006 4 I (f) Deposits for turn-on of water service. 2 (1) Deposits will be required for the turn-on of water service for any customer whose 3 account with the city has had a delinquency on a city water account during the previous twelve 4 (12) months in an amount equal to two (2) months estimated consumption, or $50.00, whichever 5 is greater. If no further delinquencies occur on the account over the succeeding twelve-month 6 period, the deposit shall be applied as a credit to the account. 7 (2) If a delinquency occurs on an account to which a deposit has been made, the 8 delinquency shall be satisfied first from the amount on deposit. 9 (g) Any work done on the water system of the city shall have prior approval and permit 10 from the city engineer. A fee of$60 shall be charged for the permit. A bond or deposit of 11 $1,500 shall accompany the request for a permit. The deposit is refundable in full upon 12 completion of the work to the satisfaction of the city engineer or water department 13 superintendent. 14 (h) All domestic water service installations of sizes 3/4" to 2", inclusive, consisting of 15 corporation and curb cocks, service line, meter boxes and meters, may be furnished and installed 16 by the city from the water main to a point approximately one foot inside the curb line, or to a 17 point within 4' of the property being served from a water main in an easement, alley or other 18 right-of-way other than dedicated street, but not exceeding a total distance from water main 19 connection to the meter box of sixty fee (60') for the following fixed fees: 20 5/8" bypass meter ................................................................... $ 350 21 3/4" service with meter ......................................................... $3,800 22 1" service with meter ........................................................... $3,840 23 1-1/2" service with meter ...................................................... $4,580 24 2" service with meter ............................................................ $4,710 25 All domestic water service installations of a size larger than two inches (2") or longer than sixty 26 feet (60') or not covered by the circumstances described above may be furnished and installed by 27 the city for the cost of labor and material, plus a sum equal to fifteen percent (15%) of the 28 combined cost of labor and material, less a credit for any existing water meter. The sum to be 5/1/2006 5 I paid for any such installations shall be estimated by the public works department, and such sum 2 shall be deposited with the department before the work of installation commences. In the event 3 that the estimated cost of making the installation proves to be insufficient to pay for said 4 installation as hereinabove provided, an additional sum sufficient to pay such costs shall be 5 charged. If the amount deposited exceeds the cost of installation as hereinabove provided, the 6 excess shall be refunded. 7 8 Section 6. Ordinance No. 1715 as amended by Ordinance No. 1754 is hereby superseded. 9 10 Section 7. This ordinance shall be published as required by law. 11 12 Mayor 13 14 I, DORIS MORTENSEN, Deputy City Clerk of the City of Burlingame, do hereby certify that the foregoing ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 15 1'day of May, 2006, and adopted thereafter at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the day of ,2006, by the following vote: 16 AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: 17 NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: 18 19 City Clerk 20 U:\FILES\Water\2006ratesfees.pwd.wpd 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 5/1/2006 6 CITY OF BURLINGAME NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING CHANGES TO WATER AND SEWER RATES The Burlingame City Council will conduct a public hearing at 7 PM, Monday, May 15, 2006 in the City Council Chambers, 501 Primrose Road to consider changes in water and sewer rates and charges to be effective July 1, 2006, July 1, 2007, and July 1, 2008.The proposal will be for a three-year program to increase revenue to fund capital improvement costs, anticipated increases in the cost of water supplied by the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission and to insure revenue stability in the long term. Water Rates: Effective for all meter readings and billings on or after July 1, 2006,the water rate per 1,000 gallons of water used will increase for City residents and businesses from $4.19 to $4.69 (12%) and for Burlingame Hills, from $4.66 to $5.22 (12%). In addition, the base monthly service charge for a residential 5/8"or 3/4"meter will increase from $19.23 to $21.54 (12%). Your bill may increase more or less depending on your water consumption. The rate increase covers an anticipated increase of up to 21%in charges from the San Francisco Water Department, increases in water operating costs, and an increased requirement for debt service in connection with water system infrastructure improvements. A number of ongoing major capital improvements are required for both the water distribution and storage systems. City of Burlingame Three Year Water Rate Schedule-Consumption Charge and Base Service Charge 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 Rates per 1,000 gallons Actual Proposed Proposed Proposed City Rate 4.19 4.69 5.25 5.88 Burlingame Hills 4.66 5.22 5.85 6.55 Base Charge(Monthly) 5/8-3/4"Meter 19.23 21.54 24.12 27.01 1"Meter 32.70 36.62 41.01 45.93 1%"Meter 63.47 71.09 79.62 89.17 2"Meter 101.93 114.16 127.86 143.20 3"Meter 192.33 215.41 241.26 270.21 4"Meter 321.19 359.73 402.90 451.25 6"Meter 640.45 717.30 803.38 899.78 8"Meter 1,025.11 1148.12 1285.89 1440.20 (Over for sewer rate information) Sewer Rates: Effective July 1 , 2006, the residential sewer rate will increase from $6.30 to $6.90 (9.5%) per 1 ,000 gallons of average winter water consumption. The sewer bill is based on the average winter water usage billings between January and April over the last three years. The rates for all other user categories will increase by 9.5% based on total water consumption, as well as the types of discharge put into the system. The sewer rate increase is necessary to provide financing for ongoing infrastructure improvements. The minimum bimonthly residential sewer charge will be increased from $12.60 to $13.80 (9.5%). City of Burlingame Three Year Sewer Rate Schedule 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 Rates per 1 ,000 gallons Actual Proposed Proposed Proposed Single Family/Duplex 6.30 6.90 7.55 8.27 Multi-Family Residential 5.89 6.45 7.06 7.73 Restaurant, Markets, Food 16.76 18.35 20.09 22.00 Processing . Moderate Strength Commercial, 11 .30 12.37 13.54 14.83 Hotels With Restaurants, Hospital Light Strength Commercial 6.96 7.62 8.34 9.13 Schools and Churches 2.47 2.70 2.96 3.24 Minimum Charge (@ 1 ,000 12.60 13.80 15. 11 16.54 Gallons Per Month) A public meeting will be held to discuss rate changes on April 26, 2006 at 6:00 PM in the Lane Room, Burlingame Library at 480 Primrose, Burlingame, CA 94010. More detailed information about the meeting will be posted on the City's website at www.burlingame.org, and will be noticed in the newspapers in early April. In addition, a staff report for the public hearing covering these changes will be available after May 1 , 2006. To obtain a copy, call the City Hall receptionist at 558- 7200, or stop by City Hall, 501 Primrose, Monday through Friday, 8 AM to 5 PM. The report will also be posted on the City's website. r r:I! � ! 3 3{) The City of Burlingame has more than 100 miles of water mains. Over 50% of the water system was installed prior to 1948 with some pipes as old as 1906. Many of the pipes are corroded and undersized making t it difficult to supply sufficient water flow and pressure to.larger new homes and businesses. Numerous water'mains are located in inaccessible backyard easements and under trees. Pipe breaks in Cracked Water Pipe 3�y these areas require lengthy neighborhood water shutoffs to fix. Broken pipes can result in flooding properties and temporarily closing street access. TJJ�J'I �� rrJ� �'i rl J��r � r� �; r �1 rrl ifIUri ��r1 New Water Pipe Installation The City of Burlingame has begun`implementing a $100 million comprehensive long-term program for an improved water distribution system.The fourth year of a planned 20 year construction program will start this summer. It includes installing new and larger pipes in the street for better flow and easy • access.The City will also increase water storage, improve pump stations, and provide SWIM interconnections to other cities.The increase in water rates will pay for the ongoing program to C� LNGAME rehabilitate the water infrastructure throughout the City. C t F MOR N 1A s Over time, citizens and businesses will experience fewer disruptive water line breaks as well as better water pressure and volume. Any required water shutoffs will be shorter in duration as new mains will be located in more accessible areas.The City's ability to fight CITY HALL fires will be strengthened, and increased storage will provide (650) 558-7230 additional water during droughts. New interconnections to PUBLIC WORKS z H R,`, " ''i �I neighboring cities will provide alternate water supplies in the event 501 PRIMROSE ROAD ' of a local emergency. Most importantly, the City will be able to BURLINGAME, CA remain in compliance with present and future state water quality 94010-3997 Water Pipe with Mineral Deposits standards. CORPORATION YARD Ho'41I ')'llfl S11��� d`"s!r`�. 111���5 ffly ,r-)ljjrl (650) 558-7670 With the proposed water rate change, the average monthly bill in Burlingame will increase about $6 1361 N. CAROLAN AVE. effective July 1, 2006.Approximately $2 of this rate increase is due to higher water purchase costs BURLINGAME, CA from San Francisco which is embarking on a $4 billion upgrade of its water delivery system to all 94010 Bay Area City's inclurl'M i Burlingame. 4M �� ®gym fill S C" �r Overflows' f Mani oldA i �� f ,r. bilitatiio ,and replacement. o s'he street Q) x �nd sewer ity. o �Y—" o 4-filk .fie M e cens Will experience fewer'sewer'"b'ackups anc4 « «*w better flows. Em'ergen'cy maintenance callouts during the winter " o M° 'rains,w�ll'be,re'duced.The potential for sewerage damage to o ertle oras' I is Into,&eeks will be minimized.The City will state health requirements iC Ws 3 A e r yp y °p� u•„ � �r,4 , y, nor,V.�i,,«,�� ,a, :^Xw s's m,W Mia rP rh }. � �48ia� 4 "t.s t�3� ��. ���' ��."u-�p 1 .�< ✓� � � � � re�*�, �r�sf�l,l�s,flot�,«....r r"�"�"var"Jd,"r :fin" +` + ���'r ^' m'"'?�r ns,.. P "a'"+�r ME a 4�1u�' ,4. sy '�` �i� '".tvt'•,: 5`��'�" tP 5 a'�d 9i��e� "�.r,;" I,',�'r s'sC p.,�� ,r � ,gyp' "'lu. c�5 � a4 * ler raterdhahge, the ` e c4i e July 1, 2006. �¢y"M „k dy� a tl'R;3� fs,"r�'s��.",�,on✓✓"�pk" ta"n��.�,'�,ry Mb`4�rr���, r r ,�, 7 fw d R r'r "" � wr -r a F New Sewer Pipe Installation "�,� �a, 5���'M r N3,�i.sYd�Y + b .� ��" t 1". �;��✓ �sr-.�, �>u " � P .a n. � � p Agenda Item # 6d Meeting BURLINGAME STAFF REPORT Date: Ma 1 2006 SUBMITTED BY -Z_ I�Xn APPROVED BY TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL DATE: MAY 2, 2006 FROM: PUBLIC WORKS SUBJECT: ADOPT AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING SEWER RATES FOR FISCAL YEARS 2006-07, 2007-08, AND 2008-09 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that Council hold a public hearing to: 1 . Adopt the proposed ordinance. 2. Direct the City Clerk to publish a summary of the ordinance within 15 days of adoption. BACKGROUND: Burlingame maintains and operates a 100 mile sewer pipe collection system and a waste water treatment plant. A majority of the system was installed over 70 years ago and has served its intended life. The old sewer pipes are partially blocked with tree roots and are cracked, which allows storm water infiltration into the system causing sewage backups and spills. In addition, the old pipes are undersized and cannot accommodate flows from Burlingame's larger, new and remodeled homes. In 2003, Council approved rate increases to fund an aggressive capital improvement program. As a result, seven miles of deteriorated pipeline was replaced with newer and larger pipelines and 500 new sewer services were installed over the last three years. Further, improvements were constructed at the wastewater treatment plant to increase its efficiency and to bring it into compliance with State requirements. To protect public health, the State has recently passed new laws which require public agencies to develop and implement a comprehensive sewer system plan to prevent sewage spills on both public and private properties. The State requires that all sewage spills be monitored and reported regardless of size. The State also imposes hefty fines on public agencies for sewage spills and for non-compliance with their requirements. Staff has developed an aggressive capital improvements program and a pro-active preventative maintenance program to meet the State requirements. DISCUSSION: With the assistance of Hilton and Farnkopf Consultants, a firm specialized in analyzing water and sewer rates, staff developed a long term financing model to identify the minimum rate increase necessary to fund the much needed capital improvement program for replacing the aging infrastructure as well as for meeting the new State requirements. Based on Council's direction at the February 22, 2006 study session, staff is proposing a 9.5% rate increase for each of the next three years. This SAA Public Works Directory\Staff Reports\Ordinance 2006Wdopt Sewer Rates 2006-2008.doc increase will fund the operation and maintenance costs required to meet State regulations and an average annual$3,700,000 capital improvement program to replace aging infrastructure. Following are the three-year rate recommendations: Three Year Sewer Rate Schedule 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 Rates per 1,000 gallons Actual Proposed Proposed Proposed Single Family/Duplex 6.30 6.90 7.55 8.27 Multi-Family Residential 5.89 6.45 7.06 7.73 Restaurant,Markets, Food 16.76 18.35 20.09 22.00 Processing Moderate Strength Commercial, 11.30 12.37 13.54 14.83 Hotels With Restaurants, Hospital Light Strength Commercial 6.96 7.62 8.34 9.13 Schools and Churches 2.47 2.70 2.96 3.24 Minimum Charge(@ 1,000 12.60 13.80 15.11 16.54 Gallons Per Month) By approving a three year rate schedule, the City will also be able to demonstrate to bond rating agencies that adequate financing is available,producing the lowest possible interest rate for the City. If approved, the average monthly sewer bill for single family residents will increase approximately by $4 from $40 to $44 for FY Year 2006-07. A customer's actual increase may vary from this amount depending on their four month winter water consumption averaged over three years. PUBLIC OUTREACH: On March 24, 2006 staff scheduled a press conference to educate the local media about the proposed rate changes. Although media representatives did not attend the conference, staff sent the information packets to the local newspapers which resulted in several articles. Staff also sent notices of the public hearing and educational brochures to customers as well as advertised in the local newspapers. In addition, staff held a public meeting on April 26, 2006 to educate the customers of the need for the proposed rate changes. BUDGET IMPACT: It is estimated that the proposed rate changes will generate approximately$818,000 in Sewer Enterprise Funds of which 64%would go towards the operations and maintenance of the system and 36%would go towards the debt service for the capital improvements program. EXHIBITS: Ordinance, Public Notification and education brochure. Sye Murtu a, Assistant Public Works Director c:City Manager, Finance Director, Public Works Director and City Attorney SAA Public Works Directory\Staff Reports\Ordinance 2006\Adopt Sewer Rates 2006-2008.doc I ORDINANCE NO. 2 ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME AMENDING CHAPTER 15.08 3 ESTABLISHING WASTEWATER COLLECTION RATES AND CHARGES 4 5 The CITY COUNCIL of the CITY OF BURLINGAME does hereby ordain as follows: 6 7 Section 1. Notice of proposed revisions to the sewer rates and of the public hearing on 8 the proposed rates was mailed to each ratepayer in the City and duly published in a newspaper of 9 general circulation in the City. The City Council, after public hearing and due study and 10 deliberation, has determined that the price of sewer service to customers must be increased to 11 balance increased costs and improvements and to fund necessary reconstruction. In the 12 construction and maintenance of the City sewer system, the City general fund has contributed 13 significant amounts of money to build, maintain, and operate the system. 14 15 Section 2. Section 15.08.070 of the Burlingame Municipal Code is hereby amended to 16 read as follows: 17 15.08.070 Sewer rental—Service charges. 18 (a) Every person whose premises in the city are served by a connection with the system 19 of sewerage of the city, whereby the sewerage or industrial wastes, or either or both, are disposed 20 by the city, shall pay a bimonthly sewer charge based upon the quantity of metered water per 21 bimonthly billing period as set forth in the following rate schedules, whether such water is 22 derived from a source other than city water supply or all or part of such water is furnished to the 23 premises without charge. The director of public works shall determine the classification of uses 24 not specifically listed. The finance director shall have the discretion and authority to establish a 25 different sewer charge when circumstances such as water leaks or unseasonable or atypical water 26 usage cause established rates to result in inequitably low or high sewer charges; any such 27 determination shall be reviewed by the city manager upon request from the customer. The 28 finance director may request documentation evidencing the existence of a leak or any other 5/1/2006 I problem that may have resulted in an inequitable charge. Classification Amount 4 (1) Single-family/duplex Effective for all billings on or after July 1, 2006: $6.90 per thousand gallons of average water consumption for the billing periods January 6 through April of the years 2004, 2005, and 2006. Any user with an average water consumption of less than a thousand gallons per month shall pay$13.80 as the bimonthly sewer charge. 9 Effective for all billings on or after July 1, 2007: 10 $7.55 per thousand gallons of average water consumption for the billing periods January 11 through April of the years 2005, 2006, and 2007. Any user with an average water consumption of less than a thousand gallons 12 per month shall pay$15.11 as the bimonthly sewer charge. 13 14 Effective for all billings on or after July 1, 2008: 1 $8.27 per thousand gallons of average water consumption for the billing periods January through April of the years 2006, 2007, and 16 2008. Any user with an average water consumption of less than a thousand gallons 17 per month shall pay $16.54 as the bimonthly sewer charge. 18 (2) Multi-family residential Effective for all billings on or after July 1, 19 2006: 20 $6.45 per thousand gallons of water consumption for the current billing period. 21 22 Effective for all billings on or after July 1, 2007: 23 $7.06 per thousand gallons of water consumption for the current billing period. 24 Effective for all billings on or after July 1, 2008: 26 $7.73 per thousand gallons of water consumption for the current billing period. 27 ,8 511/2006 - 2 - 1 (3) Restaurant, caterers, supermarkets, Effective for all billings on or after July 1, 2006: 2 bakeries and other commercial food processing and food-related commercial $18.35 per thousand gallons of water 3 consumption for the current billing period. 4 Effective for all billings on or after July 1, 2007: 5 $20.09 per thousand gallons of water consumption for the current billing period. 6 7 Effective for all billings on or after July 1, 2008: 8 $22.00 per thousand gallons of water consumption for the current billing period. 9 (4)Moderate strength commercial,including Effective for all billings on or after July 1, 2006: 10 manufacturing, commercial or industrial laundries, hotels with restaurants and $12.37 per thousand gallons of water 11 hospitals consumption for the current billing period. 12 Effective for all billings on or after July 1, 2007: 13 $13.54 per thousand gallons of water 14 consumption for the current billing period. 15 Effective for all billings on or after July 1, 2008: 16 $14.83 per thousand gallons of water consumption for the current billing period. 17 18 (5) Light strength commercial including Effective for all billings on or after July 1, 2006: offfice-warehouse, office buildings, cocktail lounges,auto-related,carwash,laundromats, $7.62 per thousand gallons of water 19 convalescent homes and hotels without consumption for the current billing period. restaurants 20 Effective for all billings on or after July 1, 2007: 21 $8.34 per thousand gallons of water 22 consumption for the current billing period. 23 Effective for all billings on or after July 1, 2008: 24 $9.13 per thousand gallons of water consumption for the current billing period. 25 26 (6) Institutional (schools and churches) Effective for all billings on or after July 1, 2006: 27 $2.70 per thousand gallons of water consumption for the current billing period. 28 5/1/2006 - 3 - l Effective for all billings on or after July 1, 2007: $2.96 per thousand gallons of water consumption for the current billing period. 4 Effective for all billings on or after July 1, 2008: 5 $3.24 per thousand gallons of water consumption for the current billing period 6 7 Section 3. Section 15.08.072 is amended to read as follows: 8 15.08.072 New customers in single-family or duplex classification.. 9 (a) When new customer service is provided to premises classified as single-family or 10 duplex under section 15.08.070, the customer will be charged at a bimonthly rate based on the 11 number of residents reported to occupy the premises as follows: 12 Number of Rate effective for billing Rate effective for billing Rate effective for billing 13 residents on or after July 1, 2006 on or after July 1, 2007 on or after July 1, 2008 1 $26.82 $29.36 $32.15 14 2 $33.35 $36.52 $40.00 15 3 $40.82 $44.70 $48.95 16 4 $48.29 $52.88 $57.90 17 5 $55.13 $60.37 $66.11 18 6 $57.10 $62.53 $68.47 19 7 $62.10 $68.00 $74.45 8 $72.31 $79.18 $86.71 20 9 or more $84.77 $92.83 $101.65 21 22 (b) This per capita rate will be used until the customer has had service through a 23 consecutive January, February, March, and April, and on July 1 following that consecutive 24 period, the sewer rate for the customer will be adjusted to the applicable rate specified in section 25 15.08.070(a)(1) above according to the water usage for those months. Following a second 26 consecutive January, February, March, and April, the rate will be further adjusted according to 27 the demonstrated water usage for the total eight months on July 1 following the second 28 consecutive period. 5/1/2006 - 4 - 1 4 - I Section 4. The City Council finds that the rates adopted by this ordinance are not 2 discriminatory or excessive and are intended to provide sufficient revenue to operate the sewer 3 enterprise pursuant to the Government Code. 4 Section 5. This ordinance shall be published as required by law. 6 7 Mayor 8 9 I, DORIS MORTENSEN, City Clerk of the City of Burlingame, do hereby certify that the 10 foregoing ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the I"day 11 of May, 2006, and adopted thereafter at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 12 day of , 2006, by the following vote: 13 AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: 14 NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: 15 ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: 16 17 18 City Clerk 19 U:\FILES\Sewer\2006rates.ord.wpd -'0 21 22 24 25 26 27 28 5%1i2006 - 5 - CITY OF BURLINGAME NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING CHANGES TO WATER AND SEWER RATES The Burlingame City Council will conduct a public hearing at 7 PM, Monday, May 15, 2006 in the City Council Chambers, 501 Primrose Road to consider changes in water and sewer rates and charges to be effective July 1, 2006, July 1, 2007, and July 1, 2008.The proposal will be for a three-year program to increase revenue to fund capital improvement costs, anticipated increases in the cost of water supplied by the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission and to insure revenue stability in the long term. Water Rates: Effective for all meter readings and billings on or after July 1, 2006,the water rate per 1,000 gallons of water used will increase for City residents and businesses from $4.19 to $4.69 (12%) and for Burlingame Hills, from $4.66 to $5.22 (12%). In addition, the base monthly service charge for a residential 5/8"or 3/4"meter will increase from $19.23 to $21.54 (12%). Your bill may increase more or less depending on your water consumption. The rate increase covers an anticipated increase of up to 21%in charges from the San Francisco Water Department, increases in water operating costs, and an increased requirement for debt service in connection with water system infrastructure improvements. A number of ongoing major capital improvements are required for both the water distribution and storage systems. City of Burlingame Three Year Water Rate Schedule-Consumption Charge and Base Service Charge 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 Rates per 11000 gallons Actual Proposed Proposed Proposed City Rate 4.19 4.69 5.25 5.88 Burlingame Hills 4.66 5.22 5.85 6.55 Base Charge(Monthly) 5/8-3/4"Meter 19.23 21.54 24.12 27.01 _ 1"Meter 32.70 36.62 41.01 45.93 1Y2"Meter 63.47 71.09 79.62 89.17 2"Meter 101.93 114.16 127.86 143.20 3"Meter 192.33 215.41 241.26 270.21 4"Meter 321.19 359.73 402.90 451.25 6"Meter 640.45 717.30 803.38 899.78 8"Meter 1,025.11 1148.12 1285.89 1440.20 (Over for sewer rate information) Sewer Rates: Effective July 1 , 2006, the residential sewer rate will increase from $6.30 to $6.90 (9.5%) per 1 ,000 gallons of average winter water consumption. The sewer bill is based on the average winter water usage billings between January and April over the last three years. The rates for all other user categories will increase by 9.5% based on total water consumption, as well as the types of discharge put into the system. The sewer rate increase is necessary to provide financing for ongoing infrastructure improvements. The minimum bimonthly residential sewer charge will be increased from $12.60 to $13.80 (9.5%). City of Burlingame Three Year Sewer Rate Schedule 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 Rates per 1 ,000 gallons Actual Proposed Proposed Proposed Single Family/Duplex 6.30 6.90 7.55 8.27 Multi-Family Residential 5.89 6.45 7.06 7.73 Restaurant, Markets, Food 16.76 18.35 20.09 22.00 Processing Moderate Strength Commercial, 11 .30 12.37 13.54 14.83 Hotels With Restaurants, Hospital Light Strength Commercial 6.96 7.62 8.34 9. 13 Schools and Churches 2.47 2.70 2.96 3.24 Minimum Charge (@ 1 ,000 12.60 13.80 15. 11 16.54 Gallons Per Month) A public meeting will be held to discuss rate changes on April 26, 2006 at 6:00 PM in the Lane Room, Burlingame Library at 480 Primrose, Burlingame, CA 94010. More detailed information about the meeting will be posted on the City's website at www.burlingame.org, and will be noticed in the newspapers in early April. In addition, a staff report for the public hearing covering these changes will be available after May 1 , 2006. To obtain a copy, call the City Hall receptionist at 558- 7200, or stop by City Hall, 501 Primrose, Monday through Friday, 8 AM to 5 PM. The report will also be posted on the City's website. VJh Is h The City of Burlingame has more than 100 miles of water mains. Over 50% of the water system was installed prior to 1948 with some pipes �k as old as 1906. Many of the pipes are corroded and undersized making it difficult to supply sufficient water flow,and pressure to.larger new homes and businesses. Numerous water mains are located in E inaccessible backyard easements and under trees. Pipe breaks in Cracked water Pipe these areas require lengthy neighborhood water shutoffs to fix. a� Broken pipes can result in flooding properties and temporarily closing ° street access. r1D'J'I J �,Jr`/ S I)J rJ :;;pr_-1AI) 1f UI) j'1 New Water Pipe Installation The City of Burlingame has begun implementing a $100million comprehensive long-term program for an improved water distribution system.The fourth year of a planned 20 year construction program will start this summer. It includes installing new and larger pipes in the street for better flow, and easy • access.The City will also increase water storage, improve pump stations, and provide interconnections to other cities.The increase in water rates will pay for the ongoing program to BURLINGAME rehabilitate the water infrastructure throughout the City. C A L i F O A N I A ,a �II) :-,I]r r rI11 r:JII)II)!JI)JrJ'� Over time, citizens and businesses will experience fewer disruptive water line breaks as well as better water pressure and volume.Any required water shutoffs will be shorter in duration as new mains will be located in more accessible areas.The City's ability to fight CITY HALL fires will be strengthened, and increased storage will provide (650) 558-7230 k additional water during droughts. New interconnections to PUBLIC WORKS neighboring cities will provide alternate water supplies in the event 501 PRIMROSE ROAD , a of a local emergency. Most importantly, the City will be able to BURLINGAME, CA remain in compliance with present and future state water quality , 94010-3997 Water Pipe with Mineral Deposits standards. CORPORATION YARD aitr-�r_;r ffly bill? (650) 558-7670 With the proposed water rate change, the average monthly bill in Burlingame will increase about $6 1361 N. CAROLAN AVE. effective July 1, 2006.Approximately $2 of this rate increase is due to higher water purchase costs BURLINGAME, CA from San Francisco which is embarking on a $4 billion upgrade of its water delivery system to all 94010 Bay Area City's inclur"--i Burlingame. e V• IS ve lows";at Manhole' •" 'A ' sive'lono-term program for sewer rehabilitation and replacement. Q) rt this-summer, at will include installing larger sewer pipes in the street make:needed improvements to the,aging,pump stations and sewer prograrnsao;rehabilitate the sewer infrastructure throughout the City. o AP fi » y C>3 ' p JffJffl!1t1J i "e", citizens will experience few' f'Sewer'backups and l; better flows;'Emergency maintenance callouts during the winter o wins will'be r"educed.The potentinallfor:sewerage damage to properties or spills into cree � � (-d,The City will :also be able to continue to meet federal and state health requirements. •d4 M�,1f d MTV } T m a s r All � v a • {.! A w ..711gR -•fn n� � „r. J(:� fid' `i y �ih ''y���,y�; The average'"mon, thly sewer bill'.in Burlingame is $40. With the proposed sewer rate change,the '°" eas+e°b about$3.30 to_a totalzof$43x8.0 effective July 1, 2006. New Sewer Pipe Installation S Agenda Item # 6e Meeting BURLINGAME STAFF REPORT Date: Ma 1 2006 SUBMITTED BY APPROVED BY TO : HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL DATE : MAY 27 2006 FROM : PUBLIC WORKS SUBJECT: ADOPT AN ORDINANCE AMENDING FEES AND PENALTIES ASOCIATED WITH THE INDUSTRIAL WASTE DISCHARGE PROGRAM FOR 2006-2007 , 2007-2008 , AND 2008-2009 RECOMMENDATION : It is recommended that Council hold a public hearing to: 1 . Adopt proposed ordinance. 2 . Direct City Clerk to publish a summary of the ordinance within 15 days of adoption . BACKGROUND : In July 2003 , Council adopted a fee schedule to recover costs associated with the Industrial Waste Discharge Program . This program is required by the State Water Resources Control Board as a condition of Burlingame's National Pollution Discharge Elimination System permit (NPDES) . The primary purpose of the program is to monitor industrial discharges to the sanitary sewer system . This monitoring protects the City's collection system and the San Francisco Bay from destructive discharges. It also protects the Wastewater Treatment Facility from pollutants which may upset facility processes or cause a pass-through resulting in violations of the City's NPDES permit. DISCUSSION : The three year fee schedule for discharge monitoring , application processing and analytical testing in the attached ordinance is set to cover the cost of labor and materials required for each task. A cost analysis of each task is attached for all FY 2006-07 fees. The FY 2006-07 fees are then adjusted for inflation for the following two years based on the Bay Area CPI of 3% . The re-sampling costs and civil penalties are also in the ordinance . Language clearly describes the difference between re-sampling costs and penalties for permit violations. The re-sampling fees are set to cover the cost of labor and materials required for each task. The penalties are set using industry standards for other Bay Area treatment plants. S:W Public Works Directory\Staff Reports\Adopt 2006-09 Amended Fees—Waste Discharge.doc BUDGET IMPACT: The fee increase is structured to recover all costs of the Waste Discharge Program. EXHIBITS: Ordinance, Fee and Labor/Materials Breakdown c: Jesus Nava, Finance Director Doris Mortensen,City Clerk Veolia(Waste Water Treatment Plant) SAA Public Works Directory\Staff Reports\Adopt 2006-09 Amended Fees—Waste Discharge.doc r I ORDINANCE No. 2 ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME AMENDING FEES AND ESTABLISHING PENALTIES ASSOCIATED WITH 3 THE INDUSTRIAL WASTE DISCHARGE PROGRAM FOR 2006-20079 2007-2008, and 2008-2009 4 5 The CITY COUNCIL of the CITY OF BURLINGAME does hereby ordain as follows: 6 Section 1 . The City Council has considered the proposed fees submitted by the Director 7 of Public Works for the Industrial Waste Discharge Program and finds that the fees represent a fair 8 estimation of the costs involved to the City and are properly apportioned among users in the 9 program, and further that the proposed penalties would continue to encourage compliance while 10 ensuring fairness. 11 Section 2. The fees and penalties provided in Exhibit A hereto are adopted for purposes 12 of implementing, monitoring, and enforcing the City Industrial Waste Discharge Program. 13 Section 3. The schedule of fees and penalties adopted by this ordinance for 2006-2007 shall 14 be effective on and after July 1, 2006. The schedule of fees and penalties adopted by this ordinance 15 for 2007-2008 shall be effective on and after July 1, 2007. The schedule of fees and penalties 16 adopted by this ordinance for 2008-2009 shall be effective on and after July 1 , 2008, and shall 17 continue in effect until such time as they are amended by subsequent ordinance even though that 18 may be beyond the year 2009. However, should no amendment providing otherwise be adopted, 19 the then-current Annual Discharge Monitoring Fees and the Application Processing Fees shall be 20 automatically adjusted on July 1 , 2009, and each July 1 thereafter to be the greater of either: 21 a. The fee in effect immediately prior to that July 1 ; or 22 b. The product obtained by multiplying the fee then in effect by a fraction, the 23 numerator of which is the Index as defined below, published for the month of June 24 immediately prior to that July 1, and the denominator of which is the Index 25 published for the immediately prior year. 26 "Index"means the Consumer Price Index-Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (CPI- 27 W), All Items, for San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose, CA (1982-84=100) published by the 28 U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. Should the Index no longer be 1 I published,the Director of Public Works shall select a comparable index that the Director 2 determines measures the increase and decrease in the cost of living in the San Francisco- 3 Oakland-San Jose area. 4 5 Mayor 6 7 I, DORIS MORTENSEN, City Clerk of the City of Burlingame, do hereby certify that the 8 foregoing ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 1 S`day of May, 2006, and adopted thereafter at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the day 9 of , 2006, by the following vote: 10 AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: 11 NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: 12 13 City Clerk U:\FILES\ORDINANC\SEWEFEEINDUSWASTE2006.PWD.wpd 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2 1 EXHIBIT A INDUSTRIAL DISCHARGE PROGRAM FEES AND CIVIL PENALTIES 2 ADOPTED , 2006 3 4 ANNUAL DISCHARGE MONITORING FEES 5 TYPE OF DISCHARGER' 2006-2007 FEE 2007-2008 FEE 2008-2009 FEE 6 LIGHT $ 571.00 $ 588.00 $ 606.00 7 MODERATE $1,565.00 $1,611.00 $1,660.00 g HEAVY/SIU $2,185.00 $2,251.00 $2,318.00 9 NON-CONVENTIONAL2 $1,168.00 $1,203.00 $1,239.00 10 GROUNDWATER Non-conventional Non-conventional Non-conventional fees plus $6.58 per fees plus $6.77 fees plus $6.98 11 1000 gallons per 1000 gallons per 1000 gallons discharged discharged discharged 12 13 APPLICATION PROCESSING FEE 14 2006-2007 FEE 2007-2008 FEE 2008-2009 FEE 15 APPLICATION FEE' $ 150.00 $ 155.00 $ 160.00 16 ANALYTICAL FEES 17 18 2006-2007 FEE 2007-2008 FEE 2008-2009 FEE 19 IN-HOUSE TESTING Charged at cost Charged at cost Charged at cost CONTRACT LAB TESTING Charged at cost Charged at cost Charged at cost 20 plus 15% plus 15% plus 15% 21 22 23 24 IThe Director of Public Works determines the type of discharger under the City Sanitary Sewer Use Regulations (Chapter 15.10) 25 This fee covers two(2)samples,Additional samples will be charged in accordance with the Analytical Processing 26 Fee Schedule below. 27 'This fee is intended to recover the initial review,inspection,and research to permit a business in the city under the industrial waste discharge requirements only. 28 4In-house lab testing consists of BOD, TSS, and pH. 3 I VIOLATION CIVIL PENALTIES/COSTS 2 A fine is a penalty resulting from a sewer discharge permit violation. Fines are not issued for a first time violation. The fee for the first violation is to recover the cost for re-sampling to 3 determine whether the discharge from a business has been brought into compliance. The fees for the 2nd, 3rd, and subsequent violations are a combination of re-sampling costs and fines. 4 For example, if on January 1, 2007, BOD & TSS limits were violated, the total cost would be $165.00 + $135.00 = $300.00. If a 2nd violation was issued on February 1, 2007, for the same 5 Violation Parameters, the cost would be $165.00 + $135.00 + $300.00 = $600.00. If a 3rd violation was issued on March 1, 2007, for the same Violation Parameters, the cost would be 6 $165.00 + $135.00 + $600.00 = $900.00. 7 Re-Sampling Costs 8 Violation Parameter Re-Sampling Cost 9 Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) $165.00 10 Total Suspended Solids (TSS) $135.00 11 pH $ 50.00 12 Oil & Grease $185.00 13 Grease Trap Interceptor Cleaning/Reporting $ 55.00 14 Other Varies as to actual cost 15 Total Fees/Fine Computation 16 1"Violation 2"d Violation 3 d or More Violation 17 One Parameter See Re-Sampling Re-sampling costs Re-Sampling costs plus Costs plus $200.00 $400.00 18 Two Parameters See Re-Sampling Re-sampling costs Re-sampling costs plus 19 Costs plus $300.00 $600.00 Three Parameters See Re-Sampling Re-sampling costs Re-sampling costs plus 20 Costs plus $400.00 $800.00 21 Four Parameters See Re-Sampling Re-sampling costs Re-sampling costs plus Costs plus $500.00 $1,000.00 22 Five Parameters See Re-Sampling Re-sampling costs Re-sampling costs plus 23 Costs plus $600.00 $1,200.00 24 Illicit Discharge $250.00 $500.00 $1,000.00 25 26 Pursuant to the Sanitary Sewer Use Regulations (Chapter 15.10) and Government Code Section 54740, the City may also seek a penalty of up to $25,000 per day for violations of industrial 27 waste requirements by petition to the Superior Court. 28 4 1 EXHIBIT A INDUSTRIAL DISCHARGE PROGRAM FEES AND CIVIL PENALTIES 2 ADOPTED 12006 3 4 ANNUAL DISCHARGE MONITORING FEES 5 TYPE OF DISCHARGER' 2006-2007 FEE 2007-2008 FEE 2008-2009 FEE 6 LIGHT $ 571.00 $ 588.00 $ 606.00 7 MODERATE $1,565.00 $1,611.00 $1,660.00 8 HEAVY/SIU $2,185.00 $2,251.00 $2,318.00 9 NON-CONVENTIONAL2 $1,168.00 $1,203.00 $1,239.00 GROUNDWATER Non-conventional Non-conventional Non-conventional 10 fees plus $6.58 per fees plus$6.77 fees plus$6.98 1000 gallons per 1000 gallons per 1000 gallons 11 discharged discharged discharged 12 13 APPLICATION PROCESSING FEE 14 2006-2007 FEE 2007-2008 FEE 2008-2009 FEE 15 APPLICATION FEE $ 150.00 $ 155.00 $ 160.00 16 ANALYTICAL FEES 17 18 2006-2007 FEE 2007-2008 FEE 2008-2009 FEE 19 IN-HOUSE TESTING Charged at cost Charged at cost Charged at cost CONTRACT LAB TESTING Charged at cost Charged at cost Charged at cost 20 plus 15% plus 15% plus 15% 21 22 23 24 'The Director of Public Works determines the type of discharger under the City Sanitary Sewer Use Regulations (Chapter 15.10) 25 ZThis fee covers two(2)samples,Additional samples will be charged in accordance with the Analytical Processing 26 Fee Schedule below. 27 3This fee is intended to recover the initial review,inspection,and research to permit a business in the city under the industrial waste discharge requirements only. 28 4In-house lab testing consists of BOD,TSS,and pH. 3 �l I VIOLATION CIVIL PENALTIES/COSTS i 2 A fine is a penalty resulting from a sewer discharge permit violation. Fines are not issued for a first time violation. The fee for the first violation is to recover the cost for re-sampling to 3 determine whether the discharge from a business has been brought into compliance. The fees for the 2nd, 3rd, and subsequent violations are a combination of re-sampling costs and fines. 4 For example, if on January 1, 2007, BOD& TSS limits were violated,the total cost would be $165.00+$135.00=$300.00. If a 2nd violation was issued on February 1,2007, for the same 5 Violation Parameters,the cost would be$165.00+$135.00+$300.00=$600.00. If a 3rd violation was issued on March 1,2007, for the same Violation Parameters, the cost would be 6 $165.00+$135.00+$600.00=$900.00. 7 Re-Sampling Costs 8 Violation Parameter Re-Sampling Cost 9 Biochemical Oxygen Demand(BOD) $165.00 10 Total Suspended Solids (TSS) $135.00 11 pH $ 50.00 12 Oil & Grease $185.00 13 Grease Trap Interceptor Cleaning/Reporting $ 55.00 14 Other Varies as to actual cost ; 15 Total Fees/Fine Computation 16 1"Violation 2"Violation 3'd or More Violation 17 One Parameter See Re-Sampling Re-sampling costs Re-Sampling costs plus Costs plus$200.00 $400.00 18 Two Parameters See Re-Sampling Re-sampling costs Re-sampling costs plus 19 Costs plus$300.00 $600.00 Three Parameters See Re-Sampling Re-sampling costs Re-sampling costs plus 20 Costs plus $400.00 $800.00 21 Four Parameters See Re-Sampling Re-sampling costs Re-sampling costs plus Costs plus $500.00 $1,000.00 22 Five Parameters See Re-Sampling Re-sampling costs Re-sampling costs plus 23 Costs plus $600.00 $1,200.00 24 Illicit Discharge $250.00 $500.00 $1,000.00 25 26 Pursuant to the Sanitary Sewer Use Regulations(Chapter 15.10)and Government Code Section 54740,the City may also seek a penalty of up to $25,000 per day for violations of industrial 27 waste requirements by petition to the Superior Court. 28 4 Office of Environmental Compliance Cost Breakdown Light Industrial and Commercial Permits Hours Cost Total Permit Writing 1 $53.54 $53.54 Outreach 3 $53.54 $160.62 Data Review 1 $32.19 $32.19 Reports 1.5 $53.54 $80.31 Login data entry 1 $32.19 $32.19 Grease Trap Insp. 3 $53.54 $160.62 Total Cost Recovery $519.47 Overhead 10% $51.95 Total 10.5 $571.42 Current cost $522.00 % Difference 8.65 * Light Dischargers have been previously discontinued for excellent compliance issues but costs have not been recovered. Light permits will be reissues to recover current inspection costs. Moderate Industrial and Commercial Permits (per permit) Hours Cost Total Permit Writing 2 @ $53.54 $107.08 Outreach 2 $44.53 $89.06 Data Review 1 @ $32.19 $32.19 Reports 1 $53.54 $53.54 Lab Fees* 6 $131.00 $786.00 Login data entry 2 @ $32.19 $64.38 Sampling" 2 @ $32.19 $64.38 Oil and Grease Analysis 2 $70.00 $140.00 Grease trapInsp, 1@ $32.19 $32.19 Industry Meeting 1 @ $53.54 $53.54 Total Cost Recovery $1,422.36 Overhead @ 10% 1 $142.24 Total 20 $1,564.60 Current cost $1,427.00 % difference 8.794 * See below the Heavy Discharger Table i Heavy Commercial and SIU permits Hours Cost Total Permit Writing 4 @ $53.54 $214.16 Outreach Sewer Science Bayfront Cleanup 6 @ $53.54 $321.24 Data Review 3 $32.19 $96.57 Reports 3 $53.54 $160.62 Login Data Entry 2 @ $32.19 $64.38 Lab Fees* 6 @ $131.00 $786.00 Sampling" 2 @ $32.19 $64.38 Oil and Grease analysis 2 @ $70.00 $140.00 Grease Interceptor Inspection 1 @ $32.19 $32.19 Annual Site Inspection 2 @ $53.54 $107.08 Total Cost Recovery $1,986.62 Overhead @10% $198.66 Total 31 $2,185.28 Current cost $1,998.00 % difference 8.57 *Lab Fees for Moderate and Heavy dischargers do not include contracted costs from analysis of the oil and grease sample ** Includes sampler calibration, instrument calibration, cleaning/disinfection, van equipment upkeep, van safety Non-Conventional/Groundwater*** Hours Cost Total Permit Writing 3 @ $53.54 $160.62 Outreach 3 @ $44.53 $133.59 Data Review 2 @ $32.19 $64.38 Reports 2 @ $53.54 $107.08 Login Data Ent 7 $32.19 $225.33 Lab Fees* 2 @ $131.00 $262.00 Sampling" 2@ $32.19 $64.38 Stormwater Inspection 1 @ $44.53 $44.53 Total Cost Recovery $1,061.91 Overhead @ 10% $106.19 Total 22 $1,168.10 Current cost $1,089.00 % difference 6.771760319 *** Groundwater permit fees subject to fees per 1000 gallons discharged plus Non-Conventional Permit fee and Oil and Grease sampling costs if applicable. z Groundwater Discharge* Cost Collections Systems annual $4,950,000.00 WWTF annual $5,710,000.00 Total Annual Process Water Cost $10,660,000.00 Monthly Process Water Cost $888,333.33 Average Daily Flow Gal. 4,500,000 MGD Average Monthly Flow Gal. 135,000,000 Cost per gallon $0.0066 Cost per 1000 Gallon $6.580 *This charge is the summation of the City's complete operating budgets for Collection Systems and the VWVfF. Application Fees Hours Cost Total Inspection and Survey 2 53.54 $107.08 Administration 1 32.19 $32.19 Subtotal $139.27 Overhead 10% $13.92 Total $153.19 * This fee is intended to recover the initial review, inspection and research to permit a business in the City under the industrial waste discharge requirements only. Contractor Approx. Resampling Fees Cost Labor Hours Materials" Total Cost Biochemical Oxygen Demand $72.00 2 $20.00 $164.00 $165.00 Total Suspended Solids $59.00 2 $20.00 $138.00 $135.00 H* $32.00 1 $20.00 $52.00 , $50.00 Oil and Grease* $70.00 $32.00 2 $50.00 $184.00 $185.00 Grease Trap/Interceptor $53.54 1 $0.00 $53.54 $55.00 Cleaning/Reporting Varies *1 Hour minimum for set up time Oil and Grease charges at contractor rate for analysis **Materials include use of automatic and/or grab sampler, pH meter, calibration of equipment and use of consumables Agenda Item 6f Meeting BURLINGAME STAFF REPORT Date: Mav 15 2006 SUBMITTED BY APPROVED BY TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL DATE: MAY 2, 2006 FROM: PUBLIC WORKS SUBJECT: ADOPT AN ORDINANCE FOR A STOP SIGN AT CORTEZ AVENUE AND SHERMAN AVENUE RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that Council hold a public hearing to: 1. Adopt the proposed ordinance. 2. Direct the City Clerk to publish a summary of the ordinance within 15 days of adoption. BACKGROUND: A request for stop signs on Cortez Avenue at Sherman Avenue was discussed at the Traffic Safety and Parking Commission in February and November of 2004. On both occasions the request was denied because minimum warrant conditions were not met. The residents appealed the request to the City Council and at the September 19, 2005 meeting, Council approved the temporary installation of stop signs for a six month trial period. DISCUSSION: At their April 17, 2006 meeting, staff made a presentation of the traffic volume and speed impacts resulting from the temporary stop signs. Council directed staff to proceed with making the stop signs permanent. BUDGET IMPACT: There are sufficient funds in the Public Works Department operating budget to maintain the stop signs. EXHIBITS: Ordinance - Stops signs at Cortez Avenue and Sherman Avenue c: Doris Mortensen, City Clerk SAA Public Works Directory\Staff Reports\Ordinance 2006\Adopting Ord inance_Cortez-S herm an Stop Signs.doc I ORDINANCE No. 2 ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME AMENDING SECTION 13.20.010 FOR 3 INSTALLATION OF STOP SIGNS AT THE INTERSECTION OF CORTEZ AVENUE AND SHERMAN AVENUE 4 5 The CITY COUNCIL of the CITY OF BURLINGAME does hereby ordain as follows: 6 Section 1. The neighborhood near the intersection of Cortez and Sherman Avenues has 7 requested the City to install stop signs at this intersection, although under traffic warrants, stop 8 signs are not indicated. The City has conducted traffic studies and put in place temporary stop 9 signs,and the neighborhood reports that the temporary stops signs have seemed to make the traffic 10 situation in the neighborhood better. In order to provide the desired amenity, this ordinance is 11 adopted. 12 13 Section 2. Subsection 13.20.010(c) is amended to read as follows: 14 (c) Carmelita Avenue approaching Cortez Avenue; 15 Carmelita Avenue approaching Vancouver Avenue; 16 Canyon Road approaching Easton Drive; 17 Carolan Avenue approaching North Lane; 18 Castenada Drive approaching Trousdale Drive and Martinez Drive; 19 Chula Vista Avenue approaching Majilla Avenue; 20 Clarice Lane approaching Quesada Way; 21 Columbus Avenue approaching Easton Drive. 22 Coronado Drive approaching Davis Drive; 23 Cortez Avenue approaching Carmelita Avenue; 24 Cortez Avenue approaching Sherman Avenue; 25 Cypress Avenue approaching Barriolhet Avenue. 26 27 Section 3. Section 13.20.010(s) is amended to read as follows: 28 (s) Sanchez Avenue approaching Cortez Avenue; I Sebastian Drive approaching Arguello Drive; 2 Sebastian Drive approaching Frontera Way; 3 Sebastian Drive approaching Mariposa Drive; 4 Sebastian Drive approaching Trousdale Drive; 5 Sequoia Avenue approaching Murchison Drive; 6 Sequoia Avenue approaching Trousdale Drive; 7 Sherman Avenue approaching Cortez Avenue; 8 Skyline Boulevard approaching Trousdale Drive; 9 Skyview Drive approaching Skyline Boulevard; 10 Stanton Road approaching Gilbreth Road; 11 Summit Drive approaching El Prado Road; 12 Summit Drive approaching Hillside Circle. 13 14 Section 4. This ordinance shall be published as required by law. 15 16 Mayor 17 18 I, DORIS MORTENSEN, City Clerk of the City of Burlingame, do hereby certify that the 19 foregoing ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 1't day of May, 2006, and adopted thereafter at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the day 20 of , 2005, by the following vote: 21 22 AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: 23 ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: 24 25 City Clerk 26 U:\FILES\ORDINANC\stopsign20061.pwd.wpd 27 28 STAFF REPORT BURL- iN�AME AGENDA ITEM# 8a MTG. DATE 5/15/06 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL SUB TED BY DATE: May 7,2006 APPROVED FROM: Parks & Recreation Director (558-7307) BY � � �` SUBJECT: UPDATE ON THE LONG RANGE PLANS FOR THE REFORESTATION OF EASTON DRIVE RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council receive the staff report regarding the reforestation of Easton Drive. BACKGROUND: Over the past several years, six eucalyptus trees have been removed from Easton Drive for health considerations. An inspection of the trees was performed by Kevin Kielty, a Certified Arborist working for Mayne Tree Company. The report indicates that the trees are still in generally fair health, but are in a general state of decline. Because the trees have been very well maintained over the past 20 years, the hazards from limb drop, splitting crotches and failure at the soil line has been greatly reduced. Last year, the City Council asked the Beautification Commission to develop a long range plan for the reforestation of the eucalyptus trees on Easton Drive. On April 6, 2006, the Commission conducted a public meeting on the long-term vision for the trees on/Viston. There were many residents present and thoughts exchanged. Topics discussed included: 1) The need for parking spaces on Easton 2) Safety impacts associated with the tree in front of library(possibly install traffic reflectors) 3) Creating a sense of uniformity/spacing(mixed opinion from residents) 4) Keeping the canopy above the height on other streets(#I item—discussion on 70'+) 5) Disease, safety evaluations and issues 6) Need for trees to allow light to homes(low priority) 7) Need for trees to provide wind protection(low priority) 8) Impacts to the streets 9) Locations to plant(planting strip only or behind sidewalk) Some of the questions raised by the community members were: 1) When would this plan take effect? 2) How long can the Eucs live? 3) Will this just be used for replacement or will they fill the spots where we park? 4) Will these be on private property or just in the planting strip? The Commission will probably have at least one additional public meeting before establishing a plan. BUDGET IMPACT: Although there may be budget impacts associated with the implementation of the reforestation plan, there are no impacts associated with this report. ATTACHMENTS: None CITY 0 STAFF REPORT BURUNGAME AGENDA ITEM# 8b MTG. *m wE DATE 5.15.06 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL SUBMITTED BY DATE: MAY 5, 2006 APPROVE FROM: CITY PLANNER BY SUBJECT: INTRODUCE ORDINANCE FOR PROPOSED ZONIN FOR THE ROLLINS ROAD ZONING DISTRICT TO IMPLEMENT THE NORTH BURLINGAME/ROLLINS ROAD SPECIFIC PLAN ADOPTED SEPTEMBER 2004. Introduction: City Council should review the proposal to amend the zoning regulations to establish a new zoning district for the Rollins Road portion of the North Burlingame/Rollins Road planning area. A public hearing on this ordinance will be held at the Second Reading. Introduction of the proposed ordinance requires the following Council actions. A. Request City Clerk to read title of the proposed ordinance. B. Waive further reading of the ordinance. C. Introduce the proposed ordinance. D. Direct the city clerk to publish a summary of the ordinance at least five days before proposed adoption. If the proposal for the zoning change and district map is clear, this item should be set for a second reading and public hearing at the Council meeting of June 5, 2006. General Plan Compliance: The Rollins Road zoning district is part of the implementation phase of the North Burlingame/Rollins Road Specific Plan adopted by the City Council and amended to the Burlingame General Plan in September 2004. The provisions in the ordinance are consistent with the plan because they are taken from the land use element and design guidelines in that adopted plan, supplemented with provisions from the existing M-1 district for the Rollins Road Light Industrial district which currently regulates development in this area. The M-1 zoning has been fundamental in implementing the 1969 General Plan and in establishing the existing land use pattern for this area. The Rollins Road district consists of all the area between the CalTrain tracks on the west, El Portal Creek which is the northern city boundry, US 101 on the west and Broadway on the south; about two- thirds of the North Burlingame/Rollins Road Specific Planning area. The proposed provisions of the Rollins Road district are consistent with the directives of the Specific Plan they are intended to implement. CEQA Compliance: Negative Declaration ND533-P was prepared and adopted for the North Burlingame/Rollins Road Specific Plan in September 2004. Since the zoning action to adopt the implementing regulations for the Rollins Road INTRODUCE ORDINANCE FOR PROPOSED ZONING FOR THE ROLLINS ROAD ZONING DISTRICT TO IMPLEMENT THE NORTH BURLINGAMEIROLLINS ROAD SPECIFIC PLAN May 15,2006 subarea is an implementation of that adopted plan and is consistent with the provisions of that plan, this zoning action is determined to be covered by ND533-P. Planning Commission Action: At the Commission meeting on September 26, 2005, the Commissioners discussed the proposed Rollins Road regulations. They directed staff to change the regulations for incidental food establishments to extend their hours of operation from 6 a.m. to 6 p.m. to 5 a.m. to 7 p.m. so that these uses could better serve those businesses in the industrial area which have employees on shifts. The commission directed that this item should be brought back to the action calendar when the change had been made and there has been proper public notice. On October 24, 2005 the Planning Commission held a public hearing and took action on the proposed zoning regulations for the Rollins Road area. The Commission voted 7-0 to approve the proposed changes and recommend them to the City Council for action with specific direction: ■ to make exceptions to the performance criteria for auto row subject to a conditional use permit; ■ to change the requirements for retail sales and display areas to allow the service of alcoholic beverages but not the sale; and ■ to leave the proposed regulations for the drainage area, the FAR in the Southern Gateway Entrance area, the prohibition of retail uses in the Southern Gateway Entrance area and the provision for veterinary hospitals. However the Commission directed staff and the subcommittee to revisit and return to the Commission with refined direction on self-storage uses in the Rollins Road drainage area; look at an appropriate minimum lot size to exempt a developer in the Southern Gateway Entrance area from having to consolidate properties to be eligible for ti,c FAR density bonus; look at what retail uses might be appropriate in the Southern Gateway Entrance an:,: and study further the regulation of veterinary hospital use in the Rollins Road area. City Council Study Session, December 19, 2005: On Decemb ;- 19, 2005, the City Council studied the Rollins Road zoning regulations as recommended to them by the I'lanning Commission. At that meeting the City Council directed the regulations back to the Planning Co.nmission for them to resolve all the issues remaining(noted above); and to return the proposed ordinance to t lie Council when the commission had acted on the entire document. Planning Commission Action , March 18, 2006 The Nortl% url1iigame/Rollins Road Subcommittee of the Planning Commission, reported out to the Planning G ,unission for action their recommendations on the remaining items to be resolved on March 18, 2006. The i';aniiing Commission held a public hearing and recommended the proposed Rollins Roads zoning district regu. ;tions to the City Council for approval on March 18, 2006. The regulations as recommended by the Plannii Commission are summarized below, with the exception of the definition of animal shelter/animal rescue center. %vhich has been revised based on the City Council direction. City Coun ;study Session , March 29, 2006 On March 2006, the City Council held a study session to review the Rollins Road zoning regulations as recommen,' .i by the Planning Commission. Following discussion the City Council directed staff to address three issues , cfore bringing the proposed regulations for Introduction: • A ci:.ritication of the definition of animal shelter/animal rescue center; • Rem,-,al of the criteria addressing traffic in the Southern Gateway Entrance overlay regulations; and • Inv, ;.-ite if a fee could be assessed for the storage of vehicles and boats. 2 INTRODUCE ORDINANCE FOR PROPOSED ZONING FOR THE ROLLINS ROAD ZONING DISTRICT TO IMPLEMENT THE NORTH BURLINGAME/ROLLINS ROAD SPECIFIC PLAN May 15,2006 A new deft»i tion for Animal shelters and rescue centers has been proposed(See City Attorney's Memo April 20, 2006, amending animal shelter definition). The proposed text narrows the definition of animal shelter/rescue center to match state law,with the clarification that the use may include faculties for public education and training of volunteers and facilities to keep animals on site for adoption. Criteria had been added to the Southern Gateway Entrance overlay area to call developer's attention to the particular impact of development on these lots on both the level of service at the Rollins Road/Broadway intersection and on the capacity of Rollins Road at this location. Council determined at study that since both of these issues were identified as community standards in the specific plan, they would be addressed in the environmental analysis of any development in the Gateway Entrance area, so do not need to be cited in the zoning regulations. This section of the Southern Gateway Entrance Overlay regulations was removed. Regarding the idea of assessing a fee for storage of vehicles and boats on properties in the Rollins Road area the City Attorney notes that the City's (airport)parking tax applies to the parking or storage of vehicles,but, on the face of it,not to the parking of boats. There are three exceptions: where the predominant use of the property is not parking or storage; where the vehicles are company-owned or leased such as a utility yard, and where the vehicles are part of an inventory, in particular a car dealership storage area. To change the present regulations to include boats or to extend the tax to the storage on other property would require a vote of the people. (See City Attorney's memo April 5, 2006, Commercial Parking Facility Tax and Its Application to Storage Businesses). BACKGROUND General Summary of the Proposed Rollins Road Zoning Regulations with changes from M-1 Noted: The proposed zoning regulations for the Rollins Road area build on the M-1 (light industrial)regulations which have been in place for many years. The discussion which follows describes the proposed Rollins Road regulations and notes in italics the changes added to the M-1 regulations in order for the zoning to comply with the specitie plan .(see Annotated Rollins Road Zoning District attached). ➢ Permitted uses (CS 25.44.020) o All uses currently permitted in the M-1 zone with the same performance criteria including: air courier, delivery or other transshipment services; ambulance services; automobile and truck repair, service and body shops; any light industrial or manufacturing use; food establishments within a multi-use building; laboratory and clean room facilities for research, teasing or creating products and goods; outdoor storage of materials accessory to a permitted use; rental and leasing of goods and equipment conducted wholly within an enclosed building; service businesses; warehousing, storage, distribution of goods,materials, liquids and equipment; accessory uses necessary for permitted uses, retail sales and display areas accessory to a permitted use; o Office use in conjunction with and for the sole support of a permitted use occurring on the same site not to exceed 25%of a warehouse building. ➢ Conditional uses (CS 25.44.030): o All uses currently conditional in the M-1 zone with the same performance criteria including: industrial uses with an FAR not to exceed 1.0; air courier, delivery or other transshipment services; automobile rental businesses (truck and recreation vehicle); automobile dealerships; automobile storage for car rental businesses; commercial recreation; health 3 INTRODUCE ORDINANCE FOR PROPOSED ZONING FOR THE ROLLINS ROAD ZONING DISTRICT TO IMPLEMENT THE NORTH BURLINGAME/ROLLINS ROAD SPECIFIC PLAN May 15,2006 services and medical clinics which function to support businesses in area; food establishments which do not meet performance criteria of permitted use; motor freight terminals; outdoor storage or treatment of materials; retail sales and display areas accessory to a permitted use; veterinary hospitals; living quarters in association with a permitted or conditional use to be used by night watchman; structures over 35' in height; structure covers more than 60%of the lot; accessory structures necessary to a conditional use; retail sales accessory to a warehouse use permit only for alcohol sales in containers and hours of operation; accessory uses related to a permitted use which require outdoor processing; o Technical schools with training related to permitted or conditional uses; o Building materials and garden supply stores; o Office uses supporting permitted or conditional uses that exceed 25% GSF and do not to exceed 50% GSF of the warehouse structure. o Animal shelter or animal rescue center with detailed performance criteria; o Any commercial or industrial use similar in nature to a permitted or conditional use in this or the Inner Bayshore (IB)zoning district. ➢ Prohibited Uses (CS 25.44.040). o All uses currently prohibited in the M-1 zone : adult oriented businesses; massage,bathing or similar; automobile sales lots; automobile wrecking,junk yards, storage or baling of scraps; conference and exhibition facilities; hotels and motels; living quarters and residential structures (except night watchman); outdoor storage or treatment of materials in required parking or landscaping; gasoline service stations; personal services. o Kennels. ➢ Special requirements for the Automobile Sales and Service Overlay Area (CS 25.44.050) o Permitted uses: only automobile sales lots, automobile repair; automobile rental; o Conditional uses: all other uses permitted or conditional in the RR district. o Prohibited uses: adult oriented businesses; massage, bathing or similar businesses; automobile wrecking,junkyards, storage, baling of scraps; conference and exhibition facilities; hotels and motels, living quarters and residential structures; outdoor storage or treatment of materials;gasoline service stations;personal services. ➢ Special requirements for the Southern Gateway Entrance Overlay Area (CS 25.44.055) 0 Permitted uses: office uses with a maximum FAR of 1.0; automobile dealers and dealerships max. FAR 1.0; commercial recreation facilities except theaters max. FAR 1.0. o Conditional uses:gasoline service stations; all other uses permitted or conditional in the RR district. o Permitted and conditional uses which include an approved gateway feature as defined by the Planning Commission and are located on a lot of at least 15, 000 SF shall be eligible for up to a maximum of 1.0 additional FAR as determined by the Planning Commission. o Prohibited uses: adult oriented businesses; massage, bathing or similar businesses; arttomobile wrecking,junkyards, storage, baling ofscraps; conference and exhibition facilities; hotels and motels, living quarters and residential structures; outdoor storage or treatment of materials;gasoline service stations,personal services.. ➢ Use of drainage rights-of-ways (CS 25.44.060) o Permitted uses: Publicly owned and operated drainage facilities and improvements ;privately owned and operated electric transmission lines. 4 INTRODUCE ORDINANCE FOR PROPOSED ZONING FOR THE ROLLINS ROAD ZONING DISTRICT TO IMPLEMENT THE NORTH BURLINGAME/ROLLINS ROAD SPECIFIC PLAN May 15,2006 o Conditional uses: supplemental parking for permitted or conditional uses in the district; storage for operable vehicles including automobiles and trucks; recreation vehicle and boat storage; outdoor storage related to immediately abutting uses; fencing; uses similar with frontage on a public street and which proposed use and siting meets all the requirements cstab;fished by the city engineer. o Prohibited uses: all uses not listed as permitted or conditional in this section shall be prohibited, including but not limited to long term airport parking. ➢ Outdoor slorage(CS 25.44.065) o Storage shall be paved, not located in requiring parking, aisles, driveways or landscaping. o Lots north of Mills Creek or with lot fronts on Rollins Road. No outdoor storage in front yard on any lot north of Mills Creek or with a lot front on Rollins Road. o Fencing. all outdoor storage shall be enclosed by an opaque of solid fence or wall 8' in height; if in side or rear of building or not visible from the street, fencing may be open. ➢ Design Review(CS 25.44.070) o Applied to all projects which are substantial construction or which change more than 50%of the front facade or any facade facing a public street or parking lot;processed as set out in the zoning code. o Six Criteria for design review based on the design guidelines in the Specific Plan o Awnings shall be included in design review ➢ Building Regulations. (CS 25.44.075) o Lot coverage: 70% o iVlaximurn front setback and build-to line. ■ Rollins Road, North Carolan road, Ingold Road, Guittard Road and Broderick Road:front wall shall be set back 20 feet from the front property line and 60% of the structure shall be located at the front setback. ■ David road, Edwards Court, Marsten Road and North Carolan: front wall shall be setback a minimum of 15 feet. ■ Adrian Road and Adrian Court: front wall shall have a 0 foot setback and shall have a minimum of 20% of the building built at the zero setback line. o bear setbacks: there shall be no rear setback requirements. ➢ Height Limitations. (CS 25.44.080) o Maximum height for structures is 60 feet. o Structures with lot fronts on Nerli Lane or Broadway shall have a maximum height of 75 feet. o Alaximum heights are subject to limitation by the FAA. ➢ Minimum lot size and street frontage.(CS 25.44.080) 0 Minimum lot size of 10,000 SF and minimum street frontage of 50 feet. ➢ No variance for lot size and street frontage.(CS 25.44.095) ➢ Landscaping, creek access and fencing requirements.(CS 25.44.100) o 10% of total property shall be landscaped; o (0% of the front setback shall be landscaped, if 10% of total property is less than 60% of front setback, all landscaping shall be in the front; if 10% of the total property is more than 60%, the remaining landscaping shall be visible fi-om the public street. 5 INTRODUCE ORDINANCE FOR PROPOSED ZONING FOR THE ROLLINS ROAD ZONING DISTRICT TO IMPLEMENT THE NORTH BURLINGAMEIROLLINS ROAD SPECIFIC PLAN May 15,2006 o landscaping shall be outside of fenced areas and visible from the public right-of-way; o landscape plan shall be submitted for City Arborist approval when construction plans are submitted. o Fences. maximum of 8 feet. o Wreck zlccess. Any parcel with fi-ontage on Easton, Mills and El Portal creeks shall provide as Dart of the on-site landscaping plan a public access trail along the top of bank for the portion of the creek bank on the site. Design shall be compliant with the Rollins Road Design District ,011iticlines and Public Works requirements. ➢ Parkin requirements. (CS 25.44.105) o All uses are subject to the standards in Ch 25.70 (parking) and such additional parking as may be required for conditional or permitted uses. ➢ Add New Definitions.- 25.08.155 efinitions:25.08.155 Building materials and garden supply store. "Buildit,,�r materials and garden supply store"means a retail or wholesale establishment that predominantly sells buildings materials,paint, wallpaper, glass,fixtures, lumber, nursery stock, lawn and garden supplies, electrical,plumbing, heating and air conditioning equipment and supplies, and building and construction tools. 25.08.077 Animal shelter or animal rescue center. "Animal shelter" or "animal rescue center"means eerpBffitteit adeptien set=L•'lE fi3Oeilitiesfio +' eelxtt, . a facility operated by a government agency, society for the prevention of cruelty to animals, humane society, or rescue group providing services for stray, lost, injured or unwanted animals including treatment, regulated under Division 14 of the boil& Agriculture Code (sections 30500 to 32030). Such a use may include facilities for public education and training of volunteers, as well as facilities for the keeping of animals on site for a limited tine. Note: Revision based on Council direction at March 29, 2006, study meeting, to see if the definition could be clarified so that it did not use as a criteria, profit or non-profit operation. The proposed definition is based on the definition l:St;d by the State of California as cited in the Food &Agriculture code. 25.08.137 Bc : ;,,Kennel "Boar... f;emml"means any kennel where more than the number of animals allowed on a single site under title 9 of this code and owned by another person are temporarily boarded for pay or other compensation of anY kind;provided, however, this definition shall not apply to zoos, animal shelters, animal rescue centers or vc �rirrary hospitals. 25.08.666 Veterinary hospital. "Veterinm y ho-)I)ital"means an establishment for the care and treatment of the diseases and injuries of animals and uv;;cre animals may be boarded during their convalescence; however, overnight care ofsaid animals is not a hart of veterinary hospital except when necessary in the medical treatment of the animal. 6 INTRODUCE ORDINANCE FOR PROPOSED ZONING FOR THE ROLLINS ROAD ZONING DISTRICT TO IMPLEMENT THE NORTH BURLINGAMEMOLLINS ROAD SPECIFIC PLAN May 15,2006 Recommendations for addressing the issues raised by the Citv Council and Planning Commission: Following meetings of the Subcommittee on December 8,2005, and January 24, 2006, the following solutions to the issues raised by Council and Commission were recommended by the Subcommittee. These recommendations were later endorsed by the Planning Commission in their action on February 27, 2006. A summary of tl,c Subcommittee recommendations follows: Land Uses in the Rollins Road Industrial Area ➢ Add a new definition of Veterinary Hospital which removes "boarding and breeding" reference. Allow Veterinary Hospitals as a conditional use but add performance criteria requiring: all exercise areas inside, operation by a licensed veterinarian, sanitary standards, and odor control. A traffic study prepared by the city to compare trip generation numbers for various animal care facilities, show that there a ineasurable differences between the trip generation characteristics of various types of ani,nal care facilities. Veterinary hospitals generate more a.m. and p.m. peak hour traffic than 'doggie day care' facilities. Animal shelters generate less than either veterinary hospitals or 'dougie day care'. Veterinary hospitals generated the most traffic in the a.m. peak hour. (See Fehr &, Peers Nlay 5, 2006, memo attached). ➢ Define and allow "Animal Shelters and Rescue Center" as a conditional use with performance criteria simil:i.-to veterinary hospitals. The use shall be defined as it is defined by the State in the Food & Agriculture code with the allowance of public education. training of volunteers and allowing aninrils to be housed on the site for a limited time. Performance criteria also address odor, noise, press: of cin attendant 24 hours a day, and veterinarian supervision. A traffic study of trips gener:ited by three types of animal care facilities indicates that Animal Shelters/Rescue centers generate the fewest trips of the three types of animal care facilities at p.m. peak hours, and no trips :it a.m. peak hours because such facilities are not open until after the a.m. peak. (See Fehr & Pc. rs Alai 5, 2006, memo attached). ➢ Defii; and prohibit "Commercial Boarding of Animals" and kennels which include breeding animals for s:;; ➢ Clarified the performance criteria for "Large Scale Building Materials and Garden Supply Stores"with a mai: mum r 100,000 SF of indoor and outdoor display including any storage area and sales area combi ,cd. 1-crformance criteria for this use make it a clear requirement that parking for all customers, loadins and unloading of trucks, and parking for all employees must be provided on-site. This on site parki: requ i rcment along with the landscaping requirements will determine that the size of almost any o _,ratios: will be below the maximum 100,000 SF allowed. Because of the available site sizes in the industrial area the space on site required for parking will limit the area available to be used for retail miles. Regarding the viable size of such businesses, it was noted that there is an emergence of a "boui.;iic" lige scale building materials and garden supply store which can be profitable at a size smaller than 100,000 SF. (See Santa Cruz Staff Report included in the Background Binder) Auto Row C, slay:"one ➢ Rccon.:rncnd that the properties fronting on Adrian Court be removed from the Auto Row Overlay area. Thew properties do not have frontage on US 101 so do not have the visibility of freeway exposure to , ourage auto sales and many of these buildings are occupied by small tenants. This area semis to be rs,ost attractive for tenants engaged in industrial or related activities which would be 7 ' INTRODUCE ORDINIENVE FOR PROPOSED ZONING FOR THE ROLLINS ROAD ZONING DISTRICT TO IM,P1 EMENT THE NORTH B URLINGAMEIROLLI A'S ROAD SPECIFIC PLAN May 1 S,2006 allowed in industrial area, so having to get a conditional use permit would be a burden since the basic use of the Adrian Court area is not likely to change. Rollins Road Drain Area ➢ The recommendation for the Rollins Road Drain area is to clarify the permitted and conditional uses and add performance criteria for the selection of any other uses based on Public Works and Planning needs. Perm fitted uses are public drainage and private power lines. Conditional uses are defined as: supplemental parking for uses in the area; storage for operable vehicles including cars and trucks with keys retained on site and cars moved by appointment outside of a.m. and p.m. peak hours; recreational and boat storage; outdoor storage related to immediately adjacent uses; fencing; and uses similar in nature which meet all the performance criteria as determined by the City Engineer and Specific Plan. Long term ai rport parking is a prohibited use. The performance criteria added include: importance of the detention basin to control flooding and to providing habitat for rare and endangered species; a listing of the agencies which must provide permits and Federal regulations including NPDES for any use to be allowed; the requirement that any property proposed for a use in the drain must have approved access on a public street; and ti.A the City Engineer must find that any use meets all the requirements set out by the Public Works Department. Southern Gatewayh i,trance ➢ Regarding incc,itives to providing a "gateway feature", the subcommittee recommended that if a parcel was at least 1 ,000 square feet and included a gateway feature acceptable to the Planning Commission (based on the design guidelines in the ado��ted plan), the user would be eligible for an additional FAR up to 1.0 with .► conditional use permit. :c amount of the additional FAR would be dependent upon the quality of the gateway feature and its compliance with the adopted design guidelines for the Southern Gatcway Entrance area. The qu�:lity and compliance with the design guidelines would be determined by the Planning Commission. ➢ For land uses, the recommendation is that the Southern Gateway Entrance be made an overlay zone, With the permitted uses being office uses. ;..►tomobile dealerships, commercial recreation(except theaters). Ho xcver, the land use base was _xpanded to allow, as conditional uses, any of the uses allowed in the adjacent industrial area. '11 Is is the same provision used in the Auto Row overlay zone. (This action would require an amendineh:, :o the Specific Plan/General Plan.) ➢ The Subcommittee recommended that "pedestrian oriented" retail uses like those in the Broadway Commercial Area not be allowed in the Soy ithem Gateway Entrance area . Their recommendation was based on the following: the heavy trail; olume in the area, the difficult access to many of these properties gig ert the high volume of traffic and the current service level of the Broadway/Rollins Road intersection in tlhe a.m. and p.m. peak tri is hours; and the separation of the area by the railroad from the Broadway Commercial district which •.,could impact pedestrian safety. Together these factors make the gateway entrance properties an "un Fri :ally" environment for high levels of pedestrian activity and "pedestrian oriented" retail uses which e: urage foot traffic. ➢ Reference to intersection capacity li nit:.�:.,ns and ascendance of the traffic analyzer,both community ste;ndards cited in the North Burlingamc/Rollins Road Specific Plan, were removed from the Southern Gateway Entra:lce Overlay requirements because they were determined to be duplications with CEQA requirements. 8 INTRODUCE ORDINANCE FOR PROPOSED ZONING FOR THE ROLLINS ROAD ZONING DISTRICT TO IMPLEMENT THE NORTH BURLINGAMEIROLLINS ROAD SPECIFIC PLAN May 15,2006 ATTACHMENTS: Map: Rollins Road Zoning District Map, amendment to Zoning District Map Ordinance of the City of Burlingame Amending Title 25 to Adopt the Rollins Road (RR) District Annotated Rollins Road (RR) District PC Minutes February 27, 2006 Larry Anderson, City Attorney, Memo to City Council, Amendment to Definition of Animal Shelter and Animal Rescue Facility, April 20, 2006. Fehr&Peers, Greg Saur and Chris Mitchel, Memo to Meg Monroe, Animal Care Trip Generation, May 5 2006 Larry Anderson, City Attorney, Memo to City Council, Commercial Parking Facility Tax and Its Application to Storage Businesses Items handed out at the March 29, 2006 City Council Study Meeting Map showing property owners that object to the SPCA and any type of boarding of animals. Daviel Moutoux, letter, March 29,2006, to City Council, re: proposed zoning changes allowing animal rescue centers in the Rollins Road Corridor. MTI Properties, letter March 29, 2006, re: proposed zoning changes with attachments of earlier submitted lcaers in opposition to animal boarding facilities. Also refer to Rollins Road section of the Background Binder. 9 I ORDINANCE No. 2 ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME 3 AMENDING TITLE 25 TO ADOPT THE ROLLINS ROAD (RR)DISTRICT 4 Section 1. In 2004,the City Council adopted the North Burlingame/Rollins Road Specific Plan 5 to guide development and use of the northern portion of the City. Among the subareas in the Plan is the 6 Rollins Road area, which includes a variety of uses and lot sizes. This ordinance implements the 7 Specific Plan for this subarea. This chapter replaces the M-1 District regulations,which had boundaries 8 that generally coincided with the new RR District. 9 10 Section 2. Chapter 25.44 is amended to read as follows: 11 Chapter 25.44 12 ROLLINS ROAD (RR)DISTRICT REGULATIONS Sections: 13 25.44.010 Scope and purpose of regulations. 25.44.020 Permitted uses. 14 25.44.030 Conditional uses. 25.44.040 Prohibited uses. 15 25.44.050 Special requirements for the automobile sales and service overlay area. 25.44.055 Special requirements for the entrance to the southern gateway entrance overlay area. 16 25.44.060 Use of drainage rights-of-ways. 25.44.065 Outdoor storage. 17 25.44.070 Design review. 25.44.075 Building Regulations. 18 25.44.080 Height limitations. 25.44.090 Minimum lot size and street frontage. 19 25.44.095 No variance for lot size and street frontage 25.44.100 Landscaping, creek access and fence requirements. 20 25.44.105 Parking space requirements and special parking requirements. 21 22 25.44.010 Scope and purpose of regulations. 23 The following regulations shall apply in all RR districts and shall be subject to all other 24 provisions of this title relating to RR districts. It is the purpose and policy of this chapter to implement 25 the North Burlingame/Rollins Road Specific Plan by establishing in the Rollins Road area a vital 26 industrial center for the Burlingame community and the mid-peninsula. The Rollins Road area lies 27 between US 101 and the CalTrain railroad tracks,the City Boundary of Millbrae and Broadway. Future 28 development in the area should build on good access to mass transit for workers and employers, 5/15/2006 1 ROLLINS ROAD I incorporating daytime amenities for area workers and encouraging new development which enhances 2 Burlingame's industrial,heavy service and employment base. Fundamental to the planned character of 3 the Rollins Road area is the development of distinct gateway entrances which are supported by safe and 4 attractive pedestrian and bicycle access and roadway facilities throughout the area which balance the 5 needs of employee access,service vehicles,and business operations. The zoning regulations establish 6 and maintain all areas designated as RR district to provide space for warehouse, distribution, and 7 manufacturing uses;to provide opportunity for a centralized area for automobile sales and service with 8 reasonable access and optimum visibility from US 101; to provide areas for commercial and service 9 uses; to encourage other similar uses which are supported by access to San Francisco International 10 Airport; and to discourage uses, buildings and structures which are incompatible with the intended 11 character of the district. 12 13 25.44.020 Permitted uses. 14 The following uses are permitted in the RR district: 15 (a) Air courier,delivery,or other trans-shipment services,including freight forwarding,which: 16 (1) Provide on-site parking for all company vehicles dispatched from the site and for vehicles 17 of employees working on the premises; and 18 (2) Provide adequate on-site space for loading and unloading goods, equipment and materials. 19 (b) Ambulance services, including dispatch, day rooms, and parking for all company vehicles 20 dispatched or stored on the site and vehicles of employees working on the premises. 21 (c)Automobile and truck repair, service and body shops,wholesale or retail,which are: 22 (1)Located south of Easton Creek; and 23 (2) Provide on-site parking for all vehicles being serviced and for vehicles of all employees 24 working on the premises. 25 (d) Any light industrial or manufacturing use,including associated laboratories,such as but not 26 limited to electronic,biotechnology, furniture,pharmaceutical, and printing,which: 27 (1)Is conducted wholly within a completely enclosed building with a floor area ratio of no more 28 than 0.5; and 5/15/2006 2 ROLLINS ROAD 1 (2) Does not increase noise at property line by more than 5 dBA L,o; and 2 (3)Does not generate vibrations which can be felt off the site and which will have no increased 3 effect on permissible adjacent uses; and 4 (4) Is conducted in such a manner so as to preclude any nuisance, hazard, or commonly 5 recognized offensive and obnoxious conditions or characteristics from odors detectable at the properly 6 line or off the site. 7 (e)Incidental food establishments within a multi-use building which meet all of the following 8 requirements: 9 (1)Are not the primary use of the building or structure; and 10 (2)Are open no earlier than five(5:00)a.m.and close no later than seven(7:00)p.m.,and open 11 Monday through Saturday only; and 12 (3)Have a maximum size of one thousand five hundred(1,500) square feet; and 13 (4)Are at least fifteen (15) feet in length and fifteen (15) feet in width; and 14 (5)Provide parking of at least one (1) space per three hundred(300) gross square feet. 15 (f) Laboratory and clean room facilities for research,testing, or creating products and goods. 16 (g)Office uses,but only in conjunction with and for the sole support of a permitted,non-office 17 use occurring on the same lot, where the office use does not exceed twenty-five(25)percent of gross 18 floor area of the buildings on the lot, and parking is provided on-site to code requirements. 19 (h) Outdoor storage of materials which is an accessory use to a permitted use and which meets 20 the requirements of section 25.44.065 below. 21 (i) Rental and leasing of goods and equipment conducted wholly within an enclosed building, 22 with no associated outdoor display or storage areas in the front yard where goods,equipment,or stored 23 supplies are visible from the street. 24 0) Service businesses,including but not limited to janitorial and contractors,and other support 25 services,but not including personal services,which: 26 (1) Provide on-site parking for all company vehicles dispatched from the site and vehicles of 27 employees working on the premises; and 28 (2)Provide adequate on-site space for loading and unloading goods, equipment and materials. 5/15/2006 3 ROLLINS ROAD I (k)Warehousing,storage,and distribution of goods,materials,liquids,and equipment conducted 2 wholly within an enclosed building with a floor area ratio not to exceed 0.5. 3 (0 Accessory uses which are necessary for the permitted uses under this section. 4 (m)Retail sales and display areas as an accessory use to a permitted use,interior to a building 5 only,with the following additional requirements: 6 (1)The hours of operation are between six (6:00)a.m. to nine(9:00)p.m. only; and 7 (2) Retail display area is limited to a maximum of 5,000 square feet; and 8 (3)No sale of alcoholic beverages; and 9 (4)Does not increase noise at property line by more than 5 dBA 1,10 ; and 10 (5)Does not generate vibrations which can be felt off the site and which will have no increased 11 effect on permissible adjacent uses. 12 13 25.44.030 Conditional uses. 14 The following are uses requiring a conditional use permit: 15 (a) Industrial uses with a floor area ratio not to exceed 1.0; 16 (b) Air courier,delivery,or other transshipment services,including trucking which do not meet 17 the requirements for permitted uses. 18 (c) Automobile rental businesses,including rental of recreation vehicles and trucks,which meet 19 the following minimum standards: 20 (1) The use is the sole tenant and only occupant of any building or area on the site; 21 (2) The site is a minimum size of seven-tenths (0.7)of an acre; 22 (3)Parking is provided on-site for storage of at least twenty-five(25)percent of the cars rented 23 monthly,based on a annual average for the site; 24 (4)Parking is provided on-site for all employees and customers; and 25 (5)The use meets all the other requirements of development in the district,including peak hour 26 trip generation at critical intersections as defined in the city's traffic analyzer. 27 (d) Automobile dealerships that are wholly enclosed within a warehouse structure with no 28 outdoor vehicle display areas; 511512006 4 ROLLINS ROAD I (e)Automobile storage for car rental businesses provided the following requirements are met: 2 (1)Vehicles shall not be moved during a.m.and p.m.peak hour traffic periods as defined by the 3 city engineer; and 4 (2)Minimum site size of seven-tenths(0.7)of an acre; and 5 (3)The storage area is enclosed with an opaque fence or wall eight(8)feet in height at a location 6 approved by the Public Works Department. 7 (f)Building materials and garden supply stores,which: 8 (1) Have no more than 100,000 square feet of indoor floor area, outdoor storage display, and 9 sales areas combined; and 10 (2) Have paved,on-site parking based on retail sales requirements of chapter 25.70 and for all 11 indoor and outdoor retail sales areas,adequate area on-site for maneuvering,parking,and unloading of 12 trucks, and employees who will be on-site at one time. 13 (g)Technical schools with training related to the permitted and conditional uses in the Rollins 14 Road district with parking as required by chapter 25.70. 15 (h) Commercial recreation, including health clubs and gymnasiums, with on-site parking. 16 (i) Health services and medical clinics whose primary function is to support businesses in the 17 RR district. 18 0) Food establishments in multiuse buildings which do not meet the requirements of section 19 25.44.020(e)above. 20 (k) Motor freight terminals whose site development meets the following requirements: 21 (1)Provide on-site parking for all company vehicles dispatched from the site and for vehicles 22 of employees working on the premises; and 23 (2)Provide adequate on-site space for loading and unloading goods, equipment and materials. 24 (0 Office uses limited to supporting only a permitted or conditional uses on the same site and 25 that exceed twenty-five(25)percent of the gross floor area of buildings on a lot,but only where parking 26 is available on-site to code requirements. 27 (m)Outdoor storage of rental or leased equipment which is a primary use of a lot located in the 28 RR district between Easton Creek and Broadway, and which meets the requirements of section 511512006 5 ROLLINS ROAD 1 25.44.065 below. 2 (n) Outdoor storage or treatment of materials which is not an accessory use to a permitted use, 3 but which meets the requirements of section 25.44.065 below. 4 (o) Retail sales and display areas as an accessory use to a permitted or conditional use,interior 5 to a building only, if the retail use will: 6 (1) Operate beyond the hours of six(6:00) a.m. to nine(9:00)p.m.; or 7 (2) Sell alcoholic beverages in containers. 8 Any such conditional use shall be conditioned on the retail use conforming to all of the other 9 requirements for retail sales and display areas of section 25.44.020 above. 10 (p)Veterinary hospitals where: 11 (1)All animal care activity,including necessary exercise and educational programs,is contained 12 within a structure; and 13 (2)The business is operated by a licensed veterinarian and all sanitary standards established by 14 the State and all local requirements as approved by the city engineer are met on the site; and 15 (3) The noise level is not increased at property line by more than 5 dBA L,o ; and 16 (4) The business is conducted in such a manner so as to preclude any nuisance, hazard, or 17 commonly recognized offensive and obnoxious conditions or characteristics from odors detectable at 18 the property line or off the site. 19 (q) Animal shelter or animal rescue centers where: 20 (1) All animal care activity, including necessary exercise and educational programs, is 21 contained within a structure,except for aviaries which may be exterior to the structure,but which shall 22 be fully enclosed with mesh as commonly used in zoos; and 23 (2)Animal care is overseen by a licensed veterinarian and all sanitary standards established by 24 the State and all local requirements as approved by the City Engineer, are met on the site; and 25 (3) The noise level is not increased at property line by more than 5 dBA L,o ; and 26 (4) No animal is kept on the site longer than allowed in the conditions of approval,unless there 27 is a specific medical need for longer term care,and the maximum density established by the conditions 28 of approval is maintained; and 5/15/2006 6 ROLLINS ROAD 1 (5) An attendant is present on the site twenty four hours a day; and 2 (6)All activity on the site is conducted in such a manner so as to preclude any nuisance,hazard, 3 or commonly recognized offensive and obnoxious conditions or characteristics from odors detectable 4 at the property line or off the site. 5 (r) Living quarters in association with a permitted or conditional use,but only to be used by a 6 night watchman or to provide security for the site; 7 (s) Structures over thirty-five(35) feet in height. 8 (t)Any structure or structures that cover more than sixty(60)percent of the lot. 9 (u) Accessory uses which are necessary for the conditional uses under this section. 10 (v) Retail sales as an accessory use to a warehouse use wholly enclosed within a structure for 11 specialty providers with a single product line for the construction industry, such as but not limited to 12 plumbing fixtures, tile outlets,paint stores. 13 (w) Accessory uses related to a permitted use which requires outdoor treatment or processing 14 of materials shall meet the following additional requirements; 15 (1) Is adequately screened from view from the street with an opaque eight(8) foot fence; and 16 (2)Is not located in the front yard of the property. 17 (x)Any commercial or industrial use similar in nature to a permitted or conditional use in this 18 or the Inner Bayshore(IB)district. 19 20 25.44.040 Prohibited uses. 21 All uses not listed as permitted or conditional shall be prohibited, including: 22 (a)Adult oriented businesses; 23 (b)Massage,bathing, or similar establishments; 24 (c)Automobile sales lots; 25 (d)Automobile wrecking,junk yards, storage or baling of scraps,paper,rags, sacks or metals; 26 (e)Conference and exhibition facilities; 27 (f)Hotels and motels; 28 (g) Living quarters and residential structures, except as specifically provided in subsection 5/15/2006 7 ROLLINS ROAD 11 1 25.44.030(q); 2 (h)Outdoor storage or treatment of materials in required parking or in landscaping in the front 3 setback; 4 (i)Gasoline service stations; 5 0) Personal services; and 6 (k)Kennels. 7 8 25.44.050 Special requirements for the automobile sales and service overlay area 9 Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter,within the Automobile Sales and Service 10 Overlay Area designated in Ordinance No._as amended, the following use regulations apply: 11 (a)Permitted uses. Only the following uses are permitted in the Automobile Sales and Service 12 Overlay Area: 13 (1)Automobile dealerships and automobile sales lots,which include the following: 14 (A)A minimum site size of five(5)acres; and 15 (B) A floor area ratio of not more than 0.15. 16 (2) Automobile repair,both minor and major,which: 17 (A) Provide on-site storage for all cars being repaired on-site; and 18 (B) Provide on-site parking for all vehicles being serviced and for vehicles of all 19 employees working on the premise; and 20 (C) Have a floor area ratio of not more than 0.5 . 21 (3) Automobile rental, including rental of recreational vehicles and trucks, which meet the 22 following minimum standards: 23 (A) The use is the sole tenant and only occupant of any building or area on the site;and 24 (B) The site is a minimum size of seven-tenths(0.7)of an acre; and 25 (C) Parking is provided on site for storage of at least twenty-five(25)percent of the cars 26 rented monthly,based on an annual average for the site; and 27 (D) Parking is provided on site for all employees and customers; and 28 (E) The use meets all the other requirements of development in the district, including 5/15/2006 8 ROLLINS ROAD I peak hour trip generation at critical intersections as defined in the city's traffic analyzer. 2 (b) Conditional uses. The following are uses requiring a conditional use permit: 3 (1) Any exception to a performance standard listed in subsection (a) above for an automobile 4 dealership, automobile sales lot,or automobile repair,both major and minor; and 5 (2) All other uses that are permitted or conditional in sections 25.44.020 and 25.44.030 shall be 6 conditional uses in the Automobile Sales and Service Overlay Area except as provided in subsection 7 (c)below. 8 (c) Prohibited uses. All uses not listed as permitted or conditional in this section shall be 9 prohibited in the Automobile Sales and Service Overlay Area, including but not limited to: 10 (a)Adult oriented businesses; 11 (b)Massage,bathing, or similar establishments; 12 (c)Automobile wrecking,junk yards, storage or baling of scraps,paper,rags, sacks or metals; 13 (d) Conference and exhibition facilities; 14 (e) Hotels and motels; 15 (f) Living quarters and residential structures, except as specifically provided in subsection 16 25.44.030(17); 17 (g)Outdoor storage or treatment of materials in required parking or in landscaping in the front 18 setback; 19 (h) Gasoline service stations; and 20 (i)Personal services. 21 22 25.44.055 Special requirements for the southern gateway entrance overlay area.. 23 Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, within the Southern Gateway Entrance 24 Overlay Area designated in Ordinance No.—as amended, the following use regulations apply: 25 (a) Permitted uses. Only the following uses are permitted in the Southern Gateway Entrance 26 Overlay Area: 27 (1) Office uses with a floor area ratio not to exceed 1.0; 28 (2) Automobile dealers and dealerships with a floor area ratio not to exceed 1.0; and 511512006 9 ROLLINS ROAD �1 i 1 \ 1 (3) Commercial recreation facilities,other than theaters,with a floor area ratio not to exceed 1.0 2 and with all activity conducted inside a building. 3 (b) Conditional uses. Only the following uses are allowed with a conditional use permit in the 4 Southern Gateway Entrance Overlay Area: 5 (1) Gasoline service stations; 6 (2) All other uses that are permitted or conditional in sections 25.44.020 and 25.44.030 above 7 except as specifically prohibited in subsection(c)below. 8 (3) All permitted and conditional uses that include an approved gateway feature as defined by 9 the Planning Commission and located on a parcel of at least fifteen thousand(15,000)square feet shall 10 be eligible for up to a maximum of 1.0 additional floor area ratio,provided the Planning Commission 11 finds that the gateway feature included in the project complies with the adopted design guidelines.The 12 amount of the 1.0 bonus floor area ratio approved shall be dependent upon the sufficiency of the 13 proposed gateway feature in distinguishing the entrance to the Rollins Road industrial area which shall 14 be determined by the Planning Commission during the design review process. 15 (c)Prohibited uses. All uses not listed as permitted or conditional uses in this section shall be 16 prohibited in the Southern Gateway Entrance Overlay Area,including but not limited to: 17 (1) Adult oriented businesses; 18 (2)Massage,bathing, or similar establishments; 19 (3)Automobile wrecking,junk yards,storage or baling of scraps,paper,rags, sacks or metals; 20 (4) Conference and exhibition facilities; 21 (5) Hotels and motels; 22 (6) Living quarters and residential structures, except as specifically provided in subsection 23 25.44.030(q); and 24 (7)Outdoor storage or treatment of materials in required parking or in landscaping in the front 25 setback. 26 27 28 5/15/2006 10 ROLLINS ROAD 1 25.44.060 Use of drainage rights-of-ways. 2 Because of the importance of the Rollins Road drain as a detention basin to prevent flooding in 3 the industrial area and its importance in providing habitat for rare and endanger species no use which 4 will impact these functions of the drain will be considered and only the following uses, with a 5 conditional use permit, environmental review, full compliance with National Pollution Discharge 6 Elimination requirements, city encroachment permits approved by the city engineer, hold harmless 7 agreement in favor of the city, permits from Pacific Gas &Electric Company or its successor,and all 8 required State and Federal permits,shall be allowed within the drainage right-of-ways from the southern 9 boundary of Millsdale Industrial Park Number 5 Subdivision north to the city boundary: 10 (a)Permitted uses. The following uses are permitted in the drainage right of way: 11 (1) Publicly owned and operated drainage facilities and improvements; and 12 (2)Privately owned and operated electric transmission lines. 13 (b) Conditional uses. The following uses are permitted in the drainage right of way with a 14 conditional use permit; 15 (1) Supplemental parking for permitted or conditional uses in the district; 16 (2) Storage for operable vehicles including automobiles and trucks provided the following 17 requirements are met: 18 (A) Vehicles must be in operable condition and must be managed at all times by a single, 19 responsible person with access to the keys for all vehicles„ and 20 (B) Vehicles shall be moved by appointment only and shall not be moved during a.m.and p.m. 21 peak hour traffic periods as defined by the City Engineer; and 22 (C) Minimum site size of.7 acres; and 23 (D) Site has approved access to a public street; and 24 (E) No customers shall visit the site; 25 (3) Recreation vehicle and boat storage as long as vehicles are not moved during a.m.and p.m. 26 peak hour traffic periods as defined by the City Traffic Engineer; 27 (4) Outdoor storage related to immediately abutting uses which are permitted or conditional in 28 the district; 5/15/2006 11 ROLLINS ROAD 1 (5) Fencing; 2 (6) Uses similar in nature to those allowed in this section on a site with frontage on a public 3 street and which proposed use and siting meets all the requirements established by the city engineer. 4 (c) Prohibited uses. All uses not listed as permitted or conditional in this section shall be 5 prohibited in the drainage right-of-ways, including but not limited to long term airport parking. 6 7 25.44.065 Outdoor storage. 8 Outdoor storage in the RR district shall be subject to the following requirements: 9 (a) The storage area shall be paved and shall not be located in required parking, aisles, 10 driveways, or landscaping. 11 (b) Lots located north of Mills Creek or with lot fronts on Rollins Road. No outdoor storage 12 shall be placed in the front yard of any lot located north of Mills Creek or with a lot front on Rollins 13 Road. 14 (c)Fencing. All outdoor storage shall be fully enclosed by either an opaque or solid fence or 15 wall eight(8)feet in height or by buildings,or a combination of fencing and buildings. However,if the 16 outdoor storage area is located at the sides or rear of a building on a lot that is located south of Mills 17 Creek, and the outdoor storage area is not visible from a public street, the eight(8) foot fence or wall 18 may be of an open design. 19 20 25.44.070 Design review. 21 Construction and alterations including substantial construction or change to more than fifty(50) 22 percent of the front facade or change to more than fifty(50)percent of any fagade facing a public or 23 private street or parking lot shall be subject to design review based on the design guidelines for the 24 Rollins Road Design District in the North Burlingame/Rollins Road Specific Plan and shall be processed 25 as provided in chapter 25.57. 26 (a) A design review application in the RR district shall be reviewed by the planning commission 27 for the following considerations: 28 511512006 12 ROLLINS ROAD 1 (1) Architectural design and siting of structures which supports the light industrial, 2 manufacturing and job creating land uses of the Rollins Road subarea as adopted in the North 3 Burlingame/Rollins Road Specific Plan with the focus on creating positive streets for safe vehicular, 4 bicycle and pedestrian use interfacing with appropriately scaled development. 5 (2) Create an appropriate form,shape and scaled interface between the vehicular,bicycle and 6 pedestrian uses of the street and the buildings and their uses along the public realm,including attention 7 to the pattern of landscaping,physical identification of the site and building entrances;the design should 8 be architecturally compatible with the surrounding development and consistent with the design 9 guidelines and development of structures in the Rollins Road subarea. 10 (3) Throughout the Rollins Road subarea, except for the special considerations for the area 11 designated for Auto Row, design of all structures should incorporate articulation on the building fagade 12 including elements which emphasize appropriate scale and relate to human form, entrances should be 13 clearly announced and oriented toward the street,a variety of materials should be used,roof screening 14 elements should be incorporated into the architectural design, signage should be a part of the site and 15 consistent with the scale and design of the building;exterior lighting should be sufficient for safety but 16 not used as an architectural feature or to illuminate adjacent properties. 17 (4) At the north and south gateway areas into the Rollins Road area special attention shall be 18 paid to incorporation of gateway oriented architectural features,entry markers,street furniture,specially 19 scaled landscaping to announce the entrance to the Rollins Road subarea; these features shall be in 20 character with the purpose, scale and function of the Rollins Road area and should facilitate access by 21 vehicles,bicycles and pedestrians from adjacent mass transit locations.Meaningful gateway features are 22 required for design review approval in the Southern Gateway Entrance Overlay Area. 23 (5) On lots with any frontage on creeks, integrate the creek feature into the site and building 24 design, incorporate the creek amenity including interconnected public access and views into site 25 landscaping and planning, design access features particularly pedestrian and bicycle trails to be 26 interconnected and consistent with those on adjacent properties in order to promote and protect natural 27 features of the area to benefit those who work in and use the area while providing a safe environment 28 511512006 13 ROLLINS ROAD I for walking and bicycling;respect and protect natural habitat areas including seasonal wetland breeding 2 locations for special species under power lines and in natural drains. 3 (6) To achieve a unified and successful Auto Row in the Rollins Road subarea, develop a 4 unifying thematic design concept for the area built on a single approach to the transition space between 5 the public sidewalk and the private outdoor sales area using such concepts as using consistent fencing 6 material throughout the auto row area,unifying signage approaches which also reflect the architectural 7 style and materials of the development on each site and take into consideration the character of the entire 8 Auto Row area;focus on development at a scale which works at the pedestrian level as well as from US 9 101,develop a pattern of consistent landscaping,and encourage building facades which are articulated 10 structurally incorporate human scale elements and properly integrate large display window areas. 11 (b) When any part of a commercial structure is subject to design review, any awnings on the 12 commercial structures shall be included in the design review. 13 (c) The following are exempt from the provisions of this section: 14 (1) Applications for building permits or planning approvals for development in the RR district 15 filed before ; 16 (2) Any amendment to a project exempt from design review pursuant to subsection(1)above 17 shall be subject to design review if the project involved would have otherwise been subject to design 18 review under subsection (a) above, the project has not been completed, and the amendment would 19 extend any structure involved in the application outside the envelope of the structure for which the 20 approval was granted or sought in the underlying application would change a fagade. Changes to, 21 additions of,or deletions of awnings as an amendment to a project shall not trigger design review under 22 this subsection. 23 24 25.44.075 Building Regulations. 25 The following maximum lot coverage shall apply to all parcels located in the RR district: 26 (a) Lot coverage. All buildings and structures or portions thereof which are hereafter erected, 27 constructed, established or enlarged shall be limited to seventy(70) percent of the total area of each 28 property or parcel. 511512006 14 ROLLINS ROAD I (b) Maximum front setback and build-to-line. 2 (1) David Road and Rollins Road. The front wall of the first story of any structure built on a 3 lot with a lot front on Rollins Road or David Road shall be set back at least twenty(20)feet from the 4 front property line; and at least sixty(60)percent of the structure shall be located at the front setback 5 line. 6 (2)Broderick Road, Edwards Court, Guittard Road, Ingold Road, Marsten Road, and North 7 Carolan Avenue. There shall be a minimum front setback of fifteen (15) feet from Broderick Road, 8 Edwards Court, Guittard Road, Ingold Road,Marsten Road,or North Carolan Avenue. 9 1 (3) Adrian Road and Adrian Court. The front wall of the first story of any structure built on a 10 lot with a lot front on Adrian Road or Adrian Court shall have a zero(0)foot setback;and at least twenty 11 (20)percent of the structure shall be located at the zero (0) setback line. 12 (c)Side setback. 13 (1) There shall be no side setback requirement for any structures constructed on lots in the 14 portion of the RR district between Easton Creek and Broadway, including properties with lot frontage 15 on Broadway. 16 (2) There shall be a minimum ten (10) foot side yard setback on all buildings and structures 17 constructed on all other lots in the RR district. 18 (d) Rear setback. There shall be no rear setback requirements. 19 20 25.44.080 Height limitations. 21 (a)The maximum height for structures in the RR district is sixty(60) feet. 22 (b) However, structures on lots in the RR district with lot fronts on either Nerli Lane or 23 Broadway have a maximum height of seventy-five(75) feet. 24 (c)Notwithstanding subsections(a)and(b)above,maximum heights are also subject to further 25 limitation by the Federal Aviation Administration. 26 27 25.44.090 Minimum lot size and street frontage. 28 5/15/2006 15 ROLLINS ROAD I There shall be a minimum lot size of ten thousand(10,000) square feet and a minimum street 2 frontage of fifty(50)feet. No property in this district shall be divided or subdivided into a lot with less 3 area or less street frontage. 4 5 25. 44.095 No variance for lot size and street frontage. 6 No variances for lot size and street frontage shall be granted to any property within this district. 7 8 25.44.100 Landscaping, creek access, and fencing requirements. 9 (a) Landscaping requirements. The following landscaping requirements shall apply to all 10 parcels located in the RR district: 11 (1) A minimum of ten(10)percent of the total area of each lot shall be suitably landscaped,and 12 the landscaped portions shall be properly irrigated and maintained. 13 (2) A minimum of sixty(60)percent of the front setback shall be covered with soft landscaping, 14 provided: 15 (A) If the area equal to ten (10) percent of the site is less than sixty (60) percent of the front 16 setback area, then all the required landscaping shall be placed within the front setback; or 17 (B) If the area equal to ten(10)percent of the site is more than sixty(60)percent of the front 18 setback area,then the remaining area of required landscaping shall be placed so that it is visible from 19 the public right-of-way. 20 (3) When fences are placed to enclose outdoor storage areas on any site,the required landscaping 21 shall be outside of the fence and visible from the public right-of-way. 22 (4) A landscaping plan and specifications,including irrigation, shall be submitted for approval 23 by the city arborist when construction plans are submitted to the building department for a building 24 permit. 25 (b) Fences. Fences up to eight(8)feet in height,as measured from the highest adjacent grade, 26 shall be allowed in this district, subject to the other requirements and limitations of this code, in 27 particular, chapters 11.12 and 25.78. 28 511512006 16 ROLLINS ROAD I (c) Creek access. Any lot in the RR district with any lot frontage on Easton,Mills,and El Portal 2 Creeks shall be required to provide,as a part of the on-site landscaping plan,a paved,public access trail 3 along the top of the bank for the portion of the creek bank on the site. The design of the trail shall be 4 compliant with the Rollins Road Design District design guidelines and designed to the specifications 5 of the public works department. Each such trail segment shall connect directly to the termination of the 6 public access trail segment along the creek bank on each adjacent property; 7 8 25.44.150 Parking space requirements. 9 All uses shall be subject to the provisions of this code and such additional parking conditions as 10 may be required for permitted or conditional uses pursuant to this chapter. 11 12 Section 3. A new Section 25.08.077 is added to read as follows: 13 25.08.077 Animal shelter or animal rescue center. 14 "Animal shelter" or" animal rescue center"means a facility operated by a government agency, 15 society for the prevention of cruelty to animals,humane society,or rescue group providing services for 16 stray,lost,injured,or unwanted animals,including treatment,regulated under Division 14 of the Food 17 &Agriculture Code(sections 30500 to 32030). Such a use may include facilities for public education 18 and training of volunteers, as well as facilities for the keeping of animals for adoption on site for a 19 limited time. 20 21 Section 4. A new Section 25.08.137 is added to read as follows: 22 25.08.137 Boarding kennel. 23 'Boarding Kennel' means any kennel where more than the number of animals allowed for a 24 single site under title 9 of this code and owned by another person are temporarily boarded for pay or 25 other compensation of any kind; provided, however, this definition shall not apply to zoos, animal 26 shelters, animal rescue centers, or veterinary hospitals. 27 28 Section 5. A new Section 25.08.155 is added to read as follows: 5/15/2006 17 ROLLINS ROAD 1 25.08.155 Building materials and garden supply store. 2 "Building materials and garden supply store" means a retail or wholesale establishment that 3 predominantly sells building materials,paint,wallpaper,glass,fixtures,lumber,nursery stock, lawn and 4 garden supplies,electrical,plumbing,heating,and air conditioning equipment and supplies,and building 5 and construction tools. 6 7 Section 6. A new section 25.08.666 is added to read as follows: 8 25.08.666 Veterinary hospital. 9 Veterinary hospital' means an establishment for the care and treatment of the diseases and 10 injuries of animals and where animals may be boarded during their convalescence;however,overnight 11 care of said animals is not a part of veterinary hospital except when necessary in the medical treatment 12 of the animal. 13 14 Section 7. This ordinance is to be published according to law. 15 16 17 Mayor 18 19 I, DORIS MORTENSEN, City Clerk of the City of Burlingame, do hereby certify that the foregoing ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the_day of 20 , 2006, and adopted thereafter at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the_ 21 _day of ,2006, by the following vote: 22 AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: 23 NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: 24 ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: 25 26 City Clerk 27 U:\FII,ES\ORDINANC\rollinsroad5152006.ord.wpd 28 5/15/2006 18 ROLLMS ROAD Rollins Road(RR)District Regulations with Annotations Draft 10 with Planning Commission Directed Changes,February 27,2006 and Council March 29,2006 Prepared May 7,2006 Annotated Rollins Road (RR) Zoning District This draft of the Rollins Road Zoning district includes the revisions to the text recommended by the Planning Commission at their study meeting on September 26 and their action meeting on October 24, 2005; and recommendations of the Planning Commission Subcommittee to address issues referred back at the Planning Commission action meeting and at the City Council Study Session on December 19, 2005 . The annotations have also been amended to reflect the recommendation by the City Council at their Study session in March that the definition of Animal shelter/animal rescue center be narrowed. The Subcommittee recommendations are shown in bold face below. Changes shown in bold face italics are changes included by the Planning Commission following the public hearing at their February 27, 2006, meeting and changes to the animal shelter definition directed by the City council . The annotations have been amended to document why each the revisions have been recommended, including the changes following the February 27, 2006, public hearing and the City Council March 29, 2006, study session. Chapter 25.44 ROLLINS ROAD (RR) DISTRICT REGULATIONS Sections: 25.44.010 Scope and purpose of regulations. 25.44.020 Permitted uses. 25.44.030 Conditional uses. 25.44.040 Prohibited uses. 25.44. 050 Special requirements for Automobile Sales and Service Overlay Area. 25.44.055 Special requirements for the entrance to the southern gateway area. 25.44.060 Use of drainage rights-of-ways, designated planter strips and public right-of-ways. 1 Rollins Road(RR)District Regulations with Annotations Draft 10 with Planning Commission Directed Changes,February 27,2006 and Council March 29,2006 Prepared May 7,2006 25.44.065 Outdoor storage. 25.44.070 Design review. 25.44.075 Building Regulations. 25.44.080 Height limitations. 25.44.090 Minimum lot size and street frontage. 25.44.095 No variance for lot size and street frontage 25.44.100 Landscaping, creek access and fence requirements. 25.44.105 Parking space requirements and special parking requirements. 25.44.010 Scope and purpose of regulations. The following regulations shall apply in all M-1 districts and shall be subject to all other provisions of this title relating to M-1 districts. It is the purpose and policy of this chapter to implement the North Burlingame/Rollins Road Specific Plan by establishing in the Rollins Road area a vital industrial center for the Burlingame community and the Mid-peninsula. The Rollins Road area lies between US 101 and the CalTrain railroad tracks,the City Boundary of Millbrae and Broadway. Future development in the area should build on good access to mass transit for workers and employers, incorporating daytime amenities for area workers and encouraging new development which enhances Burlingame's industrial,heavy service and employment base. Fundamental to the planned character of the Rollins Road area is the development of distinct gateway entrances which are supported by safe pedestrian and bicycle access and appropriate roadway facilities throughout the area which balance the needs of employee access, service vehicles and businesses operations. The zoning regulations establish and maintain all areas designated as RR district to provide space for warehouse, distribution, and manufacturing uses; to provide opportunity for a centralized area for automobile sales and service with reasonable access and optimum visibility from US 101; to provide areas for commercial and service uses; to encourage other similar uses which are supported by access to San Francisco International Airport; and to discourage uses, buildings and structures which are incompatible with the intended character of the district. Annotation: Revisions proposed by the subcommittee clarify that pedestrian and bicycle access to and through the industrial should be safe, 2 Rollins Road(RR)District Regulations with Annotations Draft 10 with Planning Commission Directed Changes,February 27,2006 and Council March 29,2006 Prepared May 7,2006 but not expected to be at the same recreational amenity as along the Bayfront . However, it was noted that bicycle and pedestrian access should be provided along the creeks which cross the industrial area in order to provide an amenity for the workers in the area. Original Annotation: The purpose section has been expanded to reflect the broad objectives of the North Burlingame/Rollins Road Specific Plan as they relate to the Rollins Road area (composed of 4 subareas : Northern gateway; Central Rollins Road; Southern Gateway; Adrian Road Auto Row District) . The sections in italics include the revised language. One item to note is that the M-1 zone is now limited to just the Rollins Road area. In the past there were areas in the Bayfront area which were zoned M-1 . These areas have now been assigned different zoning districts . 25.44.020 Permitted uses. Annotation: The land use designations for the Rollins Road area could be interpreted to present a significant change from the currently allowed use opportunities in the Rollins Road Area. In the NB/RR plan it notes (page 27) that : "The land use designation of this subarea is Industrial, which consists primarily of warehouse and manufacturing uses, as described below...Industrial uses in the area should be limited to airport-related industries, food preparation, fabrication, recreation, commercial for preparation/processing and similar light industry. Free-standing office buildings and professional uses typical of occupants of such buildings are not allowed and should be located in the City' s Bayfront Area to the east of US 101 . " The only exception to this land use direction is for the Southern Gateway area (A3) where it states (page30) "Unlike the rest of the Rollins Road area, this subarea, because it is a transition area between the Rollins Road industrial area and the Broadway Commercial area allows for retail and office uses along the Broadway frontage. The industrial uses that area allowed in the rest of the Rollins Road area allowed north of the commercial frontage on Broadway and at the Gateway" . Each of the permitted and conditional uses shown below are uses currently allowed or conditioned in the M-1 . Each should be reviewed in light of the land use description in the plan. 3 Rollins Road(RR)District Regulations with Annotations Draft 10 with Planning Commission Directed Changes,February 27,2006 and Council March 29,2006 Prepared May 7,2006 (a) Air courier, delivery or other trans-shipment services, including trucking, which: (1) provide on-site parking for all company vehicles dispatched from the site and for vehicles of employees working on the premises; and (2) provide adequate on-site space for loading and unloading goods, equipment and materials. (b) Ambulance services including dispatch, day rooms and parking for all company vehicles dispatched or stored on the site and vehicles of employees working on the premises. (c) Automobile and truck repair, service and body shops, wholesale or retail which are: (1) located south of Easton Creek; (2) provide on-site parking for all cars being serviced and for vehicles of all employees working on the premise. Annotation: Whether car repair shops should be prohibited in the RR district except in the designated Auto Row area along Adrian Road or also allowed in the area south of Easton Creek, where many are presently located, was much debated by the subcommittee. The final conclusion was that there are a lot of small, nonconforming auto repair shops which serve local residents and businesses in the area south of Easton Creek. They should not be discouraged from expanding because they are nonconforming. Moreover, expansion would require these small business sites to become conforming in parking which would greatly benefit the other businesses in their area. Without this allowance these sites might continue indefinitely without change, and there would be no improvement to the serious parking and access problem which they presently create in areas like North Carolan Road and on Nerli Lane. (d) Any light industrial or manufacturing use, including associated laboratories, such as but not limited to electronic, biotechnology, furniture, pharmaceutical, and printing, which: (1) is conducted wholly within a completely enclosed building with a floor area ratio no greater than 0.5 which: Annotation: The land use plan for the Rollins Road area sets a review line 4 Rollins Road(RR)District Regulations with Annotations Draft 10 with Planning Commission Directed Changes, February 27,2006 and Council March 29,2006 Prepared May 7,2006 for industrial uses which an FAR greater than 0 . 5, e. g. a conditional use permit will be required. The plan also sets a maximum FAR of 1 . 0 for industrial uses . (NB/RR plan page 27-32) (2) does not increase noise at property line by more than 5 dBA L 10 ; (3) does not generate vibrations which can be felt off the site and which will have no increased effect on permissible adjacent uses; (4) is conducted in such a manner so as to preclude any nuisance, hazard, or commonly recognized offensive and obnoxious conditions or characteristics from odors detectable at the property line or off the site. (e) Food establishments within a multi-use building which meet the following requirements: (1) are not the primary use of the building or structure; (2) are open no earlier than five (5:00) a.m. and close no later than seven(7:00 p.m.), and are open Monday through Saturday only; Annotation: At study the Planning Commission felt that since these food establishments were intended to serve people working in the industrial area whose work days might include shift work, the hours for these food establishments should be longer than the 6 a.m. to 5 p.m. allowed in the current M-1 zoning requirements . (3) have a maximum size of fifteen hundred (15 00) square feet; (4) are at least fifteen (15) feet in length and fifteen(15) feet in width; and Annotation: The dimensions were adjusted to be 15 ' by 15 ' which is the same for the same use as in the Inner Bayshore district . Original Annotation: Currently in the M-1 zone food establishments within a multi-use building such as a warehouse have a minimum size of 20 feet in length and 15 feet in width. However when creating the Inner Bayshore district it was suggested by the subcommittee and adopted with the ordinance that these employee serving food establishments in light industrial areas have a minimum length of 15 feet and width of 5 Rollins Road(RR)District Regulations with Annotations Draft 10 with Planning Commission Directed Changes, February 27,2006 and Council March 29,2006 Prepared May 7,2006 15 feet. This provision has been changed for the RR district to be consistent with the standards in the IB district . (5) provide parking at one (1) space per three hundred (300) gross square feet. Annotation: Large office buildings are not allowed by the land use policy of the NB/RR plan. Typically this is a use which happens in large office buildings . (f) Laboratory and clean room facilities for research, testing, or creating products and goods. (g) Office use only in conjunction with and for the sole support of a permitted use occurring on the same site, where the office use does not exceed fifty (50) twenty-five (25) percent of gross floor area of a building and parking is provided on site to code requirements. Annotation: The Subcommittee felt that it was important to make it clear that the Rollins Road area was not intended to become an office park. This provision was modified to clarify that offices uses in a building must be associated with a permitted use on the site and the amount of area that the office could occupy was reduced from 50% to 25% to insure that the office activity did not take over the light industrial or heavy commercial activity on the site. Original Annotation: This provision has been interpreted in the past to allow a free standing office use in the Rollins Road area so long as office use does not occupy more than 50% of the building (one office or a collection of offices) . The plan clearly states that, except along the Broadway frontage at the southern gateway area, office uses are to be discouraged. An overlay zone will be added to address the additional land uses/preferred land uses for the gateway and auto row areas . (h) Outdoor storage of materials which are an accessory use to a permitted use which meet the following requirements of section 25.44.065 below. Annotation: To make the zoning code easier to use the performance criteria for outdoor storage have been moved to a separate section. This 6 Rollins Road(RR)District Regulations with Annotations Draft 10 with Planning Commission Directed Changes, February 27,2006 and Council March 29,2006 Prepared May 7,2006 also underscores the universal application to each site of these standards whenever any use includes outdoor storage of materials . (i) Rental and leasing of goods and equipment conducted wholly within an enclosed building, with no associated outdoor display or storage areas in the front yard where goods, equipment, or stored supplies are visible from the street. 0) Service businesses, including but not limited to janitorial and contractors, and other support services and excepting personal services, which: (1) provide on-site parking for all company vehicles dispatched from the site and vehicles of employees working on the premises; and (2) provide adequate on-site space for loading and unloading goods, equipment and materials. (k) Warehousing, storage, distribution of goods, materials, liquids and equipment conducted wholly within an enclosed building with a floor area ratio not to exceed 0.5. Annotation: The plan clearly includes warehousing under the umbrella of industrial use, and therefore as permitted such structures are limited to 0. 5 FAR. On reason to keep this building size control is to keep the area available to smaller support type businesses and to discourage the "big box" pressure to take over an existing, very large building which might have inadequate parking and access for such a use. "Big Box" retail is prohibited in the Rollins Road area but there are other large scale operations which have had a significant impact on the area in the past such as the Purity Grocery Store ' s warehouse area (which became the Hiram Walker bottling plant and later, after subdivision, Metro Furniture manufacturing and a postal service sorting station for military mail) Outdoor storage is addressed with criteria that apply to all properties, in a separate section, see below. (0 Accessory uses which are necessary for the permitted uses under this section. (m) Retail sales and display areas as an accessory use to a permitted use, interior to a building only, with the following additional requirements: 7 Rollins Road(RR)District Regulations with Annotations Draft 10 with Planning Commission Directed Changes, February 27,2006 and Council March 29,2006 Prepared May 7,2006 (1) The hours of operation are within six (6:00) a.m. to nine (9:00) p.m.; and Annotation: The subcommittee noted that retail sales which might promote the success of an industrial or warehouse use should be allowed to operate within "normal" retail hours. The suggestion was that the previously proposed closing time of 6: 00 p.m. be extended to 9 : 00 P.M. (2) Retail display area is limited to a maximum of 5,000 square feet; and (3) No sen,iee e sale of alcoholic beverages; and Annotation: In their recommending action on the RR regulations the Planning Commission deleted the reference to "service" in item m (3) because they felt that it would be unenforceable and would discourage some businesses which would be appropriate to the area. Businesses in the are might serve alcoholic beverages at an opening or staff party for example; or a wine distributor may provide samples to a customer in a small retail area. (4) Does not increase noise at property line by more than 5 dBA L 10 ; and (5) Does not generate vibrations which can be felt off the site and which will have no increased effect on permissible adjacent uses. Annotation: The subcommittee suggested that based on the impact on the industrial are only two of the five performance criteria listed here for retail sales and display areas should be subject to a conditional use permit: hours of operation and service and sale of alcoholic beverages. The others must be complied with or the applicant must get a variance e.g. show a hardship on the property. Original Annotation: This provision was added in the 1990 ' s to allow warehouses used by wholesalers to have showrooms for retailers to come see their products. We have several such operations in the Rollins Road area presently. Wolfe appliances and a coffee bean processor are two. The direction of the plan would support these uses with wholesalers but not for the type of retail sales which sells to or serves individuals . We have 8 Rollins Road(RR)District Regulations with Annotations Draft 10 with Planning Commission Directed Changes,February 27,2006 and Council March 29,2006 Prepared May 7,2006 had some issues with entertainment equipment rental operations which have turned their display areas into locations for private parties . For this reason the changes in italics area suggested. 25.44.030 Conditional uses. The following are uses requiring a conditional use permit: (a) Industrial uses with a floor area ratio not to exceed 1.0; Annotation: The Specific Plan provides for a permitted FAR of 0 . 5 and maximum FAR of 1 . 0 for industrial uses . In a footnote it notes that the maximum FAR should not be allowed if it causes an impact on critical intersections identified in by the traffic analyzer. Usually the environmental document for development which comes before the Planning Commission identifies the traffic impacts of the use. Certainly the impacts would be considered as a part of the analysis for a conditional use permit . The way this is written, 0. 5 FAR is permitted; 0 . 51 FAR or more up to 1 . 0 FAR would require a conditional use permit. More than 1 . 0 FAR would require a variance. As written this provision would require a variance to all the other performance requirements for industrial uses, see 25. 44 . 020 (c) above. (b) Air courier, delivery, or other transshipment services, including trucking which do not meet the requirements for permitted uses. Annotation: Permitted uses are repeated in the conditional uses section with performance zoning when it has been decided that an applicant may ask for exceptions to one or more of the performance criteria . In cases where the City feels that some performance criteria must be met, these criteria are not included in description of the use in the conditional uses section. This is intended to give the instruction to the staff that the criteria not mentioned cannot be excepted. In the case of air courier it is noted here that all of the performance criteria may be exceeded with a conditional use permit . (c) Automobile rental businesses, including truck and recreation vehicles, which meet 9 Rollins Road(RR)District Regulations with Annotations Draft IO with Planning Commission Directed Changes,February 27,2006 and Council March 29,2006 Prepared May 7,2006 the following minimum standards: (1) The use is the sole tenant and only occupant of any building or area on the site; (2) The site is a minimum size of seven-tenths (0.7)of an acre; (3) Parking is provided on site for storage of at least 25 percent of the cars rented monthly, based on an annual average for the site; (4) Parking is provided on site for all employees and customers; and (5) The use meets all the other requirements of development in the district, including peak hour trip generation at critical intersections as defined in the Traffic Analyzer. Annotation: Presently auto rental, truck and RV rental uses are allowed only a conditional use; therefore this does not represent a change. This however would apply the same performance criteria to all vehicle rental uses . (d) Automobile dealerships that are wholly enclosed within a warehouse structure with no outdoor display areas; Annotation: This provision applies to those areas outside of the designated Auto Row area . So would allow automobile dealerships any place within the Rollins Road industrial area. In addition this provision no long addresses auto repair. (e) Automobile storage for car rental businesses provided the following requirements are met: (1) Vehicles shall not be moved during a.m. and p.m. peak hour traffic periods as defined by the City Engineer; and (2) Minimum site size of seven-tenths (0.7) of an acre; and (3) Area enclosed with an opaque fence eight(8) feet in height at a location approved by the Public Works Department. Annotation: In general this use is presently confined to the upland portion 10 Rollins Road(RR)District Regulations with Annotations Draft 10 with Planning Commission Directed Changes,February 27,2006 and Council March 29,2006 Prepared May 7,2006 of the drainage area under the PG and E power lines . However, this provision would allow such storage use through out the Rollins Road area. (f) Building materials and garden supply stores which: (1) Have no more than 100,000 square feet of indoor floor area, outdoor storage display and sales areas combined; and (2) Have paved, on-site parking based on retail sales requirements in Chapter 25.70 and for all indoor and outdoor retail sales area, adequate area on site for maneuvering, parking and unloading of trucks,employees who will be on site at one time. Annotation: At City Council suggestion the subcommittee strengthened the performance criteria for this use by making it clear that the size of the structure would be determined after all the parking and on site truck access and loading requirements were met. Any exception to any of the performance criteria would require a variance. The subcommittee felt that if the indoor and outdoor retail activity was confined to a stated gross square footage and parking then a floor area ratio or other measures to control mass would take care of themselves. The structure would still need to meet the requirements of the design criteria and the outdoor areas uses would have to be screened as required elsewhere in the district regulations . Original Annotation: The subcommittee directed that big box retail that supported the permitted and conditional uses of the Rollins Road area should be considered for the Rollins Road area. The kinds of large scale retail discusses as appropriate were lumber yards, building materials, and garden supplies and nursery outlets . The kinds of outlets which need larger sites than "typical" retail outlets currently in Burlingame and which support the local community. The location near the freeway of the Rollins Road area makes it suitable for the regionally oriented traffic which is necessary to support a larger retailer of this kind. Addition of this use in the Rollins Road area will require an amendment to the Specific Plan for the North Burlingame/Rollins Road area. (g) Technical schools with training related to the permitted and conditional uses in the Rollins Road area with parking as set out in chapter 25.70. 11 Rollins Road(RR)District Regulations with Annotations Draft 10 with Planning Commission Directed Changes,February 27,2006 and Council March 29,2006 Prepared May 7,2006 Annotation: There is currently at least one technical training school in the Rollins Road area. It has been there since the early 1970 ' s and there has been no use conflicts between it and the industrial uses in the area. It is located in a portion of the Rollins Road Area that is more accessible to BART. Making this a conditional use will allow the school to cease being nonconforming and allow the city to require more on-site parking if this becomes an issue in the future (presently it is not) . Training facilities which support activities in the area were allowed in the Inner Bayshore industrial area. The same wording has been used for the Rollins Road provision. (h) Commercial recreation, including health clubs and gymnasiums, with on-site parking. (i) Health services and medical clinics whose primary function is to support businesses in the M-1 district. 0) Food establishments in multiuse buildings which do not meet the requirements of section 25.44.020-5. (k) Motor freight terminals whose site development meets the following requirements: (1) Provide on-site parking for all company vehicles dispatched from the site and for vehicles of employees working on the premises; and (2) Provide adequate on-site space for loading and unloading goods, equipment and materials. (1) Office uses limited to supporting only a permitted or conditional use on the same site that exceed twenty-five (25)percent of the gross floor area of a building where parking is available on site to code requirements. Annotation: The subcommittee felt that to protect the industrial area from becoming an office park in the future, on site office uses should be limited to those which support a permitted or conditional use which is allowed in the zone. Free standing office uses, unrelated to any other activity on the site, should not be permitted. This provision would allow a permitted/conditional industrial use to have more than 250 12 Rollins Road(RR)District Regulations with Annotations Draft 10 with Planning Commission Directed Changes,February 27,2006 and Council March 29,2006 Prepared May 7,2006 office to support their activity with a conditional use permit. It would not allow application for leasing part of the building developed for office to an unrelated business which did not have a permitted or conditional use activity on the site. Original Annotation: This provision has been interpreted to allow free standing office uses in warehouse buildings so long as they employ less than 500 of the gross floor area . This interpretation is inclined to encourage conversion of the industrial area to office. (m) Outdoor storage of rental or leased equipment which is a primary use of the site, located in the RR district between Easton Creek and Broadway, and which meets the requirements of Section 25.44.065 below. Annotation: This provision allows exceptions to the performance criteria for outdoor storage to be granted with a conditional use permit rather than requiring a variance. In a sense this weakens the design direction of the specific plan for the area by allowing more flexibility for the location of outdoor storage which can be unsightly. However, this approach provides more options for industrial uses which may have unique outdoor storage needs . Should car rental storage be included with outdoor storage of rental or leased equipment. Another approach to confining this use and keeping it from over running the industrial area. (n) Outdoor storage or treatment of materials which is not an accessory use to a permitted use which meets the requirements of Section 25.44.065 below. Annotation: These provisions allow exceptions to storage uses with a CUP. A separate section has been added for the performance criteria for outdoor storage. See section 25. 44 . 065 below. (o) Retail sales and display areas as an accessory use to a permitted or conditional use, interior to a building only, if the retail use will: (1) Operate beyond the hours of six (6:00) a.m. to nine (9:00)p.m.; or (2) Sell alcoholic beverages in containers. Any such use shall be conditioned on the retail use conforming to all of the other 13 Rollins Road(RR)District Regulations with Annotations Draft 10 with Planning Commission Directed Changes, February 27,2006 and Council March 29,2006 Prepared May 7,2006 requirements for retail sales and display areas of section 25.44.020 above. Annotation: Following the public hearing the Planning Commission determined that it would be difficult to enforce a prohibition on the service of alcoholic beverages in display areas . For example, a business may give a grand opening at which they serve wine. For this reason they recommend that the sale of alcoholic beverages should be prohibited; but not the service without sale. Subcommittee extended the permitted hours for this use, so a conditional use permit is only required if the hours exceed 6 a.m. to 9 p.m. Inclusion of this use was discussed by the Subcommittee in July. This provision would allow an applicant with accessory use for retail sales and display activities to request a conditional use permit to exceed the performance criteria for hours of operation and sale of alcoholic beverages . All the other performance criteria shown in the permitted uses section must be met, or a variance granted to allow them to be exceeded. (p) Veterinary hospitals with arse iated animal ear and bear-ding f_ ilitie epting breeding, i.,,t ; ,.l„a: g a., e for- alts, . dogs where: (1)All animal care activity, including necessary exercise,and educational programs are contained within a structure; and Annotation: Following the February 27, 2006, public hearing the Planning Commission felt that it was appropriate for veterinarians to be able to include patient and public education as a part of their services, with a conditional use permit. To enable this opportunity this provision was amended to call out educational programs as a recognized part of a veterinary hospital service. (2) The business is operated by a licensed veterinarian and all sanitary standards established by the State and all local requirements as approved by the city engineer are met on the site; (2) The noise level is not increased at property line by more than 5 dBA L 10 ; and ( 3)Nanifnal is kept o g t.without attendant tto... ant i e present. �3GJVThe business is conducted in such a manner so as to preclude any nuisance, hazard, or commonly 14 Rollins Road(RR)District Regulations with Annotations Draft 10 with Planning Commission Directed Changes,February 27,2006 and Council March 29,2006 Prepared May 7,2006 recognized offensive and obnoxious conditions or characteristics from odors detectable at the property line or off the site. Annotation: The Subcommittee separated veterinary hospital from the concepts of breeding and boarding of animals (see wording struck above) . First by refining the definition of "veterinary hospital". Second by refining the terms in the zoning, removing references to breeding and boarding of animals, and revising the performance criteria to address the issues which were raised by the public at hearings on the proposed regulations, particularly odor and noise. The criteria used for these elements are the same as required for industrial uses in the RR zone. (q) Animal shelter or animal rescue center where: (1) All animal care activity,including necessary exercise and educational programs, is contained within a structure,except for aviaries which may be exterior to the structure, but which shall be fully enclosed with mesh as commonly used in zoos;and (2) animal care is overseen by a licensed veterinarian and all sanitary standards established by the State and all local requirements are,as approved by the city engineer, are met on site;and (3) The noise level is not increased at property line by more than 5 dBA L 10;and (4) No animal is kept on the site longer than allowed in the conditions of approval, more than o,.....,five(45)days unless there is a specific medical need for longer term care and the maximum density established by the conditions of approval is maintained;and Annotation: Because there are different objectives in keeping wild and domesticated animals on site, the Planning Commission recommended that the time of stay of each type of animal should be determined based on the function and policy of the particular facility as expressed in their letter of application and in the conditions of approval. By requiring conformance to a condition of approval the issue of duration of stay could be publicly discussed and environmentally evaluated with review of the project, the density proposal could be the included in the public hearings, and the specifics of the number of animals and duration of stay determined with the action on the particular 15 Rollins Road (RR) District Regulations with Annotations Draft 10 with Planning Commission Directed Changes, February 27, 2006 and Council March 29, 2006 Prepared May 7, 2006 facility. (5) An attendant is present on the site twenty-four (24) hours a day; and (6) All activity on the site is conducted in such a manner so as to preclude any nuisance, hazard, or commonly recognized offensive and obnoxious conditions or characteristics from odors detectable at the property line or off the site. Annotation : To clarify the discussion about types of animal care facilities which should be allowed in the RR zone , the Subcommittee recommended that rescue centers were appropriate because of their similarity to veterinary hospitals but commercial boarding and breeding facilities (defined in the City ' s code as kennels) were not an appropriate use in the RR zone . (see prohibited uses below) The Subcommittee felt that there should be strict performance criteria for animal shelters or rescue centers to be sure that they were properly integrated with the industrial uses . So the use was proposed as conditional and any exception to these criteria would require a variance . (r) Living quarters in association with a permitted or conditional use, to be used by a night watchman or to provide security for the site; (s) Structures over thirty-five (35) feet in height. (t) Any structure or structures that cover more than sixty (60) percent of the lot. (u) Accessory uses which are necessary for the conditional uses under this section. (v) Retail sales as an accessory use to a warehouse use wholly enclosed within a structure for specialty providers with a single product line for the construction industry such as but not limited to plumbing fixtures, tile outlets, and paint stores. Annotation : This provision allows an applicant to request a larger retail area than is allowed in the permitted uses section . (w) Accessory uses related to a permitted use which requires outdoor treatment or processing of materials shall meet the following additional requirements; (1) Is adequately screened from view from the street with an opaque eight (8) foot fence; 16 Rollins Road(RR)District Regulations with Annotations Draft 10 with Planning Commission Directed Changes,February 27,2006 and Council March 29,2006 Prepared May 7,2006 and (2) Is not located in the front yard of the property. (x) Any commercial or industrial use similar in nature to a permitted or conditional use in this or the Inner Bayshore (IB) zoning district. Annotation: This provision was taken from the M-1 district and modified to allow any use allowed or conditional in the Inner Bayshore zone . As written in the M-1 zoning district this provision would have allowed any permitted or conditional use in any commercial or industrial zone in the RR district. The subcommittee felt that this was too broad a permission, and could result in the loss of the industrial area should it be taken over by small retail establishments . It would also be inconsistent with the city' s General Plan; and therefore misleading to property owners and developers . To be consistent with the General and Specific plans the only other commercial uses which should be allowed in the RR district are those allowed in the other area of the city which is similar in character and plays a similar role in the city' s land use base, the interior of the Inner Bayshore district . 25.44.040 Prohibited uses. All uses not listed as permitted or conditional shall be prohibited, including: (a)Adult oriented businesses; (b)Massage, bathing or similar establishments; (c)Automobile sales lots; Annotation: This provision is added to make the policy clear that it is the city' s intention to concentrate new auto sales and service uses in the area designated for Auto Row, or if they are an extension of the existing auto sales and service uses presently on Broadway at the entrance to the Rollins Road industrial area. (d) Automobile wrecking,junk yards, storage or baling of scraps,paper, rags, sacks or 17 Rollins Road(RR)District Regulations with Annotations Draft 10 with Planning Commission Directed Changes, February 27,2006 and Council March 29,2006 Prepared May 7,2006 metals; (e) Conference and exhibition facilities; (f) Hotels and motels; (g) Living quarters and residential structures, except as provided in subsection 25.44.030 (17); (h) Outdoor storage or treatment of materials in required parking or in landscaping in the front setback; (i) Gasoline service stations; Annotation: Are there additional uses which should be included in the prohibited uses list to under score the City' s opposition to such uses in this area. One that comes to mind is free standing retail uses . 0) Personal Services (k) Kennels. Annotation: The subcommittee recommended that commercial breeding and boarding of animals not be allowed in the RR district because it was incompatible with the predominant uses allowed in the area in terms of traffic and activity levels . For this reason kennels, which include both breeding and boarding of animals (see definition) are listed as a prohibited use. 25.44.050 Special requirements for the Automobile Sales and Service Overlay Area Annotation: The Specific Plan for the Rollins Road area establishes an Auto Row. The provisions below create a zoning overlay to define the priority uses in the new Auto Row and provide an incentive for this area to convert to an Auto Row. These priority uses include: automobile dealerships, sales lots and related service, automobile repair, and automobile rental. Performance criteria 18 Rollins Road(RR)District Regulations with Annotations Draft 10 with Planning Commission Directed Changes, February 27,2006 and Council March 29,2006 Prepared May 7,2006 are established for each of these uses . Except for automobile dealership criteria which are new, the performance criteria are based on criteria used for these three uses elsewhere in the zoning regulations . This provision establishes a priority for these three uses by making all other uses conditional . In addition the prohibited uses are also clearly set out and include large scale retail which is auto related. The Subcommittee felt that Auto Row should not include the property at the east end of Edwards Court . They felt that this was one of the few sites large enough to support a large retail building supply use which would be more supportive of community needs and compatible with the SPCA use proposed on Rollins Road at Edwards Court than an Auto Sales and Service use might be. Further the Auto Row was more clearly defined by having David Road as its southern boundary. This change will require an amendment to the Specific Plan for the Rollins Road subarea. Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, within the Automobile Sales and Service Overlay area designed in Ordinance No. as amended, the following use regulations apply: (a) Only the following uses are permitted in the Automobile Sales and Service Overlay area as designated in the Rollins Road subarea of the North Burlingame/Rollins Road Specific Plan Land Use Map: (1) Automobile sales lots, which include the following: Annotation: Automobile as used here and in this section is an inclusive term and includes trucks, recreation vehicles and other motorized vehicles . The performance criteria listed below apply to lots for the sale of all vehicle types . (A) A minimum site size of five (5) acres; (B) A floor area ratio of not more than 0.15. Annotation: The criteria for the automobile dealerships with service business are set out in the Auto Row subarea land use description of the North Burlingame/Rollins Road Specific Plan (see page 31) . In the current code RV and truck lease and sales 19 Rollins Road(RR)District Regulations with Annotations Draft 10 with Planning Commission Directed Changes, February 27,2006 and Council March 29,2006 Prepared May 7,2006 are allowed in the M-1 zone only without any outdoor display and wholly enclosed in a warehouse. (2) Automobile repair, both minor and major,which: (A) Provide on-site storage for all cars being repair on-site; and (B) Provide on-site parking or all cares being serviced and for vehicles of all employees working on the premise; and (C) Have a floor area ratio of not more than 0.5. Annotation: Vehicular repair is a major use in the M-1 zone. Most of the present uses are located on substandard sites with no on site parking or storage for cars being repaired. Generally these are nonconforming uses (e. g. along North Carolan) . It is hoped that in the future the vehicle repair businesses will relocate to the Adrian Road area on sites which can accommodate their activities . The performance criteria included in this provision are intended to address the issues which have arisen from the currently nonconforming auto repair locations . (3) Automobile rental which meets the following minimum standards: (A) The use is the sole tenant and only occupant of any building or area on the site; and (B) The site is a minimum size of seven-tenths (0.7) of an acre; and (C) Parking is provided on site for storage of at least twenty-five (25) percent of the cars rented monthly, based on an annual average for the site; and (D) Parking is provided on site for all employees and customers; and (E) The use meets all the other requirements of development in the district, including peak hour trip generation at critical intersections as defined in the city's traffic analyzer. Annotation: The land use section of the Specific Plan does not address car rental uses in the Rollins Road subarea. The traffic impact for 20 Rollins Road(RR)District Regulations with Annotations Draft 10 with Planning Commission Directed Changes,February 27,2006 and Council March 29,2006 Prepared May 7,2006 car rental uses is different than auto sales and service businesses . The performance criteria noted here are the same criteria uses in the Inner Bayshore subarea (e.g. the O-M district) . Car rental uses are included here because the dealers in the city' s current auto row have requested car rental uses be added as a support use to their sales and service activities to improve their customer service. (b) Conditional uses: (1) Any exception to a performance standards listed in subsection (a) for a automobile dealership and sales lot and automobile repair, major and minor, shall be conditional uses in the Automobile Sales and Service Overlay Area; Annotation: As an incentive to encourage auto sales and service businesses into the Adrian Road area and in recognition that many auto repair shops are independently owned and smaller in size and capital so assemblage of acreage may not be feasible, the Commission felt that since specific design guidelines were now in place, it was appropriate to allow exceptions to the performance criteria as conditional uses rather than variances. (2) All other uses that are permitted or conditional in sections 25.44.020 and 25.44.030 shall be conditional uses in the Automobile Sales and Service Overlay Area except as provided in subsection (c)below. Annotation: The Specific Plan states that the Adrian Road Auto District "may continue to be used for industrial uses and is also targeted to establish a new center for automobile sales and services" . To provide an incentive to implement the establishment of a new auto row, a priority is given to auto/vehicle sales and service uses and support uses (auto service and auto rental) by limiting the permitted uses to only those related to automobile sales and service. All other uses would require a CUP if they area allowed at all in the overlay zone. (c) All uses not listed as permitted or conditional in this section shall be prohibited in the Automobile Overlay Zoning, including but not limited to: (1) Adult oriented businesses; 21 Rollins Road(RR)District Regulations with Annotations Draft 10 with Planning Commission Directed Changes, February 27,2006 and Council March 29,2006 Prepared May 7,2006 (2) Massage, bathing or similar businesses; (3) Automobile wrecking,junk yards, storage or baling of scraps, paper rags, sacks or metals; (4) Conference and exhibition facilities; (e) Hotels and motels; (f) Living quarters and residential structures, except as specifically provided in subsection 25.44.030 (17); (g) Outdoor storage or treatment of materials in required parking or in landscaping in the front setback; (h) Gasoline service stations; (i) Personal services. Annotation: The subcommittee determined that large Building Materials and Garden Supply businesses should be allowed in the designated Auto Row area with a conditional use permit, as they are allowed in the rest of the Rollins Road area. Therefore, this use is not included in the prohibited uses section. The specific plan makes it very clear that "large format auto parts retailer are not allowed" in the Adrian Road Auto District . (page 31) . As first drafted the prohibited uses section did not allow free standing auto part retail sales with a floor area greater than one thousand (1, 000) gross square feet. This provision is not included in the current prohibited uses . However, the RR district only allows large scale retail which is related to building materials, so large format auto part retail sales uses would be prohibited in the Auto Row area as the provisions are now written. 25.44.055 Special requirements for the e^tfa^^e to t southern gateway entrance overlay. Annotation: The Subcommittee met twice to discuss the issues raised by the 22 Rollins Road(RR)District Regulations with Annotations Draft 10 with Planning Commission Directed Changes,February 27,2006 and Council March 29,2006 Prepared May 7,2006 Planning Commission and echoed by the City Council at their December 19, 2005 study session regarding the Southern Gateway Entrance area. First they noted that the Southern Gateway Entrance area is a subset of the Southern Gateway area. The Southern Gateway Entrance area includes only the 6 to9 properties which front on Broadway at Rollins Road south of the P G and E substation on Rollins Road or have access to Rollins Road on Nerli Lane. The Specific Plan treated this area especially because of its visual prominence at the Freeway entrance to the City and at the entrance to the industrial area. The subcommittee recommended the changes shown the bold face below to address the issues raised by the Commission and Council as partially documented in the Original Annotation. Original Annotation: In their recommendation of the RR regulations to the City Council the Planning Commission directed that this section be brought forward as it was suggested by the Subcommittee. However, the commission directed that the subcommittee study further three issues : (1) whether to be eligible for the bonus FAR the applicant must both combine properties and include a "gateway feature" in the development . This consideration should include whether there should be a minimum parcel size where lot combination would not be required for eligibility for the bonus. (2) if this section represents an overlay zone or "special requirements" . As an overlay zone all of the heavy commercial and industrial uses allowed in the body of the RR zone would be allowed in the Southern Gateway area as well as the retail and office uses indicated in the plan. Defined with " special requirements" only the uses identified in the plan ( commercial retail and office uses) would be allowed. The regulations below treat the Southern Gateway with "special requirements" . (3) in referring to "retail and service commercial and office uses" in the Southern Gateway did the plan mean pedestrian oriented retail uses (like in the Broadway Commercial Area) as well as heavier commercial, basically auto access oriented; or just auto access oriented retail. Because the Commission did not want to hold up implementation of the specific plan, they recommended the provisions proposed by the subcommittee be adopted. Proposed changes will be brought back as a separate ordinance when the subcommittee has reviewed the requests for changes . 23 Rollins Road(RR)District Regulations with Annotations Draft 10 with Planning Commission Directed Changes, February 27,2006 and Council March 29,2006 Prepared May 7,2006 Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, within the Southern Gateway Entrance Overlay Area mea designated in Ordinance No. as amended, the following regulations apply: Annotation: The subcommittee recommended that the Southern Gateway Entrance area be treated as an overlay zone, e.g. all the uses allowed in the Southern Gateway industrial area also be allowed in the 'entrance' area, but as conditional uses . This is also the way the auto row overlay is addressed in the Rollins Road area. (a) Permitted Uses. Only the following uses are permitted in the Southern Gateway Entrance Overlay Area mea: (1) Office uses with a floor area ratio not to exceed 1.0; (2) Automobile dealers and dealerships and sales lots with a floor area ratio not to exceed 1.0; (3) Commercial recreation arses , facilities, other than theaters,with a floor area ratio not to exceed 1.0, and with all activity conducted inside a building. (4) > with a floor-area ratio not to exeeed Annotation: The Subcommittee felt that it was inappropriate to extend the pedestrian oriented Broadway commercial area across the railroad tracks and east to the Broadway interchange. Primarily because of the safety issues of pedestrians crossing the railroad tracks and because of the traffic volumes and speeds of traffic at the Rollins Road/Broadway intersection. Finally, it was unclear that the pedestrian oriented retail market demand in the Broadway Commercial area could support an extension across the railroad tracks . For this reason service businesses were not recommended for the Southern Gateway Entrance area. Such uses are prohibited in the Southern Gateway subarea. (b) Conditional Uses. Only the following uses are conditional uses in the Southern Gateway Entrance Overlay Area providing lots are combined and gateway amenities area 24 Rollins Road(RR)District Regulations with Annotations Draft 10 with Planning Commission Directed Changes,February 27,2006 and Council March 29,2006 Prepared May 7,2006 included: (1) Gasoline service stations; (2) All other uses that are permitted or conditional in sections 24.44.020 and 25.44.030 above except as specifically prohibited in subsection (c) below. (3) All permitted and conditional uses that include an approved gateway feature as defined by the Planning Commission and located on a parcel of at least fifteen thousand (15, 000) square feet shall be eligible for up to a maximum of 1.0 additional floor area ratio, provided the Planning Commission finds that the gateway feature include in the project complies with the adopted design guidelines. The amount of the 1.0 bonus floor area ratio approved shall be dependent upon the sufficiency of the proposed gateway feature in distinguishing the entrance to the Rollins Road industrial area which shall be determined by the Planning Commission during the design review process. Annotation: The subcommittee cleaned up this section in the sense that they clarified that to be eligible for a density bonus the property would need to be at least 15,000 SF and that the Planning Commission would have to approve the 'gateway feature' as being adequate. The Planning Commission would determine the amount of the FAR bonus (up to 1 .0 additional) based on their finding of adequacy of the gateway feature included in the project. The subcommittee noted that they felt that this approach more fairly addressed the property owner who invested in architectural features as opposed to the owner who simply planted several redwood trees . A review of the ownerships in the Southern Gateway Entrance area revealed that all the ownership aggregates, except one, exceed 15,000 SF. So the lot size for eligibility should not be an issue for future development. Based on these proposed changes, the issue of lot combination to be required in order for eligibility for a density bonus goes away. (c) Prohibited uses. All uses not listed as permitted or conditional uses in this section shall be prohibited in the Southern Gateway Entrance Overlay Area including but not limited to: (1) Adult oriented businesses; (2) Massage, bathing or similar establishments; 25 Rollins Road(RR)District Regulations with Annotations Draft 10 with Planning Commission Directed Changes, February 27,2006 and Council March 29,2006 Prepared May 7,2006 (3) Automobile wrecking,junk yards, storage or baling of scraps, paper rags, sacks or metals; (4) Conference and exhibition facilities; (5) Hotels and motels; (6) Living quarters and residential structures, except as specifically provided in subsection 25.44.030 (17); (7) Outdoor storage or treatment of materials in required parking or in landscaping in the front setback; (8) Gasoline sen4ee sta4iens. (d) Notwithstan ding the use regulations above, all ional in the Southern Gateway Entranee Overlay Area shall be required to eomplywith th-e following performance e ite ia: (1) Shall provide and have aeeepted by the City Engineer- documentation prepar by a fie-ensed traffie engineer-that nt shall not affect the existing, level of ser-Wee at the Rollins Road Broadway i (2) Using the Rollins Road -ed traffie engineer-,ka doeument than the pro- -t4tot-generate more a.m. and p.m. trips than those assigned to the pr- existing land use. Annotation: After study of the proposed regulations for the Southern Gateway Entrance area on March 29, 2006, the City Council felt that this provision calling out the requirement of new development to comply with level of service changes at the Broadway/Rollins Road intersection and trip generation increases on Rollins Road itself was unnecessary to be included in the zoning requirements because both these items are identified in the specific plan as community standards which will be required to be met by any environmental document prepared for development in the Southern Gateway Entrance overlay area. For this reason the criteria were removed from the proposed Rollins Road regulations. Original Annotation: The Subcommittee felt that any developer in the transitional 26 Rollins Road(RR)District Regulations with Annotations Draft 10 with Planning Commission Directed Changes,February 27,2006 and Council March 29,2006 Prepared May 7,2006 area at Rollins Road and Broadway should be aware of the potential circulation and traffic problems for , particularly at a.m. and p.m. peak hour, new development and/or uses in this area. These two provisions will be required for any environmental evaluation for development in this area. They are cited in the zoning for early notification for future development. 25.44.045 Use of drainage rights-of-ways. Annotation: In their recommendation for action on the section of the proposed RR regulations for use of the drainage rights-of-ways the Planning Commission determined that they would move forward the regulation as proposed by the Subcommittee. However, at the public hearing a property owner raised the question about amending the permitted uses to allow a self-storage use in the drainage area. Uses are presently restricted in the 100+ foot wide drain because of the PGandE towers and because the area acts as a retention basin annually during periods of heavy rain and high tides. Because of the periodic flooding of the drain the drain was not included in the trip generation calculations for peak hour trips impacting the Broadway/Rollins intersection. However, much of the property within the drain is in private ownership. Because of the complex issues involved with "permanent" independent uses in the drain, assignment of liability for flood damage, and lack of detailed information from Public Works regarding the impacts on the flood control/Rollins Road drainage function created by a permanent use in the drain, the commission elected to bring the regulation forward as it stands. They referred the issue of locating permanent, trip generating uses including self-storage in the drainage area back to the Subcommittee for further consideration after input from the Public Works Department. Because of the importance of the Rollins Road drain as a detention basin to prevent flooding in the industrial area and its importance in providing habitat for rear and endangered species, no use which will impact these functions of the drain will be considered and only the following uses, with a conditional use permit, environmental review, full compliance with National Pollution Discharge Elimination requirements, city encroachment permits approved by the city engineer, hold harmless agreement in favor of the city,permits from Pacific Gas and Electric Company or its successor, and all required State and Federal 27 Rollins Road(RR)District Regulations with Annotations Draft 10 with Planning Commission Directed Changes,February 27,2006 and Council March 29,2006 Prepared May 7,2006 permits, shall be allowed within the drainage right-of-ways from the southern boundary of Millsdale Industrial Park Number 5 Subdivision north to the city boundary: Annotation: Development in the drainage areas in the Rollins Road Area has been a problem for years . These drains were installed when the area was filled. They are low points in to which the land on either side, included the roadway, drains. Periodically when heavy rains and high tides coincide, these drains back up and flood. Generally the drains are about 60 feet wide and in many area are in private ownership. It has been city policy that these areas cannot be used for parking to support more intense development on the portions of properties outside of the drain, because the required parking may be underwater periodically, and not useable for on-site parking. When the traffic analyzer for the Bayfront was first done in the 1980 ' s the Rollins Road area was included since the Bayshore/Rollins intersection was critical to the access and operation of the roadway system serving the Bayshore area. At that time no trip generation was assigned to the drain and it was assumed that the area would be undeveloped. When the Bayfront plan was updated and the new North Burlingame/Rollins Road Specific Plan was completed, the traffic analyzer was revised and expanded. In the revised traffic analyzer it was assumed that the environmentally sensitive portions of the drainage area would remain undeveloped and the uses which would go into the remainder of the drainage area would be low impact, off-peak trip generators . This zoning reflects a change in policy; one which allows supportive uses (supplemental, no required, parking for permitted or conditional uses in the district) or free standing uses, such as automobile storage, with the limitation that vehicles be moved during off peak hours . The subcommittee felt that the sever limitations and regulatory requirements for any use of the drainage area should be noted upfront for any prospective owner or developer. For this reason the introductory wording to this section was amended and the section below reorganized and clarified. These changes do not represent changes to the city' s policy regarding construction or use of the drainage area. Original Annotation This section on the drain has been changed from the original in the M-1 . The references to public right of way and designated planter strips have been removed. These provisions now apply only to the designated drainage areas. There are two major such 28 Rollins Road(RR)District Regulations with Annotations Draft 10 with Planning Commission Directed Changes,February 27,2006 and Council March 29,2006 Prepared May 7,2006 areas, one parallel to the railroad tracks on the west side of the area and one in the middle of the area flanked by now abandoned Southern Pacific spur rail right-of-way. Some of the ownership of these drains is private and some is public. (a) Permitted uses. The following uses are permitted in the drainage right of way: (1) Publicly owned and operated drainage facilities and improvements; and (2) Privately owned and operated electric transmission lines/ (b) Conditional uses. The following uses are permitted in the drainage right of way with a conditional use permit: (1) Supplemental parking for permitted or conditional uses in the district; (2) Storage for operable vehicles including automobiles and trucks ear-rental bu&ineases provided the following requirements are met: (A) Vehicles must be in operable condition,must be managed at all times by a single, responsible person with access to the keys for all vehicles, and a single vehicle cannot be left on a site in the drain for more than thirty(30) days; and Annotation: In their February 27, 2006, action on the proposed regulations the Planning Commission recommended that because the drain is subject to flooding without notice, there should be an individual with access to keys for all vehicles available 24 hours a day so that any vehicle stored in the drain can be moved on short notice. Also to enforce the traffic requirements, they required that vehicles only be moved with an appointment (see provision below) . (B) Vehicles shall be moved by appointment only and shall not be moved during the a.m. and p.m. peak hour traffic periods as defined by the city engineer; and Annotation: This provision allows vehicles to be moved from the drain by their owners, but controls the timing and insures that the vehicles are moved only under supervision inorder to (1) protect the environment and (2) insure that the vehicles are moved only outside of the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. 29 Rollins Road(RR)District Regulations with Annotations Draft 10 with Planning Commission Directed Changes,February 27,2006 and Council March 29,2006 Prepared May 7,2006 (C) Minimum site size of.7 acres; and (D) Site has approved access to a public street; and (E) No customers shall visit the site. (c) Recreation vehicle and boat storage so long as vehicles are not moved during a.m. and p.m. peak hour traffic periods as defined by the City Traffic Engineer; (4) Outdoor storage related to immediately abutting uses which are permitted or conditional in the district; (5) Fencing; (6) Uses similar in nature to those allowed in this section on a site with frontage on a public street and which proposed use and siting meets all the requirements established by the city engineer; Annotation: The Subcommittee recommended that if ' free standing' uses were to be allowed in the drainage area then they should be required to meet all the standards of other free standing uses in the city, e.g. have 50 feet of frontage on a public street and meet the curb cut, site line, driveway access, utility, etc. requirements of any other property in the city. (c) Prohibited uses. All uses not listed as permitted or conditional in this section shall be prohibited in the drainage right-of-ways, including but not limited to long term airport parking. Annotation: This provision was added to make it clear that the city' s policy toward development in the drainage rights of way is very limited; and to hopefully end many debates at the Planning Counter and dead end applications to the Planning Commission. 25.44.065 Outdoor storage. Annotation: This is a new section created out of the performance criteria 30 Rollins Road(RR)District Regulations with Annotations Draft 10 with Planning Commission Directed Changes,February 27,2006 and Council March 29,2006 Prepared May 7,2006 previously included in the permitted and conditional uses section of the M-1 district . These criteria have not changed from the previous zoning; however, they have been collected together to make them easier to use. The permitted and conditional uses section refer the user to this section for the requirements for outdoor storage. Outdoor storage in the RR district shall be subject to the following requirements: (a) The storage area shall be paved, shall not be located in required parking, aisles, driveways, or landscaping. (b) Lots located north of Mills Creek or with lot fronts on Rollins Road. No outdoor storage shall be placed in the front yard or any lot located north or Mills Creek or with a lot front on Rollins Road. (c) Fencing. All outdoor storage shall be fully enclosed by either an opaque or solid fence or wall eight (8) feet in height or by buildings, or a combination of fencing and buildings. However, if the outdoor storage area is located at the sides or rear of a building on a lot that is located south of Mills Creek, and the out door storage area is not visible from a public street, the eight(8) foot fence or wall may be of an open design. 25.44.070 Design review. Annotation: This is a new section for the light industrial area. It is based on the design guidelines set out in the Specific Plan on pages 54-57 and 76-86 . Construction and alterations including substantial construction or change to more than fifty(50)percent of the front fagade or change to more than fifty(50)percent of any fagade facing a public or private street or parking lot shall be subject to design review based on the design guidelines for the Rollins Road Design District in the North Burlingame/Rollins Road Specific Plan and shall be processed as provided in chapter 25.57. (a) A design review application in the RR district shall be reviewed by the planning commission for the following considerations: (1) Architectural design and siting of structures which supports the light industrial, manufacturing and job creating land uses of the Rollins Road subarea as adopted in the North Burlingame/Rollins Road Specific Plan with the focus on creating positive streets for safe vehicular, bicycle and pedestrian use interfacing with appropriately scaled development. 31 Rollins Road(RR)District Regulations with Annotations Draft 10 with Planning Commission Directed Changes,February 27,2006 and Council March 29,2006 Prepared May 7,2006 (2) Create an appropriate form, shape and scaled interface between the vehicular, bicycle and pedestrian uses of the street and the buildings and their uses along the public realm, including attention to the pattern of landscaping,physical identification of the site and building entrances; the design should be architecturally compatible with the surrounding development and consistent with the design guidelines and development of structures in the Rollins Road subarea. (3) Through out the Rollins Road subarea, except for the special considerations for the area designated for Auto Row, design of all structures should incorporate articulation on the building fagade including elements which emphasize appropriate scale and relate to human form, entrances should be clearly announced and oriented toward the street, a variety of materials should be used, roof screening elements should be incorporated into the architectural design, signage should be a part of the site and consistent with the scale and design of the building; exterior lighting should be sufficient for safety but not used as an architectural feature or to illuminate adjacent properties. (4) At the north and south gateway areas into the Rollins Road area special attention should be paid to incorporation of gateway oriented architectural features, entry markers, street furniture, specially scaled landscaping to announce the entrance to the Rollins Road subarea; these features should be in character with the purpose, scale and function of the Rollins Road area and should facilitate access by vehicles,bicycles and pedestrians from adjacent mass transit locations (5) On lots with any frontage on creeks, integrate the creek feature into the site and building design, incorporate the creek amenity including interconnected public access and views into site landscaping and planning, design access features particularly pedestrian and bicycle trails to be interconnected and consistent with those on adjacent properties in order to promote and protect natural features of the area to benefit those who work in and use the area while providing a safe environment for walking and bicycling; respect and protect natural habitat areas including seasonal wetland breeding locations for special species under power lines and in natural drains. (6) To achieve a unified and successful Auto Row in the Rollins Road subarea, develop a unifying thematic design concept for the area built on a single approach to the transition space between the public sidewalk and the private outdoor sales area using such concepts as using consistent fencing material throughout the auto row area, unifying signage approaches which also reflect the architectural style and materials of the development on each site and take into consideration the character of the entire Auto Row area; focus on development at a scale which works at the pedestrian level as well as from US 101, develop a pattern of 32 Rollins Road(RR)District Regulations with Annotations Draft 10 with Planning Commission Directed Changes,February 27,2006 and Council March 29,2006 Prepared May 7,2006 consistent landscaping, and encourage building facades which are articulated structurally incorporate human scale elements and properly integrate large display window areas. Annotation: One of the main features of the Specific Plan for Rollins Road was to add design criteria with specific objectives. The criteria address the interface of the street with the buildings through out the Rollins Road area, then focus on specific locations : the Gateways (north and south) , the newly designated Auto Road area along Adrian Road, the properties adjacent to creeks or other natural areas (PGandE E right-of-way and drains) . The design criteria have been written to address each of these areas of design focus . However, these criteria are not intended to be used individually, they are intended to be used together, so creekside properties, for example, should also be held accountable for the criteria which address street frontage and structural architectural elements and integration of signage. (b) When any part of a commercial structure is subject to design review, any awnings on the commercial structures shall be included in the design review. (c) The following are exempt from the provisions of this section: (1) Applications for building permits or planning approvals for development in the TW district filed before ; (2) Any amendment to a project exempt from design review pursuant to subsection (1) above shall be subject to design review if the project involved would have otherwise been subject to design review under subsection(a) above, the project has not been completed, and the amendment would extend any structure involved in the application outside the envelope of the structure for which the approval was granted or sought in the underlying application would change a fagade. Changes to, additions of, or deletions of awnings as an amendment to a project shall not trigger design review under this subsection. Annotation: Section (c) above is the standard language which is being included in all of the new zoning district which have added design criteria. 25.44.075 Building Regulations. 33 Rollins Road(RR)District Regulations with Annotations Draft 10 with Planning Commission Directed Changes,February 27,2006 and Council March 29,2006 Prepared May 7,2006 The following maximum lot coverage shall apply to all parcels located in the RR district: a. Lot coverage. All buildings and structures or portions thereof which are hereafter erected, constructed, established or enlarged shall be limited to seventy(70)percent of the total area of each property or parcel. Annotation: There is no change proposed to this provision. As in other subareas, the Specific Plan does not address lot coverage. However, this provision has been applied to this area since the 1950 's and has been instrumental in the pattern of development; there does not seem to be a reason to change it at this time. b. Maximum front setback and build-to-line. 1. Rollins Road, North Carolan Road, Ingold Road, Guittard Road, and Broderick Road. The front wall of any structure built on a lot with a lot front on Rollins Road, North Carolan Road, David Road, Ingold Road, Guittard Road and Broderick Road shall be setback twenty(20) feet from the front property line; and shall have a minimum of sixty(60)percent of the structure built at the front setback line. Annotation: As written this provision would require that 60% of the front wall (no matter how many stories) of any building shall be setback 20 feet from the front property line . The remaining 40% of the structure may be setback farther on the lot and may have variation in the setback of the stories . It should be noted that this is a departure from the current M-1 zoning. The current zoning requires a 25 foot front setback on the west side of Rollins Road from Mills Creek north and a 15 foot front setback for all other buildings in the Rollins Road area. The Specific Plan would reduce the front setback for properties on the west side of Rollins Road north of Mills Creek by 5 feet and increase the overall front setback in the industrial area by 5 feet . 2. David Road, Edwards Court, Marsten Road and North Carolan Road. There shall be a minimum front setback of fifteen (15) feet from the front property line. Annotation: The plan does not designate build to lines or minimum front setbacks for these streets . Because the pattern of development 34 Rollins Road(RR)District Regulations with Annotations Draft 10 with Planning Commission Directed Changes,February 27,2006 and Council March 29,2006 Prepared May 7,2006 is established on these secondary streets, the setback standard is taken from the current M-1 zoning district regulations . 3. Adrian Road and Adrian Court. The front wall of any structure built on a lot with a lot front on Adrian Road and Adrian Court shall have a zero (0) foot setback; and shall have a minimum of twenty(20)percent of the structure built at the zero (0) setback line. Annotation: In the Adrian Road auto row overlay there is no required front setback; where 15 feet is currently required. However the design guidelines would require only 20 percent of a new structure to be built at property line . The remainder of any structure would have to be setback from the front property line. The amount of this setback is up to the developer. The design guidelines give no direction so in a worst case an entire building could be built parallel to the street frontage with 20% at property line and 80% set back six inches from the property line . (c)Side setback. (1) There shall be no side setback requirement for any structures constructed on lots in the portion of the RR districts between Easton Creek and Broadway, including properties with lot frontage on Broadway. Annotation: In the current zoning the creeks are used to separate uses . Since much of the existing development on south of Easton Creek is already developed lot line to lot line, setback standards for this area were minimal . To encourage reuse the no side setback requirement has been extended to the Gateway area along Broadway (see italics) . (2) There shall be a minimum ten(10) foot side yard setback on all buildings and structures constructed on all other lots in the RR district. Annotation: In the majority of the Rollins Road area (all of that north of Easton Creek) a 10 foot side setback is required. This standard has been in effect since the 1970 ' s and has helped to develop the pattern of development in the area. 35 Rollins Road(RR)District Regulations with Annotations Draft 10 with Planning Commission Directed Changes,February 27,2006 and Council March 29,2006 Prepared May 7,2006 (d) Rear setbacks. There shall be no rear setback requirements. Annotation: In the current zoning there are no rear setback requirements in the M-1 district zoning. For some kinds of development the California Building and Fire Codes have separation requirements which must be met . In cases where these apply at the rear of abutting structures, a new structure would be required to have a rear setback. The minimum distance between buildings for the fire department is usually 3 feet and, when any point of the development on a lot is more than 150 feet from the street, a 10 foot fire lane around the building is required. 25.44.080 Height limitations. (a) The maximum height for structures in the RR district is sixty(60) feet. (b) However, structures on lots in the RR district with lot fronts on either Nerli Lane or Broadway shall have a maximum height of seventy-five(75) feet. (c) Notwithstanding subsection s (a) and(b) above,maximum heights are also subject to further limitation by the Federal Aviation Administration. Annotation: The Specific Plan sets a base line for maximum height in the Rollins Road area. In the plan more intense development is allowed in the Southern Gateway area (higher FAR and taller buildings) . Finally, the Specific Plan recognizes the proximity of the airport and its potential impact on the safe operation of the airport and requires that the FAA review and approve any height, even if it over rides the maximum height allowed by the city. This provision reflects these adjustments. (see Plan page 56) This section has been reformatted since the first draft of the RR district which was reviewed by the Subcommittee . 25.44.090 Minimum lot size and street frontage. 36 Rollins Road(RR)District Regulations with Annotations Draft 10 with Planning Commission Directed Changes,February 27,2006 and Council March 29,2006 Prepared May 7,2006 There shall be a minimum lot size of ten thousand(10,000) square feet and a minimum street frontage of fifty(50) feet. No property in this district shall be divided or subdivided into a lot with less area or less street frontage. Annotation: The same minimum lot size provisions used in the Inner Bayshore subarea zoning are suggested here. In the current M-1 zone the minimum lot size is 5, 000 SF and the minimum lot frontage is 50 feet . Such small lots are inefficient in the industrial area. Adopting this larger lot size will protect the larger lots which are more efficient to develop as well as being more able to meet on site parking and landscaping requirements . 25. 44.095 No variance for lot size and street frontage. No variances for lot size and street frontage shall be granted to any property within this district. Annotation: This provision makes it clear that the city means the minimum lot size; and will discourage developers from thinking, when the purchase a lot that it cannot be divided into units less land 10, 000 SF. This should reduce requests to the Planning Commission and staff discussion at the counter. 25.44.100 Landscaping, creek access, and fencing requirements. (a) Landscaping requirements. The following landscaping requirements shall apply to all parcels located in the RR district: (1) A minimum of ten(10)percent of the total area of each property or parcel shall be suitably landscaped and the landscaped portions shall be properly irrigated and maintained. (2) A minimum of sixty(60)percent of the front setback shall be covered with soft landscaping,provided: (A) If the area equal to ten(10)percent of the site is less than sixty(60)percent of the front setback area,then all the required landscaping shall be placed within the front setback; or 37 Rollins Road(RR)District Regulations with Annotations Draft 10 with Planning Commission Directed Changes,February 27,2006 and Council March 29,2006 Prepared May 7,2006 (B) If the area equal to ten(10)percent of the site is more than sixty(60)percent of the front setback area,then the remaining of the required landscaping shall be placed so that it is visible from the public right-of-way. Annotation: These are the landscape provisions from the M-1 district adjusted for the new design guidelines. They focus on landscaping in the required front setback area. They do not address requiring landscaping in the area at the front of a site which is between the front setback and the face of the building e.g. on a zero front setback lot, the 80% area in which the developer decides to set the building back 10 feet . Based on these provisions that area would not need to be landscaped. Although, if it were, it would count in the 10% of the lot area required to be landscaped. (3) When fences are placed to enclose outdoor storage areas on any site, the required landscaping shall be outside of the fence and visible from the public right-of-way. (4) A landscaping plan and specifications, including irrigation, shall be submitted for approval of the City Arborist when construction plans are submitted to the building department for a building permit. (b) Fences. Fences up to eight (8) feet in height, as measured from the highest adjacent grade, shall be allowed in this district, subject to the other requirements and limitations of this code, in particular Chapters 11.12 and 25.78. (c) Creek access. Any parcel in the Rollins Road area with any frontage on Easton, Mills and El Portal creeks shall be required to provide, as a part of the on-site landscaping plan, a paved,public access trail along the top of the bank for the portion of the creek bank on the site. The design of the trail shall be compliant with the Rollins Road Design District design guidelines and designed to the specifications of the Public Works Department, and each such trail segment shall connect directly to the termination of the public access trail segment along the creek bank on each adjacent property; Annotation: The Specific Plan does not give too much direction regarding the installation of the pedestrian trails required along the creek banks in the industrial area. The provisions included here are based in concept on the provisions used for the Bay Trail in the Bayshore Planning Area. 38 Rollins Road(RR)District Regulations with Annotations Draft 10 with Planning Commission Directed Changes,February 27,2006 and Council March 29,2006 Prepared May 7,2006 25.44.150 Parking requirements. All uses shall be subject to the provisions of this code and such additional parking conditions as may be required for permitted or conditional uses pursuant to this chapter. Annotation: Unlike the O-M zone there are no special parking provisions for any use in the M-1 . The Specific Plan does not suggest a change in this policy. Add a new definition, Building Materials and Garden Supply. 25.08.155 Building materials and garden supply store. "Building materials and garden supply store" means a retail or wholesale establishment that predominantly sells buildings materials,paint,wallpaper, glass, fixtures, lumber, nursery stock, lawn and garden supplies, electrical,plumbing,heating and air conditioning equipment and supplies, and building and construction tools. Annotation: With the inclusion of building materials and garden supply store as a conditional use in the RR district a definition for this use needs to, be added to the zoning code. Add a new definition,Animal Shelter or Animal Rescue Center. 25.08.077 Animal shelter or animal rescue center. "Animal shelter: or"animal rescue center" means a facility operated by a government agency, society for the prevention of cruelty to animals,humane society, or rescue group providing services for stray, lost injured, or unwanted animals including treatment, regulated under Division 14 of the Food & Agriculture Code (sections 30500 to 32030). Such a use may include facilities for public education and training of volunteers, as well as facilities for the keeping of animals on site for a limited time. Annotation: Following the City Council's second study session on the proposed Rollins Road zoning regulations, they suggested that 39 Rollins Road(RR)District Regulations with Annotations Draft 10 with Planning Commission Directed Changes,February 27,2006 and Council March 29,2006 Prepared May 7,2006 differentiating animal shelters from other animal serving uses based on whether they were for profit or non profit was too broad a distinction to work well. The City Attorney did further research on how other jurisdictions regulate this use and in which zones the shelter use was most frequently located. (See CA Memo Amendment to Definition of animal Shelter and Animal Rescue Facility, April 20, 2006) The conclusion in the memo is that animal shelter and animal rescue center uses are most frequently located in light industrial area and less frequently in commercial zones. Based on the issues with the original definition the above definition is suggested based on the California Food & Agriculture code. The proposed definition is narrower than the original one and matches the scope of this use as set out in the State code. Add a new definition,Boarding kennel. 25.08.137 Boarding Kennel "Boarding Kennel"means any kennel where more than the number of animals allowed on a single site under title 9 of this code and owned by another person are temporarily boarded for pay or other compensation of any kind;provided,however,this definition shall not apply to zoos,animal shelters,animal rescue centers or veterinary hospitals. Annotation: The Subcommittee added this definition to clarify the distinction between veterinary hospitals, animal shelters/rescue centers and boarding kennels. Add a definition,Veterinary Hospital. 25.08.666 Veterinary hospital. "Veterinary hospital"means an establishment for the care and treatment of the diseases and injuries of animals and where animals may be boarded during their convalescence;however,overnight care of said animals is not a part of veterinary hospital except when necessary in the medical treatment of the animal. Annotation: The Subcommittee felt that there should be a bright line among the three animal care uses, veterinary hospital, animal shelter and boarding kennel. It should be noted that the performance 40 Rollins Road(RR)District Regulations with Annotations Draft]0 with Planning Commission Directed Changes,February 27,2006 and Council March 29,2006 Prepared May 7,2006 criteria particular to the use are included in the zoning regulations where the use is allowed. Previously the definition for veterinary hospital and the performance criteria were all included in the M-1 zoning regulations. 41 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes February 27, 2006 ■ consider moving the house forward on the lot to increase the rear yard space, bay window may project into the front setback up to 1'-6" and not to exceed 20 SF in footprint; ■ concerned that the proposed porch is too small and not inviting, should increase size of porch, will help to reduce the mass of the building; ■ would like to see detached garage setback an additional 1'-0" from the side and rear property lines to provide more space for maintenance around the garage structure; ■ concerned with the Photinia species proposed along the left side property line at the rear of the lot, species is susceptible to blight, should choose a different species of the same size; ■ clarify the roofing material above the bay window on the plans; ■ there are Tudor style houses across the street, porches are different with steep pitches, consider using a steeper pitch roof such as 12: 12 or 14:12 to create a distinction; ■ consider applying for a special permit for declining height envelope to raise the house, rather than shifting the house over and making the driveway narrower, encroachment into the declining height envelope would be minimal; ■ proposed balcony is an appropriate size, the balcony is small and adjacent to the master bedroom, is located on the opposite side of the house away from the neighbor's pool, will have a minimal affect on privacy, have to keep in mind that this is a suburban neighborhood; balcony helps to reduce the mass and bulk of the building, the balcony details are nice; the house is arranged in such a way that it steps away from the neighboring property towards the rear of the house, helps to improve privacy; ■ balcony will create a shadow on the first floor, could do a mock balcony instead; ■ suggest installing trees in the landscape pockets along the right side property line near the garage to provide privacy for the neighbor's pool in the rear yard; could also install a large scale shrub such as a Pittosporum which has a fast growth pattern; ■ only need a one-car garage for the proposed four bedroom house, consider reducing the size of the garage to increase the useable rear yard; and ■ encourage property owner to talk to the neighbor about type of fencing, could help to improve privacy. Comment on motion: there are a lot of little but important issues which need to be addressed on the plans, a lot of discussion about drainage, need to address drainage now, do not want to see this project come back for changes at time of construction; motion includes accepting the balcony as proposed because it is small and is not different than having a window in the same location, addressing the height of the building as it relates to the concerns with on-site drainage and addressing the landscape issues noted. Chair Auran called for a vote on the motion to place this item on the consent calendar when plans had been revised as directed. The motion passed on a voice vote 7-0. The Planning Commission's action is advisory and not appealable. This item concluded at 9:35 p.m. 6. IMPLEMENTATION OF THE NORTH BURLINGAME/ROLLINS ROAD SPECIFIC PLAN: PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED NEW ZONING REGULATIONS FOR THE ROLLINS ROAD INDUSTRIAL AREA (NEWSPAPER NOTICE AND 124 NOTICED) CITY PLANNER: MARGARET MONROE Reference staff report February 27, 2006, with attachments. CP Monroe presented the report noting that the Rollins Road zoning had been reviewed by the Planning Commission and recommended to City Council in September 2005, and the City Council had studied the proposed regulations on December 19, 2005. Council suggested that the regulations be returned to the Commission for further consideration of a number of items raised at their study session. The Subcommittee met twice to discuss and address these issues, their 11 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes February 27, 2006 recommendations on these items are included in the draft of the ordinance. The core of the proposed Rollins Road zoning has not changed from September 2005,so the staff presentation focused on the recommended changes to the areas which were identified for further consideration: land uses including veterinary hospital and animal boarding and performance standards for large scale building materials and garden supply stores; clarification of how the auto row overlay applies to the Adrian Court area; performance criteria and uses allowed in the Rollins Road drain;and in the Southern Gateway Entrance area,criteria for eligibility for the FAR bonus, whether the area should be treated as an overlay with all industrial uses also allowed, and whether'pedestrian oriented'retail uses are appropriate in the Southern Gateway Entrance area. Commissioners asked staff: how are 'personal service' uses defined in Burlingame? CP responded that 'personal service' is defined in the zoning code as service which cares for the person or personal goods/apparel such as beauty parlor,barbershop,or dry cleaners. Attorneys,CPAs, or accountant services are not considered to be'personal services'rather they are included in office uses. What kind of office uses are allowed in the industrial area(outside of the Southern Gateway Entrance overlay area)? CP noted only office uses associated with a permitted or conditional use on the site, such as an office to operate a warehousing business or an auto repair shop. Office uses for attorneys,architects or accountants which are independent of a permitted or conditional use on the site,so are free standing and are not allowed under the proposed zoning.The proposed zoning would allow a manufacturing industry like Guittard Chocolate up to 25%of its warehouse to be used as office as a permitted use and up to 50%with a conditional use permit. Commissioner noted that the reason free standing office buildings (occupied by office uses not associated with activities on site)are not allowed is that they are often incompatible with permitted uses which are to be promoted in the zone,e.g.negatively affected by the impacts such as truck traffic,noise,vibration,etc.of the industrial area. CP noted that this is so. Commissioner asked why the criteria for no fee and stay limited to 45 days were added to the definition of 'animal shelter'. CP and CA responded that the no fee was added to distinguish these facilities from for-profit boarding kennels,but the non-profit status would address the same issue, so not charging a fee is a duplicate. The 45 day limit was again a distinguishing characteristic to address differences with breeding facilities. The 45 day time limit was chosen because it was identified as a 'typical stay' for a healthy animal in an adoption facility. It was also noted that duration was chosen over density, because there did not appear to be any established density standards (e.g. dogs or cats or native animals per square foot)we could find. The time limit for adoptive healthy animals could be increased to more closely match a maximum stay rather than a'typical stay'. Commissioner expressed a concern about vehicle storage in the drain, cars are limited to 30 days but there is no time limit on RV's and boats. These should be treated the same. CA noted the need to be able to move vehicles in the drain quickly in the event of flooding; so there needed to be a single point of responsibility. Commission discussed the differences between a definition in the code and the performance criteria-included in a zoning district. CP and CA noted that a definition defines the parameters of the use in a general sense;but based on the objectives of the zone, different performance criteria may be assigned in different zoning districts. There were no more questions of staff. Chair Auran opened the public hearing. Pat Giomi, 1445 Balboa;Kevin Gabarra, 1400 Rollins Road;John Ward, 792 Willborough; Herman Christiansen, 1423-1499 Rollins Road, Jennifer Renk, representing the Peninsula Humane Society/SPCA; spoke. It is appropriate to charge a fee to adopt an animal to discourage misuse of the animal and poor maintenance; during stay the animal may need veterinary services,food and other expenditures which need to be covered,should be considered in the definition. The animal shelter use proposed is in violation of the Specific Plan; animal boarding is incompatible with an industrial area, can't differentiate use based on whether it is for profit or non-profit,only can differentiate based on whether the use is acceptable or not. Represent the corner of Rollins and Broadway, this has been a two year history, biggest issue has been addressed-required combination of parcels for eligibility for density bonus, the use 12 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes February 27, 2006 of minimum lot size is appropriate; personal services comment in letter submitted is a misunderstanding, now clear; is Commission aware that this proposal would really eliminate all retail in the overlay area (Southern Gateway Entrance) and would remove a lot of the potential of our site; are the traffic impact requirements for the overlay a policy which applies to all development in the area or just to the Southern Gateway Entrance, if apply to all don't need in the zoning. Should not allow animal shelter/rescue businesses in the Rollins Road area;will discourage other business,have the same impacts and reduce city revenues because non-profit; Humane society is a kennel without breeding, use is inappropriate and incompatible with industrial area,reason that the neighbors oppose,should give them the same consideration that you give residents in a residential neighborhood who oppose a neighbor's house; gave a map to the Planning Commission showing the location of the properties of all the people who opposed animal boarding in the Rollins Road area. Submitted a letter with what we consider technical changes,think the non-profit status covers the fee issue;people assign value to an adopted animal when they pay a fee and if an animal is not adopted will tie hands, 'typical stay' is 45 days but not always, if not adopted in 45 days then what? There were no further comments from the floor. The public hearing was closed. Commissioner comments: How do these zoning regulations relate to the PHS/SPCA application? CP noted that project was submitted before these regulations will be effective, so that project is processed under the current M-1 zoning with the design review based on compliance with the Specific Plan. If the 'animal shelter/rescue'use is not approved, the PHS/SPCA care and concern center would continue in the Rollins Road area as a nonconforming use. A nonconforming use may continue and be maintained over time,but may not be expanded or replaced. Noted that a limitation on the length of an animal's stay in a shelter may not be important since occupancy of the habitat would immediately be filled by another similar animal, so perhaps some generic approach to limits is better. Commissioners discussed setting a maximum number of dogs and cats based on an occupancy density and limiting the size of both veterinary hospitals and animal shelters/rescue centers to 1,500 to 2,000 SF, small scale like the one that used to be on Amphlett Blvd. Because Animal shelter/rescue center uses are proposed as a conditional use in the Rollins Road zoning,they would be allowed only subject to approval of the size, intensity of use and location. Agree with the prohibition of animal boarding facilities including doggie day care, they do not provide the community service that a veterinarian or the animal shelter/rescue center provides; their impacts are different from commercial recreation facilities, they bring people into the area at peak hour and believe that an animal shelter or rescue center operates more like a veterinary hospital than a boarding kennel does. Comments continued: Do not believe that pedestrian oriented retail is appropriate in the Southern Gateway Entrance area, what CalTrain is going to do at the crossing is uncertain and could affect future pedestrian access from the Broadway Commercial area. There is a lot of vehicular movement in the area so is not a good place to bring people; bicycle and pedestrian access to the Broadway bridge and over it is very dangerous and should not be encouraged; feel that the opportunity to provide free standing office uses at a higher building density than in the industrial area should be sufficient to encourage improvement of the gateway entrance; uses in such office buildings can include a small cafeteria to serve employees in the building; pedestrian retail in this area would also promote more traffic and pedestrians in this area with difficult access. It is important to note that because of the traffic and type of uses in the industrial area that efforts should be made to keep the activities of a use confined to the site,dogs from the shelter should not be walked in the area and uses should not be designed for activities which stimulate off site impacts such as attracting new volumes of pedestrians or bicyclists into the area. The following items were suggested for amendment to the proposed zoning regulations: ■ For Animal shelters and rescue center use remove the prohibition on charging fees for services and retain the nonprofit status requirement. 13 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes February 27,2006 ■ Modify the language limiting a healthy animal's stay at a shelter or rescue center from 45 days or the applicant can propose and justify a density limit which addresses the impacts of various types of animals on site. ■ Amend the regulations for use in the Rollins Road drain to allow customers to come to the area and provide a central location, controlled by an individual,where the keys for all vehicles are kept and where people can come to get their vehicle(car, RV and/or boat). ■ Amend Veterinary Hospital performance standards to allow educational programs with a conditional use permit. C. Brownrigg moved to recommend the proposed zoning regulations for the Rollins Road area to the City Council for adoption with the recommended changes noted. The motion was seconded by C. Vistica. Comment on the motion: Asked how animal shelters and rescue centers were consistent with the Goals and policies for land use set out in the Specific Plan for the Rollins Road area. Staff noted that it was the job of the commission to make this determination,but businesses also contribute to the community's economic base by offering convenient services which provide support to the value of living in the community; providing a positive revenue generation to the city is one of several criteria to be weighed by the Commission and must be balanced with the contribution to the community and the costs of any additional services which the city must provide from the General Fund to support the activity (in this case as the environmental document notes the service demands for a animal shelter/rescue center are no greater than the service demands of any other use in the area, and the utility impacts are paid for by the use through users fees); what is a "vibrant Rollins Road industrial area" is the charge of the Planning Commission and City Council to determine and should be based on the long term vision for the area expressed in the Specific Plan and on the compatibility among the land uses which the environmental study should illuminate. Chair Auran called for a voice vote on the motion to recommend the proposed Rollins Road zoning district regulations with the revisions noted by the Planning Commission. The motion passed on a 7-0 voice vote. This item concluded at 10:00 p.m. 10. 1450 ROLLINS ROAD/20 EDWARDS COURT, ZONED M-1 — SECOND ENVIRONMENTAL SCOPING FOR ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND DESIGN REVIEW STUDY FOR RECONSTRUCTION OF AND ADDITION TO AN EXISTING BUILDING FOR THE PENINSULA HUMANE SOCIETY AND SPCA (KEN WHITE, PENINSULA HUMANE SOCIETY & SPCA, APPLICANT,GEORGE MIERS&ASSOCIATES,ARCHITECT,HENRY HORN&SONS,PROPERTY OWNER) (15 NOTICED)PROJECT PLANNER: RUBEN HURIN CP Monroe noted that the purpose of this meeting is to review the current scope of the project and identify any additional environmental issues which should be investigated and to complete a design review study of the proposed project. Although the applicant has considered a number of changes to the exterior of the building which have evolved with the refinement of the project description, these are not reflected in the plans before you which are the original plans. Staff felt that before a redesign was undertaken,the applicant should have all of your comments on the design issues including whether this project should be referred to a design reviewer. In addition since a visual impact evaluation is required for the CEQA document,design review comments are important at this point so that changes responsive to the design concerns can be incorporated into the visual evaluation. Commissioner noted that he went to the current Coyote Point facility to see what the operation was. Another commissioner noted that he spoke to the architect about meeting, but the meeting never occurred. Commissioner asked if it was clear what activities currently at Coyote Point would be moved to this site and which would stay at Coyote Point. Staff noted that there was a 14 M E M O R A N D U M CITY OF BURLINGAME CITY ATTORNEY DATE: April 20, 2006 TO: Mayor and Council FROM: Larry E. Anderson, City Attorney RE : Amendment to Definition of Animal Shelter and Animal Rescue Facility INTRODUCTION At the March 29, 2006, Council study meeting on the Rollins Road , some members of the public expressed concern over making a distinction between nonprofit and profit operation of animal shelters or kennels. This memorandum discusses animal facility provisions in other cities and recommends the Council consider amending the proposed definition of shelter or rescue facility to narrow the operation definition further. DISCUSSION The proposed zoning for the Rollins Road District to implement the North Burlingame/Rollins Road Specific Plan is intended to continue the industrial nature of the Rollins Road area given its central location in the County and proximity to San Francisco International Airport. It is recognized in the Plan that development should be beneficial to the City. Veterinary hospitals have been long recognized as a part of the existing zoning (M-1) in the area. The Planning Commission has recommended that animal shelters and animal rescue centers be made a conditional use in the zoning district. This follows a determination made by the Commission in 2005 that such a use was similar in nature to veterinary hospitals. Many property owners in the Rollins Road District have objected to the inclusion of shelters or rescue centers and believe that they are little different from kennels,which the Commission does not recommend including in the conditional uses of the District. Staff conducted a quick review of zoning codes in other Bay Area cities to see if and where animal shelters or animal kennels are allowed. Attached is a summary of that review. Generally,kennels are a permitted or conditional use in many cities, and in most cases are located in light industrial zones. However, some cities such as Campbell, Palo Alto, and Walnut Creek, allow them in commercial districts. Most cities do not seem to distinguish between shelters and kennels,although Redwood City and San Carlos do limit kennels to indoor use. Mayor and Council Re: Amendment to Definition of Animal Shelter and Animal Rescue Facility April 20, 2006 Page 2 Therefore, it would certainly appear to be consistent with zoning practice and light industrial development in the Bay Area to allow kennels in the Rollins Road District. The zoning codes, at least, do not show any adverse effects from allowing kennels in light industrial zones. However,the Planning Commission felt that kennels were too broad a use to allow in the Rollins Road District. Instead,the Commission recognized the compelling public need for animal shelter or animal rescue facilities was an important community and public use. The definition recommended by the Commission limited the operation of such a shelter or facility to a "non-profit association or corporation that provides for the rescue and shelter of animals..." However,this may be too broad or vague,so it is recommended that the Council consider recrafting the definition to match California Food& Agriculture Code provisions as follows: 25.08.077 Animal shelter or animal rescue center. "Animal shelter" or " animal rescue center" means a facility operated by a government agency, society for the prevention of cruelty to animals, humane society, or rescue group providing services for stray, lost, injured, or unwanted animals, including treatment, regulated under Division 14 of the Food & Agriculture Code (sections 30500 to 32030). Such a use may include facilities for public education and training of volunteers, as well as facilities for the keeping of animals for adoption on site for a limited time. CONCLUSION The Council may wish to consider whether to allow kennels as a conditional use in the Rollins Road District in light of the many provisions of allowing kennels in light industrial zones in the Bay Area. However, in any event, staff recommends replacing Section 3 of the ordinance with the definition of animal shelter or animal rescue facility suggested in this memorandum so that the provision is narrowed to match State law. CITY DESCRIPTION LOCATION/CODE PROVISION Berkeley Municipal Animal Shelter CUP Manufacturing and Light Industrial 23E.72.030, 23E76.030,23E80.030(kennels prohibited) Campbell Cat boarding CUP General commercial—21.10.050 Dog and Cat boarding CUP Light industrial—21.10.080 Corte Madera Animal Boarding CUP C-I—18.12.020 Cupertino Kennels Permitted Light Industrial 19.60.030 Fremont Animal shelters,including Light Industrial 8-21414 boarding kennels for small domestic pets CUP Hayward Kennels CUP Industrial 10-1.1620 Los Gatos Kennels CUP Controlled Manufacturing—29.20.185 Los Altos Kennels CUP Commercial Thoroughfare 14.50.040 Mountain View Kennels as needed to serve the Manufacturing(MM)—36.20.2 City CUP Napa Kennels CUP 17.34.030—CH(Comm'I-Semi-Industrial) 17.40.030—GI(Industrial) Palo Alto Animal care,including boarding Commercial Service—18.45.040 and kennels CUP Petaluma Kennels CUP Light Industrial—14-407 Pleasant Hill Animal Care Use permitted Business&Light Industrial Districts 18.25.010/.020 Pleasanton Kennels CUP CA Commercial District 18.44.090 Animal Shelter CUP Public Facilities District 18.56.040 Redwood City Completely enclosed, CG District(General Comm'l) —15.4 soundproof kennels CUP Rohnert Park Kennel CUP C-R Zone 17.06.060 Industrial Zone 17.06.100 San Carlos Kennel(indoor)CUP Light industrial—18.66.040 CS Service—18.52.035 San Leandro Animal Boarding Permitted CS Zone—2-612 Animal Boarding Conditional CC Zone-2-606 Santa Rosa Kennel,animal boarding CUP Light Industrial or General Industrial— Table 2-10 South San Francisco Kennel CUP Light industrial—20.31.020 Walnut Creek Kennel CUP Service Commercial—10.22.1101 - f FEHR & PEERS TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS MEMORANDUM Date: May 5, 2006 To: Meg Monroe, Planning Director; City of Burlingame From: Greg Saur & Chris Mitchell, PE; Fehr & Peers Subject. Animal Care Trip Generation SF06-0254 INTRODUCTION The purpose of this study is to identify the trip generation characteristics of various types of animal care facilities to better understand the traffic-related differences between potential types of development under the City of Burlingame's proposed zoning revisions. Sites that were surveyed include one veterinary hospital, two "doggy day care" facilities, and two animal shelters within the San Francisco Bay area. PROCEDURE The study sites were selected in consultation with the City of Burlingame staff based on location, size, and available services: Veterinary Hospital • Bay Area Veterinary Specialists is a 7,500 sq. ft veterinary hospital located in San Leandro, CA that offers emergency medical treatment. "Doggy Day Care" • Every Dog Has It's Daycare is a 14,000 sq. ft. "doggy day care" facility located in Emeryville, CA that offers daycare, overnight boarding, and grooming. Membership plans are purchased on a monthly basis and include unlimited day care. The facility restricts drop-off time to occur only between 7 and 9 AM and pick-up time between 4 and 7 PM. • Planet Pooch is a 30,000 sq. ft. "doggy day care" facility located in South San Francisco, CA that offers daycare, overnight boarding, and grooming. Day care is available on a half day, full day, and full month basis. There are no drop-off or pick-up time restrictions. Animal Shelter • San Jose Animal Care Center is a 50,000 sq. ft. animal shelter located in San Jose, CA that offers animal adoption, a spay/neuter clinic, obedience classes, and houses the San Jose animal control office. 604 Mission Street, 41hRoor, San 1 rancisco, CA 94105 (415) 369-0425 Fax(415) 369-0426 www.fehrandpeers.com Meg Monroe,City of Burlingame May 5,2006 Page 2of4 FEH' P, & PEERS TRARStORTATTOM[ORSOLTANT$ • Tony LaRussa's Animal Rescue Foundation is a 37,700 sq. ft. animal shelter located in Walnut Creek, CA that offers animal adoption, a spay/neuter clinic, obedience classes, and educational outreach programs for the public. The trip generation rates presented in this memorandum were developed by comparing the building floor areas to the AM and PM peak hour traffic generated at the sites. Peak period traffic counts (7-9 AM and 4-6PM) were conducted at the facility driveways during a typical weekday during the months of April or May. For the animal shelters, only the PM peak hour was considered because neither facility is open before 9 AM. RESULTS Table 1 presents the findings of the site specific trip generation surveys. Table 2 presents the trip generation rates of the specific sites and Table 3 presents the average trip generation rates based on building floor area and facility type. As shown in Table 1, the greatest AM peak hour trip generator is one of the "doggy day care" facilities, Every Dog Has It's Daycare, with 110 AM peak hour trips. The other"doggy day care" facility, Planet Pooch, only generates 35 AM peak hour trips. The veterinary hospital, Bay Area Veterinary Specialists, is similar to Planet Pooch, in that it generates 38 AM peak hour trips. The greatest PM peak hour trip generator, as shown in Table 1, is one of the animal shelters, Tony LaRussa's Animal Rescue,with 84 PM peak hour trips. The other animal shelter, San Jose Animal Care Center, generates 60 PM peak hour trips. Similar to the AM results, the "doggy day care"facility, Every Dog Has It's Daycare, generates more PM peak hour trips(72)than the other "doggy day care" facility, Planet Pooch (17), or the veterinary hospital, Bay Area Veterinary Specialists(29). Table 1 Trip Generation Data by Site Weekday AM Peak PM Peak Hour Tris Hour Tri s Facility Type Site Size(ksf) In I Out Total In Out Total Veterinary Hospital Bay Area Veterinary Specialists 7.5 32 6 38 14 15 29 "Doggy Day Care" —Every Dog Has It's Daycare 14 55 55 110 36 36 72 Planet Pooch 30 18 17 35 7 10 17 Animal Shelter San Jose Animal Care Center 50 Not open during 23 1 37 60 Ton LaRussa's Animal Rescue 37.7 AM peak hour 31 53 84 =Source: hr&Peers,2006. As shown in Table 2, normalizing the AM and PM peak hour trips by building floor areas yields dissimilar trip generation rate results among facilities of the same type. The "doggy day care" facility, Every Dog Has It's Daycare, has the highest trip generation rate in both the AM and PM peak hours,followed by the veterinary hospital, Bay Area Veterinary Specialists. The facility that Meg Monroe,City of Burlingame May 5,2006 TP Page 3 of 4 F'E H R & PEERS TRANSPORTATION(ONS(ltIANTS exhibits the lowest trip generation rate in both the AM and PM peak hours is the other"doggy day care"facility, Planet Pooch. While the two"doggy day care"facilities differ in size, they have a similar number of employees and maximum capacity for animals. Given the disparity in peak hour trips, we believe the fee structures and membership requirements as well as the location of the facilities account for the drastic difference in peak hour trip generation. Every Dog Has It's Daycare only provides monthly, unlimited access, membership plans that restrict drop-off times to occur between 7 and 9 AM and pick-up time between 4 and 7 PM. Additionally, Every Dog Has It's Daycare is one of only two "doggie day care" facilities in the East Bay. Planet Pooch, on the other hand, offers monthly, unlimited memberships, but also provides half day and full day drop-ins and has no drop-off or pick-up restrictions. There are also eight other"doggy day care"facilities, including a second Planet Pooch in Redwood City, located on the Peninsula and in San Francisco. We believe that the monthly memberships,which have no marginal cost increase associated with using the day care service everyday, the scarcity of competition, and the pick-up and drop-off time requirements are the main reasons why Every Dog Has It's Daycare generates more peak hour trips than Planet Pooch. Table 2 Trip Generation Rates by Site Weekday AM Peak PM Peak Hour Trip Hour Trip Rate per ksf Rate per ksf Facility Type Site Size(ksf) In Out Total In Out Total Veterinary Hospital Bay Area Veterinary Specialists 7.5 4.27 0.80 5.07 1.87 2.00 3.87 "Doggy Day Care" Every Dog Has It's Daycare 14 3.93 3.93 7.86 2.57 2.57 5.14 Planet Pooch 30 0.60 0.57 1.17 0.23 0.33 0.56 Animal Shelter San Jose Animal Care Center 50 Not open during 0.46 0.74 1.20 Ton LaRussa's Animal Rescue 37.7 AM peak hour 0.82 1.41 2.23 Source:Fehr&Peers,2006. When the data from similar facility types is averaged,as shown in Table 3,the veterinary hospital is shown to have the highest trip generation rate in both the AM and PM peak hours,followed by the"doggy day care"and then the animal shelter. Meg Monroe, City of Burlingame May 5,2006 Page 4of4 EHR PEE:AS 1RAWONTA"011-C"Si UANTS i Table 3 Average Trip Generation Rates by Facility Type Weekda AM Peak PM Peak Hour Rate Hour Rate Facility Type Unit In Out Total In Out Total Veterinary Hospital 4.27 0.80 5.07 1.87 2.00 3.87 "Doggy Day Care" ksf 227 2.25 4.52 1.40 1.45 2.85 Animal Shelter Not open during AM peak hour 0.64 1.08 1.72 Source:Fehr 8 Peers,2006. CONCLUSION As determined through field observations of one veterinary hospital, two "doggy day care" facilities, and two animal shelters throughout the San Francisco Bay area, there are measurable differences in the trip generation characteristics of various types of animal care facilities. Veterinary hospitals generate more AM and PM peak hour traffic than "doggy day care"facilities, which in turn generate more AM and PM peak hour traffic than animal shelters. M E M O R A N D U M CITY OF BURLINGAME CITY ATTORNEY DATE: April 5,2006 TO: Mayor and Council FROM: Larry E. Anderson, City Attorney RE : Commercial Parking Facility Tax and Its Application to Storage Businesses QUESTION PRESENTED At the Council's March 29 study meeting regarding the Rollins Road Zoning District,the Council asked if there was a way to assess a fee or tax on the storage of vehicles and boats. This memorandum outlines the existing City tax that applies to vehicle storage. DISCUSSION In November 2001,the voters approved Measure Q,which rewrote the parking tax that the City had originally adopted as an airport parking tax in 1992. A copy of Measure Q (found in Section 6.08.085 of the Municipal Code) is attached for your reference. As you can see, the tax applies to the parking or storage of vehicles. It does not apply on its face to the storage of boats. Therefore,if an"RV storage"facility opened,it would be subject to the parking tax,even though boats might be stored as well,because the facility was predominantly for recreation vehicles. There are three exclusions: 1)where the predominant use of the site is not for parking or storage— this was written to exclude hotels in particular that charged for parking; 2)where the vehicles are company-owned or leased,such as a utility yard;and 3)where the vehicles are part of an inventory, in particular a car dealership storage area. If the Council wished to increase the tax rate or to extend the tax to the storage of other property, such as boats, the change would have to be submitted to the voters for approval. If the tax was to be a general tax(as Measure Q is),then the matter would have to be on a regular City election date; the next regular City election is November 2007. Please let me know if you would like to discuss this issue further. cc: City Planner Finance Director CITY OF BURLINGAME MEASURE Q Shall the ordinance amending the Municipal Code to establish a business license tax of five percent (5%)of gross receipts on operators of commercial parking facilities within the City of Burlingame be adopted? Measure Q: Text of Proposed Ordinance This ordinance is proposed by the City Council of the City of Burlingame to establish a business license tax of five percent on operators of commercial parking facilities. PROPOSED ORDINANCE THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Section 6.08.085 is adopted to read as follows: 6.08.085 Operators of commercial parking facilities (a) Commercial parking facility defined. "Commercial parking facility"means any privately owned or operated facility that provides, for any form of consideration,parking or storage for motor vehicles, motorcycles, trailers,bicycles, or other similar means of conveyance for passengers or property. "Commercial parking facility"does not include a parking facility that is: (i) Not the predominant use of the parcel on which the parking facility is located; or (ii)Leased or owned by a business and operated exclusively to park or store vehicles that are owned or leased by that same business; or (iii)Leased or owned by a business and operated exclusively to park or store vehicles that are part of that same business' inventory for purposes of sale, lease, or resale. (b) Operator defined. "Operator"means any person who, as owner, lessee, employee, agent, or otherwise,operates,maintains, manages,keeps,permits,or allows to be operated, maintained,managed, or keep any commercial parking facility in or upon any premises owned, leased,managed, operated, or controlled by such person within the city. (c)The operator of a commercial parking facility in the city shall pay an annual license tax of five percent(5%) of the gross receipts received from the operation of the commercial parking facility without deduction therefrom. (d)Each operator of a facility shall, on or before the last day of the month following the close of each calendar quarter, or at the close of any shorter reporting period which may be established by the license collector, make a return to the license collector, on forms provided by the collector of the total tax. At the time the return is filed, the full amount of the tax shall be remitted to the license collector. The license collector may establish shorter reporting periods for any operator if the collector deems it necessary in order to insure timely collection of the tax; and the collector may also require further information in the return. Returns and payments are due immediately upon cessation of business for any reason. Section 2. This ordinance shall be considered adopted on the date that the City Council declares the vote,and shall go into effect ten(10) days thereafter. s LAW OFFICES' DAVID T. MOUTOUX 1400Rollins Road - �Burlingame,CA '9401©' . ` pH NE':6 54$-0324 FAX-(650); 0325 , W00294. 006 - t Bur tngame -i1W Council -5161. Road s .. , . ... " . 1Y Re ►genda Item: 3h -, 1 Iarch.29,,2006-Study Session , =f Dear Distinguished Members: - t am an'attorney with;a law practice at 1"400.Rollins Road. I=arn writing to express,my opposition to the proposed zoning changes.allowing'animal.rescue centersin the Rollins Road d Corridor,Agenda Item 3b Proposed Zoning Changes A: . . .Animalheliter Ilse �Conflict with,the Specific Plan The Specific Plan for the Rollins Road Comdor was gassed in September X004("SP") and provides a vision and"direction for.the orderly"economic developmerit of this•vital.industrial area. Nowhere inthat document is there a provision or policy statement which sanctions or encourages the establishment ofnon-profit shelters for the keeping of large numbers of healthy, domestic and wild animals for.extended periods`of time(up to 45 days). Indeed,this proposed new use is such a dramatic departure from the stated vision of the SP thaj it cannot be implemented,if at all,without an amendment to the'SP as required by California�rovernmenti-Code-§65860(a) and•Burlingame City Code §25:04:480. 1 _n The D ri" stated Go is and Policies of the )x_i&lude(emphasis added). t Il tom. i � - X =1! 1✓ncoure Izus'tnesses tooeate n 't Rollins Road area "B IZeco ize the_[Rollins board area] contributes to the City's=economac Kase "B�1 Ix velopment in [the':RoIlufis Ttoad.areal`should';have.0 ,hive cost benef t ratio u �'- ` ,� r have.a ne frtrli> iactMon the" �s 'ieeral fid:' C. the R olluns load area should cot#arrue to be a vabrant frtdtstraal area to provxde:a strong cornponerit'of fife City',s.employment and eco i�ortac brise " e } " �rse -erand eicpandpthe numbef eastlg horn tie I1sAd ', . deSaRgg aVote !equate land area>to support and`maintaan`the • industrtgTuse. 4; A n. s encourage automorle sales and servace.bsanesses, including local-onemted :au'0 parts sales: t v, The stated Implementation Goals-of ffi, anolpde _ Development incentives This SPS includes-several development-incentives intended:to spur the.. Private development community to.implement the ideas in The proposed zoning change(25.08.077):allowing non-profit animal shelters in the Rollins Ro :d area:is_atodds with-the primary goalsand-plans for:this area:-This new and un _reced' ed use does;not contribute to the advancement ofthis uidustnai area or its economy �p - — -_ _ _ . and in fact hinders these goals }y devoting vital land areas•to economieally,non-productive.uses, areas that`shoui be used in ways that are'consistent with SP for exam-le;:ao`sa�es: new use willalso-negatively impact the City's-General Fund'by removing such parcels,(and potential business)from the County property tax roles'and City sales tax roles. Moreover,itis hard to imagine how the City expects to implement its vision through: incentives to the primary development community when a majority of the owners and tenants that-comprise that very community are opposed to this unprecedented use. (See Petition and . letters submitted in_opposition to the,keeping of-animals-in the Rollins Road corridor). And once allowed -t-he presenee-of-animal'sheltersmay likely preclude-further industrial.development and investment in the immediate area:out of concern for-uses that are inconsistent and incompatible with the activities of an animal shelter vs.trucking,for example. 2 F Cerkarrrl �if the City believes fhe keeprng:of large numbers of domestic and wild arumaTs tn'the Rolling Road azea rs an important plana, g ob1ective,the pity can mgve forward with l these proposedanmg changes but must first make apprgpriae changes to the SP in order to do so,.or risk havuig these new ordinances challenged throw the courts;(but see below). . Y B I�tsiwetwti Betwee COmItl0rC18Boarding-and Tarin:Profit•Boarding Is orb" ary �.: _frelated concern,rs the meaningless distmctiofi being drawn between,commercral animai boaxduxg;'virhntrIfl pirolnbrted;and non profit anunal boarding wlucii will be allowed ( � p8 Q77and 2$ Q8,.17) "fie ketng. f large;numbers ofhpalthy animals for.extended _- periods of time involves the same nirripacts=and challenges to•the area area ownership r.S [EIn ;1'EaF �} ..er �eayr Ironically,the Plann>yn Eomtnissxonl Subcomrriittee char ed'wrth studying these issues, argues ties;-point best in its Proposed Revisions dated Eebruary.l6,20Q6 Suomnttee determined that animal boarding-kerne uses were jr appxop ate i e I ollrnsAd Uudustrial area:b were incompatible with the primary rndustrial-uses in the area. -Such uses attract aMvolum ,pattern.and type;of traffic which is u consistent-with the ciroulafion:peeds of an industrial area. This unequivocal-statement begs the.question:how are non-profit an boarding kennels substantively different from commercial-kennels from a land use'perspective? Why are non-profit kennels appropriate in ilicaollins Road area;,and compatible.witli the prinary industrial uses in the,area,while for-piofit kennels are not? A strong•argument can be trade that not only-is there-no substantive land use difference, but hat non profit kennels would=likely-have a greater,negafive impact than for=profit kennels= generate-even eater volumes-of eo le and-cars = since non Accordingly, I encourage the Council to reject the following pro posed-zomng changes; : r w New 25.44.065 New 25 44.150 New 2-5,08.077 ;y Nov 25p8.137 , `i`hank you for co s dei gay Ooh**. Please don't hesitate to contact me with fti#ther questtons` fi} cinest_ ti Wer,' pre�ord of prbceedgs .. ... I �va :Mo cc: Lamy Anderson,,]*. Marg#6t Monroe.... BK25 TAX CODE AREA 26-10 S 4'4f TS"W yai'7p)e•w 445.04' NTi 14'0!'W \ 5a O R O p i pp LqOO I � c. t PARCEL A ,OCG\e\ 2c Irate' (JJ �y� WAt�IVG *,.ml Ed'E. 1.177AC 3* Q PARC COURT O m AM.�Wi2 EDWARDS RD. EDWARDS w aJ � rti ILI W b buglTiwb Vj s - cr- " RFi'f� W Gi4 z $A O _ � Z RECE VED sre5" Q LINGAME CHANNEL ; �1 N4rare 2� OITY OF DEPT. NI B 50' DRAINAGE 5O. PLANO i 1 DCPA/NAGE CNANNEG ,PARCEL MAP VOL 56//2 w N e PARCEL MAP VOL /622 /2 PARCEL MAP VOL 381/4 MTI PROPERTIES M f 1415 Rollins Road, Suite 210, Burlingame, CA 94010 Tel (650) 348-6140 Fax(650) 348-6149 March 29, 2006 Burlingame City Council 501 Primrose Road Burlingame, CA 94010 Re: Proposed zoning changes; Dear City Council; We operate the property at 1415 Rollins Road. We are concerned that the Specific Plan for the Rollins Road Corridor that was passed in September 2004, in not being considered with the proposed new zoning allowing any type of animal boarding. This is not in the vision of the Specific Plan at all. It is very hard to understand how the City can stray from the direction that was intended for the Rollins Road Area. We are opposed to this unprecedented use and join the majority of owners and tenants of the Rollins Road area in requesting you to not change the current zoning in the M-1 area as it relates to animal boarding. Sincerely, Tomo Fukumoto Controller MTI Properties RECTOR MOTOR CAR COMPANY 1010 CADILLAC WAY BURLINGAME,CALIFORNIA 94010 OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT TELEPHONE(650)348-0111 October 21, 2005 Ms. Margaret W. Monroe City-Planner- Burlingame City Hall 501 Primrose-Road Burlingame, CA 94010 Dear Meg: I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed M-1 zoning change in the Rollins Road area allowing for"doggie day care." This proposed new use is-inconsistent with the conditional use regulations for the M-1 zone which prohibit the boarding of animals. Animal_boarding has no-recent history_in-Burlingame in-any.zone. The two-veterinary. hospitals currently operating in the Burlingame(C-1 and R-3)do not allow boarding and such-is.a new use, in,my view, is-in conflict with,thevision-for the Rollins-Road corridor. As you are aware,in 20011 choose to keep my business in Burlingame and invested an additional_$5 million in.significant upgrades to.my property.. Making a change to the existing M-1 zone will have an adverse effect on the area which will significantly affect property values. I therefore request that the Planning Commission vote against this proposed zoning change. Thanking you-in,advance for your consideration. Most sincerely, J s Hannay Copies:All-Burlingame Planning Commissioners. RECEIVED OCT 2 4 2005 CITY OF BURLkt TAME PLANNING DEPT. _}---ft COMMLINICATIONRECEIYED R PREPIIIg1Y OF TA - �R1�PiQJ - October 21,2005 Ms.Margaret W.Monroe - City Planner - BURLINGAME CITY HALL 501 Primrose Road Burlingame,CA 94010 Dear Ms.Monroe, - After finishing my project at 1755 Rollins Road in 2003, I was pleased to see the passage of the North Burlingame/Rollins Road Specific Plan in September of 2004. I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed M-1 zoning change in the Rollins Road area allowing for"doggie day care." This proposed new use is inconsistent with the conditional use regulations for the M-1 _ zone which prohibit the boarding of animals. Animal boarding has no recent history in Burlingame in any zone. The two veterinary hospitals currently operating in Burlingame do not allow any boarding and are in C-1 and R-3 zones. Such a new use,in my opinion,is in conflict with the vision for the Rollins Road corridor. ` = I,therefore,request that the Planning Commission vote againstflus `•` a=.�;��T i_ proposed zonin ge, - - Sincerely, f - - RECEIVED t - - UL 1 L 4 2005 CfrY OF BURLINGAME I PLANNING DEPT. Robert P_Riggs P—id—r&CEO I - 1755 Rollins Road,Burlingame,California 94010�650.240.3000.-650.240.3091 145 West 134th Street,Los Angeles,California 90061 ,a 323.770.3610323.770.3821 938 Piikoi Street,Honolulu,Hawaii 96814.8808.597.1669 w 808_597_1633 _- www_subzerowolf_com THE WESTYE GkOUP 1 � c r►� -rr�o u � TTAtieztz-7 f0� z R COMM MAJTIONRECEIVED �J�u'e 9868 .4F?ER PREP,4RATION •• OF STAFF REPORT February 23, 2006 RECEIVED FEB 2 7 2006 crnF OF BURUWAW City of Burlingame Planning Commission c/o City of Burlingame Planning Department 501 Primrose Road Burlingame, CA 94010 Re: Changes to the M-1 Zoning within the North Burlingame/Rollins Road area. Dear Planning Commission: Our business, Guittard Chocolate Company, has been located at 10 Guittard Road in Burlingame since 1955. We also own and do business at 50 Broderick Road. We are partners in G&T Properties(Guittard & Timberlake)who own buildings that are leased at 6 Guittard Road,23 Broderick Road, 1805 Rollins Road, 1815 Rollins Road and 1835 Rollins Road. Eleven Guittard Road is also a family owned building. I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed M-I zoning change in the Rollins Road area allowing for Keeping and/or Boarding of animals. Animal boarding has no recent history in Burlingame in any zone. The two veterinary hospitals currently operating in Burlingame (C 1 and R3)do not allow boarding and such is a new use, in my view, is in conflict with the vision for the Rollins Road corridor. I therefore request that the Planning Commission vote against this proposed zoning change. Sin r , Fresiaent GUITTARD CHOCOLATE COMPANY MANUFACTURERS OF CHOCOLATE AND COCOA PRODUCTS• 10 GU r]1ARD ROAD,BURLJLyGAME,CA 94010-2203 P.O.BOX 4308• BURLJNGAME,CA 94011-4308 (650)697-4427• (800)468-2462• FAX(650)692-2761 • www.guittard.com 2`zl/ota P• C. Terry Timberlake COMMZINICATIDNRECEIYED 401 Chapin Lane AFTER PREPARATION p OF STAFF REPORT Burlingame, CA 94010 RECEIVED FEB 2 TpNffi February 18,2046 cay of BURUNGAME PLANNING DEPT: Planning Department City of Burlingame 501 Primrose Road Burlingame, CA 94010 Re: Changes to the M-1 Zoning within the North Burlingame/Rollins Road area. Dear Planners: I am the owner of the property at 15 Guittard Road, Burlingame. I do not feel any boarding of animals is compatible within the M-1 zone. I am in opposition to the proposed M-1 zoning change in the Rollins Road area allowing for"doggie day care." This proposed new use is inconsistent with the conditional use regulations for the M-1 zone which prohibit the boarding of animals. Changing this zoning is in conflict with the North Burlingame/Rollins Road Specific Plan passed September 20, 2004. 1 therefore request that the Planning Commission vote against this proposed zoning change. Sincerely, Terry 111- berlake RESTONIC/SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION OF SLEEPRITE INDUSTRIES, INC. 1492 ROLLINS ROAD BURLINGAME, CA 94010 650-344-1980; FAX 650-344-2258 October 24,2005 City of Burlingame Planning Commission c/o City of Burlingame Planning Department 501 Primrose Road Burlingame, CA 94010 Re: Changes to the M-1 Zoning within the North BurlingamelRollins Road area. Dear Planning Commission: Our business has been located at 1492 Rollins Road in Burlingame since 1985. I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed M-1 zoning change in the Rollins Road area allowing for"doggie day care." This proposed new use is inconsistent with the conditional use regulations for the M I zone which prohibit the boarding of animals. Animal boarding has.no recent history in Burlingame.in any zone. The two veterinary hospitals currently operating in Burlingame(Cl and R3)do not allow boarding and such is a new use, in my view,is in conflict with the vision for the Rollins Road corridor. T therefore request that the Planning Commission vote against this proposed zoning change. S' I ly, l J� eS Karp r RECEIVED OCT 2 4 S RILCO - EDWARDS LLC 1 743 CRANE STREET,SUITE 200 MENLO PARK,CALIFORNIA 94025-4341 PHONE: 650-32H-082❑ FACSIMILE: 650-323-5390 E-MAIL:JKUECHL£Rg"IHP.COM HENRYVICNP I PRESIDENT £R Ib VICE RECEIVED E PRESIDENT - OCT 2 4 2005 CM OF BURL.INGAME PLANNING DEPT. October 21, 2005 City of Burlingame Planning Commission c!o City of Burlingame Planning Department 501 Primrose Road Burlingame, CA 94010 Re: Changes to the M- 1 Zoning within the North Burlingame/Rollins Road area. Dear Planning Commission: I.am writing to express my opposition to the proposed M-1 zoning change in the North Burlingame/ Rollins Road area allowing for animal adoption and care facilities. This proposed new use is inconsistent with the conditional use regulations for the M-1 zone which prohibit the boarding of animals. Animal boarding has no recent history in Burlingame in any zone. The two veterinary hospitals currently operating in Burlingame (C-1 and R-3) do not allow boarding and such is a new use, in my view, is in conflict with the vision for the Rollins Road corridor. Therefore, I request that the Planning Commission vote against this proposed zoning change. 4S,incerel, t Henry N_ Kuechler IV cc: Margaret Monroe, City.Planner, City of Burlingame FIUSERSUACKIDATAXWORDPRM05hnkn2239-wpd SO, IERSET October 241 2005 Planning Department City of Burlingame 501 Primrose Road Burlingame, CA 94010 Dear Planners; I have owned and operated my business in Burlingame since 1982. After the passage of the North Burlingame/Rollins Road Specific Plan I was excited about the direction the area was moving towards,bringing new business to the area. With the new proposed M-I zoning change in the Rollins Road area allowing for"doggie day care"I would like to express my opposition to that change. This proposed new use is inconsistent with the conditional use regulations for the M-1 zone which prohibit the boarding of animals. Animal boarding has no recent history in Burlingame in any zone. The two veterinary hospitals currently operating in Burlingame do not allow boarding and such is a new use, in my view, is in conflict with the vision for the Rollins Road corridor. I therefore request that the Planning Commission vote against this proposed zoning change. Sincerel , Isac T. Gutfreund Ktl,tl V CV OCT 2 4 2005 C1rN or eunt.r-,itiA— . �r�:.t; Z- 'S. 1221 Rollins Road,Burlingame,California 94010-2416 • (800)966-8545 • Fax_(650)342-8593 •E-mail:SomersetPr@aol.com p ®"t'.— CQ�[J�IUMCATIONRRCEI�BD AF7ER PREPARAnON OF STA Sunkist Enterprises RECEIVED October 24,2005 OCT 2 4 2005 CITY OF BURUNGAME PLANNING DEPT. Ms.Margaret W.Monroe City Planner . Burlingame City Hall 501 Primrose Rd. Burlingame,CA 94010 RE: M-1 Zoning Change to allow for"Doggie Day Care" Dear Ms. Monroe: I am the owner of 1308, 1310& 1312 Rollins Road and wish to express my opposition to the proposed M-1 zoning change in the Rollins Road area allowing for"doggie day care". This proposed new use is inconsistent with the conditional use regulations for the M-1 zone which prohibit the boarding of animals. Animal boarding has no recent history in Burlingame in any zone. The two veterinary hospitals currently operating in Burlingame do not allow boarding and such a new use,in my view,is in conflict with the vision for the Rollins Road corridor. I therefore request that the Planning Commission vote against this proposed zoning change. SmiAiH—us6ain rel , S. 1308 Rollins Road,Burlingame,California 94010-2410 t:6503473900 f.6503474277 www.sunkistenterprises.com SCULPTOR BURUNGAME,CA 94010 www.gubara_COm STUDIO BY APPOINTMENT (650)3414332 October 22,2005 City of Burlingame Planning Commission c/o.City.of Burlingame. 501 Primrose Road Burlingame, CA 94010- Re:Doggie Day Care. I have been a property owner of 1400 Marsten Rd. and 1400 Rollins Rd in Burlingame for over-27 years. I havealways-agreed with the zoning in-the areaand been,happy with. the-mix of business in this area. I am opposed to the proposed M-1 zoning change in the Rollins Road area allowing for "doggie day care." This proposed.new,use is-inconsistent with the conditional-use regulations for the M-1 zone which proluibit the boarding of animals. The smells,the noise of dogs.barking corning and going,are not in.keeping with.this area_ How would this fit if it were next to the City Hall? Animal boarding has no recent history in Burlingame in any zone. The two.veterinary hospitals.currently operating inBurlingame do not allow boarding and such is a new use, in my view, is in conflict with the vision for the Rollins Road corridor. nth the goals of the new North Burlingame/Rollins Road Specific Plan, why would any new business,biotech,R and D,or office want to be in-this_arm I amhopefulthat the Planning Commission-vote against this.proposed zoning change. Si rely Albert Guibara RECEIVED O C T 2 4 2005 CITY OF BURUNGAME PLANNING DEPT. -Ja11 CranCISCO,La "' •.......• uru�Mt/A - TX Toronto,ONT notU�11E11 '_ New York City,NY Los Halifax,NS - .Chica4o>IL Angetes,GA _ Boston,MA ,MN Edmonton,ALTA i as City,KS Mwbeal.OUE. PIRO� ���. .. Denver,CO Seattle,WA - Vancouver.BC �,� WEST COASTa384 ROWNS ROAD. . • �• BURLINGAME CALIFORNIA 94010 . (650)401-7711 ._ FAX(650).401=871 EAST COAST. WATER ST(jEET . MIDDLESEX,NEW YORK 14507-..(585)554500 . FAX(585)554 4114 E-MAIL: docrePs@do, +ientrepr•ocessors.com WEB ADDRESS:htipXwww.documentreprocessors.com., Oct.22,200$ CITY OF BURLINGAW. Planning Commission Re: . Proposed Change m M-1 Zoning ob Rollins Road Gentlemen: I am writing to ezpress my opositon to the proposed M-1 .zoning change in the Rollins Road area allowing for"doggie day case This proposed new We is"inconsistent with the conditional use re lotions for o M:1 zone:which prghibit the boarding of animals: Animal.boarding`has no recent history in Burlingame in any zone.:The two veterinary hospitals currently operating m Burin P game(C and.R3)zones_do not allow boarding and such a new(proposed)use, In my: view;is in conflict with the vision for the Rallies Road corridor. I therefore request that the Planing Commission vote against this proposed zoning change. Very-Truly Yours, eMail:docreps@documentreprocessors.com C:- Eric G: Lundquist,Presid t San Francisco Office: Tel:- 650-342-9988 FAX: .650-401-871 l OCT 2 4 .2005 CITY OF BU UN PLA[VNU.3z' In USA& CANADA 24 hour as 1-800-4-0RY1NG (43T 9464) FLOODS.SPRINKLER LEAKAGE "IF IT'S WET, WEIL DRY IT" WATER MAIN BREAKAGE;FIRES. OUR PLAN]—YOUR SITE NEW SPACE AGE TECHNOLOGY WE DRY WET BOOKS 8 DOCUMENTS MINIMIZES OR ELIMINATES MILDEW REDUCES BUSINESS INTERRUpT1pDJ 212.'7(OG F-L. Mrs.Alice Honerlah COMMUNICATION RECEIVED 1110 Yew Avenue AFTER PREPARATION San Mateo,CA 94402 OFSTAFFREPORT RECEIVED FEB 2 7 2006 February 20,2006 CRY OF BURIJNtiAME City of Burlingame Planning Commission FNM oto. City of Burlingame 501 Primrose Road Burlingame,CA 94010 Re:Changes to the M-I Zoning within the North Burlingame/Rollins Road area Dear Planning Commission: I am the owner of 1409 Rollins Road in Burlingame and am happy with the new North Burlingame/Rollins Road Specific Plan passed on September 20,2004. Allowing "doggie day care"is incompatible with the current uses in the area and with the Specific Plan. This new use is inconsistent with the conditional use regulations for the M-I zone which prolu'bit the boarding of animals. Animal boarding has no recent history in Burlingame in any zone. Such anew use is in conflict with the vision for the Rollins Road corridor. I therefore request that the Planning Commission keep the current zoning which prohibits the boarding of animals. Sincerely, / zo�l � Z- Alice Honerlah alp �vnv�vICAT10NRECEIYED AFTER P 1;-4p ION OF STAFFREPORT PEGASUS GROUP k RECEIVED _ FEB 2 4 2006 CIN OF BURLINGAME PLANNING DEPT. February 21, 2006 - Ms. Margaret W. Monroe City Planner Burlingame City Hall 501 Primrose Road Burlingame,.CA 94010 Dear Ms. Monroe, As you know, we have finished our project at 1280 Rollins Road in 2005 and we hope you are as pleased with the final building as we are. We were also pleased to see the passage of the North Burlingame/Rollins Road Specific Plan. However, I am writing to express opposition to the proposed "doggie day care". This proposed new use really conflicts with the vision for the Rollins Road corridor. Please ask the Planning Commission to vote against this proposal. erely, Bob Dailey RD/bas 1148 Alpine Road 0 Walnut Creek, CA 94596 ■ (925) 930-0810 ■ Fax 256-0300 Z 127/0L 1P. G. Reedy and Hoover Investements CO"UNICATIONRECEIVED 1104 San Mateo Ave. AFTER PREPARATION South San Francisca, CA 94484 OF STAFF REPORT RECEIVED February- 23,2006 FEB 2 7 2006 CrfY OF BURUNGAME City of Burlingame Planning Commission KMNING DT, City of Burlingame 501 Primrose Road Burlingame, CA 94010 Re. M-1 zoning within the_North Burlingame/Rollins Road area Dear Planning Commission; We own the properties at 1324 Rollins Road, 1330 Rollins Road, 1333 Marsten Road, and 1336-Marsten Road. Allowing"doggie day care"is incompatible with the current uses in the area and with the Specific Plan. This new use is inconsistent with the conditional use regulations for the- M-1 zone which prohibit the boarding of animals. Animal boarding has no recent history in Burlingame in any zone. Such a new use is in conflict with the vision for the Rollins Road corridor. I therefore request that the Planning Commission keep the current zoning which prohibits the.boarding of animals Sincerely, S&— A-A�L Steve Reedy FCF Benefd Administrators,Inc Tel 650 341-0306 887 Witten Road, Toll Free 800-899-0306 Suite 200 Fax 650-341-7432 Burlingame,CA 94010-1303 corpoffice0kebenefit-corn L _ BENEFITS October 24,2005 = Ms. Margaret W.Monroe . City Planner Burlingame City Hall 501 Primrose Rd= Burlingame, CA-94010 RE: M=1 Zoning Change to allow for"Doggie Day Laze" Dear Ms. Monroe: This letter is in response to the proposed M-1 zoning`change in the Rollins Rd area allowing for"doggie day care.Y' I am opposed to the considered change since it is inconsistent with the conditional use regulations for the M-1 zone,which prohibits the boarding of animals. In fact,animal boarding has no:recent history in Burlingame-in any zone. The two veterinary hospitals currently operating in Burlingame,located in C-1 and R=3 zones,do not allow for any animal boarding. In my-view,as:a businessman with roughly-50 employees located just down the street from the proposed.site-for_the`.`doggie day caaz ,"the proposed M-1 zoning change will have an adverse affectonmy company. The increased level of noise and traffic not only is in conflict with the vision for the Rollins Rd_corridors but will also hinder my. einployees from completing all of thein responsibilities.at FCE Benefits. I,therefore,request that the Planning Commission vote against this proposed zoning "change. Lely, = RECEIVED gPorter OCT .2 4 2005 Executive-Vice President CRY OF FILIM +SAME PLANNWG DEPT. JMA INVESTMENTS A CALIFORNIA GENERAL PARTNERSHIP October 24, 2005 Ms.Margaret W.Monroe City Planner Burlingame City Hall .501 Primrose Rd Burlingame, CA 94010 RE: "Doggie Day Care'—Proposed M-1 Zoning Change Dear Ms. Monroe: As partner in JMA Invest-meats,owner of the 887 Mitten Rd office building,I am writing this letter to express my opposition to-the proposed M-1 zoning change in the Rollins Rd area for"doggie day care:'.. The considered change is inconsistent with the conditional use regulations for the M-1 zone;which prohibits the boarding of animals.-Historically, Burlingame has been free of animal Boarding-in any zone. The two veterinary hospitals currently operating in Burlingame;located in C-1 and R-3 zones,'do not even allow for such services. This change,in my opinion,conflicts with the vision for the Rollins Rd corridor. If a change to the existing M-1 zone occurs,the property values for this area will decline, detrimentally affecting my.investment. Therefore,I request_ that the Planning Commission vote against this proposed zoning change. Sincerely,- n R [:1[man = RECEDE OCT 2 4 2005 COY of surtUN KMNW DEPT- 887 MITTEN ROAD,SUITE 200 • BuRLINGAME, CALIFORNIA_94010-1303 -TEL: 650.341.0306 FAx: 650.341.7432 PROM PRX N0. :6505410325 Oct. 25 2005 06:51PM P1 PRW PENINSULA SING SE RuICE PMW Nn. : 650 342 1228 Oct. 25 2005 02:22PM P1 Received Q�k-r- October 24,2005 RECEIVED Ms.Margaret Monroe,City Plsn W 0 C T 2 6 2005 Buriingwm City Hall 501 Prhnrose F' CITY OF BURLINGAME aniffiW le,Caw. PLANNING DEPT_ Re:M-1 Zoning Change Dear Ms.Monroe: As part owner of a property in the M-1 Zoning Area,I am writing you to object to the proposed zoning change allowing doggie day cane centers. I sat puzzled why the City would.wane to chane the zoning in tW arca and allow the boarding of animals when,if I am.not misukM the arigtnal allowaaae of the two vet bospltals on Bayswater and at Burlingame Plaza were only permitted if they would not take bowdm. I was very surprised to Isom ofthe SPCA wanting to open a facility in the area. I'tbhk this proposal needs more tune and study and public notice and input before going ahead with it at this tame_ Tb%vfow I request the Plmfing Commission to vote against the proposed zoning change at this time. S* iv► L U Sportcars �I ' RECEIVED -ate knmv the cars BuFh�,CA 9+010 phone:Bw 558-8255 OCT 2 4 2005 Br�don Lawrence p-sso sse-Hasa -- - -...—__.--- _--- CnY OF BUnUNGAME PLANNING DEPT- October 24,2005 COMMUNICATION RECEIVED City of Burlingame Planning Commission AFTER PREPARATION 501 Primrose Road OFSTAFF"PORT Burlingame,CA 94010 Dear Planning Commission; Six years ago I located my business at 1390 Rollins Road_ The area has been improving since then and with the new North Burlingame/Rollins Road Specific Plan it will continue to do so. I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed M-I zoning change in the Rollins Road area allowing for"doggie day care." This proposed new use is inconsistent with the conditional use regulations for the M-1 zone which prohibit the boarding of animals. Animal boarding has no recent history in Burlingame in any zone. The two veterinary hospitals currently operating in Burlingame do not allow any boarding and are in C-1 and R-3 zones. Such a new use,in my opinion,is in conflict with the vision for the Rollins Road corridor. I feel to keep the area growing in the direction we all have worked towards,I therefore request that the Planning Commi vote against this proposed zoning change. Since ly, 'A on Lawre ce I L= ILL.. d d. �esc 53� (�ertuce, (� y5015 October 21, 2005 Burlingame Planning Department Burlingame City Hall 501 Primrose Road Burlingame, CA 94010 RE. PROPOSED ZONING CHANGES TOM 1 DISTRICT O T INS ROAD AREA To Whom It May Concern: I am writing this letter to express my opposition to the proposed change to the M-1 District plan that would allow animal boarding also referred to as "doggie day-care." I am of the opinion that this proposed use is inconsistent with the existing uses in the area. To my knowledge, Burlingame has no history of a similar use in any zoning area. Further, I am concerned that adding this new conditional use to the code may adversely affect property values. I respectfully request that members of the Planning Commission vote against this proposed zoning change. Sincerely, 1 _ John T. Michael Property Owner 1327, 1329 Marsten Road, Burlingame RECEIVED OCT 2 4 2005 C17Y r)r BURLNGAME P�NNING p¢T HERMA October 24,2005 In regards to:M1 Zoning Change Ms.Margaret W Monroe City Planner Burlingame City Hall 501 Primrose Road Burlingame,CA 94010 Dear Ms. Monroe, Sherman and Baum is a executive search firm doing business at 1400 Rollins.This letter is in opposition of the proposed Ml Zoning change in the area to accommodate the addition of a "doggy day care". The boarding of animals is inconsistent with the current M1 Zone that prohibits the boarding of animals.To my knowledge, there is no history of animal boarding in Burlingame for any zone. The current vet hospitals in.Burlingame do not allow boarding of animals to specifically abide by current zoning rules. The proposed zoning change would have adverse effects on the area. Our business would need to consider relocation I therefore request that the Planning Commission vote against this proposed new zoning change. Sincer y, Jas um Fo er/Managing Partner Sherman and Baum,Inc RECEIVED E:D OCT 2 4 2005 1400 ROLUNS RD_ BURUNGAME, CALIFORNIA 94010 650.340.8700 OFFICE i 650.340.7911FAx www.sherman-baum.com Law & Mediation OffK s of Barbara, .Wuchn e-mait A PROFEMONAL CORPORATION - 1400 Roldns Road.-BurtingarK Caffomia 94010 Frandiesc ee Telephone(650)401-23M- Fax(650)401=2321 acnim-net October 24, 2005: Planning. Commission- City of Burlingame Burlingame, California 94010 Re: Zoning Change Dear Sir or Madam: I learned recently that the City is considering a proposed M-1 zoning change -in the.. Rollins Rpad area --to.-:allow for "doggie day care." I operate a professional law &. mediation office .at 1400 Rollins Road which ,is a quiet professional business area. . The proposed new use of the Rollins Road. area is inconsistent with the conditional use regulations for the- M-1 zone,.- which. prohibits the boarding of -animals. There his no recent history in Burlingame in any zone of. aniinal boarding. The two veterinary hospitals operating currently in the City (Cl and R3) do- not allow boarding: Such a new use, An. my view is: in conflict with the vision for the :Rollins- Road corridor. I, therefore, request that. the Planning . Commission vote against -this proposed zoning change and�. .keep ,.the ol:lins Road corridor the quiet business -area that current xi-st Ve y :tr . . yours;.. J . `. KUEHN r BJK:mnl RECEIVED OCT_:2 4. 2005. Joe Gurkoff / Photography October 20,2005 Ms Margaret W.Monroe City Planner City of Burlingame 501 Primrose Rd. Burlingame,CA 94010 .Dear Ms Monroe I am writing to document my opposition to the Rollins Road area zoning change that would make it possible for a`doggie day care'/pet boarding facility to be'located on Rollins Road. I have a photography studio on Rollins Rd.and have been here for more than two years. This is a clean,business oriented environment,which makes it a great place for my business. The location has greatly helped my business. Allowing an animal boarding center to locate here would be allowing this environment to be ruined. There will be there will be animal litter,the place will smell like a barnyard, andthere will be constant noise. The smell and noise,the detriment to my business would be such that I'd have to move. Moving would be both disruptive and expensive. Please consider my needs and the needs of other business owners,who like myself,value this environment and depend onyou to maintain it. There is simply no reason to ruin one of Burlingame's great business areas. A pet/animal related facility will make it worse and will discourage the kind of businesses and developers that will maintain and improve it. In conclusion I oppose any property use or zoning change that would allow an animal care facility of any kind and request that you relay this opposition along with my request that the Planning Commission to vote against this change. With my best regards, Joe Gurff 1400 Rollins Rd. RECEIVED Suite B. Burlingame,CA 94010 OCT 2 4 2005 650-695-1180 CITY OF BURLWC�a+E PLAN104G DEPT- . A U T O M O T I V E SERVICES 71291 WtUTYMORN WAY 4BURLINGAME,CA 94010-2432 (650)5N-1275 October 23,2005 Planning Department City-of Burlingame 501 Primrose Rd. Burlingame, CA 9401-0. Dear Planners I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed M-1 zoning change in the Rollins Road,area allowing for"doggie day care," This-proposed new use_is-inconsistent with- the conditional use regulations.for the M-1 zone.which prohibit the.boarding of animals. I have a lease option to purchase 1275 Rollins Rd. in the next 4 years. A large part of my net worth is tied up in this-building purchase along with.my business-that is-at 1291. Whitethorn Way. I feel that this proposed zoning change will have an adverse affect on my.property value. Who needs-dogs_mixed with-business-in-a M4-zone. Why less than a year after the North Burlingame/Rollins Road Specific Plan was passed are you making such a-radical-change to the zoning. Animal boarding has no recent history in Burlingame in any zone. The two veterinary hospitals currently operating in.Burlingame.(C I and R3�do.not allow boarding and such is a new use, in my view, is-in.conflict with.the vision.for the Rollins-Road corridor. I therefore request that the Planning Commission vote against this proposed zoning change. S' 1 CharhVNtts RECEIVED OCT 2 4 2005 CrrY Or eUnLNG"AE PLAm4m DEPT. October 21, 2005 Ms. Margaret W. Monroe City Planner Burlingame City Hall 501 Primrose Road Burlingame, California 94010-3997 Dear Ms. Monroe: I am an independent businessman who has had offices at 1400 Marsten Road in Burlingame for the past six years. I have just learned of your proposal to change the zoning regulations for the area in which my office resides (the Rollins Road corridor) to one which would accommodate "doggie day care." I am writing to express my dismay about this proposed change as well as my utter opposition to it. This proposed new use is inconsistent with the conditional use regulations for the M-1 zone, which prohibit the boarding of animals. Animal boarding has no recent history in Burlingame in any zone. The two veterinary hospitals currently operating in Burlingame (Cl and R3) do not allow boarding and such a new use is, in my judgment, in conflict with the vision for the Rollins Road corridor. respectfully request that you reconsider your position on this proposed zoning change and vote against its adoption. Sinc r ly your , F ank J. Tolve RECEIVED OCT 2 4 2005 CITY OF BUFlL.INGAME PLANNING DEPT. L� r� » MOTORS INDEPENDENT MERCEDES - BENZ ® October 20;2005 Approved Auto Repair Ms. Margaret W. Monroe City Planner Burlingame City Hall 501-Primrose-Road Burlingame, CA 940IG Dear Ms. Monroe,- I have owned Burlingame Motors at 1295 Rollins Road in Burlingame for over 15 years. After the-passage of the North-Burlingame/Rollins Road_Specific.Plan-in September-of 2004,1 felt the surrounding area would have growth in the types of business that would be drawn-to.the area therefore..increasing the.value ofmy-building. 1 am writing to express my opposition to the proposed M-1 zoning change in the Rollins Road-area allowing for"doggie day_care."This.proposed new use is.inconsistent with the. conditional use regulations for the M-1 zone which prohibit the boarding of animals. Animalboarding has-no-recent history in,Burlingame inany.zone. The twoveterinary hospitals currently operating in Burlingame(C1 and R3)do not allow boarding and such a new use,in,my view, is.in-conflict with-the,vision for the Rollins-Road-corridor. I therefore request that the Planning Commission vote against this proposed zoning change. Sincerely, Rene Wiegand �vv RECEIVED! 1295 Rollins Road OCT 2 4. 2005 ita ingame,California 94010 C17Y OF 8l1RLE3.C,r. . 415-343.8858 PLAkw4ra C-P . 2l2 r1010 W MW n AFMAWA"2704 RESC op'S;r4Fl iepoir EQUIPMENT RENTALS Corporate Headquarters 318 Stealth Court RECEIVED Livermore,CA 94551 (925)961-0130 February 22,2006 FEB 2 7 2006 CITY of BURLINGAME PMMNG DEPT. Ms. Margaret W. Monroe City Planner BURLINGAME CITY HALL 501 Primrose Road Burlingame, CA 94010 Dear Ms. Monroe, After buying Michael's Rentals in 2002 and enjoying our Burlingame business since, I was pleased to see the passage of the North Burlingame/Rollins Road Specific Plan in September of 2004. I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed M-1 zoning change in the Rollins Road area allowing for"doggie day care." This proposed new use is inconsistent with the conditional use regulations for the M-1 zone which prohibit the boarding of animals. Animal boarding has no recent history in Burlingame in any zone. The two veterinary hospitals currently operating in Burlingame do not allow any boarding and are in C-1 and R-3 zones. Such a new use, in my opinion, is in conflict with the vision for the Rollins Road corridor. 1, therefore, request that the Planning Commission vote against this proposed zoning change.- Sincerely hange:Sincerely ,6(2 Chris Smi BURLINGAME FAIRFIELD GILROY LIVERMORE MONTCLAIR PLEASANT HILL RICHMOND SANTA ROSA SO.SAN FRANCISCO (650)347-4660 (707)863-7504 (408)846-1830 (925)456-9750 (510)601-6480 (925)827-1742 (510)233-5677 (707)588-7434 (650)588-3267 DANVILLE FREMONT LAFAYETTE MARTINEZ OAKLAND PLEASANTON SANTA CLARA SAN FRANCISCO WALNUT CREEK (925)837-4475 (510)793-5881 (925)284-4595 (925)228-9811 (510)383-1099 (925)846-0151 (408)235-8840 (415)920-2801 (925)934-5250 - � LAW-OFFICES . DAVLD T: MOIiTOUX 1400`Rollins Road - .Burlingame,CA 94010 PHONE:(650)548-0324 FAXt.(65n�:548=0325 :. 0-ober 24.2005 .Burlingame Planning—commission - "501 frim ose Road Bur G 1 _ Re; agenda-Item#3 `Pro09s Zoningfor`Rollins Road : '1004/05- Commission Hearing Dear Planning:cofniriissiotI: _ Have a.lavv ptactiee at-1400 Rollins Road: I am writing to express my corices.about : the..Proposed:zoiaing_change to.aliow for"doggie day care,,iri the Roliins.Roadi corridor: This _ change:is foui3d iir-thepyaposed amendri ent as 0�p 25.44:03 )� In--y:view;the proposed new lari e.is based on-faul assum 'o - - ns a bout t� w _ g hat=: h' l� . constitutes A. -similat","cbiiditional u-se"iir the:M= I zone:which was_a subject at the°May:9,. .2005 determination meeting of-this Commission in.con�iiection with.the:31'eA a: lication pp-. :At=that lvtay.9'meeting,-which-Idid not:attencl because I-did riot receive=notice:a.. _ l € : oenlVl'ain' one`:hhe:SP:�Asimietertiinatiwgdetiar irfiaturers-a`,&dpop acuicanthngveteinary y ' hospitals: �`; -At the,�.ej*mb6f 2630 2005 Planning Commission meeting;.which'I did'attend, I; submitted: ,: icoi neitfs pointing out:that.in fact there:areveterinary-hospitals located iri-the iV1--= _- : :l zone: Tho:two yet:hospitals.inBurlingaxrt6 Att. &ted,i_nthe R zones,41114 iieithez.of #hose:hcspitals`.prQYides oveintght care, animals: _ : a.iuz....au,Yyiuuta� wuc IL! ZJI J!PO 1¢11guagt:ct:rdiiy_CxiCA4ues.-- 0040in. ._-4m. allowed ieQnditio�ial-us&-i6 the Ivf- 1 zone::There iS lisle. deu}�t-that the SP.—A use wit iri+clude = "bard ne.afhealk aniriials far exteticiea periods of bine as tl3ey:await:adopuon� :I#seerrris to' _ Ind tlisP .uei+€i its.obviaus con#li+ctwith ttie.boardnf exciusinn wanot carefnl_1 exatriined at file:May 9dieing: : g y The.probleih I see is'tliat-thispropgsed new language.ailtiwirig"doggie day.cafe :ielying for its legitimacy.in.large part on an i ll*considered it terini atiori folicjwing a Beat rig that,was not widely noticed for ptiblie.comment. Jhit :May-9"de im imatiori teg�rditig the.SPCA. use IS-IM-mg explicitly of er-ed 46rp as justification•for this new use.in the Rollins_Road'CtirudQr- use-whickwill-irupact the�-area in=ways that.may be quite d�ffeient,froni,tl*SPCA-impact:. I therefoje uwge the-eoiitmissiomto stepba k an4 re=ek.nine the'meriis of.rep�ai ng.the'. "bc�ardirig exclusion"in.the RollinsRoad corridor-before,-ndorsiiig the new."doggie day car; language fouriil in this:proposed.zoning amendirieht;- Respectfiill ;,this ommissiori slibuld : .. consider the cozicerns:of a:majori'y°of business:owners_along-the 1 o11ins Road-.corridoF.wljn,like:. 3myselt are stronglyopposed.to animal boarding.i�this transitional.and improvirig.areaot Burlingame. avid u : ' - • . . , : . : _ . . - - - . ' : -_ .- . "- -: -.'. - : � �-fey,,, � 5-: _ - tA1N OFFICES- _ .. WA"17 Ljppn ":.. DAVID T. MOUT-OUX : . t - 1400 Rollins Road: Burtingaine;CA .%o Q OHON f ("-54$-03 4 FAX:(650)548-0325 " October 24,2009 Ms:Margaret 1r+Ionroe url game Planning ComiYiissioii. ' 501-.Priinrose.Road.' $uriingame,CA .. . . :Re: Agenda item Ptoposed ZoOiiig_fssi.9011. 46i '10/24105 cMuiii iMU Nearing - . Dear TVIs. Monroe: I am a tenant at'1400 Rollins Read,"Endosed" iert;w th is a Petition in Opposition.wliici� ::: :•" .. ` vias ptared.in-the reco>d°al:ihe�eptemtiei �f 205 Plan iiig�oa�mission Meeting conce#nirig: tfie conditional rise application b xhe.SPCA: : : I request that this PeG�tion in.Opoosition also be-included m the record-at the October 24; 2005_Planning Corimmussion-Meetirig.as it_gertaiiisto;tlie issue ofboarding animals in the Rollins Road coiridor;a use.opposed by-.i e_signatories,vvhicli issjie.is beii[g discussed at the'subject ne�eting in co ectiQu with zor►i g amendments 25:4�1.030(p),�4innotaiion dor."iloggie:day:care:' tor yob antieipated,Oboperation. - ; David T.-Moutou _ :.. LITER PREPARATION r . — ' OFSTAFFREPORr ' SEP 2 6 2009 PETITION IN OPPOSITION Cay of WMNGAME PLANNING DEPT. The undersigned owners and tenants of the Rollins Road Corridor oppose the proposed request for conditional use permit by the SPCA at 1450 Rollins Road and 20 Edwards Court, Burlingame CA. Said opposition is based upon concerns including, but not limited to,the negative impact on parking,noise from the keeping and housing of large volumes of domestic animals inside and wild animals outside, the potential for unpleasant smells from said use, environmental.impact from the handling and disposal of animal waste, the likelihood of animal waste on the public streets from visitors coming and going with their animals,and the conflict between the proposed use and the City of Burlingame's design review guidelines found_ in the North Burlingame/Rollins Road Specific Plan dated September 20,2004. Name(print) Address Signature t 6u R�i�tiz 1 pp `` -70---------------- e �I �quoP 2. m 1336 3 Y , 20 �- SPENC�2 lZ� t Wt� Ik(URuJv ! 4 C.C—2 C Q v R c c. ra 6 �s7 ,4 g. REC OCT 2 4 2005 CLTY of 13URUW-AME. PLANNING DEPT. PETITION IN OPPOSITION The undersigned owners and tenants of the Rollins Road Corridor oppose the proposed request for conditional use permit by the SPCA at 1450 Rollins Road and 20 Edwards Court, Burlingame CA. Said opposition is based upon concerns including,but not limited to, the negative impact on parking,noise from the keeping and housing of large volumes of domestic animals inside and wild animals outside,the potential for unpleasant smells from said use,. environmental impact from the handling and disposal of animal waste, the likelihood of animal waste on the public streets from visitors coming and going with their animals,and the conflict between the proposed use and the City of Burlingame's design review guidelines found in the North Burlingame/Rollins Road Specific Plan dated September 20,2004. Name(print) Address Signature 1--Aw (9 4:ACe;� 1.Ut T Mom 1900 2. 3. t r o 4. �Qu.-G ruses no�'c� 5- 124 ti g. - l 305 N.CAkO1,W fie., RECEIVED OCT 2 4 2009 ® � MY OF BURUNGAME PLANNING DEPT. PETITION IN OPPOSITION The undersigned owners and tenants of the Rollins Road Corridor oppose the proposed request for conditional use permit by the SPCA at 1450.Rollins Road and 20 Edwards Court, Burlingame CA. Said opposition is based upon concerns including,but not limited to,the negative impact on parking,noise from the keeping and housing of large volumes of domestic animals inside and wild animals outside,the potential for unpleasant smells from said use, environmental impact from the handling and disposal of animal waste,the likelihood of animal waste on the public streets from visitors coming and going with their animals,and the conflict between the proposed use and the City of Burlingame's design review guidelines found in the North Burlingame/Rollins Road Specific Plan dated September 20,2004. Name(print) Address Signature AE� —A lqtoo 47 -g I 1. Uc�s 2. . No wi eh fur. Ito 13:17 /Zd, 3. �/U�/� / /��lgw,Srfh%/e4. TvN► 1442-/10 y� �! 5. / . EG rt� /fl 102C 2CD PAtiy /6/D 5Mi"C 6. Z e4az9lzoo�--)d 8. RECEIVED o� �� OCT 2 4 2005 cmr of 13u1AINGME PLANNING DEPT_ PETITION IN OPPOSITION The undersigned owners and tenants of the Rollins Road Corridor oppose the proposed request for conditional use permit by the SPCA at 1450'Rollms Road and 20 Edwards Court, Burlingame-CA_ Said opposition is based upon concerns including,but not limited to,the negative impact on parking, noise from the keeping and housing of large volumes of domestic animals inside and wild animals outside, the potential for unpleasant smells from said use, environmental impact from the handling and disposal of animal waste,the likelihood of animal waste on the public streets from visitors coming and going with their animals, and the conflict between the proposed use and the City of Burlingame's design review guidelines found in the North Burlingame/Rollins Road Specific Plan dated September 20,2004_ Name.(print) Address Signature ;. law ytim J, �9 rzls c 4. 29 .s 1 ` 5.�//��i' !/✓ /�!�4��f t dl Cay- J o I? P."37aa LO 6. g. �� l RECEIVED OCT 2 4 2005 O CITY OF BURUNGAME PLANNING DEPT_ 9t PETITION IN OPPOSITION The undersigned owners and tenants of the Rollins Road Corridor oppose the proposed request for conditional use permit by the SPCA at 1450 Rollins Road and 20 Edwards Court, Burlingame CA. Said opposition is based upon concerns including,but not limited to,the negative impact on parking,noise from the-keeping and housing of large volumes of domestic animals inside and wild animals outside,the potential for unpleasant smells from said use, environmental impact from the handling and disposal of animal waste,the likelihood of animal waste on the public streets from visitors coming and going with their animals, and the conflict between the proposed use and the City of Burlingame's design review guidelines found in the North Burlingame/Rollins Road.Specific Plan dated September 20,2004. Name(print) Address Signature motc,� �►�6j►�►b two- 2. 2R� � r�-( 1714Yrg� 4. Pa ans "414 a � acs -6- moo -I38 8. 4911,F(Dn 13 )ZejfiP3 XP 60 Qwt�f RECEIVED OCT .2 4 2005 CRY OF BURUNGAME PLANNING DEPT. CITY o� STAFF REPORT BURLINGAME AGENDA 8c ITEM# °,4 9 MTG. °R.E°4UNE DATE 5.15.06 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL SUBMITTEDV__L( BY DATE: MAY 8, 2006 APPROVED )flo ,u�G�'' FROM: CITY PLANNER BY SUBJECT: INTRODUCE ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE MUNCIPAL CODE ZONING MAPS BY RECLASSIFYING THE M-1 DISTRICT TO ROLLINS ROAD (RR) DISTRICT AND ESTABLISHING THE AUTOMOBILE SALES AND SERVICE OVERLAY AREA AND THE SOUTHERN GATEWAY ENTRANCE OVERLAY AREA TO IMPLEMENT THE NORTH BURLINGAME/ROLLINS ROAD SPECIFIC PLAN ADOPTED SEPTEMBER 2004. Introduction: City Council should review the proposed ordinance to amend the zoning map for the Rollins Road area, previously zoned M-1 and new proposed as Rollins Road(RR) zoning district. This map will also establish the Automobile Sales and Service and Southern Gateway Entrance overlay areas within the Rollins Road zoning district. If this map is determined to be complete the Council should introduce the Ordinance. A public hearing is not required at introduction; Council should review the draft to be sure that the issues from the Study Meeting of March 29, 2006, have been met and direct staff. Introduction of the proposed ordinance requires the following Council actions. A. Request City Clerk to read title of the proposed ordinance. B. Waive further reading of the ordinance. C. Introduce the proposed ordinance. D. Direct the city clerk to publish a summary of the ordinance at least five days before proposed adoption. If the proposed ordinance for the Rollins Road district map is clear, this item should be set for a second reading and public hearing at the Council meeting of June 5, 2006. General Plan Compliance: The Rollins Road zoning district is part of the implementation phase of the North Burlingame/Rollins Road Specific Plan adopted by the City Council and amended to the Burlingame General Plan in September 2004. The provisions in the ordinance are consistent with the plan because they are taken from the land use maps, and based on the implementing zoning for the Rollins Road district. The Rollins Road district consists of all the area between the CalTrain tracks on the west, El Portal Creek which is the northern city boundry, US 101 on the west and Broadway on the south; about two-thirds of the North Burlingame/Rollins Road Specific Planning area. The proposed map is consistent with the directives of the Specific Plan it is intended to implement. INTRODUCE ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE ZONING MAP FOR THE ROLLINS ROAD ZONING DISTRICT TO • IMPLEMENT THE NORTH BURLINGAMEIROLLINS ROAD SPECIFIC PLAN May 15,2006 CEQA Compliance: Negative Declaration ND533-P was prepared and adopted for the North Burlingame/Rollins Road Specific Plan in September 2004. Since the zoning action to adopt the zoning map for the Rollins Road subarea is an implementation of that adopted plan and is consistent with the provisions of that plan, the action to adopt the map is determined to be covered by ND533-P. Planning Commission Action , March 18, 2006 After referral by the City Council and Planning Commission of several items regarding the zoning provisions for the Rollins Road area, the North Burlingame/Rollins Road Subcommittee of the Planning Commission, reported out to the Planning Commission for action their recommendations on a revised set of zoning regulations which included establishing two overlay zones within the Rollins Road area: Automobile Sales and Service Overlay and Southern Gateway Entrance Overlay. In their recommendation the Subcommittee noted that the Automobile Sales and Service overlay should be adjusted so that it included only those properties directly facing US 101 or with property frontage on US 101. This caused the properties with frontage on Adrian Court to be removed from the Automobile Sales and Service overlay area and reincorporated with the larger, light industrial subarea called the Northern Gateway. In these same recommendations, the Southern Gateway Entrance was revised so that it became a true overlay zone, with the core industrial uses underlying the specific uses called out in the plan to create an 'entrance' to the Rollins Road area. On March 18, 2006, The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the revised regulations as proposed by the Subcommittee and recommended the Rollins Roads zoning district regulations, without change, to the City Council for approval. The Planning Commission is not required to vote on the amendment to the Municipal Code for the zoning map. So while no formal action was taken by the Commission on the map, to implement their recommendations the attached map is necessary. BACKGROUND On March 18, 2006, the City Council studied the Rollins Road zoning district. At that time staff reviewed the zoning map. The broad boundaries of the Rollins Road area stay the same. However, within the Rollins Road zoning district two overlay zones were created. An overlay zone is an area within a zoning district where preference is given to particular areas in a subarea of the district, in order to promote implementation of the plan. The North Burlingame/Rollins Road Specific Plan promotes developing another auto row in Burlingame on the properties fronting US 101 along Adrian Road and extending to the properties at the end of Edwards Court which have site frontage on US 101. Originally the properties on Adrian Court, most of which have no frontage on Adrian Road and US 101, were included in the auto row overlay. During the review process it was suggested that the properties on Adrian Road, mostly small light industrial tenant spaces, would be better served if they remained a part of the light industrial area to the west (Northern Gateway subarea). In this way all industrial uses would not be required to get a conditional use permit in the future. The map has been adjusted to reflect this change. Ultimately the Specific Plan will also need to be amended to reflect this change. The purpose of the Southern Gateway Entrance area was described in the plan as establishing a definable entrance to the Rollins Road area. Originally specific uses were allowed in this area that were not allowed in the adjoining light industrial area. After public hearings and recommendation by the Subcommittee, it was determined that physical entrance features could be incorporated into many types of light industrial or heavy 2 INTRODUCE ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE ZONING MAP FOR THE ROLLINS ROAD ZONING DISTRICT TO IMPLEMENT THE NORTH BURLINGAMEIROLLINS ROAD SPECIFIC PLAN May 15,2006 commercial buildings, so those uses should not be excluded from the Southern Gateway Entrance area. Rather an overlay zone was created which will allow as conditional uses, the uses allowed in the larger, light industrial Southern Gateway subarea. This allowance of underlying light industrial uses in the Southern Gateway Entrance area also will require subsequent clarification in the Specific Plan. Attachments: Ordinance of the City of Burlingame Amending the Burlingame Municipal Code and the Zoning Maps Incorporated in the Zoning Code by Reclassifying the M-1 District to Rollins Road (RR) District and Establishing the Automobile Sales and Service Overlay Area and the Southern Gateway Entrance Overlay Area in the Rollins Road District. Rollins Road (RR) Zoning District Map 3 1i iii ■,1 1C L ba 1 A :moi ��i � � ■ � � ' � tii . �► •C �� NTP57�1 iiii► � � ' Nis ����111111 111111111111 �� �� �� CO � .p jjllll��I ' ►\1111111/� _- - ���� ��� ���� �j 11111►��11111/1111 pC -- �- ____ _r. .=♦� %: =; =e%`= ■II■■111 See����, ���� %,1111111 — I ■1■■������ U111111// 11111��_— ==•1_ ���� D �Iu111111111 �1�111►� II 11111 39 -- 111.111 Zoning District Map 111111111111= 111111/1 Ordinance • III 111111 1111■_ � \ .> • 1111= p 1111= ®■ ®i 1111111 Date: '� -� 11111 ■ • • • • 1111111111111— .• IIII11111111111 111111 r • •- C. 1111111_. � ���' SouthernOverlay .�-- �i� �111111�11� • r- Auto Row Overlay 1111111 __ __ _ �._ i l► -- .. . • � • . • _ C .0 pp 1� ►i �we Gp ! I ORDINANCE NO. 2 ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME AMENDING THE BURLINGAME MUNICIPAL CODE AND THE ZONING MAPS INCORPORATED 3 IN THE ZONING CODE BY RECLASSIFYING THE M-1 DISTRICT TO ROLLINS ROAD(RR)DISTRICT AND ESTABLISHING THE 4 AUTOMOBILE SALES AND SERVICE OVERLAY AREA AND THE SOUTHERN 5 GATEWAY ENTRANCE OVERLAY AREA IN THE ROLLINS ROAD DISTRICT 6 The CITY COUNCIL of the CITY OF BURLINGAME does hereby ordain as follows: 7 8 Section 1. In September 2004,the City Council adopted the North Burlingame/Rollins 9 Road Specific Plan for the northern portion of the City. This ordinance is adopted to implement 10 the zoning change of the Rollins Road area in accordance with that Specific Plan. 11 12 Section 2. The zoning maps attached to Ordinance No.539 as amended and referenced 13 in Section 25.12.010 of the Municipal Code are amended as follows: 14 The area currently zoned as M-1 is rezoned as Rollins Road(RR)District. 15 The area along the Bayshore Freeway as shown on the exhibit to this ordinance north 16 of Easton Creek is placed within the Automobile Sales and Service Overlay Area. 17 The area along the north side of Broadway as shown on the exhibit to this ordinance is 18 placed within the Southern Gateway Entrance Overlay Area. 19 This reclassification is shown on the exhibit to this ordinance. 20 21 Section 3. This ordinance shall be published as required by law and shall take effect 22 upon the effective date of the Rollins Road (RR) District regulations adopted by separate 23 ordinance. 24 25 26 Mayor 27 I,DORIS MORTENSEN,City Clerk of the City of Burlingame,do hereby certify that I the foregoing ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the_ 2 day of ,2006, and adopted thereafter at a regular meeting of the City Council 3 held on the day of ,2006,by the following vote: 4 AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: 5 NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: 6 ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: 7 8 City Clerk 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 -2 - Agenda Item # 8d BURLINGAME Meeting Date: Ma 15 2 STAFF REPORT SUBMITTED BY APPROVED BY l ; TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL DATE: MAY 4, 2006 FROM: PUBLIC WORKS SUBJECT: INTRODUCE AN ORDINANCE TO MODIFY THE SANITARY SEWER USE REGULATIONS RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that Council introduce an ordinance to modify the Sanitary Sewer Use Regulations by: • Requesting the City Clerk to read title of the proposed ordinance. • Waiving further reading of the ordinance. • Adopting the proposed ordinance. • Directing the City Clerk to publish a summary of the ordinance within 15 days of adoption. BACKGROUND: The purpose of the Sanitary Sewer Use Regulations is to protect the sewer collection system and the Wastewater Treatment Plant. By mandating regulatory controls through a pretreatment program, the City ensures that commercial and industrial users abide by the rules regarding usage of the sewer system. The pretreatment program is implemented by Wastewater Treatment Plant staff who perform inspections and monitor the waste streams and facility activities of businesses. DISCUSSION: Staff is recommending that definitions be added to the Sanitary Sewer Use Regulations Ordinance to reflect changes in the pretreatment program. These include "Commercial User" which more accurately identifies the type of discharge from commercial facilities having domestic type waste streams as opposed to industrial waste streams and "Control Authority" which designates the City as having the ultimate responsibility for the pretreatment program. Staff is also recommending changes regarding oil and grease limits as well as pH limits. The oil and grease limit would be removed in order to allow inspectors to target facilities causing backups in the collection system irrespective of the magnitude of oil and grease concentrations. This will enable the City to address most incidences of sewer overflows and spills caused by oil and grease blockages. pH is used to measure the alkalinity versus acridity of the waste stream. A pH of 7.0 is considered neutral. The ordinance change would establish a compliance range of 9.0 as an upper limit and 5.0 as a new more reasonable lower limit. This range will allow the treatment plant to discharge effluent into the Bay in compliance with State Water Board regulations and is compatible with most other Bay Area cities. BUDGET IMPACT: Approval of the ordinance has no financial impact. EXHIBITS: Ordinance c: Doris Mortensen, City Clerk SAA Public Works Directory\Staff Reports\Intro Ord Modify Sewer Use Regulations.doc I ORDINANCE No. 2 ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME AMENDING CHAPTER 15.10 REGARDING SANITARY SEWER USE 3 REGULATIONS 4 5 The CITY COUNCIL of the CITY OF BURLINGAME does hereby ordain as follows: 6 Section 1. 7 8 Section 2. Section 15.10.015(c) is amended to read as follows: 9 (c) "C"definitions. 10 (1)Categorical Pretreatment Standards. "Categorical pretreatment standards"means the 11 limitations on pollutant discharges to POTW's promulgated by EPA in accordance with Section 12 307 of the Act, that apply to specified process wastewaters of particular industrial categories. [40 13 CFR 403.6 and Parts 405-47 1]. 14 (2) COD or Chemical Oxygen Demand. "COD"or"chemical oxygen demand"means the 15 measure of chemically decomposable material in domestic or industrial wastewater as represented 16 by the oxygen utilized as determined by the appropriate procedure described in standard methods. 17 (3)Code of Federal Regulations or CFR. "Code of Federal Regulations"or"CFR"means 18 the Code of Federal Regulations published by the Office of the Federal Register,National Archives 19 and Records Administration. Whenever a reference is made to any portion of the CFR,or to any 20 other federal regulation,that reference shall include to all amendments and additions to that portion 21 of the CFR or regulation, now or hereinafter adopted. 22 (4) Combined sewer. "Combined sewer"means a sewer receiving both surface runoff and 23 sewage. 24 (5) Commercial user (COM). "Commercial user" or "COM" means any person who 25 discharges non-domestic wastewater and who provides a service or engages in the purchase or sale 26 of commodities. 27 (6) (s -Community sewer. "Community sewer"means a sewer owned and operated by the 28 city and tributary to a treatment facility operated by the city. 1 1 (7)(6}Compatiblepollutant. "Compatible pollutant"means biochemical oxygen demand, 2 suspended solids,pH,and fecal coliform bacteria,plus additional pollutants identified in the city's 3 National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System(NPDES)Permit if the city's treatment plant is 4 designed to treat such pollutants and if fact, does remove such pollutants to a substantial degree. 5 (8) (t Composite sample. "Composite sample" means a flow-proportional or time- 6 proportional sample, which accurately represents the average pollutant concentration discharged 7 during a continuous time period.A composite sample may be obtained manually or automatically, 8 and discretely or continuously. For manual compositing, at least six (6)individual samples from 9 each sample point shall be combined and mixed to obtain one composite sample;flow-proportion 10 may be obtained either by varying the time interval between each discrete sample and the volume 11 of each discrete sample. 12 (9)f&}Contamination. "Contamination"means an impairment of the quality of water of 13 the State by waste to a degree that creates a hazard to the public health through poisoning or 14 through the spread of disease. "Contamination"includes any equivalent effect resulting from the 15 disposal of wastewater,whether or not waters of state are affected. 16 (10)f9�Contractor. "Contractor"means an individual, firm,corporation,partnership,or 17 association licensed by the state to perform the type of work to be done under the permit. 18 (11) Control authority. "Control authority'means the POTW. 19 (12){10)-Cost effective. "Cost effective"means that total project costs,if financed over a 20 five(5)year period at the prime interest rate published in the Wall Street Journal plus two percent 21 (2%)at the time the project costs are being determined,do not exceed the total savings that would 22 be generated by the project during the same five (5)year period. Project costs shall also be 23 considered cost effective,if financing assistance is available to the discharger,from the city or any 24 other source, at a lower rate and the project costs, if financed over a five (5) year period at that 25 rate do not exceed the total savings that would be generated by the project during the same five 26 (5)year period. 27 (13) f4Kritical user. "Critical user" means a discharger whose wastewater contains 28 priority pollutants,or who discharges waste that has the potential to cause interference,excluding 2 I sanitary sewage. 2 3 Section 3. Subsection 15.10.040(b)is amended to read as follows: 4 (b)Any waste having a pH lower than 5.0 , r having any corrosive or 5 detrimental characteristic that may cause injury to any person operating,maintaining,repairing,or 6 constructing the sanitary sewer system or any part thereof,or working in or about the sanitary sewer 7 system, or any damage to any part of the sanitary sewer system, or any waste with a pH high 8 enough to cause alkaline incrustations on sewer walls; or 9 10 Section 4. Section 15.10.050 is amended to read as follows: 11 Section 15.10.050 Limitations on wastewater strength. 12 No person shall discharge, cause, allow, or permit to be discharged into a public sanitary 13 sewer or any part thereof, any waste containing an excess in concentration of the following 14 substances: 15 Substance Maximum Allowable Concentration 16 Arsenic 0.08 mg/L 17 BOD 1300 mg/L 18 Cadmium 0.138 mg/L 19 Copper 2.0 mg/L 20 Cyanide 0.292 mg/L 21 Lead 0.365 mg/L 22 Mercury 0.010 mg/L 23 Nickel 0.445 mg/L 24 25 Phenol 7.8 mg/L 26 Selenium 0.106 mg/L 27 Silver 0.200 mg/L 28 TSS 1200 mg/L 3 I Total Chromium 2.532 mg/L 2 Zinc 0.386 mg/L 3 These limitations are subject to amendment at any time, and no permit granted under this chapter 4 shall constitute any vested right of any kind to continue to maintain concentrations at this or any 5 other level. 6 7 Section 5. A new Section 15.10.081 is added to read as follows: 8 15.10.081 Reclassification from significant indsutrial user. 9 At any time, the director may on the director's own initiative or in response to a petition 10 from the industrial user or POTW determine that the industrial user should not be not classified as 11 a significant industrial user in accordance with 40 C.F.R. § 403.8(f)(6)even though the industrial 12 user meets the definition of a significant industrial user, if the director determines the following: 13 (a)The industrial user has no reasonable potential for adversely affecting operation of the 14 POTW; and 15 (b)The industrial user has no reasonable potential for violating any pretreatment standards 16 or requirements. 17 18 Section 6. This ordinance shall be published as required by law. 19 20 Mayor 21 22 I,DORIS MORTENSEN,City Clerk of the City of Burlingame,do hereby certify that the 23 foregoing ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the day 24 of , 2006, and adopted thereafter at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the_ 25 _day of , 2006, by the following vote: 26 AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: 27 NOES: COUNCIL,MEMBERS: 28 ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: 4 • ♦ e w 1 City Clerk 2 U:\FILES\ORDINANC\SEWERRULES2006-1.wO 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 5 �- AGENDA 9a °�` ITEM# 6URL,NGAME STAFF REPORT MAG. *�9q DATE 5/15/2006 `%moi[ uuc 6��o TO: Honorable Mayor and Council SUBMITT f BY ` DATE: May 10, 2006 APPROVE BY FROM: Larry E. Anderson, City Attorney SUBJECT: ADOPT AN ORDINANCE TO FOLLOW ON THE URGENCY ORDINANCE ADOPTED ON MAY 1,2006, ALLOWING THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO APPROVE EXTENDED HOURS FOR CONSTRUCTION OF THE PARKING GARAGE FOR PENINSULA HOSPITAL RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the ordinance allowing the Planning Commission to approve extended hours for construction of the parking garage for Peninsula Hospital to follow on the urgency ordinance that was adopted on May 1, 2006, and direct the City Clerk to publish a summary of the ordinance within 15 days of adoption. DISCUSSION: Mills Peninsula Health Services requested the City Council to allow extended hours for construction of the parking garage at the Peninsula Hospital project because of the extended rains of 2005-2006. The project was approved in 2004 with more limited hours than allowed by the Municipal Code § 18.07.110, and the hospital wanted to go beyond the Code-allowed hours on weekday evenings and Saturday mornings to finish the garage. Comparison of Construction Hour Limitations Municipal Code Peninsula Hospital Ordinance Applicant's Requested Section Replacement Project Amendment to the Hours for Garage 18.07.130 Condition No.94 Municipal Code for Construction Current -Hospital Project Weekdays 7:00 am to 7:00 7:00 am to 6:00 pm 7:00 am to 9:00 pm 7:00 am to 9:00 pm Pm Saturdays 9:00 am to 6:00 59:00 am to 6:00 pm* 8:00 am to 6:00 pm 8:00 am to 6:00 pm Pm Sundays 10:00 am to 6:00 No construction on No Change 10:00 am to 6:00 pm m Sundays and Holidays (10:00 am to 6:00 m) * In reviewing the existing conditions of approval for the project as adopted by the Council,staff discovered that an error was made in the original project construction hours for Saturday. The hours are listed in Condition No. 94 as 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. However, notwithstanding the Urgency Ordinance, the existing municipal code requires that construction not begin on Saturdays until 9:00 a.m. Therefore,a correction to the conditions to reflect the municipal code hours is also being proposed at this time. On May 1, 2006, the City Council adopted an urgency ordinance to allow the Planning Commission to consider extended hours on certain conditions: Mayor and Council Re: Ordinance to Allow Planning Commission to Extend Hours for Peninsula Hospital Construction May 10, 2006 Page 2 1. The extended hours would only last to September 1, 2006 (or the completion of the garage, whichever occurs first), and would be limited to the parking garage construction. 2. The Planning Commission would review the extended hours once a month during the extension. The ordinance presented for the May 15 meeting is a regular ordinance that will supersede the urgency ordinance as a best practice, and will contain the same restrictions as the urgency ordinance. This ordinance will also automatically expire on September 1, 2006. For the Council's information, the Planning Commission heard the Mills Peninsula request on May 8, 2006, and approved a limited extension of hours as allowed by the Council. The details of the Commission's action is contained in the Commission minutes, but of note is that the Commission limited the extended evening hours to 9 p.m. to Thursdays only based on the concrete pour schedule proposed for the project. Attachment: Proposed Ordinance Distribution City Planner Mills Peninsula Health Services U:\FILES\COUNREPS\peninsulahospitalhours.ccr.wpd I ORDINANCE NO. 2 ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME ADOPTING AN INTERIM AMENDMENT TO THE HOURS OF CONSTRUCTION 3 ALLOWED BY SECTION 18.07.110 TO ALLOW PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF EXTENDED HOURS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE 4 PARKING GARAGE FOR PENINSULA HOSPITAL 5 The CITY COUNCIL of the CITY OF BURLINGAME does hereby ordain as follows: 6 Section 1. 7 A. In 2004,the City Council approved a conditional use permit for the construction of a 8 new hospital to replace Peninsula Hospital in accordance with the mandates of State law to make 9 all hospitals in the State resistant to and usable during earthquakes and other natural disasters. 10 The new hospital is indispensable to provide quality and comprehensive health care to the 11 residents of the Peninsula Hospital District,including Burlingame residents. Construction on the 12 project has begun with the excavation and framing of the necessary parking garage at the 13 southwest corner of Trousdale Drive and El Camino Real. 14 B. Beginning in November 2005,the San Francisco Peninsula experienced more than 70 15 days of measurable precipitation, and in particular over 30 days of rain in March and early April 16 of this year. Rainfall in March was twice normal,and through just mid-April,rainfall was already 17 four times normal for an entire month of April. This has pushed the expected completion of the 18 parking garage back over two months,and created unexpected impacts on neighboring homes as 19 the excavation spoils cannot be removed until the garage is completed. On April 10, 2006, the 20 Governor of California declared a State of Emergency in San Mateo County. 21 C. The soaring costs of construction created in large part by the shortage of contractors 22 able and willing to work on projects of this complexity and magnitude endanger the successful 23 completion of the project envisioned by the Hospital District and the community. Delays into the 24 next rainy season would compound this threat. 25 D. It is necessary that in order to protect public health and safety to be served by the 26 completion of a fully functioning, timely new hospital, that the Planning Commission be given 27 authority to approve an extension of the hours of construction for the parking garage if such an 28 extension would serve the public interest and meet the findings of an amended conditional use I permit. The current provision governing construction hours of the Municipal Code does not 2 provide this limited authority to the Commission. E. Upon becoming effective, this ordinance is intended to replace Ordinance No. 1781 4 adopted on May 1, 2006, as an urgency ordinance. 5 Section 2. Notwithstanding Section 18.07.110 of the Burlingame Municipal Code, the 6 Planning Commission may approve an extension of the hours of construction on the parking 7 garage for Peninsula Hospital on the following terms: 8 (a)The hours of construction may be extended to end at or before 9:00 p.m. on weekdays. 9 (b)The hours of construction may be extended to begin at or after 8:00 a.m.on Saturdays. 10 (c)Any extension of the hours shall be made an amendment to and a part of the conditional 11 use permit for the hospital project, shall be expressly limited to the construction of the parking 12 garage only,and shall be expressly terminated no later than September 1,2006,or the completion 13 of the parking garage, whichever occurs first. 14 (d)Any extension of the hours shall also be reviewed by the Planning Commission at least 15 once per month on dates set by the Commission. 16 Section 3. This ordinance shall be effective only until September 1, 2006, unless earlier 17 repealed, and shall have no further force and effect beyond that date. 18 Section 4. This ordinance shall be published as required by law. 19 20 Mayor 21 22 I,DORIS MORTENSEN,City Clerk of the City of Burlingame,do hereby certify that the foregoing ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council on the 1St day of May, 23 2006, and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the day of 2006, as follows: 24 AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: 25 NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: 26 27 28 City Clerk U:\FILES\ORDfNANC\peninsulaparkinggrg-regular.pin.wpd - 2 - CITY G PLANNING DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM TION !I DATE: May 11, 2006 AFTER I'ARAT..I OFSTAFFREPORT TO: City Council Mayor Baylock Russ Cohen Ann Keighran Rosalie O'Mahony Terry Nagel FROM: Margaret Monroe, City Planner RE: Planning Commission Action on Amendment to Condition 94(Hospital Construction Hours) for the Peninsula Hospital Replacement Project, May 8, 2006 At their meeting on May 8, 2006, the Planning Commission held a public hearing and voted to approve a temporary extension to the hours the construction team can work on the parking garage and the at grade entrance from Trousdale to the garage. The parking garage needs to be completed before the applicant can begin construction on the replacement hospital building because the footprint of the new hospital structure is on existing at grade parking. Parking on site to support the continued operation of the existing hospital will be severely limited without the use of the new parking garage. Planning Commission action: Planning Commission comments: In their discussion about the temporary construction hours the Planning Commissioner's made the following points,then adopted the amendment(italics) to Condition 94 included below. ■ Decision needs to be made tonight,in part because this action is subject to appeal(ends May 18, 2006). ■ Applicant is asking for the one week night of extended hours (7-9 p.m.)to float; cannot do that because it is not enforceable. ■ Request to increase hours is valid,had a unique period rain,like project to be kept on track, its OK because it is for a limited time, if the applicant violates this it will be harder to get another exception later. ■ Need to get information back to the Mitigation Monitoring Panel and the applicant needs to inform the neighbors about construction schedules, one schedule showing what would happen without the extension of hours and one schedule showing what will happen with the Memo: Planning Commission Action on Amendment to Condition 94 (Hospital Construction Hours) for the Peninsula Hospital Replacement Project, May 8, 2006 extended hours, so community can be educated about the trade offs. The Commission included the following concepts in their recommended amendment to Condition 94 for temporary construction hours for the construction of the parking garage and driveway entrance to the garage: (1), the extension of the hours based on the construction hours currently allowed throughout the city in the Municipal Code, plus one hour Saturday morning (8:00a.m to 9:00 a.m.) and two hours on Thursday evening (7:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m.); (2), limited the extension to the period from May 15, 2006 through August 2006, to expire September 1 , 2006; (3), mandated that the applicant notify neighbors of complaint phone number, complaint process, and to develop a complaint log and reporting system; (4), using the Mitigation Monitoring Panel to review compliance and which must report compliance/enforcement to the Planning Commission at their first meeting each month; and (5), a new requirement to provide neighbors by mail each month with a two month schedule of construction activities, to be renewed each month during the extended hours. The wording of the amended conditions is included below in italics. Adopted Amendment to Condition 94 (construction hours) 94. that because of the impact on the residential neighborhood along the southern property line of the hospital site, there shall be stricter construction hours imposed for this project; construction shall be limited to the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Monday through Friday, the hours of 8:80 9:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. Saturdays, and no construction on Sundays and holidays as defined in CS 13.04. 100; the construction noise restriction in the condition shall not apply to work done within the building after it is fully enclosed; prior to 9:00 a.m., work should be focused on the northern portions of the site and the buildings; ■ except that for the period of May 15, 2006, through August 31, 2006, construction hours shall be extended only for construction on the parking garage and new main entrance to the replacement hospital to thefollowing.- 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Monday through Wednesday and Friday, 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. on Thursday; 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Saturday; and 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Sunday; and that during the hours between 7:00 p.m. and 9:00 p.m. on Thursday, only "quiet" construction activities, as determined by the City Engineer, such as concrete finishing and form removal and reinstallation shall occur and that during the extended hours on Thursday and Sunday, access to the construction site shall be limited to El Camino Real and Trousdale Drive; ■ that the temporary extension of construction hours only for the parking garage and portion of the new main entrance to the replacement hospital to serve the parking garage shall end on September 1, 2006, and all construction activity shall then conform to the construction hours originally approved with the adjustment of Saturday hours to be consistent with the City's current Saturday construction hours of 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., `. 2 Memo: Planning Commission Action on Amendment to Condition 94 (Hospital Construction Hours) for the Peninsula Hospital Replacement Project, May 8, 2006 construction hours for other days shall be 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Monday through Friday and no construction on Sunday; ■ that within 10 days of the Planning Commission action the applicant shall mail to all property owners and residents in the standard noticing area of the hospital replacement project established by the City, a notification of telephone numbers to use to make complaints regarding construction hours, that to insure maximum compliance the notice shall encourage complaints to be made at the time the problem is occurring, that a daily/hourly log shall be kept of the complaints including any action taken, and that the Mitigation Panel shall meet each 30 days following the action to amend the conditions in order to review the complaint log and resolution of each complaint, and the Panel shall report its findings and any corrective actions they recommended to the Planning Commission at the Commission 's first meeting each month; the Mitigation Panel's compliance report shall be filed with the Planning Commission within in S days of their meeting; failure to follow this compliance and review process shall result in the immediate review by the Planning Commission of the condition of approval to extend construction hours; ■ the applicant shall provide by the fifth day of each month, by mail, each property owner and resident within the City's standard noticing area for the hospital project, a schedule of the construction activities for that and the next month, this notice should include the twenty-four hour contact number for complaints and shall encourage complaints to be made at the time the problem is occurring. As is custom to simplify future title searches, all the conditions of approval are included in the Planning Commission minutes and attached to the recorded planning action on this matter. The only change to the conditions is the amendment to Condition 94. Background Staff provided the Commission with a description of the Urgency Ordinance and the City Council's observations following their public hearing. Below is a summary of the comments made by the applicant and the members of the public at the Planning Commission's public hearing. These comments are summarized here because they changed in some respects following the City Council action. In some cases, these changes were reflected in the Commission's choice of language in the amendment of Condition 94 (hours of construction). Key points made by the applicant at the Commission's public hearing were: ■ If the construction schedule is violated in a major way, the primary contractor on the project can renegotiate the construction contract which will substantially escalate the cost ofthe new hospital. ■ Should construction costs exceed the current Sutter Health allocation to the project, the project would need to be reduced, there is no budget for cost increases to build the approved 3 Memo: Planning Commission Action on Amendment to Condition 94 (Hospital Construction Hours) for the Peninsula Hospital Replacement Project, May 8, 2006 project. ■ Asking for a temporary change to the construction hours in Condition 94 to allow them to use the citywide construction hours established in the Municipal Code, plus one hour earlier on Saturdays (8:00 a.m.) and extended hours one day a week (7:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m.). ■ Extended hours will allow them to alter the way they form and pour the floors of the parking garage to reduce the cycle time for the concrete, but this requires a 12 hour day (two shifts) in order to allow the concrete pour to set up and have the surface finished. Concrete finish work and removal of concrete forms is quiet construction work. • Concerned about impacts on the neighbors and would like the complaint calls to come directly to the project manager at the time the problem is occurring, so that the cause of the problem can be identified in the field immediately. ■ Other work will be occurring in the structure including utilities, and electrical; work on the Trousdale entrance driveway is complicated because of all the utilities in the area and the need to construct a detention basin where the original SF Water District pipe was below grade, this work could spill over onto Sunday. ■ This is a one time extension request, once the primary contractor begins work on the hospital lie will be obliged to meet the hours in the original condition of approval. ■ Received a complaint this week about three trucks in the Ray Park neighborhood, investigated, they were hospital delivery trucks and those responsible for hospital service were informed that their delivery trucks should not use this route. ■ Mitigation Monitoring Panel members were notified individually of the need to request extended hours, they did not choose to meet, but responded that they understood why the request was being made; neighbors were notified by hand delivered memo, entire cycle from decision to Council hearing was about 3 to 4 weeks. Timing was important, need hours soon so can catch up in next 60 days. ■ Landscaping behind the houses on the east end of Davis Drive has also been held up because the ground is too wet to backfill and compact over the new San Francisco water main; hope to be back on that soon if the weather holds. Summary of Neighbor comments: ■ Sunday construction is a big deal, if need to choose between, 9 neighbors would prefer evening construction to Sunday. ■ Role of the Mitigation Monitoring Panel was not appropriate in this case, should have met and negotiated the hours issue with the neighbors before the applicant came to the city. • Concerned that this is the first of many requests to change the hours of construction approved that were issued with the project. ■ Concern that during the extended hours construction trucks will exit behind the houses at the west end of Davis Drive; all trucks should be covered and there should be no deliveries after 6:00 p.m. ■ Clarify that the construction of the entrance to the parking garage is included in the extended hours. ■ Extending the hours of construction for the garage will save the hospital money and will .`. 4 Memo: Planning Commission Action on Amendment to Condition 94 (Hospital Construction Hours) for the Peninsula Hospital Replacement Project, May 8, 2006 cause the neighbors added inconvenience, so the hospital should provide the neighbors with financial compensation to address the issues; and then the neighbors will not complain. Attachments: Draft Unapproved Planning Commission Minutes May 8, 2006 5 4. 1783 EL CAMINO REAL, ZONED C-1, C-3 AND UNCLASSIFIED — APPLICATION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AMENDMENT FOR THE PENINSULA HOSPITAL REPLACEMENT PROJECT TO ALLOW EXTENDED CONSTRUCTION HOURS FOR THE PARKING GARAGE PHASE OF THE PROJECT (MILLS PENINSULA HEALTH SERVICES, APPLICANT; PENINSULA HEALTH CARE DISTRICT AND MILLS PENINSULA HEALTH SERVICES, PROPERTY OWNERS) (245 NOTICED) PROJECT PLANNER: MAUREEN BROOKS Reference staff report May 8, 2006, with attachments. CP Monroe presented the report, reviewed criteria and staff comments. She noted the City Council's approval of the Urgency Ordinance regarding temporary extension of construction hours for the hospital and their suggested observations to the Commission. She also noted that the Municipal Code and Urgency Ordinance set the parameters within which the Commission may amend condition 94, should they choose to provide a place to begin. An amendment to condition 94 was suggested for consideration. Commissioners noted that the commission had been charged to determine the appropriate amendment to condition 94 (hours of construction) and can choose among the current hours in condition 94, the longer hours allowed in the current Municipal Code and the extended hours allowed by the Urgency Ordinance. In any case the extension requested is for a limited time, May 15 through August, to expire September 1 , 2006. Staff noted that the Council added a provision to the Urgency Ordinance that the hospital report about compliance with whatever hours are allowed to the Planning Commission every 30 days from commencement of the work. Chair Brownrigg opened the public hearing. Oren Reinbolt, project construction manager, represented the applicant, 1783 El Camino Real. He discussed briefly the findings of a study about hospital construction costs in California including the causes of major cost escalation particularly 'construction congestion' which is unique to this market at this time. Currently they are not affected by this since Turner Construction has been under contract to them for 5 years, but if that agreement is broken, their costs will increase substantially and they will need to revise the project significantly. He noted the remaining steps to get through to bind Turner, they include finishing the parking garage and its access on time, holding down the cost of the project to what was funded by Sutter Health by getting the permits from the State on time, and the Hospital district needs a public vote on the building. Asked for broader hours in the Urgency Ordinance request because at the public hearing neighbors felt less concern over Sunday than they expected and Sunday adds flexibility if get off schedule, already had the extra hour on Saturday that they lost because it was not within the current municipal code hours of construction, and neighbors not feel that working until 7 p.m. weeks days is a problem, but working from 7 - 9 p.m. is a big deal; these neighbors represent the lightening rod for the construction hours and would like to work to the limit acceptable. Extended hours are needed so that they are able to make up lost time by changing the way the floors of the garage are poured; can do quiet concrete finish work during the extended hours 7 -9 p.m. because need two 7 hour shift when pour and finish concrete; don't think the neighbors south of the site will hear anything; want the flexibility to do two things: this is a giant project to live next to, trying to make impact minimal; try to set cycle time so that only need the extra 2 hours on Thursday, and finish concrete only after 7 p.m.; complaints need to come directly to him and he will air them with the Mitigation Monitoring Panel and if deemed appropriate tonight will report to the Planning Commission. Commissioners asked will concrete finishing be the only activity during the extended hours, 7-9 p.m., no heavy equipment with bells will be backing up, applicant noted if work on Sunday there may be some heavy equipment, and some concrete pumping to 7 p.m., pumpers will access site from Trousdale and El Camino. Commission asked, originally you were approved to work 63 hours a week, now you aske for 88 hours, a 40% increase, what is suggested here is 25% hours more than the original, is that enough to make a time recovery; applicant noted that the key is being able to reduce the cycle time by pouring the garage floors in thirds rather than quarters. What other construction will be occurring besides concrete? Will work on electrical, utilities, the at grade entrance roadway from Trousdale into the garage, but the cycle of pour is the limiting factor, would like flexibility to use extended hours once a week on any week day in case the cycle gets off schedule. Your request is the Municipal Code construction hours plus 7-9 p.m. on Thursday? Yes. Comments from the public: Terry Hubner, 1708 Davis Drive; Pat Giorni, 1445 Balboa Avenue; Kevin Nelson, 1654 Albermarle Avenue; Steve Dambrosie, 1504 Davis Drive; Chris Foley, 1504 Davis Drive; Christo Daskalakis, 836 Fairfield Road owner of 1700-1702 Albermarle Drive. Have a letter from 9 families to submit, concerned that it is clear what happened at the Council meeting, Sunday construction is a big deal, try to be fair allow Sundays or evenings, prefer evenings. Concerned about the Mitigation Monitoring Panel because it did not notify the neighbors about this issue until April 20, 2006; anticipating 5 months with no windows open, evening and Sunday noise, need more quiet time, project just begun, how do we know that they will not come back again when construction gets behind; because neighbors could not meet with Mitigation Monitoring Panel did not have an opportunity to come up with a solution, before this meeting the Planning Commission and Council need to get the Mitigation Monitoring Panel going so address concerns; if we had a choice of faster to get the project over sooner, majority would prefer extra 3 months and keep the construction hours in the conditions of approval; concern that the trucks will exit behind the houses on the west end of Davis during the extended hours for the next several months, Commission should require that all trucks be covered all the time and that no deliveries be made after 6 p.m. Unclear in the staff report whether the entrance is included with the construction of the garage for the extended hours. Small group of residents have to continue to come back to the city, this is a request to save $200,000,000, would like the hospital to mitigate the neighbors' problems caused by �— construction by providing them with compensation such as installing double pane windows, Sutter has money are considering another new hospital in San Carlos; should be a condition if the conditions are changed or removed the neighbors should be compensated. Clarify that this will not be extended hours from 7-9 p.m. every day; feel should grant on a 30 day basis and see if they comply, then extend another 30 days; would like to have experience of extended hours and review. This change is not what the city and neighbors agreed to, this is much worse, and will affect our quality of life, it's a bad precedent this early in this project, fought hard for the current conditions, did not get compensation should have through the Mitigation Fund which also did not address the hospital mitigating noise and dust. Complained to Carole Groom about replacement of trees at the end of Albermarle in February and about several things since, each time told nothing could do; have not raised my rents in four years, concerned about the impact of the extended hours to tenants, especially those there all day, hospital should provide money to assist in replacing windows. Applicant responded: this will not be a precedent for requests to extend construction hours, will not be repeated once they start on the hospital construction, we are close, once have the prime under contract do not have to worry, but the next 60 days are a critical phase. Commissioner asked when the trees will be installed along the property line on Davis Drive. Applicant responded within 30 days, had a delay on covering the SF water line because of the wet soil. Given present weather feel can issue a reliable schedule to neighbors on a bi-monthly basis, should be pretty accurate for the next 90 days. Commissioner asked about the Mitigation Monitoring Panel. Applicant noted that he needs timely reporting of problems so can track down, neighbors should call hospital switchboard and ask for the administrator on duty, and note complaint, the administrator will call the construction team person on duty who can check right away; got a complaint this week end about three trucks through the Ray Park neighborhood, they were hospital service trucks not construction trucks, Carole Groom contacted all the people who do normal operations of the hospital and told them this route was not acceptable. Time line for the extension of hours has been less than a month since identified the issue, notified the members of the Mitigation Monitoring Panel, hand distributed memo to all the neighbors, and have had two public meetings. Don't want to work outside approved hours, am asking permission; in general the public process is working. Need to coordinate with the rest of the hospital operations. If quiet activities can be done on Thursday evening, what non-quiet activities will be done on Sunday, can you limit access to Trousdale on Sunday and Thursday evenings? Could limit to Trousdale and El Camino, with no construction truck use of Marco Polo during this time. Would like flexibility in what day of the week we can use extended hours in case get off cycle. Can Sunday be stipulated for quiet work only? Not if a pour is needed, also need to get the access road built and occasionally that will require equipment; this is the piece of the road at grade into the parking garage, need to remove part of the SF water line and create a drainage retention basin, there will be a lot of stuff under that road. There were no further comments from the floor. The public hearing was closed. Commissioner discussion: City Council has looked to the Planning Commission to define this action; value making this decision tonight because if delay no point in change, also there is still an appeal period; clarify asking week-days 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. and one night 7 p.m. to 9 p.m.; CA noted that letting the applicant choose one night each week for extended hours would not be enforceable; asking Saturday 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. and Sunday 10 a.m. to 6 p.m., don't see that they will use all this time; feel that the argument to increase hours is valid, to deny is a disservice to the community, lot of rain, like the project to be kept on track, what asking is OK since it is for a limited length of time; if this develops into a pattern of requests we will know right away, if they violate this it will be harder to get something in the future; could not foresee this, unique rainy period, to not address now will compound the delay into the next rainy period; need to get information back to the Mitigation Monitoring Panel and the community with issuance of a schedule which documents what will happed now without the increase in hours and what will happen with the recovery schedule, to increase community understanding. If not extend hours it will be a disservice to the community, cuts will reduce quality and what can expect for landscaping and affect neighborhood; project well run to this point, not a request based on mismanagement. C. Vistica moved to approve the amendment to condition 94 as noted in the staff report with hours of construction extended to September 1 , 2006, from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. on Weekdays, adding 7 p.m. to 9 p.m. on Thursdays with work activity limited to quiet construction activities, and 8 a.m. to 6 p.m. on Saturday and 10 a.m. to 6 p.m. on Sundays, and that the Mitigation Monitoring Panel shall notify the neighbors if there will not be a pour on Thursday; and including the other items proposed in the staff reportabout notification of the compliance and notifying the neighbors about the construction schedule, by resolution including all the conditions in the staff report: 1) that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department and date stamped September 10, 2004, Sheets A0.01 through PS7, including topography, grading, utilities, landscape plans, floor diagrams, site plans, phasing plans, site section, elevations, parking structure plans, etc., and as shown on the perspective drawings of the Pedestrian View along El Camino Real at Medical Office Building and the View from Davis Drive Property to the South date stamped November 10, 2004 as they may be refined pursuant to Condition #5; (Planning, Building); 2) that the project shall include a hospital with a floor area of not more than 441 ,000 square feet and a medical office building with a floor area of not more than 150,000 square feet; (Planning, Building); 3) that the project shall provide a l minimum of 1 ,490 parking spaces, with 809 spaces in the parking garage and no more than twenty (20) percent of the required parking shall be in compact parking spaces; (Planning, Building); 4) that construction shall be carried out in the phases described in the Environmental Impact Report and the phasing plans dated September 10, 2004; (Planning, Building, Public Works); 5) that the approved exterior design of the hospital, medical office building and garage shall be further refined by the applicant pursuant to Planning Commission and City Council direction, and the refined designs shall be submitted to the City Planner for review and approval prior to issuance of the building permit for the parking garage; if the City Planner determines that the submitted exterior designs are inconsistent with the exterior design approved by the Commission and City Council, the design shall be forwarded for review and approval to the Planning Commission; in any event the emerging and final design of the medical office building, hospital and parking garage shall be forwarded to the Planning Commission for their information; and that any material changes in floor area, design, or use shall require City approval of an amendment to this use permit;(Planning); 6) that the applicant shall record an access easement between the Mills Peninsula Health Services property at 1811 Trousdale Drive and the adjacent Peninsula Hospital District property to the south before closing the El Camino Real access to the existing hospital, and that prior to issuance of a building permit for the garage, the applicant shall record an access easement or otherwise demonstrate legal irrevocable access for construction and parking ingress and egress between the merged Mills Peninsula Health Services properties along El Camino Real and the Peninsula Hospital District property to the west, to the satisfaction of the City Attorney; (Public Works); 7) that an application shall be submitted and recorded for a lot line adjustment for the exchange of 35 feet of street frontage along Trousdale Drive from the east side to the west side of Magnolia Gardens Care Center between Mills Peninsula Health Services and Magnolia Gardens Care Center prior to the issuance of a building permit for the parking garage; (Public Works); 8) that the two parcels with frontage on El Camino Real that are owned by Mills Peninsula Health Services shall be merged and the map recorded prior to issuance of a building permit for the parking garage; (Public Works); 9) that prior to issuance of a building permit for the medical office building, the three parcels remaining after compliance with Condition #8 shall be merged, the map shall be recorded, and the zoning shall be changed to Unclassified for the resulting parcel; (Public Works); 10) that if the actions described above in Condition #9 and all prerequisite conditions are not complete within five years of the approval of this Conditional Use Permit, the City shall review and modify the Conditional Use Permit as appropriate; (Planning); 11) that no building permit shall be issued to any structure whose required parking is on a separate parcel;(Building); 12) that any improvements for the replacement hospital structure shall meet all requirements of California law and shall be approved by the California Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development; (Building, Planning); 13) that within three years of completion and occupancy of the new hospital facilities and medical office building, the existing hospital structure and its support facilities shall be demolished and all on-site and off-site improvements completed, inspected and approved by the city; (Building, Planning, Public Works); 14) that no later than the last phase of hospital construction (demolition of the existing hospital), the applicant shall meet with the property owners in the Davis Drive neighborhood to discuss whether or not the proposed landscaped area and improved pedestrian access from Davis Drive to the hospital site, which is shown on the approved plans, shall be provided or the site shall be used for an alternative use; and that if the parties cannot agree, the issue shall be decided by the Planning Commission; (Planning, Neighborhood); 15) that any future development on the 4. 15 acre undeveloped area to be left for future use or disposition by the Peninsula Hospital District shall require a conditional use permit from the City of Burlingame and shall be subject to review under the California Environmental Quality Act; (Planning); 16) that the applicant shall apply for and receive approval, including required permits, from all other regulatory public agencies as necessary and required prior to the issuance of a building permit for the parking garage, including but not limited to the California Department of Transportation, the San Francisco Water District/ SF PUC, the Federal Aviation Administration, the San Francisco Regional Water Quality Control Board, the San Francisco Air Quality Control Board, the San Mateo County _Airport Land Use Commission, and San Mateo County Transit Authority; (Planning); 17) that in the event of any discrepancy between adopted EIR mitigation measures for the project and these conditions of approval, or between any of these conditions of approval, the most stringent requirement shall apply; (Planning); 18) that the applicant shall pay for and designate an appropriate area to locate a significant piece of public statuary, art or fountain in the gateway area along El Camino Real at a location no further south than the medical office building approved by the Planning Commission; this proposed art work shall be selected and reviewed using a process with public input developed by the City for the selection and placement of public art and shall be installed at the time of the final landscaping and hardscape on this corner of the site; the public art shall be substantial enough to become a focal point for the gateway and site and to help mitigate the location of the parking structure; the applicant shall pay to install the artwork and maintain it after installation; (Planning); 19) that the surface parking area which is a part of the lease agreement for this development should be available through good faith negotiations with the lessor and hospital operator to facilitate future development of the remaining 4. 15 acre site by the Peninsula Hospital District and reduce the extent of surface parking on the total site; required parking for the hospital can be met after CEQA review by joint use of an appropriately located and sized multi-level parking structure by amendment to this conditional use permit; (Planning); 20) that neither the hospital or medical office building nor any other use on the site shall charge employees, clients, patients or visitors for the use of on- site parking without an amendment to the conditional use permit, for which the application shall include traffic and circulation studies documenting the impacts of a pay-for-parking program on the site access, on-site circulation, use and shift of use of on-site parking, impact on access to and from any part of the site, and any possible impact on off-site and on-street parking in the vicinity of the hospital and medical office building; (Planning); 21) that the applicant shall develop a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program for the hospital and medical office building which shall be approved by C/CAG and the City of Burlingame consistent with C/CAG requirements, and that the required facilities for the TDM program shall be included in the plans for each facility prior to filing the plans for the new hospital structure with the California Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development or issuance of a building permit for the parking garage, whichever comes first, and shall be installed and/or implemented prior to occupancy of each structure; (Planning); 22) that the applicant shall do a baseline study and then monitor parking usage quarterly throughout construction, and if the monitoring reports, resident complaints and/or staff observations demonstrate that parking for this project is occurring off-site, the hospital shall propose modifications on-site to address the increase above the baseline which shall be approved by the City Engineer; and the approved necessary changes shall be implemented as soon as feasible by the hospital operator; (Planning, Public Works); 23) that following the completion of construction and occupancy of the replacement hospital, the applicant shall monitor parking usage quarterly for the first three years; if any quarterly study indicates that the on-site parking required is inadequate, the applicant shall identify solutions in consultation with the City Engineer and shall implement the approved improvements in a time frame established by the City Engineer; (Planning, Public Works); 24) that no construction traffic shall use the Davis Drive access to the hospital, and no employees associated with the construction shall use the Davis Drive entrance to the site or shall park on Davis Drive or nearby residential streets; (Public Works, Neighborhood); 25) that to monitor the effectiveness of traffic access, circulation and parking during the entire construction period, including construction trucks and equipment, the applicant shall hire an independent traffic consultant to conduct a baseline parking and traffic study prior to the start of garage construction and to update the study quarterly during each critical phase of construction, and the baseline and intermediate studies by the traffic consultant shall be reviewed by the City Planner prior to issuance of the building permit for the garage; and that the applicant shall resolve any unanticipated problems identified through these traffic and parking studies and/or by the City Engineer within 15 days; (Public Works, Planning); 26) that the recycling deposit for the demolition of the existing hospital structure that is required pursuant to Condition #96 will be retained until the Davis Drive entrance is closed and landscaped to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the City Arborist, and that the City may use these funds to close the Davis Drive entrance as required; 27) that the applicant shall include language in all construction documents prohibiting all construction traffic from using the Davis Drive entrance; (Planning); 28) that the applicant shall provide a plan for traffic control for each phase of construction, to be approved by the Department of Public Works prior to issuance of the next set of permits required for the project; (Public Works); 29) that at no time shall any person connected with the operation of the hospital direct, order or encourage parking off-site, and the hospital shall take all reasonable steps to ensure that staff and employees park on the site itself in the parking provided pursuant to this approval; (Public Works, Planning, Neighborhood); 30) that the relocation and reconstruction, including paving and striping, of the Magnolia Gardens Care Center's required parking (west side lot) shall be done prior to the time that the construction entrance at Magnolia/Trousdale is built, with the final provision of a total of at least 26 on-site parking spaces for Magnolia Gardens; (Planning, Building); 31) that existing parking on the east side at the Magnolia Gardens Care Center shall not be demolished or restriped until the new west side lot parking is in place, construction of the west side lot shall not commence until the City has approved all required permits, and all construction shall be completed within 90 days;(Planning, Building); 32) that use of the fire access lane on the south side of the property shall be limited to pedestrians and emergency vehicles only; (Planning); 33) that trucks shall not be left more than 48 consecutive hours on the hospital site, either at the loading docks or in the parking areas; however, this condition shall not apply to a truck that is directly attached to the technology dock; (Planning); 34) that the hours for delivery at the hospital loading dock off El Camino Real shall be limited to 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. Monday through Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. Saturdays, Sundays and Holidays; these hours do not apply to non-routine delivery of medical equipment or consumable medical supplies that are required for urgent or emergency use in the following 24 hours; holidays are defined in Burlingame Municipal Code Section 13.04. 100; these hours shall be posted in clear public view and each vendor shall be notified of the hours of delivery; (Planning); 35) that the applicant shall install and/or replace streetlights along the project frontage on El Camino Real and Trousdale Drive, and the size, design and location of the streetlights shall be approved by the Department of Public Works and shall have CalTrans permits prior to installation; (Public Works); 36) that the hospital operator shall permanently maintain an off-site supply warehouse to be used to stage deliveries to the hospital in smaller trucks for the duration of this permit, and that if this warehouse supply system is materially altered, the hospital shall pay for an independent traffic analysis of the change in the number and size of trucks used for deliveries, and shall provide appropriate mitigation as determined by the Planning Commission by amendment to this Conditional Use Permit; (Planning); 37) that the hospital shall inform and require all vendor trucks to use El Camino Real and city-designated arterial streets and not to use adjacent residential streets (collector or local) in traveling to or from the hospital, and failure to comply shall result in a review of the use permit; (Planning); 38) that the applicant shall pay the North Burlingame/Rollins Road Development Fee based on peak hour trips generated by the hospital and medical office building; with the fee for the hospital paid in two installments, one-half at the time of city approval of the project and one-half before demolition permits are issued for the existing hospital building; and the fee for the medical office building paid in two installments, one-half within 90 days of City Council certification of the Final EIR and one-half before the final inspection is scheduled for the medical office building; (Planning); 39) that the applicant shall replace the bus shelter on El Camino Real as directed by SamTrans and shall obtain all approvals for adjusting the location of the bus stop from required agencies prior to installing the curb, gutter and sidewalk improvements on the El Camino Real frontage of the site; (Public Works); 40) that, because of the importance of providing continued access to the Burlingame Plaza Shopping Center from Trousdale between El Camino Real and Magnolia, the applicant shall prepare a traffic study to modify the left-turn movement/lanes into the hospital site to retain the existing left-turn pocket on Trousdale eastbound into the Burlingame Plaza Shopping Center, and, working with the City Engineer, determine how these changes can be most safely implemented including modifications to the mitigation monitoring plan which will clarify and improve access to both the hospital and shopping center; the identified solution shall be incorporated into the roadway improvements on Trousdale to be installed by the applicant; (Public Works); 41) that the applicant shall design, install and pay for any and all necessary upgrades to traffic signals including at Trousdale/Magnolia and El Camino Real/Trousdale intersections, as well as roadway restriping, and other transportation improvements required by the project, as described in the project plans dated September 10, 2004, the EIR for the project, and in the transportation Mitigation Measures set forth below; (Public Works); 42) that traffic signal plans shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for all changes to traffic signals due to the project, and the plans shall be reviewed and approved prior to implementation pursuant to encroachment permits; (Public Works); 43) that prior to issuance of the demolition permit for the existing hospital building, the applicant shall provide an irrevocable letter of credit or other form of security acceptable to the City Attorney to cover the estimated cost of installation of a single traffic signal at the new Trousdale Drive emergency/staff entrance, which improvements, if necessary, shall be installed within three years of the date the security is provided. The applicant shall conduct traffic counts at the Trousdale/emergency entrance intersection approximately twelve months after the start-of-service date of the new hospital to determine whether the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices peak hour signal warrants are met or exceeded at the new entrance, and if so, the applicant shall pay for the cost of installing said traffic signal improvements to City standards and requirements. In the alternative or in combination with improvements at the Trousdale/emergency entrance and if determined to be necessary by the City Engineer, the applicant shall pay for the cost of installing appropriate traffic control improvements at the intersection of Trousdale and Ogden or Marco Polo Way, provided that in no event shall the applicant be responsible for total costs, construction or installation greater than the dollar amount of the security provided for the one traffic signal; (Public Works); 44) that a State Heliport permit shall be issued by the California Department of Transportation, Division of Aeronautics, for the replacement helipad prior to the issuance of a building permit for the medical office building; (Planning); 45) that the helipad shall be operated within the criteria of the State Heliport Permit and that no more than eight helicopter trips shall arrive at the hospital within any single month, with a maximum of 24 trips per year and that the only exception without amendment to this permit shall be in the event of natural or declared emergency; (Planning); 46) that helicopter service to the site shall cease during construction as required by the Federal Aviation Administration and the CalTrans Division of Aeronautics; (Planning); 47) that the primary helicopter flight path shall be the approach from the northeasterly direction over the intersection of El Camino Real and Trousdale Drive as shown on the Flight Path Layout dated September 29, 2004, prepared by Heliplanners Aviation Planning Consultants, and that the westerly flight path arc shall only be used when strong wind conditions prevent the use of the primary flight path; helicopters shall not use the westerly flight path arc without Planning Commission review and approval except in emergency situations; (Planning); 48) that before the Peninsula Medical Center is identified and/or licensed to operate as a regional trauma center, the Planning Commission shall review and rule on any physical changes caused, including changes in helicopter and emergency service vehicles, and determine how the implementation of these changes will have the least impact on the safety and environment of the residents and businesses in the area; (Planning); 49) that curb and street elevations and detailed driveway profiles, as well as driveway transitions, for each phase of work shall be submitted to and approved by the Department of Public Works prior to issuance of construction permits for that phase of work; (Public Works); 50) that detailed plans for the curb, gutter and sidewalk realignment at the Marco Polo entrance shall be submitted and approved by the City prior to the commencement of work on the entrance and in the Marco Polo staff parking lot and that the driveway at Marco Polo Way shall be redesigned to be perpendicular to the street to provide safe sight distance for vehicles exiting from the parking lot, and the design shall be approved by the City Engineer before issuance of an encroachment permit; (Public Works); 51) that all changes required within the right-of-way of Trousdale Drive for this project shall be reviewed and approved by the Department of Public Works pursuant to the encroachment permit process and approved for each phase by the Department of Public Works prior to implementing each phase; (Public Works); 52) that any damaged asphaltic concrete pavement along the project frontage on Trousdale Drive, El Camino Real and Marco Polo shall be repaved to pre-project conditions; (Public Works); 53) that, for each phase of construction, the applicant shall post a performance bond payable to the City of Burlingame for an amount sufficient to construct all required improvements for that phase of the project which are located within the public right-of-way including, but not limited to, curb, gutter, sidewalk, road way construction, utilities, traffic signals and street lighting to the satisfaction of the City Attorney prior to issuance of any permits for that phase; (Public Works); 54) that detailed plans for the modifications proposed to the medians along El Camino Real shall be reviewed and approved by CalTrans and the Burlingame Department of Public Works pursuant to the encroachment permit process and approved for each phase by the Department of Public Works prior to implementing each phase; (Public Works); 55) that the applicant shall, at its own cost, design and construct public improvements including curb, gutter, sidewalk, asphaltic concrete pavement, street furniture and other necessary appurtenant work along the El Camino Real frontage of the site, Trousdale Drive between El Camino Real and the Magnolia Gardens Care Center property, and the entrance at Marco Polo Way in compliance with the streetscape guidelines in the North Burlingame/Rollins Road Specific Plan, and the improvements shall be designed by a civil engineer, approved by the City Engineer, and installed by the project, and that the design of these improvements shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of the building permit for the parking garage; (Public Works); 56) that the applicant shall submit detailed plans for the loading dock entrance on El Camino Real, including a complete dimensional layout, to the Department of Public Works for review and approval prior to issuance of a building permit for the medical office building;(Public Works); 57) that the hospital shall design in and employ water conservation measures as adopted for the region or specifically by the City during construction and operation; ( Planning ); 58) that the applicant shall submit detailed plans for the proposed new water connection and sizing to the Department of Public Works prior to issuance of the building permit for the parking garage, and shall incorporate any on-site or off-site improvements deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works; (Public Works); 59) that prior to the issuance of the building permit for the parking garage, the applicant shall provide plans as approved by the San Francisco Water Department for the realignment of the SFPUC water line, including details of tie-ins and turn-outs, and all work associated with the realignment shall be coordinated with the Department of Public Works; (Public Works); 60) that, before issuance of the building permit for the medical office building, the applicant shall submit an updated sanitary sewer analysis of the public sewer system at the project site to assess the project flow effect of the proposed new sanitary sewer connection to the Department of Public Works, together with anticipated demands on the sanitary sewer system and the 1740 Rollins Road pump station, and shall incorporate any on-site or off-site improvements deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works; (Public Works); 61) that the applicant shall relocate, restore or replace any City facility affected or damaged by the project, or of insufficient size, and shall replace any such facility in kind; (Public Works); 62) that prior to issuance of the building permit for the parking garage the applicant shall submit detailed plans to address storm and surface drainage on the site which identify potential impacts on CalTrans, the adjacent neighbors and the City's storm drain system, and shall comply with NPDES requirements to keep as much drainage on-site as possible, and shall incorporate any improvements deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works; (Public Works); 63) that, for each phase of construction, the applicant shall submit detailed plans for all City utilities in public rights-of-way adjacent to and affected by the work to the City Engineer, who shall approve the plans prior to issuance of any permits for that phase of the project; (Public Works); 64) that all irrigation systems and plantings shall follow the City's water conservation guidelines and each facility within the project shall be appropriately metered as determined by the City Engineer; (Public Works); 65) that all on-site catch basins and drainage inlets shall be protected during construction so that no debris can enter them, and all catch basins shall be stenciled with a City-provided stencil; (Public Works); 66) that the applicant shall submit an overall site drainage and erosion control plan for approval prior to the issuance of the building permit for the garage, and the plans shall conform to the guidelines and requirements of the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program; (Public Works); 67) that, for each phase of construction, the site drainage and erosion control plan shall be refined and approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of any permits for that phase of the project; (Public Works); 68) that the hospital shall store a minimum of 30,000 gallons of water for firefighting, plus an additional 150 gallons of drinkable water per licensed bed on the site at all times; 69) that the hospital shall work with the Burlingame Police Department to identify and inspect installation of appropriate security surveillance devices along the all pedestrian pathways including the fire access lane, and the effectiveness of these devices in providing security shall be reviewed jointly each year, with improvements made as necessary; (Police Department); 70) that a safety and security measures shall be installed over or around the cooling towers and that there shall be an alarm system and surveillance provided for oxygen storage bunker; (Planning Department, Building); 71) that a �-' pedestrian access way that is compliant with the Americans with Disabilities Act shall be provided from El Camino Real to the main entrance area of the hospital and medical office building; (Building, Public Works);72) that all work shall be done in conformance with the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act (Building, Public Works); 73) that pedestrian access along all street frontages shall be provided continuously throughout construction and shall comply with ADA requirements; (Pubic Works); 74) that a set of plans clearly showing the division between the portions of the project that are under the jurisdiction of the California Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development (OSHPD) and the portions that are under the jurisdiction of the City of Burlingame shall be approved by both OSHPD and the Burlingame Building Official and provided to the Building Official before plans for the medical office building shall be accepted by the Building Department for plan check; (Building); 75) that the applicant shall verify compliance with the California Building Code for building type, occupancy group, allowable area, allowable area increases, height, sprinklers, property lines or assumed property lines, exiting plan, accessibility, and minimum plumbing facilities according to Appendix Chapter, Table 29-A, for both the parking garage and the medical office building; (Building); 76) that all improvements for the Medical Office Building and garage shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Fire Codes, 2001 Edition as amended by the City of Burlingame; (Building); 77) that Fire Department access shall be consistent with Section 902 of the 2001 California Fire Code, including clearly identified fire lanes and curb parking restrictions consistent with the Burlingame Municipal Code Section 17.04.025; (Fire); 78) that canopies and vegetation along fire lanes shall maintain clear heights of 13 '6" to provide clearance for fire and emergency equipment; (Fire, City Arborist); 79) that turn radii and surface support capabilities of fire lanes shall accommodate the largest fire department apparatus within San Mateo County and fire lanes shall not exceed sixteen (16) percent in slope at any point; (Fire); 80) that fire flow requirements shall be consistent with Appendix IIIA and IIIB, and fire sprinklers shall be provided for all structures over 2000 square feet, with consideration for fire sprinklers being applied to fire flow reductions to be negotiated with the Fire Marshal, and additional considerations shall be made to ensure roof tip standpipes achieve a minimum pressure of 100 psi at the outlet; (Fire); 81 ) that fire pumps shall be diesel driven or have secondary power supplied by emergency generators with an on-site fuel supply of 48 hours of more;(Fire); 82) that Fire Department connections for standpipes and fire sprinkler systems shall be located within 50 feet of a fire hydrant;(Fire); 83) that a post indicator valve shall be provided for each separate building and so located as to be at least two-thirds the height of the building away from the building, and control valves and separate shut-off valves shall be provide for each floor of each building and electronically monitored;(Fire); 84) that fire alarm annunciation shall be identified by each smoke compartment and/or by each floor for buildings equipped with a fire alarm system (required for all buildings in excess of 20,000 square feet), and that activation shall clearly identify the location of the device and remote annunciation shall be visible from the exterior of the building, in a location to be approved by the Central County Fire Department;(Fire); 85) that the applicant shall receive approval by the Central County Fire Department for the location of the fire control room in the hospital structure, and the fire control room shall be clearly shown on the floor plans, prior to issuance of a building permit for the medical office building; (Fire); 86) that any land area which is to remain undeveloped and not specifically landscaped as shown on the approved plans, including the 4. 15 acre area to be left for future use by the Peninsula Hospital District, shall be hydro mulched and planted with materials which will meet NPDES erosion control requirements and shall be properly irrigated and maintained with ground cover until the use of the land changes; (Public Works); 87) the applicant shall submit a report from a certified arborist citing measures to be taken to protect trees during construction, particularly the redwood grove behind the Magnolia Gardens Care Center, and that report shall be approved by the City Arborist prior to issuance of a building permit for the garage and that protection shall be installed for each phase of construction as required by the City Arborist before grading and/or building permits are issued for the phase of work; (City Arborist); 88) that planters with irrigation shall be installed as approved by the Planning Department and City Arborist on the upper roof level of the parking garage as shown on the landscape plans before an occupancy permit shall be issued for the garage, plant materials shall be approved by the City Arborist; and vines shall be planted at various locations at the base of the parking garage structure on both the El Camino Real and Trousdale sides to break up the mass of the building and blend it into the gateway landscaping and design at this corner and along these street frontages, the City Arborist shall review the selection of vine and its irrigation and proposed maintenance program; (Planning, City Arborist, Building); 89) that the landscaped setback areas along El Camino Real and Trousdale Drive and along the entire south property line parallel to Davis Drive shall be irrigated and maintained by the hospital operator; (Public Works) ; 90) that the approved landscape plan for the site shall be further refined in the following stages by the applicant pursuant to Commission direction prior to the issuance of a demolition or building permit for (1) the construction of the new emergency/replacement entrance to the existing hospital, (2) the installation of the San Francisco water main on the south side of the property, (3) the construction of the new main entrance and parking garage (to include landscaping construction detail along Trousdale and El Camino Real street frontages) and (4) the demolition of the existing hospital (landscaping of the remainder of the site); and the refined plans at each of these stages shall include detailed tree protection measures including long-term maintenance programs, and planting, irrigation and hardscape plans and shall be submitted to the City Planner and reviewed by the City Arborist who will make recommendations, the plans will then be forwarded to the Planning Commission for information; during each period of construction the City Arborist shall inspect the site for compliance with the approved installation plan; if the project landscaping causes an unusual level of inspection by the City Arborist, the costs for inspection shall be reimbursed by the applicant to the City; (Planning, City t Arborist); 91) that truck deliveries, pick-ups, collection of trash and other wastes and other truck service noise-generating activities shall be prohibited prior to 7:00 am and after 10:00 p.m. Monday through Friday, and prior to 8:00 a.m. and after 10:00 p.m. on Saturday, Sundays and holidays or as stated in the Municipal Code, Section 10.40.039; (Planning, Neighborhood); 92) that the testing of the emergency generators shall be limited to once per week or the minimum required by law, whichever is more frequent, and if possible, shall occur between 7:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. on weekdays only; (Planning, Neighborhood); 93) that the oxygen storage tanks adjacent to the loading dock shall be filled no more than three times a week, and only between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m.; (Planning, Neighborhood); 94) that because of the impact on the residential neighborhood along the southern property line of the hospital site, there shall be stricter construction hours imposed for this project; construction shall be limited to the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Monday through Friday, the hours of 8:00 9:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. Saturdays, and no construction on Sundays and holidays as defined in CS 13.04. 100; the construction noise restriction in the condition shall not apply to work done within the building after it is fully enclosed; prior to 9:00 a.m., work should be focused on the northern portions of the site and the buildings; except that for the period of May 15, 2006, through August 31 , 2006, construction hours shall be extended, only for construction on the parking garage and new main entrance to the replacement hospital, to the following: 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Monday through Wednesday and Friday; 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. on Thursday; 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Saturday; and 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Sunday; and that during the hours between 7:00 p.m. and 9:00 p.m. on Thursday, only "quiet" construction activities, as determined by the City Engineer, such as concrete finishing and form removal and reinstallation shall occur and that during the extended hours on Thursday and Sunday, access to the construction site shall be limited to El Camino Real and Trousdale Drive; that the temporary extension of construction hours only for the parking garage and portion of the new main entrance to the replacement hospital to serve the parking garage shall end on September 1 , 2006, and all construction activity shall then conform to the construction hours originally approved with the adjustment of Saturday hours to be consistent with the City's current Saturday construction hours of 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., construction hours for other days shall be 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Monday through Friday and there shall be no construction on Sunday; that within 10 days of the Planning Commission action the applicant shall mail to all property owners and residents in the standard noticing area of the hospital replacement project established by the City, a notification of telephone numbers to use to make complaints regarding construction hours, that to insure maximum compliance the notice shall encourage complaints to be made at the time the problem is occurring, that a daily/hourly log shall be kept of the complaints including any action taken, and that the mitigation panel shall meet each 30 days following the Planning Commission action to amend the conditions in order to review the complaint log and resolution of each complaint, and the panel shall report its findings and any corrective actions they recommended to the Planning Commission at the Commission 's first meeting each month; the Mitigation Panel's compliance report shall be filed with the Planning Commission within in 5 days of the panel's meeting; failure to follow this compliance and review process or documentation of continued failure to adhere to the hours of construction or other negligence shall result in the immediate review by the Planning Commission of the condition of approval to extend construction hours; the applicant shall provide by the fifth day of each month, by mail, to each property owner and resident within the City's standard noticing area for the hospital project, a schedule of the construction activities for that and the next month, this notice should include the twenty-four hour contact number for complaints and shall encourage complaints to be made at the time the problem is occurring. 95) that the applicant shall submit to the City a recycling plan for each structure to be approved prior to issuance of the demolition permit for that structure, and a site inspection for compliance shall be required prior to each new phase of construction; (Building); 96) that a recycling deposit and compliance report shall be required for each phase of the project; (Building); 97) that the hospital and medical office building shall have a recycling plan approved by BFI and the City and shall continuously recycle as much of their waste stream as is possible and insures the public health; (Building); 98) that during construction and demolition of the existing hospital, at the direction of the City Engineer, the applicant shall evaluate the operation of the Marco Polo/Trousdale intersection whenever a traffic safety/operation problem is identified by the City, and the applicant shall install whatever interim solution the City Engineer determines to be appropriate for the duration of the phase of construction or the event causing the problem; (Public Works, Neighborhood); 99) that the Davis Drive access to the hospital shall be open only to hospital staff during construction and when demolition is occurring; the Davis Drive access shall be regulated by kiosk with security officer or by card actuated gate between the hours of 6:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. daily; outside of these hours the entrance shall be closed by a gate or chain; the use of this staff access shall be monitored prior to any construction to establish a current baseline of the use and then quarterly during construction; should the usage during construction exceed 100% of the current baseline usage, the applicant shall review with the City Engineer ways to reduce the level of use; the determination of the City Engineer may be appealed to the Planning Commission; should the staff gate access prove to be inadequate or exceed the 100% of current baseline and become a neighborhood nuisance the applicant shall meet with the neighbors and the City Engineer to discuss appropriate and safe alternatives, the City Engineer shall determine an appropriate and safe the alternative solution, and the applicant shall install or construct the necessary facilities; (Public Works, Neighborhood); 100) before the end of 2004, the applicant shall undertake a feasibility and cost study for undergrounding and connecting to the houses the electric and any other utilities currently placed along the shared property line between the hospital site and Davis Drive and, provided it is possible and economically feasible to underground just the utilities behind the north side of Davis Drive; and based on the conclusions of the feasibility and cost study, the applicant shall work with all the affected parties to determine if the utility work is feasible, how the costs to underground would be shared and its effect on landscaping; all of the affected parties must agree on the program and the timing for accomplishing the work in the context of the landscaping and other construction and operations on the hospital site; (Planning, Neighborhood); 101) that the applicant shall investigate the feasibility including P.U.C. approval of moving the San Francisco Water Line Easement along the rear of the properties facing Davis Drive north to increase the planting area between the property line and easement to at least 15 feet, the City Engineer shall review the study and shall determine the viable setback; however that setback shall be no less than 10 feet at any point except where the existing line connects to the new line at Balboa extended; (Public Works, Neighborhood); 102) that the applicant shall build a wall or fence between the rear of the Davis Drive residences and the replacement hospital's landscaped areas along the southern property line of the hospital, the wall or fence shall be built at a location and of a common design agreed to by all parties; if the parties cannot agree the Planning Commission shall select the location and type of wall or fence prior to the completion of the installation of the San Francisco Water Main in the new easement; (Planning, Neighborhood); 103) that the landscaping within the area between the rear of each of the property lines on Davis Drive and the San Francisco Water Line Easement shall be selected by each property owner from a palette of trees and shrubs provided by the applicant and approved by the City Arborist, with each property owner receiving individual assistance from the project's licensed landscape architect; selection of all trees and shrub sizes shall be based on achieving the design intention of the landscape plan including the maximum growth in a reasonable time given the species, location including utilities and landscape objectives, and any discrepancies between property owner and applicant shall be arbitrated by the City Arborist; the applicant, with permission, shall install trees on private property if it is determined that such planting is a reasonable or better way to address the wind or visual impacts caused by the project; the entire planted area on the hospital site shall be irrigated with irrigation in place within 30 days of planting, and the landscaping shall be installed as soon as the segment of the water line along the hospital's south property line is installed unless it is necessary to wait for a better planting season or timing as determined by the City Arborist; (Planning, City Arborist, Neighborhood); 104) that the parking lot landscaping on hospital property at the southern property line west of the San Francisco Water Line Easement shall be selected by each adjacent Davis Drive property owner from a palette of trees and shrubs provided by the applicant and approved by the City Arborist, with the objective of providing a 20 foot tall vegetative screen for the property line fences and to extend the overall pattern of landscaping for the replacement hospital site; this landscaping and its irrigation system as approved by the City Arborist shall be installed in a planter area no less than 4 feet in width on the hospital side of the replacement property line wall or fence; the plant size at installation shall be based on achieving the design intent of the landscape plan including the maximum growth in a reasonable amount of time given the species, location including utilities and landscape objectives, disputes shall be resolved by the City Arborist; planting and irrigation shall be installed no later than the second phase of construction of the replacement hospital; and that the applicant shall provide individual landscape consultation to each property owner in order to determine the best solution for screening along the hospital property line, with mutual agreement this could include plantings on the private property side, if it is agreed that it is the best location to achieve the landscape goals for the location; (Planning, City Arborist, Neighborhood); 105) that because the maintenance landscaping is so important to achieving the growth goals and to the quality of the hospital project, the property owner shall be required to provide intensive professional maintenance of all landscaped areas and to maintain all irrigation systems in operating condition, failure to do so shall result in Planning Commission review of the use permit; (Planning, City Arborist, Neighborhood); 106) that if the eucalyptus trees at the end of Albemarle Drive cannot be retained, the applicant shall investigate relocating them within the planting area between the hospital's southern boundary and the San Francisco Water Easement; if this is not a viable option as determined by the City Arborist, the applicant shall with the cooperation of the City plant a tree variety selected by the City Arborist, at a size selected by the City Arborist, which will achieve at height of at least 25 feet in six years and a maximum height of at least 60 feet, irrigation shall be provided to this cluster of trees and they shall be planted with irrigation when the water line installation is completed and before a building permit is issued for the medical office building; (Planning, City Arborist, Neighborhood); 107) that the area on the north side of the San Francisco Water Main Easement adjacent to the replacement hospital shall be raised with the approval of the P.U.C. by an earthen berm and planted with a massing of redwood trees and other varieties of tall growing trees and shrubs which will grow to a height to screen the view of the lower and closer portions of the new hospital structure from view of the near by residents; the selection and various sizes of plant material and trees as well as the irrigation system, shall be approved by the City Arborist prior to installation, no trees installed shall be smaller than 24 inch box size, and this landscaping and its necessary grading shall be installed before issuance of the demolition permit for the existing hospital structure; (Planning, City Arborist, Neighborhood); 108) that the design of the grading and landscaped area between the replacement hospital and the rear of the properties along Davis Drive shall include drainage which will retain all surface and subsurface drainage on the hospital site and which will accommodate as necessary existing natural surface and subsurface drainage now occurring from adjacent private properties; the City Engineer shall approve all site grading and drainage plans affecting this area prior to commencement of the work to relocate the San Francisco Water Main; (Public Works); 109) that the applicant shall evaluate the impact of the proposed hospital structure on the wind velocity and turbulence on the properties adjacent to the south property line of the hospital site, this study shall be completed by the mid-point of Phase Two of the construction (installation of the San Francisco water line) so that landscaping along the southern property line east of the Davis Drive access can be adjusted to mitigate any changes to prevailing wind velocity or turbulence caused on the adjacent properties, landscape consultations with individual property owners shall include this information and address the wind issue; (Planning, City Arborist, Neighborhood); that noise levels of the future cooling towers will not exceed the noise levels of the existing cooling towers during full operation along the southern property line of the hospital. The baseline ambient and design criteria is to be defined as an hourly measurement during a 24-hour continuous measurement period. In addition, the ambient is to be defined as the L10 as required in the General Plan; (Planning, Neighborhood); 111) that the future ambient noise of the project shall be designed to not exceed the existing baseline ambient by more than 3 dBA during full operation along any property line of the hospital. The baseline ambient and design criteria is to be defined as an hourly measurement during a 24- hour continuous measurement period. In addition, the ambient is to be defined as the L10 as required in the General Plan; (Planning, Neighborhood); 112) that the applicant shall adhere to all NPDES and air quality requirements throughout construction, and shall meet with homeowners or tenants at their request and provide individually negotiated and reasonable on-site mitigation for observed impacts of dust and particulates from the replacement hospital construction, landscape installation or demolition of the existing hospital; (Public Works, Building, Neighborhood); 113) that during the construction of the replacement hospital, the demolition of the existing hospital and the final landscaping of the site, parking on the Peninsula Hospital site shall be limited to employees, staff, patients, patient visitors and construction workers only during the hours of their employment on the site; on site parking shall not be used for off-site parking for any other facility or service and shall not be used by any employee, staff, or member of the community for extended parking when they are not on the premises; (Planning, Neighborhood); 114) that for the duration of the project construction and any use of the site for a hospital and medical office building, no on-site parking required by the municipal code or by city approval for staff, employees, or users of Peninsula Hospital shall be leased, loaned or otherwise obligated to any other user or business; (Planning, Neighborhood); 115) that the south tower of the hospital facing Davis Drive shall be clad in translucent spandrel glass with a low reflectivity rating (reflectance out) of 9% to limit the amount of interior light emitting to the exterior, and that all hospital rooms above the third floor level facing the Davis Drive side of the property shall include interior design which shall encourage occupants to stand back at least 3 feet from the window, all windows shall be provided with blinds or coverings, and glazing shall reduce light transmission at night; (Planning, Neighborhood); 116) that, if feasible given the location of protected trees, the agreement of adjacent commercial property owners to the north, the amount of grading/fill required to achieve appropriate slope and the approval of the PUC regarding appropriate protection of the San Francisco water line and its facilities in the area as determined by the City Engineer, to reduce the heavy truck traffic immediately adjacent to the single family residences on the south side and west end of Davis Drive during the phase of construction which includes the demolition of the existing hospital, there shall be a truck entrance to the site established and maintained from Marco Polo Drive, in addition to the existing Marco Polo staff entrance; and should it be feasible and necessary during other phases of construction for more than two days a week for heavy trucks to stage or access the site from Marco Polo the applicant shall provide a second access to Marco Polo sooner; if this additional entrance causes a relocation of staff parking on site, the applicant shall submit a plan to the City Engineer for approval to show how this parking will be accommodated elsewhere; the approved plan will be implemented immediately as directed by the City Engineer; (Public Works, Neighborhood); 117) that prior to removal of hazardous materials and demolition of the existing hospital, the applicant shall meet with the neighbors to discuss the methods of removal to be used, the precautions being taken, the timing of the various activities, and how possible impacts on their properties can be cooperatively addressed; (Public Works, Building, Neighborhood); 118) that the applicant shall propose a mitigation monitoring panel composed of District, applicant, City, and neighbor (including both residential and commercial) representatives to coordinate issues regarding compliance with conditions of approval and mitigation measures as well as neighborhood concerns and questions. The applicant shall also appoint a single point of contact to respond to questions and complaints regarding the construction and operation of the hospital under this approval. The proposed panel and contact process shall be submitted for review and approval by the Planning Commission prior to issuance of the building permit for the garage; (Planning); 119) that the applicant shall establish a mitigation fund to address concerns of immediate neighbors regarding issues such as dust, noise, and landscaping during construction of the project. The proposed mitigation fund and process shall be submitted for review and approval by the Planning Commission prior to issuance of the building permit for the garage; (Planning); 120) that the project sponsor shall install planters at the upper deck (roof level) of the El Camino Real and Trousdale Drive sides of the garage upon completion of garage construction; (visual quality; Planning) (VQ 1 . 1); 121) that the project sponsor shall agree to develop and implement a Construction Visual Improvements Plan that would make visual improvements to construction zones within a given construction phase and between phases if the zone is not scheduled for construction activity or will remain unused for a period greater than six months; construction zones subject to this mitigation measure shall be defined by the City Planner, and shall consider the size of the area, the nature of the construction activity, and the proximity or visibility of the area to public vantage points or residential uses; the Construction Visual Improvements Plan shall be implemented by the project contractor(s) and must be approved by the City Planner; the intent of the plan is to aesthetically improve portions of the project site that would remain unimproved for an extended period and screen the construction zone from view by passersby along the public streets and sidewalks, or to make the zone usable for MPHS employees, patients, and the public; possible improvements in the plan include, but are not limited to, the following (if timelines other than six months are specified below, the shorter of six months or the time specified below shall apply): a) the project sponsor shall clear a construction zone of `— construction debris and remove construction equipment whenever construction is not anticipated for at least two weeks; b) if a site is a construction zone, but no construction activities are scheduled for more than one month, the project sponsor shall be responsible for regular garbage removal and watering of any existing landscaping; c) the project sponsor shall ensure fencing is removed or visually treated around construction zones that front onto El Camino Real, Trousdale Drive, Marco Polo Way, or Davis Drive in a manner deemed acceptable by the Chief Building Official, in order to promote safety, connectivity through the site, and pedestrian friendliness; d) if a site is not in use as a construction zone for more than six months due to demolition or construction of a structure, the project sponsor shall improve the site with landscaping (e.g., trees, shrubs, and groundcover), passive recreation/open space facilities (e.g., benches, picnic tables), decorative fencing and/or seating walls, and pedestrian and bicycle routes that connect to adjacent open spaces; pedestrianibicycle networks shall be defined by and to the satisfaction of the City Planner; e) the project sponsor shall install all landscaping as early as possible to decrease visual impacts of construction; (visual quality; Planning, Building) (VQ 6.1); 122) that the project sponsor shall be responsible for lengthening the left-turn pocket on northbound El Camino Real (to westbound Trousdale Drive) from about 180 feet to 375 feet; this improvement would eliminate left-turning vehicles from blocking traffic flow along northbound El Camino Real and satisfy the queue storage requirement; note that under cumulative conditions, a lengthier turn pocket (475 feet) is required, as described in Mitigation Measure TR-12. 1 below; (transportation; Public Works) (TR 2. 1); 123) that the project sponsor shall be responsible for converting the eastbound through lane on Trousdale Drive at El Camino Real to a shared left-through lane; the project sponsor shall be responsible for extending the existing dedicated left-turn lane to provide 145 feet of storage (a 35-foot extension) for vehicles turning left; the left-turn pocket (145 feet) and the extra capacity in the shared left-through lane (about 380 feet) would be sufficient to accommodate the 400-foot queue length; (transportation; Public Works) (TR 2.2); 124) that the project sponsor shall be responsible for extending the southbound left-turn pocket on El Camino Real at Trousdale Drive an additional 100 feet; this measure would require the removal of a portion of the median strip; this measure is necessary because, by adding project traffic to the other turning movements at this intersection, signal green time is taken away from the southbound left-turn movement; longer turn storage is needed; (transportation; Public Works) (TR 2.3); 125) that the project sponsor shall be responsible for extending the eastbound left-turn pocket on Trousdale Drive at Magnolia Avenue to 175 feet; (transportation; Public Works) (TR 2.4); 126) that the project sponsor shall be responsible for extending the westbound left-turn pocket on Trousdale Drive at Magnolia Avenue/Main Entrance to 175 feet; adequate distance is available between the main entrance and the El Camino Real intersection to accommodate the left-turn pocket requirements identified in Mitigation Measure TR-2.2 and this measure (in a back-to-back configuration) plus a 20- to 60-foot taper; (transportation; Public Works) (TR 2.5); 127) [DELETED (see Conditions 41 and 124)]; 128) that the project sponsor shall implement an attendant parking program to increase the parking supply during critical phases of construction; the project sponsor shall fully fund a mitigation monitoring program (Program) that will enable City of Burlingame to monitor parking demand on a quarterly basis throughout the critical phases of construction; the Program shall also provide an alternative that could be quickly implemented should the monitoring show that the parking deficit remains; (transportation; Public Works) (TR 9. 1); 129) that the project sponsor shall adjust the property line and construct the proposed replacement parking area at the northwest end of the Magnolia Gardens Care Center property prior to demolishing existing parking area and both property line adjustments may occur on the same map; (transportation; Public Works) (TR 9.2); 130) that the project sponsor shall complete the roadway improvements needed to mitigate the project traffic impacts (i.e., Mitigation Measures TR-2. 1 through TR-2.5) before the end of Phase 2, to ensure that construction traffic would have a less-than-significant impact; (transportation; Public Works) (TR 10. 1); 13 1) that the Revised Project with cumulative development would result in LOS E operations on the El Camino Real/Trousdale Drive intersection during the AM & PM peak hours; one turn lane is insufficient to accommodate this high turn volume; the project sponsor shall be responsible for ensuring that sufficient capacity is available by converting the eastbound Trousdale Drive through lane to a left-through lane, which would require the signal to operate in a split phase scheme in the east-west direction; converting this lane would improve operations to LOS D, reducing this impact to a less-than-significant level; (transportation; Public Works) (TR 11 . 1); 132) that the project sponsor shall be responsible for lengthening the left-turn pocket on northbound El Camino Real (to westbound Trousdale Drive) from about 180 feet to 475 feet; this improvement would eliminate left-turning vehicles from blocking traffic flow along northbound El Camino Real and satisfy the queue storage requirement; (transportation; Public Works) (TR 12. 1); 133) that the project sponsor shall be responsible for extending the southbound left-turn pocket on El Camino Real at Trousdale Drive an additional 100 feet; this measure would require the removal of a portion of the median strip; (transportation; Public Works) (TR 12.2); 134) that the project sponsor shall incorporate the following practices into the construction documents to be implemented by the project contractor, and these practices shall be provided to the City Planner for approval prior to the issuance of building permits; a) maximizes the physical separation between noise generators and noise receptors; such separation includes, but is not limited to, the following measures: use heavy-duty mufflers for stationary equipment and barriers around particularly noisy areas of the site or around the entire site; use shields, impervious fences, or other physical sound barriers to inhibit transmission of noise to sensitive receptors; locate stationary equipment to minimize noise impacts on the community; and minimize backing movements of equipment; b) use quiet construction equipment whenever possible; c) impact equipment (e.g., jack hammers and pavement breakers) shall be hydraulically or electrically powered wherever possible to avoid noise associated with compressed air exhaust from pneumatically-powered tools; compressed air exhaust silencers shall be used on other equipment; other quieter procedures, such as drilling rather than using impact equipment, shall be used whenever feasible; d) prohibits unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines; e) select routes for movement of construction-related vehicles and equipment in conjunction with the Burlingame Planning Department so that noise-sensitive areas, including residences, hotels, and outdoor recreation areas, are avoided as much as possible; include these routes in materials submitted to the City Planner for approval prior to the issuance of building permits; f) designate a noise disturbance coordinator who will be responsible for responding to complaints about noise during construction; the telephone number of the noise disturbance coordinator shall be conspicuously posted at the construction site and shall be provided to the Burlingame Planning Director; copies of the construction schedule shall also be posted at nearby noise-sensitive areas; (noise; Planning, Public Works, Building) (NO 1 . 1); 135) that to reduce particulate matter emissions during project demolition and construction phases, the project sponsor shall require the construction contractors to comply with the dust control strategies developed by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD); the project sponsor shall include in construction contracts the following requirements: a) cover all trucks hauling construction and demolition debris from the site; b) water all exposed or disturbed soil surfaces at least twice daily; c) use watering to control dust generation during demolition of structures or break-up of pavement; d) pave, apply water three times daily, or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers on all unpaved parking areas and staging areas; e) sweep daily (with water sweepers) all paved parking areas and staging areas during the earthwork phases of construction; f) provide daily clean-up of mud and dirt carried onto paved streets from the site; g) enclose, cover, water twice daily, or apply non- toxic soil binders to exposed stockpiles (dirt, sand, etc.); h) limit traffic speeds on unpaved roads to 15 mph; i) install sandbags or other erosion control measures to prevent silt runoff to public roadways; and; j) replant vegetation in disturbed areas as quickly as possible; (air quality; Public Works, Building) (AQ l . l); 136) that Mills-Peninsula Health Services (MPHS) shall �-- retain a qualified environmental specialist (e.g., a Registered Environmental Assessor or similarly qualified individual) to inspect existing buildings subject to demolition for the presence of asbestos, polychlorinated byphenyls (PCBs), mercury, lead, or other hazardous materials; MPHS shall submit the report to the City prior to demolition, together with an explanation of how the project will address any issues identified in the report; if found at levels that require special handling (i.e., any building material containing 0. 1 percent asbestos, paint that contains more than 5,000 parts per million of lead, or any building materials known or suspected to contain PCBs or mercury), MPHS shall manage these materials as required by law and according to federal and state regulations and guidelines, including those of the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC), BAAQMD, California Occupational Safety and Health Administration (Cal/OSHA), County of San Mateo Health Services Agency (CSMHSA), and any other agency with jurisdiction over these hazardous materials (hazardous materials; CSMHSA, Building, Planning) (HM 1 . 1); 137) that in the event that contamination is visually discovered during construction activities, MPHS shall be required to conduct a Phase II Environmental Site Assessment; this investigation shall involve the collection and analysis of soil and groundwater samples as directed by the site assessment consultant; sampling shall extend at least to depths proposed for excavation, and samples shall be tested for elevated levels of petroleum hydrocarbons, VOCs, or lead, if any; soil and/or groundwater samples shall be collected throughout the project site as directed by the site assessment consultant; this assessment shall be completed by a Registered Environmental Assessor, Registered Geologist, Professional Engineer, or similarly qualified individual prior to initiating any further earth-moving activities at the project site; if it were determined by sample collection and analysis that petroleum hydrocarbons, VOCs, or lead is present in soil and/or groundwater samples, the impacted materials shall be segregated and stockpiled separately from non-impacted soils throughout the construction phase; if deemed necessary by the local oversight agency, some impacted materials shall be mitigated prior to construction; soils with elevated petroleum hydrocarbon, VOC, or lead concentrations may require excavation and off-site disposal; soils with concentrations above regulatory threshold limits for petroleum hydrocarbons, VOCs, or lead shall be disposed of off site in accordance with California hazardous waste disposal regulations (CCR Title 26) or shall be managed in place with approval of DTSC, CSMHSA or the Bay Area Regional Water Quality Control Board; (hazardous materials; CSMHSA, Building, Planning) (HM 2. 1); 138) that in the event that contaminated soil or groundwater is encountered, MPHS shall comply with the Occupational Safety and Health Guidance Manual for Hazardous Waste Site Activities regulatory requirements for hazardous materials/waste health and safety plans; the Site Health and Safety Plan shall establish policies and procedures to protect workers and the public from potential hazards posed by residual contamination issues at the site; the plan shall include items applicable to site conditions, such as: identification of contaminants; potential hazards; material handling procedures; dust suppression measures; personal protection clothing and devices; controlled access to the site; health and safety training requirements; monitoring equipment used during construction to verify health and safety of workers and the public; measures to protect public health and safety; and emergency response procedures; if petroleum hydrocarbons are present in the soil or groundwater proposed for the use of backfill or disposal, the handling and disposal of the contaminated soil or groundwater shall be governed by the applicable local and federal hazardous materials regulations; (hazardous materials; Public Works, Planning, CSMHSA) (HM 2. 1); 139) that in the event that runoff induced by the Revised Project implementation would enter the Caltrans storm drainage system under SR-82, the project sponsor would immediately contact Caltrans for necessary review and approval; (hydrology; Public Works, Caltrans) (HY 1 . 1); 140) that the project applicant shall prepare a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to prevent polluted runoff from flowing into public drainage facilities during construction of the proposed facilities; the SWPPP shall include Best Management Practices (BMPs) that include schedules of N-- activities, prohibitions of practices, maintenance procedures, and other management practices to prevent or reduce the pollution in storm water runoff during construction; the SWPPP shall be reviewed and approved by the City of Burlingame and other appropriate agencies, such as the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), prior to issuance of any grading or building permit; (hydrology; Public Works); 141) that the project sponsor shall submit an application to the City of Burlingame's Parks and Recreation Department Director for a tree removal permit and meet the replacement requirements of the Tree and Vegetation Ordinance (Municipal Code, Title 11 .06.020); included with the permit application shall be a landscaping plan that illustrates species, numbers, and sizes of replacement trees; (biological resources; City Arborist, Building) (BR 1 . 1); 142) that the project sponsor shall be responsible for maintaining and protecting the existing on-site trees to be retained; the following specific actions shall be followed to maintain the health of the remaining trees: a) any pruning shall be done according to the direction of a certified arborist and all pruning shall comply with International Society of Arboriculture, Western Chapter Standards or other comparable standards deemed acceptable to the City Arborist; b) any abandoned utility lines (water, electrical, etc.) in the root zones (radius of ten times the trunk diameter) shall be cut and left in the ground to the satisfaction of the City Arborist; c) any surfacing material inside the root zone shall be pervious and installed on top of the existing grade; as an example, pervious pavers are acceptable provided the base material is also sufficiently pervious; base rock containing granite fines is not sufficiently pervious; d) temporary construction fencing shall be erected to protect the retained trees of a size to be established by the City Arborist; the fencing shall be placed at the perimeter of the root zone unless the pavement is supervised by a certified arborist; the fencing shall be in place prior to the arrival of construction materials or equipment; e) the landscape irrigation shall be designed to prevent trenching inside the root zones of retained trees; f) supplemental irrigation shall be provided during construction; approximately 10 gallons of water for each inch of trunk diameter should be applied at or near the perimeter of the root zone every two weeks during the dry months (any month receiving less than 1 inch of rainfall on average); g) retained trees shall be thoroughly mulched with a 3-inch layer of bark chips with the exception of a 6- to 12-inch area around the base of the root collar, which must be left bare and dry; (biological resources; City Arborist) (BR 1 .2); 143) that the removal of trees, shrubs, or weedy vegetation shall be avoided during the February 1 through August 31 bird nesting period to the extent possible; if no vegetation or tree removal is proposed during the nesting period, no surveys shall be required; if it is not feasible to avoid the nesting period, a survey for nesting birds shall be conducted by a qualified wildlife biologist no sooner than 14 days prior to the start of removal of trees, shrubs, grassland vegetation, buildings, grading, or other construction activity; survey results shall be valid for 21 days following the survey; therefore, if vegetation or building removal is not started within 21 days of the survey, another survey shall be required; the area surveyed shall include all construction sites, access roads, and staging areas, as well as areas within 150 feet outside the boundaries of the areas to be cleared or as otherwise determined by the biologist; in the event that an active nest is discovered in the areas to be cleared, or in other habitats within 150 feet of construction boundaries, clearing and construction shall be postponed for at least two weeks or until a wildlife biologist has determined that the young have fledged (left the nest), the nest is vacated, and there is no evidence of second nesting attempts; (biological resources; City Arborist, Planning) (BR 2. 1); 144) that the project sponsor shall revise the preliminary planting plan to give preference to native trees; suggested native tree species, subject to approval by the City Arborist, include California sycamore, box elder, Monterey cypress, and Monterey pine; (biological resources; City Arborist, Planning) (BR 3. 1 ); 145) that the project sponsor shall include methods of water conservation in the Proposed Project's buildings and landscaping; these methods shall include, but not be limited to the following: a) install water-conserving dishwashers and washing machines, and water- efficient centralized cooling systems in the hospital and MOB; b) install water-conserving irrigation `- systems (e.g., drip irrigation and automated irrigation systems); c) design landscaping with drought- resistant and other low-water-use plants; d) install water-saving devices such as water-efficient toilets, faucets, and showerheads; (utilities; Public Works, Building) (UT 5. 1); 146) that the following mitigation measures shall be incorporated into the grading and construction contracts: a) if potential historical or unique archaeological resources are discovered during construction, all work in the immediate vicinity (within approximately 50 feet) shall be suspended and alteration of the materials and their context shall be avoided pending site investigation by a qualified archaeological or cultural resources consultant retained by the project applicant; construction work shall not commence again until the archaeological or cultural resources consultant has been given an opportunity to examine the findings, assess their significance, and offer proposals for any additional exploratory measures deemed necessary for the further evaluation of and/or mitigation of adverse impacts to any potential historical resources or unique archaeological resources that have been encountered; b) if the find is determined to be a historical or unique archaeological resource, and if avoidance of the resource would not be feasible, the archaeological or cultural resources consultant shall prepare a plan for the methodical excavation of those portions of the site that would be adversely affected; the plan shall be designed to result in the extraction of sufficient volumes of non-redundant archaeological data to address important regional research considerations; the work shall be performed by the archeological or cultural consultant, and shall result in detailed technical reports; such reports shall be performed by the archaeological or cultural resources shall be submitted to the California Historical Resources Regional Information Center; construction in the vicinity of the find shall be accomplished in accordance with current professional standards and shall not recommence until this work is completed; c) the project applicant shall assure that project personnel are informed that collecting significant historical or unique archaeological resources discovered during development of the project is prohibited by law; prehistoric or Native American resources can include: chert or obsidian flakes, projectile points, mortars, and pestles; and dark friable soil containing shell and bone dietary debris, heat-affected rock, or human burials; historic resources can include nails, bottles, or other items often found in refuse deposits; d) if human remains are discovered, there shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the discovery site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains until the project applicant has complied with the provisions of State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(e); in general, these provisions require that the County Coroner shall be notified immediately; if the remains are found to be Native American, the County Coroner shall notify the Native American Heritage Commission within 24 hours; the most likely descendant of the deceased Native American shall be notified by the Commission and given the chance to make recommendations for the remains; if the Commission is unable to identify the most likely descendent, or if no recommendations are made within 24 hours, remains may be re-interred with appropriate dignity elsewhere on the property in a location not subject to further subsurface disturbance; if recommendations are made and not accepted, the Native American Heritage Commission will mediate the problem. (cultural resources; Planning) The motion was seconded by C. Terrones. Commission comment on the motion: support motion, people more likely to be away during the summer, encourage the hospital to work within these hours; closest distance to the garage is 570 feet, beyond the limit that commissioner required by the state to recuse from a vote, most of the noise this far away will come from El Camino and an occasional airplane; hospital will serve the region, it is important to the greater community. Would like to add a condition to limit site construction access during the extended hours on Thursday and Sunday to El Camino Real during the temporary construction. Maker of the motion and second agreed. Ask applicant to think about procedure, concern about neighborhood impact, significant opportunity cost if applicant creates uncertainty, more than money would like to see some monitoring by first Commission meeting in June, will value the way they develop a program for the neighbors to report and they respond; city is being flexible; those savings or some portion of them will accrue to the benefit of the city, would like to discuss this at the first meeting in June. Would like the applicant to report performance regarding hours of construction at the first Planning Commission meeting each month during the temporary extension of construction hours. Feel that there was a lapse with the Mitigation Monitoring Panel and the applicant, want the neighbors informed first. Would like to see some neighbors help Mr. Dambrosie out. Chair Brownrigg called for a voice vote on the amended motion to amend condition 94 (hours of construction) for the hospital replacement project. The motion passed on a 6-0- 1 (C. Cauchi absent) voice vote. Appeal procedures were advised. This item concluded at 9: 10 p.m. Agenda Item # 9b Meeting BURLINGAME STAFF REPORT Date: May 15, 2006 SUBMITTED BY APPROVED BY TO : HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL DATE: MAY 812006 FROM PUBLIC WORKS SUBJECT: TENTATIVE AND FINAL PARCEL MAP FOR LOT COMBINATION OF PORTIONS OF LOTS D & E, BLOCK 11 , BURLINGAME LAND COMPANY MAP NO . 2 SUBDIVISION , 1427 CHAPIN AVENUE , PM 06-04 RECOMMENDATION : It is recommended that Council concur with the Planning Commission and approve the subject Tentative and Final Map with the following conditions: • A final parcel map for a lot merger shall be filed by the applicant within the two year time period allowed by the Subdivision Map Act and the City's subdivision ordinance and if necessary, an extension of up to one year may be filed . • All property corners shall be set and shown on the final parcel map. • The final map shall show the width of the right-of-way for Chapin Avenue, Primrose Road , and El Camino Real; including the centerline of the right-of-way, bearings and distance of the centerline and any existing monuments in the roadway. • All sidewalk, driveway, curb and gutter shall be replaced with new. The project shall , at its own cost, design and construct frontage streetscape improvements including sidewalk, curb , gutter, parking meters and poles, trees and streetlights in accordance with the streetscape master plan . • During construction , the project developer shall maintain the existing street in good condition to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director. If the construction activity results in street damage, the developer shall re-pave the street frontage to City standards. The developer shall take photographs of the street condition prior to and after construction to document any damage caused by the project construction . The street reconstruction shall be a minimum of 2 inches of asphalt concrete removal and replacement. • The project shall reserve a 12-feet wide strip of land for a future driveway on its site in the event that the revocable easement in the City parking lot is terminated . S:\A Public Works Directory\Staff Reports\1427 Chapin Ave, PM06-04.doc • The City reserves the right to terminate the revocable easement for the purpose of ingress and egress to access private parking lot at the rear of the site, with reasonable notice at the City's sole option. • The applicant shall enter into an agreement for the maintenance and repair of the City lot due to wear and tear by the project. The applicant shall annually pay to the City 50% of the cost for maintaining the Parking Lot B-1. The costs will be based on the prevailing costs and adjusted to the CPI index for future years. • The applicant shall pay the City for the loss of revenue from potential parking spots on lot B-1 in the area used to provide driveway access to the project site. BACKGROUND: At their meeting of April 24, 2006, the Planning Commission reviewed the attached tentative parcel map and recommended Council approval with the conditions listed above. The parcel map should be considered as both the tentative and final parcel map to facilitate processing. Staff will ensure that the proper map is recorded. EXHIBITS: Tentative Parcel Map; Staff Memorandum; April 24, 2006 Planning Commission Minutes Victo Voong Assistan gin r c: City Clerk,Applicant S:\A Public Works Directory\Staff Reports\1427 Chapin Ave,PMO6-04.doc BURLINGAME MEMORANDUM PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT TO: PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: PUBLIC WORKS -ENGINEERING DATE: APRIL 5, 2006 RE: TENTATIVE AND FINAL PARCEL MAP FOR LOT COMBINATION OF PORTIONS OF LOTS D & E, BLOCK 10, BURLINGAME PARK NO. 2 SUBDIVISION, 1427 CHAPIN LANE,PM 06-04 This application is to combine two (2) existing lots into one (1) lot at 1427 Chapin Lane. The applicant is proposing an on-site improvement which will require a lot combination in order to meet the zoning code. There are no comments from the Building Department and Planning Department. There will be no new easements created by this map. The map application is complete and therefore may be recommended to the City Council for approval subject to the following conditions: 1. A final parcel map for lot merger must be filed by the applicant within the time period as allowed by the Subdivision Map Act and the City's Subdivision Ordinance. Action on this map should be considered as both the tentative and final map to facilitate processing. 2. All property corners shall be set and shown on the final parcel map. 3. The final map shall show the widths of the right-of-way for Chapin Avenue, El Camino Real and Primrose Road, including the centerline of right-of-way, bearing and distance of centerline and any existing monuments in the roadway. 4. All damaged/displaced sidewalk, curb and gutters shall be replaced with new. The project shall, at its own cost, design and construct frontage streetscape improvements including sidewalk, curb, gutter, parking meters and poles, trees and streetlights in accordance with streetscape master plan. 5. During construction, the project developer shall maintain the existing street in good condition to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director. If the construction activity results in street damage, the developer shall re-pave the street frontage to City standards. The developer shall take photographs of the existing condition prior to the start of construction and after construction to document whether or not any damages to the street were caused by the project construction. The street reconstruction shall be a minimum of 2" of asphalt concrete removal and replacement. 6. The project shall reserve a 12-feet wide strip of land for a future driveway on its site in the event that the revocable easement in the City parking lot is terminated. t1.1VICTOR W rojectsTrivateTM06.04.wpd 7. The City reserves the right to terminate the revocable easement for the purpose of ingress and egress to access private parking lot in the rear of the site, with reasonable notice at the City's sole option. 8. The applicant shall enter into an agreement for the maintenance and repair of the City lot due to wear and tear by the project. The applicant shall annually pay to the City 50% of the cost for maintaining the Parking Lot B-1. The costs will be based on the prevailing costs and adjusted to the CPI index for future years. 9. The applicant shall pay the City for the loss of revenue from potential parking spots on lot B-1 in the area used to provide driveway access to the project site. Exhibit: Tentative Map&Assessor's Map Vi or Voong Assistant E 'nee U.VICTOR\Projects%PrivateNPM06.04.wpd City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes April 24, 2006 VII. ACTION ITEM 5. 1427 CHAPIN AVENUE, ZONED C-1, SUBAREA B — PROPOSED TWO-STORY OFFICE BUILDING ADDITION(FRED BERTETTA,OLYMPIAN JV,APPLICANT AND PROPERTY OWNER; FARRO ESSALAT, ARCHITECT) (66 NOTICED)PROJECT PLANNER: MAUREEN BROOKS A. APPLICATION FOR MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW TO CONSTRUCT A TWO-STORY OFFICE ADDITION TO AN EXISTING TWO- STORY BUILDING; AND B. APPLICATION FOR TENTATIVE AND FINAL PARCEL MAP FOR LOT COMBINATION OF PORTIONS OF LOTS D & E, BLOCK 10, BURLINGAME PARK NO. 2 SUBDIVISION, 1427 CHAPIN AVENUE, PM 06-04 Reference staff report April 24,2006,with attachments. CP Monroe presented the report,reviewed criteria and staff comments. Twenty three conditions including the mitigations for the mitigation monitoring plan were suggested for consideration. There were no questions of staff. Chair Auran opened the public hearing. Mark Hudak, 216 Park Road,represented the project along with Frank and Bonnie Bertetta, property owners, Ferro Essalat, architect, and Greg Terry, real estate agent. Applicant noted that they felt that the development team had done the right thing,engaged an award winning architect,worked with the city's subcommittee and the historical architect,feel that they and the city will be proud of the outcome, the project includes useful parking,hope that the commission will be satisfied with the landscape plan. Public Comments: Pat Giorni, 1445 Balboa Avenue;Patricia Urbane, 1210 Bellevue Avenue. Only regret is that the city did not purchase this landmark and make it a teen center; think the proposed design is good, sorry to see the existing brick wall along the street removed, liked it. Agree that this should be a public project, have a disadvantage son who is an artist, this building would be great for an art studio for such people, the parents of participants could do most of the up keep of the building, need places for the more unfortunate people in our community. The Commission asked the applicant for clarification about the location of the equipment on the roof, could it be moved more to the middle of the structure. Architect responded that the stacks are incorporated into the design of the fire escape stairwell on the side of the building and should be screened from view. Is there a way to landscape the replacement brick wall on the adjacent property. The architect responded that if the adjacent property owner will allow them to build a new wall they will also landscape it. Landscape plan is lacking, there are no details included on how the redwood tree and Chinese elm will be protected during construction and no details provided about the type of shrubs,size at planting or even clear notation of what are shrubs and what are seating blocks,would like to see a more detailed landscape plan which is what was requested,can come back as an FYI but needs to be reviewed. Staff noted that it could come back as an FYI before a building permit is issued. Concerned about the absence of identified tree protection measures, also revision should include species and size of all plantings around the water features and in open spaces. Applicant responded that they would be happy to revise the landscape plan and add tree protection measures and submit for FYI review. There were no further comments from the floor. The public hearing was closed. C.Vistica noted that this is a great way to save the most significant building in the city,have talked about the way to preserve the brick building and this solution meets the California Building Code seismic and access requirements, opens the site to view from the street, would move to approve the mitigated negative 2 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes April 24, 2006 declaration and commercial design review by resolution with the following conditions in the staff report: 1) that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department date stamped March 22, 2006, Sheets T0, T1, D1.0, A1.0, A2.0, A2.3, A2.5, A3.0, A3.1, A3.2, A4.0, A5.4, and date stamped April 12, 2006, Sheet L1.0, preliminary landscape plan, and that any changes to the building materials,exterior finishes,footprint or floor area of the building shall require an amendment to this permit; 2)that any changes to the size or envelope of the building,which would include changing or adding exterior walls or parapet walls,moving or changing windows and architectural features or changing the roof height or pitch, shall be subject to design review; 3)that demolition of existing structures proposed for removal and any grading or earth moving on the site shall not occur until a building permit has been issued and such site work shall be required to comply with all the regulations of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District; 4) that prior to scheduling the framing inspection, the project architect, engineer or other licensed professional shall provide architectural certification that the architectural details such as window locations and bays are built as shown on the approved plans; if there is no licensed professional involved in the project, the property owner or contractor shall provide the certification under penalty of perjury. Certifications shall be submitted to the Building Department; 5) that prior to scheduling the roof deck inspection,a licensed surveyor shall shoot the height of the roof ridge and provide certification of that height to the Building Department;6)that prior to final inspection,Planning Department staff will inspect and note compliance of the architectural details(trim materials,window type,etc.)to verify that the prof ect has been built according to the approved Planning and Building plans; 7) that during demolition of the existing structures to be removed, site preparation and construction of the new structure,the applicant shall use all applicable "best management practices" as identified in Burlingame's Storm Water Ordinance, to prevent erosion and off-site sedimentation of storm water runoff; 8)that the applicant shall comply with Ordinance 1503, the City of Burlingame Storm Water Management and Discharge Control Ordinance; 9) that all construction shall abide by the construction hours established in the municipal code; 10) that this project shall comply with Ordinance No. 1477, Exterior Illumination Ordinance for all site lighting; 11) that the conditions of the Chief Building Official's May 27,2005 memo,the City Engineer's June 15, 2005 memo, the City Arborist's June 22, 2005 memo,the Recycling Specialist's May 27, 2005 memo, and the NPDES Coordinator's June 2, 2006 memo shall be met; 12)that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building Code and California Fire Code,2001 edition,as amended by the City of Burlingame; 13) that the proposed structures and the renovation of the existing brick building shall be constructed to California Building Code (CBC) standards, as adopted by the City of Burlingame. The CBC requires the determination of expected seismic shaking at the specific location of the project site.The design engineers for the on-site structures shall design the structure and foundations based on the results of the site-specific geotechnical study and the determination of the expected seismic shaking.The geotechnical report shall be prepared by a licensed professional and submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval prior to issuance of a building permit. Reinforcement of the historic structure shall be interior to the building and shall place a priority on retaining the exterior historic qualities of the building; 14)that prior to issuance of a building permit, a site-specific geotechnical report shall be prepared by a licensed professional for review and approval by the City. The report shall evaluate the potential for liquefaction hazards at the site and provide recommendations for hazard reduction in accordance with accepted industry standards. The report shall also evaluate the potential presence of expansive soils underlying the project site and provide recommendations for treatment in accordance with standard industry practices. Priority shall be given to treatments that do not affect the exterior of the historic brick structure; 15)that the project shall incorporate the following measures established by BAAQMD to minimize and control dust emissions generated during construction activities:All active construction areas shall be watered at least twice daily;All trucks hauling soil,sand,and other loose materials shall be covered with tarpaulins or other approved effective covers;All unpaved access roads, parking areas, and staging areas at the construction site shall be paved; otherwise, water or non-toxic soil stabilizers shall be applied to all unpaved access roads. In addition, paved access 3 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes April 24,2006 roads,parking areas,and staging areas shall be swept daily with a water sweeper,Hydro seed or apply non- toxic soil stabilizers to inactive construction areas(previously graded area inactive for ten days or more); Enclose,cover,water twice daily or apply non-toxic soil binders to exposed stockpiles(dirt,sand,etc.); Limit traffic speeds on unpaved roads or on-site to 15 miles per hour;Install sandbags or other erosion control measures to prevent silt runoff to public roadways,and replant vegetation in disturbed areas as quickly as possible; 16) that the applicant shall contribute to the cost of striping at the Chapin Avenue/Primrose intersection on the Chapin Avenue approach to create two lane;twenty percent of the cost of the work should be funded by the applicant;17) that prior to obtaining a building permit,a report shall be prepared by an independent arborist and submitted to the City Arborist for review and approval.The report shall identify the construction period protection measures to ensure that the redwood and elm trees will not be adversely affected;measures may include fencing around the trees and prohibition of trenching and intrusive fencing near the root system;and include a plan with the palette of proposed landscaping trees (no fruit and nut trees)and other landscaping as well as an irrigation system plan;18)that all trees on the site should be retained on-site to the extent feasible considering the proposed footprint of the addition;19)that prior to demolition or remodeling ofbuildings at the project site,a lead-based paint and asbestos-containing material survey shall be conducted by a certified professional and submitted to the City Planning Department.Identified loose and peeling lead-based paint and asbestos-containing materials shall be abated in accordance with applicable regulations.Federal and state construction worker safety regulations shall be followed during construction activities where lead and/or asbestos are known or suspected to be present. Other common hazardous materials that maybe encountered during demolition,such as mercury switches and air conditioning refrigerants,shall be handled and disposed of in accordance with DTSC hazardous waste regulations;20)that prior to construction at the site,a Contingency Plan(Plan)shall be prepared by a licensed professional and submitted to the City Planning Department.The Plan shall delineate monitoring activities to be implemented during excavation to detect volatile organic compounds.The Plan shall provide recommendations for construction worker training and personal protection in the event volatile organic compounds are encountered above specified action levels.If volatile organic corn pounds are identified,the Plan shall also specify notification requirements to San Mateo County Health Department,Environmental Health Division;21)that the project shall comply with the Construction and Demolition Debris Recycling Ordinance,which requires affected demolition,new construction,and alteration projects to submit a Waste Reduction plan and meet recycling requirements;any partial or full demolition of a structure,interior or exterior,shall require a demolition permit;22)that the following changes to the project shall be incorporated into the final design:(a)Move the proposed addition closer to the street so the setback is less than about 20 feet;or Maintain the proposed setback,but include a low seat wall or other design feature along the front property line with brick elements to respect the previous land uses where the courtyard was used to display plants for the garden center,previously occupying the site.The treatment at the street edge should reference the existing brick wall along the front of the property;(b)The transition of the proposed addition to the George Farrell House should be revised to make the roof treatment more compatible with the existing roofline;this could include reducing the height of the proposed addition;(c) The circular tube proposed ten feet up on the front facade should be either eliminated or be made of concrete;(d)Using the courtyard for active use(e.g.,retail or a caf6)should be considered;(e)A pervious pathway off the right front of the proposed addition and to the rear of the property is encouraged to allow pedestrians to access retail on Burlingame Avenue(through an opening in the wall).The two ehn trees should be retained at this time,and reconsidered for removal at a time when this area is needed for a driveway;(f)The reflecting pond at the entrance shall be included in the design only if it will not affect the foundation of the George Farrell House;(g)For the rear and side elevation,details should be added to break up the mass of the second floor windows and to make the entry more prominent from the rear;and(h)For the side elevation,concrete elements should be considered to break up the facade,similar to what is proposed on the rear elevation;and 23)that should any cultural resources or human remains be discovered during construction,all work shall be 4 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes April 24, 2006 halted until they are fully investigated by a professional accepted as qualified by the City Planner and the recommendations of the expert have been executed to the satisfaction of the City. The motion was seconded by C. Brownrigg. Chair Auran called for a voice vote on the motion to approve the Mitigated Negative Declaration and commercial design review for this project with the conditions in the staff report including those from the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Mitigation Monitoring Plan. The motion passed on a 6-0-1(C. Cauchi absent). The Chair noted that the Commission directed and the applicant agreed that the landscape plan shall be revised with tree protection measures added and a more detailed planting plan with species and container size, and that the plan shall be returned to the Planning Commission for FYI and accepted before the building permit is issued for this project. C. Osterling moved to recommend the Tentative and Final Parcel Map for the merger of the two parcels to the City Council for approval. The motion was seconded by C. Brownrigg. Chair Auran called for a voice vote on the motion to recommend the Tentative and Final Parcel Map to the City Council for approval. The motion passed on a 6-0-1 (C. Cauchi absent) voice vote. Appeal procedures were advised. This item concluded at 7:30 p.m. VI. STUDY ITEMS 1. 1529 ALBEMARLE WAY,ZONED R-1 —APPLICATION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS FOR AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE TO BE USED FOR RECREATION PURPOSES/SLEEPING QUARTERS WITH A FULL BATHROOM (ALLEN MENICUCCI, APPLICANT AND PROPERTY OWNER) PROJECT PLANNER: CATHERINE BARBER Plr. Barber presented a summary of the staff report and applicants request to now use this accessory structure for recreation and living purposes. Commissioners asked: • Have there been complaints about this property over the years? • Has been approved several times, the Planning Commission always includes a five year sunset, but not final approval, concerned about this pattern; • Would like to see staff craft a condition of approval that has no five year expiration but says that if there is an addition to the house or a building permit issued for $100,000 or more then the accessory structure must be demolished; • Has been there for 17 years now, part of the house; • Condition should be added that says if the house is altered the Planning Commission shall require the removal of the accessory structure; • Condition should be added that accessory structure shall not be used as a second dwelling unit; • The previous Planning Commission approved in 1994 because the property owner had an ailing wife and needed an exercise area, it was not for guests or others, was trying to help out the owner at that time, should be removed now; • Owner needs a better explanation of why the Planning Commission should allow use of structure to continue. 5 Agenda Item # 9c Meeting BURL®E Date: May 15, 2006 STAFF REPORT SUBMITTED BY Z—Pq &Owrlf*_� APPROVED BY � � TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL DATE: MAY 8, 2006 FROM: PUBLIC WORKS SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR APPROVAL FOR OUT OF STATE TRAINING FOR FLEET MECHANIC RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that Council approve out of state training for the Fleet Mechanic in Jacksonville, Florida. BACKGROUND: Currently the sewer and flood control maintenance staff utilizes the VACCON truck for relieving sewer system blockages and for cleaning the flood control facilities. The City will be acquiring another VACCON truck in order to meet the new requirements from the State to maintain the sewer system. The manufacturer of the VACCON truck is providing a free two-day class in Jacksonville, Florida for the Fleet Mechanic. The class will include training on the repair of the mechanical parts, engine mechanism and hydraulic system, as well as preventative maintenance. Boarding and lodging will be provided by the manufacturer and the only expense to the City is the airfare which is estimated to be $400. There are sufficient funds in the Vehicle Maintenance operating budget to cover this cost. yed M za, P.E. Assistant Public Works Director c: Doris Mortensen, City Clerk Larry Anderson, City Attorney SAA Public Works Directory\Staff Reports\Vaccoon Out-of-State Trainiing .doc CITY G BURLINGAME STAFF REPORT AGENDA ITEM# 9d QO,i° m FIRE DEPARTMENT MEETING DATE: 5/15/06 9 NnT[o� w[6 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council SUBMITTED BY: B' l Reilly, Fire Chief FROM: Fire Department APPROVED BY: _Vz�no /74�Iw SUBJECT: Modular Office Space for Fire Department—Resolut on Authorizing the Appropriation and Expenditure of$89,500 from the Contingency Reserve RECOMMENDATION: That Council approve a Resolution authorizing an appropriation and expenditure of$89,500 for modular office space necessary to consolidate the administrative offices of the Central County Fire Department. BACKGROUND: When the Central County Fire Department was first formed,we were using office space both in the Town of Hillsborough and the City of Burlingame. We are now in a position to consolidate the offices into one location at Fire Station#36 on Rollins Road in Burlingame. Doing so will improve our efficiency and provide Hillsborough with needed office space. There is a proposal in the City of Burlingame Facilities Master Plan to provide additional office space for the Fire Department but that is not likely to happen within at least the next five years. The project will add approximately 1000 square feet of modular office space on the parking lot at the rear of Station#36 behind the existing offices. This will consolidate our administrative functions and re- establish a conference room that is currently being used for office space. The estimated cost is $89,500. This includes the cost of the modular office building, utilities and communications, and purchasing some furniture. We intend to use as much of the existing furniture and equipment as possible. We expect to be in the modular offices for a minimum of five years. Our research has shown that it is less expensive to purchase the building compared to leasing if the use exceeds three years. CEQA STATUS: This project is Categorically Exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per Section 15303: Class 3(c), construction and location of limited numbers of new, small facilities or structures including(c) an office not exceeding 2500 square feet in floor area(10,000 SF in urbanized areas) where all necessary public services and facilities are available and the surrounding area is not environmentally sensitive. This project proposes placement of a 1056 SF modular building on the existing fire station site to be used as office space for department staff. The existing fire station is 5309 SF in size, so with the addition of the modular structure, the total site contains 6365 SF of floor area. FINANCIAL IMPACT: The cost to purchase and equip the modular office space is $89,500. Burlingame's 60% share is $53,700 and Hillsborough's 40% share is $35,800. Funds are appropriated from the General Fund Contingency Reserve. ATTACHMENTS: Central County Fire Department Office Relocation Budget A Resolution of the Burlingame City Council Authorizing the Appropriation and Expenditure of $89,500 for Modular Office Space for the Fire Department CCFD Office Relocation 4/27/2006 Burlingame Hillsborough Price Confirmed? PG&E $ 12,000.00 $ 7,200.00 $ 4,800.00 yes Sewer $ 2,000.00 $ 1 ,200.00 $ 800.00 yes Phone/Data $ 5,500.00 $ 3,300.00 $ 2,200.00 yes Furniture $ 10,000.00 $ 6,000.00 $ 4,000.00 no Modular Building $ 60,000.00 $ 36,000.00 $ 24,000.00 yes TOTAL: $ 89,500.00 $ 53,700.00 $ 35,800.00 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME AUTHORIZING TRANSFER OF $89,500 FROM THE CONTINGENCY RESERVE FUND TO THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND FOR PURCHASE OF MODULAR OFFICES FOR THE CENTRAL FIRE DEPARTMENT RESOLVED,by the City Council of the City of Burlingame: WHEREAS,the City maintains a Contingency Reserve Fund for unanticipated expenditures, and any transfers from this reserve must be approved by Council Resolution; and WHEREAS, the consolidation of fire services in the Central Fire Department allows the Department to consolidate administration of the Department at a single location; and WHEREAS, the most cost effective way to accomplish this co-location is to provide modular offices behind Fire Station 36 until such time as additional office space is built; and WHEREAS, pursuant to CEQA Regulations section 15303, the project consists of the construction and location of a new, small structure not exceeding 2,500 square feet in floor area and is therefore categorically exempt from CEQA, NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS RESOLVED AND ORDERED: 1. A transfer of$89,500 from the Contingency Reserve Fund to the 2005-2006 Capital Improvement Program for purchase and installation of modular office space is approved. MAYOR I,DORIS MORTENSEN,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 day of , 2006, and was adopted thereafter by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: CITY CLERK $2,234,392.84 Ck. No. 18055- 18597 Excludes Library Checks 18172-18204 RECOMMENDED FOR PAYMENT APPROVED FOR PAYMENT Payroll for April 2006 $2,569,000.66 Ck. No. 165262- 165475 INCLUDES ELECTRONIC FUNDS TRANSFERS PERS HEALTH PERS RETIREMENT FEDERAL 941 TAX STATE DISABILITY TAX STATE INCOME TAX PERS&ICMA DEFERRED COMP SECTION 125 DEDUCTION C � CD m m � a w � o � Cm— 3 m S:\FINEXCEL\MISCELLANEOUS\COUNCILCKS.XLS in 0 CITY OF BURLINGAME 05-05-2006 W A. R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 10 FUND RECAP - 05.06 NAME FUND AMOUNT GENERAL FUND 101 49,275.86 CENTRAL COUNTY FIRE 201 9,400.83 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS FUND 320 12,582.63 WATER CAPITAL PROJECT FUND 326 20,997.80 SEWER CAPITAL PROJECT FUND 327 47,410.07 WATER FUND 526 18,079.93 SEWER FUND 527 49,943.24 SOLID WASTE FUND 528 3,906.28 PARKING ENTERPRISE FUND 530 837.64 FACILITIES SERVICES FUND 619 3,129.65 EQUIPMENT SERVICES FUND 620 1,063.04 INFORMATION SERVICES FUND 621 973.86 FIRE MECHANIC SERVICES FUND 625 100.83 OTHER LOCAL GRANTS/DONATIONS 730 1,189.88 TRUST AND AGENCY FUND 731 2,685.95 UTILITY REVOLVING FUND 896 8,893.72 TOTAL FOR APPROVAL $230,471.21 HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL: THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE CLAIMS LISTED ON PAGES NUMBERED FROM 1 THROUGH 10 INCLUSIVE, AND/OR CLAIMS NUMBERED FROM 18482 THROUGH 18597 INCLUSIVE,TOTALING IN THE AMOUNT OF $230,471.21, HAVE BEEN CHECKED IN DETAIL AND APPROVED BY THE PROPER OFFICIALS, AND IN MY OPINION REPRESENT FAIR AND JUST CHARGES AGAINST THE CITY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THEIR RESPECTIVE AMOUNTS AS INDICATED THEREON. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, ..... . . ... ........... . ...I. . . ....... . . ./. ../. .. FINANCE DIRECTOR DATE APPROVED FOR PAYMENT ......... .. I... ........ . . .I.. . ...... .. ./.. ./... COUNCIL DATE CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 9 05/05/06 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 18593 TERRY NAGEL 26521 466. 14 TRAVEL & MEETINGS 466. 14 101 64100 250 18594 MARIA BOWER 26523 76.00 MISCELLANEOUS 76.00 101 36330 000 1890 18595 ALEX CHAN 26524 436.00 MISCELLANEOUS 158.00 101 36330 000 1782 MISCELLANEOUS 132.00 101 36330 000 1372 MISCELLANEOUS 146.00 101 36330 000 1646 18596 WENDY VOORSANGER 26525 100.00 MISCELLANEOUS 100.00 101 22593 18597 ROBERTO CASTILLO 26526 50.00 MISCELLANEOUS 50.00 101 22593 TOTAL $230,471 .21 � l CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 8 05/05/06 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Cheeks 18578 CINGULAR WIRELESS ATLYS 25777 609.19 COMMUNICATIONS 609.19 201 65200 160 18579 CINGULAR WIRELESS ATLYS 25778 248.21 COMMUNICATIONS 248.21 101 66100 160 18580 CINGULAR WIRELESS ATLYS 25792 104.98 COMMUNICATIONS 104.98 201 65200 160 18581 HASLER FINANCIAL SERVICES, LLC 25852 512.46 CITY HALL MAINTENANCE 512.46 621 64450 200 18582 MAYA TOGASHI 25940 60.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 60.00 101 68010 220 1644 18583 BRIAN STUBBS 26014 216.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 216.00 101 68010 220 1660 18584 IDVILLE 26029 105.75 OFFICE EXPENSE 105.75 101 64420 110 18585 IMPACT SCIENCES 26099 3,735.00 DEPOSIT REFUND 3,735.00 101 22590 18586 ALLIED OFFICE SUPPLIES 26138 711.80 OFFICE EXPENSE 211.93 101 65300 110 OFFICE EXPENSE 139.35 101 64150 110 MISC. SUPPLIES 93.19 101 66210 120 MISC. SUPPLIES 25.93 530 65400 120 OFFICE EXPENSE 241.40 621 64450 110 18587 CINGULAR WIRELESS ATLYS 26143 94.70 MISC. SUPPLIES 94.70 101 64150 120 18588 CINGULAR WIRELESS ATLYS 26144 35.22 OFFICE EXPENSE 35.22 101 64150 110 18589 IES LANGUAGE FOUNDATION 26293 2,147.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 2,147.00 101 68010 220 1349 18590 JOE DIODATI 26487 1,050.00 MISCELLANEOUS 1,050.00 101 22546 18591 CINGULAR WIRELESS 26519 - 1,045.91 COMMUNICATIONS 1,045.91 201 65200 160 18592 GSWAW 26520 240.24 SMALL TOOLS 240.24 526 69020 130 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 7 05/05/06 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 18562 FLORA ROBELET 24167 50.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 50.00 101 68010 220 1521 18563 ERIC GATTMAN 24169 206.40 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 206.40 101 68010 220 1521 18564 CINGULAR WIRELESS TITAN 24299 49.99 MISC. SUPPLIES 49.99 101 64150 120 18565 FASTLANE TEK INC. 24304 4,800.00 MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSE 4,800.00 526 69020 290 18566 SWRCB FEES 24588 718.00 OTHER AGENCY CONTRIBUTIONS 718.00 527 66530 270 18567 DE LAGE LANDEN 25057 438.02 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 414.94 101 65100 220 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 23.08 101 65150 220 18568 DOWNTOWN BURLINGAME IMPROVEMENT 25058 811 .71 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 811 .71 530 65400 220 18569 SCOTT 'S PPE RECON INC 25084 165.44 UNIFORMS AND EQUIPMENT 165.44 201 65200 140 18570 CATHY FOXHOVEN 25088 430.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 430.00 101 68010 220 1370 18571 GINA BALDRIDGE 25092 260.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 260.00 730 69583 220 18572 OFFICE DEPOT 25224 90.52 OFFICE EXPENSE 90.52 201 65200 110 18573 OFFICE DEPOT 25244 278.66 OFFICE EXPENSE 278.66 101 65100 110 18574 MARINA DULMAN 25330 150.00 MISCELLANEOUS 150.00 101 22593 18575 MERCY HIGH SCHOOL 25350 100.00 MISCELLANEOUS 100.00 101 22593 18576 CINGULAR WIRELESS 25731 742.01 UTILITY EXPENSE 742.01 896 20281 18577 CINGULAR WIRELESS 25775 119.54 COMMUNICATIONS 119.54 101 65100 160 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 6 05/05/06 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 18549 OFFICE DEPOT 23153 - 151.59 OFFICE EXPENSE 151.59 101 68010 110 1101 18550 CRAIG DILL 23171 50.00 TRAINING EXPENSE 50.00 527 66520 260 18551 OFFICE MAX 23306 286.87 OFFICE EXPENSE 64.03 101 68010 110 1101 OFFICE EXPENSE 156.54 101 66100 110 OFFICE EXPENSE 61.07 101 64200 110 OFFICE EXPENSE -32.48 101 68010 110 1101 MISC. SUPPLIES 37.71 101 66100 120 18552 ERLER AND KALINOWSKI,INC. 23531 15,359.20 PROFESSIONAL&SPECIALIZED S 2,979.34 326 80931 210 PROFESSIONAL&SPECIALIZED S 12,379.86 326 81480 210 18553 REFRIGERATION SUPPLIES DISTRIBUT 23639 83.40 MISC. SUPPLIES 83.40 619 64460 120 18554 BKF ENGINEERS 23641 47,410.07 PROFESSIONAL &SPECIALIZED S 768.00 327 81440 210 PROFESSIONAL&SPECIALIZED S 4,490.96 327 81150 210 PROFESSIONAL&SPECIALIZED S 42,151.11 327 81500 210 18555 SCS FIELD SERVICES 23727 2,795.00 PROFESSIONAL&SPECIALIZED S. 2,795.00 528 66600 210 18556 SBC/MCI 23728 8,151.71 UTILITY EXPENSE 8,151.71 896 20281 18557 KEITH MARTIN 23788 130.77 TRAINING EXPENSE 111.09 526 69020 260 SUPPLIES 6.45 620 15000 TRAVEL&MEETINGS 13.23 620 66700 250 18558 INDUSTRIAL PLUMBING SUPPLY 23857 209.08. MISC. SUPPLIES 209.08 619 64460 120 5170 18559 DEWEY SERVICES, INC. 23902 2,701.00 RAT CONTROL PROGRAM 2,701.00 527 66520 218 18560 UNIVERSAL BUILDING SERVICES 23941 410.04 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 410.04 619 64460 220 5110 18561 WINZLER&KELLY CONSULTING ENGIN 23992 1,324.31 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,324.31 326 80770 220 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 5 05/05/06 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 18533 H.V. CARTER CO. , INC. 20876 124.42 EQUIPMENT MAINT. 124.42 101 68020 200 2200 18534 LAWRENCE S. MOY 20954 1 ,311 .00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 11311 .00 101 68010 220 1762 18535 RENEE RAMSEY 21136 1 ,075.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1 ,075.00 1.01 68010 220 1331 18536 SPARTAN TOOL LLC 21329 231 .43 MISC. SUPPLIES 231 .43 527 66520 120 18537 CDW GOVERNMENT, INC. 21482 323.27 OFFICE EXPENSE 323.27 201 65200 110 18538 MANDEGO, INC. 21855 4, 167.99 MISC. SUPPLIES 4, 167.99 101 68010 120 1781 18539 MSM INC. 21856 915.09 MISC. SUPPLIES 915.09 527 66520 120 18540 CIRCLEPOINT 21986 2,852.80 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 2,852.80 326 80770 210 18541 TOWNE FORD SALES, INC. 22146 247.45 SUPPLIES 247.45 620 15000 18542 ROBERTS AND BRUNE 22178 159.30 MISC. SUPPLIES 159.30 526 69020 120 18543 ALLAN RIDLEY 22191 435.75 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 435.75 101 68010 220 1660 18544 BUSINESS 2000 INC 22326 10,950.00 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 10,950.00 320 81120 210 18545 TECHNOLOGY,ENGINEERING & CONSTRU 22435 760.00 GAS, OIL & GREASE 380.00 101 65100 201 MISC. SUPPLIES 380.00 620 66700 120 18546 COUNTY CLERK SAN MATEO COUNTY 22558 1 ,275.00 MISC. SUPPLIES 11275.00 326 80910 120 18547 MAXIMUS, INC 22746 6,950.00 MISCELLANEOUS 6,950.00 101 33900 18548 PENINSULA UNIFORM & EQUIPMENT 22899 313.76 UNIFORMS AND EQUIPMENT 313.76 101 65100 140 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 4 05/05/06 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 18519 HILLSBOROUGH RECREATION 18796 - 1,060.00 MISC. SUPPLIES 1,060.00 101 68010 120 1781 18520 BAY ALARM 18854 1,547.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 198.00 619 64460 220 5190 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 87.50 619 64460 220 5130 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 89.00 619 64460 220 5230 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 498.00 619 64460 220 5110 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 496.00 619 64460 220 5180 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 178.50 619 64460 220 5210 18521 ACCESS UNIFORMS&EMBROIDERY 18990 184.03 MISC. SUPPLIES 184.03 201 65500 120 18522 ANG NEWSPAPERS 19083 186.49 MISC. SUPPLIES 186.49 326 80910 120 18523 ARROWHEAD MOUNTAIN SPRING WATER 19330 51.23 MISC. SUPPLIES 51.23 620 66700 120 18524 BURTON'S FIRE, INC. 19366 55.20 FIRE APPARATUS MAINT. 55.20 201 65200 203 18525 POWER WASHING SERVICE 19564 1,111.28 PROFESSIONAL&SPECIALIZED S 1,111.28 528 66600 210 18526 FISHER DEVELOPMENT INC. 19576 300.00 DEPOSIT REFUNDS 300.00 101 22520 18527 PENINSULA CORRIDOR JOINT 20060 3,914.00 RENTS&LEASES 1,957.00 526 69020 180 RENTS&LEASES 1,957.00 527 66520 180 18528 GE CAPITAL 20216 379.75 OFFICE EXPENSE 94.93 101 68020 110 2100 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 284.82 101 68010 220 1101 18529 AFFINITEL COMMUNICATIONS 20246 220.00 COMMUNICATIONS 220.00 621 64450 160 18530 DAPPER TIRE CO., INC. 20464 364.68 SUPPLIES 364.68 620 15000 18531 SPRINT PCS 20724 44.06 COMMUNICATIONS 44.06 101 65150 160 18532 JEFF DOWD 20779 228.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 228.00 101 68010 220 1785 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 3 05/05/06 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 18506 CHIEF BILL REILLY 11568 3,382.01 MISC. SUPPLIES 20.60 201 65200 111 MISC. SUPPLIES 62.79 201 65200 120 SMALL TOOLS 210.50 201 65200 130 UNIFORMS AND EQUIPMENT 97.03 201 65200 140 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 295.14 201 65200 240 TRAVEL & MEETINGS 145.00 201 65200 250 TRAINING EXPENSE 185.00 201 65500 260 MISCELLANEOUS 81.07 731 22554 MISCELLANEOUS_ 2,284.88 731 22557 18507 WECO INDUSTRIES, INC. 11640 509.25 MISC. SUPPLIES 509.25 527 66520 120 18508 FORTE PRESS CORP. 13759 132.07 MISC. SUPPLIES 132.07 101 65100 120 18509 ALL CITY MANAGEMENT 15595 1,900.47 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,900.47 101 65100 220 18510 PENINSULA SPORTS OFFICIALS 15711 1,552.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,552.00 101 68010 220 1787 18511 HILTON, FARNKOPF & HOBSON 16656 1,204.21 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 1,204.21 526 69020 210 18512 MARTIN JOYCE 17485 8,490.00 MISCELLANEOUS 8,490.00 101 22546 18513 COLORPRINT 17497 56.83 MISC. SUPPLIES 56.83 526 69020 120 18514 HI-TECH EMERGENCY VEHICLE 17546 100.83 FIRE APPARATUS MAINT. 100.83 625 65213 203 18515 ACCURATE MAILINGS, INC 17623 1,790.16 MISC. SUPPLIES 1,217.43 526 69020 120 MISC. SUPPLIES 572.73 527 66520 120 18516 TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH 18419 3,153.83 TRAINING EXPENSE 3,153.83 201 65200 260 18517 RALF SINGER 18476 160.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 160.00 101 68010 220 1521 18518 VALLEY CREST TREE COMPANY 18713 929.88 MISC. SUPPLIES 929.88 730 69560 120 2300 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 2 05/05/06 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 18493 PUMP REPAIR SERVICE CO. 03197 7,675.66 PUMP EQUIPMENT REPAIR 7,675.66 526 69020 230 18494 DOROTHY RADYK 03235 752.50 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 752.50 101 68010 220 1644 18495 JULIE COHN 09122 246.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 246.00 101 68010 220 1644 18496 LIFE ASSIST 09392 87.68 SUPPLIES 87.68 201 65200 112 18497 SIERRA PACIFIC TURF SUPPLY 09459 1,334.72 MISC. SUPPLIES 1,334.72 101 68020 120 2200 18498 CALLANDER ASSOCIATES 09461 957.29 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 957.29 320 81090 210 18499 OLE'S 09626 . 1,481.72 FIRE APPARATUS MAINT. 1,481.72 201 65200 203 18500 ANA FITZGERALD 09975 516.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 516.00 101 68010 220 1646 18501 LEONA MORIARTY 09979 1,806.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,806.00 101 68010 220 1644 18502 BARKER BLUE REPROGRAPHICS 09990 675.34 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 675.34 320 81090 210 18503 ALERT DOOR SERVICE, INC. 10059 150.00 MISC. SUPPLIES 150.00 619 64460 120 5110 18504 AUGUST SUPPLY, INC 10256 1,050.67 MISC. SUPPLIES 1,050.67 201 65200 111 18505 LINDA FREITAS 11126 628.77 TRAVEL & MEETINGS 628.77 101 64250 250 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 1 05/05/06 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT *� Denotes Hand Written Checks 18482 * DOWNTOWN BURLINGAME IMPROVEMENT 25058 320.00 MISCELLANEOUS 320.00 731 22542 18483 WHITE CAP 01250 658.17 SMALL TOOLS 658.17 526 69020 130 18484 MATTHEW BENDER & CO., INC. 01312 326.72 TRAINING EXPENSE 326.72 101 65100 260 18485 CALIFORNIA PARK & RECREATION 01726 105.00 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 105.00 101 68010 240 1100 18486 VEOLIA WATER 02110 22,877.95 OTHER AGENCY CONTRIBUTIONS 22,877.95 527 66530 270 18487 EWING IRRIGATION PRODUCTS 02157 91.04 MISCELLANEOUS 91.04 101 68020 192 2200 18488 FEDEX 02160 27.99 POLICE--SUPPLIES 27.99 101 65100 126 18489 W.W. GRAINGER, INC. 02248 1,324.12 MISC. SUPPLIES 271.88 101 68020 120 2200 MISC. SUPPLIES 387.26 101 66210 120 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 664.98 619 64460 210 18490 GARY KAISER 02654 1,571.78 MISCELLANEOUS 1,571.78 101 65100 010 18491 MILLBRAE LUMBER CO. 02898 818.89 OFFICE EXPENSE 21.87 101 66210 110 MISC. SUPPLIES -42.78 101 66210 120 MISC. SUPPLIES 29.91 101 68020 120 2300 MISC. SUPPLIES 55.55 101 66210 120 BLDG. & GROUNDS MAINT. 4.94 101 68020 190 2200 SIDEWALK REPAIR EXPENSE 212.66 101 66210 219 STREET RESURFACING EXPENSE 398.22 101 66210 226 FIRE APPARATUS MAINT. 32.33 201 65200 203 MISC. SUPPLIES 41.04 527 66520 120 MISC. SUPPLIES 18.95 619 64460 120 5240 MISC. SUPPLIES 46.20 619 64460 120 18492 P. G. & E. 03054 19,369.75 GAS & ELECTRIC 19,369.75 527 66520 170 C v CITY OF BURLINGAME 04-27-2006 WARRANT REGI ST ER PAGE 10 FUND RECAP - 05-06 NAME FUND AMOUNT GENERAL FUND 101 66,285.05 PAYROLL REVOLVING FUND 130 14,877.68 CENTRAL COUNTY FIRE 201 25,883.71 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS FUND 320 41,839.09 WATER CAPITAL PROJECT FUND 326 1,096.88 SEWER CAPITAL PROJECT FUND 327 200,367.23 WATER FUND 526 18,281.71 SEWER FUND 527 252,873.95 PARKING ENTERPRISE FUND 530 25.18 SELF INSURANCE FUND 618 25,338.98 FACILITIES SERVICES FUND 619 8,563.18 EQUIPMENT SERVICES FUND 620 18,520.22 INFORMATION SERVICES FUND 621 9,112.75 OTHER LOCAL GRANTS/DONATIONS 730 1,578.86 TRUST AND AGENCY FUND 731 214,684.24 BURLINGAME TRAIN SHUTTLE PROGRAM 736 23,401.44 UTILITY REVOLVING FUND 896 40,323.88 TOTAL FOR APPROVAL $963,054.03 A HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL: THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE CLAIMS LISTED ON PAGES NUMBERED FROM 1 THROUGH 10 INCLUSIVE, AND/OR CLAIMS NUMBERED FROM 18359 THROUGH 18481 INCLUSIVE,TOTALING IN THE AMOUNT OF 8963,054.03, HAVE BEEN CHECKED IN DETAIL AND APPROVED BY THE PROPER OFFICIALS, AND IN MY OPINION REPRESENT FAIR AND JUST CHARGES AGAINST THE CITY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THEIR RESPECTIVE AMOUNTS AS INDICATED THEREON. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, .................................... .../.../... FINANCE DIRECTOR DATE APPROVED FOR PAYMENT .................................... .../.../... COUNCIL DATE CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 9 04/27/06 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT 4*' Denotes Hand Written Checks 18468 NATIONAL IMPRINT CORP 26505 166.98 MISCELLANEOUS •11.96 101 23611 MISC. SUPPLIES 178.94 101 65100 120 18469 CEMEX 26506 29.70 MISC. SUPPLIES 29.70 527 66520 120 18470 ELITE BACKGROUNDS INC. 26507 - 1,000.00 PERSONNEL EXAMINATIONS 1,000.00 101 64420 121 18471 KENNETH PLOTKIN 26508 28.00 MISCELLANEOUS 28.00 101 36330 000 1521 18472 TINA MARIE SCOTT 26509 1,201.00 MISCELLANEOUS 1,201.00 101 36330 000 1370 18473 VICTORIA BERGER 26510 64.00 MISCELLANEOUS 64.00 101 36330 000 1782 18474 LISA DEL PUERTO 26511 55.00 MISCELLANEOUS 55.00 101 36330 000 1890 18475 SHELLY SMITH 26512 90.00 - MISCELLANEOUS 90.00 101 36330 000 1660 16476 JULIE WILSON 26513 50.00 MISCELLANEOUS 50.00 101 22593 18477 LULUEMON ATHLETICA 26514 50.00 MISCELLANEOUS 50.00 101 22593 18478 EDWARD R BACON CO 26515 822.70 MISC. SUPPLIES 822.70 526 69020 120 18479 MORI CONSULTANTS 26516 1,800.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,800.00 320 79160 220 18480 MIKE ADAM 26517 174.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 174.00 101 68010 220 1788 18481 MR/MRS COLLINS 26518 364.00 MISCELLANEOUS 364.00 101 36330 000 1330 TOTAL $963,054.03 C � CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 8 04/27/06 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 18457 GRAPHICS ON THE EDGE 26096 807.85 , VEHICLE MAINT. 807.85 201 65200 202 18458 ALLIED OFFICE SUPPLIES 26138 493.53 OFFICE EXPENSE 27.67 101 68010 110 1101 OFFICE EXPENSE 3.48 101 64150 110 OFFICE EXPENSE 12.86 101 65300 110 OFFICE EXPENSE 19.93 101 64420 110 OFFICE EXPENSE 34.10 101 68010 110 1101 OFFICE EXPENSE 269.41 101 64420 110 OFFICE EXPENSE 3.47 101 64350 110 OFFICE EXPENSE 59.58 101 64150 110 MISC. SUPPLIES 17.45 101 66210 120 MISC. SUPPLIES 30.23 526 69020 120 OFFICE EXPENSE 15.35 527 66520 110 18459 STRUCTORIS INC. 26139 10,637.00 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 9,842.00 320 80790 210 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 795.00 619 64460 210 5110 18460 SOLEM AND ASSOCIATES 26196 11,650.00 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 11,650.00 320 80760 210 18461 CALIFORNIA POWER PARTNERS 26205 101,324.48 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 101,324.48 327 81510 220 18462 VISION INTERNET PROVIDERS INC 26294 9,000.00 CITY HALL MAINTENANCE 9,000.00 621 64450 220 18463 ANNE INGRAM 26314 77.00 MISCELLANEOUS 77.00 101 36330 000 1891 18464 DANCE FORCE 26351 - 3,275.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 3,275.00 101 68010 220 1646 18465 BOB DRON NARLEY DAVIDSON 26501 16,758.94 CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 16,758.94 620 66700 800 18466 CYGANY INC 26503 72.00 MISCELLANEOUS -4.95 101 23611 SMALL TOOLS 76.95 101 68020 130 2200 18467 DAVID CLARKSON 26504 9.64 MISCELLANEOUS 9.64 526 22502 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 7 04/27/06 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 18442 HONEYWELL 24546 740.01 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 740.01 619 64460 210 5240 18443 AETNA 24760 2,948.32 MISCELLANEOUS 271.30 130 20028 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 2,677.02 130 20022 18444 THE HARTFORD PRIORITY ACCOUNTS 24796 5,166.26 MISCELLANEOUS 989.15 130 20025 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 4,177.11 130 20021 18445 CRESCENT CREATIVE 25017 - 775.00 OFFICE EXPENSE 775.00 101 64200 110 18446 SBC LONG DISTANCE 25033 86.24 UTILITY EXPENSE 86.24 896 20281 18447 DOWNTOWN BURLINGAME IMPROVEMENT 25058 16,721.26 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 16,721.26 320 80480 220 18448 CATHY FOXHOVEN 25088 763.50 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 709.50 101 68010 220 1646 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 54.00 101 68010 220 1644 18449 JESSE MOORE 25104 110.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 110.00 101 68010 220 1785 18450 SAN MATEO COUNTY POLICE CHIEFS 25216 3,500.00 TRAINING EXPENSE 3,500.00 101 65100 260 18451 OFFICE DEPOT 25224 62.24 OFFICE EXPENSE 62.24 201 65200 110 18452 OFFICE DEPOT 25244 135.01 OFFICE EXPENSE 135.01 101 65100 110 18453 PAUL CLAY 25282 87.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 87.00 101 68010 220 1788 18454 ROCHE GEORGE 25323 232.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 232.00 101 68010 220 1788 16455 NETVERSANT SILICON VALLEY 25422 300.00 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 300.00 619 64460 210 5270 18456 OFFICE DEPOT 25488 34.46 OFFICE EXPENSE 34.46 101 64200 110 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 6 04/27/06 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hard Written Checks 18429 BKF ENGINEERS 23641 1,737.79 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 1,737.79 327 81330 210 18430 JANNETTE GREER 23769 108.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 108.00 101 68010 220 1648 18431 SFPUC WATER QUALITY BUREAU 23846 1,950.00 MISCELLANEOUS 1,950.00 526 69020 233 18432 DEWEY SERVICES, INC. 23902 430.00 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 70.00 619 64460 210 5120 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 70.00 619 64460 210 5110 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 55.00 619 64460 210 5130 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 55.00 619 64460 210 5150 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 55.00 619 64460 210 5160 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 70.00 619 64460 210 5180 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 55.00 619 64460 210 5170 18433 UNIVERSAL BUILDING SERVICES 23941 672.66 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 319.22 619 64460 220 5110 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 84.39 619 64460 220 5190 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 47.68 619 64460 220 5130 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 221.37 619 64460 220 5180 18434 C.W. ROEN CO. 24474 79,075.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 79,075.00 327 79480 220 18435 CENTRAL COUNTY FIREFIGHTERS FUND 24518 4,485.00 MISCELLANEOUS 4,485.00 130 20016 18436 CENTRAL COUNTY FIREFIGHTERS FUND 24519 64.00 UNION DUES 64.00 130 21080 18437 BURLINGAME POLICE ADMINISTRATION 24520 180.00 MISCELLANEOUS 180.00 130 20024 18438 BURLINGAME POLICE OFFICERS ASSN 24521 580.00 MISCELLANEOUS 580.00 130 20024 18439 C.L.E.A. 24523 643.50 MISCELLANEOUS 643.50 130 20026 18440 TEAMSTERS #856 24526 490.00 UNION DUES 490.00 130 21091 18441 TEAMSTERS UNION LOCAL 856 24528 320.60 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 5.52 130 21015 MISCELLANEOUS 315.08 130 21092 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 5 04/27/06 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 18415 MR/MRS MORI 22209 110.00 MISCELLANEOUS 110.00 101 36330 000 1890 18416 NORTH AMERICAN SPORTS MANAGEMENT 22382 1 ,200.00 MISC. SUPPLIES 11200.00 101 68010 120 1785 18417 CSG CONSULTANTS 22465 31230.00 MISCELLANEOUS 760.00 201 35221 000 7100 MISCELLANEOUS 2,470.00 201 35220 000 7100 18418 PARKING COMPANY OF AMERICA 22500 21 ,534.64 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 15,267.71 736 64571 220 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 6,266.93 736 64572 220 18419 COUNTY OF SAN MATEO 22620 19,661 .75 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 19,661 .75 201 65200 220 18420 SAN MATEO REGIONAL NETWORK, INC. 22759 435.00 UTILITY EXPENSE 435.00 896 20281 18421 ATHENS ADMINISTRATORS 22851 10, 122.00 CLAIMS ADJUSTING SERVICES 10, 122.00 618 64520 225 18422 OFFICE DEPOT 23153 259.77 OFFICE EXPENSE 259.77 101 68010 110 1101 18423 CYBERNET CONSULTING, INC. 23234 2,812.50 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 787.50 320 79400 210 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 1 ,096.88 326 79400 210 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 928. 12 327 79400 210 18424 WILCO SUPPLY 23333 114.31 MISC. SUPPLIES 114.31 619 64460 120 5240 18425 THE PRACTICAL SOLUTIONS GROUP 23367 1 , 120.00 TRAINING EXPENSE 300.00 101 66100 260 TRAINING EXPENSE 820.00 526 69020 260 18426 LIBERTY FLAG AND SPECIALTY CO 23402 206.95 MISCELLANEOUS -16.01 101 23611 MISC. SUPPLIES 222.96 101 65100 120 18427 MCMASTER-CARR SUPPLY CO. 23611 165.90 MISC. SUPPLIES 103.50 619 64460 120 MISC. SUPPLIES 62.40 619 64460 120 5240 18428 PETERSON 23633 17.27 SUPPLIES 17.27 620 15000 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 4 04/27/06 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 18402 PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY 19027 261.65 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 261.65 201 65200 220 18403 ARROWHEAD MOUNTAIN SPRING WATER 19330 625.25 OFFICE EXPENSE 7.88 101 64200 110 OFFICE EXPENSE 89.75 101 64250 110 MISC. SUPPLIES 7.87 101 64350 120 MISC. SUPPLIES 7.88 101 64420 120 MISC. SUPPLIES 7.88 101 64150 120 MISC. SUPPLIES 391.24 201 65200 111 OFFICE EXPENSE 112.75 621 64450 110 18404 PENINSULA CORRIDOR JOINT 20060 1,866.80 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,866.80 736 64570 220 18405 RACQUET SMITH 20339 2,241.60 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 2,241.60 101 68010 220 1782 18406 SAN MATEO COUNTY SHERIFF'S AREA 20366 936.00 PRISONER EXPENSE 936.00 101 65100 291 18407 LONGS DRUGS 20453 11.63 POLICE INVESTIGATION EXPENSE 11.63 101 65100 292 18408 JEFF DOWD 20779 114.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 114.00 101 68010 220 1785 18409 DELL MARKETING L.P. 20900 3,973.83 MISC. SUPPLIES 3,973.83 101 64400 120 18410 CIR 21211 679.25 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 679.25 527 66520 220 18411 DU-ALL SAFETY 21613 3,742.10 TRAINING EXPENSE 1,247.37 101 66210 260 TRAINING EXPENSE 1,247.36 526 69020 260 TRAINING EXPENSE 1,247.37 527 66520 260 18412 TURBO DATA SYSTEMS, INC. 21767 7,537.46 MISCELLANEOUS 7,537.46 101 37010 18413 TOWNE FORD SALES, INC. 22146 225.45 SUPPLIES 225.45 620 15000 18414 ROBERTS AND BRUNE 22178 174.28 MISC. SUPPLIES 174.28 526 69020 120 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 3 04/27/06 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 18387 ROYAL WHOLESALE ELECTRIC 14855 908.40 MISC. SUPPLIES 908.40 619 64460 120 5141 18388 DON E. GIOVANNETTI 15229 87.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 87.00 101 68010 220 1788 18389 PENINSULA ASA 15701 754.00 MISC. SUPPLIES 754.00 101 68010 120 1787 18390 JOE MCCLAIN 16066 42.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 42.00 101 68010 220 1787 18391 CON BROSNAN 16126 1,400.00 DEPOSIT REFUNDS 1,400.00 101 22520 18392 MOSS RUBBER & EQUIPMENT CORP. 16225 321.34 MISC. SUPPLIES 321.34 526 69020 120 18393 COLORPRINT 17497 577.41 OFFICE EXPENSE 93.53 101 64250 110 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 483.88 320 80480 220 18394 PENINSULA DIGITAL IMAGING 17534 633.80 MISC. SUPPLIES 554.45 320 81120 120 MISC. SUPPLIES 79.35 527 66520 120 18395 LEE & ASSOCIATES 17568 285.00 MISCELLANEOUS 285.00 731 22557 18396 GORDON E. MC CLINTOCK 17702 3,196.85 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 3,196.85 618 64520 210 18397 STADAM & ASSOCIATES 18275 58.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 58.00 101 68010 220 1788 18398 MANUEL BROS INC 18386 85.00 MISCELLANEOUS 85.00 526 22502 18399 DEESIGNS 18388 2,144.38 MISC. SUPPLIES 2,144.38 526 69020 120 18400 STATE OF CA OFFICE OF EMERGENCY 18857 1,425.00 TRAINING EXPENSE 1,425.00 201 65500 260 18401 PREFERRED ALLIANCE 19025 211.20 PERSONNEL EXAMINATIONS 211.20 101 64420 121 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 2 04/27/06 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 18373 SAN MATEO COUNTY CONVENTION & 03431 214,399.24 MISCELLANEOUS 214,399.24 731 22587 18374 CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO 03483 37,857.75 OTHER AGENCY CONTRIBUTIONS 37,857.75 527 66530 270 18375 U S POSTAL SERVICE 03821 3,000.00 MISCELLANEOUS 31000.00 101 64250 114 18376 WEST GROUP PAYMENT CTR. 03964 503.29 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 503.29 101 64350 210 18377 JEAN BUCKS 09019 271.50 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 271.50 101 68010 220 1644 18378 B.E.I. ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES 09072 106.46 MISC. SUPPLIES 59.48 619 64460 120 5140 MISC. SUPPLIES 16.02 619 64460 120 5150 MISC. SUPPLIES 30.96 619 64460 120 18379 POM INC. 09248 25.18 EQUIPMENT MAINT. 25.18 530 65400 200 18380 ABAG - LIABILITY 09518 12,020.13 INSURANCE PREMIUMS 12,020.13 618 64520 602 18381 LEE STAMBOLIS 11361 87.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 87.00 101 68010 220 1788 18382 CAMINO REAL PET CLINIC 11577 70.00 MISC. SUPPLIES 70.00 101 65100 120 18383 SCHWAAB, INC. 11684 75.95 OFFICE EXPENSE 75.95 101 64250 110 18384 STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION 11707 192.00 OFFICE EXPENSE 1.00 101 67500 110 MISC. SUPPLIES 114.00 101 67500 120 LIBRARY--RECORDS AND CASSETT 27.00 101 67500 125 LIBRARY--BOOKS AND MAPS 47.00 101 67500 129 BLDG. & GROUNDS MAINT. 3.00 101 67500 190 18385 BOETHING TREELAND FARMS, INC. 13743 1,578.86 MISC. SUPPLIES 1,578.86 730 69560 120 2300 18386 SENSUS METERING SYSTEMS 14144 10,676.78 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 10,676.78 526 69020 220 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 1 04/27/06 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 18359 ALPINE AWARDS, INC. 01052 23.27 TRAINING EXPENSE 23.27 527 66520 260 18360 ALAN STEEL & SUPPLY CO. 01059 1,190.75 SUPPLIES 11190.75 620 15000 18361 BRIDGES TIRE & WHEEL SERVICE 01403 315.91 SUPPLIES 315.91 620 15000 18362 L. N. CURTIS & SONS 02027 43.98 UNIFORMS AND EQUIPMENT 43.98 201 65200 140 18363 VEOLIA WATER 02110 230,243.75 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 17,301.84 327 79480 210 BLDG. & GROUNDS MAINT. 4,516.05 527 66530 190 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 202,286.00 527 66530 220 CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 6,139.86 527 66530 800 18364 WATER/FINANCE PETTY CASH 02184 2,641.15 MISCELLANEOUS 2,641.15 896 20282 18365 GRANITE ROCK COMPANY 02261 260.47 STREET RESURFACING EXPENSE 260.47 101 66210 226 18366 MACTEC ENGINEERING 02365 11.90 SMALL TOOLS 11.90 620 66700 130 18367 K & W DISCOUNT LIGHTING & SUPP 02645 4,330.44 MISC. SUPPLIES 1,561.99 619 64460 120 5120 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 1,380.63 619 64460 210 5141 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 1,387.82 619 64460 210 5120 18368 P. G. & E. 03054 37,161.49 UTILITY EXPENSE 37,161.49 896 20280 18369 AT&T 03080 84.95 COMMUNICATIONS 84.95 101 65100 160 18370 DON PLAGMANN 03172 87.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 87.00 101 68010 220 1788 18371 CITY OF SAN MATEO 03366 24,060.55 MISCELLANEOUS 17,250.00 101 66100 173 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 6,810.55 101 66100 220 18372 INFORMATION SERVICES DEPT. 03378 3,826.84 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 3,826.84 101 65100 220 • CITY OF BURLINGAME 04-21-2006 W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 15 FUND RECAP - 05-06 NAME FUND AMOUNT GENERAL FUND 101 87,445.97 PAYROLL REVOLVING FUND 130 2,061.43 CENTRAL COUNTY FIRE 201 4,826.36 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS FUND 320 9,424.20 WATER CAPITAL PROJECT FUND 326 585,953.19 SEWER CAPITAL PROJECT FUND 327 3,140.00 WATER FUND 526 26,211.95 SEWER FUND 527 14,062.67 SOLID WASTE FUND 528 35.64 PARKING ENTERPRISE FUND 530 2,708.12 SELF INSURANCE FUND 618 12,572.14 FACILITIES SERVICES FUND 619 2,979.38 EQUIPMENT SERVICES FUND 620 5,098.14 INFORMATION SERVICES FUND 621 34,210.42 FIRE MECHANIC SERVICES FUND 625 7,484.41 OTHER LOCAL GRANTS/DONATIONS 730 2,221.30 TRUST AND AGENCY FUND 731 13,312.96 UTILITY REVOLVING FUND 896 199.86 TOTAL FOR APPROVAL $807,948.14 Vn t D K. HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL: THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE CLAIMS LISTED ON PAGES NUMBERED FROM 1 THROUGH 15 INCLUSIVE, AND/OR CLAIMS NUMBERED FROM 18205 THROUGH 18358 INCLUSIVE,TOTALING IN THE AMOUNT OF$807,948.14, HAVE BEEN CHECKED IN DETAIL AND APPROVED BY THE PROPER OFFICIALS, AND IN MY OPINION REPRESENT FAIR AND JUST CHARGES AGAINST THE CITY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THEIR RESPECTIVE AMOUNTS AS INDICATED THEREON. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, .................................... .../. ./. .................... . .. FINANCE DIRECTOR DATE APPROVED FOR PAYMENT .................................... .../. ./. .. • COUNCIL DATE CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 14 04/21/06 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT '* ' Denotes Hand Written Checks 18358 SUSAN CROWLEY 26500 28.00 MISCELLANEOUS 28.00 101 36330 000 1891 TOTAL $8071948. 14 010 v CITY OF BURLINGAME WARRANT REGI ST ER - PAGE 13 04/21/06 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT *' Denotes Hand Written Checks 18342 ANDRES HASKELL 26483 350.00 MISCELLANEOUS 350.00 101 22525 18343 AGUILAR AND SONS 26484 1,232.00 DEPOSIT REFUNDS 1,232.00 101 22520 18344 WILKINSON CONSTRUCTION 26485 300.00 DEPOSIT REFUNDS 300.00 101 22520 18345 TONY LEUNG 26486 3,150.00 DEPOSIT REFUNDS 3,150.00 101 22520 18346 JOE DIOOATI 26487 1,400.00 DEPOSIT REFUNDS 1,400.00 101 22520 18347 JEANNIE&STEPHEN TRUST 26488 - 30.00 MISCELLANEOUS 30.00 101 36330 000 1521 18348 KRISTI BLISS 26489 49.00 MISCELLANEOUS 49.00 101 36330 000 1890 18349 MR./MRS. HUANG 26490 132.00 MISCELLANEOUS 132.00 101 36330 000 1661 18350 MARINA PERRY 26491 41.00 MISCELLANEOUS 41.00 101 36330 000 1646 18351 JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES 26492 200.00 MISCELLANEOUS 200.00 101 22593 18352 MARTHA LOFTIS 26493 98.00 MISCELLANEOUS 98.00 101 36330 000 1890 18353 CHRISTINE GNOS 26494 49.00 MISCELLANEOUS 49.00 101 36330 000 1890 18354 LYNETTE POZZO 26495 49.00 MISCELLANEOUS 49.00 101 36330 000 1890 18355 PHILLIP TOY 26496 49.00 MISCELLANEOUS 49.00 101 36330 000 1890 18356 KIMBERLY TESTA 26497 49.00 MISCELLANEOUS 49.00 101 36330 000 1890 18357 NANCY R. BLACHMAN 26499 98.00 MISCELLANEOUS 98.00 101 36330 000 1890 CITY OF BURLINGAME WARRANT REG I ST ER PAGE 12 04/21/06 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 18327 IMPACT SCIENCES 26099 8,008.17 DEPOSIT REFUND 81008. 17 101 22590 18328 ALLIED OFFICE SUPPLIES 26138 448.32 OFFICE EXPENSE 129.57 101 65300 110 OFFICE EXPENSE 64.73 101 65100 110 MISC. SUPPLIES 127.01 101 66210 120 MISC. SUPPLIES 127.01 526 69020 120 18329 V&A CONSULTING ENGINEERS 26234 1 ,820.00 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 1 ,820.00 327 81440 210 18330 GOLDFARB LIPMAN ATTORNEYS 26325 2,528.00 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 2,528.00 101 64350 210 18331 AUSTINE QUIEN 26471 210.00 MISCELLANEOUS 200.00 101 22593 MISCELLANEOUS 10.00 101 36330 000 1213 18332 LISA KARSON 26472 150.00 MISCELLANEOUS 150.00 101 22593 18333 OFFICE OF THE SHERRIF 26474 471 .00 TRAINING EXPENSE 471 .00 101 65100 260 18334 BILL FLOWERDAY 26475 255.00 TRAVEL & MEETINGS 255.00 527 66520 250 18335 RANDALL HAYES 26476 238.00 TRAVEL & MEETINGS 238.00 527 66520 250 18336 CALIFORNIA MUNICIPAL REVENUE & T 26477 50.00 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 50.00 101 64250 240 18337 PRESERVATION BOOKS 26478 65.20 MISC. SUPPLIES 65.20 101 64400 120 18338 CAPITAL RUBBER CO LTD 26479 715.95 MISC. SUPPLIES 715.95 526 69020 120 18339 SECURITY METRICS 26480 99.95 BANKING SERVICE FEES 99.95 101 64250 120 18340 DISCOUNT PLUMBING 26481 300.00 DEPOSIT REFUNDS 300.00 101 22520 18341 JEFFREY SHORT 26482 150.00 DEPOSIT REFUNDS 150.00 101 22520 CITY OF BURLINGAME WARRANT REG 1 ST ER PAGE 11 04/21/06 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 18312 ELIZABETH WHITTEMORE 24860 115.00 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 115.00 130 20015 18313 GINA FORNESI 24903 4,800,00 DEPOSIT REFUNDS 4,800.00 101 22520 18314 BAY CITIES DRIVING SCHOOL 25220 535.50 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 535.50 101 68010 220 1422 18315 OFFICE DEPOT 25224 45.45 OFFICE EXPENSE 45.45 201 65200 110 18316 MICHAEL VONADA 25235 100.00 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 100.00 130 20060 18317 OFFICE DEPOT 25244 84.79 OFFICE EXPENSE 3.49 101 65100 110 OFFICE EXPENSE 33.92 101 65150 110 OFFICE EXPENSE 30.42 101 65100 110 EQUIPMENT MAINT. 16.96 530 65400 200 18318 TES 25256 245.85 MISC. SUPPLIES 245.85 527 66520 120 18319 VIRG CRISTOBAL 25287 175.50 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 175.50 101 68010 220 1660 18320 CINTAS FIRST AID&SAFETY 25729 30.29 TRAINING EXPENSE 30.29 101 68020 260 2200 18321 KATHLEEN VON MAYRHAUSER 25771 195.00 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 195.00 130 20015 18322 WELLS FARGO FINANCIAL LEASING 25820 153.22 RENTS&LEASES 153.22 526 69020 180 18323 TONY LEUNG 25821 1,020.00 MISCELLANEOUS 1,020.00 101 22525 18324 ED BARTON 25850 375.45 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 375.45 130 20060 18325 BASELINE ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTIN 25885 4,469.81 DEPOSIT REFUND 4,469.81 101 22590 18326 GRAPHICS ON THE EDGE 26096 2,693.55 VEHICLE MAINT. 2,693.55 201 65200 202 CITY OF BURLINGAME WARRANT REGI ST ER PAGE 10 04/21/06 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 18310 I.M.P.A.C. GOVERNMENT SERVICES 24752 13,329.22 MISCELLANEOUS 378.00 101 64150 031 OFFICE EXPENSE 23.79 101 66100 110 OFFICE EXPENSE 21.87 101 67500 110 OFFICE EXPENSE 148.98 101 65100 110 OFFICE EXPENSE 394.32 101 66210 110 OFFICE EXPENSE 36.79 101 64420 110 OFFICE EXPENSE 90.93 101 64150 110 MISC. SUPPLIES 30.18 101 68020 120 2200 MISC. SUPPLIES 88.49 101 66100 120 MISC. SUPPLIES 64.93 101 68010 120 1101 MISC. SUPPLIES 148.98 101 65100 120 MISC. SUPPLIES 702.36 101 68010 120 1101 MISC. SUPPLIES 525.00 101 68010 120 1423 MISC. SUPPLIES 682.75 101 67500 120 MISC. SUPPLIES 145.34 101 68010 120 1330 MISC. SUPPLIES 466.83 101 68010 120 1521 MISC. SUPPLIES 71.33 101 64100 120 LIBRARY--BOOKS AND MAPS 274.45 101 67500 129 SMALL TOOLS 285.36 101 68020 130 2200 SMALL TOOLS 189.41 101 65300 130 BLDG. & GROUNDS MAINT. 66.14 101 67500 190 MISCELLANEOUS 500.00 101 68020 192 2200 EQUIPMENT MAINT. 186.95 101 65100 200 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 856.80 101. 68010 220 1782 MISCELLANEOUS 25.94 101 67500 235 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 126.00 101 66100 240 TRAVEL & MEETINGS 738.50 101 68010 250 1101 TRAVEL & MEETINGS 79.72 101 64150 250 TRAVEL & MEETINGS 625.40 101 68010 250 1101 TRAVEL & MEETINGS 37.58 101 69537 250 TRAVEL & MEETINGS 649.92 101 68020 250 2100 TRAVEL & MEETINGS 30.76 101 68010 250 1101 TRAVEL & MEETINGS 260.00 101 67500 251 TRAINING EXPENSE 120.00 101 68010 260 TRAINING EXPENSE 498.78 101 64250 260 TRAINING EXPENSE 275.00 101 67500 260 POLICE INVESTIGATION EXPENSE 43.25 101 65100 292 MISCELLANEOUS 560.69 101 68010 400 1101 TRAINING EXPENSE 330.53 526 69020 260 TRAVEL & MEETINGS 1,365.00 527 66520 250 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 338.00 620 66700 210 MISC. SUPPLIES 417.87 730 69546 120 MISC. SUPPLIES 394.63 730 69533 120 MISC. SUPPLIES 31.67 730 69583 120 18311 THE COHEN GROUP 24776 3,061.36 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 3,061.36 320 76010 210 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 9 04/21/06 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 18306 NELSON NUGENT 24295 250.46 TRAVEL & MEETINGS 250.46 527 66520 250 18307 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 24466 204.65 MISC. SUPPLIES 46.06 619 64460 120 MISC. SUPPLIES 158.59 619 64460 120 5141 18308 KENNEDY/JENKS CONSULTANTS 24570 23,299.97 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 23,299.97 326 80950 210 18309 DIAMOND SECURITY SOLUTIONS 24659 75.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 75.00 619 64460 220 5121 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 8 04/21/06 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 18292 ERLER AND KALINOWSKI , INC. 23531 11 ,909. 16 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 9,539.58 326 81480 210 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 2,369.58 326 80931 210 18293 LIEBERT GLOBAL SERVICES 23551 661 .00 CITY HALL MAINTENANCE 661 .00 621 64450 200 18294 BANK OF NEW YORK 23553 2,962.00 BANK TRUSTEE SERVICES 2,962.00 527 66530 763 18295 AT&T 23661 23.82 COMMUNICATIONS 23.82 621 64450 160 18296 SBC/MCI 23728 84.17 COMMUNICATIONS 84. 17 621 64450 160 18297 KEITH MARTIN 23788 106.27 OFFICE EXPENSE 57.34 527 66520 110 MISC. SUPPLIES 21 .64 527 66520 120 TRAVEL & MEETINGS 14.95 527 66520 250 TRAVEL & MEETINGS 3.00 620 66700 250 TRAINING EXPENSE 9.34 620 66700 260 18298 DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 23905 1 ,075.00 MISCELLANEOUS 1 ,075.00 101 23620 18299 DUNBAR ARMORED 23925 2,993.71 BANKING SERVICE FEES 548.70 101 64250 120 MISC. SUPPLIES 2,445.01 530 65400 120 18300 CHOICE POINT BUSINESS AND GOVERN 23935 250.00 POLICE INVESTIGATION EXPENSE 250.00 101 65100 292 18301 UNIVERSAL BUILDING SERVICES 23941 182.45 MISC. SUPPLIES 128.80 101 68010 120 1114 MISC. SUPPLIES 53.65 101 68010 120 1111 18302 NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS 23946 36.35 COMMUNICATIONS 36.35 101 65300 160 18303 ABE KIRSCHENBAUM 24136 500.00 TRAVEL & MEETINGS 500.00 619 64460 250 18304 DOUG BELL 24189 65.84 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 65.84 320 80520 210 18305 CALIFORNIA WATER SERVICE COMPANY 24249 675.00 MISCELLANEOUS 675.00 526 69020 233 1 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 7 04/21/06 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT *� Denotes Hand Written Checks 18277 BURLINGAME GOLF CENTER 22582 590.95 , GAS&ELECTRIC 590.95 101 68010 170 1286 18278 JOHN KAMMEYER 22612 400.00 MISCELLANEOUS 400.00 731 22554 18279 JIM KELLY 22703 627.16 TRAVEL&MEETINGS 627.16 101 66100 250 18280 SAN MATEO REGIONAL NETWORK, INC. 22759 300.00 MISCELLANEOUS 300.00 731 22554 18281 CALIFORNIA NEVADA SECTION, AWWA 22787 205.00 PROFESSIONAL&SPECIALIZED S 205.00 101 66100 210 18282 SAN MATEO DAILY JOURNAL 22804 200.00 PUBLICATIONS&ADVERTISING 200.00 101 64420 150 18283 LANDS' END, INC. 22854 61.04 OFFICE EXPENSE 61.04 101 64400 110 18284 QUALITY LANDSCAPE AND CONCRETE 22934 3,200.00 DEPOSIT REFUNDS 3,200.00 101 22520 18285 MIKE COFFEY 23009 1,250.00 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 1,250.00 130 20015 18286 OFFICE DEPOT 23153 80.83 OFFICE EXPENSE 80.83 101 68010 110 1101 18287 OFFICE MAX 23306 517.56 OFFICE EXPENSE 112.28 101 66100 110 OFFICE EXPENSE 223.66 101 68010 110 1101 MISC. SUPPLIES 105.76 101 66100 120 OFFICE EXPENSE 75.86 621 64450 110 18288 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC. 23436 1,573.15 CITY HALL MAINTENANCE 1,573.15 621 64450 200 18289 TAMMY MAK 23445 419.00 PROFESSIONAL&SPECIALIZED S 419.00 101 64420 210 18290 PACIFIC PARKING SYSTEMS, INC. 23462 214.95 EQUIPMENT MAINT. 214.95 530 65400 200 18291 ICE CENTER OF SAN MATEO 23512 873.60 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 873.60 101 68010 220 1762 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 6 04/21/06 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 18262 AARONSON, DICKERSON, COHN & 20798 1 ,600.00 MISCELLANEOUS 11600.00 731 22557 18263 QUICK MIX CONCRETE 21140 649.09 MISC. SUPPLIES 649.09 101 66210 120 18264 THYSSENKRUPP ELEVATOR-042 21240 233.56 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 233.56 619 64460 220 5130 18265 DU-ALL SAFETY 21613 5,672.75 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 1 ,900.00 101 64420 210 TRAINING EXPENSE 1 ,257.58 101 66210 260 TRAINING EXPENSE 1 ,257.59 526 69020 260 TRAINING EXPENSE 11257.58 527 66520 260 18266 RICOH CORPORATION 21630 118.96 OFFICE EXPENSE 118.96 101 68010 110 1101 18267 WESTERN HIGHWAY PRODUCTS, INC. 21680 24.57 TRAFFIC CONTROL MATERIALS 24.57 101 66210 222 18268 CHRISSY HOLMES 21723 153.75 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 153.75 101 68010 220 1644 18269 RON RICKMAN 21880 237.00 TRAVEL & MEETINGS 237.00 527 66520 250 18270 CIRCLEPOINT 21986 2,719. 15 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 2,719. 15 320 81350 210 18271 CRANE CERTIFICATION CO 22007 975.00 TRAINING EXPENSE 975.00 527 66520 260 18272 TOWNE FORD SALES, INC. 22146 461 .62 VEHICLE MAINT. 207.37 201 65200 202 SUPPLIES 254.25 620 15000 18273 ROBERTS AND BRUNE 22178 4,797.21 MISC. SUPPLIES 4,797.21 526 69020 120 18274 YEV PHILOPOVITCH 22217 17,738.00 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 17,738.00 326 80770 210 18275 ANDERSON PACIFIC ENGINEERING CON 22387 428,510.06 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 4281510.06 326 80950 220 18276 OTTO MILLER 22399 2,000.00 DEPOSIT REFUNDS 2,000.00 101 22520 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 5 04/21/06 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 18249 KELLEHER&ASSOCIATES 18239 12,572.14 PROFESSIONAL&SPECIALIZED S 12,572.14 618 64520 210 18250 ESPOSTO'S RED CARPET CATERING 18385 3,476.62 MISC. SUPPLIES 3,476.62 101 64100 120 18251 VERIZON WIRELESS MESSAGING SERVI 18763 63.68 COMMUNICATIONS 21.22 101 66210 160 COMMUNICATIONS 21.23 526 69020 160 COMMUNICATIONS 21.23 527 66520 160 18252 AMERICAN WATER WORKS ASSN. 18951 400.00 TRAINING EXPENSE 400.00 526 69020 260 18253 PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY 19027 1,289.52 UNIFORMS AND EQUIPMENT 250.68 101 66210 140 UNIFORMS AND EQUIPMENT 385.66 526 69020 140 UNIFORMS AND EQUIPMENT 250.66 527 66520 140 UNIFORMS AND EQUIPMENT 35.64 528 66600 140 UNIFORMS AND EQUIPMENT 94.85 619 64460 140 UNIFORMS AND EQUIPMENT 272.03 620 66700 140 18254 ANG NEWSPAPERS 19083 655.10 MISC. SUPPLIES 655.10 320 81120 120 18255 GARY PARTEE 19249 2,600.00 DEPOSIT REFUNDS 2,600.00 101 22520 18256 CLEARLITE TROPHIES 19679 124.49 MISC. SUPPLIES 124.49 101 68020 120 2200 18257 AMERICAN SOCIETY OF CIVIL ENGINE 19821 240.00 DUES&SUBSCRIPTIONS 240.00 101 66100 240 18258 LYNX TECHNOLOGIES 20501 9,507.00 MISC. SUPPLIES 8,187.00 326 81590 120 PROFESSIONAL&SPECIALIZED S 1,320.00 327 75170 210 18259 EIP ASSOCIATES 20526 10,417.85 DEPOSIT REFUND 10,417.85 731 22590 18260 PHIL SCOTT 20550 373.39 TRAVEL&MEETINGS 373.39 527 66520 250 18261 SPRINT PCS 20724 259.29 MISCELLANEOUS 259.29 731 22554 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 4 04/21/06 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 18236 WECO INDUSTRIES, INC. 11640 2,406. 16 MISC. SUPPLIES 21406.16 527 66520 120 18237 RADIOSHACK CORPORATION 11749 30.05 MISCELLANEOUS 20.32 101 68020 192 2200 MISC. SUPPLIES 9.73 527 66520 120 18238 BURLINGAME POLICE DEPT 13720 5,009.34 OFFICE EXPENSE 200.00 101 65100 110 MISC. SUPPLIES 245.00 101 65150 120 MISC. SUPPLIES 50.00 101 65100 120 COMMUNICATIONS 51 .48 101 65100 160 TRAINING EXPENSE 41062.86 101 65100 260 MISC. SUPPLIES 400.00 730 69530 120 18239 DANKA OFFICE IMAGING CO 13758 787.30 OFFICE EXPENSE 787.30 621 64450 110 18240 ALL CITY MANAGEMENT 15595 3,455.40 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 31455.40 101 65100 220 18241 MOSS RUBBER & EQUIPMENT CORP. 16225 122.25 TRAINING EXPENSE 122.25 526 69020 260 18242 LINDA HOECK 16390 1 ,280.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 11280.00 101 68010 220 1349 18243 MUNICIPAL MAINTENANCE 16629 45.64 SUPPLIES 45.64 620 15000 18244 CINTAS CORP. #464 16911 920.74 UNIFORMS AND EQUIPMENT 920.74 101 68020 140 2200 18245 JMB CONSTRUCTION, INC. 17299 96,309.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 961309.00 326 80770 220 18246 MARTIN JOYCE 17485 3,000.00 DEPOSIT REFUNDS 31000.00 101 22520 18247 COLORPRINT 17497 2,973.52 OFFICE EXPENSE 68.68 526 69020 110 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 11418.08 526 69020 220 OFFICE EXPENSE 1 ,486.76 527 66520 110 18248 LEE & ASSOCIATES 17568 34.64 MISC. SUPPLIES 34.64 201 65200 111 - CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R - PAGE 3 04/21/06 NUMBER NAMEVENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT ... Denotes Hand Written Checks 18228 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWARE 09670 3,084.99 MISC. SUPPLIES 153.99 101 68020 120 2200 SMALL TOOLS 260.18 101 68020 130 2200 BLDG. &GROUNDS MAINT. 453.91 101 68020 190 2200 MISCELLANEOUS 87.41 101 68020 192 2200 TRAFFIC CONTROL MATERIALS 111.49 101 66210 222 MISC. SUPPLIES 24.65 201 65200 111 SMALL TOOLS 38.03 201 65200 130 BLDG. &GROUNDS MAINT. 48.68 201 65200 190 VEHICLE MAINT. 129.26 201 65200 202 FIRE APPARATUS MAINT. 65.87 201 65200 203 MISC. SUPPLIES 1,307.87 526 69020 120 SMALL TOOLS 268.35 526 69020 130 MISC. SUPPLIES 16.82 527 66520 120 MISC. SUPPLIES 31.20 530 65400 120 MISC. SUPPLIES 7.58 619 64460 120 5250 MISC. SUPPLIES 79.70 619 64460 120 18229 INTERSTATE TRAFFIC 09790 4,905.27 TRAFFIC CONTROL MATERIALS 1,886.39 101 66210 222 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 2,922.75 320 80470 220 MISC. SUPPLIES 96.13 527 66520 120 18230 BARKER BLUE REPROGRAPHICS 09990 62.50 OFFICE EXPENSE 62.50 527 66520 110 18231 3 T EQUIPMENT CO. 10077 499.63 SUPPLIES 499.63 620 15000 18232 TELECOMMUNICATIONS ENGINEERING A 10101 491.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 491.00 201 65200 220' 18233 CAL-STEAM 10557 1,399.48 MISCELLANEOUS 28.33 101 68020 192 2200 MISC. SUPPLIES 551.22 526 69020 120 MISC. SUPPLIES 693.04 527 66520 120 MISC. SUPPLIES 34.48 619 64460 120 5110 MISC. SUPPLIES 40.58 619 64460 120 MISC. SUPPLIES 51.83 619 64460 120 5120 18234 MEYERS, NAVE, RIBACK, SILVER 11101 37.80 PROFESSIONAL&SPECIALIZED S 37.80 101 64350 210 18235 WINGFOOT COMMERCIAL TIRE SYSTEMS 11316 377.02 FIRE APPARATUS MAINT. 377.02 625 65213 203 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 2 04/21/06 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 18216 ROSS RECREATION EQUIPMENT 03271 977. 13 MISC. SUPPLIES 977.13 730 69560 120 2300 18217 BAY AREA WATER SUPPLY 03361 13,588.75 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 13,588.75 526 69020 240 18218 CITY OF SAN MATEO 03366 681 .24 MISCELLANEOUS 681 .24 101 66100 172 18219 FRANK TEALDI 03743 25.98 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 25.98 130 20060 18220 WITMER-TYSON IMPORTS, INC. 03788 350.00 TRAINING EXPENSE 350.00 101 65100 260 18221 BARTLETT 'S AUTO BODY 09079 1 ,037.72 FIRE APPARATUS MAINT. 1 ,037.72 625 65213 203 18222 MUFFIE CALBREATH 09125 387.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 387.00 101 68010 220 1660 18223 RD OFFICE SOLUTIONS 09213 766.43 OFFICE EXPENSE 35.74 527 66520 110 MISC. SUPPLIES 730.69 527 66520 120 18224 LIFE ASSIST 09392 716.07 SUPPLIES 716.07 201 65200 112 18225 SAN MATEO COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFC. 09433 1 ,833.50 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1 ,833.50 101 65100 220 18226 STERICYCLE, INC. 09439 231 .48 PRISONER EXPENSE 231 .48 101 65100 291 18227 OCE 09493 857.34 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 857.34 101 66100 210 . CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 1 04/21/06 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT '*' Denotes Hand Written Checks 18205* HITECH SYSTEMS, INC. 15712 2,198.00 TRAINING EXPENSE 2,198.00 101 65100 260 18206 MATTHEW BENDER&CO., INC. 01312 329.56 MISC. SUPPLIES 329.56 101 64350 120 18207 BURLINGAME AUTO SUPPLY 01507 4,187.48 EQUIPMENT MAINT. 86.42 101 68020 200 2200 GAS, OIL&GREASE 24.62 201 65200 201 VEHICLE MAINT. 14.60 201 65200 202 FIRE APPARATUS MAINT. 292.57 201 65200 203 MISC. SUPPLIES 23.35 526 69020 120 SUPPLIES 3,668.80 620 15000 SMALL TOOLS 7.45 620 66700 130 FIRE APPARATUS MAINT. 69.67 625 65213 203 18208 CALIFORNIA PARK&RECREATION 01726 335.82 MISCELLANEOUS 335.82 731 22553 18209 CITY OF REDWOOD CITY 01862 31,075.36 OFFICE EXPENSE 70.24 101 64250 110 COMMUNICATIONS 300.00 621 64450 160 CITY HALL MAINTENANCE 30,705.12 621 64450 220 18210 GENE EVANS 02149 387.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 387.00 101 68010 220 1644 18211 EWING IRRIGATION PRODUCTS 02157 371.61 MISC. SUPPLIES 290.30 101 68020 120 2200 MISCELLANEOUS 81.31 101 68020 192 2200 18212 W.W. GRAINGER, INC. 02248 608.21 MISC. SUPPLIES 92.16 619 64460 120 5141 MISC. SUPPLIES 15.24 619 64460 120 5110 MISC. SUPPLIES 251.40 619 64460 120 5150 MISC. SUPPLIES 249.41 619 64460 120 5120 18213 GRANITE ROCK COMPANY 02261 540.46 STREET RESURFACING EXPENSE 540.46 101 66210 226 18214 K&W DISCOUNT LIGHTING&SUPP 02645 1,048.94 MISC. SUPPLIES 159.18 619 64460 120 5250 PROFESSIONAL&SPECIALIZED S 889.76 619 64460 210 5250 18215 SBC 03080 199.86 UTILITY EXPENSE 199.86 896 20281 CITY OF BURLINGAME 04- 14-2006 W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 9 FUND RECAP 05-06 NAME FUND AMOUNT GENERAL FUND 101 65,036.60 PAYROLL REVOLVING FUND 130 14,685.26 CENTRAL COUNTY FIRE 201 6,269.67 SEWER CAPITAL PROJECT FUND 327 53,003. 16 WATER FUND 526 3,906.92 SEWER FUND 527 211 .90 PARKING ENTERPRISE FUND 530 30.00 SELF INSURANCE FUND 618 25,302.88 FACILITIES SERVICES FUND 619 19,265.34 EQUIPMENT SERVICES FUND 620 5,927.41 INFORMATION SERVICES FUND 621 1 ,133. 10 FIRE MECHANIC SERVICES FUND 625 8,025.58 OTHER LOCAL GRANTS/DONATIONS 730 2,884.85 TRUST AND AGENCY FUND 731 27,686.79 TOTAL FOR APPROVAL $233,369.46 HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL: THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE CLAIMS LISTED ON PAGES NUMBERED FROM 1 THROUGH 9 INCLUSIVE, AND/OR CLAIMS NUMBERED FROM 18055 THROUGH 18171 INCLUSIVE,TOTALING IN THE AMOUNT OF $233,369.46, HAVE BEEN CHECKED IN DETAIL AND APPROVED BY THE PROPER OFFICIALS, AND IN MY OPINION REPRESENT FAIR AND JUST CHARGES AGAINST THE CITY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THEIR RESPECTIVE AMOUNTS AS INDICATED THEREON. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ./. . ./- . . FINANCE DIRECTOR DATE APPROVED FOR PAYMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ./. . ./. . . COUNCIL DATE 1 CITY OF BURLINGAME _ W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 8 04/14/06 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 18156 DATABANK IMX 26176 3,356.67 MISCELLANEOUS 3,356.67 101 22518 18157 TERESA SILVESTRI 26266 500.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 500.00 730 69546 220 18158 ECONOMICS RESEARCH ASSOCIATES 26380 9,452.07 DEPOSIT REFUND 9,452.07 101 22590 18159 STEVEN OUADT 26459 300.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 300.00 101 68010 220 1780 18160 JANET HOLBROOK 26460 150.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 150.00 101 68010 220 1330 18161 JILL PILLOT 26461 450.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 450.00 730 69546 220 18162 CALIFORNIA REDEVELOPMENT ASSOCIA 26462 92.01 MISC. SUPPLIES 92.01 101 64350 120 18163 LB HAYHURST&ASSOCIATES INC 26463 2,500.00 PROFESSIONAL&SPECIALIZED S 2,500.00 101 64420 210 18164 THE AMERICAN GLASS LIGHT COMPANY 26464 450.00 PROFESSIONAL&SPECIALIZED S 450.00 619 64460 210 5150 18165 JEFF BASHAW 26465 1,020.00 MISCELLANEOUS 1,020.00 101 22525 18166 MR/MRS. WOO 26467 36.00 MISCELLANEOUS 36.00 101 36330 000 1890 18167 MARTHA C. CHAMBERS 26468 52.00 MISCELLANEOUS $2.00 101 36330 000 1660 18168 LORI N. SMOLINSKI 26469 40.00 MISCELLANEOUS 40.00 101 36330 000 1331 18169 GEORGE ATHANASIOU 26470 150.00 MISCELLANEOUS 75.00 101 22593 MISCELLANEOUS 75.00 101 36330 000 1213 18170 AUSTINE-OUIEN 26471 350.00 MISCELLANEOUS 350.00 101 22593 18171 CALIF DEBT& INVESTMENT ADVISORY 26473 250.00 TRAVEL&MEETINGS 250.00 101 66100 250 TOTAL $233,369.46 0 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 7 04/14/06 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 18142 JESSE MOORE 25104 110.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 110.00 101 68010 220 1785 18143 OFFICE DEPOT 25244 278.69 OFFICE EXPENSE 278.69 101 65100 110 18144 MERCY MARTIN 25270 903.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 903.00 101 68010 220 1661 18145 KIM BULLOCK-UTRATA 25333 39.00 MISCELLANEOUS 39.00 101 36330 000 1660 18146 LORAL LANDSCAPING 25394 160.00 BLDG. & GROUNDS MAINT. 160.00 526 69020 190 18147 LAURA LIGHTHOUSE 25765 172.00 MISCELLANEOUS 172.00 101 36330 000 1890 18148 SATISH DUTT 26020 125.00 MISCELLANEOUS 125.00 101 22525 18149 EDMOND'S PLAZA FLORIST 26041 121.24 MISC. SUPPLIES 121.24 101 65100 120 18150 GRAPHICS ON THE EDGE 26096 1,480.70 VEHICLE MAINT. 1,480.70 201 65200 202 18151 IMPACT SCIENCES 26099 7,195.79 DEPOSIT REFUND 7,195.79 101 22590 18152 ALLIED OFFICE SUPPLIES 26138 414.84 OFFICE EXPENSE 11.86 101 64150 110 OFFICE EXPENSE 35.78 101 64400 110 OFFICE EXPENSE 125.55 101 64350 110 MISC. SUPPLIES 115.58 101 66210 120 MISC. SUPPLIES 115.59 526 69020 120 OFFICE EXPENSE 10.48 619 64460 110 18153 SYSKA HENNESSEY 26142 720.00 MISCELLANEOUS 720.00 619 64460 804 18154 LANCE BAYER 26156 275.00 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 275.00 101 64350 210 18155 SHAUN ANDERSON-AHN 26166 107.00 MISCELLANEOUS 107.00 101 36330 000 1349 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 6 04/14/06 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT *� Denotes Hand Written Checks 18129 FORDERER CORNICE WORKS 23775 487. 12 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 487.12 619 64460 210 5180 18130 UNIVERSAL BUILDING SERVICES 23941 13,559.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 13,559.00 619 64460 220 5190 18131 NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS 23946 185.95 COMMUNICATIONS 185.95 619 64460 160 18132 RUSS COHEN 23985 215.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 215.00 101 68010 220 1660 18133 JESUS NAVA 24204 341 .91 MISCELLANEOUS 341 .91 101 64250 031 18134 COMPUCOM 24467 274.96 OFFICE EXPENSE 274.96 101 66100 110 18135 CENTRAL COUNTY FIREFIGHTERS FUND 24518 8,375.00 MISCELLANEOUS 8,375.00 130 20016 18136 PRESERVATION PAINTING 24552 2,200.00 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 2,200.00 619 64460 210 5240 18137 INTERNATIONAL CODE COUNCIL 24647 81 .69 TRAINING EXPENSE 81 .69 101 65300 260 18138 MANAGED HEALTH NETWORK 24714 585.15 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 585.15 101 64420 210 18139 I .M.P.A.C. GOVERNMENT SERVICES 24752 8,617.64 OFFICE EXPENSE 19089.33 201 65200 110 MISC. SUPPLIES 71 .45 201 65200 111 MISC. SUPPLIES 160.88 201 65200 120 MISC. SUPPLIES 372.00 201 65500 120 SMALL TOOLS 198.94 201 65200 130 FIRE APPARATUS MAINT. 4.80 201 65200 203 RADIO MAINT. 247.09 201 65200 205 MISCELLANEOUS 5,351 .06 731 22557 MISCELLANEOUS 1 , 122.09 731 22554 18140 DELTA DENTAL PLAN OF CALIFORNIA 24793 6,310.26 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 61310.26 130 20014 18141 WESCO GRAPHICS INC 25007 6,093.94 MISCELLANEOUS 6,093.94 101 68010 115 1101 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 5 04/14/06 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 18114 QUENVOLDS SAFETY SHOEMOBILES 22479 162.38 TRAINING EXPENSE 162.38 527 66520 260 18115 COUNTY OF SAN MATEO 22620 115.00 TRAVEL & MEETINGS 115.00 101 64420 250 18116 CALPELRA 22902 265.00 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 265.00 101 64420 240 18117 TLC ADMINISTRATORS 23156 175.00 MISCELLANEOUS 175.00 101 64420 031 18118 OFFICE MAX 23306 115.83 OFFICE EXPENSE 115.83 101 68010 110 1101 18119 WILCO SUPPLY 23333 30.42 MISC. SUPPLIES 30.42 619 64460 120 5150 18120 THE PRACTICAL SOLUTIONS GROUP 23367 1,694.00 TRAINING EXPENSE 1,694.00 526 69020 260 18121 RECALL- TOTAL INFORMATION MGMT 23411 105.00 MISCELLANEOUS 105.00 101 22518 18122 CRESCO EQUIPMENT RENTALS 23470 108.79 MISC. SUPPLIES 25.98 101 66210 120 STREET RESURFACING EXPENSE 82.81 101 66210 226 18123 KORALEEN ENTERPRISES 23510 1,232.25 MISC. SUPPLIES 11232.25 526 69020 120 18124 MCMASTER-CARR SUPPLY CO. 23611 749.97 MISC. SUPPLIES 679.36 526 69020 120 MISC. SUPPLIES 70.61 619 64460 120 18125 REFRIGERATION SUPPLIES DISTRIBUT 23639 68.07 MISC. SUPPLIES 68.07 619 64460 120 5180 18126 BKF ENGINEERS 23641 51,931.16 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 3,519.50 327 81440 210 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 23,047.16 327 81150 210 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 25,364.50 327 81500 210 18127 GWENDOLYN BOGER 23703 5,440.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 5,440.00 101 68010 220 1331 18128 JANNETTE GREER 23769 36.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 36.00 101 68010 220 1648 '• CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 4 04/14/06 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT *' Denotes Hand Written Checks 18098 BURTON'S FIRE, INC. 19366 48.28 FIRE APPARATUS MAINT. 48.28 625 65213 203 18099 JOHN CHOMA 19758 173.00 MISCELLANEOUS 173.00 101 36330 000 1891 18100 EL CAMINO CHARTER LINES INC 20105 1,168.82 MISC. SUPPLIES 1,168.82 101 68010 120 1521 18101 DANIEL STRAMBI 20134 3,500.00 MISCELLANEOUS 3,500.00 101 22546 18102 AFFINITEL COMMUNICATIONS 20246 45.00 COMMUNICATIONS 45.00 621 64450 160 18103 CLAUDE ARRIOLA 20435 450.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 450.00 101 68010 220 1789 18104 DAPPER TIRE CO., INC. 20464 838.09 SUPPLIES 838.09 620 15000 18105 BRIDGE WIRELESS 20633 27.75 SUPPLIES 27.75 620 15000 18106 AARONSON, DICKERSON, COHN& 20798 1,970.00 PROFESSIONAL&SPECIALIZED S 1,970.00 101 64420 210 18107 CATHERINE J.M. NILMEYER 20801 450.00 MISCELLANEOUS 450.00 731 22525 18108 PHYLLIS E. EVERSON 20833 1,393.60 MISC. SUPPLIES 1,393.60 730 69585 120 18109 NANCY LOCKE 21195 486.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 486.00 101 68010 220 1660 18110 CES 21210 206.76 MISC. SUPPLIES 206.76 101 64350 120 18111 HILLYARD 21658 467.43 MISC. SUPPLIES 467.43 101 68020 120 2200 18112 IEDA 21981 2,426.32 DUES'&SUBSCRIPTIONS 2,426.32 101 64420 240 18113 TOWNE FORD SALES, INC. 22146 152.85 SUPPLIES 152.85 620 15000 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 3 04/14/06 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 18083 TEAM CLEAN 15827 425.54 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 425.54 201 65200 220 18084 MOSS RUBBER & EQUIPMENT CORP. 16225 38.52 SUPPLIES 38.52 620 15000 18085 BROADWAY BUSINESS 16849 425.00 MISCELLANEOUS 425.00 731 22555 18086 STATE OF CALIFORNIA 16919 1 ,220.78 SUPPLIES 1 ,220.78 620 15000 18087 GOLDEN NURSERY 17128 25.72 MISC. SUPPLIES 25.72 526 69020 120 18088 COLORPRINT 17497 39.29 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 39.29 527 66520 220 18089 HI -TECH EMERGENCY VEHICLE 17546 6,315.79 FIRE APPARATUS MAINT. 6,315.79 625 65213 203 18090 CENTRAL BUSINESS EQUIPMENT 18011 160.63 EQUIPMENT MAINT. 100.63 101 65100 200 EQUIPMENT MAINT. 30.00 101 65150 200 COMMUNICATIONS 30.00 530 65400 160 18091 RICKER MACHINERY COMPANY 18378 559.43 SUPPLIES 559.43 620 15000 18092 DEAN'S AUTO BODY & 18795 800.00 MISCELLANEOUS 800.00 618 64520 604 18093 BAY ALARM 18854 950.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 950.00 619 64460 220 5130 18094 ACCESS UNIFORMS & EMBROIDERY 18990 536.23 MISC. SUPPLIES 536.23 101 64420 120 18095 ANG NEWSPAPERS 19083 2,318.92 PUBLICATIONS & ADVERTISING 2,318.92 101 64200 150 18096 A-ARCO RENTS & SELLS 19114 414. 10 MISC. SUPPLIES 414. 10 101 68010 120 1950 18097 PRIORITY 1 19239 2,274.11 MISCELLANEOUS 2, 132.88 618 64520 604 SUPPLIES 141 .23 620 15000 1 CITY OF BURLINGAME ' W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 2 04/14/06 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT '•' Denotes Hand Written Checks 18069 LYNGSO GARDEN MATERIALS 09143 144.74 SIDEWALK REPAIR EXPENSE 144.74 101 66210 219 18070 CITY OF MILLBRAE 09234 3,152.82 PROFESSIONAL&SPECIALIZED S 3,152.82 101 64350 210 18071 TESTING ENGINEERS, INC. 09270 1,072.00 PROFESSIONAL&SPECIALIZED S 1,072.00 327 81150 210 18072 SIERRA PACIFIC TURF SUPPLY 09459 465.48 BLDG. &GROUNDS MAINT. 465.48 101 68020 190 2200 18073 NOEL L. MILLER, INC, 09499 635.55 MISC. SUPPLIES 635.55 625 69582 120 18074 ABAG - LIABILITY 09518 22,370.00 INSURANCE PREMIUMS 22,370.00 618 64520 602 18075 SAN MATEO LAWN MOWER SHOP 09560 632.15 EQUIPMENT MAINT. 594.29 101 68020 200 2200 SUPPLIES 37.86 620 15000 18076 OLE'S 09626 256.38 SUPPLIES 256.38 620 15000 18077 WINGFOOT COMMERCIAL TIRE SYSTEMS 11316 759.22 FIRE APPARATUS MAINT. 759.22 625 65213 203 18078 STANDARD BUSINESS MACHINES 14252 395.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 395.00 101 68010 220 1101 18079 SUZETTE ODELL 14294 541.25 MISC. SUPPLIES 541.25 730 69544 120 18080 ALFRED H. ESCOFFIER 15413 2,500.00 MISCELLANEOUS 2,500.00 101 67500 031 18081 MILLBRAE LOCK SHOP 15739 110.21 MISC. SUPPLIES 86.12 101 68020 120 2200 VEHICLE MAINT. 13.26 201 65200 202 MISC. SUPPLIES 10.83 619 64460 120 5180 18082 VALLEY OIL CO. 15764 4,238.78 GAS, OIL&GREASE 2,089.80 201 65200 201 SUPPLIES 2,148.98 620 15000 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 1 04/14/06 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 18055 GRAY'S PAINT, BURLINGAME 01025 360.29 FIRE APPARATUS MAINT. 69.77 201 65200 203 MISC. SUPPLIES 23.78 619 64460 120 5120 FIRE APPARATUS MAINT. 266.74 625 65213 203 18056 BURLINGAME ELEM. SCHOOL DIST. 01500 9,849.82 SCHOOL DEVELOPMENT FEE 91849.82 731 22563 18057 BURLINGAME STATIONERS 01676 242.59 OFFICE EXPENSE 136.40 101 64400 110 OFFICE EXPENSE 10.83 101 68010 110 1101 MISC. SUPPLIES 95.36 101 68020 120 2200 18058 COMPUTER TECHNICIANS, INC. , 01987 1 ,088.10 CITY HALL MAINTENANCE 1 ,088. 10 621 64450 200 18059 D & M TOWING, INC. 02029 320.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 320.00 101 65100 220 18060 W.W. GRAINGER, INC. 02248 46.11 FIRE APPARATUS MAINT. 46. 11 201 65200 203 18061 GRANITE ROCK COMPANY 02261 766.62 STREET RESURFACING EXPENSE 766.62 101 66210 226 18062 PENINSULA BATTERIES 02625 389.09 EQUIPMENT MAINT. 66.42 101 68020 200 2200 MISC. SUPPLIES 54.64 619 64460 120 5180 SUPPLIES 268.03 620 15000 18063 LAWSON PRODUCTS, INC. 02755 681 .95 MISC. SUPPLIES 444.44 619 64460 120 SUPPLIES 237.51 620 15000 18064 P. G. & E. 03054 10.23 GAS & ELECTRIC 10.23 527 66520 170 18065 STEPHEN J. PICCHI 03168 532.80 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 532.80 101 68010 220 1372 18066 MARGARET PRENDERGAST 03179 204.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 204.00 101 68010 220 1641 18067 SAN MATEO UNION HIGH 03471 6,680. 14 SCHOOL DEVELOPMENT FEE 6,680. 14 731 22562 18068 STATE OF CA/CONSERVATION DEPT 09073 3,808.68 DEPOSIT REFUNDS 3,808.68 731 22520 MEETING ME UTES Regular Meeting of the Burlingame Parks &Recreation Commission Thursday, April 20, 2006 The regular meeting of the Burlingame Parks &Recreation Commission was called to order by Chairman Heathcote at 7:10 pm at Burlingame City Hall, 501 Primrose Road,Burlingame. ROLL CALL Commissioners Present: Dittman,Heathcote,Hesselgren,Larios, Shanus Commissioners Absent: Schreurs,Muller Staff Present: Randy Schwartz,Parks &Recreation Director; Joleen Butler, Account Clerk III. Others Present: Bobbi Benson(550 El Camino, #103,Burlingame) MINUTES Commissioner Dittman noted that her comments of agreement to limit the amount of signage towards Mills Canyon were not included in the February 16, 2006 minutes. The minutes of the February 16, 2006 regular Commission meeting were approved as amended. PUBLIC COMMENTS Bobbi Benson of Friends of Mills Canyon reported the trees have been removed from the canyon and they are waiting for stumps to be mulched. The California Conservation Corps has worked to re-route two washouts on the creek side trail and two new bridges have been put into place. There has been a landslide on the creek side, which was just a matter of time. Public Works was out with a consultant to assess the damage caused by the earth movement but the bottom of the trail may need to be let go. Ms. Benson mentioned that FMOC is still working on obtaining 501c3 non- profit status. They had 24 volunteers out in the Canyon in March to help widen trails and take out poison oak. FMOC has taken the neighbors comments and concerns to heart and the organization is working to remove deadwood and hanging limbs. In addition to making the views better this will also make it easier for homeowners to self-patrol and easier for the police department to patrol the area. Ms. Benson mentioned that she checked with the Fire Marshall, Roque Yballa, regarding gating off the side trails to keep people out of the Canyon in the evening hours. Ms. Benson invited the Commission and public to the May 7, 8:00 am Planting Day on Burlingame Avenue at Primrose. Approximately 1/3 of the planters on those streets are full. Ms. Benson also mentioned there is a workday on April 29 at 9:00 am at the Arguello entrance to the Canyon. The phone number and website for Friends of Mills Canyon are as follows: (650) 558- 7325 &www.finoc.orc. OLD BUSINESS A. Senior Resource Handbook—Commissioner Dittman worked on the last publishing of the handbook Dittman informed the Commission that the handbook is published approximately every two years. In 2002-03,the handbook was also put onto the City's website. High school volunteers and Youth Advisory Committee members call all the organizations in the handbook to confirm the information and to update any outdated information. On the website, the Parks&Recreation Commission mutes April 20,2006—page 2 organizations with websites are actual links to the sites. Dittman reported that the handbook is amazing and she has given copies to many people. The first run was 1,000 copies, and then more copies were run off. Dittman said it was time to update the handbook. Dittman asked who could be contacted to start the volunteer process. Commissioner Larios said to talk to Sue Glick at Burlingame High School to organize another time. He suggested picking a date about 2-3 weeks out to get things moving. Director Schwartz said to contact Tony Riccomini at the Parks &Recreation Department to ask for Youth Advisory Committee volunteers. Commissioner Heathcote asked to whom we distribute the handbooks and who does the distribution. Schwartz said that the handbook is distributed to City Hall, the Recreation Center, local churches, libraries and many of the organizations in the handbook itself. As for the distribution,the Senior Coordinator for the Recreation Department, Arlene Castro, handles it. Dittman asked how we find out about new Senior Services in the area. Schwartz said there is a County handbook and it is a good idea to compare our handbook to that one and add anything we do not have, as the County book is very current. Commissioner Shanus asked if the handbooks are distributed to the local Senior Homes as they may have resources of their own to add to the handbook. Larios asked who would do the crosschecking of the County handbook to the City's handbook. Schwartz replied that the volunteers would call to check if service is current and check the web links to see if they are active. Dittman mentioned the contact names could also be checked. The volunteers mark up hard copies. These changes will.be collectively put into one book and Dittman will update the website. Dittman asked if there are phones and computers available for the volunteers. Schwartz said that there are phones and computers at the Recreation Center. Larios mentioned that this should be done on a weekday after school as most of the businesses and organizations would most likely be open during the week as opposed to a Saturday. Larios asked what happens if there are not enough volunteers. He offered his help. Heathcote said that between high school kids and the Y.A.C. kids there should be enough volunteers. Schwartz reminded the Commission that only three members of the Commission could show up to help. NEW BUSINESS A. Update on Senior Citizens—Ms. Butler reported that Arlene Castro, Recreation Coordinator, and Tricia Pinney,Recreation Supervisor, were unable to attend this meeting. However, a packet of information had been put together listing programs and services offered by the Parks & Recreation Department. The packet was handed out to the Commission for review. Commissioner Dittman asked if senior lunch is still offered twice a week. Schwartz said that the County lunch program was discontinued about two years ago, however, in its place is offered a Parks&Recreation Commission Minutes April 20,2006—page 3 Bingo-n-Bag lunch every Tuesday. Attendees bring their own bag lunch and a dessert is provided by the department. The program is well attended. B. Capital Improvement Projects—Schwartz reported that the Bayside Restrooms project is out to public bid. The project will begin in early July after the BYBA tournament, as the renovation will require closing off the new parking lot. Pershing Park renovation is completed and the remainder of the money from that project will be transferred to the Cuernevaca Park renovation project. Commissioner Shanus asked what the scope of the Cuernevaca project was. Schwartz replied that Cuernavaca was the last playground to be renovated for ADA compliance and playground safety standards. Schwartz also said the Department would invite the neighbors to join a Cuernavaca Committee. He also discussed some new playground equipment that was exhibited at a CPRS conference earlier this year. Currently there is $50,000 annually in the Eucalyptus tree management and $50,000 in earmarked for landscaping improvements,which will be used for improvements to the Bayside and Washington Park pathways. Commissioner Shanus asked if this will fix the"mini lakes" on Bayside#3 and when the paths were scheduled to be re-done as tripping is a concern and right now, the kids are playing in standing water. Schwartz said that the paths would be angled for better drainage and that the renovation was scheduled for spring 2006. Schwartz explained the Long-term CIP Replacement Plan. Schwartz explained that several items were not on this list. Examples are new capital improvements such as a synthetic grass field for lower Bayside Park and some maintenance items such as fencing or path lights. Commissioner Larios asked if there is a priority to the CIP Plan. Schwartz replied the Long- Term CIP Replacement Plan is a maintenance only plan; however, the Parks &Recreation CII' Plan is prioritized with safety items at the top of the list. The Parks &Recreation Department will be receiving $270,000 in CIP funds for 2006-07 that will be used exclusively for safety items such as park pathways and playground surfacing. Commissioner Dittman asked if one of the Commissions old CIP lists is still available. Schwartz stated that staff would pull one of the old lists for discussion at the next commission meeting. He also said the only two items he remembers from the old list that have not been completed are the bandstand in the park and the front entrance to Washington Park which is now being addressed as part of the Burlingame Avenue train station discussions. Commissioner Shanus asked if the Community Center project should be on the list. Schwartz said that is a part of the City's facility master plan and described the process and status. Commissioner Hesselgren added that it would be good to have discussions at the next meeting regarding the benefits of Parks &Recreation noting the recent press regarding obesity in children. Parks&Recreation Commission Minutes April 20,2006—page 4 Commissioner Dittman asked if the staff could provide blurbs, study guides and important points to keep in mind when they are out and talking to the public. Schwartz will send some out to the Commissioners. REPORTS/HAND-OUTS A. Parks &Recreation Department Reports 1) Monthly Report(see attached) Director Schwartz reported that the portables are to be removed soon from the BHS backfield. There is a meeting scheduled for April 26, 2006 at 5:30 pm with the neighbors involved in the renovation of the backfield. Commissioner Dittman asked what the status is on the high school football field as there are ruts and bunched areas of the top surface. Schwartz also reported the addition of a small dog area to the dog park at Bayside Park. 2) 2004-5 FY Revenue Report(see attached) B. Commissioners Commissioner Larios asked when the pavement at Pershing Park was due to be resurfaced. Schwartz said it was due for maintenance and resurfacing in 2007. NEXT MEETING The next meeting of the Parks &Recreation Commission is scheduled to be held on Thursday,May 18, 2006 at 7:00 p.m. at Burlingame City Hall. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 8:25 pm. Respectfully submitted, Joleen Butler Parks &Recreation Account Clerk III CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION UNAPPROVED MINUTES 501 Primrose Road,Burlingame, CA May 8,2006 Council Chambers I. CALL TO ORDER Chair Auran called the May 8, 2006, regular meeting of the Planning Commission to order at 7:02 p.m. II. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Auran, Brownrigg, Deal, Osterling, Terrones and Vistica Absent: Commissioners: Cauchi Staff Present: City Planner, Margaret Monroe; Planner, Erica Strohmeier City Attorney, Larry Anderson; Senior Engineer, Doug Bell. III. ROTATION OF OFFICERS Chair Auran thanked the Planning Commission for supporting him during a great and busy years which included Bayfront and North Burlingame/Rollins Road zoning, the project to replace the hospital, the addition to the garden center,and an election cycle. He passed the gavel to Michael Brownrigg who will be the Chair for 2006-2007. Chair Brownrigg thanked C. Auran for being an excellent and impartial chair and for his dedication and even handed and expeditious running of Commission meetings. �. IV. MINUTES The minutes of the April 24, 2006 regular meeting of the Planning Commission were amended by C. Auran, page 5, item I first bullet "Have there been complaints about this preperky parking issues on this street over the years; the minutes were approved as amended on a 6-0-1 (C. Cauchi absent)voice vote. V. APPROVAL OF AGENDA There were no changes to the agenda. VI. FROM THE FLOOR There were no public comments. VII. STUDY ITEMS Chair Brownrigg commented that study session items are not open to the public, that it is expected that all Commissioners visit all the sites on the agenda prior to the meeting and that if a Commissioner misses the meeting then they listen to the tapes from the previous meeting of all items carried forward. 1. 1840 OGDEN DRIVE,ZONED TW—APPLICATION FOR MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION, DESIGN REVIEW, CONDOMR41UM PERMIT, FRONT AND SIDE SETBACK VARIANCES AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR LOT COVERAGE FOR A NEW, 4-STORY, 45-UNIT RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM WITH TWO LEVELS OF UNDERGROUND PARKING (ALEX NOVELL,BURLINGAME HILLS MANOR,LLC,APPLICANT AND PROPERTY OWNER AND TOBY LEVY, LEVY DESIGN PARTNERS,ARCHITECT) PROJECT PLANNER: MAUREEN BROOKS CP Monroe presented a summary of the staff report. City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes May,8, 2006 Commissioners asked: ■ clarify procedure if Public Works does not agree with the 17% driveway slope and a change i" needed; would the change come back to the Commission for review? ■ clarify build-to line and if anything on this site is at the build-to line; seems as though everything is between an 11' and 14' setback; ■ would it be a problem to bring the building up to the build-to line; ■ what will the final color of the copper panels be; want samples of material and color; ■ what is the life expectancy and upkeep of the cedar planks that run through the design,will they be a maintenance problem; ■ landscaping seems to lack character;needs to be a lot of landscaping to off-set the brick fagade or need to create more texture to the building; provided example of building in Palo Alto with stone features that make the building stand out, good alternative; ■ why is the piece of building placed along Ogden where it is? Could it be moved north? This could alleviate a curb-cut issue; ■ landscaping at pedestrian entry and at service vehicle parking is important and needs more attention; ■ more information is needed on how they plan to treat the transformer at the main entry and back-flow preventors as well; should be screened or put below grade; ■ would like to see what type of brick is intended, veneer,whole brick, etc;need to provide window details and fascia detail including material and a profile;profile should show the edge of the window and how it meets the cladding; ■ what is the reason for the varying floor-to-floor heights; ■ how will oil separation be provided for sump pumps? ■ can applicant get this project on the LEEDS roster? What is he doing to make the building more "green"; ■ the build-to-line issue is a critical aspect on the Ogden side of the building; design has a walk up nature to units on Ogden side; if build-to lines are encouraged, stoops should be encouraged to be maintained because they help with the street frontage; ■ how do you plan to monitor and run the inclusionary/affordable unit program; ■ how is equipment going to be screened on the roof? What will be seen from above; ■ would like to see a restroom facility and hot and cold running water around the trellis and picnic table areas in the courtyard facility; ■ in reference to site amenities,would like landscaped area on Ogden to remain a useable landscape space for play activity with a bench;would help this area to be less static; and ■ need to determine how the intention of the build-to-line is to be accomplished;not the best time to determine if porch constitutes a build-to line;on Sunrise project,porch defined by a trellis structure, did not constitute a build-to line; if project is not changed regarding the build-to line, it will be noticed as a variance. Staff responded that the applicant has put porches and ramps at the build-to lines but that they are all less than 30"above adjacent grade and are not considered structures in the zoning code;bringing the building to the build-to lines could change the underground parking structure;the Commission needs to determine if the front setback build-to line does create a variance or do front porch areas and walkways count towards build- to line; and the applicant chose to follow the new TW zoning regulations. This item was set for the regular action calendar when all the questions have been addressed and th, information has been submitted and reviewed by the Planning Department. The item will be scheduled when there is space on the agenda. This item concluded at 7:30 p.m. 2 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes May 8, 2006 2. 1155 CALIFORNIA DRIVE, ZONED C-2 — APPLICATION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AMENDMENT AND PARKING VARIANCE TO EXPAND AN EXISTING FINANCIAL INSTITUTION (TIM MULLER, FIRST REPUBLIC BANK, APPLICANT; WESLEY FUKUMORI, ARCHITECT; GREEN BANKER,PROPERTY OWNER)PROJECT PLANNER: RUBEN HURIN CP Monroe presented a summary of the staff report. Commissioners asked: ■ the building was approved at a time when they could provide on-site parking spaces;do we have an in-lieu fee that we can charge for the parking space? ■ can a condition be set to require the applicant to keep the correct time on the clock;believe there may be such a condition now which is not being met; ■ are there any parking complaints related to this building and its uses; ■ this use permit should be tied to a financial institution;no conversation of the space to another office should take place without an amendment to the permit and the parking variance; ■ the banking use provided here is less intense than other banking no tellers behind counters with lines; and ■ could argue that only one ATM creates loitering. Staff responded that there is no parking in-lieu fee for this part of the city, that the Commission could ask applicant if there is another way to mitigate the variance and he might volunteer an in lieu payment,and that the Commission could tie this application to not having more than one ATM machine. This item concluded at 7:40 p.m. VIII. ACTION ITEMS Consent Calendar- Items on the consent calendar are considered to be routine. They are acted on simultaneously unless separate discussion and/or action is requested by the applicant,a member of the public or a commissioner prior to the time the commission votes on the motion to adopt. Chair Brownrigg asked if anyone in the audience or on the Commission wished to call any item off the consent calendar. C.Auran asked that item 3d,433 Chatham Road be removed from the consent calendar. There were no other requests. 3a. 608 CONCORD WAY, ZONED R-1 — APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW AND SPECIAL PERMIT FOR DECLINING HEIGHT ENVELOPE FOR A FIRST AND SECOND FLOOR ADDITION (JESSE GEURSE, GEURSE CONCEPTUAL DESIGN, APPLICANT AND DESIGNER; CHRIS AND DERRIE RONAN, PROPERTY OWNERS) (65 NOTICED) PROJECT PLANNER: CATHERINE BARBER 3b. 1625 HOWARD AVENUE,ZONED R-1—APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW,SPECIAL PERMIT FOR DECLINING HEIGHT ENVELOPE AND PARKING VARIANCE FOR A SECOND STORY ADDITION (MATT MEFFORD, TRG ARCHITECTS, APPLICANT AND ARCHITECT; DAN AND EILEEN CONWAY, PROPERTY OWNERS) (60 NOTICED) PROJECT PLANNER: CATHERINE BARBER 3 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes May 8, 2006 3c. 1111 HOWARD AVENUE, ZONED C-1, SUBAREA B—APPLICATION FOR HEALTH SERVICE USE (SKIN TREATMENT) (KEITH RALEY, DEMALOUNGE, APPLICANT; VIVIAN DWYER. DWYER DESIGN, DESIGNER; SAEED ESMAILTALAI, PROPERTY OWNER) (41 NOTICED, PROJECT PLANNER: RUBIN HURIN C. Auran moved to approve the consent calendar, items 3a, 608 Concord Way, 3b, 1625 Howard Avenue, and 3c, 1111 Howard Avenue, by resolution with the findings and conditions in the staff reports. The motion was seconded by C. Deal Chair Brownrigg called for a voice vote on the three items remaining on the consent calendar. The motion passed on a 6-0-1 (C. Cauchi absent)voice vote. Appeal procedures were advised. This item concluded at 7:40 p.m. IX. REGULAR ACTION ITEM 3d. 433 CHATHAM ROAD, ZONED UNCLASSIFIED — APPLICATION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS TO AN EXISTING TENNIS CLUB (JEFFREY TSU, APPLICANT; PENINSULA TENNIS CLUB, PROPERTY OWNER; GUZZARDO PARTNERSHIP, ARCHITECT) (47 NOTICED)PROJECT PLANNER: ERICA STROHMEIER C. Vistica recused himself from this action because he is a member of the club,he stepped down from the dias and left the Council Chambers. ZT Strohmeier presented the staff report. C. Auran noted that he called this item off the consent calendar --� because the tennis club is a wonderful community institution and has been in the community for 73 years, and for that time has been informally sharing parking with Burlingame High School;he felt that this was an opportunity for them to get a parking agreement with the High School for use of the 10 parking spaces on the school site next to their facility. There were no other questions or comments to staff by the Commission. Chair Brownrigg opened the public hearing. Jeff Tsu,member represented the Tennis Club at 433 Chatham Road. He noted that he had asked the Principal of the High School for a written agreement for their use of the 10 parking spaces,the Principal could not write such an agreement and referred him to the San Mateo Unified High School District. Yesterday got an indemnity agreement for the club to use the spaces during the construction which is occurring on the high school site,but not for permanent use. The High School District is comfortable with the current informal arrangement, which includes their occasional use of the Tennis Club facilities. Commissioner noted that parking is not usually a problem for the Tennis Club,which has been there 73 years,but the club is not legally entitled to use the school parking and if the club members should not be allowed to use the parking it would put a burden on the residents on Chatham Road. There were no further comments from the floor. The public hearing was closed. Commissioners commented: the only issue noted was parking, the hold harmless agreement they have during construction is the agreement the club should have permanently;if loose use of high school parking should have to come back to the Planning Commission;agree that it would be nice to have the agreement in writing,but they have been using the school's parking for 73 years. C.Deal moved to approve the request for a conditional use permit for proposed improvements to an existing tennis club at 433 Chatham Road by resolution with one added condition,that if the tennis club looses the 4 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes May 8, 2006 right to use the parking on the Burlingame High School site, this application shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission,and with the conditions in the staff report: 1)that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department and date stamped April 24,2006,Pool Area Renovation �- Schematic Plan with Conceptual Planting, and date stamped February 21, 2006, sheet L2.1, showing the maintenance of three tennis courts, a swimming pool and a hot tub;2) that the tennis club shall only be open seven days a week during the daylight hours and depending upon weather conditions,with a maximum of 3 full-time employees;that any changes to the floor area,use,hours of operation,or number of employees which exceeds the maximums as stated in these conditions shall require an amendment to this conditional use permit; 3)that any intensification of the current use on the property shall require a parking variance;and should the use of the site ever change,parking to code requirements for that use shall be provided on site and should the tennis club ever loose the use of the parking spaces on the Burlingame High School site, the conditional use permit for the tennis use shall be automatically reviewed by the Planning Commission; 4) that the tennis club use shall be limited to its existing building areas,outdoor tennis court areas and outdoor pool and pool deck areas; 5)that the conditions of the Chief Building Official's February 23,2006,memo, the City Engineer's February 24, 2006 memo, the Recycling Specialist's and Fire Marshal's February 27, 2006, memos, and the NPDES Coordinator's February 28, 2006, memo shall be met; and 6) that the existing and proposed landscaping shall be installed as shown on the Pool Area Renovation Schematic Plan With Conceptual Planting, date stamped April 24,2006, and that all areas of landscaping shall be irrigated by an automatic sprinkler system on a timer and shall be maintained by the property owner in good operating condition at all times; 7) that during all grading and construction,the property owner shall be required to control dust by watering the site and complying with all the San Francisco Regional Air Quality Control Boards permit requirements; 8) that demolition or removal of the existing structures and any grading or earth moving on the site shall not occur until a building permit has been issued and such site work shall be required to comply with all the regulations of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District; 9) that the project shall comply with the Construction and Demolition Debris Recycling Ordinance which requires affected demolition,new construction and alteration projects to submit a Waste Reduction plan and meet recycling requirements; a construction recycling plan shall also be issued and any partial or full demolition of a structure,interior or exterior,shall require a demolition permit which shall not be issued until a building permit has been issued; 10) that the applicant shall comply with Ordinance 1503,the City of Burlingame Storm Water Management and Discharge Control Ordinance; 11) that during demolition of the existing facilities, site preparation and construction of the new facilities,the applicant shall use all applicable"best management practices"as identified in Burlingame's Storm Water Ordinance,to prevent erosion and off-site sedimentation of storm water runoff; 12) that the project is subject to the state-mandated water conservation program,and a complete Irrigation Water Management Plan must be submitted with landscape and irrigation plans at time of permit application;and 13)that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Uniform Fire Codes,2001 Edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame. The motion was seconded by C. Auran. Chair Brownrigg called for a voice vote on the motion to approve the conditional use permit for the Tennis Club with the additional condition that the conditional use permit shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission should the club members ever loose the ability to use the Burlingame High School parking lot. The motion passed on a 5-0-1-1 (C.Vistica abstaining,C.Cauchi absent). Appeal procedures were advised. This item concluded at 7:50 p.m. 4. 1783 EL CAMINO REAL, ZONED C-1, C-3 AND UNCLASSIFIED — APPLICATION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AMENDMENT FOR THE PENINSULA HOSPITAL REPLACEMENT PROJECT TO ALLOW EXTENDED CONSTRUCTION HOURS FOR THE PARKING GARAGE 5 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes May 8, 2006 PHASE OF THE PROJECT (MILLS PENINSULA HEALTH SERVICES, APPLICANT; PENINSULA HEALTH CARE DISTRICT AND MILLS PENINSULA HEALTH SERVICES,PROPERTY OWNERS) (245 NOTICED) PROJECT PLANNER: MAUREEN BROOKS Reference staff report May 8, 2006,with attachments. CP Monroe presented the report,reviewed criteria and staff comments. She noted the City Council's approval of the Urgency Ordinance regarding temporary extension of construction hours for the hospital and their suggested observations to the Commission. She also noted that the Municipal Code and Urgency Ordinance set the parameters within which the Commission may amend condition 94,should they choose to provide a place to begin.An amendment to condition 94 was suggested for consideration. Commissioners noted that the commission had been charged to determine the appropriate amendment to condition 94(hours of construction)and can choose among the current hours in condition 94,the longer hours allowed in the current Municipal Code and the extended hours allowed by the Urgency Ordinance. In any case the extension requested is for a limited time, May 15 through August, to expire September 1,2006. Staff noted that the Council added a provision to the Urgency Ordinance that the hospital report about compliance with whatever hours are allowed to the Planning Commission every 30 days from commencement of the work. Chair Brownrigg opened the public hearing. Oren Reinbolt,project construction manager,represented the applicant, 1783 El Camino Real. He discussed briefly the findings of a study about hospital construction costs in California including the causes of major cost escalation particularly'construction congestion'which is unique to this market at this time. Currently they are not affected by this since Turner Construction has been under contract to them for 5 years,but if that agreement is broken,their costs will increase substantially and they will need to revise the project significantly. He noted the remaining steps to get through to bind Turner,they include finishing the parking garage and its access on time,holding down the cost of the project to what was funded by Sutter Health by getting the permits from the State on time,and the Hospital district -� needs a public vote on the building. Asked for broader hours in the Urgency Ordinance request because at the public hearing neighbors felt less concern over Sunday than they expected and Sunday adds flexibility if get off schedule, already had the extra hour on Saturday that they lost because it was not within the current municipal code hours of construction, and neighbors not feel that working until 7 p.m. weeks days is a problem, but working from 7 - 9 p.m. is a big deal; these neighbors represent the lightening rod for the construction hours and would like to work to the limit acceptable. Extended hours are needed so that they are able to make up lost time by changing the way the floors of the garage are poured;can do quiet concrete finish work during the extended hours 7 -9 p.m. because need two 7 hour shift when pour and finish concrete;don't think the neighbors south of the site will hear anything; want the flexibility to do two things: this is a giant project to live next to,trying to make impact minimal; try to set cycle time so that only need the extra 2 hours on Thursday,and finish concrete only after 7 p.m.;complaints need to come directly to him and he will air them with the Mitigation Monitoring Panel and if deemed appropriate tonight will report to the Planning Commission. Commissioners asked will concrete finishing be the only activity during the extended hours, 7-9 p.m., no heavy equipment with bells will be backing up, applicant noted if work on Sunday there may be some heavy equipment,and some concrete pumping to 7 p.m.,pumpers will access site from Trousdale and El Camino. Commission asked,originally you were approved to work 63 hours a week, now you aske for 88 hours, a 40%increase,what is suggested here is 25%hours more than the original,is that enough to make a time recovery; applicant noted that the key is being able to reduce the cycle time by pouring the garage floors in thirds rather than quarters. What other construction will be occurring besides concrete? Will work on electrical, utilities,the at grade entrance roadway from Trousdale into the garage, but the cycle of pour is the limiting factor,would like flexibility to use extended hours once a week on any .� week day in case the cycle gets off schedule. Your request is the Municipal Code construction hours plus 7- 9 p.m. on Thursday?Yes. 6 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes May 8, 2006 Comments from the public: Terry Hubner, 1708 Davis Drive; Pat Giorni, 1445 Balboa Avenue; Kevin Nelson, 1654 Albermarle Avenue; Steve Dambrosie, 1504 Davis Drive; Chris Foley, 1504 Davis Drive; Christo Daskalakis, 836 Fairfield Road owner of 1700-1702 Albermarle Drive. Have a letter from 9 families to submit,concerned that it is clear what happened at the Council meeting,Sunday construction is a big deal, try to be fair allow Sundays or evenings,prefer evenings. Concerned about the Mitigation Monitoring Panel because it did not notify the neighbors about this issue until April 20,2006; anticipating 5 months with no windows open, evening and Sunday noise,need more quiet time,project just begun,how do we know that they will not come back again when construction gets behind; because neighbors could not meet with Mitigation Monitoring Panel did not have an opportunity to come up with a solution,before this meeting the Planning Commission and Council need to get the Mitigation Monitoring Panel going so address concerns;if we had a choice of faster to get the project over sooner,majority would prefer extra 3 months and keep the construction hours in the conditions of approval;concern that the trucks will exit behind the houses on the west end of Davis during the extended hours for the next several months,Commission should require that all trucks be covered all the time and that no deliveries be made after 6 p.m.Unclear in the staff report whether the entrance is included with the construction of the garage for the extended hours. Small group ofresidents have to continue to come back to the city,this is a request to save$200,000,000,would like the hospital to mitigate the neighbors' problems caused by construction by providing them with compensation such as installing double pane windows, Sutter has money are considering another new hospital in San Carlos; should be a condition if the conditions are changed or removed the neighbors should be compensated. Clarify that this will not be extended hours from 7-9 p.m. every day; feel should grant on a 30 day basis and see if they comply, then extend another 30 days; would like to have experience of extended hours and review. This change is not what the city and neighbors agreed to, this is much worse, and will affect our quality of life,it's a bad precedent this early in this project,fought hard for the current conditions,did not get compensation should have through the Mitigation Fund which also did not address the hospital mitigating noise and dust. Complained to Carole Groom about replacement of trees at the end of Albermarle in February and about several things since, each time told nothing could do; have not raised my rents in four years, concerned about the impact of the extended hours to tenants, especially those there all day,hospital should provide money to assist in replacing windows. Applicant responded: this will not be a precedent for requests to extend construction hours, will not be repeated once they start on the hospital construction,we are close,once have the prime under contract do not have to worry,but the next 60 days are a critical phase. Commissioner asked when the trees will be installed along the property line on Davis Drive. Applicant responded within 30 days,had a delay on covering the SF water line because of the wet soil. Given present weather feel can issue a reliable schedule to neighbors on a bi-monthly basis,should be pretty accurate for the next 90 days. Commissioner asked about the Mitigation Monitoring Panel. Applicant noted that he needs timely reporting of problems so can track down,neighbors should call hospital switchboard and ask for the administrator on duty,and note complaint,the administrator will call the construction team person on duty who can check right away; got a complaint this week end about three trucks through the Ray Park neighborhood,they were hospital service trucks not construction trucks, Carole Groom contacted all the people who do normal operations of the hospital and told them this route was not acceptable. Time line for the extension of hours has been less than a month since identified the issue, notified the members of the Mitigation Monitoring Panel, hand distributed memo to all the neighbors, and have had two public meetings. Don't want to work outside approved hours, am asking permission; in general the public process is working. Need to coordinate with the rest of the hospital operations. If quiet activities can be done on Thursday evening,what non-quiet activities will be done on Sunday,can you limit access to Trousdale on Sunday and Thursday evenings? Could limit to Trousdale and �- El Camino,with no construction truck use of Marco Polo during this time. Would like flexibility in what day of the week we can use extended hours in case get off cycle. Can Sunday be stipulated for quiet work 7 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes May 8, 2006 only? Not if a pour is needed, also need to get the access road built and occasionally that will require equipment;this is the piece of the road at grade into the parking garage,need to remove part of the SF water -� line and create a drainage retention basin,there will be a lot of stuff under that road. There were no furthei comments from the floor. The public hearing was closed. Commissioner discussion: City Council has looked to the Planning Commission to define this action;value making this decision tonight because if delay no point in change,also there is still an appeal period;clarify asking week-days 7 a.m.to 7 p.m.and one night 7 p.m.to 9 p.m.; CA noted that letting the applicant choose one night each week for extended hours would not be enforceable; asking Saturday 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. and Sunday 10 a.m.to 6 p.m.,don't see that they will use all this time;feel that the argument to increase hours is valid,to deny is a disservice to the community,lot of rain,like the project to be kept on track,what asking is OK since it is for a limited length of time; if this develops into a pattern of requests we will know right away,if they violate this it will be harder to get something in the future;could not foresee this,unique rainy period,to not address now will compound the delay into the next rainy period; need to get information back to the Mitigation Monitoring Panel and the community with issuance of a schedule which documents what will happed now without the increase in hours and what will happen with the recovery schedule,to increase community understanding. If not extend hours it will be a disservice to the community, cuts will reduce quality and what can expect for landscaping and affect neighborhood; project well run to this point,not a request based on mismanagement. C. Vistica moved to approve the amendment to condition 94 as noted in the staff report with hours of construction extended to September 1,2006,from 7 a.m.to 7 p.m.on Weekdays,adding 7 p.m.to 9 p.m.on Thursdays with work activity limited to quiet construction activities,and 8 a.m.to 6 p.m.on Saturday and 10 a.m.to 6 p.m. on Sundays,and that the Mitigation Monitoring Panel shall notify the neighbors if there will not be a pour on Thursday;and including the other items proposed in the staff reportabout notification of the compliance and notifying the neighbors about the construction schedule, by resolution including all the conditions in the staff report: 1) that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department and date stamped September 10,2004,Sheets A0.01 through PS7,including topography,grading,utilities,landscape plans,floor diagrams,site plans,phasing plans,site section,elevations,parking structure plans,etc.,and as shown on the perspective drawings of the Pedestrian View along El Camino Real at Medical Office Building and the View from Davis Drive Property to the South date stamped November 10, 2004 as they may be refined pursuant to Condition #5; (Planning, Building); 2) that the project shall include a hospital with a floor area of not more than 441,000 square feet and a medical office building with a floor area of not more than 150,000 square feet;(Planning,Building);3)that the project shall provide a minimum of 1,490 parking spaces,with 809 spaces in the parking garage and no more than twenty(20)percent of the required parking shall be in compact parking spaces; (Planning, Building); 4) that construction shall be carried out in the phases described in the Environmental Impact Report and the phasing plans dated September 10, 2004; (Planning, Building, Public Works); 5) that the approved exterior design of the hospital, medical office building and garage shall be further refined by the applicant pursuant to Planning Commission and City Council direction, and the refined designs shall be submitted to the City Planner for review and approval prior to issuance of the building permit for the parking garage; if the City Planner determines that the submitted exterior designs are inconsistent with the exterior design approved by the Commission and City Council,the design shall be forwarded for review and approval to the Planning Commission; in any event the emerging and final design of the medical office building,hospital and parking garage shall be forwarded to the Planning Commission for their information;and that any material changes in floor area,design,or use shall require City approval of an amendment to this use permit;(Planning);6)that the applicant shall record an access easement between the Mills Peninsula Health Services property at 1811 Trousdale Drive and the 8 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes May 8, 2006 adjacent Peninsula Hospital District property to the south before closing the El Camino Real access to the existing hospital,and that prior to issuance of a building permit for the garage,the applicant shall record an access easement or otherwise demonstrate legal irrevocable access for construction and parking ingress and egress between the merged Mills Peninsula Health Services properties along El Camino Real and the Peninsula Hospital District property to the west,to the satisfaction of the City Attorney;(Public Works);7) that an application shall be submitted and recorded for a lot line adjustment for the exchange of 35 feet of street frontage along Trousdale Drive from the east side to the west side of Magnolia Gardens Care Center between Mills Peninsula Health Services and Magnolia Gardens Care Center prior to the issuance of a building permit for the parking garage;(Public Works); 8)that the two parcels with frontage on El Camino Real that are owned by Mills Peninsula Health Services shall be merged and the map recorded prior to issuance of a building permit for the parking garage; (Public Works); 9)that prior to issuance of a building permit for the medical office building,the three parcels remaining after compliance with Condition#8 shall be merged, the map shall be recorded, and the zoning shall be changed to Unclassified for the resulting parcel; (Public Works); 10) that if the actions described above in Condition #9 and all prerequisite conditions are not complete within five years of the approval of this Conditional Use Permit,the City shall review and modify the Conditional Use Permit as appropriate;(Planning); 11)that no building permit shall be issued to any structure whose required parking is on a separate parcel;(Building); 12) that any improvements for the replacement hospital structure shall meet all requirements of California law and shall be approved by the California Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development;(Building,Planning); 13) that within three years of completion and occupancy of the new hospital facilities and medical office building,the existing hospital structure and its support facilities shall be demolished and all on-site and off- site improvements completed,inspected and approved by the city;(Building,Planning,Public Works); 14) that no later than the last phase of hospital construction(demolition of the existing hospital),the applicant shall meet with the property owners in the Davis Drive neighborhood to discuss whether or not the proposed landscaped area and improved pedestrian access from Davis Drive to the hospital site,which is shown on the approved plans, shall be provided or the site shall be used for an alternative use; and that if the parties cannot agree, the issue shall be decided by the Planning Commission; (Planning,Neighborhood); 15) that any future development on the 4.15 acre undeveloped area to be left for future use or disposition by the Peninsula Hospital District shall require a conditional use permit from the City of Burlingame and shall be subject to review under the California Environmental Quality Act; (Planning); 16)that the applicant shall apply for and receive approval, including required permits, from all other regulatory public agencies as necessary and required prior to the issuance of a building permit for the parking garage, including but not limited to the California Department of Transportation, the San Francisco Water District/ SF PUC, the Federal Aviation Administration, the San Francisco Regional Water Quality Control Board, the San Francisco Air Quality Control Board, the San Mateo County Airport Land Use Commission,and San Mateo County Transit Authority; (Planning); 17) that in the event of any discrepancy between adopted EIR mitigation measures for the project and these conditions of approval,or between any of these conditions of approval, the most stringent requirement shall apply; (Planning); 18) that the applicant shall pay for and designate an appropriate area to locate a significant piece of public statuary, art or fountain in the gateway area along El Camino Real at a location no further south than the medical office building approved by the Planning Commission; this proposed art work shall be selected and reviewed using a process with public input developed by the City for the selection and placement ofpublic art and shall be installed at the time of the final landscaping and hardscape on this corner of the site;the public art shall be substantial enough to become a focal point for the gateway and site and to help mitigate the location of the parking structure;the applicant shall pay to install the artwork and maintain it after installation; (Planning); 19) that the surface parking area which is a part of the lease agreement for this development should be available through good `-- faith negotiations with the lessor and hospital operator to facilitate future development of the remaining 4.15 acre site by the Peninsula Hospital District and reduce the extent of surface parking on the total site;required 9 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes May 8,2006 parking for the hospital can be met after CEQA review by joint use of an appropriately located and sized multi-level parking structure by amendment to this conditional use permit;(Planning);20)that neither the-, hospital or medical office building nor any other use on the site shall charge employees,clients,patients o; visitors for the use of on-site parking without an amendment to the conditional use permit,for which the application shall include traffic and circulation studies documenting the impacts of a pay-for-parking program on the site access,on-site circulation,use and shift of use of on-site parking,impact on access to and from any part of the site,and any possible impact on off-site and on-street parking in the vicinity of the hospital and medical office building; (Planning);21)that the applicant shall develop a Transportation Demand Management(TDM)program for the hospital and medical office building which shall be approved by C/CAG and the City of Burlingame consistent with C/CAG requirements,and that the required facilities for the TDM program shall be included in the plans for each facility prior to filing the plans for the new hospital structure with the California Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development or issuance of a building permit for the parking garage,whichever comes first,and shall be installed and/or implemented prior to occupancy of each structure;(Planning);22)that the applicant shall do a baseline study and then monitor parking usage quarterly throughout construction,and if the monitoring reports,resident complaints and/or staff observations demonstrate that parking for this project is occurring off-site,the hospital shall propose modifications on-site to address the increase above the baseline which shall be approved by the City Engineer;and the approved necessary changes shall be implemented as soon as feasible by the hospital operator;(Planning,Public Works);23)that following the completion ofconstruction and occupancy of the replacement hospital,the applicant shall monitor parking usage quarterly for the first three years;if any quarterly study indicates that the on-site parking required is inadequate,the applicant shall identify solutions in consultation with the City Engineer and shall implement the approved improvements in a time flame established by the City Engineer;(Planning,Public Works);24)that no construction traffic shall use the Davis Drive access to the hospital,and no employees associated with the construction shall use the Davir Drive entrance to the site or shall park on Davis Drive or nearby residential streets; (Public Works, Neighborhood);25)that to monitor the effectiveness of traffic access,circulation and parking during the entire construction period, including construction trucks and equipment, the applicant shall hire an independent traffic consultant to conduct a baseline parking and traffic study prior to the start of garage construction and to update the study quarterly during each critical phase of construction,and the baseline and intermediate studies by the traffic consultant shall be reviewed by the City Planner prior to issuance of the building permit for the garage;and that the applicant shall resolve any unanticipated problems identified through these traffic and parking studies and/or by the City Engineer within 15 days;(Public Works, Planning);26)that the recycling deposit for the demolition of the existing hospital structure that is required pursuant to Condition 996 will be retained until the Davis Drive entrance is closed and landscaped to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the City Arborist,and that the City may use these funds to close the Davis Drive entrance as required;27)that the applicant shall include language in all construction documents prohibiting all construction traffic from using the Davis Drive entrance;(Planning);28)that the applicant shall provide a plan for traffic control for each phase of construction,to be approved by the Department of Public Works prior to issuance of the next set ofpermits required for the project;(Public Works);29)that at no time shall any person connected with the operation of the hospital direct,order or encourage parking off- site,and the hospital shall take all reasonable steps to ensure that staff and employees park on the site itself in the parking provided pursuant to this approval;(Public Works,Planning,Neighborhood);30)that the relocation and reconstruction,including paving and striping,of the Magnolia Gardens Care Center's required parking(west side lot)shall be done prior to the time that the construction entrance at Magnolia/Trousdale is built,with the final provision of a total of at least 26 on-site parking spaces for Magnolia Gardens; (Planning,Building);31)that existing parking on the east side at the Magnolia Gardens Care Center shall not be demolished or restriped until the new west side lot parking is in place,construction of the west side lot shall not commence until the City has approved all required permits,and all construction shall be 10 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes May 8, 2006 completed within 90 days;(Planning, Building); 32) that use of the fire access lane on the south side of the property shall be limited to pedestrians and emergency vehicles only; (Planning); 33) that trucks shall not be left more than 48 consecutive hours on the hospital site, either at the loading docks or in the parking areas; `- however, this condition shall not apply to a truck that is directly attached to the technology dock; (Planning); 34) that the hours for delivery at the hospital loading dock off El Camino Real shall be limited to 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. Monday through Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. Saturdays, Sundays and Holidays; these hours do not apply to non-routine delivery of medical equipment or consumable medical supplies that are required for urgent or emergency use in the following 24 hours; holidays are defined in Burlingame Municipal Code Section 13.04.100; these hours shall be posted in clear public view and each vendor shall be notified of the hours of delivery; (Planning); 35) that the applicant shall install and/or replace streetlights along the project frontage on El Camino Real and Trousdale Drive, and the size, design and location of the streetlights shall be approved by the Department of Public Works and shall have CalTrans permits prior to installation; (Public Works); 36) that the hospital operator shall permanently maintain an off-site supply warehouse to be used to stage deliveries to the hospital in smaller trucks for the duration of this permit, and that if this warehouse supply system is materially altered, the hospital shall pay for an independent traffic analysis of the change in the number and size of trucks used for deliveries, and shall provide appropriate mitigation as determined by the Planning Commission by amendment to this Conditional Use Permit; (Planning); 37) that the hospital shall inform and require all vendor trucks to use El Camino Real and city-designated arterial streets and not to use adjacent residential streets (collector or local) in traveling to or from the hospital, and failure to comply shall result in a review of the use permit; (Planning); 38) that the applicant shall pay the North Burlingame/Rollins Road Development Fee based on peak hour trips generated by the hospital and medical office building; with the fee for the hospital paid in two installments, one-half at the time of city approval of the project and one-half before demolition permits are issued for the existing hospital building; and the fee for the medical office building paid in two installments, one-half within 90 days of City Council certification of the Final EIR and one-half before the final inspection is scheduled for the medical office building; (Planning); 39) that the applicant shall replace the bus shelter on El Camino Real as directed by SamTrans and shall obtain all approvals for adjusting the location of the bus stop from required agencies prior to installing the curb, gutter and sidewalk improvements on the El Camino Real frontage of the site; (Public Works); 40) that, because of the importance of providing continued access to the Burlingame Plaza Shopping Center from Trousdale between El Camino Real and Magnolia, the applicant shall prepare a traffic study to modify the left-turn movement/lanes into the hospital site to retain the existing left-turn pocket on Trousdale eastbound into the Burlingame Plaza Shopping Center, and, working with the City Engineer, determine how these changes can be most safely implemented including modifications to the mitigation monitoring plan which will clarify and improve access to both the hospital and shopping center; the identified solution shall be incorporated into the roadway improvements on Trousdale to be installed by the applicant; (Public Works); 41) that the applicant shall design, install and pay for any and all necessary upgrades to traffic signals including at Trousdale/Magnolia and El Camino Real/Trousdale intersections, as well as roadway restriping, and other transportation improvements required by the project, as described in the project plans dated September 10, 2004, the EIR for the project, and in the transportation Mitigation Measures set forth below; (Public Works); 42) that traffic signal plans shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for all changes to traffic signals due to the project, and the plans shall be reviewed and approved prior to implementation pursuant to encroachment permits; (Public Works); 43) that prior to issuance of the demolition permit for the existing hospital building, the applicant shall provide an irrevocable letter of credit or other form of security acceptable to the City Attorney to cover the estimated cost of installation of a single traffic signal at the new Trousdale Drive emergency/staff entrance, which improvements, if necessary, shall be installed within three years of the date the security is provided. The �. applicant shall conduct traffic counts at the Trousdale/emergency entrance intersection approximately twelve months after the start-of-service date of the new hospital to determine whether the Manual of Uniform 11 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes May.8, 2006 Traffic Control Devices peak hour signal warrants are met or exceeded at the new entrance, and if so, the applicant shall pay for the cost of installing said traffic signal improvements to City standards and requirements. In the alternative or in combination with improvements at the Trousdale/emergency entranct and if determined to be necessary by the City Engineer, the applicant shall pay for the cost of installing appropriate traffic control improvements at the intersection of Trousdale and Ogden or Marco Polo Way, provided that in no event shall the applicant be responsible for total costs,construction or installation greater than the dollar amount of the security provided for the one traffic signal; (Public Works); 44)that a State Heliport permit shall be issued by the California Department of Transportation,Division of Aeronautics,for the replacement helipad prior to the issuance of a building permit for the medical office building;(Planning); 45)that the helipad shall be operated within the criteria of the State Heliport Permit and that no more than eight helicopter trips shall arrive at the hospital within any single month,with a maximum of 24 trips per year and that the only exception without amendment to this permit shall be in the event of natural or declared emergency; (Planning); 46)that helicopter service to the site shall cease during construction as required by the Federal Aviation Administration and the CalTrans Division of Aeronautics; (Planning); 47) that the primary helicopter flight path shall be the approach from the northeasterly direction over the intersection of El Camino Real and Trousdale Drive as shown on the Flight Path Layout dated September 29, 2004, prepared by Heliplanners Aviation Planning Consultants, and that the westerly flight path arc shall only be used when strong wind conditions prevent the use of the primary flight path; helicopters shall not use the westerly flight path arc without Planning Commission review and approval except in emergency situations; (Planning);48)that before the Peninsula Medical Center is identified and/or licensed to operate as a regional trauma center, the Planning Commission shall review and rule on any physical changes caused,including changes in helicopter and emergency service vehicles, and determine how the implementation of these changes will have the least impact on the safety and environment of the residents and businesses in the area; (Planning);49)that curb and street elevations and detailed driveway profiles,as well as driveway transitions for each phase of work shall be submitted to and approved by the Department of Public Works prior to issuance of construction permits for that phase of work;(Public Works);50)that detailed plans for the curb, gutter and sidewalk realignment at the Marco Polo entrance shall be submitted and approved by the City prior to the commencement of work on the entrance and in the Marco Polo staff parking lot and that the driveway at Marco Polo Way shall be redesigned to be perpendicular to the street to provide safe sight distance for vehicles exiting from the parking lot, and the design shall be approved by the City Engineer before issuance of an encroachment permit;(Public Works);51)that all changes required within the right-of- way of Trousdale Drive for this project shall be reviewed and approved by the Department of Public Works pursuant to the encroachment permit process and approved for each phase by the Department of Public Works prior to implementing each phase;(Public Works);52)that any damaged asphaltic concrete pavement along the project frontage on Trousdale Drive, El Camino Real and Marco Polo shall be repaved to pre- project conditions; (Public Works); 53) that, for each phase of construction, the applicant shall post a performance bond payable to the City of Burlingame for an amount sufficient to construct all required improvements for that phase of the project which are located within the public right-of-way including,but not limited to,curb,gutter,sidewalk,road way construction,utilities,traffic signals and street lighting to the satisfaction of the City Attorney prior to issuance of any permits for that phase; (Public Works); 54) that detailed plans for the modifications proposed to the medians along El Camino Real shall be reviewed and approved by CalTrans and the Burlingame Department of Public Works pursuant to the encroachment permit process and approved for each phase by the Department of Public Works prior to implementing each phase; (Public Works); 55) that the applicant shall, at its own cost, design and construct public improvements including curb, gutter, sidewalk, asphaltic concrete pavement, street furniture and other necessary -� appurtenant work along the El Camino Real frontage of the site,Trousdale Drive between El Camino Rea, and the Magnolia Gardens Care Center property,and the entrance at Marco Polo Way in compliance with the streetscape guidelines in the North Burlingame/Rollins Road Specific Plan,and the improvements shall be 12 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes May 8, 2006 designed by a civil engineer,approved by the City Engineer,and installed by the project,and that the design of these improvements shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of the building permit for the parking garage; (Public Works); 56) that the applicant shall submit detailed plans for the loading dock �— entrance on El Camino Real,including a complete dimensional layout,to the Department of Public Works for review and approval prior to issuance of a building permit for the medical office building;(Public Works); 57)that the hospital shall design in and employ water conservation measures as adopted for the region or specifically by the City during construction and operation;(Planning);58)that the applicant shall submit detailed plans for the proposed new water connection and sizing to the Department of Public Works prior to issuance of the building permit for the parking garage, and shall incorporate any on-site or off-site improvements deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works; (Public Works);59)that prior to the issuance of the building permit for the parking garage, the applicant shall provide plans as approved by the San Francisco Water Department for the realignment of the SFPUC water line,including details of tie-ins and turn-outs, and all work associated with the realignment shall be coordinated with the Department of Public Works; (Public Works); 60) that, before issuance of the building permit for the medical office building, the applicant shall submit an updated sanitary sewer analysis of the public sewer system at the project site to assess the project flow effect of the proposed new sanitary sewer connection to the Department of Public Works,together with anticipated demands on the sanitary sewer system and the 1740 Rollins Road pump station,and shall incorporate any on-site or off-site improvements deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works;(Public Works);61)that the applicant shall relocate,restore or replace any City facility affected or damaged by the project,or of insufficient size,and shall replace any such facility in kind; (Public Works); 62)that prior to issuance of the building permit for the parking garage the applicant shall submit detailed plans to address storm and surface drainage on the site which identify potential impacts on CalTrans, the adjacent neighbors and the City's storm drain system, and shall comply with NPDES requirements to keep as much drainage on-site as possible,and shall incorporate any improvements deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works; (Public Works); 63) that, for each phase of construction,the applicant shall submit detailed plans for all City utilities in public rights-of-way adjacent to and affected by the work to the City Engineer,who shall approve the plans prior to issuance of any permits for that phase of the project; (Public Works); 64)that all irrigation systems and plantings shall follow the City's water conservation guidelines and each facility within the project shall be appropriately metered as determined by the City Engineer; (Public Works); 65)that all on-site catch basins and drainage inlets shall be protected during construction so that no debris can enter them,and all catch basins shall be stenciled with a City-provided stencil; (Public Works); 66) that the applicant shall submit an overall site drainage and erosion control plan for approval prior to the issuance of the building permit for the garage, and the plans shall conform to the guidelines and requirements of the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program;(Public Works); 67)that, for each phase of construction,the site drainage and erosion control plan shall be refined and approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of any permits for that phase of the project; (Public Works); 68) that the hospital shall store a minimum of 30,000 gallons of water for firefighting, plus an additional 150 gallons of drinkable water per licensed bed on the site at all times;69)that the hospital shall work with the Burlingame Police Department to identify and inspect installation of appropriate security surveillance devices along the all pedestrian pathways including the fire access lane,and the effectiveness of these devices in providing security shall be reviewed jointly each year, with improvements made as necessary;(Police Department);70)that a safety and security measures shall be installed over or around the cooling towers and that there shall be an alarm system and surveillance provided for oxygen storage bunker; (Planning Department,Building);71)that a pedestrian access way that is compliant with the Americans with Disabilities Act shall be provided from El Camino Real to the main entrance area of the hospital and medical office building; (Building, Public Works);72) that all work shall be done in conformance with the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act(Building,Public Works); 73)that pedestrian access along all street frontages shall be provided continuously throughout construction and shall comply with 13 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes May 8, 2006 ADA requirements;(Pubic Works);74)that a set of plans clearly showing the division between the portions of the project that are under the jurisdiction of the California Office of Statewide Health Planning and-� Development (OSHPD) and the portions that are under the jurisdiction of the City of Burlingame shall be approved by both OSHPD and the Burlingame Building Official and provided to the Building Official before plans for the medical office building shall be accepted by the Building Department for plan check; (Building); 75) that the applicant shall verify compliance with the California Building Code for building type,occupancy group,allowable area,allowable area increases,height,sprinklers,property lines or assumed property lines,exiting plan,accessibility,and minimum plumbing facilities according to Appendix Chapter, Table 29-A, for both the parking garage and the medical office building; (Building); 76) that all improvements for the Medical Office Building and garage shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Fire Codes, 2001 Edition as amended by the City of Burlingame; (Building); 77) that Fire Department access shall be consistent with Section 902 of the 2001 California Fire Code,including clearly identified fire lanes and curb parking restrictions consistent with the Burlingame Municipal Code Section 17.04.025; (Fire); 78)that canopies and vegetation along fire lanes shall maintain clear heights of 13'6"to provide clearance for fire and emergency equipment; (Fire, City Arborist); 79)that turn radii and surface support capabilities of fire lanes shall accommodate the largest fire department apparatus within San Mateo County and fire lanes shall not exceed sixteen(16) percent in slope at any point; (Fire); 80)that fire flow requirements shall be consistent with Appendix IIIA and IRB, and fire sprinklers shall be provided for all structures over 2000 square feet,with consideration for fire sprinklers being applied to fire flow reductions to be negotiated with the Fire Marshal, and additional considerations shall be made to ensure roof tip standpipes achieve a minimum pressure of 100 psi at the outlet; (Fire); 81)that fire pumps shall be diesel driven or have secondary power supplied by emergency generators with an on-site fuel supply of 48 hours of more;(Fire); 82)that Fire Department connections for standpipes and fire sprinkler systems shall be located within 50 feet of a fire hydrant;(Fire); 83) that a post indicator valve shall be provided for each separate building and so located as to be at least two-thirds the height of the building away from the building, and control valves and separate shut-off valves shall be provide for each floor of each building and electronically monitored;(Fire); 84) that fire alarm annunciation shall be identified by each smoke compartment and/or by each floor for buildings equipped with a fire alarm system(required for all buildings in excess of 20,000 square feet), and that activation shall clearly identify the location of the device and remote annunciation shall be visible from the exterior of the building, in a location to be approved by the Central County Fire Department;(Fire); 85)that the applicant shall receive approval by the Central County Fire Department for the location of the fire control room in the hospital structure,and the fire control room shall be clearly shown on the floor plans, prior to issuance of a building permit for the medical office building; (Fire); 86)that any land area which is to remain undeveloped and not specifically landscaped as shown on the approved plans,including the 4.15 acre area to be left for future use by the Peninsula Hospital District, shall be hydro mulched and planted with materials which will meet NPDES erosion control requirements and shall be properly irrigated and maintained with ground cover until the use of the land changes;(Public Works); 87)the applicant shall submit a report from a certified arborist citing measures to be taken to protect trees during construction,particularly the redwood grove behind the Magnolia Gardens Care Center,and that report shall be approved by the City Arborist prior to issuance of a building permit for the garage and that protection shall be installed for each phase of construction as required by the City Arborist before grading and/or building permits are issued for the phase of work; (City Arborist); 88)that planters with irrigation shall be installed as approved by the Planning Department and City Arborist on the upper roof level of the parking garage as shown on the landscape plans before an occupancy permit shall be issued for the garage,plant materials shall be approved by the City Arborist; and vines shall be planted at--,., various locations at the base of the parking garage structure on both the El Camino Real and Trousdale side: to break up the mass of the building and blend it into the gateway landscaping and design at this corner and along these street frontages, the City Arborist shall review the selection of vine and its irrigation and 14 City ofBurlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes May 8, 2006 proposed maintenance program; (Planning,City Arborist,Building); 89)that the landscaped setback areas along El Camino Real and Trousdale Drive and along the entire south property line parallel to Davis Drive shall be irrigated and maintained by the hospital operator;(Public Works);90)that the approved landscape plan for the site shall be further refined in the following stages by the applicant pursuant to Commission direction prior to the issuance of a demolition or building permit for (1) the construction of the new emergency/replacement entrance to the existing hospital,(2)the installation of the San Francisco water main on the south side of the property, (3) the construction of the new main entrance and parking garage (to include landscaping construction detail along Trousdale and El Camino Real street frontages) and(4) the demolition of the existing hospital(landscaping of the remainder of the site);and the refined plans at each of these stages shall include detailed tree protection measures including long-term maintenance programs,and planting,irrigation and hardscape plans and shall be submitted to the City Planner and reviewed by the City Arborist who will make recommendations,the plans will then be forwarded to the Planning Commission for information;during each period of construction the City Arborist shall inspect the site for compliance with the approved installation plan; if the project landscaping causes an unusual level of inspection by the City Arborist,the costs for inspection shall be reimbursed by the applicant to the City;(Planning,City Arborist); 91) that truck deliveries, pick-ups, collection of trash and other wastes and other truck service noise- generating activities shall be prohibited prior to 7:00 am and after 10:00 p.m.Monday through Friday, and prior to 8:00 a.m. and after 10:00 p.m. on Saturday, Sundays and holidays or as stated in the Municipal Code, Section 10.40.039; (Planning,Neighborhood);92)that the testing of the emergency generators shall be limited to once per week or the minimum required by law,whichever is more frequent,and if possible, shall occur between 7:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. on weekdays only; (Planning, Neighborhood); 93) that the oxygen storage tanks adjacent to the loading dock shall be filled no more than three times a week,and only between the hours of 8:00 a.m.and 7:00 p.m.;(Planning,Neighborhood);94)that because of the impact on the residential neighborhood along the southern property line of the hospital site, there shall be stricter construction hours imposed for this project;construction shall be limited to the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Monday through Friday,the hours of 8-100 9:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. Saturdays,and no construction on Sundays and holidays as defined in CS 13.04.100;the construction noise restriction in the condition shall not apply to work done within the building after it is fully enclosed; prior to 9:00 a.m., work should be focused on the northern portions of the site and the buildings; except that for the period of May 15, 2006, through August 31,2006,construction hours shall be extended,only for construction on the parking garage and new main entrance to the replacement hospital, to the following: 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Monday through Wednesday and Friday;7:00 a.m.to 9:00 p.m.on Thursday;8:00 a.m.to 6:00 p.m.on Saturday;and 10:00 a.m.to 6:00 p.m.on Sunday;and that during the hours between 7:00 p.m. and 9:00 p.m.on Thursday, only"quiet"construction activities,as determined by the City Engineer,such as concrete finishing and form removal and reinstallation shall occur and that during the extended hours on Thursday and Sunday,access to the construction site shall be limited to El Camino Real and Trousdale Drive;that the temporary extension of construction hours only for the parking garage and portion of the new main entrance to the replacement hospital to serve the parking garage shall end on September 1,2006,and all construction activity shall then conform to the construction hours originally approved with the adjustment of Saturday hours to be consistent with the City's current Saturday construction hours of 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., construction hours for other days shall be 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Monday through Friday and there shall be no construction on Sunday; that within 10 days of the Planning Commission action the applicant shall mail to all property owners and residents in the standard noticing area of the hospital replacement project established by the City, a notification of telephone numbers to use to make complaints regarding construction hours, that to insure maximum compliance the notice shall encourage complaints to be made at the time the problem is occurring, that a daily/hourly log shall be kept of the complaints including any action taken, and that the mitigation panel shall meet each 30 days following the Planning Commission action to amend the conditions in order to review the complaint log and resolution of each complaint, and the panel shall report its findings and any 15 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes May 8, 2006 corrective actions they recommended to the Planning Commission at the Commission's first meeting each month; the Mitigation Panel's compliance report shall be filed with the Planning Commission within in 5 days of the panel's meeting; failure to follow this compliance and review process or documentation of continued failure to adhere to the hours of construction or other negligence shall result in the immediate review by the Planning Commission of the condition of approval to extend construction hours;the applicant shall provide by the fifth day of each month,by mail,to each property owner and resident within the City's standard noticing area for the hospital project,a schedule of the construction activities for that and the next month,this notice should include the twenty-four hour contact number for complaints and shall encourage complaints to be made at the time the problem is occurring. 95)that the applicant shall submit to the City a recycling plan for each structure to be approved prior to issuance of the demolition permit for that structure, and a site inspection for compliance shall be required prior to each new phase of construction; (Building); 96)that a recycling deposit and compliance report shall be required for each phase of the project;(Building); 97)that the hospital and medical office building shall have a recycling plan approved by BFI and the City and shall continuously recycle as much of their waste stream as is possible and insures the public health; (Building); 98)that during construction and demolition of the existing hospital, at the direction of the City Engineer, the applicant shall evaluate the operation of the Marco Polo/Trousdale intersection whenever a traffic safety/operation problem is identified by the City, and the applicant shall install whatever interim solution the City Engineer determines to be appropriate for the duration of the phase of construction or the event causing the problem; (Public Works,Neighborhood); 99)that the Davis Drive access to the hospital shall be open only to hospital staff during construction and when demolition is occurring;the Davis Drive access shall be regulated by kiosk with security officer or by card actuated gate between the hours of 6:00 a.m.to 6:00 p.m. daily;outside of these hours the entrance shall be closed by a gate or chain;the use of this staff access shall be monitored prior to any construction to establish a current baseline of the use and then quarterly during construction; should the usage during construction exceed 100% of the current baseline--� usage,the applicant shall review with the City Engineer ways to reduce the level ofuse;the determination of the City Engineer may be appealed to the Planning Commission; should the staff gate access prove to be inadequate or exceed the 100%of current baseline and become a neighborhood nuisance the applicant shall meet with the neighbors and the City Engineer to discuss appropriate and safe alternatives,the City Engineer shall determine an appropriate and safe the alternative solution, and the applicant shall install or construct the necessary facilities; (Public Works, Neighborhood); 100) before the end of 2004, the applicant shall undertake a feasibility and cost study for undergrounding and connecting to the houses the electric and any other utilities currently placed along the shared property line between the hospital site and Davis Drive and, provided it is possible and economically feasible to underground just the utilities behind the north side of Davis Drive;and based on the conclusions of the feasibility and cost study,the applicant shall work with all the affected parties to determine if the utility work is feasible,how the costs to underground would be shared and its effect on landscaping; all of the affected parties must agree on the program and the timing for accomplishing the work in the context of the landscaping and other construction and operations on the hospital site; (Planning, Neighborhood); 10 1) that the applicant shall investigate the feasibility including P.U.C. approval of moving the San Francisco Water Line Easement along the rear of the properties facing Davis Drive north to increase the planting area between the property line and easement to at least 15 feet,the City Engineer shall review the study and shall determine the viable setback;however that setback shall be no less than 10 feet at any point except where the existing line connects to the new line at Balboa extended; (Public Works,Neighborhood); 102) that the applicant shall build a wall or fence between the rear of the Davis Drive residences and the replacement hospital's landscaped areas along the southern property line of the hospital,the wall or fence shall be built at a location and of a common design agreed to by all parties;if the parties cannot agree the Planning Commission shall select the location and type of wall or fence prior tc --� the completion of the installation of the San Francisco Water Main in the new easement; (Planning, Neighborhood); 103)that the landscaping within the area between the rear of each of the property lines on 16 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes May 8, 2006 Davis Drive and the San Francisco Water Line Easement shall be selected by each property owner from a palette of trees and shrubs provided by the applicant and approved by the City Arborist,with each property owner receiving individual assistance from the project's licensed landscape architect; selection of all trees and shrub sizes shall be based on achieving the design intention of the landscape plan including the maximum growth in a reasonable time given the species, location including utilities and landscape objectives, and any discrepancies between property owner and applicant shall be arbitrated by the City Arborist; the applicant,with permission, shall install trees on private property if it is determined that such planting is a reasonable or better way to address the wind or visual impacts caused by the project;the entire planted area on the hospital site shall be irrigated with irrigation in place within 30 days of planting,and the landscaping shall be installed as soon as the segment of the water line along the hospital's south property line is installed unless it is necessary to wait for a better planting season or timing as determined by the City Arborist;(Planning,City Arborist,Neighborhood); 104)that the parking lot landscaping on hospital property at the southern property line west of the San Francisco Water Line Easement shall be selected by each adjacent Davis Drive property owner from a palette of trees and shrubs provided by the applicant and approved by the City Arborist, with the objective of providing a 20 foot tall vegetative screen for the property line fences and to extend the overall pattern of landscaping for the replacement hospital site; this landscaping and its irrigation system as approved by the City Arborist shall be installed in a planter area no less than 4 feet in width on the hospital side of the replacement property line wall or fence;the plant size at installation shall be based on achieving the design intent of the landscape plan including the maximum growth in a reasonable amount of time given the species, location including utilities and landscape objectives,disputes shall be resolved by the City Arborist;planting and irrigation shall be installed no later than the second phase of construction of the replacement hospital; and that the applicant shall provide individual landscape consultation to each property owner in order to determine the best solution for screening along the hospital property line,with mutual agreement this could include plantings on the private property side, if it is agreed that it is the best location to achieve the landscape goals for the location; (Planning,City Arborist,Neighborhood); 105)that because the maintenance landscaping is so important to achieving the growth goals and to the quality of the hospital project,the property owner shall be required to provide intensive professional maintenance of all landscaped areas and to maintain all irrigation systems in operating condition, failure to do so shall result in Planning Commission review of the use permit; (Planning, City Arborist, Neighborhood); 106) that if the eucalyptus trees at the end of Albemarle Drive cannot be retained, the applicant shall investigate relocating them within the planting area between the hospital's southern boundary and the San Francisco Water Easement; if this is not a viable option as determined by the City Arborist, the applicant shall with the cooperation of the City plant a tree variety selected by the City Arborist,at a size selected by the City Arborist,which will achieve at height of at least 25 feet in six years and a maximum height of at least 60 feet,irrigation shall be provided to this cluster of trees and they shall be planted with irrigation when the water line installation is completed and before a building permit is issued for the medical office building;(Planning,City Arborist,Neighborhood); 107)that the area on the north side of the San Francisco Water Main Easement adjacent to the replacement hospital shall be raised with the approval of the P.U.C.by an earthen berm and planted with a massing of redwood trees and other varieties of tall growing trees and shrubs which will grow to a height to screen the view of the lower and closer portions of the new hospital structure from view of the near by residents;the selection and various sizes of plant material and trees as well as the irrigation system, shall be approved by the City Arborist prior to installation,no trees installed shall be smaller than 24 inch box size, and this landscaping and its necessary grading shall be installed before issuance of the demolition permit for the existing hospital structure;(Planning,City Arborist,Neighborhood); 108)that the design of the grading and landscaped area between the replacement hospital and the rear of the properties along Davis Drive shall include drainage which will retain all surface and subsurface drainage on the hospital site and which will accommodate as necessary existing natural surface and subsurface drainage now occurring from adjacent private properties; 17 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes May 8, 2006 the City Engineer shall approve all site grading and drainage plans affecting this area prior to commencement of the work to relocate the San Francisco Water Main; (Public Works); 109) that the applicant shall evaluate the impact of the proposed hospital structure on the wind velocity and turbulence on the properties adjacent to the south property line of the hospital site, this study shall be completed by the mid-point of Phase Two of the construction(installation of the San Francisco water line)so that landscaping along the southern property line east of the Davis Drive access can be adjusted to mitigate any changes to prevailing wind velocity or turbulence caused on the adjacent properties, landscape consultations with individual property owners shall include this information and address the wind issue; (Planning, City Arborist,Neighborhood);that noise levels of the future cooling towers will not exceed the noise levels of the existing cooling towers during full operation along the southern property line of the hospital. The baseline ambient and design criteria is to be defined as an hourly measurement during a 24-hour continuous measurement period. In addition, the ambient is to be defined as the L10 as required in the General Plan; (Planning,Neighborhood); 111)that the future ambient noise of the project shall be designed to not exceed the existing baseline ambient by more than 3 dBA during full operation along any property line of the hospital. The baseline ambient and design criteria is to be defined as an hourly measurement during a 24- hour continuous measurement period. In addition,the ambient is to be defined as the L10 as required in the General Plan; (Planning,Neighborhood); 112)that the applicant shall adhere to all NPDES and air quality requirements throughout construction, and shall meet with homeowners or tenants at their request and provide individually negotiated and reasonable on-site mitigation for observed impacts of dust and particulates from the replacement hospital construction,landscape installation or demolition of the existing hospital; (Public Works, Building, Neighborhood); 113) that during the construction of the replacement hospital, the demolition of the existing hospital and the final landscaping of the site, parking on the Peninsula Hospital site shall be limited to employees, staff, patients, patient visitors and construction workers only during the hours of their employment on the site;on site parking shall not be used for off-site parking for any other facility or service and shall not be used by any employee, staff, or member of the community for extended parking when they are not on the premises;(Planning,Neighborhood); 114)that for the duration of the project construction and any use of the site for a hospital and medical office building,no on-site parking required by the municipal code or by city approval for staff,employees,or users of Peninsula Hospital shall be leased, loaned or otherwise obligated to any other user or business; (Planning, Neighborhood); 115) that the south tower of the hospital facing Davis Drive shall be clad in translucent spandrel glass with a low reflectivity rating (reflectance out) of 9% to limit the amount of interior light emitting to the exterior,and that all hospital rooms above the third floor level facing the Davis Drive side of the property shall include interior design which shall encourage occupants to stand back at least 3 feet from the window, all windows shall be provided with blinds or coverings, and glazing shall reduce light transmission at night;(Planning,Neighborhood); 116)that,if feasible given the location of protected trees, the agreement of adjacent commercial property owners to the north,the amount of grading/fill required to achieve appropriate slope and the approval of the PUC regarding appropriate protection of the San Francisco water line and its facilities in the area as determined by the City Engineer,to reduce the heavy truck traffic immediately adjacent to the single family residences on the south side and west end of Davis Drive during the phase of construction which includes the demolition of the existing hospital, there shall be a truck entrance to the site established and maintained from Marco Polo Drive, in addition to the existing Marco Polo staff entrance;and should it be feasible and necessary during other phases of construction for more than two days a week for heavy trucks to stage or access the site from Marco Polo the applicant shall provide a second access to Marco Polo sooner; if this additional entrance causes a relocation of staff parking on site, the applicant shall submit a plan to the City Engineer for approval to show how this parking will be accommodated elsewhere; the approved plan will be implemented immediately as directed by the City Engineer;(Public Works,Neighborhood); 117)that prior to removal of hazardous materials and demolition of the existing hospital,the applicant shall meet with the neighbors to discuss the methods of removal to be 18 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes May 8, 2006 used, the precautions being taken, the timing of the various activities, and how possible impacts on their properties can be cooperatively addressed;(Public Works,Building,Neighborhood); 118)that the applicant shall propose a mitigation monitoring panel composed of District,applicant,City,and neighbor(including �- both residential and commercial)representatives to coordinate issues regarding compliance with conditions of approval and mitigation measures as well as neighborhood concerns and questions. The applicant shall also appoint a single point of contact to respond to questions and complaints regarding the construction and operation of the hospital under this approval. The proposed panel and contact process shall be submitted for review and approval by the Planning Commission prior to issuance of the building permit for the garage; (Planning); 119) that the applicant shall establish a mitigation fund to address concerns of immediate neighbors regarding issues such as dust, noise, and landscaping during construction of the project. The proposed mitigation fund and process shall be submitted for review and approval by the Planning Commission prior to issuance of the building permit for the garage;(Planning); 120)that the project sponsor shall install planters at the upper deck(roof level) of the El Camino Real and Trousdale Drive sides of the garage upon completion of garage construction; (visual quality; Planning) (VQ 1.1); 121)that the project sponsor shall agree to develop and implement a Construction Visual Improvements Plan that would make visual improvements to construction zones within a given construction phase and between phases if the zone is not scheduled for construction activity or will remain unused for a period greater than six months; construction zones subject to this mitigation measure shall be defined by the City Planner,and shall consider the size of the area,the nature of the construction activity,and the proximity or visibility of the area to public vantage points or residential uses;the Construction Visual Improvements Plan shall be implemented by the project contractor(s) and must be approved by the City Planner; the intent of the plan is to aesthetically improve portions of the project site that would remain unimproved for an extended period and screen the construction zone from view by passersby along the public streets and sidewalks,or to make the zone usable for MPHS employees, patients, and the public; possible improvements in the plan include, but are not limited to,the following(if timelines other than six months are specified below,the shorter of six months or the time specified below shall apply): a)the project sponsor shall clear a construction zone of construction debris and remove construction equipment whenever construction is not anticipated for at least two weeks; b)if a site is a construction zone,but no construction activities are scheduled for more than one month,the project sponsor shall be responsible for regular garbage removal and watering of any existing landscaping;c) the project sponsor shall ensure fencing is removed or visually treated around construction zones that front onto El Camino Real,Trousdale Drive,Marco Polo Way,or Davis Drive in a manner deemed acceptable by the Chief Building Official, in order to promote safety, connectivity through the site, and pedestrian friendliness; d) if a site is not in use as a construction zone for more than six months due to demolition or construction of a structure,the project sponsor shall improve the site with landscaping(e.g.,trees, shrubs, and groundcover),passive recreation/open space facilities(e.g.,benches,picnic tables),decorative fencing and/or seating walls, and pedestrian and bicycle routes that connect to adjacent open spaces; pedestrian/bicycle networks shall be defined by and to the satisfaction of the City Planner; e) the project sponsor shall install all landscaping as early as possible to decrease visual impacts of construction; (visual quality;Planning,Building)(VQ 6.1); 122)that the project sponsor shall be responsible for lengthening the left-turn pocket on northbound El Camino Real(to westbound Trousdale Drive)from about 180 feet to 375 feet;this improvement would eliminate left-turning vehicles from blocking traffic flow along northbound El Camino Real and satisfy the queue storage requirement;note that under cumulative conditions, a lengthier turn pocket(475 feet)is required,as described in Mitigation Measure TR-12.1 below;(transportation;Public Works) (TR 2.1); 123) that the project sponsor shall be responsible for converting the eastbound through lane on Trousdale Drive at El Camino Real to a shared left-through lane; the project sponsor shall be responsible for extending the existing dedicated left-turn lane to provide 145 feet of storage (a 35-foot extension)for vehicles turning left;the left-turn pocket(145 feet)and the extra capacity in the shared left- through lane(about 380 feet)would be sufficient to accommodate the 400-foot queue length;(transportation; 19 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes May 8, 2006 Public Works)(TR 2.2); 124)that the project sponsor shall be responsible for extending the southbound left- turn pocket on El Camino Real at Trousdale Drive an additional 100 feet; this measure would require the -� removal of a portion of the median strip;this measure is necessary because,by adding project traffic to the other turning movements at this intersection,signal green time is taken away from the southbound left-turn movement; longer turn storage is needed; (transportation; Public Works) (TR 2.3); 125) that the project sponsor shall be responsible for extending the eastbound left-turn pocket on Trousdale Drive at Magnolia Avenue to 175 feet; (transportation; Public Works) (TR 2.4); 126) that the project sponsor shall be responsible for extending the westbound left-turn pocket on Trousdale Drive at Magnolia Avenue/Main Entrance to 175 feet; adequate distance is available between the main entrance and the El Camino Real intersection to accommodate the left-turn pocket requirements identified in Mitigation Measure TR-2.2 and this measure (in a back-to-back configuration)plus a 20- to 60-foot taper; (transportation; Public Works) (TR 2.5); 127) [DELETED(see Conditions 41 and 124)]; 128)that the project sponsor shall implement an attendant parking program to increase the parking supply during critical phases of construction; the project sponsor shall fully fund a mitigation monitoring program(Program)that will enable City of Burlingame to monitor parking demand on a quarterly basis throughout the critical phases of construction; the Program shall also provide an alternative that could be quickly implemented should the monitoring show that the parking deficit remains; (transportation;Public Works)(TR 9.1); 129)that the project sponsor shall adjust the property line and construct the proposed replacement parking area at the northwest end of the Magnolia Gardens Care Center property prior to demolishing existing parking area and both property line adjustments may occur on the same map; (transportation; Public Works) (TR 9.2); 130) that the project sponsor shall complete the roadway improvements needed to mitigate the project traffic impacts(i.e.,Mitigation Measures TR-2.1 through TR-2.5)before the end of Phase 2,to ensure that construction traffic would have a less-than- significant impact;(transportation;Public Works)(TR 10.1); 131)that the Revised Project with cumulative development would result in LOS E operations on the El Camino Real/Trousdale Drive intersection during'1 the AM&PM peak hours; one turn lane is insufficient to accommodate this high turn volume;the project sponsor shall be responsible for ensuring that sufficient capacity is available by converting the eastbound Trousdale Drive through lane to a left-through lane, which would require the signal to operate in a split phase scheme in the east-west direction;converting this lane would improve operations to LOS D,reducing this impact to a less-than-significant level; (transportation;Public Works)(TR 11.1); 132)that the project sponsor shall be responsible for lengthening the left-turn pocket on northbound El Camino Real (to westbound Trousdale Drive)from about 180 feet to 475 feet;this improvement would eliminate left-turning vehicles from blocking traffic flow along northbound El Camino Real and satisfy the queue storage requirement;(transportation;Public Works)(TR 12.1); 133)that the project sponsor shall be responsible for extending the southbound left-turn pocket on El Camino Real at Trousdale Drive an additional 100 feet;this measure would require the removal of a portion of the median strip; (transportation; Public Works) (TR 12.2); 134)that the project sponsor shall incorporate the following practices into the construction documents to be implemented by the project contractor, and these practices shall be provided to the City Planner for approval prior to the issuance of building permits; a) maximizes the physical separation between noise generators and noise receptors; such separation includes,but is not limited to,the following measures:use heavy-duty mufflers for stationary equipment and barriers around particularly noisy areas of the site or around the entire site;use shields,impervious fences,or other physical sound barriers to inhibit transmission of noise to sensitive receptors; locate stationary equipment to minimize noise impacts on the community; and minimize backing movements of equipment;b)use quiet construction equipment whenever possible;c) impact equipment(e.g.,jack hammers and pavement breakers)shall be hydraulically or electrically powered wherever possible to avoid noise associated with compressed air exhaust from pneumatically-powered tools; compressed air exhaust silencers shall be used on other equipment;other quieter procedures,such as drilling --� rather than using impact equipment, shall be used whenever feasible; d) prohibits unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines;e)select routes for movement of construction-related vehicles and equipment 20 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes May 8, 2006 in conjunction with the Burlingame Planning Department so that noise-sensitive areas,including residences, hotels, and outdoor recreation areas, are avoided as much as possible; include these routes in materials submitted to the City Planner for approval prior to the issuance of building permits; f) designate a noise disturbance coordinator who will be responsible for responding to complaints about noise during construction;the telephone number of the noise disturbance coordinator shall be conspicuously posted at the construction site and shall be provided to the Burlingame Planning Director; copies of the construction schedule shall also be posted at nearby noise-sensitive areas;(noise;Planning,Public Works,Building)(NO 1.1); 13 5)that to reduce particulate matter emissions during project demolition and construction phases,the project sponsor shall require the construction contractors to comply with the dust control strategies developed by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District(BAAQMD);the project sponsor shall include in construction contracts the following requirements: a)cover all trucks hauling construction and demolition debris from the site; b)water all exposed or disturbed soil surfaces at least twice daily; c)use watering to control dust generation during demolition of structures or break-up of pavement;d)pave,apply water three times daily, or apply(non-toxic) soil stabilizers on all unpaved parking areas and staging areas; e) sweep daily (with water sweepers) all paved parking areas and staging areas during the earthwork phases of construction; f)provide daily clean-up of mud and dirt carried onto paved streets from the site; g)enclose, cover, water twice daily, or apply non- toxic soil binders to exposed stockpiles (dirt, sand, etc.); h) limit traffic speeds on unpaved roads to 15 mph; i)install sandbags or other erosion control measures to prevent silt runoff to public roadways; and; j) replant vegetation in disturbed areas as quickly as possible; (air quality;Public Works,Building)(AQ 1.1); 136)that Mills-Peninsula Health Services(MPHS)shall retain a qualified environmental specialist (e.g., a Registered Environmental Assessor or similarly qualified individual)to inspect existing buildings subject to demolition for the presence of asbestos,polychlorinated byphenyls (PCBs), mercury, lead, or other hazardous materials; MPHS shall submit the report to the City prior to demolition,together with an explanation of how the project will address any issues identified in the report; if found at levels that require special handling (i.e., any building material containing 0.1 percent asbestos,paint that contains more than 5,000 parts per million of lead,or any building materials known or suspected to contain PCBs or mercury), MPHS shall manage these materials as required by law and according to federal and state regulations and guidelines, including those of the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC), BAAQMD, California Occupational Safety and Health Administration (Cal/OSHA), County of San Mateo Health Services Agency (CSMHSA), and any other agency with jurisdiction over these hazardous materials(hazardous materials;CSMHSA,Building,Planning)(HM 1.1); 137)that in the event that contamination is visually discovered during construction activities,MPHS shall be required to conduct a Phase II Environmental Site Assessment;this investigation shall involve the collection and analysis of soil and groundwater samples as directed by the site assessment consultant; sampling shall extend at least to depths proposed for excavation, and samples shall be tested for elevated levels of petroleum hydrocarbons, VOCs, or lead, if any; soil and/or groundwater samples shall be collected throughout the project site as directed by the site assessment consultant;this assessment shall be completed by a Registered Environmental Assessor,Registered Geologist,Professional Engineer,or similarly qualified individual prior to initiating any further earth-moving activities at the project site;if it were determined by sample collection and analysis that petroleum hydrocarbons, VOCs, or lead is present in soil and/or groundwater samples, the impacted materials shall be segregated and stockpiled separately from non- impacted soils throughout the construction phase;if deemed necessary by the local oversight agency,some impacted materials shall be mitigated prior to construction; soils with elevated petroleum hydrocarbon, VOC,or lead concentrations may require excavation and off-site disposal; soils with concentrations above regulatory threshold limits for petroleum hydrocarbons, VOCs, or lead shall be disposed of off site in accordance with California hazardous waste disposal regulations (CCR Title 26) or shall be managed in place with approval of DTSC,CSMHSA or the Bay Area Regional Water Quality Control Board;(hazardous materials; CSMHSA, Building, Planning) (HM 2.1); 138) that in the event that contaminated soil or 21 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes May 8, 200.6 groundwater is encountered,MPHS shall comply with the Occupational Safety and Health Guidance Manual for Hazardous Waste Site Activities regulatory requirements for hazardous materials/waste health and safety plans; the Site Health and Safety Plan shall establish policies and procedures to protect workers and the public from potential hazards posed by residual contamination issues at the site;the plan shall include items applicable to site conditions, such as: identification of contaminants; potential hazards;material handling procedures; dust suppression measures; personal protection clothing and devices; controlled access to the site;health and safety training requirements;monitoring equipment used during construction to verify health and safety of workers and the public;measures to protect public health and safety;and emergency response procedures;if petroleum hydrocarbons are present in the soil or groundwater proposed for the use ofbackfill or disposal, the handling and disposal of the contaminated soil or groundwater shall be governed by the applicable local and federal hazardous materials regulations;(hazardous materials;Public Works,Planning, CSMHSA) (HM 2.1); 139) that in the event that runoff induced by the Revised Project implementation would enter the Caltrans storm drainage system under SR-82,the project sponsor would immediately contact Caltrans for necessary review and approval; (hydrology; Public Works, Caltrans) (HY 1.1); 140) that the project applicant shall prepare a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan(SWPPP)to prevent polluted runoff from flowing into public drainage facilities during construction of the proposed facilities;the SWPPP shall include Best Management Practices (BMPs)that include schedules of activities,prohibitions of practices, maintenance procedures,and other management practices to prevent or reduce the pollution in storm water runoff during construction;the SWPPP shall be reviewed and approved by the City of Burlingame and other appropriate agencies,such as the Regional Water Quality Control Board(RWQCB),prior to issuance of any grading or building permit; (hydrology; Public Works); 141) that the project sponsor shall submit an application to the City of Burlingame's Parks and Recreation Department Director for a tree removal permit and meet the replacement requirements of the Tree and Vegetation Ordinance (Municipal Code, Title 11.06.020); included with the permit application shall be a landscaping plan that illustrates species. numbers,and sizes of replacement trees;(biological resources;City Arborist,Building)(BR 1.1); 142)that the project sponsor shall be responsible for maintaining and protecting the existing on-site trees to be retained;the following specific actions shall be followed to maintain the health of the remaining trees:a)any pruning shall be done according to the direction of a certified arborist and all pruning shall comply with International Society of Arboriculture, Western Chapter Standards or other comparable standards deemed acceptable to the City Arborist; b) any abandoned utility lines (water, electrical, etc.) in the root zones (radius of ten times the trunk diameter) shall be cut and left in the ground to the satisfaction of the City Arborist;c)any surfacing material inside the root zone shall be pervious and installed on top of the existing grade;as an example,pervious pavers are acceptable provided the base material is also sufficiently pervious; base rock containing granite fines is not sufficiently pervious; d)temporary construction fencing shall be erected to protect the retained trees of a size to be established by the City Arborist; the fencing shall be placed at the perimeter of the root zone unless the pavement is supervised by a certified arborist;the fencing shall be in place prior to the arrival of construction materials or equipment;e)the landscape irrigation shall be designed to prevent trenching inside the root zones of retained trees; f)supplemental irrigation shall be provided during construction; approximately 10 gallons of water for each inch of trunk diameter should be applied at or near the perimeter of the root zone every two weeks during the dry months (any month receiving less than 1 inch of rainfall on average);g)retained trees shall be thoroughly mulched with a 3-inch layer of bark chips with the exception of a 6-to 12-inch area around the base of the root collar,which must be left bare and dry;(biological resources;City Arborist)(BR 1.2); 143)that the removal of trees,shrubs,or weedy vegetation shall be avoided during the February 1 through August 31 bird nesting period to the extent possible;if no vegetation or tree removal is proposed during the nesting period,no surveys shall be required; if it is not feasible to avoid the nesting period, a survey for nesting birds shall be conducted by a qualified wildlife biologist no sooner than 14 days prior to the start of removal of trees,shrubs,grassland vegetation, buildings, grading, or other construction activity; survey results shall be valid for 21 days following the 22 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes May 8, 2006 survey; therefore, if vegetation or building removal is not started within 21 days of the survey, another survey shall be required; the area surveyed shall include all construction sites, access roads, and staging areas, as well as areas within 150 feet outside the boundaries of the areas to be cleared or as otherwise �- determined by the biologist; in the event that an active nest is discovered in the areas to be cleared, or in other habitats within 150 feet of construction boundaries,clearing and construction shall be postponed for at least two weeks or until a wildlife biologist has determined that the young have fledged(left the nest),the nest is vacated, and there is no evidence of second nesting attempts; (biological resources; City Arborist, Planning)(BR 2.1); 144)that the project sponsor shall revise the preliminary planting plan to give preference to native trees; suggested native tree species, subject to approval by the City Arborist, include California sycamore,box elder,Monterey cypress,and Monterey pine;(biological resources;City Arborist,Planning) (BR 3.1); 145)that the project sponsor shall include methods ofwater conservation in the Proposed Project's buildings and landscaping;these methods shall include,but not be limited to the following:a)install water- conserving dishwashers and washing machines, and water-efficient centralized cooling systems in the hospital and MOB; b) install water-conserving irrigation systems (e.g., drip irrigation and automated irrigation systems); c)design landscaping with drought-resistant and other low-water-use plants;d)install water-saving devices such as water-efficient toilets, faucets, and showerheads; (utilities; Public Works, Building)(UT 5.1); 146)that the following mitigation measures shall be incorporated into the grading and construction contracts: a) if potential historical or unique archaeological resources are discovered during construction, all work in the immediate vicinity (within approximately 50 feet) shall be suspended and alteration of the materials and their context shall be avoided pending site investigation by a qualified archaeological or cultural resources consultant retained by the project applicant;construction work shall not commence again until the archaeological or cultural resources consultant has been given an opportunity to examine the findings,assess their significance,and offer proposals for any additional exploratory measures deemed necessary for the further evaluation of and/or mitigation of adverse impacts to any potential historical resources or unique archaeological resources that have been encountered; b) if the find is determined to be a historical or unique archaeological resource,and if avoidance of the resource would not be feasible, the archaeological or cultural resources consultant shall prepare a plan for the methodical excavation of those portions of the site that would be adversely affected;the plan shall be designed to result in the extraction of sufficient volumes of non-redundant archaeological data to address important regional research considerations; the work shall be performed by the archeological or cultural consultant, and shall result in detailed technical reports; such reports shall be performed by the archaeological or cultural resources shall be submitted to the California Historical Resources Regional Information Center; construction in the vicinity of the find shall be accomplished in accordance with current professional standards and shall not recommence until this work is completed; c)the project applicant shall assure that project personnel are informed that collecting significant historical or unique archaeological resources discovered during development of the project is prohibited by law;prehistoric or Native American resources can include: chert or obsidian flakes,projectile points,mortars,and pestles;and dark friable soil containing shell and bone dietary debris, heat-affected rock, or human burials; historic resources can include nails, bottles,or other items often found in refuse deposits; d)if human remains are discovered,there shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the discovery site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains until the project applicant has complied with the provisions of State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(e); in general,these provisions require that the County Coroner shall be notified immediately; if the remains are found to be Native American, the County Coroner shall notify the Native American Heritage Commission within 24 hours; the most likely descendant of the deceased Native American shall be notified by the Commission and given the chance to make recommendations for the remains; if the Commission is unable to identify the most likely descendent,or if no recommendations are �-- made within 24 hours, remains may be re-interred with appropriate dignity elsewhere on the property in a location not subject to further subsurface disturbance; if recommendations are made and not accepted,the 23 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes May 8, 200,6 Native American Heritage Commission will mediate the problem. (cultural resources; Planning) The motion was seconded by C. Terrones. Commission comment on the motion: support motion,people more likely to be away during the summer, encourage the hospital to work within these hours;closest distance to the garage is 570 feet,beyond the limit that commissioner required by the state to recuse from a vote,most of the noise this far away will come from El Camino and an occasional airplane; hospital will serve the region, it is important to the greater community. Would like to add a condition to limit site construction access during the extended hours on Thursday and Sunday to El Camino Real during the temporary construction. Maker of the motion and second agreed. Ask applicant to think about procedure, concern about neighborhood impact, significant opportunity cost if applicant creates uncertainty,more than money would like to see some monitoring by first Commission meeting in June, will value the way they develop a program for the neighbors to report and they respond; city is being flexible; those savings or some portion of them will accrue to the benefit of the city,would like to discuss this at the first meeting in June. Would like the applicant to report performance regarding hours of construction at the first Planning Commission meeting each month during the temporary extension of construction hours. Feel that there was a lapse with the Mitigation Monitoring Panel and the applicant,want the neighbors informed first. Would like to see some neighbors help W. Dambrosie out. Chair Brownrigg called for a voice vote on the amended motion to amend condition 94 (hours of construction)for the hospital replacement project. The motion passed on a 6-0-1 (C. Cauchi absent)voice vote. Appeal procedures were advised. This item concluded at 9:10 p.m. 5. 755 PALOMA AVENUE,ZONED R-1—APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW,SPECIAL PERMITS AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS FOR A FIRST AND SECOND STORY ADDITION TO A SINGLF FAMILY DWELLING AND FOR A NEW OFFICE IN AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE(JONATHAN FELDMAN, APPLICANT AND ARCHITECT; ANN STOWE & MICHAEL CELICEO, PROPERTY OWNERS (70 NOTICED) PROJECT PLANNER: CATHERINE BARBER Reference staff report May 8,2006,with attachments. ZT Strohmeier presented the report,reviewed criteria and staff comments. Fourteen conditions were suggested for consideration. There were no questions of staff. Chair Brownrigg opened the public hearing. Jonathan Feldman,architect,29 Park Hill Avenue,represented the project; Pat Giorni, 1445 Balboa Avenue spoke. Applicant noted he would answer questions. Commission asked about the removal of the overhang on the east side of the garage; architect noted that it was cut back to conform to code;Commission noted could add a barge rafter at the front of the garage would look like an overhang but meets code-sounds like a good solution;will the skylights be tinted?-will do if asked,not intend to; Commission noted that the dormer over the stair at the front has a lot of glass,window and skylight-want to add light inside the two floors, larger the opening between the floors the more light provided;only egress from the garage is the garage door,can you add a man door think code requires it,see no reason not to have a man door. Commission concerned about allowing a toilet in a detached structure often leads to creation of living quarters down the road, should limit waste line to 2 inches which would allow a sink but no toilet-applicant wants a toilet so not have to go back into the house and disturb people. Reason not allow toilet is so that living uses which belong in the house are provided in the house, the accessory structure is not intended to be a part of the living environment, using it for living especially on -� property lineimpinges on the neighbors. Applicant feels he has addressed the neighbors near the garage b,, removing all the skylights and openings in the garage visible to the neighbors, there will be no light seen, need to accommodate people working at home. Could add a basement and put the office there in the house. 24 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes May 8, 2006 Remind Commission of the application where an accessory structure was allowed to be used to support a disabled resident fifteen years ago and now owner wants to continue using it as living space, accessory structures are for accessory uses,should not be used as living spaces. There were no further comments from the floor. The public hearing was closed. Commission discussion: commend revisions made by the applicant and architect,but feel that use of the accessory structure for an extension of living quarters which could extend late into the night beyond normal office hours is an encroachment on the neighbors and not an appropriate activity in an accessory structure. C. Vistica noted that the design review process worked with this application,use of accessory structure as home office is OK with more people working at home it is helpful to be away from the house so moved by resolution with the amended conditions that a man door be added for egress on the side of the garage away from the property line, a barge rafter be added to the front of the garage on the property line side to balance the appearance of the roof overhangs, and that all skylights be tinted, and with the fourteen conditions of approval in the staff report. The motion was seconded by C. Osterling with the added condition that there be no toilet in the garage structure. The maker of the motion agreed to the amendment to the motion. Comment on the motion:not concerned about the use of the garage with this applicant but in the future once the toilet is installed; this is different from the situation on Albermarle since this garage is well integrated into the design,more potential for use as a second unit;cannot support unless the waste line is limited to 2 inches which is too small for a toilet; there is a storage area next to the proposed toilet which could easily serve as a shower stall; not want the change in use next to the property line and impact the neighbor's recreational use of their rear yard. Chair Brownrigg called for a roll call vote on the motion to approve with amended conditions which exclude a toilet in the garage,modify the garage design by adding a barge rafter next to the property line and a man door, and requires tinting of all skylights. The motion was denied on a 2-4-1 (Cers.Auran,Deal,Osterling and Terrones dissenting, C. Cauchi absent). The Chair called for another motion. C. Deal moved noting that the garage is an accessory use to the house and not intended to be used as an extension of the living quarters in the house,that the garage is in close proximity to the neighbors and late night use on the property line will infringe on the neighbors, so he moved to approve the project by resolution with the added conditions that all the skylights be tinted;that a man door be added for egress from the garage;that a barge rafter be added to the property line side of the roof of the garage to visually balance the eaves;that a toilet not be allowed in the accessory structure and any waste line to the accessory structure shall be limited to a maximum of 2 inches and with the conditions in the staff report as follows: 1)that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department date stamped April 25, 2006, A0.0 through A4.2 and EXST.1 and EXT.2, site plan, floor plan, building elevations, landscape plan(on site plan),that all skylights shall be tinted to reduce the diffusion of light at night,that a barge rafter of sufficient length to balance the overhangs on each side of the structure shall be installed on the property line side at the front of the garage,and that a man door shall be added to the side of the garage interior to the rear yard for a second egress from the garage structure, and that any changes to building materials,exterior finishes,footprint or floor area of the building shall require an amendment to this permit; 2)that the office attached to the detached garage shall not exceed 132 SF in area;3)that the detached garage shall only be used for parking and an office and shall never be used for accessory living or sleeping purposes and shall never include a kitchen or any kind of cooking facility;4)that the bathfoom in the detached gar-ag shall eenlain only a toilet and sink(no shower-or-tub)and shall not exeeed 22.5 SF and shall be sefved by water- a no larger- -14"and-a-sewer-line no a.-ger- "; there shall be no toilet allowed in the garage 25 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes May 8, 2006 structure and no waste line larger than two inches shall be allowed in the garage accessory structure or within the area used for an office; 5) that any changes to the size or envelope of the basement, first or second floors,or garage,which would include adding or enlarging a dormer(s),moving or changing windows anc architectural features or changing the roof height or pitch,shall be subject to Planning Commission review; 6) that prior to scheduling the framing inspection, the project architect, engineer or other licensed professional shall provide architectural certification that the architectural details such as window locations and bays are built as shown on the approved plans; if there is no licensed professional involved in the project, the property owner or contractor shall provide the certification under penalty of perjury. Certifications shall be submitted to the Building Department; 7) that prior to final inspection, Planning Department staff will inspect and note compliance of the architectural details(trim materials,window type, etc.)to verify that the project has been built according to the approved Planning and Building plans; 8)that all air ducts, plumbing vents, and flues shall be combined, where possible, to a single termination and installed on the portions of the roof not visible from the street; and that these venting details shall be included and approved in the construction plans before a Building permit is issued; 9) that prior to scheduling the roof deck inspection, a licensed surveyor shall establish the height of the roof ridge and provide certification of that the height is consistent with what was approved by the Building Department; 10) that the conditions of the Chief Building Official, Recycling Specialist, City Engineer, Fire Marshall and NPDES Coordinator's memos dated December 22, 2005, memos shall be met; 11) that demolition or removal of the existing structures or any part of the existing structures,and any grading or earth moving on the site shall not occur until a building permit has been issued and such site work shall be required to comply with all the regulations of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District; 12)that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Uniform Fire Codes,2001 Edition,as amended by the City of Burlingame; 13) that the project shall comply with the Construction and Demolition Debris Recycling Ordinance which requires affected demolition,new construction and alteration projects to submit a Waste Reduction plan and meet recycling requirements; any partial or full demolition of a structure, interior or exterior,shall require a demolition permit;and; 14)that the applicant shall comply with Ordinance 1503,the City of Burlingame Storm Water Management and Discharge Control Ordinance. The motion was seconded by C. Terrones. Chair Brownrigg called for a voice vote on the motion to approve with amended conditions which exclude a toilet in the garage,limit any waste line to serve the garage or office area in the garage to a maximum of two inches, modify the garage design by adding a barge rafter next to the property line and a man door, and requires tinting of all skylights. The motion passed on a voice vote 6-0-1 (C. Cauchi absent). Appeal procedures were advised. This item concluded at 9:30 p.m. 6. 37 STANLEY ROAD, ZONED R-1 — APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW FOR A FIRST AND SECOND STORY ADDITION (FRED STRATHDEE, F.R. STRATHDEE ARCHITECTURE, ARCHITECT; DON AND LORRI MCCARTHY, PROPERTY OWNERS (70 NOTICED) PROJECT PLANNER: CATHERINE BARBER Reference staff report May 8,2006,with attachments. ZT Strohmeier presented the report,reviewed criteria and staff comments. Eleven conditions were suggested for consideration. There were no questions of staff. Chair Brownrigg opened the public hearing. Fred Strathdee, architect, 147 Westly Drive, San Carlos, represented the project noting that he responded to comments from the last meeting. Like the fact that you -� straightened out the front porch,on the right elevation the pitch could be increased to 6:12 on the gables anc adding a wood vent would reduce the amount of stucco on this side; should be sure that the driveway is permeable material/blocks built on a sand base-this should be added as a condition;why were the headers 26 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes May 8, 2006 over the windows removed-architect noted it was to match the existing,what about decorative downspouts, -we are moving back to those originally shown; is all the stone veneer new,if so should be noted on each elevation- architect noted he would; still issue with gable on the left elevation,with revisions still doesn't �— continue through all the way to the back, left side could also use a belly band; are the windows French casement with mullions dividing, if so should be noted on all elevations of the plans, should be sure how emergency egress is going to be met from the sleeping areas using these windows. There were no more comments from the floor. The public hearing was closed. C.Vistica noted that the changes discussed will increase the consistency of the design throughout the house, so he moved approval of the proj ect by resolution with the following amendments to the conditions that the .driveway shall be built of permeable material set on sand,that a belly band shall be extended along the left elevation, that wooden vents shall be installed on the front elevation dormers, that the decorative down spouts shown on the original plans submitted shall be included in the building plans,the pitch of the dormers on the singe floor roof on the right shall not be changed and vents do not need to be added;that the French casement windows shall be designed so that they accommodate emergency egress from all sleeping areas, and that all the stone veneer throughout the project shall be matching and of the new type proposed on the plans, and with the conditions in the staff report as follows: 1)that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department date stamped April 16, 2006, sheets A.1 through A.5, and sheet L-1,with all windows to be new simulated true divided light windows in the house and garage, except that the driveway shall be built of permeable material set on sand,that a belly band shall be extended along the left elevation,that wooden vents shall be installed on the front elevation of all dormers,that the decorative down spouts shown on the original plans submitted shall be included in the building plans,the pitch of the dormers on the single floor roof on the right shall not be changed and vents do not need to be added;that the French casement windows shall be designed so that they accommodate emergency egress from all sleeping areas,and that all the stone veneer throughout the project shall be matching and of the new type proposed on the plans, and that any changes to building materials, and all changes to exterior finishes, footprint or floor area of the building shall require an amendment to this permit; 2) that any changes to the size or envelope of the basement, first or second floors, or garage, which would include adding or enlarging a dormer(s), moving or changing windows and architectural features or changing the roof height or pitch,shall be subject to Planning Commission review;3)that prior to scheduling the framing inspection, the project architect, engineer or other licensed professional shall provide architectural certification that the architectural details such as window locations and bays are built as shown on the approved plans;if there is no licensed professional involved in the project,the property owner or contractor shall provide the certification under penalty of per ury. Certifications shall be submitted to the Building Department;4)that prior to scheduling the roof deck inspection,a licensed surveyor shall shoot the height of the roof ridge and provide certification of that height to the Building Department; 5)that prior to final inspection,Planning Department staff will inspect and note compliance of the architectural details(trim materials,window type,etc.)to verify that the project has been built according to the approved Planning and Building plans;6)that all air ducts,plumbing vents,and flues shall be combined,where possible,to a single termination and installed on the portions of the roof not visible from the street;and that these venting details shall be included and approved in the construction plans before a Building permit is issued; 7) that the conditions of the Chief Building Official,City Engineer,Fire Marshal,Recycling Specialist,and the NPDES Coordinator's memos dated March 24,2006 shall be met; 8)that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Uniform Fire Codes,2001 Edition,as amended by the City of Burlingame;9) that demolition or removal of all or part of the existing structures and any grading or earth moving on the site �. shall not occur until a building permit has been issued and such site work shall be required to comply with all the regulations of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District; 10)that the project shall comply with 27 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes May 8, 200.6 the Construction and Demolition Debris Recycling Ordinance which requires affected demolition, new construction and alteration projects to submit a Waste Reduction plan and meet recycling requirements;any partial or full demolition of a structure,interior or exterior,shall require a demolition permit;and 11)that the applicant shall comply with Ordinance 1503, the City of Burlingame Storm Water Management and Discharge Control Ordinance. The motion was seconded by C. Auran. Chair Brownrigg called for a voice vote on the motion to approve with amended conditions addressing installation of a permeable driveway built on sand, adding a belly band on the left elevation, installing wooden vents on the dormers on the front elevation, installing the decorative downspouts shown in the initial plans, retaining the pitch of the roof on one story portion of the right elevation, being sure that the egress requirements are met from sleeping areas, and replacing all the stone veneer on the house with new stone veneer. The motion passed on a 6-0-0 (C. Cauchi absent). Appeal procedures were advised. This item concluded at 9:45 p.m. 7. 1255 BERNAL AVENUE, ZONED R-1 - APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW FOR A NEW SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING WITH A DETACHED GARAGE(CHRISTOPHER&ANITA KENNON, APPLICANTS AND PROPERTY OWNERS;JAMES CHU,CHU DESIGN AND ENGINEERING,INC., DESIGNER(54 NOTICED) PROJECT PLANNER: RUBEN HURIN C. Auran recused himself from action on this item because he lives within 500 feet of the project site. Reference staff report May 8, 2006,with attachments. CP Monroe presented the report,reviewed criteria and staff comments. She noted the review history of this site. Fifteen conditions were suggested for consideration. There were no questions of staff. -� Chair Brownrigg opened the public hearing. James Chu, designer, 39 W.43rd Avenue, represented the project.Pat Giorni, 1445 Balboa Avenue,spoke. He noted that he felt that it was clear what they are trying to do now,redesign increased the floor area by 40 SF which was used to increase the porch,porches are now 300 SF total. Commissioners noted that this was a great improvement over the first project; suggest that pink Creap Myrtle will not bloom well at the location shown, might change species to an evergreen like Pittisporum or Bay Laurel, 36 inch box size; this is a large house but now it works better, removing the double arch at the front porch and making it a single opening would reduce the visual mass; minor inconsistencies in the drawings, on the right elevation it is hard to see the gutter, assume it is to look as it does on the front-2 architect noted yes; it is unfortunate that the existing mature trees,especially the holly, will be removed;why are you building a house so close to the maximum size-need room for family to grow into. This is a different house than saw before,it is 64 feet long,two times as long as any other house on the block,but incorporated a lot of Commission suggestions,might try to position the house on the lot with the same orientation as the existing house, not boxy but still a lot of square feet which would read better if turned; porch is too narrow, 3.5 feet, to use to sit on, would help the house if it were deeper and longer. There were no further comments from the floor. The public hearing was closed. C. Deal noted this project has come a long way,looking at it as if it were a new design,move approval by resolution with amended conditions that the Creap Myrtle be replaced by evergreen Pitisporum and architect shall look at changes to porch to open it up and lighten the front fagade,although feel the porch is alright as it is, and with the conditions in the staff report as follows: 1)that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department date stamped April 27,2006,sheets A.1 through A.7 and L1.0,except that the Creap Myrtle shall be replaced with 36 inch 28 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes May 8, 2006 box evergreen pitisporum plants and the designer shall look at changes to the front porch to open it up and lighted the front fagade; and that any changes to building materials,exterior finishes,footprint or floor area of the building shall require an amendment to this permit;2)that any changes to the size or envelope of the basement,first or second floors,or garage,which would include adding or enlarging a dormer(s),moving or changing windows and architectural features or changing the roof height or pitch, shall be subject to Planning Commission review;3)that prior to scheduling the foundation inspection a licensed surveyor shall locate the property corners and set the building footprint; 4)that prior to underfloor frame inspection the surveyor shall certify the first floor elevation of the new structure(s) and the various surveys shall be accepted by the City Engineer; 5) that prior to scheduling the framing inspection, the project architect, engineer or other licensed professional shall provide architectural certification that the architectural details such as window locations and bays are built as shown on the approved plans; if there is no licensed professional involved in the project, the property owner or contractor shall provide the certification under penalty of perjury. Certifications shall be submitted to the Building Department;6)that prior to scheduling the roof deck inspection,a licensed surveyor shall shoot the height of the roof ridge and provide certification of that height to the Building Department; 7)that prior to final inspection,Planning Department staff will inspect and note compliance of the architectural details(trim materials,window type,etc.)to verify that the project has been built according to the approved Planning and Building plans; 8)that all air ducts,plumbing vents,and flues shall be combined,where possible,to a single termination and installed on the portions of the roof not visible from the street; and that these venting details shall be included and approved in the construction plans before a Building permit is issued; 9)that the conditions of the City Arborist's October 19, 2005 memo,the Chief Building Official's October 13, 2005 memo,the City Engineer's and Recycling Specialist's October 17, 2005 memos, the Fire Marshal's October 18, 2005 memo and the NPDES Coordinator's October 21,2005 memo shall be met; 10)that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Uniform Fire Codes,2001 Edition,as amended by the City of Burlingame; 11)that demolition for removal of the existing structures and any grading or earth moving on the site shall not occur until a building permit has been issued and such site work shall be required to comply with all the regulations of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District; 12) that the project shall comply with the Construction and Demolition Debris Recycling Ordinance which requires affected demolition, new construction and alteration projects to submit a Waste Reduction plan and meet recycling requirements;any partial or full demolition of a structure,interior or exterior,shall require a demolition permit; 13)that during demolition of the existing residence, site preparation and construction of the new residence, the applicant shall use all applicable"best management practices"as identified in Burlingame's Storm Water Ordinance,to prevent erosion and off-site sedimentation of storm water runoff; 14)that the applicant shall comply with Ordinance 1503,the City of Burlingame Storm Water Management and Discharge Control Ordinance;and 15)that the project is subject to the state-mandated water conservation program,and a complete Irrigation Water Management Plan must be submitted with landscape and irrigation plans at time of permit application. The motion was seconded by C. Osterling. Chair Brownrigg called for a voice vote on the amended motion to change the Creap Myrtle and take a second look at the opening for the porch. The motion passed on a voice vote 5-0-1-1 (C.Auran abstaining, C. Cauchi absent). Appeal provisions were advised. This item concluded at 9:55 p.m. C. Auran returned to the chambers and his seat on the dais. 8. 1400 BROADWAY, ZONED C-1, BROADWAY COMMERCIAL AREA - APPLICATION FOR MASTER SIGN PERMIT AND SIGN VARIANCE FOR A NEW BLADE SIGN (CONNIE MORRIS �- BOVIS, APPLICANT; MARTIN DREILING/ERIC HOLM, CSS ARCHITECTURE, ARCHITECTS; THOMAS KOROS, PROPERTY OWNER(73 NOTICED)PROJECT PLANNER: RUBEN HURIN 29 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes May 8, 2006 C.Deal recused himself from this item because he lives within 500 feet of the property. C.Terrones recused himself because of a business relationship with the applicant. Both stepped down from the dais and left the Council chambers. Reference staff report May 8, 2006, with attachments. CP Monroe presented the report,reviewed criteria and staff comments. Five conditions were suggested for consideration. CP noted that the location of the support members through the scroll work at the parapet of the building was an error in the original plans,and the applicant has revised the location of the supports. There were no questions of staff. Chair Brownrigg opened the public hearing. Eric Holm, architect, represented the project. Tom Koros, property owner, 1400 Broadway, spoke. Proposed sign is based on the more historical blade signs on the street as documented in the pictorial survey done by staff. Most of the older blade signs predate the 1978 sign code. Commission asked how the sign would be lit,bright colors?Applicant noted would move toward dark colors. Seems as if it is intended to be bright. Yes. Sign blocks the scroll work from view,why not shift it over one column, it would be closer to the front door. Looked at,not seem proper scale, next to a curved column,this is the only building with curved columns on Broadway,want to put the sign on a part of the building where there is a bigger field. Did you consider shrinking the sign? The size and scale is based on the size of the letters which is the same as in other signs in the area,Broadway is a long word. Drove up and down the street and studied area, this is a pretty big sign, would encourage not to be too boisterous visually, stripes will be different colored lights with the Broadway lettering a different color,don't know if would recommend all that. Comments from the floor continued: bought the building after the Bank of America left,want to revitalize --� this gem,allowing more restaurants provided an opportunity for an appropriate use, there is a tree in front of the building which affects where signage can be seen,neon is used because the sign is a period aesthetic, can be good and bad,hope to open in August. There were no further comments from the floor. The public hearing was closed. C.Osterling moved to approve the master sign permit request and the sign variance for height on the primary frontage at 1400 Broadway by resolution with the conditions in the staff report as follows: 1 )that the double-faced blade sign (74.2 SF, 37.1 SF each side) shall be installed as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department and date stamped March 31,2006,sheets Al.1 and A4.1;except that the sign supports for the blade sign shall be located below the scroll work and cornice along the top edge of the building; 2)that the blade sign shall not contain animated,moving or flashing lights on the light bulbs, lettering or neon tubes;3)that no additional signage shall be installed on the primary or secondary frontages of this building without approval of an amendment to the master sign permit by the Planning Commission; 4)that the master sign permit and variance for sign height shall only apply to the signs on this building and shall become void if the signs are ever demolished or destroyed by catastrophe or natural disaster or for replacement; and 5) that any improvements for the use shall meet all California Building and Fire Codes, 2001 Edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame. The motion was seconded by C. Brownrigg. Chair Brownrigg called for a voice vote on the motion to approve the master sign permit and sign variance for height. The motion passed on a 4-0-2-1 (Cers. Deal and Terrones abstaining, C. Cauchi absent)voice vote. Appeal procedures were advised. This item concluded at 10:20 p.m. Cers. Deal and Terrones returned to the Council Chambers and took their seats on the dais. 30 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes May 8, 2006 Cers. Deal and Terrones returned to the Council Chambers and took their seats on the dais. X. DESIGN REVIEW STUDY ITEMS 9. 1243 CABRILLO AVENUE, ZONED R-1 — APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW, PARKING VARIANCE AND FRONT AND SIDE SETBACK VARIANCES FOR SUBSTANTIAL CONSTRUCTION INCLUDING A FIRST AND SECOND STORY ADDITION(FARHAD ASHRAFI AND DEBBIE DAUFMAN, STEWART ASSOCIATES, APPLICANTS AND DESIGNERS; FRANK KNIFSEND, PROPERTY OWNER) (63 NOTICED)PROJECT PLANNER: CATHERINE BARBER CP Monroe briefly presented the project description. There were no questions of staff. Chair Brownrigg opened the public comment. John Stewart, project architect, 1351 Laurel Street, San Carlos,commented that a letter was written regarding the variances,wanted to reiterate that they are all very close to code requirements including only 4" off in garage depth and 2" off in side setback. The Commission made the following comments: ■ has the existing foundation been analyzed? Can it support a second story without replacement? ■ unit pavers in driveway should be built on sand to be permeable; ■ second floor of right side elevation doesn't read well,a 1'projection is not deep enough to break up the plane,needs work along this side;solution along right side is not to just bump out the projection 2% need to change roof lines; ■ rear second floor gable end needs a wooden vent in the triangular area;can add a false vent at gable; ■ is there a knee brace at the front above the porch,clarified open truss work;porch would look better if it were wider instead of the shingles continuing over; .� ■ design looks like it was driven by the declining height envelope; ■ chimney needs to be more distinctive, have more style; ■ if electric/automatic gate is put in across driveway,an off-street uncovered full parking space should be retained on the outside when the gate is closed; ■ stepping back massing along left side is good; ■ side elevations are broad; design should take cues from neighbor to the right; ■ roof element could come down to help break up the massing,break the roof line; ■ existing elevations are needed, add to next submittal; and ■ note casement windows on plans. There were no other comments from the floor. The public comment was closed. C. Auran made a motion to place this item on the regular action calendar at a time when the requested revisions have been made,plan checked and there is room on the agenda. This motion was seconded by C. Vistica. Chair Brownrigg called for a vote on the motion to place this item on the regular action calendar when plans had been revised as directed. The motion passed on a voice vote 6-0-1 (C. Cauchi absent). The Planning Commission's action is advisory and not appealable. This item concluded at 10:25 p.m. 10. 110 CLARENDON ROAD, ZONED R-1 — APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW FOR A NEW, TWO-STORY SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING AND DETACHED GARAGE (TINA CHENG, APPLICANT AND PROPERTY OWNER; JERRY DEAL, JD & ASSOCIATES, DESIGNER) (65 31 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes May.8, 2006 NOTICED)PROJECT PLANNER: ERICA STROHMEIER C. Deal noted that he would recuse himself from the item because of a business relationship with the applicant. He stepped down from the dias and left the chambers. ZT Strohmeier briefly presented the project description. There were no questions of staff. Chair Brownrigg opened the public comment. Tina Cheng, project applicant, 110 Clarendon Road, represented the project. The Commission made the following comments: ■ think the project is off on the wrong foot,it is a huge house and has no consistency with the adjacent houses in the neighborhood; ■ what's the need for a three car garage; too big for neighborhood; ■ have problem with removing the huge pine tree without the effort to design the house to keep it; large trees in the rear yard have a very large privacy effect for owners and neighbors; there's no comparison in size between the two pine trees on the property; should get an arborist report and install tree protection measures during construction to protect the trees; ■ like the house, like a Spanish style home in this area; likes the design;as you go north you see more Spanish style homes in this neighborhood; ■ front entry area inside 36"wall could have French doors opening into it; ■ proposed house makes a major statement; concerned with mass and bulk and to take the large pine tree out and build this house would be counterproductive; ■ landscape plan should be provided to incorporate larger scale and more landscaping in the front yard, and an arborist report should be prepared for the protected trees on site; ■ plans call for a concrete deck in the rear, seems a little out of place; and "1 ■ at the rear elevation next to/below the balcony, there is a narrow piece of roof tiles caused by the balcony on the second floor above;balcony should be revised so roof below can be better addressed. The applicant responded that they have three cars and would like to be able to park all of their cars in the garage;they are still thinking about keeping the pine tree and just trimming it back;there is another pine tree in the rear yard; the tree in the middle of the yard has large branches and the neighbors have complained about the pine needles. Pat Giorni, 1445 Balboa Avenue, commented and presented a letter from Susan Schmidt, 112 Clarendon Road, Carl Burtus, 516 Bayswater Avenue: not concerned about shape and size of house,concerned about noise and obstruction of sidewalk during construction, hoping noise could be kept to a minimum during construction; could owners erect as high a fence as possible; house does not seem to fit into the neighborhood and is maxed out;doorway is similar to 2112 Easton Drive,which is a departure from what's in the neighborhood; an arborist report should be provided for the removal of the tree; feels house is much too big and is out of character for the neighborhood;do not like it;concerned about asbestos,debris and dust flying off the house during demolition,construction workers have no consideration for the neighborhood;do not like the tree,wants it removed. There were no other comments from the floor and the public comment was closed. Commission had further comment: ■ this particular neighborhood does not have a lot of full sized houses; ■ along Bloomfield there are Spanish style houses; how do we usher in the transition of the --. neighborhood? ■ project does not work with adjacent properties because of its mass; 32 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes May 8, 2006 ■ applicant does not understand what we're trying to do with our design guidelines;there is too much detail on this house, more than the existing houses in the neighborhood; ■ this is a very deep lot, the house goes back further; concerned with right elevation; ■ could drop or reduce bedroom number two and pull back the second story element from the street; would reduce scale visible from the street; ■ second floor plate line could be broken up,varied or lowered somehow so that it is integrated better and the first floor plate height could be lowered in some locations; ■ is it the right design for the right place? and ■ surprised about comments of style of homes in this area; Spanish style and heritage is dominant in this area; find Spanish to work in this neighborhood. C. Osterling made a motion to send this project to a design reviewer with the comments made. This motion was seconded by C. Vistica. Comment on motion: this is a difficult situation, the house is just not integrated into the immediate neighborhood very well, maybe some other architectural style would be more appropriate. There are problems with the lack of a landscape plan and an arborist report must be provided for protection of the pine tree. The three car garage is too much. Look at the house on Bloomfield,just north of Bayswater that's under construction and see its impact on a similar neighborhood in transition. Chair Brownrigg called for a vote on the motion to refer this item to a design reviewer with the comments made. The motion passed on a voice vote 5-0-1-1 (C.Deal abstaining and C.Cauchi absent). The Planning Commission's action is advisory and not appealable. This item concluded at 10:55 p.m. C. Deal returned to the chambers and took his seat on the dias. 11. 1824 BARROILHET AVENUE, ZONED R-1 — APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW AND SPECIAL PERMIT FOR HEIGHT FOR FIRST AND SECOND STORY ADDITION (PAUL AND MIHAELA HOWIE,APPLICANTS AND PROPERTY OWNERS;MARK ROBERTSON,DESIGNER(38 NOTICED)PROJECT PLANNER: ERICA STROHMEIER ZT Strohmeier briefly presented the project description. There were no questions of staff. Chair Brownrigg opened the public comment. Mark Robertson,project designer, 918 E. Grant Place, San Mateo stated that the original project included a mansard roof which did not seem to work,the roof plan has been revised and now the applicant is asking for a special permit in the revised proposal to raise the roof height. He also stated that the owners are partial to the colonial style and that they went with a standard Colonial front fagade and they staggered the back part of the house. The Commission made the following comments on the project: ■ the stairs going up to the second floor are winders and will have to be brought up to current Building Code standards because of the remodel and addition proposed on the second floor; ■ existing garage seems too perfect, are the dimensions correct? ■ the chimney is quite big and somewhat contemporary looking, come up with some Colonial character to the chimney,possibly a different material; chimney looks cape cod and is very tall; ■ the wrought iron railing is all drawn to look as if it were a wood rail, this adds character to the building that otherwise is not there; ■ concerned with full height double bay windows at the front and the front facade in general; front elevation is very massive; 33 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes May R, 2006 ■ the house has Colonial elements,yet is not very Colonial;not sure you would see bay windows on a Colonial; ■ commend owners for bringing in an architect but project still needs some work; ■ effort was given to embrace the symmetry of the existing house;existing house has a low roof with a low plate height which now has a broad front elevation leading to broad side elevations; ■ Columns holding up front balcony do not look right,narrow at top into cap,not visually substantial enough; ■ Make sure wrought iron railing is drawn the way it is going to.be built; the shown has bulk like wood; ■ Could place three gables across the front to reduce mass and still be a Colonial; and ■ Porch element has been lost in the redo, it would help to create a more human scale. There were no other comments from the floor and the public comment was closed. C. Terrones made a motion to send this project to a design reviewer with the comments made.This motion was seconded by C. Auran. Chair Brownrigg called for a vote on the motion to refer this item to a design reviewer with the comments made. The motion passed on a voice vote 6-0-1 (C. Cauchi absent). The Planning Commission's action is advisory and not appealable. This item concluded at 11:10 p.m. XI. PLANNER REPORTS - CP Monroe reviewed the actions of the Council meeting of May 1, 2006. CP reviewed the Council actions on the urgency hours for the hospital and the appeal of the project at 1416 Balboa which was continued to May 15,2006. She also noted that Commissioner Vistica was reappointed for another term on the Planning Commission to end in April 2010. CA Anderson announced the next set of opportunities for the Commission to sign up for the State mandated ethics training. The Chair gave staff the revised seating chart for the Commission. Staff will rearrange the seats at the next meeting. - FYI: 216 Bloomfield Road—changes to approved design review project. The Commission had no comments and approved this request. - FYI: 2518 Hillside Drive—change to approved design review project. The Commission had no comments and approved this request. - FYI: 1715 Quesada Way—Hope Technology School operations update. The Commission had no comments and approved this request. XII. ADJOURNMENT Chair Auran adjourned the meeting at 11:20p.m. Respectfully submitted, Jerry Deal, Secretary SAMINUTESWinutes Template.doc 34 City of Burlingame MONTHLY PERMIT ACTIVITY April 2006 THIS MONTH THIS MONTH LAST YEAR DIFF F. Y. 2006 F. Y.2005 DIFF Permit Type # # % # # % WATER HEATER 6 6,294 9 0 57 54,361 66 0 0 SWIMMING POOL 2 66,500 5 103,800 9 169,300 -39 SIGN 1 3,500 2 1,700 106 26 72,177 25 85,300 -15 ROOFING 18 170,449 12 123,855 38 207 2,508,181 202 2,446,075 3 RETAINING WALL 5 169,017 2 0 0 PLUMBING 10 33,350 15 28,000 19 326 1,148,196 437 176,010 552 NEW SFD 2 905,560 13 4,660,000 12 4,666,639 0 NEW COMMERCIAL 1 15,000,000 NEW 5 UNIT APT OR CO 1 85,000 NEW 3 OR 4 UNIT APT MECHANICAL 1 3,000 6 55,050 -95 34 153,365 45 167,050 -8 KITCHEN UPGRADE 3 93,000 4 77,500 20 28 723,594 18 355,575 103 FURNACE 6 34,724 3 0 35 140,175 32 20,000 601 ELECTRICAL SERVICE 6 12,800 12 78,200 City of Burlingame MONTHLY PERMIT ACTIVITY April 2006 THIS MONTH THIS MONTH LAST YEAR DIFF F. Y. 2006 F. Y.2005 DIFF Permit Type # # % # # % ELECTRICAL 1 20,140 14 0 63 240,672 159 14,000 1,619 BATHROOM UPGRADE 4 95,000 2 45,000 111 42 767,363 15 167,900 357 ALTERATION RESIDENTI 24 563,450 24 898,629 -37 302 12,090,828 345 10,588,039 14 ALTERATION NON RES 9 283,490 5 1,295,159 -78 72 6,886,387 75 7,025,902 -2 Totals: 89 1,319,197 100 3,496,953 -62 1,229 44,881,316 1,442 25,881,790 73 )4-19-06 SUMMARY OF PART ONE OFFENSES PAGE: 1 FOR: MARCH, 2006 Current Prev Last Actual Actual YTD YTD :rime Classification................... . Current Year.. YTD.. YTD. . Change Change 4urder and Nonnegligent Manslaughter 0 0 0 0 0 4anslaughter by Negligence 0 0 0 0 0 tape By Force 0 0 2 0 2 lttempt to Commit Forcible Rape 0 0 0 0 0 2obbery Firearm 1 0 2 1 1 100.00 2obbery Knife 0 0 1 0 1 2obbery Other Dangerous Weapon 1 0 1 1 0 0.00 2obbery Strong-Arm 2 1 4 4 0 0.00 %ssault - Firearm 0 1 0 1 -1 -100.00 Nssault - Knife 0 3 0 4 -4 -100.00 assault - Other Dangerous Weapon 2 1 5 2 3 150.00 4ssault - Hands,Fists,Feet 2 0 4 1 3 300.00 4ssault - Other (Simple) 12 15 46 50 -4 -8.00 3urglary - Forcible Entry 4 9 16 26 -10 -36.46 3urglary - Unlawful Entry 10 7 28 20 8 40.00 3urglary - Attempted Forcible Entry 1 0 1 0 1 Larceny Pocket-Picking 0 0 0 0 0 Larceny Purse-Snatching 0 0 1 0 1 Larceny Shoplifting 5 7 13 9 4 44.44 Larceny From Motor Vehicle 34 21 85 61 24 39.34 Larceny Motor Veh Parts Accessories 8 9 30 34 -4 -11.76 Larceny Bicycles 0 4 1 7 -6 -65.71 Larceny From Building 12 14 25 16 9 56.25 Larceny From Any Coin-Op Machine 0 0 4 8 -4 -50.00 Larceny All Other 6 6 21 49 -28 -57.14 Motor Vehicle Theft Auto 6 3 20 21 -1 -4.76 Motor Vehicle Theft Bus 2 0 3 0 3 Motor Vehicle Theft Other 0 0 2 0 2 ------- ------ ------- ------- 108 101 315 315 J4-19-06 MONTHLY SUMMARY OF PART TWO OFFENSES PAGE: 1 CITY REPORT FOR: MARCH, 2006 Current Prev Last Actual Actual YTD YTD Crime Classification.................... Current Year.. YTD.. YTD.. Change Change All Other Offenses 45 36 118 121 -3 -2.48 Animal Abuse 0 0 0 0 0 Animal Nuisance 0 0 0 1 -1 -100.00 Arson 2 0 6 0 6 Assists to Outside Agencies 0 0 0 0 0 Bicycle Violations 0 0 0 0 0 Bigamy 0 0 0 0 0 Bomb Offense 0 0 0 0 0 Bomb Threat 0 0 0 1 -1 -100.00 Bribery 0 0 0 0 0 Check Offenses 0 2 2 3 -1 -33.33 Child Neglect/prot custody 9 2 21 8 13 162.50 Computer Crime 0 0 0 0 0 Conspiracy 0 0 0 0 0 Credit Card Offenses 0 0 1 0 1 Cruelty to Dependent Adult 0 0 0 2 -2 -100.00 Curfew and Loitering Laws 0 0 0 2 -2 -100.00 Death Investigation 1 3 6 14 -8 -57.14 Disorderly Conduct 0 8 5 14 -9 -64.29 Driver's License Violations 2 0 2 2 0 0.00 Driving Under the Influence 4 3 17 19 -2 -10.53 Drug Abuse Violations 0 4 7 8 1 -12.50 Drug/Sex Registrants/Violations 0 0 0 0 0 Drunkeness 12 0 19 8 11 137.50 Embezzlement 0 0 1 1 0 0.00 Escape 0 0 0 0 0 Extortion 0 0 0 0 0 False Police Reports 0 0 0 0 0 False Reports of Emergency 0 0 2 0 2 Fish and Game Violations 0 0 0 0 0 Forgery and Counterfeiting 3 2 11 12 -1 -8.33 Found Property 1 8 10 24 -14 -58.33 Fraud 3 1 8 12 -4 -33.33 Gambling 0 0 0 0 0 Harrassing Phone Calls 1 2 6 7 -1 -14.29 04-19-06 MONTHLY SUMMARY OF PART TWO OFFENSES PAGE: 2 CITY REPORT FOR: MARCH, 2006 Current Prev Last, Actual Actual YTD YTD Crime Classification.................... Current Year.. YTD.. YTD.. Change Change Hit and Run Accidents - 5 7 11 12 -1 -8.33 Impersonation 0 0 0 2 -2 -100.00 Incest 0 0 0 0 0 Indecent Exposure 0 0 1 0 1 Intimidating a Witness 0 0 0 0 0 Kidnapping 0 0 0 0 0 Lewd Conduct 0 0 0 0 0 Liquor Laws 0 2 0 2 -2 -100.00 Littering/Dumping 0 0 0 0 0 Marijuana Violations 0 3 4 3 1 33.33 Mental Health Cases 13 5 29 21 8 38.10 Missing Person 6 9 15 18 -3 -16.67 Missing Property 7 10 23 17 6 35.29 Municipal Code Violations 5 4 27 10 17 170.00 Narcotics Sales/Manufacture 0 0 0 0 0 Offenses Against Children 0 0 3 0 3 Other Assaults 12 15 46 50 -4 -8.00 Other Juvenile Offenses 0 0 0 0 0 Other Police Service 5 6 17 15 2 13.33 Pandering for immoral purposes 0 0 0 0 0 Parole Violations 0 0 1 0 1 Perjury 0 0 0 0 0 Possession of Burglary Tools 0 0 0 1 -1 -100.00 Possession of drug paraphernalia 0 0 0 0 0 Possession of obscene literature;picture 0 0 0 0 0 Probation Violations 0 0 2 1 1 100.00 Prostitution and Commercial Vice 0 0 2 0 2 Prowling 0 1 2 1 1 100.00 Resisting Arrest 0 0 1 1 0 0.00 Restraining Orders 0 1 0 8 -6 -100.00 Runaways (Under 18) 0 0 0 0 0 Sex Offenses 0 0 2 1 1 100.00 Sex Offenses against Children 0 0 1 0 1 Sodomy 0 0 0 0 0 Stalking 0 0 0 0 0 )4-19-06 MONTHLY SUMMARY OF PART TWO OFFENSES PAGE: 3 CITY REPORT FOR: MARCH, 2006 Current Prev Last Actual Actual YTD YTD :rime Classification..................1. Current Year.. YTD.. YTD.. Change Change statutory Rape 0 1 0 2 -2 -100.00 3tolen Property;Suying;Receiving;Possess 0 0 2 2 0 0.00 Suspended License 4 2 11 4 7 175.00 rax Evasion 0 0 0 0 0 rerrorist Threats 2 2 4 3 1 33.33 rowed Vehicle 37 38 81 118 -37 -31.36 trespassing 3 0 7 6 1 16.67 truants/Incorrigible Juvs 0 0 0 0 0 IS Mail Crimes 0 0 0 0 0 Jagrancy 0 0 0 0 0 Jandalism 18 21 48 54 -6 -11.11 Jehicle Code Violations 1 1 1 11 -10 -90.91 Jiolation of Court Order 1 0 3 3 0 0.00 garrants - Felony 1 3 3 4 -1 -25.00 Narrants - Misd 5 10 16 19 -3 -15.79 aeapons;Carrying,Possessing 1 1 2 2 0 0.00 Nelfare Fraud 0 0 0 0 0 ------- ------ ------- ------- 209 213 607 650 209 213 607 650 04-19-06 MONTHLY SUMMARY OF CITATIONS PAGE: 1 CITY REPORT FOR: MARCH, 2006 Current Prev Last Actual Actual Crime Classification. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Current Year. . YTD . . YTD. . Parking Citations 3540 3 , 063 8 , 029 9, 844 Moving Citations 300 123 736 302 --- ---- ------ -- - -- -- ------- 3840 3 , 186 8 , 765 10, 146 ------- ------ ------- ------- 3840 3 , 186 8 , 765 10 , 146 Officer Productivity. . . . generated on 04/19/2006 at 05:10 : 36 PM Reported On: All Officers Report Range: 03/01/2006 to 03/31/2006 Data Type Reported on: PARKING Valid % All Voids % All % Officer: ID: Cnt Valid Cnt Voids Valid ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ALVISO 355 975 28.78 11 20.75 98.88 CAINE 119 0 0.00 3 5.66 0.00 PEITELBERG 508 1258 37.13 20 37.74 98.44 GARRETT 501 619 18.27 7 13.21 98.88 KIRKPATRICK 502 536 15.82 9 16.98 98.35 ROSCOE 503 0 0.00 3 5.66 0.00 Total 3388 53 Page 1 of 1 CITY OF BURLINGAME Portfolio Management Portfolio Summary April 30, 2006 Par Market Book %of Days to YTM YTM Investments Value Value Value Portfolio Term Maturity 360 Equiv, 365 Equiv. LAIF&County Pool 19,600,492.83 19,600,492.83 19,600,492.83 62.03 1 1 4.079 4.136 Federal Agency Issues-Coupon 12,000,000.00 11,848,550.00 12,000,000.00 37.97 868 432 3.862 3.916 31,600,492.83 31,449,042.83 31,600,492.83 100.00% 330 165 3.997 4.052 Investments Total Earnings April 30 Month Ending Fiscal Year To Date Current Year 94,180.29 810,390.72 Average Daily Balance 30,265,194.57 28,038,723.35 Effective Rate of Return 3.79% 3.47% Pursuant to State law,there are sufficient available funds to meet Burlingame's expenditure requirements for the coming 6 months. Total funds invested represent consolidation of all fund types,and availaUjIfty,of some of these funds is restricted by law(e.g.Gas Tax,Trust&Agency funds,Capital Projects,and Enterprise funds). i d f4V 41 SUS N A, FINANCE DIR./TREASURER Reporting period 04/01/2006-04/30/2006 p 9 P Portfolio CITY CP Run Date:05/10/2006-08:51 PM(PRF_PM1)SyrnRept 6.41.202a Report Ver.5.00 CITY OF BURLINGAME Portfolio Management Page 2 Portfolio Details - Investments April 30, 2006 Average Purchase Stated YTM Days to Maturity CUSIP Investment# Issuer Balance Date Par Value Market Value Book Value Rate Moody's 365 Maturity Date LAW&County Pool SYS77 77 LOCAL AGENCY INV.FD. 7,978,635.06 7,978,635.06 7,978,635.06 4.305 4.305 1 SYS79 79 S M COUNTY POOL 11,621,857.77 11,621,857.77 11,621,857.77 4.020 Aaa 4.020 1 Subtotal and Average 18,265,194.57 19,600,492.83 19,600,492.83 19,600,492.83 4.136 1 Federal Agency Issues-Coupon 3133X9QV5 517 FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK 12/22/2004 1,000,000.00 980,310.00 1,000,000.00 3.500 Aaa 3.500 417 06/22/2007 3133XARN9 518 FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK 03/08/2005 1,000,000.00 992,500.00 1,000,000.00 3.390 Aaa 3.390 130 09/08/2006 3133XDGM7 519 FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK 10/24/2005 1,000,000.00 990,630.00 1,000,000.00 4.450 Aaa 4.450 907 10/24/2008 3133XDNL1 520 FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK 11/17/2005 1,000,000.00 990,000.00 1,000,000.00 5.000 Aaa 5.000 931 11/17/2008 3133XE2W8 521 FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK 12/28/2005 1,000,000.00 994,060.00 1,000,000.00 5.000 Aaa 5.000 606 12/28/2007 3133XEUE 522 FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK 03/22/2006 2,000,000.00 1,994,380.00 2,000,000.00 5.000 Aaa 5.000 235 12/22/2006 3128X2NA9 514 FEDERAL HOME LOAN MORTG.CORP. 01/30/2004 3,000,000.00 2,947,920.00 3,000,000.00 3.000 Aaa 3.000 274 01/30/2007 3136F5TJ0 515 FANNIE MAE 04/27/2004 1,000,000.00 978,750.00 1,000,000.00 3.100 Aaa 3.100 361 04/27/2007 3136F6FZ7 516 FANNIE MAE 10/18/2004 1,000,000.00 980,000.00 1,000,000.00 3.820 Aaa 3.547 535 10/18/2007 Subtotal and Average 12,000,000.00 12,000,000.00 11,848,550.00 12,000,000.00 3.916 432 Total and Average 30,265,194.57 31,600,492.83 31,449,042.83 31,600,492.83 4.052 165 Portfolio CITY CP Run Date:05/10/2006-08:51 PM(PRF PM2)S/ymRept 6.41.202a • / rt Ver.5.00 CITY OF BURLINGAME Portfolio Management Activity BY Type e Page 3 April 1, 2006 through April 30, 2006 Beginning Stated Transaction Purchases Redemptions Ending CUSIP Investment# Issuer Balance Rate Date or Deposits or Withdrawals Balance LAIF&County Pool (Monthly Summary) SYS77 77 LOCAL AGENCY INV.FD. 4.305 79,723.82 1,500,000.00 SYS79 79 S M COUNTY POOL 4.020 4,155,515.52 0.00 Subtotal 16,865,253.49 4,235,239.34 1,500,000.00 19,600,492.83 Federal Agency Issues-Coupon Subtotal 12,000,000.00 12,000,000.00 Total 28,865,253.49 4,235,239.34 1,500,000.00 31,600,492.83 Portfolio CITY CP Run Date:05/10/2006•08:51 PM(PRF_PM3)SyrnRept 6.41.202a Report Ver.5.00 CITY OF BURLINGAME Portfolio Management Page 4 Activity Summary April 2005 through April 2006 Yield to Maturity Managed Number Number Month Number of Total 360 365 Pool of Investments of Investments Average Average End Year Securities Invested Equivalent Equivalent Rate Purchased Redeemed Term Days to Maturity April 2005 8 28,872,808.56 2.864 2.903 2.880 0 0 292 181 May 2005 8 31,478,082.19 2.976 3.018 3.043 0 0 268 158 June 2005 8 31,826,904.29 3.006 3.048 3.085 0 0 265 147 July 2005 8 30,880,702.93 3.045 3.087 3.141 0 0 273 143 August 2005 8 29,380,702.93 3.048 3.091 3.151 0 0 287 141 September 2005 8 25,480,702.93 3.125 3.168 3.285 0 0 330 151 October 2005 9 26,721,256.73 3.268 3.313 3.406 1 0 356 175 November 2005 9 26,614,225.47 3.484 3.532 3.521 1 1 344 206 December 2005 10 27,741,871.03 3.594 3.644 3.613 1 0 356 214 January 2006 10 29,203,493.47 3.692 3.743 3.767 0 0 338 192 February 2006 10 27,236,535.77 3.734 3.786 3.836 0 0 363 196 March 2006 11 28,865,253.49 3.750 3.802 3.721 1 0 361 192 April 2006 11 31,600,492.83 3.997 4.052 4.136 0 0 330 165 Average 9 28,915,617.89 3.352% 3.399% 3.430 0 0 320 174 Portfolio CITY CP Run Dale:05/10/2006-08:51 PM(PRF_PM4)SyrnRept 6.41.202a Report Ver.5.00 � l ► CITY OF BURLINGAME Portfolio Management Page 5 Distribution of Investments By Type April 2005 through April 2006 April May June July August September October November December January February March April Average Security Type 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2006 2006 2006 2006 by Period LAIF&County Pool 68.8 71.4 71.7 70.9 69.4 64.7 62.6 66.2 64.0 65.8 63.3 58.4 62.0 66.1% .... ......... .......... ................... _..-. Certificates of Deposit-Bank ...............1. ............... -__. ...... ................ ............. ..................... ...................................... ........_........ -..................... _ Certificates of Deposit-S&L Certificates of Deposit-Thrift&Ln Negotiable CD's-Bank ..................................................... CORP NOTES Bankers Acceptances Commercial Paper-Interest Bearing Commercial Paper-Discount . . ........ ....... Federal Agency Issues-Coupon 31.2 28.6 28.3 29.1 30.6 35.3 37.4 33.8 36.1 34.2 36.7 41.6 38.0 33.9% Federal Agency Issues-Discount ............._ .......... _.. ...... . .... . . ..,,. Treasury Securities-Coupon Treasury Securities-Discount Miscellaneous Securities-Coupon .............. ........................ .............__........................................_.... ..... ................... Miscellaneous Securities-Discount Non Interest Bearing Investments _..... _............. ................................... Mortgage Backed Securities _._1..1.11.. 1...1..1...1.._.....11.........................1111._.........................1111...................._.................................1._1111 .................. 11 11 1111..... ... . ......,....., . 1111.. ..1.1.11... ._................. Miscellaneous Discounts-At Cost 2 Miscellaneous Discounts-At - Portfolio CITY CP Run Date:05/10/2006-08:51 PM(PRF PM5)SymRep16.41.202a Report Ver.5.00 CITY OF BURLINGAME Portfolio Management Page 6 Interest Earnings Summary April 30, 2006 April 30 Month Ending Fiscal Year To Date CD/Coupon/Discount Investments: Interest Collected 56,850.00 251,750.00 Plus Accrued Interest at End of Period 93,566.10 93,566.10 Less Accrued Interest at Beginning of Period ( 111,032.77) ( 66,482.49) Less Accrued Interest at Purchase During Period ( 0.00) ( 0.00) Interest Earned during Period 39,383.33 278,833.61 Adjusted by Capital Gains or Losses 0.00 0.00 Earnings during Periods 39,383.33 278,833.61 Pass Through Securities: Interest Collected 0.00 0.00 Plus Accrued Interest at End of Period 0.00 0.00 Less Accrued Interest at Beginning of Period ( 0.00) ( 0.00) Less Accrued Interest at Purchase During Period ( 0.00) ( 0.00) Interest Earned during Period 0.00 0.00 Adjusted by Premiums and Discounts 0.00 0.00 Adjusted by Capital Gains or Losses 0.00 0.00 Earnings during Periods 0.00 0.00 Cash/Checking Accounts: Interest Collected 164,875.74 638,316.04 Plus Accrued Interest at End of Period 317,884.31 317,884.31 Less Accrued Interest at Beginning of Period ( 427,963.09) ( 424,643.24) Interest Earned during Period 54,796.96 531,557.11 Total Interest Earned during Period 94,180.29 810,390.72 Total Capital Gains or Losses 0.00 0.00 Total Earnings during Period 94,180.29 810,390.72 Portfolio CITY CP Run Date:05/10/2006.08:51 PM(PRF_PM6)SyrnRept 6.41.202a ( r Report Ver.5.00 ®� PFM / Investment Portfolio Information For CAMP-CITY OF BURLINGAME (116-00) Portfolio # 12510150 Section/Report Title A. Account Summary B. Detail of Securities Held C. Fair Market Values&Analytics D. Security Transactions&Interest E. Cash Transactions Report F. Realized Gains&Losses G. Cash Balance Report For The Month Ending April 30, 2006 CAMP-CITY OF BURLINGAME CA PFM Asset Management LLC*One Keystone Plaza*North Front&Market Streets,Suite 300*Harrisburg,PA 17101-2044*(717)232-2723 For more information,please contact your client manager: NSESA KAZADI (415)982-5544 KAZADIN@pfin.com PFM Asset Management LL C- I PROGRAM I , I Account Summary: 12510150 CAMP-CITY OF BURLINGAME(116-00) (Excluding Cash) MONTH ENDED: April 30,2006 MARKET%OF YTM AT YTM AT DURATION SECURITY TYPE PAR VALUE AMORTIZED COST MARKET VALUE PORTFOLIO COST MARKET TO WORST FED AGY BOND/NOTE 3,800,000.00 3,794,059.90 3,783,812.50 41.004 3.987 5.152 0.220 FED AGY DN 5,560,000.00 5,457,819.44 5,444,028.64 58.996 4.391 5.037 0.403 TOTAL SECURITIES 9,360,000.00 9,251,879.34 9,227,841.14 100.000 4.226% 5.084% 0.328 TOTAL INVESTMENTS 9,360,000.00 9,251,879.34 9,227,841.14 100.000% ACCRUED INTEREST 39,959.72 39,959.72 TOTAL PORTFOLIO $9,360,000.00 $9,291,839.06 $9,267,800.86 Disclosure Statement: PFM's monthly statement is intended to detail our investment advisory activity.The custodian bank maintains the control of assets and executes(i.e.settles)all investment transactions.The custodian statement is the official record of security and cash holdings and transactions.Only the client has the authority to withdraw funds from or deposit funds to the custodian and to direct the movement of securities.Clients retain responsibility for their internal accounting policies,implementing and enforcing internal controls and generating ledger entries or otherwise recording transactions.PFM recognizes that our clients may use these reports to facilitate record keeping,therefore the custodian bank statement and the PFM statement should,be reconciled and differences resolved.PFM's market prices are derived from closing bid prices as of the last business day of the month as supplied by F.T.Interactive Data,Bloomberg or Telerate.Prices that fall between data points are interpolated. Non-negotiable FDIC insured bank certificates of deposit ay priced at par. / � l( A-I PFM Asset Manageme LLC- CAMP PROGRAM �- Detail vi Securities Held: 12510150 CAMP-CITY OFBURLINGAME(116-00) (Excluding Cash) MONTH ENDED: April 30,2006 SECURITY TYPE MATURITY S&P TRADE SETTLE ORIGINAL YTM ACCRUED AMORTIZED MARKET CUSIP DESCRIPTION PAR COUPON DATE RATING DATE DATE COST AT COST INTEREST COST VALUE FED AGY BOND/NOTE 31359MJX2 FNMA BENCHMARK NOTES 1,000,000 5.250 06/15/06 AAA 07/18/05 07/19/05 1,011,340.00 3,958 19,833.33 1,001,548.06 1,000,000.00 31359MVP5 FNMA GLOBAL BENCHMARK NOTES 1,000,000 3.125 07/15/06 AAA 07/18/05 07/19/05 991,682.00 3.991 9,201.39 998,254,98 995,625.00 3133X85Z1 FHLB GLOBAL NOTES 1,800,000 2,875 08/15/06 AAA 07/18/05 07/19/05 1,778,891.40 4.002 10,925,00 1,794,256.86 1,788,187.50 3,800,0003,781,913.40 3.987 39,959.72 3,794,059.90 0 FED AGY DN 313397WS6 FHLMC DISC NOTE 1,000,000 05/12/06 A-I+ 07/18/05 07/19/05 969,260.50 3,844 0.00 998,861.50 998,382.19 313397G47 FHLMC DISC NOTE 1,560,000 09/19/06 A-1+ 09/22/05 09/22/05 1,498,508.27 4.081 0,00 1,536,048.80 1,529,617.66 313589M26 FNMA DISC NOTE 1,000,000 - 10/27/06 A-l+ 11/17/05 11/18/05 958,077.78 4.593 0.00 978,122.22 975,242.21 313397P47 FHLMC DISC NOTE 1,000,000 11/14/06 A-1+ 12/21/05 12/21/05 959,246.00 4.663 0.00 975,522.75 972,748.71 313589760 FNMA DISC NOTE 1,000,000 12/18/06 A-1+ 03/22/06 03/22/06 963,941.94 4.969 0.00 969,264.17 968,037.87 5,560,000 5,349,034.49 4.391 0.00 5,457,819.44 5,444,028.64 TOTAL SECURITIES $9,360,000 $9,130,947.89 4.226% $39,959.72 $9,251,879.34 $9,227,841.14 Issuers by Market Value Ratings by Market Value R 0 FHLB $1,788,188 19.4% $5,444,029 59.0% 0 FHLMC $3,500,749 37.9% ❑q.tt D FNMA $3 938 905 42.7% AAA $3.783.813 41.0% oa: o Total: $9,227,841 100.0% B-I I i I PROGRAM 1 , I Fair Market Values & Analytics: 12510150 CAMP-CITY OFBURLINGAME(116-00) (Excluding Cash) MONTH ENDED: April 30,2006 SECURITY TYPE MATURITY FIRST CALL MARKET MARKET UNREAL G/(L) UNREAL G/(L) DURATION YTM CUSIP DESCRIPTION PAR COUPON DATE DATE PRICE VALUE ON AMORT COST ON COST TO WORST AT MKT FED AGY BOND/NOTE 31359MJX2 FNMA BENCHMARK NOTES 1,000,000 5.250 06/15/06 100.000 1,000,000.00 (1,548.06) (11,340.00) 0.122 5.149 31359MVP5 FNMA GLOBAL BENCHMARK NOTES 1,000,000 3,125 07/15/06 99.563 995,625.00 (2,629.98) 3,943.00 0,203 5.200 3133X85Z1 FHLB GLOBAL NOTES 1,800,000 2.875 08/15/06 99.344 1,788,187.50 (6,069.36) 9,296.10 0.284 5.128 FED AGY DN 313397WS6 FHLMC DISC NOTE 1,000,000 05/12/06 99.838 998,382.19 (479.31) 29,121.69 0.032 4.861 313397G47 FHLMC DISC NOTE 1,560,000 09/19/06 98.052 1,529,617.66 (6,431.14) 31,109,39 0.379 5.036 313589M26 FNMA DISC NOTE 1,000,000 10/27/06 97.524 975,242.21 (2,880.01) 17,164.43 .0.481 5.077 313397P47 FHLMC DISC NOTE 1,000,000 11/14/06 97.275 972,748.71 (2,774.04) 13,502.71 0.529 5.094 313589T60 FNMA DISC NOTE 1,000,000 12/18/06 96.804 968,037.87 (1,226.30) 4,095,93 0.620 5.123 SUBTOTALS $9,227,841,14 ($24,038.20) $96,893.25 0.328 5.084 ACCRUED INTEREST ON INVESTMENT 39,959.72 TOTAL MARKET VALUE OF INVESTMENTS $9,267,800.86 G1 C PFMAsset ManagemI I I , I AM Se cur,.,, ransactions & Interest: 12510150 CAMP-Cts f OFBURLINGAME(116-00) (Excluding Cash) MONTH ENDED: April 30,2006 S&P MATURITY PRINCIPAL ACCRUED TRADE SETTLE TRAN TYPE SECURITY DESCRIPTION CUSIP RATING PAR COUPON DATE AMOUNT INTEREST TOTAL 04/13/06 04/13/06 MATURITY FHLMC DISC NOTE 313397VMO A-1+ 1,000,000 0.000 04/13/06 1,000,000.00 0.00 1,000,000.00 1,000,000 1,000,000.00 0.00 1,000,000.00 TOTAL SECURITY TRANSACTIONS 1,000,000.00 D-I PFM Asset Management LLC-CAMP PROGRAM Cash Transactions Report: 12510150 CAMP-CITY OF BURLINGAME(116-00) MONTH ENDED: April 30,2006 CASH DATE TRANSACTION CODE TRANSACTION DESCRIPTION TOTAL AMOUNT 04/13/06 CW WITHDRAW (1,000,000.00) (11000,000.00) NET CASH CONTRIBUTIONS/(WITHDRAWS) (53,000,000.00) E-I PFMAssetMt-tnqgemj&LC - CAMP PROGRAM R2a11Zt.. sins and Losses: 12510150 CAMP-CITY OFBVALINGAME (1]6-00) (Excluding Cash) MONTH ENDED: Aril 30, 2006 TRADE SETTLE PRINCIPAL REALIZED REALIZED DATE DATE TRAN TYPE SALE METHOD SECURITY DESCRIPTION CUSIP PAR VALUE COUPON PROCEEDS G/(L) COST G/(L)AMORT CST 04/13/06 04/13/06 MATURITY FHLMC DISC NOTE 313397VMO 1,000,000 0.000 1,000,000.00 27,723.11 0.00 TOTAL GAINS AND LOSSES $27,723.11 $0.00 F-1 PFMAsset Management LLC- I PROGRAM I / I Cash Balance Report: 12510150 CAMP-CITY OFBURLINCAME(116-00) MONTH ENDED: April 30,2006 CASH BALANCE: $0.00 Earnings Calculation Templates Current Month-End Book Value + Add Coupon Interest Received + Current Month-End Accrued Interest + Less Purchased Interest Related to Coupons Less Purchases Add/Subtract Gains or Losses on Cost For The Mth +/- Less Purchased Interest Total Cost Basis Earnings For The Month Add Disposals(Sales,Maturities,Paydowns,Sinks,etc.) + Add Coupon Interest Received + Less Previous Month-End Book Value Less Previous Month-End Accrued Interest Total Accrual Basis Earnings For The Month Economic Calendar 05/05/06 Change in Nonfarm Payrolls 05/18/06 Leading Indicators 05/05/06 Unemployment Rate 05/24/06 Durable Goods Orders 05/11/06 Advance Retail Sales 05/25/06 Existing Home Sales 05/16/06 Producer Price Index 05/25/06 GDP Annualized 05/16/06 Housing Starts 05/25/06 Personal Consumption 05/17/06 Consumer Price Index 05/31/06 Chicago Purchasing Manager Market Commentary Interest rates headed higher throughout the month of April as most economic indicators pointed to a strong economy. The yield curve steepened as higher rates overseas and higher commodity prices weighed on the long-end of the yield curve. Oil,gold and silver led other commodities higher during the month adding to inflation concerns. Crude oil traded over$75 a barrel for a time and gold closed the month at over $656 an ounce. FOMC Chairman Bernanke gave the bond market some good news indicating that the Fed may be near the end of their tightening cycle. During his remarks to congress Mr. Bernanke testified that the FOMC may pause at one of its meetings to await more economic data to better assess the state of the economy, The next FOMC meeting is on May 10 when the FOMC is expected in increase rates an additional 25 basis points to 5.00%, City ®f 1 kngae ! MONTHLY PERMIT ACTIVITY April 2006 THIS MONTH THIS MONTH LAST YEAR DIFF F. Y. 2006 F. Y.2005 DIFF Pen nit Type # # % # # % WATER HEATER 6 6,294 9 0 57 54,361 66 0 0 SWIMMING POOL 2 66,500 5 103,800 9 169,300 -39 SIGN 1 3,500 2 1,700 106 26 72,177 25 85,300 -15 ROOFING 18 170,449 12 123,855 38 207 2,508,181 202 2,446,075 3 RETAINING WALL 5 169,017 2 0 0 PLUMBING 10 33,350 15 28,000 19 326 1,148,196 437 176,010 552 NEW SFD 2 905,560 13 4,660,000 12 4,666,639 0 NEW COMMERCIAL 1 15,000,000 NEW 5 UNIT APT OR CO 1 85,000 NEW 3 OR 4 UNIT APT MECHANICAL 1 3,000 6 55,050 -95 34 153,365 45 167,050 -8 KITCHEN UPGRADE 3 93,000 4 77,500 20 28 723,594 18 355,575 103 FURNACE 6 34,724 3 0 35 140,175 32 20,000 601 ELECTRICAL SERVICE 6 12,800 12 78,200 City of Burlingame MONTHLY PERMIT ACTIVITY Apd12006 THIS MONTH THIS MONTH LAST YEAR DIFF F. Y. 2006 F. Y.2005 DIFF Permit Type # # % # # % ELECTRICAL, 1 20,140 14 0 63 240,672 159 14,000 1,619 BATHROOM UPGRADE 4 95,000 2 45,000 111 42 767,363 15 167,900 357 ALTERATION RESIDENTI 24 563,450 24 898,629 -37 302 12,090,828 345 10,588,039 14 ALTERATION NON RES 9 283,490 5 1,295,159 -78 72 6,886,387 75 7,025,902 -2 Totals: 89 1,319,197 100 3,496,953 -62 1,229 44,881,316 1,442 25,881,790 73 )4-19-d6 SUMMARY OF PART ONE OFFENSES PAGE: 1 FOR: MARCH, 2006 Current Prev Last Actual Actual YTD YTD :rime Classification.................... Current Year.. YTD.. YTD.. Change Change 4urder and Nonnegligent Manslaughter 0 0 0 0 0 4anslaughter by Negligence 0 0 0 0 0 tape By Force 0 0 2 0 2 kttempt to Commit Forcible Rape 0 0 0 0 0 Zobbery Firearm 1 0 2 1 1 100.00 Zobbery Knife 0 0 1 0 1 Zobbery Other Dangerous Weapon 1 0 1 1 0 0.00 Zobbery Strong-Arm 2 1 4 4 0 0.00 kssault - Firearm 0 1 0 1 -1 -100.00 kssault - Knife 0 3 0 4 -4 -100.00 kssault - Other Dangerous Weapon 2 1 5 2 3 150.00 kssault - Hands,Fists,Feet 2 0 4 1 3 300.00 kssault - Other (Simple) 12 15 46 50 -4 -8.00 3urglary - Forcible Entry 4 9 16 26 -10 -38.46 3urglary - Unlawful Entry 10 7 28 20 8 40.00 3urglary - Attempted Forcible Entry 1 0 1 0 1 Larceny Pocket-Picking 0 0 0 0 0 Larceny Purse-Snatching 0 0 1 0 1 Larceny Shoplifting 5 7 13 9 4 44.44 Larceny From Motor Vehicle 34 21 85 61 24 39.34 Larceny Motor Veh Parts Accessories. 8 9 30 34 -4 -11.76 Larceny Bicycles 0 4 1 7 -6 -85.71 - Larceny From Building 12 14 25 16 9 56.25 Larceny From Any Coin-Op Machine 0 0 4 8 -4 -50.00 Larceny All Other 6 6 21 49 -28 -57.14 Motor Vehicle Theft Auto 6 3 20 21 -1 -4.76 Motor Vehicle Theft Bus 2 0 3 0 3 Motor Vehicle Theft other 0 0 2 0 2 ------ ------ ------- ------- 108 101 315 315 34-19-06 MONTHLY SUMMARY OF PART TWO OFFENSES PAGE: 1 CITY REPORT FOR: MARCH, 2006 Current Prev Last Actual Actual YTD YTD Crime Classification.................... Current Year.. YTD.. YTD.. Change Change All Other Offenses 45 36 118 121 -3 -2.48 Animal Abuse 0 0 0 0 0 Animal Nuisance 0 0 0 1 -1 -100.00 Arson 2 0 6 0 6 Assists to Outside Agencies 0 0 0 0 0 Bicycle Violations 0 0 0 0 0 Bigamy 0 0 0 0 0 Bomb Offense 0 0 0 0 0 Bomb Threat 0 0 0 1 -1 -100.00 Bribery 0 0 0 0 0 Check Offenses 0 2 2 3 -1 -33.33 Child Neglect/prot custody 9 2 21 8 13 162.50 Computer Crime 0 0 0 0 0 Conspiracy 0 0 0 0 0 Credit Card Offenses 0 0 1 0 1 Cruelty to Dependent Adult 0 0 0 2 -2 -100.00 Curfew and Loitering Laws 0 0 0 2 -2 -100.00 Death Investigation 1 3 6 14 -8 -57.14 Disorderly Conduct 0 B 5 14 -9 -64.29 Driver's License Violations 2 0 2 2 0 0.00 Driving Under the Influence 4 3 17 19 -2 -10.53 Drug Abuse Violations 0 4 7 6 -1 -12.50 Drug/Sex Registrants/Violations 0 0 0 0 0 Drunkeness 12 0 19 8 11 137.50 Embezzlement 0 0 1 1 0 0.00 Escape 0 0 0 0 0 Extortion 0 0 0 0 0 False Police Reports 0 0 0 0 0 False Reports of Emergency 0 0 2 0 2 Fish and Game Violations 0 0 0 0 0 Forgery and Counterfeiting 3 2 11 12 -1 -8.33 Found Property 1 8 10 24 -14 -58.33 Fraud 3 1 8 12 -4 -33.33 Gambling 0 0 0 0 0 Harrassing Phone Calls 1 2 6 7 -1 -14.29 04=19-0'o MONTHLY SUMMARY OF PART TWO OFFENSES PAGE: 2 CITY REPORT FOR: MARCH, 2006 Current Prev Last, Actual Actual YTD YTD Crime Classification........ ............ Current Year.. YTD.. YTD.. Change W Change Hit and Run Accidents 5 7 11 12 -1 -8.33 Impersonation 0 0 0 2 -2 -100.00 Incest 0 0 0 0 0 Indecent Exposure 0 0 1 0 1 Intimidating a Witness 0 0 0 0 0 Kidnapping 0 0 0 0 0 Lewd Conduct 0 0 0 0 0 Liquor Laws 0 2 0' 2 -2 -100.00 Littering/Dumping 0 0 0 0 0 Marijuana Violations 0 3 4 3 1 33.33 Mental Health Cases 13 5 29 21 8 38.10 Missing Person 6 9 15 18 -3 -16.67 Missing Property 7 10 23 17 6 35.29 Municipal Code Violations 5 4 27 10 17 170.00 Narcotics Sales/Manufacture 0 0 0 0 0 - Offenses Against Children 0 0 3 0 3 Other Assaults 12 15 46 50 -4 -8.00 Other Juvenile Offenses 0 0 0 0 0 Other Police Service $ 6 17 15 2 13.33 Pandering for immoral purposes 0 0 0 0 0 Parole Violations 0 0 1 0 1 Perjury 0 0 0 0 0 Possession of Burglary Tools 0 0 0 1 -1 -100.00 Possession of drug paraphernalia 0 0 0 0 0 Possession of obscene literature;picture 0 0 0 0 0 Probation Violations 0 0 2 1 1 100.00 Prostitution and Commercial Vice 0 0 2 0 2 .Prowling 0 1 2 1 1 100.00 Resisting Arrest 0 0 1 1 0 0.00 Restraining Orders 0 1 0 8 -8 -100.00 Runaways (Under 18) 0 0 0 0 0 Sex Offenses 0 0 2 1 1 100.00 Sex Offenses against Children 0 0 1 0 1 Sodomy 0 0 0 0 0 Stalking 0 0 0 0 0 )4-19-06 MONTHLY SUMMARY OF PART TWO OFFENSES PAGE: 3 CITY REPORT FOR: MARCH, 2006 Current Prev Last Actual Actual YTD YTD :rime Classification..................:. Current Year.. YTD. . YTD. . Change Change Statutory Rape 0 1 0 2 -2 -100.00 Stolen Property;Buying;Receiving;Possess 0 0 2 2 0 0.00 Suspended License 4 2 11 4 7 175.00 Pax Evasion 0 0 0 0 0 terrorist Threats 2 2 4 3 1 33.33 rowed Vehicle 37 38 81 118 -37 -31.36 trespassing 3 0 7 6 1 16.67 truants/Incorrigible Juvs 0 0 0 0 0 JS Mail Crimes 0 0 0 0 0 Vagrancy 0 0 0 0 0 Vandalism 18 21 48 54 -6 -11.11 Vehicle Code Violations 1 1 1 11 -10 -90.91 - Violation of Court Order 1 0 3 3 0 0.00 Narrants - Felony 1 3 3 4 -1 -25.00 Narrants - Misd 5 10 16 19 -3 -15.79 Neapons;Carrying,Possessing 1 1 2 2 0 0.00 Nelfare Fraud 0 0 0 0 0 ------- ------ ------- ------- 209 213 607 650 209 213 607 650 )4-19-06 MONTHLY SUMMARY OF CITATIONS PAGE : 1 CITY REPORT FOR: MARCH, 2006 Current Prev Last Actual Actual rime Classification. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Current Year. . YTD . . YTD. . ?arking Citations 3540 3 , 063 8 , 029 9, 844 4oving Citations 300 123 736 302 3840 3 , 186 8 , 765 10, 146 ------- ------ ------- ------- 3840 3 , 186 8 , 765 10, 146 Officer Productivity. . . . generated on 04/19/2006 at 05:10: 36 PM eported On: A11 Officers Report Range: 03/01/2006 to 03/31/2006 ata Type Reported on: PARKING Valid 8 All Voids All % Officer: ID: cnt Valid cnt Voids Valid ---------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------I%-- WISO 355 975 28.78 11 20.75 98.88 4INE 119 0 0.00 3 5.66 0.00 EITELBERG 508 1258 37.13 20 37.74 98.44 4RRETT 501 619 18.27 7 13.21 98.88 IRKPATRICK 502 536 15.82 9 16.98 98.35 OSCOE 503 0 0.00 3 5.66 0.00 otal 3388 53 Page 1 of 1 C00mcasto Comcast Cable 12647 Alcosta Boulevard Suite 200 San Ramon,CA 94583 73.7000 May 1, 2006 Fax:925.9 9.7015 www.comcast.com Mr. Jesus Nava City of Burlingame 501 Primrose Road Burlingame, CA 94010 Subject: June 1, 2006 Trouble Call Price Dear Mr. Jesus Nava: On March 1, 2006 Comcast forwarded to your office the FCC Forms 1240 and 1205. The FCC Forms represent Comcast's annual filling for adjustments to the basic service tier, equipment and installation prices. The intent of this letter is to provide clarification to an amount that was listed on the FCC Forms as a price to be adjusted. As listed in the FCC Forms, we indicated that the price for the "Customer Trouble Call" would decrease to $16.99 from $17.99. Upon review, Comcast has decided not to adjust the current price for the Customer Trouble Call—the price will remain $17.99. If you should have any questions or concerns regarding the enclosed please feel free to contact your local Government Affairs Director, Lee-Ann Peling at (650) 289-6794. Sincerely, Mitzi Givens-Russell Franchise Compliance Manager Bay Market Comcast® Comcast Cable 12647 Alcosta Boulevard Suite 200 San Ramon,CA 94583 April 28, 2006 Office:925.973.7000 Fax:925.973.7015 www.comcast.com Mr. Jesus Nava City of Burlingame 501 Primrose Road Burlingame, CA 94010 Subject: June 1, 2006 Equipment Rental Price Adjustment Dear Mr. Jesus Nava: On March 1, 2006 Comcast forwarded to your office the FCC Forms 1240 and 1205. The FCC Forms represent Comcast's annual filling for adjustments to the basic service tier, equipment and installation prices. The purpose of this letter is to provide your office with the details of the adjustment. Effective June 1, 2006, Comcast intends to adjust the current equipment rental prices as follows: Item Current Price June 1, 2006 Price Remote Control $0.25 $0.20 Analog Converter (basic only) $1.25 $1.10 DCT Receiver (non basic only) $4.75 $3.80 Customers have been informed of the adjustment via a message on their billing statement. If you should have any questions or concerns regarding the enclosed please feel free to contact your local Government Affairs Director, Lee-Ann Peling at (650) 289-6794. Sincerely, Mitzi Givens-Russell Franchise Compliance Manager Bay Market co m ca st� Comcast Cable c 12647 Alcosta Boulevard Suite 200 San Ramon,CA 94583 April 21 , 2006 Office: 9 52973.701000 www.comcast.com Mr. Jesus Nava City of Burlingame 501 Primrose Road Burlingame, CA 94010 Dear Mr. Jesus Nava: As you may already be aware of, it is our goal at Comcast to ensure that your office remains informed of the programming services we offer to our customers who reside in your community. In pursuit of attaining our goal, we are courteously sending you this letter to inform you of an upcoming programming adjustment to the current programming line-up. Effective May 2, 2006 Jewelry TV will become a shared channel with FSN Plus on the Digital Classic level of service at channel 410. Customers will be informed of the adjustment via a message on their Digital Control Terminal. If you should have any questions or concerns regarding the matter, please feel free to contact your local Government Affairs Director, Lee-Ann Peling at (650) 289-6794. Sincerel , r Mitzi Givens-Russell Government Affairs Manager Bay Market