Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet - CC - 2007.04.16 1�CITY C BURUNGAME a a9aOaem.wrc�: BURLINGAME CITY HALL 501 PRIMROSE ROAD BURLINGAME,CA 94010 CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA Monday, April 16,2007 Planning Commission Interviews—6:15 p.m. Conference Room A 1. CALL TO ORDER—7:00 p.m. - Council Chambers 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG 3. ROLL CALL 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES—Regular Council Meeting of April 2, 2007 5. PRESENTATION a. Best of Burlingame Presentation b. Proclamation recognizing West Nile Virus and Mosquito Vector Control Awareness Week c. Key Indicators for Human Resources d. Historical Museum Structural Report and Future Vision at Burlingame Avenue Train Station 6. PUBLIC HEARINGS a. Public Hearing and Adoption of Broadway Area Business Improvement District Assessments for FY 2007/08 b. (i) Review of Planning Commission's approval of an application for Mitigated Negative Declaration, Design Review, Condominium Permit, Front Setback Variance and Conditional Use Permits for Height and Lot Coverage for a new Seven-Story, 25 Unit Residential Condominium; and(ii)Tentative Condominium Map for a 25-unit condominium at 1800 Trousdale Drive - 0.503 Acre portion of Block 7, Map of Mills Estate No. 3 Subdivision, PM 06-01 c. Resolution approving the Master Fee Schedule for City services for FY 2007-08 1 d. Adopt an Ordinance for Revisions to Fees for Water Service (Water Services and Meter Installations) 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. 8. STAFF REPORTS AND COMMUNICATIONS a. Introduce Ordinance establishing the Community Development Department and making conforming changes to the Municipal Code—INTRODUCE b. Policy Issues for Citizens Survey—DIscUss/DIRECTION 9. APPROVAL OF CONSENT CALENDAR a. Resolution accepting Mills Tank Seismic Retrofit Project by Anderson-Pacific Engineering Construction b. Resolution approving professional services agreement with Metcalf&Eddy for the Trousdale Pump Station Supply Pipeline Design c. Resolution authorizing continued participation in the City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County(C/CAG) and Approval of the Joint Powers Agreement d. Award contract to Kevin Gardiner&Associates for preparation of the Downtown Specific Plan e. Recommendation to Adopt Revised 2007 Council Calendar f. Appointment of Council Member to the Bay Area Water Supply& Conservation Agency (BAWSCA) Board of Directors and Bay Area Regional Water System Financing Authority (RFA) g. Warrants&Payroll 10. COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS 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 a. Set appeal hearing date for 2212 Hillside Drive 2 14. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS a. Commission Minutes: Beautification, April 5, 2007; Planning, April 9, 2007 b. Department Reports: Building, March 2007 15. ADJOURNMENT TO CLOSED SESSION CLOSED SESSION a. Threatened Litigation (Government Code § 54956.9(b)(1), (3)(C)): Claim of Joseph Bronzini b. Conference with Real Property Negotiators pursuant to Government Code § 54956.8: Property: Frontage Road along El Camino Real in Front of 1766 El Camino Real Agency negotiators: Jim Nantell, Meg Monroe, Larry Anderson Negotiating parties: Certosa, Inc. Under negotiation: Exchange of property 16. 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.burlingame.org. Agendas and minutes are available at this site. NEXT MEETING—WEDNESDAY,APRIL 18, 2007 3 CITY 0 BURLJNGAME BURLINGAME CITY COUNCIL Unapproved Minutes Regular Meeting of April 2, 2007 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 Terry Nagel called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG Led by Brian Foley. 3. ROLL CALL COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT: Baylock, Cohen, Nagel, O'Mahony COUNCILMEMBERS ABSENT: Keighran 4. MINUTES Councilwoman Baylock made a motion to approve the minutes of the March 19, 2007 regular Council meeting; seconded by Councilman Cohen. The motion was approved by voice vote, 4-0-1 (Keighran absent). A correction was made to the March 24, 2007 Joint Council and Planning Commission meeting minutes: Page 1, 2nd Paragraph: change spelling of Kate O'Brien to Katie O'Brien. Vice Mayor O'Mahony made a motion to approve the amended minutes of the March 24, 2007 Joint Council and Planning Commission meeting; seconded by Councilwoman Baylock. The motion was approved by voice vote, 4-0-1 (Keighran absent). 5. PRESENTATIONS a. BEST OF BURLINGAME AWARD Mayor Nagel presented Burlingame residents Fiona and Stephen Hamilton with the Best of Burlingame Award. The Hamiltons are board members of the Friends of Mills Canyon. They are also members of the Citizens for a Better Burlingame and have been involved in the Burlingame Improvement Committee, which explored ways to improve the downtown streetscapes. Both firmly believe that community events bring the community together. They help plan the annual Burlingame Pet Parade as part of the steering committee and are assisting with the city's Centennial Variety Show. Both volunteer at the Burlingame Relay for Life each October. 1 Burlingame City Council April 2,2007 Unapproved Minutes b. PUBLIC WORKS KEY INDICATORS DPW Bagdon provided an overview of the Public Works Department's key performance indicators. 6. PUBLIC HEARINGS a. ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 1804 TO DESIGNATE 2 HOUR PARKING AT 1361 N. CAROLAN AVENUE (PUBLIC WORKS CORPORATION YARD) DPW Bagdon reviewed the staff report and requested Council hold a public hearing on the adoption of Ordinance No. 1804 establishing two-hour parking limit for three parking spaces in front of 1361 North Carolan Avenue. Mayor Nagel opened the public hearing. There were no comments from the floor, and the hearing was closed. Vice Mayor O'Mahony made a motion to approve adoption of Ordinance No. 1804 establishing two-hour parking limit for three parking spaces in front of 1361 North Carolan Avenue; seconded by Councilwoman Baylock. The motion was approved by voice vote, 4-0-1 (Keighran absent). Mayor Nagel directed CC Mortensen to publish a summary of the ordinance within 15 days of adoption. 7. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no comments from the floor. 8. STAFF REPORTS AND COMMUNICATIONS a. RESOLUTION NO. 25-2007 ORDERING AND CALLING A GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD NOVEMBER 6. 2007 CC Mortensen reviewed the staff report and requested Council approve a resolution calling for a general municipal election in November. Councilwoman Baylock made a motion to approve Resolution No. 25-2007 ordering and calling a general municipal election to be held in the City of Burlingame on November 6, 2007; requesting the services of the Registrar of Voters, requesting consolidation of elections, and specifying certain procedures for the consolidated election; requiring payment of prorated costs of candidates' statement; and providing for giving notice of election; seconded by Councilman Cohen. The motion was approved by voice vote, 4-0-1 (Keighran absent). b. INTRODUCE AN ORDINANCE FOR REVISIONS TO FEES FOR WATER SERVICE (WATER SERVICES AND METER INSTALLATIONS) DPW Bagdon reviewed the staff report and requested Council introduce an ordinance adopting revisions to water service fees. Mayor Nagel requested CC Mortensen read the title of the proposed ordinance adopting revisions to installation fees for water service. Vice Mayor O'Mahony made a motion to waive further reading of the 2 Burlingame City Council April 2,2007 Unapproved Minutes proposed ordinance; seconded by Councilwoman Baylock. The motion was approved by voice vote, 4-0-1 (Keighran absent). Councilwoman Baylock made a motion to introduce the proposed ordinance; seconded by Vice Mayor O'Mahony. The motion was approved by voice vote, 4-0-1 (Keighran absent). Mayor Nagel requested CC Mortensen publish a summary of the proposed ordinance at least five days before proposed adoption. 9. CONSENT CALENDAR Vice Mayor O'Mahony requested removal of Item b. from the Consent Calendar for further discussion. Councilman Cohen requested removal of Item f. from the Consent Calendar for further discussion. a. FINAL CONDOMINIUM MAP—RESUBDIVISION OF LOTS 3, 4 AND 5,BLOCK 4, MAP OF EASTON ADDITION NO.1 SUBDIVISION, 1137-1145 PALOMA AVENUE DPW Bagdon requested Council approve the Final Condominium Map for 1137-1145 Paloma Avenue. C. REQUEST TO SERVE ALCOHOL AT RECEPTION FOR MARY BADHAM IN CITY HALL LOBBY Librarian Escoffier requested Council approve the serving of alcohol and hors d'oeuvres in the City Hall Lobby following the Big Read event on April 24, 2007. d. REQUEST OF CITY LIBRARIAN TO ATTEND CONFERENCE IN WASHINGTON,D.C. Librarian Escoffier requested Council approve conference travel for the City Librarian to the American Library Association conference in Washington, D.C. in June 2007. e. APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NO. 27-2007 AUTHORIZING INVESTMENT OF PROCEEDS OF THE 2007 WATER AND WASTEWATER REVENUE BONDS IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA LOCAL AGENCY INVESTMENT FUND (LAIF) FinDir Nava requested Council approve Resolution No. 27-2007 authorizing investment of proceeds of the 2007 water and wastewater revenue bonds in the State of California Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF). Vice Mayor O'Mahony made a motion to approve Items a., c., d., and e. of the Consent Calendar; seconded by Councilwoman Baylock. The motion was approved by voice vote, 4-0-1 (Keighran absent). b. RESOLUTION NO. 26-2007 SUPPORTING SENATE BILL (SB) 613, REAUTHORIZATION OF THE $4 VEHICLE FEE FOR SAN MATEO COUNTY AREA TO FUND TRAFFIC CONGESTION RELIEF AND STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PROGRAMS Vice Mayor O'Mahony expressed her support of this resolution and Senate Bill 613 to reauthorize an assessment of$4 on the motor vehicle fee to fund programs in San Mateo County. Vice Mayor O'Mahony made a motion to approve Resolution No. 26-2007 supporting Senate Bill 613 reauthorization of Motor Vehicle Fee for traffic congestion relief and Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program, California Government Code Section 65089.11 ET, Seq.; seconded by Councilwoman Baylock. The motion was approved by voice vote, 4-0-1 (Keighran absent). 3 Burlingame City Council April 2,2007 Unapproved Minutes L INCREASE THE MAXIMUM CHARGE ALLOWED FOR VALET PARKING Councilman Cohen asked about the maximum fee of$15 per vehicle as stated in the resolution. COP Van Etten explained that setting a cap on the fee allows for interim increases up to a maximum of$15 without the need for Council approval. The business owners set the actual fee based on the current market price. Councilwoman Baylock made a motion to approve Resolution No. 28-2007 increasing the maximum fee for valet parking service pursuant to Burlingame Municipal Code Section 6.30.010(c); seconded by Vice Mayor O'Mahony. The motion was approved by voice vote, 4-0-1 (Keighran absent). 10. COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS Council reported on various events and committee meetings each of them attended on behalf of the City. 11. PUBLIC COMMENTS Pat Giorni, 1445 Balboa Avenue, spoke on the attributes of DPW Bagdon who has announced his retirement. There were no further comments from the floor. 12. OLD BUSINESS a. STATE LANDS UPDATE Councilman Cohen stated that there are five to seven acres of vacant State land on bayfront property. Senator Leland Yee has arranged for the City to meet with the State Lands Commission to discuss potential use for the property. There is no project being planned at this time. Council expressed the following concerns: that any project in this area support or complement the hotels and support the Bayfront Plan; suggestions included a professional arts center, a convention center, a commercial recreation or entertainment complex which would complement the hotels; consideration must be made of the existing infrastructure and emergency services available to the area. b. CALTRANS AND EL CAMINO TREES P&RD Schwartz stated that Caltrans removed Elm trees on El Camino Real about a month ago due to Dutch Elm Disease without advance notice to the City. At a recent meeting in the field with Caltrans, staff emphasized the importance of trees in Burlingame and that past agreements included advance notification to the City and testing before tree removal, and replacement of trees on a 2:1 basis to perpetuate the tall canopy of the trees. Staff continues to work with Caltrans towards the planting of replacement trees in the fall. Staff and Council members thanked the offices of Senator Leland Yee and Assemblyman Gene Mullin for their help in this matter as well as concerned citizens like Jennifer Pfaff for their awareness and efforts in contacting the City. c. COUNCIL GOALS CM Nantell reviewed the staff report and requested Council confirm the list of goals for inclusion in the 2007/08 budget. After Council accepted the list of goals, Mayor Nagel suggested renaming the Go Green task force (Goal No. 9) to the Green Ribbon task force with which Council agreed. 4 Burlingame City Council April 2,2007 Unapproved Minutes 13. NEW BUSINESS Councilwoman Baylock requested calling up 1800 Trousdale Drive for Council review at the April 16th Council meeting. Councilman Cohen announced that there will be a presentation at the April 16th Council meeting by two architects of the plans for the Burlingame-Hillsborough History Museum. CLOSED SESSION CA Anderson advised that Council met in closed session and directed staff regarding the following: a. Claim of Joseph Zuffi 14. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS a. Commission Minutes: Library Board of Trustees, February 20, 2007; Parks &Recreation, March 15, 2007; Planning, March 26, 2007 b. Department Reports: Police, February 2007; Library, March 9, 2007 15. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Nagel adjourned the meeting at 8:40 p.m. in memory of Edith Sperman and Casey Raffaelli of Burlingame and Matilda Wilbur of Hillsborough. Respectfully submitted, Doris J. Mortensen City Clerk 5 Burlingame City Council April 2,2007 Unapproved Minutes Gti�� of Burin gq� C BURLINGAME The Studio Shop IS HEREBY PROCLAIMED ONE OF THE �p • ' FOR PROVIDING OUTSTANDING COMMUNITY SERVICE TARRY NACEL,MAYOR ��� CITY 0 STAFF REPORT BURUNGAME AGENDA 6a ITEM # '1,c0ga ,900 MTG. 4/16/07 ORATED JUNE 6 DATE TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL SUBMI T BY DATE: April 16, 2007 A ROVED FROM: Jesus Nava, Finance Director BY It SUBJECT: Public Hearing & Adoption of Broadway Area BusiniXs Improvement District Assessments for FY 2007-2008 RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council hold a public hearing and adopt the resolution setting 2007-2008 assessments for the Broadway Area Business Improvement District. BACKGROUND: At the March 19, 2007 meeting, the City Council adopted a resolution of intention to set the 2007-2008 Broadway Area Business Improvement District assessments and established April 16, 2007, at 7:00 p.m. as the public hearing date and time. There are no changes proposed in the boundaries, assessments or business classifications. If there is a protest by a majority of the value of the assessments to any of these items, the resolution cannot be approved. As of the time of writing this memorandum, the City had not received any protests, although protests may be presented in writing before or at the hearing. Any and all protests must be received by the City Clerk at or before the time fixed for the public hearing. BUDGET IMPACT: Approximately $26,000 in assessments is collected annually with our business licenses. All of these funds are forwarded to the Broadway Improvement District for improvements as authorized the BID Board of Directors. The City of Burlingame covers the expenses associated with the renewal of the BID. Those expenses are approximately $6,000. ATTACHMENTS: 1 .) Resolution Of the City Council of the City of Burlingame Establishing 2007-2008 Assessments For the Broadway Area Business Improvement District 2.) Exhibit A: Types of Improvements and Activities Proposed to be Funded By the Levy of Assessments 3.) Exhibit B: Broadway Area Business Improvement District Assessment Basis 4.) Assessment Roll SABusiness Improvement DistrictsTY 07-08 Renewal Process\Agenda Report Public Hearing & Assessment-Broadway.doe 1 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME ESTABLISHING 2007-2008 ASSESSMENTS FOR THE BROADWAY AREA BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT WHEREAS, pursuant to California Streets and Highways Code Section 36500 et sea., the Broadway Area Business Improvement District has been established for the purpose of promoting economic revitalization and physical maintenance of this important business district; and WHEREAS, the Broadway Area Business Improvement District Advisory Board has requested the Burlingame City Council to establish 2007-2008 assessments for the improvement district; and WHEREAS, on March 19, 2007, the City Council received and approved the annual report of the Broadway Area Business Improvement District Advisory Board; and WHEREAS, a public hearing on the proposed assessments was duly noticed for April 16, 2007, at 7:00 p.m. before the City Council of the City of Burlingame, at the Council Chambers at 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, as required by State law; and WHEREAS, at the public hearing held at that place and time, the City Council received and considered all oral and written testimony from all interested persons; and WHEREAS, it appears that the current assessments should continue so that improvements and programs may continue in the District, and the activities and improvements are without substantial change from those previously established for the District. NOW, THEREFORE, the City of Burlingame does hereby resolve, determine, and find as follows: 1 I. Written protests to assessments, improvements or activities were not received at or before the close of the public hearing that constituted a majority as defined in Government Code sections 36500 and following.. 2. The City Council does hereby levy an assessment for the 2007-2008 fiscal year on businesses in the District as described in City of Burlingame Ordinance No. 1461, to pay for improvements and activities of the District. 3. The types of improvements and activities to be funded by the levy of assessments on businesses in the District are set forth in Exhibit "A", incorporated herein by reference. 4. The method and basis for levying the assessments on all businesses within the District are set forth in Exhibit "B", incorporated herein by reference. 5. New businesses shall not be exempt from assessment. 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 on the day of 2007, and was adopted thereafter by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: CITY CLERK U:\FILES\BIDBRDWY\BIDBDWYres22007.RE2.wpd 2 EXHIBIT A TYPES OF IMPROVEMENTS AND ACTIVITIES PROPOSED TO BE FUNDED BY THE LEVY OF ASSESSMENTS 1) Streetscape Beautification, Seasonal Decorations, and Public Arts Programs a. Seasonal street plantings of flowers. b. Seasonal flags and banners. f. Sidewalk enhancement and maintenance. 2) Business Recruitment and Retention a. Matching funds for storefront improvement incentive b. Develop strategy to fill commercial vacancies. C. Small business assistance workshops. 3) Commercial Marketing, Public Relations, and Advertising a. Organize special events throughout the year. 4) Shuttle Establish a people mover system between the area and the hotel district,to be funded on a cooperative cost sharing basis. U:\FILES\BIDBRDWY\improvmtlis2OOO.bid.wpd EXHIBIT B BROADWAY AREA BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT ASSESSMENT BASIS* BUSINESS TYPE NO. OF STAFF x x ANNUAL ASSESSMENT RETAIL & 4+ $450 ---------------------- ------------------------------ RESTAURANT 1 - 3 $300 SERVICE ----------3+------------ -------------$250$250 ------------ 1 - 2 $150 PROFESSIONAL ----------3+------------ -------------$200$200 ------------ 1 - 2 $150 FINANCIAL NA $500 * ----- Amount shown is annual total ** --- Staff means any persons working(full time or full time equivalency) including owners,partners, managers, employees, family members, etc. Business Definitions (Burlingame Municipal Code § 6.52.010): Retail ❑ Businesses that buy and resell goods. Examples are clothing stores, shoe stores, office supplies, etc. Restaurant ❑ Selling prepared food and drink. Service ❑ Businesses that sell services. Examples are beauty and barber shops, repair shops that do not sell goods, contractors, auto shops, etc. Professional ❑ Includes engineering firms, architects, attorneys, dentists, optometrists, physicians, realtors, insurance offices, etc. Financial ❑ Banks, savings and loans, household finance companies, etc. U:\FILES\BIDBRDWY\assessbas.bid.wpd BROADWAY AVENUE BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT-FY 2007-08 ASSESSMENTS LICENSE CODE BID FEE BUSINESS NAME ADDRESS VOTE PROTESTS WEIGHT 30674 D1 $ 450 BURLINGAME GAS&CAR WASH 1000 BROADWAY 1.65% 33210 D1 $ 450 MIKE HARVEY ACURA 1070 BROADWAY 1.65% 17408 D1 $ 450 TUNISS COMPUTER 1124 BROADWAY 1.65% 18813 D1 $ 450 WALGREENS#06655-J JACKSON-TAX DEPT 1160 BROADWAY 1.65% 7704 D1 $ 450 ROYAL DONUT 1165 BROADWAY 1.65% 14722 D1 $ 450 PRESTON'S CANDY&ICE CREAM 1170 BROADWAY 1.65% 17895 D1 $ 450 AJI YOSHI YA 1190 BROADWAY 1.65% 21657 D1 $ 450 FAT CRAB INC/JOANIES HAPPY DAY DINER 1199 BROAWAY SUITE 2 1.65% 30410 D1 $ 450 VILLAGE HOST 1201 BROADWAY 1.65% 7979 D1 $ 450 YAKINIKU HOUSE JUBAN 1204 BROADWAY 1.65% 21407 D1 $ 450 RISTORANTE ROCCA 1205 BROADWAY 1.65% 7373 D1 $ 450 IL PICCOLO CAFFE 1219 BROADWAY 1.65% 19703 D1 $ 450 STARBUCKS COFFEE#6871 1230 BROADWAY 1.65% 19745 D1 $ 450 MIVAN MEDITERRANEN CUISINE 1232 BROADWAY 1.65% 22102 D1 $ 450 BIG JOE'S CAFE 1251 BROADWAY 1.65% 22535 Dl $ 450 SIWOOD INC,DBA BROADWAY PHARMACY 1300 BROADWAY 1.65% 10222 D1 $ 450 GOLDENWEST DIAMOND DBA JEWELRY EXCH. 1301 BROADWAY 1.65% 10449 D1 $ 450 SUBWAY 1308 BROADWAY 1.65% 17948 D1 $ 450 BROADWAY PRIME 1316 BROADWAY 1.65% 5991 D1 $ 450 CAFE FIGARO 1318 BROADWAY 1.65% 10027 D1 $ 450 EARTHBEAM 1399 BROADWAY 1.65% 21656 D1 $ 450 BROADWAY GRILL 1400 BROADWAY 1.65% 13026 D1 $ 450 DOLAN'S WINDOWS AND DOORS 1410 BROADWAY 1.65% 16659 D1 $ 450 AQUA DEVELOPMENT CORP DBA PISCES 1190 CALIFORNIA DR 1.65% 20872 D2 $ 300 AMERICAN WOOD FLOOR CENTER 1120 BROADWAY 1.10% 17342 D2 $ 300 CHEZ ALEXANDER 1136 BROADWAY 1.10% 18486 D2 $ 300 LE CROISSANT 1151 BROADWAY 1.10% 19329 D2 $ 300 SUTTERFIELD CONSIGNMENT 1174 BROADWAY 1.10% 17378 D2 $ 300 WEIMAX CORPORATION 1178 BROADWAY 1.10% 20481 D2 $ 300 BONNE SANTE' 1184 BROADWAY 1.10% 21813 D2 $ 300 CHOCOLATE MOUSSE BAKERY 1199 BROADWAY#1 1.10% 20232 D2 $ 300 BURLINGAME JEWELRY CENTER 1199 BROADWAY#3 1.10% BID BW EFILE 4 6 07.XLS 1 4/6/2007 BROADWAY AVENUE BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT - FY 2007-08 ASSESSMENTS LICENSE CODE BID FEE BUSINESS NAME ADDRESS VOTE PROTESTS WEIGHT 15708 D2 $ 300 GRACE GARDEN CHINESE RESTAURANT 1200 BROADWAY 1.10% 20061 D2 $ 300 E MOBILE CELLULAR 1212 BROADWAY 1.10% 19108 D2 $ 300 ATELIER DESIGN STUDIO, GP 1233 BROADWAY 1.10% 22031 D2 $ 300 LUMIERE 1235 BROADWAY 1.10% 17712 D2 $ 300 BURLINGAME FOODS 1236 BROADWAY 1.10% 21990 D2 $ 300 LIU'S INTERNATIONAL KITCHEN 1236 BROADWAY 1.10% 11683 D2 $ 300 NUTS FOR CANDY 1241 BROADWAY 1.10% 15633 D2 $ 300 LA DOLCE VITA TILE &STONE 1247 BROADWAY 1.10% 22096 D2 $ 300 TREASURE HOUSE ANTIQUES ARTS CO 1305 BROADWAY 1.10% 35174 D2 $ 300 BUA THONG KITCHEN 1320 BROADWAY 1.10% 21779 D2 $ 300 GIUNGLA-ARTE CORPORATION 1323 BROADWAY 1.10% 12505 D2 $ 300 BROADWAY HARDWARE 1326 BROADWAY 1.10% 30427 D2 $ 300 BEHAN'S "AN IRISH PUB" 1327 BROADWAY 1.10% 20108 D2 $ 300 RESTAURANT JUN 1355 BROADWAY 1.10% 21935 D2 $ 300 GEM DESIGNS 1365 BROADWAY 1.10% 6601 D2 $ 300 ABSOLUTE CELLULAR SERVICES 1405 BROADWAY 1.10% 44399 D2 $ 300 YOUNG'S BURLINGAME LIQUOR 1408 BROADWAY 1.10% 21081 D2 $ 300 BLUE SKIES ON BROADWAY 1423 BROADWAY 1.10% 16731 D2 $ 300 KCB &ASSOCIATES LLC 1431 BROADWAY 1.10% 21930 D2 $ 300 GRAFFEO 1452 BROADWAY 1.10% 16408 D2 $ 300 ROSEDALE 1454 BROADWAY 1.10% 14938 D3 $ 250 L & S AUTO REPAIR CENTER 1100 BROADWAY 0.92% 7232 D3 $ 250 CHEVRON STATIONS INC. #1504 1101 BROADWAY 0.92% 20765 D3 $ 250 TRENZ SALON 1211 BROADWAY 0.92% 17617 D3 $ 250 NETWORK VIDEO INC 1215 BROADWAY 0.92% 35910 D3 $ 250 SUPERCUTS 1222 BROADWAY 0.92% 21924 D3 $ 250 BROADWAY NAIL BAR 1224 BROADWAY 0.92% 20962 D3 $ 250 JVL PERFECT 10 SALON 1360 BROADWAY 0.92% 19790 D3 $ 250 SDT BROADWAY STATION 1480 BROADWAY 0.92% 6003 D4 $ 150 GATEWAYS TO THE WORLD 1122 BROADWAY 0.55% 15975 D4 $ 150 NORTHERN CALIFORNIA PRACTICE SALES 1126 BROADWAY#8 0.55% 21655 D4 $ 150 LULU NAIL SPA 1134 BROADWAY 0.55% 17348 D4 $ 150 ON BROADWAY 1163 BROADWAY 0.55% BID BW EFILE 4 6 07ALS 2 4/6/2007 BROADWAY AVENUE BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT - FY 2007-08 ASSESSMENTS LICENSE CODE BID FEE BUSINESS NAME ADDRESS VOTE PROTESTS WEIGHT 21324 D4 $ 150 BROADWAY REALTY/TRAVEL DESIGNERS 1199 BROADWAY#5 0.55% 19645 D4 $ 150 BURLINGAME LAGUNA FLORIST 1202 BROADWAY 0.55% 13277 D4 $ 150 BROADWAY CLEANERS 1234 BROADWAY 0.55% 8225 D4 $ 150 HJS PROP. & INVEST./SECURED ASSET MGT 1243 BROADWAY 0.55% 20729 D4 $ 150 BUNKY BROTHERS 1243 BROADWAY 0.55% 8621 D4 $ 150 CHIC 1249 BROADWAY 0.55% 16449 D4 $ 150 BELLALUNA-AVON PRODUCTS 1310 BROADWAY 0.55% 9304 D4 $ 150 YOUR CLEANERS/YOUR FRENCH TAILOR 1321 BROADWAY 0.55% 9412 D4 $ 150 ADAMS FINE TAILORING 1324 BROADWAY 0.55% 13318 D4 $ 150 RAINBOW FULL SERVICE SALON 1361 BROADWAY 0.55% 18408 D4 $ 150 ANNE H HINCKLE 1425 BROADWAY#2 0.55% 12031 D4 $ 150 DESIRED DATA& DESIGN 1425 BROADWAY#7 0.55% 21340 D4 $ 150 SOOGLE TOURS AND TRAVEL 1425 BROADWAY#17 0.55% 20619 D4 $ 150 IMMIGRATION & TRANSLATION SERVICES 1425 BROADWAY#23 0.55% 21218 D4 $ 150 PAWSITIVELY GROOMED PET SALON 1427 BROADWAY 0.55% 21008 D4 $ 150 MAGIC NAILS HAIR SALON 1199 CHULA VISTA AVE 0.55% 14434 D5 $ 200 A.V.R. REALTY, INC. 1169 BROADWAY 0.73% 17316 D6 $ 150 BROADWAY EYE CENTER 1159 BROADWAY 0.55% 13602 D6 $ 150 T C KITA, O.D. 1322 BROADWAY 0.55% 17010 D6 $ 150 HUI LIN - HO WAI CHEUNG 1425 BROADWAY#8 0.55% 11170 D6 $ 150 MARIBETH HULSEY 1425 BROADWAY#12 0.55% 20538 D6 $ 150 MARTHA POLLOCK, LICENSED CLINICAL SOCIAL WORKER 1425 BROADWAY#14 0.55% 10050 D6 $ 150 CELEBRITY CONNECTION 1425 BROADWAY#19 0.55% 11918 D6 $ 150 TRIO CONSULTING 1425 BROADWAY#20 0.55% 8831 F2 $ 500 WELLS FARGO BANK - CORP PROP GRP 99167 1145 BROADWAY 1.83% 17390 F2 $ 500 STERLING BANK &TRUST FSB 1210 BROADWAY 1.83% 17800 F2 $ 500 U.S. BANK ATTN CORP REAL ESTATE 1188 EL CAMINO REAL 1.83% TOTAL ASSESSMENTS: $27,250 TOTAL VOTES 100.00% 0.001% BID BW EFILE 4 6 07.XLS 3 4/6/2007 Agenda Item # 6b Meeting BURLINGAME STAFF REPORT Date: April 16, 2007 ;, SUBMITTED BY APPROVED BY ' v TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL DATE: April 5, 2007 FROM: PUBLIC WORKS SUBJECT: TENTATIVE CONDOMINIUM MAP FOR A 25-UNIT CONDOMINIUM AT 1800 TROUSDALE DRIVE — 0.503 ACRE PORTION OF BLOCK 7, MAP OF MILLS ESTATE NO. 3 SUBDIVISION, PM 06-01 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that Council approve this map subject to the following: • All sidewalk, driveway, curb and gutter shall be replaced as new. • All conditions attached to the condominium permit shall be met. • The conditions, covenants and restrictions for this map shall be approved by the City Attorney and conform to all approval conditions and City codes. • 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. BACKGROUND: The condominium map was approved by Planning Commission on March 26, 2007. Staff has reviewed the tentative condominium map and recommends approval subject to the above conditions. All related environmental documents are not part of this report as they will be presented separately. EXHIBITS: Tentative Condominium Map, Staff Memorandum, Planning Commission Minutes Victor oon Assi ant En ineer c: Doris Mortensen, City Clerk SAA Public Works Directory\Staff Reports\06-01Condo.doc I UTILITY NOTE: 3 0 THE UTILITIES EXISTING ON THE SURFACE AND SHOWN ON BEEN LOCATED BY FIELD SURVEY. ALL UNDERGROUND UTIL pp96 m DRAWING ARE FROM RECORDS OF THE VARIOUS UTILITY C( p�S E SURVEYOR/ENGINEER DOES NOT ASSUME RESPONSIBILITY F COMPLETENESS, INDICATED LOCATION, OR SIZE. RECORD U' SHOULD BE CONFIRMED BY EXPOSING THE UTILITY. aq �' o IAw 15 w ';I •1 M16 p' I a,6• 1q ^; I I A.C.PAVE. o p pbp LAND a'L I 63 ,69 p0 0h tab ° L EDGE OF PL A NI -_- -- • e�,t 1q 67.5'1 NOT TO SCALE V by � T J 42 Ve{ « NP.5304 M �� —— ———FF'$._./ 1•` ppb` �G3 �ry�C6 s, c 1 so •M1� q'1.-'t1l`7�' 1e a3 AC.PAVE. ea y ¢ p b SBC cl W Lo pti p',pq yti7 p1'bq C C /n lb .051 58 �'Lf/ppI A.C.PAVE. y '�V .-¢� Q O in /4 p 6 / v aSti Y no �5 Z O p /1 } `ati9 s 'LSA - w d' 5 w ¢ aS;l AVg _ ,N Q O U Z `COL 4,j A\'0d� �Q' N J O a 0CD a A.C.PAVE. a !� W Z W I Q Z py;L > (� q9 Q W W w LLJ L1J O J w m }COL A.C.PAV I U Z ',n. S p.5 H Q U, �s 16 ARPORT OVERHANG (J�- -.. 6 Q } OCOL *TEMPORARY BENCHMARK: 0 � [ J TOP OF FIRE HYDRANT 03 u t w aS6 V.a 46.22 p CITY OELEF BURLINGAME DP7VM) W � bq' •,91 d O_ w c a w F 15 7` a ¢ u n 69 O _U ¢ a COL Q a I�PFf S � U Z > O O 0 Q Q Q U s, 0 w I O jY� `z1 W ¢ ��Y •,1 ��• ar r 0 a N a. �7 I'u aA / p B• SS 39.41 V. Q(� Oo CL W RAVE 10 aA°A+ z 00 ¢ t.7 ��a•}ry /�:Y -sl g ss Abgo+ 1_r a}— m � pA. c a q�p k J" w x a — 61 O 5 / p y •a a 46 / ti 0.69 Pf�o A• SM1�"T / / T-�06 _-- sbb` 3 's •�f.0 DRAWN BY: G.I. / A.C.PAVE. yB2 N hhqa DESIGNED BY- NO �, a•65 REVISED RECEIVED 7 GRAPHIC SCALE "� SCALE MAR 1 4 2007 DATE: OS-IB-2005 ffY OF&IRUNGAME PLANNING DEPT, DRAWING N0. (IN veers2455—TOPO L inch- B n PARCEL AREA 21,741 t S.F. SHEET ( = 0.50 f ACRES 1 OF 1 w > > < 44 E N -10'51 113.51' �113.44r�/ 6 -P-,I 41N > STORejpE BUILDI 0 29Z < T m P A —Sir WALI­ z C, U 15 MAX. 0 054" 0 > 0 z V m z LR r c z z L CC z 0 0 co) z c a 0 w m A to m 7r z g !�z m Z �Ntm 0 0 DALE DR E z NNTR 00* 1 0 �> I+ m m > 3 -OF-WAY) > RIGHT m < m w__w w m —W W - w z A Qs 0> 11 10, 0 w w 0 1 W —W-1 .0 oc) RE :10 m qo < m :-E0 F-n.-sT,.A.S kp"HN—c— VPG 3/02/07 VPG 01/25/07 VESTING TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP PREPARED FOR: NEW SITE PLAN VPG 06/17/0-6 F 2 FOR CONDOMINIUM PURPOSES (25 UNITS) NEW SITE PLAN VPG 05/17/06 En 91 M%CLEGO AHO ASSOC OAST - --- REWSM NtAffil.OF UNITS VPG 01/23 BEING A SUBDIVISION OF A PORTION OF BLOCK 7, 'MILLS ESTATE NO.3.BURLINGAME,SAN MATEO COUNTY. CALIFORNIA", PAUL BOGATSKY CIVIL ENGINEERING-LAND SURVEYING --- R"SED WMIIER OF UNITS \PG 01/03/06 965 CENTER STREET-SAN CARLOS-CA 94070-(650) 593-8580 PER CITY COMMENTS DATED 8/24/bfi MPQ 10/14/05 FILED IN BOOK 39 OF MAPS AT PAGES 13, 14 AND 15. CITY OF BURLINGAME SAN MATEO COUNTY CALIFORNIA RM DESCRIPTION Dr.I DAIE. BURLINGAME MEMORANDUM PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT TO: PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: PUBLIC WORKS -ENGINEERING DATE: FEBRUARY 5, 2007 RE: TENTATIVE CONDOMINIUM MAP OF PORTION OF BLOCK 7, MILLS ESTATE NO. 3 SUBDIVISION, 1800 TROUSDALE DRIVE, PM 06-01 This application is for a new condominium map at 1800 Trousdale Drive. 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 condominium map must be filed by the applicant within the time period as allowed by the Subdivision Map Act and the City's Subdivision Ordinance. 2. All sidewalk, driveway, curb and gutter shall be replaced with new. 3. All conditions attached to the condominium permit shall be met. 4. The conditions, covenants and restrictions for the map shall be approved by the City Attorney and conform to all approved conditions and City Codes. 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 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. Exhibit: Tentative Map & Assessor's Map Victor V n Assista n ' eer U:\V I CTO R\Projects\Private\P M06.01.wpd /6 /5 EL CAMI NO 3 /� ,� ,vaa2azz••w t 98.68' 639.53' 250' 5 44°20'6 gd6 134.29' I/5.7/ !19.17' 150.05' v^ ur1•,�?0.2¢� . 0. in � I .. N 2• .p a 4' o PARCEL Q o E N O v v V 4 2 LU C oI 2 ml Q m o vm ) V /2cr- Z cn 170, Q N rr0• 135.31' e 134.24 115.67' CITY 8 CO. OF Ss /00' 150' ' � 09' — za AVE. W 120_21 — MAGNOLIA545'49'09"E 245.80' 149.06' GS�o ` 46.94' 216' 50 O . -" 363.41' ^ O 4 OS. ao 3 clt IN N (\ O 110.2!' Z16' I ID- Q W ON45"49'09"W \o 7_4 u /82.68' ;T 225 80' 2 v �I PARCEL A clTl z�- NA 5'EASE. _ — 6 w C; _ 544- — — — 3 a103-04'03.0 7PARCEL B 26 0 —Tp -5 GASE._ J /2 ul 1zo' 7J 190 86' !74.90' 82.04' 180.08' m PT $T pUl r O o w NQ m J o 7 4 _ nl I N N N � S.B.E. N le N V _ Q 279-4/- 14C) io A N I W N ^ O PAR. 7 ~ aA N 20 /j ap8 84• 8 o C.B. _ /5, /9 I 70, 155.76' �� '5.j-4 - O ° 180. 60' 9° C 34.16' 'e i �D 1 82.06' 74.E3' DRIVE ,p• 'L�' 109' N 47`31'32N � 120.05' 2p OGD EN o MARCO ,5 -M 39115 Q /to City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes March 26, 2007 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 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; (8) that the conditions of the City Arborist's April 5, 2004,memo including the requirements of the Arborlogic Consulting report dated March 23,2004,and the City Engineer's, Chief Building Official's, Fire Marshal's and Recycling Specialist's August 11, 2003, memos shall be met; (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; any partial or full demolition of a structure, interior or exterior, shall require a demolition permit; (10) that the applicant shall comply with Ordinance 1503, the City of Burlingame Storm Water Management and Discharge Control Ordinance; and (11) 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. The motion was seconded by C.Brownrigg. Commission noted that an extremely large tree and the slope of the lot help to mitigate the height of the house. Chair Brownrigg called for a voice vote on the motion to approve. The motion passed on a 5-0-2 (Cers. Cauchi and Osterling absent). Appeal procedures were advised. This item concluded at 9:40 p.m. 6. 1800 TROUSDALE DRIVE, ZONED TW — APPLICATION FOR MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION,DESIGN REVIEW,CONDOMINIUM PERMIT,TENTATIVE CONDOMINIUM MAP, FRONT SETBACK AND LOT COVERAGE VARIANCES AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR HEIGHT FOR A 25-UNIT, 7-STORY RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM (PAUL BOGATSKY, APPLICANT AND PROPERTY OWNER; DAN IONESCU ARCHITECTS AND PLANNERS, ARCHITECT) (14 NOTICED)PROJECT PLANNER: MAUREEN BROOKS a. MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION, DESIGN REVIEW, CONDOMINIUM PERMIT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR HEIGHT; AND b. TENTATIVE CONDOMINIUM MAP—PROJECT ENGINEER: VICTOR VOONG Reference staff report March 24,2007,with attachments. CP Monroe presented the report,reviewed criteria and staff comments. Fifty-two(52)conditions including the mitigation monitoring program were suggested for consideration. CP noted that on February 12, 2007, the Commission held a public hearing on this multiple family residential project and continued the action until the applicant had responded to several design and open space issues identified. The applicant submitted revised plans dated March 14,2007,and notice was sent for a continued public hearing this evening. Commissioners had no questions of staff. Chair Brownrigg opened the public hearing. Dan Ionesco, architect, and Paul Bogatsky,property owner, represented the project. Issues discussed: the changes to the plans, placement of wrought iron below the store front gate; the construction of the trellis on the front of the building; the new podium used for open space; materials sample board. There were no further comments from the floor. The public hearing was closed. C.Vistica made a motion finding that,on the basis of the Initial Study and any comments received in writing and at the public hearing,there is no substantial evidence that the project would have a negative impact on the environment,so recommend the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Tentative Condominium Map to the City Council for action. The motion was seconded by C. Auran. 8 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes March 26, 2007 Chair Brownrigg called for a voice vote on the motion to find the Mitigated Negative Declaration an adequate environmental disclosure and recommending both the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Tentative Condominium Map to the Council for action. The motion passed on a 5-0-2 (Cers. Cauchi, Osterling absent) voice vote. Commissioners comments on the project: because of the proximity of the hospital entrance across the street from this site would like to see all staging and debris management for this project done on site, applicant should find alternate parking for employees and for storage of materials during construction if necessary. Note that the exception for lot coverage is met because the area covered not only improves the quality of life in the building by sheltering future residents and neighbors from noise from the access ramps to the parking area below the building but also provides additional open space for the use of future owners; the front setback variance is justified on the basis that a major objective of the North Burlingame/Rollins Road Specific Plan is to increase pedestrian activity and life on the street, because the grade on this lot and easement location resulted in the first deck of parking being at grade, the main entrance into the building projecting into the front setback supports the objective of bringing more life to the street and encourages pedestrians. C.Vistica made a motion to approve the residential condominium permit,front setback variance,conditional use permits for lot coverage and height for a new seven story 25-unit residential condominium project by resolution with amended conditions that building materials for this project shall be stored on this property or managed from another property in the area approved by the City Engineer; that all employee parking and equipment parking for this construction project shall be provided on the site or shall be provided on another site in the immediate area as approved by the City Engineer; that no mitigations proposed for materials storage, equipment storage and staging, or employee parking shall involve the Plaza Shopping Center parking or facilities; and that the portions of the trellises on the front elevation shown to be built with the 2x 10's shall be increased to at least 4x 10 over the 6x6 posts; and with all the conditions, including the conditions from the mitigation monitoring plan as follows: (1) that the proj ect shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department date stamped March 14, 2007, sheets A0.1,A.1,A2.1,A2.1.1,A2.2 through A2.7,A3.1 through A3.4,A4.1,A4.2,A5.1 through A5.9, Ground Floor Landscape Plan and Podium Level Landscape Plan, and Boundary and Topographic Survey Plan and Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map; and that the portions of the trellises on the front elevation shown to be 2X 10's shall be increased to at least 4x 10 over the 6x6 posts; (2) that building materials for this project shall be stored on this property or managed from another property in the area as approved by the City Engineer;that all employee parking and equipment parking for this construction project shall be provided on the site or shall be provided on another site in the immediate area as approved by the City Engineer; that no mitigations proposed for materials storage, equipment storage and staging,or employee parking shall involve the Plaza Shopping Center parking or any of its facilities; (3) that the maximum elevation at the top of the roof ridge shall not exceed elevation 117.18" as measured from the average elevation at the top of the curb along Trousdale Drive(42.18')for a maximum height of 75'-0", and that the top of each floor and final roof ridge shall be surveyed and approved by the City Engineer as the framing proceeds and prior to final framing and roofing inspections. The lower level garage floor finished floor elevation shall be elevation 33.5'; at-grade garage level finished floor elevation shall be elevation 42.5'; first floor above garage finished floor shall be elevation 53.5'; second floor finished floor shall be elevation 63.5'; third floor finished floor shall be elevation 73.5'; fourth floor finished floor shall be elevation 83.5'; sixth floor loft finished floor shall be elevation 102.5'; and the top of ridge elevation shall be no more than 117.18'. Should any framing exceed the stated elevation at any point it shall be removed or adjusted so that 9 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes March 26, 2007 the final height of the structure with roof shall not exceed the maximum height shown on the approved plans; (4) that any changes to the size or envelope of the building, which would include expanding the footprint or floor area of the structure,replacing or relocating windows or changing the roof height or pitch, shall be subject to Planning Commission review; (5) 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; (6) that the backflow prevention device and post indicator valve (PIV) shall be located and screened by landscaping so they will be hidden from both the street and project residents; (7) that the conditions of the City Engineer's June 21,2006,memo,the Chief Building Official's August 2,2005,memo, the Fire Marshal's August 12, 2005 and September 3, 2006 memos, the NPDES Coordinator's August 15, 2005, memo and the Recycling Specialist's August 8, 2005, memo shall be met; (8) that storage of construction materials and equipment on the street or in the public right-of-way shall be prohibited; (9) that prior to issuance of a building permit for the project, the applicant shall pay the first half of the North Burlingame Rollins Road Development fee in the amount of $12,593.70, made payable to the City of Burlingame and submitted to the Planning Department; (10) that prior to scheduling the final framing inspection for the condominium building, the applicant shall pay the second half of the North Burlingame Rollins Road Development fee in the amount of$12,593.70, made payable to the City of Burlingame and submitted to the Planning Department; (11) that prior to issuance of a building permit for the project, the applicant shall enter into an agreement with the City to establish the affordability of the three below market rate units required as a part of this project;the applicant shall also submit a below market rate housing plan which shall describe in detail the applicant's proposal for a third party to meet and manage the inclusionary housing requirements as required by Chapter 25.63 of the Burlingame Municipal Code; the applicant shall enter into an agreement with a third-party non-profit organization approved by the City to administer the program; (12) that'guest parking stall'shall be marked on the three guest parking spaces and designated on the final map and plans,these stalls shall not be assigned to any unit,but shall be owned and maintained by the condominium association, and the guest stalls shall always be accessible for parking and not be separately enclosed or used for resident storage;and that in addition to the three guest parking stalls,and one service vehicle parking stall, 52 parking spaces shall be available on site for owners,and none of the on-site parking shall be rented, leased or sold to anyone who does not own a unit on the site; (13) that the Covenants Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs) for the condominium project shall require that the three guest parking stalls shall be reserved for guests only and shall not be used by condominium residents; (14) that the final inspection shall be completed and a certificate of occupancy issued before the close of escrow on the sale of each unit; (15) that the developer shall provide to the initial purchaser of each unit and to the board of directors of the condominium association,an owner purchaser manual which shall contain the name and address of all contractors who performed work on the project, copies of all warranties or guarantees of appliances and fixtures and the estimated life expectancy of all depreciable component parts of the property, including but not limited to the roof, painting, common area carpets, drapes and furniture; (16) that the trash receptacles, furnaces, and water heaters shall be shown in a legal compartment outside the required parking and landscaping and in conformance with zoning and California Building and Fire Code requirements before a building permit is issued; (17) that the security gate system across the right side entrance driveway shall be installed a minimum 20'-0'back from the front property line; the security gate system shall include an intercom system connected to each dwelling which allows residents to communicate with guests and to provide guest access to the parking area by pushing a button inside their units; (18) that prior to scheduling the foundation inspection a licensed surveyor shall locate the property corners, set the building envelope; (19) 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; (20) that prior to scheduling the framing inspection the project architect or residential designer,or another architect or residential design professional,shall provide an architectural certification that the architectural details shown 10 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes March 26, 2007 in the approved design which should be evident at framing, such as window locations and bays, are built as shown on the approved plans; architectural certification documenting framing compliance with approved design shall be submitted to the Building Division before the final framing inspection shall be scheduled; (21) that prior to scheduling the roof deck inspection, a licensed surveyor shall establish the height of the roof ridge and provide certification of that height; (22) that trash enclosures and dumpster areas shall be covered and protected from roof and surface drainage and that if water cannot be diverted from these areas,a self-contained drainage system shall be provided that discharges to an interceptor; (23) that this project shall comply with the state-mandated water conservation program, and a complete Irrigation Water Management and Conservation Plan together with complete landscape and irrigation plans shall be provided at the time of building permit application; (24) that all site catch basins and drainage inlets flowing to the bay shall be stenciled. All catch basins shall be protected during construction to prevent debris from entering; (25) that project approvals shall be conditioned upon installation of an emergency generator to power the sump pump system; and the sump pump shall be redundant in all mechanical and electrical aspects (i.e., dual pumps, controls, level sensors, etc.). Emergency generators shall be housed so that they meet the City's noise requirement; (26) 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; (27) that in lieu of meeting the requirement specific to fire apparatus access required by Section 902.2.1,Uniform Fire Code,as adopted by Burlingame Municipal Code 17.04, the project applicant shall extend the required Class I Standpipe outlets to garage stair landings in accordance with fire department approved locations,and install Quick Response Sprinklers throughout the garage; (28) that the proposed project shall comply with construction standards and seismic design criteria contained in the Building Code as adopted by the City; (29) that before construction of the proposed project, per the Building Code, the project applicant shall obtain a site-specific soils report that identifies any potentially unsuitable soil conditions(such as expansive, liquefiable,or compressive soils)and contains appropriate recommendations for foundation type and design criteria,including provisions to reduce the effects of expansive soils.The recommendations made in the soils report for ground preparation and earthwork shall be incorporated in the construction design. The soils evaluations shall be conducted by registered soil professionals,and the measures to eliminate inappropriate soil conditions must be applied. The design for soil support of foundations shall conform to the analysis and implementation criteria described in the Building Code,Chapters 16, 18,and A33; (30) that a site-specific evaluation of soil conditions required by the City shall be completed as part of the building permit process and shall contain recommendations for ground preparation and earthwork specific to the project site that would become an integral part the construction design. Recommendations shall be included in the excavation and construction plans for the proposed project; (31) that although the proposed project would be exempt from preparing and implementing a project-specific SWPPP,because the City of Burlingame is a member of the STOPPP, the proposed project shall obtain coverage under STOPPP's Phase I Municipal Storm water Permit and comply with performance standards set forth by STOPPP's Storm water Management Plan.The City Storm Water Management and Discharge Control Ordinance(Municipal Code Chapter 15.14; Ordinance 1503 Section 1; June 20, 1994)would also be applied to the proposed project. In addition, the project applicants shall perform the following actions as uniformly required conditions of project approval, as identified by the City's NPDES Coordinator upon submittal of project applications to the City: (a) Implement appropriate storm water best management practices(BMPs)to minimize pesticide usage in accordance with the City's New Development/Redevelopment Landscaping Fact Sheet; (b) Incorporate applicable structural source control measures to minimize storm water pollutants in accordance with the City's Model List of Structural Source Control Measures; (c) Identify the responsible party who would be responsible for the operation and maintenance of the permanent post-construction storm water treatment measure(s). Prior to issuance of a final building permit, submit a completed, notarized Storm water Treatment Measure Maintenance Agreement; (32) that the proposed project shall comply with City grading requirements specified in Section 18.20 of the Municipal Code; (33) that the proposed project shall 11 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes March 26, 2007 comply with the City's Model Efficient Landscape Ordinance (Municipal Code Section 18.17.001; Ordinance 1476 Section 1;January 4, 1993),thereby reducing the amount of project site runoff polluted by landscape chemicals; (34) that the project applicant shall ensure implementation of the following mitigation measures during proj ect construction,in accordance with BAAQMD standard mitigation requirements: (a) Water all active construction areas at least twice daily; (b) Cover all trucks hauling soil, sand, and other loose materials or require all trucks to maintain at least two feet of freeboard; (c) Pave, apply water three times daily,or apply(non-toxic)soil stabilizers on all unpaved access roads,parking areas and staging areas at construction sites; (d) Sweep daily (with water sweepers) all paved access roads, parking areas and staging areas at construction sites; (e) Sweep streets daily(with water sweepers) if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent public streets; (35) that the project applicant shall prepare and implement a construction phasing plan and traffic management plan that defines how traffic operations would be managed and maintained during each phase of construction. The plan should be developed with the direct participation of the City of Burlingame. To the maximum practical extent,the plan should: (a) Detail how access will be maintained to individual properties where construction activities may interfere with ingress and egress. Any driveway closures shall take place during non-business hours; (b) Specify predetermined haul routes from staging areas to construction sites and to disposal areas of agreement with the City prior to construction. The routes shall follow streets and highways that provide the safest route and have the least impact on traffic. (c) During construction,require the contractor to provide information to the public using signs,press releases,and other media tools of traffic closures,detours or temporary displacement of left-turn lanes. (d) Identify a single phone number that property owners and businesses can call for construction scheduling,phasing,and duration information,as well as for complaints. (e) Identify construction activities that must take place during off-peak traffic hours or result in temporary road closures due to concerns regarding traffic safety or traffic congestion. Any road closures will be done at night under ordinary circumstances. If unforeseen circumstances require road closing during the day, the City of Burlingame should be consulted; (36) that in order to improve the ability of vehicles to turn from the lower level ramp to the driveway, the project has been revised so that the west driveway is 12 feet wide; (37) that the proposed project driveways shall be secured with an automatic gate system that would allow delivery vehicles to enter and exit the driveways with an opener. The entrance gate shall also provide an intercom system that would allow delivery vehicles to call from the entrance.Furthermore,rolling dumpsters shall be acquired by the project applicant, which can be maneuvered outside of the parking garage to the curb, to facilitate garbage pickup from Trousdale Avenue; (38) that the project applicant shall include in the proposed project a bicycle parking area that is 12 feet by 21 feet,in the lower level of the parking garage,as indicated in the site plan which is sufficient space for approximately 25 bicycles; (39) 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 should be conducted by a qualified wildlife biologist no earlier than 14 days prior to the removal of trees, shrubs, grassland vegetation,buildings, grading, or other construction activity. Survey results shall be valid for 21 days following the survey. 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; (40) that the trees proposed to be removed shall be evaluated by a licensed arborist whose report shall be reviewed by the City arborist to determine whether they are"protected trees"per Section 11.06.020 of the Burlingame Municipal Code and whether a tree removal permit is appropriate. If any trees proposed to be removed are protected trees, the City Arborist shall make a determination regarding the removal and replacement of these trees. As the 12 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes March 26, 2007 proposed landscaping plan includes the planting of 16 new trees, the City Arborist may determine that the proposed landscaping plan is sufficient and no other replacement trees are required. (a) The Municipal Code includes the following requirements regarding replacement trees; (b) Replacement shall be three 15- gallon size, one 24-inch box size, or one 36-inch box size landscape tree(s) for each tree removed; and (c) Any tree removed without a valid permit shall be replaced by two 24-inch box size,or two 36-inch box size landscape trees for each tree removed; and (d) Replacement of a tree may be waived by the director if a sufficient number of trees exists on the property to meet all other requirements of the Urban Reforestation and Tree Protection Ordinance; and (e) Size and number of the replacement tree(s)shall be determined by the director and shall be based on the species, location and value of the tree(s) removed; and (f) If replacement trees cannot be planted on the property,payment of equal value shall be made to the City. Such payments shall be deposited in the tree-planting fund to be drawn upon for public tree planting; (41) that the project applicant 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; (42) that as required by BAAQMD Regulation 11, Rule 2, the proposed project shall implement preventative measures during demolition and removal of all asbestos containing materials (ACMs) to prevent emissions of asbestos into the air. The proposed project shall also remove and dispose of all asbestos and PCB-containing materials according to Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) regulations and comply with the Cal/OSHA guidelines for worker safety during removal; (43) that the project applicant shall abide by its declared building height as specified in the FAA determination for the proposed project. The project applicant shall also ensure that construction equipment for the proposed project(e.g. cranes) shall not exceed the maximum height restriction specified in the San Francisco Airport Land Use Plan for the project site; (44) that if markings or lighting are to be included in the proposed project, the project applicant shall ensure that they are installed and maintained according to FAA guidelines; (45) that the applicant shall incorporate the following practices into the construction documents to be implemented by the project contractor.These control measures,such as installation of noise control devices (e.g. mufflers), selection of quieter machinery, and other noise control measures (e.g. surrounding stationary equipment with noise barriers), all of which would not require major equipment redesign. (a) Maximize the physical separation between noise generators and noise receptors. Such separation includes, but is not limited to, the following measures: (1) Use heavy-duty mufflers for stationary equipment and barriers around particularly noisy areas of the site or around the entire site; (2) Use shields,impervious fences,or other physical sound barriers to inhibit transmission of noise to sensitive receptors; (3) Locate stationary equipment to minimize noise impacts on the community; and (4) Minimize backing movements of equipment; (b) Use quiet construction equipment whenever possible; (c) 13 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes March 26, 2007 Impact equipment(e.g.,jackhammers 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) Prohibit 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 and schools, are avoided as much as possible; (f) The project applicant shall designate a "disturbance coordinator"for construction activities.The coordinator would be responsible for responding to any local complaints regarding construction noise and vibration.The coordinator would determine the cause of the noise or vibration complaint and would implement reasonable measures to correct the problem; (g) The construction contractor shall send advance notice to neighborhood residents within 50 feet of the project site regarding the construction schedule and including the telephone number for the disturbance coordinator at the construction site; (46) that the project applicant shall incorporate the following practice into the construction documents to be implemented by the project contractor.The project applicant shall require that loaded trucks and other vibration-generating equipment avoid areas of the project site that are located near existing residential uses to the maximum extent compatible with project construction goals; (47) that the project applicant shall include in the final project design noise insulation features that would effectively maintain interior noise levels of 45 dBA or less; (48) that the existing sanitary sewer on site shall be examined by the City after project construction to evaluate the pipe's condition. If the City Engineer determines that the pipe is substandard or if the pipe has been damaged by project construction, the pipe shall be replaced or repaired by the project applicant to the City Engineer's satisfaction; (49) that if the project applicant does not provide a 12-foot wide driveway, the project applicant shall be required to purchase maintenance equipment for the City that can access the on-site sewer easement through the proposed 9.5-foot-wide driveway; (50) that per the City's Construction and Demolition Waste Recycling Requirement, the project applicant shall submit a waste reduction plan that demonstrates that at least 50 percent of the construction and demolition waste can be recycled; (5 1) that the project applicant shall design and locate all exterior lighting so that the cone of light and/or glare from the lighting elements is kept entirely on the project site on or below the top of any fence, hedge, or wall at the site's property line, as required by the Burlingame Municipal Code Section 18.16.030 (pertaining to light spillage off site in commercial or residential areas).All wall mounted up-lighting shall be excluded from the proposed project. All project lighting shall comply with requirements of the California Energy Commission and the Illuminating Engineering Society of North America for illumination levels; and (52) that the following provisions shall be incorporated into the grading and construction contracts to address the potential to encounter currently unknown cultural resources: (a) Prior to the initiation of construction or ground- disturbing activities, all construction personnel shall receive environmental training that will include discussion of the possibility of buried cultural and paleontological resources,including training to recognize such possible buried cultural resources, as well as the procedure to follow if such cultural resources are encountered; (b) Retain Project Archaeologist. Since the project area contains a portion of one recorded Native American archeological resource, and other previously unknown prehistoric or historic cultural deposits may be encountered elsewhere in the project site during excavations, the City shall retain the services of a qualified archaeological consultant meeting federal criteria under 36 CFR 61, and who has expertise in California prehistory and urban historical archaeology; (c) If potential historical or unique archaeological resources are discovered during construction, all work in the immediate vicinity 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. The immediate vicinity wherein work shall be suspended shall be approximately 50 feet from the discovery or within an appropriate distance to be determined by the archaeologist or cultural resources consultant. Construction work shall not commence again until the archaeological or cultural resources consultant has been given an 14 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes March 26, 2007 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; (d) If the find is determined to be an 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 archaeological or cultural resources consultant, and shall result in detailed technical reports. Such reports 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; (e) 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; (f) 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. The motion was seconded by C. Auran. Chair Brownrigg called for a voice vote on the motion to approve the project including the condominium permit, front setback variance, and the conditional use permits for lot coverage and height. The motion passed on a 5-0-2 (Cers. Cauchi, Osterling absent). Appeal procedures were advised. This item concluded at 10:00 p.m. IX. DESIGN REVIEW STUDY ITEMS 7. 1560 COLUMBUS AVENUE,ZONED R-1—APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW AND SPECIAL PERMITS FOR BASEMENT FOR A NEW SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING AND DETACHED GARAGE (ROBERT AND CYNTHIA GILSON,APPLICANTS AND PROPERTY OWNERS;JAMES CHU,CHU DESIGN &ENGINEERING, DESIGNER)57 NOTICED) PROJECT PLANNER: RUBEN HURIN C. Brownrigg noted that he lives within 500' of the subject property and recused himself from the item. C. Auran noted that he had a business relationship with the applicant and also recused himself from this item. Both Commissioners stepped down from the dais and left the council chambers. Chair Brownrigg passed the gavel to Vice Chair Deal. CA Anderson noted that there was not a quorum on the item and that the applicant must make the decision themselves to either go to a design review consultant for guidance or to place themselves on the action 15 • STAFF REPORT BURLINGAME AGENDA 6b � w ITEM# MTG. DATE 4.16.07 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL SUBMITTED BY Ni_- DATE: APRIL 6, 2007 APPROVED FROM: CITY PLANNER BY �!O SUBJECT: Review of the Planning Commission's approval of an Zlication for Mitigated Negative Declaration, Design Review, Condominium Permit, Front Setback Variance and Conditional Use Permits for Height and Lot Coverage for a New Seven-story, 25-unit Residential Condominium RECOMMENDATION: City Council should hold a public hearing and take action. The public hearing can include both the planning requests (Mitigated Negative Declaration, Design Review, Condominium Permit, Front Setback and Lot Coverage Variance and Conditional Use Permit for Height) and the Tentative Condominium Map. Action should be taken separately on the three items listed below and the reasons for each action should be clearly stated for the record. Affirmative action on the planning requests should include findings for the Negative Declaration, Design Review, Condominium Permit, Variances and Conditional Use Permit. a. Mitigated negative declaration which includes the project and the tentative map requests; b. Planning requests including: design review, condominium permit, front setback variance, and conditional use permits for height and lot coverage; and C. Tentative condominium map. 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. Action Alternatives and the requirements for findings are attached at the end of the staff report. The conditions on the project approved by the Planning Commission follow. The conditions in italics represent mitigation measures taken from the mitigated negative declaration. 1. that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department date stamped March 14, 2007, sheets A0.1, A.1, A2.1, A2.1.1, A2.2 through A2.7, A3.1 through A3.4, A4.1, A4.2, A5.1 through A5.9, Ground Floor Landscape Plan and Podium Level Landscape Plan, and Boundary and Topographic Survey Plan and Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map; and that the portions of the trellises on the front elevation shown to be 2x10's shall be increased to at least 4x 10 over the 6x6 posts; Review of the Planning Commission's approval of an application for Mitigated Negative Declaration,Design Review, Condominium Permit, Front Setback and Lot Coverage Variances and Conditional Use Permit for Height for a New Seven-story,25-unit Residential Condominium April 16,2007 2. that building materials for this project shall be stored on this property or managed from another property in the area as approved by the City Engineer; that all employee parking and equipment parking for this construction project shall be provided on the site or shall be provided on another site in the immediate area as approved by the City Engineer; that no mitigations proposed for materials storage, equipment storage and staging, or employee parking shall involve the Plaza Shopping Center parking or any of its facilities; 3. that the maximum elevation at the top of the roof ridge shall not exceed elevation 117.18" as measured from the average elevation at the top of the curb along Trousdale Drive (42.18') for a maximum height of 75'-0", and that the top of each floor and final roof ridge shall be surveyed and approved by the City Engineer as the framing proceeds and prior to final framing and roofing inspections. The lower level garage floor finished floor elevation shall be elevation 33.5% at-grade garage level finished floor elevation shall be elevation 42.5% first floor above garage finished floor shall be elevation 53.5% second floor finished floor shall be elevation 63.5% third floor finished floor shall be elevation 73.5% fourth floor finished floor shall be elevation 83.5% sixth floor loft finished floor shall be elevation 102.5'; and the top of ridge elevation shall be no more than 117.18'. Should any framing exceed the stated elevation at any point it shall be removed or adjusted so that the final height of the structure with roof shall not exceed the maximum height shown on the approved plans; 4. that any changes to the size or envelope of the building, which would include expanding the footprint or floor area of the structure, replacing or relocating windows or changing the roof height or pitch, shall be subject to Planning Commission review; 5. 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; 6. that the backflow prevention device and post indicator valve (PIV) shall be located and screened by landscaping so they will be hidden from both the street and project residents; 7. that the conditions of the City Engineer's June 21, 2006, memo, the Chief Building Official's August 2, 2005, memo, the Fire Marshal's August 12, 2005 and September 3, 2006 memos, the NPDES Coordinator's August 15, 2005, memo and the Recycling Specialist's August 8, 2005, memo shall be met; 8. that storage of construction materials and equipment on the street or in the public right-of-way shall be prohibited; 9. that prior to issuance of a building permit for the project, the applicant shall pay the first half of the North Burlingame Rollins Road Development fee in the amount of$12,593.70, made payable to the City of Burlingame and submitted to the Planning Department; 10. that prior to scheduling the final framing inspection for the condominium building, the applicant shall pay the second half of the North Burlingame Rollins Road Development fee in the amount of $12,593.70, made payable to the City of Burlingame and submitted to the Planning Department; -2- Review of the Planning Commission's approval of an application for Mitigated Negative Declaration,Design Review, Condominium Permit, Front Setback and Lot Coverage Variances and Conditional Use Permit for Height for a New Seven-story, 25-unit Residential Condominium April 16,2007 11. that prior to issuance of a building permit for the project, the applicant shall enter into an agreement with the City to establish the affordability of the three below market rate units required as a part of this project; the applicant shall also submit a below market rate housing plan which shall describe in detail the applicant's proposal for a third party to meet and manage the inclusionary housing requirements as required by Chapter 25.63 of the Burlingame Municipal Code; the applicant shall enter into an agreement with a third-party non-profit organization approved by the City to administer the program; 12. that 'guest parking stall' shall be marked on the three guest parking spaces and designated on the final map and plans, these stalls shall not be assigned to any unit, but shall be owned and maintained by the condominium association, and the guest stalls shall always be accessible for parking and not be separately enclosed or used for resident storage; and that in addition to the three guest parking stalls, and one service vehicle parking stall, 52 parking spaces shall be available on site for owners, and none of the on-site parking shall be rented, leased or sold to anyone who does not own a unit on the site; 13. that the Covenants Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs) for the condominium project shall require that the three guest parking stalls shall be reserved for guests only and shall not be used by condominium residents; 14. that the final inspection shall be completed and a certificate of occupancy issued before the close of escrow on the sale of each unit; 15. that the developer shall provide to the initial purchaser of each unit and to the board of directors of the condominium association, an owner purchaser manual which shall contain the name and address of all contractors who performed work on the project, copies of all warranties or guarantees of appliances and fixtures and the estimated life expectancy of all depreciable component parts of the property, including but not limited to the roof, painting, common area carpets, drapes and furniture; 16. that the trash receptacles, furnaces, and water heaters shall be shown in a legal compartment outside the required parking and landscaping and in conformance with zoning and California Building and Fire Code requirements before a building permit is issued; 17. that the security gate system across the right side entrance driveway shall be installed a minimum 20'- 0' back from the front property line; the security gate system shall include an intercom system connected to each dwelling which allows residents to communicate with guests and to provide guest access to the parking area by pushing a button inside their units; 18. that prior to scheduling the foundation inspection a licensed surveyor shall locate the property corners, set the building envelope; 19. 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; 20. that prior to scheduling the framing inspection the project architect or residential designer, or another architect or residential design professional, shall provide an architectural certification that the architectural details shown in the approved design which should be evident at framing, such as -3- Review of the Planning Commission's approval of an application for Mitigated Negative Declaration,Design Review, Condominium Permit, Front Setback and Lot Coverage Variances and Conditional Use Permit for Height for a New Seven-story,25-unit Residential Condominium April 16,2007 window locations and bays, are built as shown on the approved plans; architectural certification documenting framing compliance with approved design shall be submitted to the Building Division before the final framing inspection shall be scheduled; 21. that prior to scheduling the roof deck inspection, a licensed surveyor shall establish the height of the roof ridge and provide certification of that height; 22. that trash enclosures and dumpster areas shall be covered and protected from roof and surface drainage and that if water cannot be diverted from these areas, a self-contained drainage system shall be provided that discharges to an interceptor; 23. that this project shall comply with the state-mandated water conservation program, and a complete Irrigation Water Management and Conservation Plan together with complete landscape and irrigation plans shall be provided at the time of building permit application; 24. that all site catch basins and drainage inlets flowing to the bay shall be stenciled. All catch basins shall be protected during construction to prevent debris from entering; 25. that project approvals shall be conditioned upon installation of an emergency generator to power the sump pump system; and the sump pump shall be redundant in all mechanical and electrical aspects (i.e., dual pumps, controls, level sensors, etc.). Emergency generators shall be housed so that they meet the City's noise requirement; 26. 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; 27. that in lieu of meeting the requirement specific to fire apparatus access required by Section 902.2.1, Uniform Fire Code, as adopted by Burlingame Municipal Code 17.04, the project applicant shall extend the required Class I Standpipe outlets to garage stair landings in accordance with fire department approved locations, and install Quick Response Sprinklers throughout the garage; (Land Use, Fire Dept) 28. that the proposed project shall comply with construction standards and seismic design criteria contained in the Building Code as adopted by the City; (Geology and Soils; Building Division) 29. that before construction of the proposed project, per the Building Code, the project applicant shall obtain a site-specific soils report that identifies any potentially unsuitable soil conditions (such as expansive, liquefiable, or compressive soils) and contains appropriate recommendations for foundation type and design criteria, including provisions to reduce the effects of expansive soils. The recommendations made in the soils report for ground preparation and earthwork shall be incorporated in the construction design. The soils evaluations shall be conducted by registered soil professionals, and the measures to eliminate inappropriate soil conditions must be applied. The design for soil support of foundations shall conform to the analysis and implementation criteria described in the Building Code, Chapters 16, 18, and A33; (Geology and Soils, Building Division) 30. that a site-specific evaluation of soil conditions required by the City shall be completed as part of the building permit process and shall contain recommendations for ground preparation and earthwork -4- Review of the Planning Commission's approval of an application for Mitigated Negative Declaration,Design Review, Condominium Permit, Front Setback and Lot Coverage Variances and Conditional Use Permit for Height for a New Seven-story,25-unit Residential Condominium April 16,2007 specific to the project site that would become an integral part the construction design. Recommendations shall be included in the excavation and construction plans for the proposed project; (Geology and Soils, Building Division) 31. that although the proposed project would be exempt from preparing and implementing a project- specific SWPPP, because the City of Burlingame is a member of the STOPPP, the proposed project shall obtain coverage under STOPPP's Phase I Municipal Stormwater Permit and comply with performance standards set forth by STOPPP's Stormwater Management Plan. The City Storm Water Management and Discharge Control Ordinance (Municipal Code Chapter 15.14; Ordinance 1503 Section 1; June 20, 1994) would also be applied to the proposed project. In addition, the project applicants shall perform the following actions as uniformly required conditions of project approval, as identified by the City's NPDES Coordinator upon submittal of project applications to the City: • Implement appropriate stormwater best management practices (BMPs) to minimize pesticide usage in accordance with the City's New Development/Redevelopment Landscaping Fact Sheet. • Incorporate applicable structural source control measures to minimize stormwater pollutants in accordance with the City's Model List of Structural Source Control Measures. • Identify the responsible party who would be responsible for the operation and maintenance of the permanent post-construction stormwater treatment measure(s). Prior to issuance of a final building permit, submit a completed, notarized Stormwater Treatment Measure Maintenance Agreement; (Hydrology and Water Quality; Public Works Department) 32. that the proposed project shall comply with City grading requirements specified in Section 18.20 of the Municipal Code; (Hydrology and Water Quality; Public Works Department) 33. that the proposed project shall comply with the City's Model Efficient Landscape Ordinance (Municipal Code Section 18.17.001; Ordinance 1476 Section 1; January 4, 1993), thereby reducing the amount of project site runoff polluted by landscape chemicals; (Hydrology and Water Quality; City Arborist) 34. that the project applicant shall ensure implementation of the following mitigation measures during project construction, in accordance with BAAQMD standard mitigation requirements: • Water all active construction areas at least twice daily. • Cover all trucks hauling soil, sand, and other loose materials or require all trucks to maintain at least two feet of freeboard. • Pave, apply water three times daily, or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers on all unpaved access roads,parking areas and staging areas at construction sites. • Sweep daily (with water sweepers) all paved access roads,parking areas and staging areas at construction sites. • Sweep streets daily (with water sweepers) if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent public streets; (Air Quality; Building Division) 35. that the project applicant shall prepare and implement a construction phasing plan and traffic management plan that defines how traffic operations would be managed and maintained during each -5- Review of the Planning Commission's approval of an application for Mitigated Negative Declaration,Design Review, Condominium Permit, Front Setback and Lot Coverage Variances and Conditional Use Permit for Height for a New Seven-story,25-unit Residential Condominium April 16,2007 phase of construction. The plan should be developed with the direct participation of the City of Burlingame. To the maximum practical extent, the plan should: • Detail how access will be maintained to individual properties where construction activities may interfere with ingress and egress. Any driveway closures shall take place during non- business hours. • Specify predetermined haul routes from staging areas to construction sites and to disposal areas of agreement with the City prior to construction. The routes shall follow streets and highways that provide the safest route and have the least impact on traffic. • During construction, require the contractor to provide information to the public using signs, press releases, and other media tools of traffic closures, detours or temporary displacement of left-turn lanes. • Identify a single phone number that property owners and businesses can call for construction scheduling,phasing, and duration information, as well as for complaints. • Identify construction activities that must take place during off-peak traffic hours or result in temporary road closures due to concerns regarding traffic safety or traffic congestion. Any road closures will be done at night under ordinary circumstances. If unforeseen circumstances require road closing during the day, the City of Burlingame should be consulted; (Traffic;Public Works Department) 36. that in order to improve the ability of vehicles to turn from the lower level ramp to the driveway, the project has been revised so that the west driveway is 12 feet wide; (Traffic, Public Works and Planning Departments) 37. that the proposed project driveways shall be secured with an automatic gate system that would allow delivery vehicles to enter and exit the driveways with an opener. The entrance gate shall also provide an intercom system that would allow delivery vehicles to call from the entrance. Furthermore, rolling dumpsters shall be acquired by the project applicant, which can be maneuvered outside of the parking garage to the curb, to facilitate garbage pickup from Trousdale Avenue; (Traffic; Public Works Department) 38. that the project applicant shall include in the proposed project a bicycle parking area that is 12 feet by 21 feet, in the lower level of the parking garage, as indicated in the site plan which is sufficient space for approximately 25 bicycles; (Traffic;Public Works and Planning Departments) 39. 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 should be conducted by a qualified wildlife biologist no earlier than 14 days prior to the removal of trees, shrubs, grassland vegetation, buildings, grading, or other construction activity. Survey results shall be valid for 21 days following the survey. 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 -6- Review of the Planning Commission's approval of an application for Mitigated Negative Declaration,Design Review, Condominium Permit, Front Setback and Lot Coverage Variances and Conditional Use Permit for Height for a New Seven-story,25-unit Residential Condominium April 16,2007 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) 40. that the trees proposed to be removed shall be evaluated by a licensed arborist whose report shall be reviewed by the City arborist to determine whether they are 'protected trees"per Section 11.06.020 of the Burlingame Municipal Code and whether a tree removal permit is appropriate. If any trees proposed to be removed are protected trees, the City Arborist shall make a determination regarding the removal and replacement of these trees. As the proposed landscaping plan includes the planting of 16 new trees, the City Arborist may determine that the proposed landscaping plan is sufficient and no other replacement trees are required. • The Municipal Code includes the following requirements regarding replacement trees. • Replacement shall be three 15-gallon size, one 24-inch box size, or one 36-inch box size landscape tree(s)for each tree removed; and • Any tree removed without a valid permit shall be replaced by two 24-inch box size, or two 36- inch box size landscape trees for each tree removed; and • Replacement of a tree may be waived by the director if a sufficient number of trees exists on the property to meet all other requirements of the Urban Reforestation and Tree Protection Ordinance; and • Size and number of the replacement trees) shall be determined by the director and shall be based on the species, location and value of the tree(s) removed; and • If replacement trees cannot be planted on the property,payment of equal value shall be made to the City. Such payments shall be deposited in the tree planting fund to be drawn upon for public tree planting; (Biological Resources; City Arborist) 41. that the project applicant 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. -7- Review of the Planning Commission's approval of an application for Mitigated Negative Declaration,Design Review, Condominium Permit, Front Setback and Lot Coverage Variances and Conditional Use Permit for Height for a New Seven-story,25-unit Residential Condominium April 16,2007 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) 42. that as required by BAAQMD Regulation 11, Rule 2, the proposed project shall implement preventative measures during demolition and removal of all asbestos containing materials (ACMs) to prevent emissions of asbestos into the air. The proposed project shall also remove and dispose of all asbestos and PCB-containing materials according to Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) regulations and comply with the Cal/OSHA guidelines for worker safety during removal; (Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Building Division) 43. that the project applicant shall abide by its declared building height as specified in the FAA determination for the proposed project. The project applicant shall also ensure that construction equipment for the proposed project (e.g. cranes) shall not exceed the maximum height restriction specified in the San Francisco Airport Land Use Plan for the project site; (Hazards and Hazardous Materials; Planning Department) 44. that if markings or lighting are to be included in the proposed project, the project applicant shall ensure that they are installed and maintained according to FAA guidelines; (Hazards and Hazardous Materials;Planning Department) 45. that the applicant shall incorporate the following practices into the construction documents to be implemented by the project contractor. These control measures, such as installation of noise control devices (e.g. mufflers), selection of quieter machinery, and other noise control measures (e.g. surrounding stationary equipment with noise barriers), all of which would not require major equipment redesign. a. Maximize 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 -8- Review of the Planning Commission's approval of an application for Mitigated Negative Declaration,Design Review, Condominium Permit, Front Setback and Lot Coverage Variances and Conditional Use Permit for Height for a New Seven-story,25-unit Residential Condominium April 16,2007 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. Prohibit 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 and schools, are avoided as much as possible. f. The project applicant shall designate a "disturbance coordinator"for construction activities. The coordinator would be responsible for responding to any local complaints regarding construction noise and vibration. The coordinator would determine the cause of the noise or vibration complaint and would implement reasonable measures to correct the problem. g. The construction contractor shall send advance notice to neighborhood residents within 50 feet of the project site regarding the construction schedule and including the telephone number for the disturbance coordinator at the construction site; (Noise; Planning, Public Works) 46 that the project applicant shall incorporate the following practice into the construction documents to be implemented by the project contractor. The project applicant shall require that loaded trucks and other vibration-generating equipment avoid areas of the project site that are located near existing residential uses to the maximum extent compatible with project construction goals; (Noise, Building Division) 47. that the project applicant shall include in the final project design noise insulation features that would effectively maintain interior noise levels of 45 dBA or less; (Noise;Planning and Building) 48. that the existing sanitary sewer on site shall be examined by the City after project construction to evaluate the pipe's condition. If the City Engineer determines that the pipe is substandard or if the pipe has been damaged by project construction, the pipe shall be replaced or repaired by the project applicant to the City Engineer's satisfaction; (Utilities and Service Systems; Public Works Department) 49. that if the project applicant does not provide a 12 foot wide driveway, the project applicant shall be required to purchase maintenance equipment for the City that can access the on-site sewer easement through the proposed 9.5-foot-wide driveway; (Utilities and Sewer Systems; Public Works Department) 50. that per the City's Construction and Demolition Waste Recycling Requirement, the project applicant shall submit a waste reduction plan that demonstrates that at least 50 percent of the construction and demolition waste can be recycled; (Utilities and Service Systems;Building Division) 51. that the project applicant shall design and locate all exterior lighting so that the cone of light and/or glare from the lighting elements is kept entirely on the project site on or below the top of any fence, hedge, or wall at the site's property line, as required by the Burlingame Municipal Code Section 18.16.030 (pertaining to light spillage off site in commercial or residential areas). All wall mounted up-lighting shall be excluded from the proposed project. All project lighting shall comply with -9- Review of the Planning Commission's approval of an application for Mitigated Negative Declaration,Design Review, Condominium Permit, Front Setback and Lot Coverage Variances and Conditional Use Permit for Height for a New Seven-story,25-unit Residential Condominium April 16,2007 requirements of the California Energy Commission and the Illuminating Engineering Society of North America for illumination levels; and(Aesthetics; Planning and Building) 52. that the following provisions shall be incorporated into the grading and construction contracts to address the potential to encounter currently unknown cultural resources: a. Prior to the initiation of construction or ground-disturbing activities, all construction personnel shall receive environmental training that will include discussion of the possibility of buried cultural and paleontological resources, including training to recognize such possible buried cultural resources, as well as the procedure to follow if such cultural resources are encountered. b. Retain Project Archaeologist. Since the project area contains a portion of one recorded Native American archeological resource, and other previously unknown prehistoric or historic cultural deposits may be encountered elsewhere in the project site during excavations, the City shall retain the services of a qualified archaeological consultant meeting federal criteria under 36 CFR 61, and who has expertise in California prehistory and urban historical archaeology. C. If potential historical or unique archaeological resources are discovered during construction, all work in the immediate vicinity 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. The immediate vicinity wherein work shall be suspended shall be approximately 50 feet from the discovery or within an appropriate distance to be determined by the archaeologist or cultural resources consultant. 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. d. If the find is determined to be an 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 archaeological or cultural resources consultant, and shall result in detailed technical reports. Such reports 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. e. 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. -10- Review of the Planning Commission's approval of an application for Mitigated Negative Declaration,Design Review, Condominium Permit, Front Setback and Lot Coverage Variances and Conditional Use Permit for Height for a New Seven-story,25-unit Residential Condominium April 16,2007 f. 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) Planning Commission Action: At their meeting on March 26, 2007, the Planning Commission held a public hearing and voted 5-0-2 (Cers. Cauchi and Osterling absent) to approve the project including the condominium permit, tentative condominium map, front setback variance and conditional use permits for lot coverage and height. In their action on the project, Commissioners noted a concern with construction staging because the project is directly across the street from the entrance to Peninsula Hospital which is now under construction; a condition was added to require that all staging for the project be done on site or on a nearby site, not in the public street; and noted that the findings for the lot coverage exception can be met because the area to be covered not only provides common open space on the raised deck which encloses the access ramps, but also provides a buffer from the noise from the parking access ramps which are being covered by the deck; the front setback variance is justified on the basis that a major objective of the North Burlingame/Rollins Road Specific Plan is to increase pedestrian activity and life on the street, the proposed outdoor stairway will make the project more pedestrian friendly by providing direct access for residents and visitors to Trousdale, in addition, the existing sewer easement on the left side of the property resulted in the first deck of parking being at grade. At the conclusion of their action, the Planning Commission recommended the tentative map to the City Council for action. Previous Planning Commission Meetings: Prior to their action on March 26, 2007, the Planning Commission had reviewed the application at a study meeting on January 8, 2007, and at an action meeting on February 12, 2007 (refer to attached 1/8/07 and 2/12/07 Planning Commission minutes). At the study meeting, the project before the Planning Commission included several variances related to driveway width and parking space dimensions. The Planning Commission gave direction to the applicant to revise the project to eliminate these variances. On February 12, 2007, the Planning Commission reviewed a revised project submitted by the applicant which had eliminated the parking and circulation variances by providing two 12-foot wide access driveways on either side of the building, and by providing parking spaces which met the zoning code dimensional requirements. The Planning Commission reviewed the project and gave direction to the applicant to further revise the project. The Commission requested that the applicant include an outdoor stairway entrance at the front of the building to increase the pedestrian activity and access on the street. The Commission also asked the applicant to provide a podium level open space area by covering the two driveway ramps at the rear of the building to create a landscaped deck area above and improved access for residents from the building to the at-grade common open space at the rear of the site. -11- Review of the Planning Commission's approval of an application for Mitigated Negative Declaration,Design Review, Condominium Permit, Front Setback and Lot Coverage Variances and Conditional Use Permit for Height for a New Seven-story, 25-unit Residential Condominium April 16,2007 The applicant revised the plans to reflect the Commission's comments (revised plans date stamped March 14, 2007). These two changes triggered requirements for a front setback variance for the entrance stairway and a conditional use permit for lot coverage to accommodate the deck above the driveway ramps. On March 26, 2007, the Planning Commission approved the project with these changes. BACKGROUND: The applicant, Paul Bogatsky, is proposing to demolish an existing one-story office building on the site and construct a seven-story, 25-unit residential condominium structure with underground parking and parking at grade on the first level of the structure. This site is located on Trousdale Drive between Ogden Drive and Magnolia Avenue. There is an existing 10' wide sewer easement containing a 6" diameter sewer main that runs along the left (east) side property line. Construction of the structure is required to be outside the 10' sewer easement. The surrounding area consists of offices and multi-family residential uses. The proposed structure is a rectangular building with wrought iron balconies, a stucco finish and a Spanish tile roof. The proposed building is 74.82 feet tall and has a lot coverage of 58.8%, including the raised deck over the ramps to the underground parking. One level of underground parking is proposed. The ground level consists of parking and the building lobby; the remaining six floors contain the 25 two- and three- bedroom condominium units ranging in size from 1003 SF to 2961 SF. The parking area is accessed by two 12'-wide one-way driveways along either side of the building, with a 12' entrance to the underground parking on the right side, and a 12' exit on the left side of the building. Common open space is provided at grade at the rear of the structure (1618 SF) and at a podium level (1821 SF) above the ramps to the underground garage. The project is being reviewed under the requirements of the Trousdale West (TW) zoning. The following applications required for this project: • Condominium permit for a 25-unit residential condominium (CS 26.030.020); • Tentative Condominium Map (CS 26.08.020); • Front setback variance for main entry stairway with a setback which varies from 2'-6" to 4'-0" from front property line where a 10' setback/build to line is required (CS 25.40.070 (a) (2); • Conditional use permit for building height over 35 feet (74.82'proposed where height over 35'-0" requires a conditional use permit and 75' is the maximum allowed) (CS 25.40.025(d)); and • Conditional Use Permit for lot coverage (58.8% lot coverage (12,787 SF)where TW zoning permits a maximum lot coverage of 50% lot coverage (10,870.5 SF); a conditional use permit rather than a variance is required for lot coverage exceeding 50% because additional common open space is provided in an amount equal to the square footage of excess lot coverage (CS 25.40.025 (e). Mitigated Negative Declaration: Since the project proposes new construction of more than four units, the project is subject to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Therefore, an Initial Study was prepared. Based on the Initial Study, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was proposed for review by the Planning Commission. This document has also been sent to the County Clerk's Office and circulated to other responsible agencies for comment. As presented, based on the mitigation measures identified in the Initial Study, it has been determined that the proposed project can be addressed by a Mitigated Negative Declaration since the Initial Study did not identify any adverse impacts which could not be reduced to acceptable levels by mitigation (refer to attached Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 543-P). Please note that the proposed mitigation measures for the project are summarized Mitigated Negative -12- Review of the Planning Commission's approval of an application for Mitigated Negative Declaration,Design Review, Condominium Permit, Front Setback and Lot Coverage Variances and Conditional Use Permit for Height for a New Seven-story,25-unit Residential Condominium April 16,2007 Declaration cover sheet at the front of the document and have been incorporated into the conditions of approval (see conditions in italics). Planning staff would note that while the Mitigated Negative Declaration did not identify any significant adverse impact, the traffic analysis indicates that some of the turns within the 9.5-foot wide drive aisle are tight and would require driver attention and low speed execution to maneuver, and a number of the parking stalls are smaller than the City requires, thus making entering and exiting them more difficult than typical. Revisions have been made to the project to address this concern (plans date stamped March 14, 2007), with two 12'-wide driveways proposed, and the tight turns identified in the initial study have been eliminated. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A: Action Alternatives and Criteria for Design Review, Condominium Permit,Variance and Conditional Use Permits Attachment B: Visual Simulations Attachment C: Planning Commission Minutes, March 26, 2007 Attachment D: Planning Commission Staff Report with Attachments Attachment E: Notice of Review Hearing, Mailed April 6, 2007 Attachment F: Aerial, 1800 Trousdale Drive Attachment G: City Council Resolution Attachment H: Negative Declaration(separate document attached) -13- ACTION ALTERNATIVES 1. City council may vote in favor of an applicant's request. If the action is a variance,use permit,hillside area construction permit, fence exception, sign exception or exception to the antenna ordinance, the Council must make findings as required by the code. Findings must be particular to the given properties and request. Actions on use permits should be by resolution. A majority of the Council members seated during the public hearing must agree in order to pass an affirmative motion. 2. City Council may deny an applicant's request. The reasons for denial should be clearly stated for the record. 3. City Council may deny a request without prejudice. This action should be used when the application made to the City Council is not the same as that heard by the Planning Commission; when a Planning Commission action has been justifiably, with clear direction, denied without prejudice; or when the proposed project raises questions or issues on which the Council would like additional information or additional design work before acting on the project. Direction about additional information required to be given to staff, applicant and Planning Commission/City Council for the further consideration should be made very clear. Council should also direct whether any subsequent hearing should be held before the City Council or the Planning Commission. FINDINGS FOR A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION The California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA)requires that to be approved the governing body acting on a project must find,on the basis of the Initial Study and any comments received in writing or at the public hearing, that there is no substantial evidence that the project with the mitigations proposed will have a significant (negative) effect on the environment. The proposed mitigations shall be included in the conditions of approval of the project and this constitutes the required mitigation monitoring plan to insure that the terms of the mitigations which reduce the effects of the project on the environment are implemented. DESIGN REVIEW CRITERIA: The criteria for design review as established in the TW District regulations are outlined as follows: (a) Support of the pattern of diverse architectural styles as defined in the design guidelines for the El Camino Real Design District; and (b) Respect for and promotion of the streetscape and pedestrian accessibilityby the placement ofbuildings to maximize the commercial and safe residential use of the street frontage, location of off-street public open spaces, and by locating parking so that it does not dominate street frontages; and (c) The design should fit the site, support the building rhythm,the sense of pedestrian scale along the street frontage, is compatible with the surrounding development and is consistent with the design guidelines and development standards for the El Camino Real Design District; and (d) Compatibility of the architecture and landscaping with the design guidelines for the El Camino Real Design District including building materials, articulation of the facades, differentiation of architectural elements,building mass, and use of decorative elements, including awnings and signage; and (e) Architectural design consistency: by using a single architectural style with appropriate articulation on the site that is consistent among primary elements of the structure(s) and with the directives of the design guidelines and development standards for the El Camino Real Design District; and Action Alternatives and Requirements for Findings (f) Provision of site features identified in the design guidelines and development standards for the El Camino Real Design District such as landscaping and pedestrian circulation which enriches the existing opportunities of the mixed use commercial and residential neighborhood,as well as those structures with only residential uses. CRITERIA FOR PERMITTING A RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM: The following condominium standards shall apply to all land and structures proposed as a part of a condominium project and shall be evaluated and processed pursuant to the procedural requirements set forth for conditional use permits in title 25 of this code.No condominium project or portion thereof shall be approved or conditionally approved in whole or in part unless the planning commission,or city council upon appeal or review,has reviewed the following on the basis of their effect on: (a) Sound community planning; the economic, ecological, social and aesthetic qualities of the community; and on public health, safety and general welfare; (b) The overall impact on schools, parks, utilities, neighborhoods, streets, traffic, parking and other community facilities and resources; and (c) Conformity with the general plan and density permitted by zoning regulations. REQUIREMENTS FOR FINDINGS FOR A VARIANCE In order to grant a variance the City Council must find that the following conditions exist on the property(CS 25.54.020 a-d): (a) there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property involved that do not apply generally to property in the same district; (b) the granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant, and to prevent unreasonable property loss or unnecessary hardship; (c) the granting of the application will not be detrimental or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity and will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, general welfare or convenience; (d) that the use of the property will be compatible with the aesthetics,mass,bulk and character of existing and potential uses of properties in the general vicinity. REQUIREMENTS FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT In order to grant a conditional use permit the City Council must find that the following conditions exist on the property(CS 25.52.020 a-c): (a) The proposed use, at the proposed location, will not be detrimental or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity and will not be detrimental to the public health, safety,general welfare or convenience; (b) The proposed use will be located and conducted in a manner in accord with the Burlingame general plan and the purposes of this title; (c) The planning commission may impose such reasonable conditions or restrictions as it deems -� necessary to secure the purposes of this title and to assure operation of the use in a manner compatible with the aesthetics, mass,bulk and character of existing and potential uses on adjoining properties. -2- j tui r � 4 4t a. Existing View Proposed Project Outl e x e b. Outline of Proposed Project which would be hidden by existing buildings Source:Square One Productions,2006. E_I P FIGURE M-5 View of Existing Setting and Proposed Project from Trousdale Drive and Sequoia Avenue ADivision of D41185.00 1800 Trousdale Drive Residential Condominium Project a. Existing View , a t $18�t�b0sddfe b; b. Proposed View Source:Square One Productions,2006. E._L_P FIGURE M-9 Existing and Proposed Buildings at 1800 and 1818 Trousdale Drive ADivision of D41186.00 1800 Trousdale Drive Residential Condominium Project I I I I IIS 1 r a. Existing View 5 RV4 r Propos roject. - i ,J - i .Y m. b. Proposed View Source:Square One Productions,2006. E_I P FIGURE M-6 View of Existing Setting and Proposed Project from Trousdale Drive and Marco Polo Way A Division of MI. D41185.00 1800 Trousdale Drive Residential Condominium Project City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes March 26, 2007 installed on the po ions of the roof not vis' e from the street; and that ese venting details shall be �.. included and ap oved in the constructio plans before a Building pe it is issued; (7) that prior to scheduling the oof deck inspection, a lic sed surveyor shall shoot the ight of the roof ridge and prov�de certificatio f that height to the Build' g Department; (8) that the co ditions of the City Arborist's Ap 15, 2004, me o including the require nts of the Arborlogic Consulti g report dated March 23, 2004, d the City E ineer's, Chief Buildin fficial's, Fire Marshal's and ecycling Specialist's August , 2003, mem s shall be met; (9) th the project shall comply wit the Construction and Demoli 'on Debris Re cling Ordinance which quires affected demolition, ne construction and alteration prof cts to submit aste Reduction Plan d meet recycling requiremen ; any partial or full demolitio of a structure, interior or exterior, shal require a demolition permit; ( ) that the applicant shall comp with Ordinance 1503, the City of Bur ' game Storm Water Manage nt and Discharge Control Ordi ce; and (11) that the project shall m tall the requirements of the C ifornia Building Code and Calif rnia Fire Code, 2001 edition, as amen d by the City of Burlingame. The motion as seconded by C. Brownrigg. ommission noted that an extrem y large tree and the slope of the lot hel to mitigate the height of the h se. Chair rownrigg called for a voice v e on the motion to approve. The otion passed on a 5-0-2 (Cers. Cau i and Osterling absent). App 1 procedures were advised. This ' em concluded at 9:40 p.m. 6. 1800 TROUSDALE DRIVE, ZONED TW — APPLICATION FOR MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION, DESIGN REVIEW, CONDOMINIUM PERMIT, TENTATIVE CONDOMINIUM MAP, FRONT SETBACK AND LOT COVERAGE VARIANCES AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR HEIGHT FOR A 25-UNIT, 7-STORY RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM (PAUL BOGATSKY, APPLICANT AND PROPERTY OWNER; DAN IONESCU ARCHITECTS AND PLANNERS, ARCHITECT) (14 NOTICED) PROJECT PLANNER: MAUREEN BROOKS a. MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION, DESIGN REVIEW, CONDOMINIUM PERMIT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR HEIGHT; AND b. TENTATIVE CONDOMINIUM MAP — PROJECT ENGINEER: VICTOR VOONG Reference staff report March 24, 2007, with attachments. CP Monroe presented the report, reviewed criteria and staff comments. Fifty-two (52) conditions including the mitigation monitoring program were suggested for consideration. CP noted that on February 12, 2007, the Commission held a public hearing on this multiple family residential project and continued the action until the applicant had responded to several design and open space issues identified. The applicant submitted revised plans dated March 14, 2007, and notice was sent for a continued public hearing this evening. Commissioners had no questions of staff. Chair Brownrigg opened the public hearing. Dan Ionesco, architect, and Paul Bogatsky, property owner, represented the project. Issues discussed: the changes to the plans, placement of wrought iron below the store front gate; the construction of the trellis on the front of the building; the new podium used for open space; materials sample board. There were no further comments from the floor. The public hearing was closed. �. C. Vistica made a motion finding that, on the basis of the Initial Study and any comments received in writing and at the public hearing, there is no substantial evidence that the project would have a negative impact on the environment, so recommend the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Tentative Condominium Map to the City Council for action. The motion was seconded by C. Auran. 8 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes March 26, 2007 Chair Brownrigg called for a voice vote on the motion to find the Mitigated Negative Declaration an adequate environmental disclosure and recommending both the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Tentative Condominium Map to the Council for action. The motion passed on a 5-0-2 (Cers. Cauchi, Osterling absent) voice vote. Commissioners comments on the project: because of the proximity of the hospital entrance across the street from this site would like to see all staging and debris management for this project done on site, applicant should find alternate parking for employees and for storage of materials during construction if necessary. Note that the exception for lot coverage is met because the area covered not only improves the quality of life in the building by sheltering future residents and neighbors from noise from the access ramps to the parking area below the building but also provides additional open space for the use of future owners; the front setback variance is justified on the basis that a major objective of the North Burlingame/Rollins Road Specific Plan is to increase pedestrian activity and life on the street, because the grade on this lot and easement location resulted in the first deck of parking being at grade, the main entrance into the building projecting into the front setback supports the objective of bringing more life to the street and encourages pedestrians. C.V istica made a motion to approve the residential condominium permit,front setback variance,conditional use permits for lot coverage and height for a new seven story 25-unit residential condominium project by resolution with amended conditions that building materials for this project shall be stored on this property or managed from another property in the area approved by the City Engineer; that all employee parking and equipment parking for this construction project shall be provided on the site or shall be provided on another site in the immediate area as approved by the City Engineer; that no mitigations proposed for materials storage, equipment storage and staging, or employee parking shall involve the Plaza Shopping Center parking or facilities; and that the portions of the trellises on the front elevation shown to be built with the 2x10's shall be increased to at least 4x 10 over the 6x6 posts; and with all the conditions, including the conditions from the mitigation monitoring plan as follows: (1) that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department date stamped March 14,2007, sheets A0.1,A.1,A2.1,A2.1.1,A2.2 through A2.7,A3.1 through A3.4,A4.1,A4.2,A5.1 through A5.9, Ground Floor Landscape Plan and Podium Level Landscape Plan, and Boundary and Topographic Survey Plan and Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map; and that the portions of the trellises on the front elevation shown to be 2x10's shall be increased to at least 4x 10 over the 6x6 posts; (2) that building materials for this project shall be stored on this property or managed from another property in the area as approved by the City Engineer;that all employee parking and equipment parking for this construction project shall be provided on the site or shall be provided on another site in the immediate area as approved by the City Engineer;that no mitigations proposed for materials storage,equipment storage and staging,or employee parking shall involve the Plaza Shopping Center parking or any of its facilities; (3) that the maximum elevation at the top of the roof ridge shall not exceed elevation 117.18" as measured from the average elevation at the top of the curb along Trousdale Drive(42.18')for a maximum height of 75'-0",and that the top of each floor and final roof ridge shall be surveyed and approved by the City Engineer as the framing proceeds and prior to final framing and roofing inspections. The lower level garage floor finished floor elevation shall be elevation 33.5';at-grade garage level finished floor elevation shall be elevation 42.5';-� first floor above garage finished floor shall be elevation 53.5';second floor finished floor shall be elevatioi 635; third floor finished floor shall be elevation 73.5'; fourth floor finished floor shall be elevation 83.5'; sixth floor loft finished floor shall be elevation 102.5'; and the top of ridge elevation shall be no more than 117.18'. Should any framing exceed the stated elevation at any point it shall be removed or adjusted so that 9 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes March 26, 2007 the final height of the structure with roof shall not exceed the maximum height shown on the approved plans; (4) that any changes to the size or envelope of the building, which would include expanding the footprint or floor area of the structure,replacing or relocating windows or changing the roof height or pitch, shall be subject to Planning Commission review; (5) 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; (6) that the backflow prevention device and post indicator valve (PIV) shall be located and screened by landscaping so they will be hidden from both the street and project residents; (7) that the conditions of the City Engineer's June 21,2006,memo,the Chief Building Official's August 2,2005,memo, the Fire Marshal's August 12, 2005 and September 3, 2006 memos, the NPDES Coordinator's August 15, 2005, memo and the Recycling Specialist's August 8, 2005, memo shall be met; (8) that storage of construction materials and equipment on the street or in the public right-of-way shall be prohibited; (9) that prior to issuance of a building permit for the project, the applicant shall pay the first half of the North Burlingame Rollins Road Development fee in the amount of $12,593.70, made payable to the City of Burlingame and submitted to the Planning Department; (10) that prior to scheduling the final framing inspection for the condominium building, the applicant shall pay the second half of the North Burlingame Rollins Road Development fee in the amount of$12,593.70,made payable to the City of Burlingame and submitted to the Planning Department; (11) that prior to issuance of a building permit for the project,the applicant shall enter into an agreement with the City to establish the affordability of the three below market rate units required as a part of this project;the applicant shall also submit a below market rate housing plan which shall describe in detail the applicant's proposal for a third party to meet and manage the inclusionary housing requirements as required by Chapter 25.63 of the Burlingame Municipal Code;the applicant shall enter into an agreement with a third-party non-profit organization approved by the City to administer the program; (12) that'guest parking stall'shall be marked on the three guest parking spaces and designated on the final map and plans,these stalls shall not be assigned to any unit,but shall be owned and maintained by the condominium association, and the guest stalls shall always be accessible for parking and not be separately enclosed or used for resident storage;and that in addition to the three guest parking stalls,and one service vehicle parking stall, 52 parking spaces shall be available on site for owners,and none of the on-site parking shall be rented, leased or sold to anyone who does not own a unit on the site; (13) that the Covenants Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs) for the condominium project shall require that the three guest parking stalls shall be reserved for guests only and shall not be used by condominium residents; (14) that the final inspection shall be completed and a certificate of occupancy issued before the close of escrow on the sale of each unit; (15) that the developer shall provide to the initial purchaser of each unit and to the board of directors of the condominium association,an owner purchaser manual which shall contain the name and address of all contractors who performed work on the project, copies of all warranties or guarantees of appliances and fixtures and the estimated life expectancy of all depreciable component parts of the property, including but not limited to the roof, painting, common area carpets, drapes and furniture; (16) that the trash receptacles, furnaces, and water heaters shall be shown in a legal compartment outside the required parking and landscaping and in conformance with zoning and California Building and Fire Code requirements before a building permit is issued; (17) that the security gate system across the right side entrance driveway shall be installed a minimum 20'-0'back from the front property line; the security gate system shall include an intercom system connected to each dwelling which allows residents to communicate with guests and to provide guest access to the parking area by pushing a button inside their units; (18) that prior to scheduling the foundation inspection a licensed surveyor shall locate the property corners, set the `— building envelope; (19) 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; (20) that prior to scheduling the framing inspection the proj ect architect or residential designer,or another architect or residential design professional,shall provide an architectural certification that the architectural details shown 10 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes March 26, 2007 in the approved design which should be evident at framing, such as window locations and bays,are built as --� shown on the approved plans; architectural certification documenting framing compliance with approved design shall be submitted to the Building Division before the final framing inspection shall be scheduled; (2 1) that prior to scheduling the roof deck inspection, a licensed surveyor shall establish the height of the roof ridge and provide certification of that height; (22) that trash enclosures and dumpster areas shall be covered and protected from roof and surface drainage and that if water cannot be diverted from these areas,a self-contained drainage system shall be provided that discharges to an interceptor; (23) that this project shall comply with the state-mandated water conservation program, and a complete Irrigation Water Management and Conservation Plan together with complete landscape and irrigation plans shall be provided at the time of building permit application; (24) that all site catch basins and drainage inlets flowing to the bay shall be stenciled. All catch basins shall be protected during construction to prevent debris from entering; (25) that project approvals shall be conditioned upon installation of an emergency generator to power the sump pump system; and the sump pump shall be redundant in all mechanical and electrical aspects (i.e., dual pumps, controls, level sensors, etc.). Emergency generators shall be housed so that they meet the City's noise requirement; (26) 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; (27) that in lieu of meeting the requirement specific to fire apparatus access required by Section 902.2.1,Uniform Fire Code,as adopted by Burlingame Municipal Code 17.04, the project applicant shall extend the required Class I Standpipe outlets to garage stair landings in accordance with fire department approved locations,and install Quick Response Sprinklers throughout the garage; (28) that the proposed project shall comply with construction standards and seismic design criteria contained in the Building Code as adopted by the City; (29) that before construction of the proposed project, per the Building Code, the project applicant shall --� obtain a site-specific soils report that identifies any potentially unsuitable soil conditions(such as expansive, liquefiable,or compressive soils)and contains appropriate recommendations for foundation type and design criteria,including provisions to reduce the effects of expansive soils.The recommendations made in the soils report for ground preparation and earthwork shall be incorporated in the construction design. The soils evaluations shall be conducted by registered soil professionals,and the measures to eliminate inappropriate soil conditions must be applied.The design for soil support of foundations shall conform to the analysis and implementation criteria described in the Building Code,Chapters 16, 18,and A33; (30) that a site-specific evaluation of soil conditions required by the City shall be completed as part of the building permit process and shall contain recommendations for ground preparation and earthwork specific to the project site that would become an integral part the construction design. Recommendations shall be included in the excavation and construction plans for the proposed project; (31) that although the proposed project would be exempt from preparing and implementing a project-specific SWPPP,because the City of Burlingame is a member of the STOPPP, the proposed project shall obtain coverage under STOPPP's Phase I Municipal Storm water Permit and comply with performance standards set forth by STOPPP's Storm water Management Plan.The City Storm Water Management and Discharge Control Ordinance(Municipal Code Chapter 15.14; Ordinance 1503 Section 1;June 20, 1994)would also be applied to the proposed project.In addition, the project applicants shall perform the following actions as uniformly required conditions of project approval, as identified by the City's NPDES Coordinator upon submittal of project applications to the City: (a) Implement appropriate storm water best management practices(BMPs)to minimize pesticide usage in accordance with the City's New Development/Redevelopment Landscaping Fact Sheet; (b) Incorporate applicable structural source control measures to minimize storm water pollutants in accordance with the City's Model List of Structural Source Control Measures; (c) Identify the responsible party who would be responsible for the operation and maintenance of the permanent post-construction storm wate treatment measure(s). Prior to issuance of a final building permit, submit a completed, notarized Storm water Treatment Measure Maintenance Agreement; (32) that the proposed project shall comply with City grading requirements specified in Section 18.20 of the Municipal Code; (33) that the proposed project shall 11 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes March 26, 2007 comply with the City's Model Efficient Landscape Ordinance (Municipal Code Section 18.17.001; Ordinance 1476 Section 1;January 4, 1993),thereby reducing the amount of project site runoff polluted by landscape chemicals; (34) that the project applicant shall ensure implementation of the following mitigation measures during proj ect construction,in accordance with BAAQMD standard mitigation requirements: (a) Water all active construction areas at least twice daily; (b) Cover all trucks hauling soil, sand, and other loose materials or require all trucks to maintain at least two feet of freeboard; (c) Pave, apply water three times daily,or apply(non-toxic)soil stabilizers on all unpaved access roads,parking areas and staging areas at construction sites; (d) Sweep daily (with water sweepers) all paved access roads, parking areas and staging areas at construction sites; (e) Sweep streets daily(with water sweepers) if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent public streets; (35) that the project applicant shall prepare and implement a construction phasing plan and traffic management plan that defines how traffic operations would be managed and maintained during each phase of construction. The plan should be developed with the direct participation of the City of Burlingame. To the maximum practical extent,the plan should: (a) Detail how access will be maintained to individual properties where construction activities may interfere with ingress and egress. Any driveway closures shall take place during non-business hours; (b) Specify predetermined haul routes from staging areas to construction sites and to disposal areas of agreement with the City prior to construction. The routes shall follow streets and highways that provide the safest route and have the least impact on traffic. (c) During construction,require the contractor to provide information to the public using signs,press releases,and other media tools of traffic closures,detours or temporary displacement of left-turn lanes. (d) Identify a single phone number that property owners and businesses can call for construction scheduling,phasing,and duration information,as well as for complaints. (e) Identify construction activities that must take place during off-peak traffic hours or result in temporary road closures due to concerns �-- regarding traffic safety or traffic congestion. Any road closures will be done at night under ordinary circumstances. If unforeseen circumstances require road closing during the day, the City of Burlingame should be consulted; (36) that in order to improve the ability of vehicles to turn from the lower level ramp to the driveway, the project has been revised so that the west driveway is 12 feet wide; (37) that the proposed project driveways shall be secured with an automatic gate system that would allow delivery vehicles to enter and exit the driveways with an opener. The entrance gate shall also provide an intercom system that would allow delivery vehicles to call from the entrance.Furthermore,rolling dumpsters shall be acquired by the project applicant, which can be maneuvered outside of the parking garage to the curb, to facilitate garbage pickup from Trousdale Avenue; (38) that the project applicant shall include in the proposed project a bicycle parking area that is 12 feet by 21 feet,in the lower level of the parking garage,as indicated in the site plan which is sufficient space for approximately 25 bicycles; (39) 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 should be conducted by a qualified wildlife biologist no earlier than 14 days prior to the removal of trees, shrubs, grassland vegetation,buildings, grading, or other construction activity. Survey results shall be valid for 21 days following the survey. 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; (40) that the trees proposed to be ... removed shall be evaluated by a licensed arborist whose report shall be reviewed by the City arborist to determine whether they are"protected trees"per Section 11.06.020 of the Burlingame Municipal Code and whether a tree removal permit is appropriate. If any trees proposed to be removed are protected trees, the City Arborist shall make a determination regarding the removal and replacement of these trees. As the 12 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes March 26, 2007 proposed landscaping plan includes the planting of 16 new trees,the City Arborist may determine that the _NI proposed landscaping plan is sufficient and no other replacement trees are required. (a) The Municipal Code includes the following requirements regarding replacement trees; (b) Replacement shall be three 15 gallon size, one 24-inch box size, or one 36-inch box size landscape tree(s) for each tree removed; and (c) Any tree removed without a valid permit shall be replaced by two 24-inch box size,or two 36-inch box size landscape trees for each tree removed; and (d) Replacement of a tree may be waived by the director if a sufficient number of trees exists on the property to meet all other requirements of the Urban Reforestation and Tree Protection Ordinance; and (e) Size and number of the replacement tree(s)shall be determined by the director and shall be based on the species, location and value of the tree(s) removed; and (f) If replacement trees cannot be planted on the property,payment of equal value shall be made to the City. Such payments shall be deposited in the tree-planting fund to be drawn upon for public tree planting; (41) that the project applicant 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; (fl 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; (42) that as required by BAAQMD Regulation 11, Rule 2,the proposed project shall implement preventative measures during demolition and removal of all asbestos containing materials (ACMs)to prevent emissions of asbestos into the air. The proposed project shall also remove and dispose of all asbestos and PCB-containing materials according to Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) regulations and comply with the Cal/OSHA guidelines for worker safety during removal; (43) that the project applicant shall abide by its declared building height as specified in the FAA determination for the proposed project.The project applicant shall also ensure that construction equipment for the proposed project(e.g. cranes) shall not exceed the maximum height restriction specified in the San Francisco Airport Land Use Plan for the project site; (44) that if markings or lighting are to be included in the proposed project, the project applicant shall ensure that they are installed and maintained according to FAA guidelines; (45) that the applicant shall incorporate the following practices into the construction documents to be implemented by the project contractor.These control measures,such as installation of noise control devices (e.g. mufflers), selection of quieter machinery, and other noise control measures (e.g. surrounding stationary equipment with noise barriers), all of which would not require major equipment redesign. (a) Maximize the physical separation between noise generators and noise receptors. Such separation includes, but is not limited to, the following measures: (1) Use heavy-duty mufflers for—, stationary equipment and barriers around particularly noisy areas of the site or around the entire site; (2, Use shields,impervious fences,or other physical sound barriers to inhibit transmission of noise to sensitive receptors; (3) Locate stationary equipment to minimize noise impacts on the community; and (4) Minimize backing movements of equipment; (b) Use quiet construction equipment whenever possible; (c) 13 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes March 26, 2007 Impact equipment(e.g.,jackhammers 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) Prohibit 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 and schools, are avoided as much as possible; (f) The project applicant shall designate a "disturbance coordinator"for construction activities.The coordinator would be responsible for responding to any local complaints regarding construction noise and vibration.The coordinator would determine the cause of the noise or vibration complaint and would implement reasonable measures to correct the problem; (g) The construction contractor shall send advance notice to neighborhood residents within 50 feet of the project site regarding the construction schedule and including the telephone number for the disturbance coordinator at the construction site; (46) that the project applicant shall incorporate the following practice into the construction documents to be implemented by the project contractor.The project applicant shall require that loaded trucks and other vibration-generating equipment avoid areas of the project site that are located near existing residential uses to the maximum extent compatible with project construction goals; (47) that the project applicant shall include in the final project design noise insulation features that would effectively maintain interior noise levels of 45 dBA or less; (48) that the existing sanitary sewer on site shall be examined by the City after project construction to evaluate the pipe's condition. If the City Engineer determines that the pipe is substandard or if the pipe has been damaged by project construction, the pipe shall be replaced or repaired by the project applicant to the City Engineer's satisfaction; (49) that if the project applicant does not provide a 12-foot wide driveway, the project applicant shall be required to �— purchase maintenance equipment for the City that can access the on-site sewer easement through the proposed 9.5-foot-wide driveway; (50) that per the City's Construction and Demolition Waste Recycling Requirement, the project applicant shall submit a waste reduction plan that demonstrates that at least 50 percent of the construction and demolition waste can be recycled; (51) that the project applicant shall design and locate all exterior lighting so that the cone of light and/or glare from the lighting elements is kept entirely on the project site on or below the top of any fence, hedge, or wall at the site's property line, as required by the Burlingame Municipal Code Section 18.16.030 (pertaining to light spillage off site in commercial or residential areas).All wall mounted up-lighting shall be excluded from the proposed project. All project lighting shall comply with requirements of the California Energy Commission and the Illuminating Engineering Society of North America for illumination levels; and (52) that the following provisions shall be incorporated into the grading and construction contracts to address the potential to encounter currently unknown cultural resources: (a) Prior to the initiation of construction or ground- disturbing activities, all construction personnel shall receive environmental training that will include discussion of the possibility of buried cultural and paleontological resources,including training to recognize such possible buried cultural resources, as well as the procedure to follow if such cultural resources are encountered; (b) Retain Project Archaeologist. Since the project area contains a portion of one recorded Native American archeological resource, and other previously unknown prehistoric or historic cultural deposits may be encountered elsewhere in the project site during excavations, the City shall retain the services of a qualified archaeological consultant meeting federal criteria under 36 CFR 61, and who has expertise in California prehistory and urban historical archaeology; (c) If potential historical or unique archaeological resources are discovered during construction, all work in the immediate vicinity 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. The immediate vicinity wherein work shall be suspended shall be approximately 50 feet from the discovery or within an appropriate distance to be determined by the archaeologist or cultural resources consultant. Construction work shall not commence again until the archaeological or cultural resources consultant has been given an 14 March 26, 2007 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes 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; (d) If the find is determined to be an 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 archaeological or cultural resources consultant, and shall result in detailed technical reports. Such reports 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; (e) 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 storic or Native American resources can include chert or obsidian flakes,projectile prohibited by law.Prehi les; and dark friable soil containing shell and bone dietary debris,heat-affected rock, points,mortars,and pest or human burials. Historic resources can include nails,bottles,or other items often found in refuse deposits; isturbance of the discovery site (f) If human remains are discovered,there shall be no further excavation or d 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 likel: descendent, or if no recommendations are made within 24 hours, remains may be ce disturbance.th If appropriate dignity elsewhere on the prop the Native Americanin a location not ,ect to further Heritage Commission will mediate the recommendations are made and not accepted, problem. The motion was seconded by C. Auran. Chair Brownrigg called for a voice vote on the motion toe1pp ove thet for lop overage roject luding the and height oThe motion ndominium permit, front setback variance, and the conditional use p passed on a 5-0-2 (Cers. Cauchi,Osterling absent). Appeal procedures were advised. This item concluded at 10:00 P.M. IX. DESIGN REVIEW STUDY ITEMS 7. 1510 COLUMBUS AVENUE,ZON -R-1—APPLICATION D L DWELLING AND DESI VITA HEL W AND GE PE ITS FOR BASEMENT FOR A NEW SINGLE FAMILY PROPERTY RS S HU (ROB T AND ON,GILO5 OTICCANTS ED PROJECT PLANNER: R N AN P DESIG ENGINEERING DESIGNER C.Brownrig oted tm. hat he lives within 500' of the s ect property and recused himself from th 'tem. C. Auran noted th he had a business relationship with the plicant and also recused himself from tte he Both Commissio rs stepped down from the dm. ais and left th ouncil chambers. Chair Brownrigg passe gavel to Vice ChaiXthahe cision CA Anderson notede was not a quorum al on the it Tm andance ord th e o place themselcant must ves on theeaction themselves to eithedesign review consultant fo gu 15 March 26, 2007 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes calendar after incorporating the changes recommended by the Commission. Without a quorum, the Commission cannot make a motion on this item. ZT Strohmeier briefly presented the project description. There were no questions of staff. Two letters were submitted: March 21, 2007 and March 26, 2007. Vice Chair Deal opened the public comment. James Chu,55 W.43rd Ave, San Mateo,architect,and Robert and Cindy Gilson, property owners; Pat Giorni, 1445 Balboa, commented. Issues noted: existing fence, drainage; and requirements for basements to exempt 700 SF of FAR. There were no other comments from the floor and the public hearing was closed. Commissioners had the following comments regarding the project: ■ Looks like front of house is sunk down a couple feet; looks like grade is going down to the house and then up again,needs to be addressed; can do some sort of retaining wall in front of house to step down into a flat landscape area; ■ Will the stone surround be actual stone? ■ The cantilevered stone chimney at the back of the house hanging over a stairwell does not work;need to push chimney into house; ■ Will the attic vents stick out from the roof and will they have arched tops made of copper? Should show on the side elevations; ■ Areas of flat roof could be eliminated;the flat roof area at top will break the 30' maximum line by 6"to 8", which should be easily solved with a special permit;because it is a small area,would be willing to ~-' consider a special permit for height to mitigate the flat roof, ■ Note fencing on plans, including where existing fencing is to remain; and ■ A wood beam should be added to the corbels that frame the double doors at the left elevation; ■ Fancy window above entry door is a little small. Because there was no quorum, the Planning Commission only provided direction. The Commission suggested that it would be best for this proj ect to come back on regular action with the provision to allow the applicant to choose to go to a design review consultant. There was no motion. The applicant may decide to either go to a design review consultant or to come back on the regular action calendar. This item concluded at 10:25 p.m. Cers. Brownrigg and Auran returned to the dais. 8. 1511 DRAKE AVENUE,ZONED R-1 —APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW FOR A FIRST AND SECOND STORY ADDITION TO A SINGLE FAMILY DE (6ODPDLI CANT AND PROPERTY OWNER; YURI BUBNOV ARCHITECT) 4 NICEPROJECT PLANNER: ERICA STROHMEIER CP Monroe briefly presented the project description. Commissioners noted that the plans were not to scale, staff noted they had one set to scale which was the basis of the plan check; this is a second floor so entire structure subject to design review?yes;were retaining walls include in the originally submitted plans?No; why is an FAR variance not requested;part of the lower floor will remain as storage with a ceiling height of 5'-11"; noted issues with the accuracy of the plans. Two letters were submitted: Alexander Klein, 1509 Drake,Jani Ochse, 1512 Drake,Janet Garcia, 1561 Drake,together,March 26,2007;and James Frolik, 1517 Drake, March 26, 2007. 16 City of Burlingame Mitigated Negative Declaration, Design Review, Condominium Permit, Front Item No. Setback and Lot Coverage Variances, and Conditional Use Permit for Height Action Calendar for a New Seven-story 25-unit Residential Condominium Address: 1800 Trousdale Drive Meeting Date: 3/26/07 Request: Mitigated Negative Declaration, condominium permit, tentative condominium map, front setback and lot coverage variances and conditional use permit for height for a 25-unit, 7-story condominium structure. Applicant & Property Owner: Paul Bogatsky APN: 025-121 -060 Architect: Dan Ionescu Architects and Planners Zoning: TW General Plan: Office Use Lot Area: 21 ,741 SF (0.50 acre) North Burlingame/Rollins Road Specific Plan: Mixed Use/Office and Residential Adjacent Development: Offices and Multiple Family Residential CEQA Status: Refer to attached Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 543-P Current Use: Single-story Office Building Proposed Use: 25-unit, seven-story condominium building with underground and at-grade parking on the first level Allowable Use: Multi-family residential use permitted; condominium permit required. Project Summary: The applicant, Paul Bogatsky, is proposing to demolish an existing one-story office building on the site and construct a seven-story, 25-unit residential condominium structure with underground parking and parking at grade on the first level of the structure. This site is located on Trousdale Drive between Ogden Drive and Magnolia Avenue. There is an existing 10' wide sewer easement containing a 6" diameter sewer main that runs along the left (east) side property line. Construction of the structure is required to be outside the 10' sewer easement. The surrounding area consists of offices and multi-family residential uses. Planning Commission Action Meeting: On February 12, 2007, the Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider the project. The Commission gave direction to the applicant to revise the plans and voted to continue the hearing on the item until a time when the revised plans had been submitted and plan checked. The Commission suggested that the applicant provide more detail regarding the materials to be used on the exterior of the building and the decorative elements on the front elevation, and asked for additional refining work to be done at the entry; should consider adding a cover to the ramps to create usable open space and a better living environment for residents; prefer the original entry with stairs to the first floor because in increases the sense of activity along the street which is an objective of the North Burlingame/Rollins Road Specific Plan for Trousdale Drive. The applicant has submitted revised plans date stamped March 14, 2007, which incorporate the following changes to the plans. Planning staff would note that the revised plans reflect the previous changes to the parking and circulation which increased the driveway width and dimensions of the parking spaces to eliminate the need for the originally requested variances. On the current plans date stamped March 14, 2007, the following changes were made for resubmittal: • Corrections were made to the plans to show the proper intersection between roof dormers on the top floor and the main roof; • Exterior stairs were added at the front entry (encroaches into the front setback, variance application submitted); Mitigated Negative Declaration,Design Review,Condominium Permit,Variance&Conditional Use Permits 1800 Trousdale Drive • Lower garage access ramps covered and new podium level open space area added above the lower garage access ramps(increases lot coverage to 58.8%,conditional use permit application submitted) and • More architectural details have been provided on the front elevations,including lighting fixtures(refer to Sheet A3.1). Present Project Description: The proposed structure is a rectangular building with wrought iron balconies,a stucco finish and a Spanish tile roof. One level of underground parking is proposed. The ground level consists of parking and the building lobby;the remaining six floors contain the 25 two-and three-bedroom condominium units ranging in size from 1003 SF to 2961 SF. The parking area is accessed by two 12'-wide one-way driveways along either side of the building,with a 12'entrance to the underground parking on the right side,and a 12'exit on the left side of the building. Common open space is provided at grade at the rear of the structure and at a podium level above the ramps to the underground garage. The following applications required for this project: • Condominium permit for a 25-unit residential condominium(CS 26.030.020); • Tentative Condominium Map(CS 26.08.020); • Front setback variance for main entry stairway with a setback which varies from 2'-6"to 4'-0"from front property line where a 10'setback/build to line is required(CS 25.40.070(a)(2); • Conditional use permit for building height over 35 feet(74.82'proposed where height over 35'-0" requires a conditional use permit and 75'is the maximum allowed)(CS 25.40.025(d));and "1 • Conditional Use Permit for lot coverage(58.8%lot coverage(12,787 SF)where TW zoning permits a maximum lot coverage of 50%lot coverage(10,870.5 SF);a conditional use permit rather than a variance is required for lot coverage exceeding 50%because additional common open space is provided in an amount equal to the square footage of excess lot coverage(CS 25.40.025(e). Planning staff would note that the notices sent to surrounding property owners indicated that a lot coverage variance rather than conditional use permit for increased lot coverage was being requested. However,the TW zoning district allows a conditional use permit for an increase in lot coverage,if additional common open space is provided in an amount equal to the increase in lot coverage. In this case,the entire podium level which triggers the lot coverage over 50%will be used as common open space. Zoning and Specific Plan Criteria: The site is presently zoned TW.When the project was submitted in August 2005,the site was zoned C-3 with an R-4 overlay. Because the TW zoning now in effect reflects the current North Burlingame/Rollins Road Specific Plan design guidelines,the applicant has chosen to use the new TW zoning code regulations for review of the project. The project is also subject to the design guidelines in the North Burlingame/Rollins Road Specific Plan. Table 1 provides a comparison of the proposed project to the TW Zoning District development standards. Table 2 shows how the proposed project complies with the design guidelines of the adopted North Burlingame/Rollins Road Specific Plan. The project includes three 1002 SF,2- bedroom affordable units,and is compliant with the City's inclusionary zoning requirements. Mitigated Negative Declaration: Since the project proposes new construction of more than four units,the '1 project is subject to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA).Therefore,an Initial Study was prepared. Based on the Initial Study,a Mitigated Negative Declaration has been proposed for review by the Planning Commission. This document has also been sent to the County Clerk's Office and circulated to other responsible agencies for comment. As presented,based on the mitigation measures identified in the Initial -2- Mitigated Negative Declaration, Design Review, Condominium Permit, Variance & Conditional Use Permits 1800 Trousdale Drive Study, it has been determined that the proposed project can be addressed by a Mitigated Negative Declaration �-- since the Initial Study did not identify any adverse impacts which could not be reduced to acceptable levels by mitigation (refer to attached Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 543-P). Please note that the proposed mitigation measures for the project are summarized Mitigated Negative Declaration cover sheet at the front of the document and have been incorporated into the conditions of approval (see conditions in italics). Planning staff would note that while the Mitigated Negative Declaration did not identify any significant adverse impact, the traffic analysis indicates that some of the turns within the 9.5-foot wide drive aisle are tight and would require driver attention and low speed execution to maneuver, and a number of the parking stalls are smaller than the City requires, thus making entering and exiting them more difficult than typical. The recent revisions to the project (plans date stamped January 31, 2007), with two 12'-wide driveways, addresses this concern and eliminates the tight turns identified in the initial study. Table 1 - Compliance with TW zoning regulations Lot Area: 21,741 SF Proposed Allowed/Required Plans date stamped 3/14/07 SETBACKS: Maximum Front Setback 10' to structure; 50'-11" of 84'-2" wall built 10' setback/build-to line and Build-to Line to the 10 line =',67.5%1. !' 60%0 of structure to be located at build-to (Trousdale Drive): Setback to stairs varies from 2'-6" to 4'-0" 1 line Left Side —Garage/IS`flr 14'-0" 7' Podium/2nd flr 12'-6" 8' 3id flr 12'-6" 9' 4`h flr: 12'-6" 10' Srh flr 12'-6" 111 6`h flr 12'-6" 12' LofU7'h flr 19'-5" to wall 13' Right Side — Garage/1 s`flr 13'-0" 7' Podium/2nd flr 12'-2" 8' 3'd flr 12'-2" 9' 4`h flr: 12'-2" 10' 5'h flr 12'-2" 11' 6`h flr 12'-2" 12' Lgft/7`h flr 18'-7" to wall 13' Rear. 16'-0" to podium deck 15' 48'-0" to structure Building Height:" 74.82' z 35`=0" (46-0" allowed as an incentive for providing affordable units) Parking: 56 spaces 56 spaces 28 compact 28 compact (50% compact allowed as 3 guest spaces incentive for affordable units) 1 service vehicle 1 service vehicle Parking Space All parking spaces meet minimum Standard = 9'x 20' Dimensions: requirements Compact = 8' x 17' add'1 foot width re 'd when adjacent to wall Driveway width Two 12' wide driveways Parking areas > 30 vehicles: two 12' wide driveways or one 18' wide driveway Clear back-up space: 24' provided for all spaces 24'-0" clear back up space required Lot Coverage: 58.8% 3 50% 129787 SF 10,870.5 SF -3- Mitigated Negative Declaration,Design Review,Condominium Permit,Variance&Conditional Use Permits 1800 Trousdale Drive Proposed Allowed/Required -� tans date stamped 3/14/07 Private Open Space All units comply(75 SF to 214 SF 75 SF per unit proposed) 10'min.dimension-I"flr Meets min.dimensions 3'-6"min.dim.all other firs Common Open Space 2601 SF 100 SF per unit=2,500 SF No dimension<15' Min.dimension=15' 1618 SF(62.2%)soft landscaping 50%soft landscaping Located at ground level Located within 6'of grade Additional 1821 SF of common open space provided at podium level(more than 6' abovegrade) Front Setback 65.3%% 60% Landscaping., 732 SF 672 SF Affordable Units 3 affordable units 1 unit per 10 units=25/10=2.5 3 two-bedroom units 3 affordable units required Front setback variance required for 2'-6"to 4'-0"setback to stairway where 10'-0"is the setback/build-to line. z Conditional use permit required for building height over 35 feet(74.82'proposed where height over 35'requires a conditional use permit and 75'is the maximum allowed. Conditional use permit for lot coverage in excess of 50%(58.8%proposed)when additional open space is provided in an amount equal to the amount of excess lot coverage(excess lot coverage:1916 SF;additional open space:1922 SF) Table 2 indicates whether the proposed project complies,partially complies or does not complywith the intent of the recently adopted design guidelines of the North Burlingame/Rollins Road Specific Plan.A copy ofthe design guidelines of the El Camino Real Area is included in the staff report. Table 2-Compliance with Design Guidelines North Burlingame/Rollins Road S ecf tc Plan-El Camino Real Area Design Guidelines/FAR Compliance Development Density Complies-50 units per acre proposed Maximum of 50 units per acre Build-To Lines: Partially Complies- 10"-0"required on Trousdale Drive 10'to structure 60%of structure must be at build to line(108') 50'-11"of 84'-2"wall is built to the 10 line=67.5% Stairway encroaches into setback/build to line-2'-6"min. Minimum Building Height: Complies-Seven stories proposed Three stories Maximum Building Height: Complies-exceeds 35'review line,74.82'building 35'review line/75'maximum on Trousdale Drive height requires conditional use permit Front Setback Areas: Except for driveways,all areas between the sidewalk Complies-area between sidewalk and front fagade and the front fagades of buildings shall be adequately landscaped designed and maintained,including installation of an irrigation system for planted areas. Streetscape Improvements-Trees Complies-Golden Rain proposed for Trousdale Drive. Golden Rain Tree or Red Oak recommended Planning Commission to review as a part of the Design Building Fagade-Articulation Review process. Staff Comments:See attached. -4- Mitigated Negative Declaration, Design Review, Condominium Permit, Variance & Conditional Use Permits 1800 Trousdale Drive Landscaping: Both the TW zoning regulations and the Design Guidelines of the North Burlingame/Rollins Road Specific Plan require on-site landscaping. The proposed site landscaping is shown on the Ground Floor Landscape Plan and Podium Level Landscape Plan, and includes trees, shrubs, groundcover, seating area and decorative paving installed on the site's perimeter and the common open space area. The project proposal includes installation of four streets trees along Trousdale Drive (Golden Rain Tree). The North Burlingame/Rollins Road Specific Plan specifies Golden Rain or Red Oak as the recommended street trees for Trousdale Drive. Inclusionary Zoning: This project is subject to the Inclusionary Zoning regulations which require that affordable units be included with any residential projects with 4 or more units. The 25-unit proposal requires three affordable units, one unit for every 10 dwelling units with fractions rounded up. The applicant is proposing that three affordable units (3 — 2-bedroom units at 1003 SF each) will be provided. Since the applicant is providing three affordable units as required in the Inclusionary Zoning regulations, the project is eligible for up to two of three incentives offered. The applicant has chosen to use the incentive that allows up to 50% of the required parking spaces to be compact (12 compact spaces (26.6%) proposed). The applicant is not invoking the State allowed density bonus. January 8, 2007 Study Meeting: At the January 8, 2007 study meeting, the Planning Commission had several comments about the project (refer to attached January 8, 2007, P.C. Minutes). These comments were addressed in the previous submittal and these changes have also been incorporated into the current submittal (plans date stamped March 14, 2007). Findings for a Mitigated Negative Declaration: For CEQA requirements the Planning Commission must review and approve the Mitigated Negative Declaration (ND 543-P), finding that on the basis of the Initial Study and any comments received in writing or at the public hearing that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant (negative) effect on the environment. Design Review Criteria: The criteria for design review as established in the TW District regulations are outlined as follows: (a) Support of the pattern of diverse architectural styles as defined in the design guidelines for the El Camino Real Design District; and (b) Respect for and promotion of the streetscape and pedestrian accessibility by the placement of buildings to maximize the commercial and safe residential use of the street frontage, location of off-street public open spaces, and by locating parking so that it does not dominate street frontages; and (c) The design should fit the site, support the building rhythm, the sense of pedestrian scale along the street frontage, is compatible with the surrounding development and is consistent with the design guidelines and development standards for the El Camino Real Design District; and (d) Compatibility of the architecture and landscaping with the design guidelines for the El Camino Real Design District including building materials, articulation of the facades, differentiation of architectural elements, building mass, and use of decorative elements, including awnings and signage; and (e) Architectural design consistency: by using a single architectural style with appropriate articulation on the site that is consistent among primary elements of the structure(s) and with the directives of the design guidelines and development standards for the El Camino Real Design District; and (f) Provision of site features identified in the design guidelines and development standards for the El Camino Real Design District such as landscaping and pedestrian circulation which enriches the existing opportunities of the mixed use commercial and residential neighborhood, as well as those structures with only residential uses. -5- Mitigated Negative Declaration,Design Review, Condominium Permit, Variance&Conditional Use Permits 1800 Trousdale Drive Criteria for Permitting a Residential Condominium: The following condominium standards shall apply to all --� land and structures proposed as a part of a condominium project and shall be evaluated and processed pursuant to the procedural requirements set forth for conditional use permits in title 25 of this code.No condominium project or portion thereof shall be approved or conditionally approved in whole or in part unless the planning commission, or city council upon appeal or review,has reviewed the following on the basis of their effect on: (a) Sound community planning; the economic, ecological, social and aesthetic qualities of the community; and on public health, safety and general welfare; (b) The overall impact on schools,parks, utilities,neighborhoods, streets, traffic,parking and other community facilities and resources; and (c) Conformity with the general plan and density permitted by zoning regulations. Findings for a Conditional Use Permit: In order to grant a conditional use permit for height, the Planning Commission must find that the following conditions exist on the property(Code Section 25.52.020 a-c): (a) the proposed use, at the proposed location, will not be detrimental or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity,and will not be detrimental to the public health, safety,general welfare,or convenience; (b) the proposed use will be located and conducted in a manner in accord with the Burlingame general plan and the purposes of this title; (c) the Planning Commission may impose such reasonable conditions or restrictions as it deems necessary to secure the purposes of this title and to assure operation of the use in a manner compatible with the aesthetics,mass,bulk and character of existing and potential uses on adjoining properties in the general vicinity. Planning Commission Action: The Planning Commission should hold a public hearing. Affirmative action should be taken by resolution including the conditions representing mitigation for the Mitigated Negative Declaration(in italics below)and any conditions from the staff report and/or that the commissioners wish to add. The reasons for any action should be clearly stated. The resolution with conditions shall be recorded with the property to insure implementation of the required mitigations. Please note that the conditions below which are in italics reflect the mitigation measures taken from the Mitigated Negative Declaration. If approved,these conditions will also be placed on the building permit: 1. that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department date stamped March 14, 2007, sheets A0.1, A.1, A2.1, A2.1.1, A2.2 through A2.7, A3.1 through A3.4, A4.1, A4.2, A5.1 through A5.9,Ground Floor Landscape Plan and Podium Level Landscape Plan,and Boundary and Topographic Survey Plan and Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map; 2. that the maximum elevation at the top of the roof ridge shall not exceed elevation 117.18"as measured from the average elevation at the top of the curb along Trousdale Drive(42.18')for a maximum height of 75'-0", and that the top of each floor and final roof ridge shall be surveyed and approved by the City Engineer as the framing proceeds and prior to final framing and roofing inspections. The lower level garage floor finished floor elevation shall be elevation 33.5';at-grade garage level finished floor elevation shall be elevation 42.5'; first floor above garage finished floor shall be elevation 53.5'; second floor finished floor shall be elevation 63.5'; third floor finished floor shall be elevation 73.5'; fourth floor finished floor shall be elevation 83.5';sixth floor loft finished floor shall be elevation 102.5';and the top -6- Mitigated Negative Declaration,Design Review,Condominium Permit,variance&Conditional Use Permits 1800 Trousdale Drive of ridge elevation shall be no more than 117.18'. Should any framing exceed the stated elevation at any point it shall be removed or adjusted so that the final height of the structure with roof shall not exceed the maximum height shown on the approved plans; 3, that any changes to the size or envelope of the building,which would include expanding the footprint or floor area of the structure,replacing or relocating windows or changing the roof height or pitch,shall be subject to Planning Commission review; 4. 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; 5. that the backflow prevention device and post indicator valve(PIV)shall be located and screened by landscaping so they will be hidden from both the street and project residents; 6. that the conditions of the City Engineer's June 21,2006,memo,the Chief Building Official's August 2, 2005, memo, the Fire Marshal's August 12, 2005 and September 3, 2006 memos, the NPDES Coordinator's August 15,2005,memo and the Recycling Specialist's August 8,2005,memo shall be met; 7. that storage of construction materials and equipment on the street or in the public right-of-way shall be prohibited; 8. that prior to issuance of a building permit for the project,the applicant shall pay the first half of the North Burlingame Rollins Road Development fee in the amount of$12,593.70,made payable to the City of Burlingame and submitted to the Planning Department; 9. that prior to scheduling the final framing inspection for the condominium building,the applicant shall pay the second half of the North Burlingame Rollins Road Development fee in the amount of$12,593.70, made payable to the City of Burlingame and submitted to the Planning Department; 10. that prior to issuance of a building permit for the project,the applicant shall enter into an agreement with the City to establish the affordability of the three below market rate units required as a part of this project; the applicant shall also submit a below market rate housing plan which shall describe in detail the applicant's proposal for a third parry to meet and manage the inclusionary housing requirements as required by Chapter 25.63 of the Burlingame Municipal Code;the applicant shall enter into an agreement with a third-party non-profit organization approved by the City to administer the program; 11. that guest parking stall'shall be marked on the three guest parking spaces and designated on the final map and plans,these stalls shall not be assigned to any unit,but shall be owned and maintained by the condominium association,and the guest stalls shall always be accessible for parking and not be separately enclosed or used for resident storage;and that in addition to the three guest parking stalls,and one service vehicle parking stall,52 parking spaces shall be available on site for owners,and none of the on-site parking shall be rented,leased or sold to anyone who does not own a unit on the site; 12. that the Covenants Conditions and Restrictions(CC&Rs)for the condominium project shall require that the three guest parking stalls shall be reserved for guests only and shall not be used by condominium residents; -7- Mitigated Negative Declaration,Design Review,Condominium Permit, Variance&Conditional Use Permits 1800 Trousdale Drive 13. that the final inspection shall be completed and a certificate of occupancy issued before the close of escrow on the sale of each unit; 14. that the developer shall provide to the initial purchaser of each unit and to the board of directors of the condominium association, an owner purchaser manual which shall contain the name and address of all contractors who performed work on the project,copies of all warranties or guarantees of appliances and fixtures and the estimated life expectancy of all depreciable component parts of the property,including but not limited to the roof,painting, common area carpets, drapes and furniture; 15. that the trash receptacles, furnaces,and water heaters shall be shown in a legal compartment outside the required parking and landscaping and in conformance with zoning and California Building and Fire Code requirements before a building permit is issued; 16. that the security gate system across the right side entrance driveway shall be installed a minimum 20'-0' back from the front property line;the security gate system shall include an intercom system connected to each dwelling which allows residents to communicate with guests and to provide guest access to the parking area by pushing a button inside their units; 17. that prior to scheduling the foundation inspection a licensed surveyor shall locate the property comers,set the building envelope; 18. 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; 19. that prior to scheduling the framing inspection the project architect or residential designer, or another architect or residential design professional, shall provide an architectural certification that the architectural details shown in the approved design which should be evident at framing,such as window locations and bays, are built as shown on the approved plans; architectural certification documenting framing compliance with approved design shall be submitted to the Building Division before the final framing inspection shall be scheduled; 20. that prior to scheduling the roof deck inspection,a licensed surveyor shall establish the height of the roof ridge and provide certification of that height; 21. that trash enclosures and dumpster areas shall be covered and protected from roof and surface drainage and that if water cannot be diverted from these areas,a self-contained drainage system shall be provided that discharges to an interceptor; 22. that this project shall comply with the state-mandated water conservation program, and a complete Irrigation Water Management and Conservation Plan together with complete landscape and irrigation plans shall be provided at the time of building permit application; 23. that all site catch basins and drainage inlets flowing to the bay shall be stenciled. All catch basins shall be protected during construction to prevent debris from entering; 24. that project approvals shall be conditioned upon installation of an emergency generator to power the sump pump system;and the sump pump shall be redundant in all mechanical and electrical aspects(i.e., -8- Mitigated Negative Declaration, Design Review, Condominium Permit, Variance & Conditional Use Permits 1800 Trousdale Drive dual pumps, controls, level sensors, etc.). Emergency generators shall be housed so that they meet the City's noise requirement; 25. 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; 26. that in lieu of meeting the requirement specific to fire apparatus access required by Section 902.2.1, Uniform Fire Code, as adopted by Burlingame Municipal Code 17.04, the project applicant shall extend the required Class I Standpipe outlets to garage stair landings in accordance with fire department approved locations, and install Quick Response Sprinklers throughout the garage; (Land Use, Fire Dept) 27. that the proposed project shall comply with construction standards and seismic design criteria contained in the Building Code as adopted by the City; (Geology and Soils; Building Division) 28. that before construction of the proposed project,per the Building Code, the project applicant shall obtain a site-specific soils report that identifies any potentially unsuitable soil conditions (such as expansive, liquefiable, or compressive soils) and contains appropriate recommendations for foundation type and design criteria, includingprovisions to reduce the effects of expansive soils. The recommendations made in the soils report for ground preparation and earthwork shall be incorporated in the construction design. The soils evaluations shall be conducted by registered soil professionals, and the measures to eliminate inappropriate soil conditions must be applied. The design for soil support of foundations shall conform to the analysis and implementation criteria described in the Building Code, Chapters 16, 18, and A33; (Geology and Soils, Building Division) 29. that a site-specific evaluation of soil conditions required by the City shall be completed as part of the building permit process and shall contain recommendations for ground preparation and earthwork specific to theproject site that would become an integralpart the construction design. Recommendations shall be included in the excavation and construction plans for the proposed project; (Geology and Soils, Building Division) 30. that although theproposedproject would be exempt frompreparing and implementing aproject-specific SWPPP, because the City of Burlingame is a member of the STOPPP, the proposed project shall obtain coverage under STOPPP's Phase I Municipal Stormwater Permit and comply with performance standards set forth by STOPPP 's Stormwater Management Plan. The City Storm Water Management and Discharge Control Ordinance (Municipal Code Chapter 15.14; Ordinance 1503 Section 1; June 20, 1994) would also be applied to the proposed project. In addition, the project applicants shall perform the following actions as uniformly required conditions ofproject approval, as identified by the City's NPDES Coordinator upon submittal ofproject applications to the City: • Implement appropriate stormwater best management practices (BMPs) to minimize pesticide usage in accordance with the City 's New Development/Redevelopment Landscaping Fact Sheet. • Incorporate applicable structural source control measures to minimize stormwater pollutants in accordance with the City's Model List of Structural Source Control Measures. • Identify the responsible party who would be responsible for the operation and maintenance of the permanent post-construction stormwater treatment measure(s). Prior to issuance of a final building permit, submit a completed, notarized Stormwater Treatment Measure Maintenance Agreement; (Hydrology and Water Quality; Public Works Department) -9- Mitigated Negative Declaration,Design Review, Condominium Permit, Variance&Conditional Use Permits 1800 Trousdale Drive 31. that the proposed project shall comply with City grading requirements specified in Section 18.20 of the Municipal Code; (Hydrology and Water Quality;Public Works Department) 32. that the proposed project shall comply with the City's Model Efficient Landscape Ordinance(Municipal Code Section 18.17.001; Ordinance 1476 Section 1;January 4, 1993), thereby reducing the amount of project site runoff polluted by landscape chemicals; (Hydrology and Water Quality; City Arborist) 33. that the project applicant shall ensure implementation of the following mitigation measures during project construction, in accordance with BAAQMD standard mitigation requirements: • Water all active construction areas at least twice daily. • Cover all trucks hauling soil, sand, and other loose materials or require all trucks to maintain at least two feet of freeboard. • Pave, apply water three times daily, or apply(non-toxic)soil stabilizers on all unpaved access roads,parking areas and staging areas at construction sites. • Sweep daily (with water sweepers) all paved access roads,parking areas and staging areas at construction sites. • Sweep streets daily(with water sweepers) if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent public streets; (Air Quality;Building Division) 34. that the project applicant shall prepare and implement a construction phasing plan and traffic -� management plan that defines how traffic operations would be managed and maintained during each phase of construction. The plan should be developed with the direct participation of the City of Burlingame. To the maximum practical extent, the plan should: • Detail how access will be maintained to individual properties where construction activities may interfere with ingress and egress. Any driveway closures shall take place during non- business hours. • Specify predetermined haul routes from staging areas to construction sites and to disposal areas of agreement with the City prior to construction. The routes shall follow streets and highways that provide the safest route and have the least impact on traffic. • During construction, require the contractor to provide information to the public using signs, press releases, and other media tools of traffic closures, detours or temporary displacement of left-turn lanes. • Identify a single phone number that property owners and businesses can call for construction scheduling,phasing, and duration information, as well as for complaints. • Identify construction activities that must take place during off-peak traff c hours or result in temporary road closures due to concerns regarding traffic safety or traffic congestion. Any road closures will be done at night under ordinary circumstances. If unforeseen circumstances require road closing during the day, the City of Burlingame should be -� consulted; (Traffic; Public Works Department) 35. that in order to improve the ability of vehicles to turn from the lower level ramp to the driveway, the project has been revised so that the west driveway is 12 feet wide; (Traffic, Public Works and Planning -10- Mitigated Negative Declaration,Design Review, Condominium Permit, Variance&Conditional Use Permits 1800 Trousdale Drive Departments) 36. that the proposed Project driveways shall be secured with an automatic gate system that would allow delivery vehicles to enter and exit the driveways with an opener. The entrance gate shall also provide an intercom system that would allow delivery vehicles to call from the entrance. Furthermore, rolling dumpsters shall be acquired by the project applicant, which can be maneuvered outside of the parking garage to the curb, to facilitate garbage pickup from Trousdale Avenue; (Traffic; Public Works Department) 37. that the project applicant shall include in the proposed project a bicycle parking area that is 12 feet by 21 feet, in the lower level of theparking garage, as indicated in the siteplan which is sufficient space for approximately 25 bicycles; (Traffic; Public Works and Planning Departments) 38. 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 should be conducted by a qualified wildlife biologist no earlier than 14 days prior to the removal of trees,shrubs,grassland vegetation, buildings,grading, or other construction activity. Survey results shall be valid for 21 days following the survey. 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) 39. that the trees proposed to be removed shall be evaluated by a licensed arborist whose report shall be reviewed by the City arborist to determine whether they are 'protected trees"per Section 11.06.020 of the Burlingame Municipal Code and whether a tree removal permit is appropriate.If any trees proposed to be removed are protected trees, the City Arborist shall make a determination regarding the removal and replacement of these trees.As the proposed landscaping plan includes the planting of 16 new trees, the City Arborist may determine that the proposed landscaping plan is sufficient and no other replacement trees are required. • The Municipal Code includes the following requirements regarding replacement trees. • Replacement shall be three 15-gallon size, one 24-inch box size, or one 36-inch box size landscape tree(s)for each tree removed; and • Any tree removed without a valid permit shall be replaced by two 24-inch box size, or two 36- inch box size landscape trees for each tree removed; and • Replacement of a tree may be waived by the director if a sufficient number of trees exists on the property to meet all other requirements of the Urban Reforestation and Tree Protection Ordinance; and `-- Size and number of the replacement tree(s)shall be determined by the director and shall be based on the species, location and value of the tree(s) removed; and • If replacement trees cannot be planted on the property,payment of equal value shall be made to the City. Such payments shall be deposited in the tree planting fund to be drawn upon for -11- Mitigated Negative Declaration,Design Review, Condominium Permit, Variance&Conditional Use Permits 1800 Trousdale Drive public tree planting; (Biological Resources; City Arborist) -� 40. that the project applicant 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) 41. that as required by BAAQMD Regulation 11,Rule 2, the proposed project shall implement preventative measures during demolition and removal of all asbestos containing materials (ACMs) to prevent emissions of asbestos into the air. The proposed project shall also remove and dispose of all asbestos and PCB-containing materials according to Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) regulations and comply with the Cal/OSHA guidelines for worker safety during removal; (Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Building Division) 42. that the project applicant shall abide by its declared building height as specified in the FAA determination for the proposed project. The project applicant shall also ensure that construction equipment for the proposed project (e.g. cranes) shall not exceed the maximum height restriction specified in the San Francisco Airport Land Use Plan for the project site; (Hazards and Hazardous Materials;Planning Department) 43. that if markings or lighting are to be included in the proposed project, the project applicant shall ensure that they are installed and maintained according to FAA guidelines; (Hazards and Hazardous Materials; Planning Department) -12- Mitigated Negative Declaration,Design Review, Condominium Permit, Variance&Conditional Use Permits 1800 Trousdale Drive 44. that the applicant shall incorporate the following practices into the construction documents to be �- implemented by the project contractor. These control measures, such as installation of noise control devices (e.g. mufflers), selection of quieter machinery, and other noise control measures (e.g. surrounding stationary equipment with noise barriers), all of which would not require major equipment redesign. a. Maximize 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. Prohibit 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 and schools, are avoided as much as possible. f. The project applicant shall designate a "disturbance coordinator"for construction activities. The coordinator would be responsible for responding to any local complaints regarding construction noise and vibration. The coordinator would determine the cause of the noise or vibration complaint and would implement reasonable measures to correct the problem. g. The construction contractor shall send advance notice to neighborhood residents within 50 feet of the project site regarding the construction schedule and including the telephone number for the disturbance coordinator at the construction site; (Noise; Planning, Public Works) 45. that the project applicant shall incorporate the following practice into the construction documents to be implemented by theproject contractor. Theproject applicant shall require that loaded trucks and other vibration-generating equipment avoid areas of theproject site that are located near existing residential uses to the maximum extent compatible with project construction goals; (Noise, Building Division) 46. that the project applicant shall include in the final project design noise insulation features that would effectively maintain interior noise levels of 45 dBA or less; (Noise; Planning and Building) 47. that the existing sanitary sewer on site shall be examined by the City after project construction to evaluate thepipe's condition.If the City Engineer determines that thepipe is substandard or if thepipe has been damaged by project construction, the pipe shall be replaced or repaired by the project applicant to the City Engineer's satisfaction; (Utilities and Service Systems; Public Works Department) -13- Mitigated Negative Declaration,Design Review, Condominium Permit, Variance&Conditional Use Permits 1800 Trousdale Drive 48. that if the project applicant does not provide a 12 foot wide driveway, the project applicant shall be required to purchase maintenance equipment for the City that can access the on-site sewer easement through the proposed 9.5-foot-wide driveway; (Utilities and Sewer Systems;Public Works Department) 49. that per the City's Construction and Demolition Waste Recycling Requirement, the project applicant shall submit a waste reduction plan that demonstrates that at least 50 percent of the construction and demolition waste can be recycled; (Utilities and Service Systems; Building Division) 50. that the project applicant shall design and locate all exterior lighting so that the cone of light and/or glare from the lighting elements is kept entirely on the project site on or below the top of any fence, hedge, or wall at the site's property line, as required by the Burlingame Municipal Code Section 18.16.030(pertaining to light spillage offsite in commercial or residential areas).All wall mounted up- lighting shall be excluded from theproposedproject.Allproject lighting shall comply with requirements of the California Energy Commission and the Illuminating Engineering Society of North America for illumination levels; and(Aesthetics; Planning and Building) 51. that the following provisions shall be incorporated into the grading and construction contracts to address the potential to encounter currently unknown cultural resources: a. Prior to the initiation of construction or ground-disturbing activities, all construction personnel shall receive environmental training that will include discussion of the possibility of buried cultural and paleontological resources, including training to recognize such -� possible buried cultural resources, as well as the procedure to follow if such cultural resources are encountered. b. Retain Project Archaeologist. Since the project area contains a portion of one recorded Native American archeological resource, and other previously unknown prehistoric or historic cultural deposits may be encountered elsewhere in the project site during excavations, the City shall retain the services of a qualified archaeological consultant meetingfederal criteria under 36 CFR 61, and who has expertise in California prehistory and urban historical archaeology. C. If potential historical or unique archaeological resources are discovered during construction, all work in the immediate vicinity 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. The immediate vicinity wherein work shall be suspended shall be approximately 50 feet from the discovery or within an appropriate distance to be determined by the archaeologist or cultural resources consultant. 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. d. If the find is determined to be an 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 -14- Mitigated Negative Declaration,Design Review, Condominium Permit, Variance&Conditional Use Permits 1800 Trousdale Drive considerations. The work shall be performed by the archaeological or cultural resources N1— consultant, and shall result in detailed technical reports. Such reports 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. e. 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. f. 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) Maureen Brooks Senior Planner c: Dan Ionescu Architects and Planners -15- DAN iON SCU PRCH?ECS&PLANN---RS DIAP -1111 SAN FRANCISCO-SILICON VALLEY OSLO SHANGHAI BUENOS AIRES March 2, 2007 Mrs. Maureen Brooks Planning Department RECEIVED City of Burlingame City hall 501, Primrose Rose Road, MAR 14 2007 Burlingame, CA 94010-3997 CITY OF BURLINGAME Re: 1800 Trousdale Drive Condominiums PLANNING DEPT. Planning Commission's comments February 17, 2007 meeting Dear Mrs. Brooks, Followings are the answers to the Planning Commission's comments from the February 17, 2007 Meeting: 1. Roof dormers intersections with main roof corrections. See roof dormers intersections with main roof corrections and roof plumbing vent general locations on sheet A2.7. 2. Original front entry as suggested and supported by the present Planning Commissioners. See original front entry design on sheets A2.1.1, A2.2, A2.3, A3.1, A3.3, A3.4 and A4.2. See attached variance papers. 3. Rear yard redesign as suggested and supported by the present Planning Commissioners. See the new podium over the lower garage access ramps on sheets A2.1.1, A2.2, A2.3, A3.2, A3.3, A3.4, and A4.2. See attached variance papers. 4. Front elevation- more details. See sheet A3.1 for elevation details. These details are typical for all four elevations. 5. Front elevation lighting details. See sheet A3.1 for lighting details. These lighting fixtures are typical for the project. 6. Material Board See submitted material board and samples. 1611 BOREL PLACE #230 SAN MATEO, CA 94402 T 650.570.6681 F 650.570.6540 E : DIONES@DIAP.COM W WW . D I A P . C 0 M ©Copyright 2007 DIAP DAN 10NEESCU ARCH?EC":S&PL OMERS DIAP SAN FRANCISCO-SILICON VALLEY OSLO SHANGHAI BUENOS AIRES Please note that civil and landscape drawings have been updated according to the planning commission's suggested and supported variances: (1) front yard original design, (2) rear yard podium redesign over lower garage access ramps. Best Regards, Rita Munoz Boyle Project architect DIAP 1611 BOREL PLACE #230 SAN MATEO,CA 94402 T 650.570.6681 F 650.570.6540 E : DIONES9DIAP.COM WWW . D I A P . C O M ©Copyright 2007 DIAP City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes February 12, 2007 7. 1800 TROUSDALE DRIVE, ZONED TW-APPLICATION FOR MITIGATED NEGATIVE -� DECLARATION, DESIGN REVIEW, CONDOMINIUM PERMIT, TENTATIVE CONDOMINIUM MAP AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR HEIGHT FOR A 25-UNIT, 7-STORY RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM (PAUL BOGATSKY, APPLICANT AND PROPERTY OWNER; AND DAN IONESCU ARCHITECTS AND PLANNERS, ARCHITECT) (13 NOTICED) PROJECT PLANNER: MAUREEN BROOKS a. MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION, DESIGN REVIEW, CONDOMINIUM PERMIT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR HEIGHT; AND b. TENTATIVE CONDOMINIUM MAP-PROJECT ENGINEER: VICTOR VOONG Reference staff report February 12, 2007, with attachments. CP Monroe presented the report, reviewed criteria and staff comments. Fifty-one(5 1)conditions including the mitigations for the Mitigated Negative Declaration were suggested for consideration. There were no questions of staff. Chair Brownrigg opened the public hearing. Dan Ionescu, architect, and Paul Bogatsky, property owner, represented the project. They reviewed the changes made to the project since the study meeting. Commissioners asked about: a problem with the roof plan and the slope on the dormers.Concerned that this project will be lifeless at the street level with no lobby, recreation room or living area on the ground level which is counter to the City policy for this area. Said earlier that the exterior surface would be precaste material, is that now the plan? Will foam molding be used, not see note on plans? The detail of the front elevation is key, so it is important to know the size of the materials uses like metal railings,cement or bricP--� decking etc. the plans do not show the detail/size of these elements,why?Would like to see less stucco,are the windows metal cased wood,need windows to be deeper set to increase the shadow line on plain fagade (need to know dimension);how big are the knee braces,what is the area with hatch lines under the windows, need to know how it will look, articulation, what the shadow lines will be. For example what are the decorations on either side of the front door, should be identified and their size noted, this is like a single family house, need to know what is being proposed so can determine if it is appropriate. Building looks plain,need to see how trees will soften, see a lot of tan stucco and not much roof,not exciting. Should do additional work on the entry, now mostly trim and detail, need structural change; are the rear two parking ramps covered? this deck area could be used as outdoor area by the residents of the building, can this be done? How much of the common open space was lost with the reconfiguration of the driveways and parking spaces and aisles? Change of the materials on the front elevation and lowering the roof would help the entry. Architect responses to questions: yes, missed the beginning of the dormer and it can be corrected without raising the height of the overall roof; exterior surface will be stucco not pre-caste material; there will be foam molding with 3 coats of stucco finish on top which is fire rated;building will be Type II fire rated,the concrete edge of the decks will have stucco look; the decorations on either side of the front door are lights; intend to develop design as it is represented here with minor adjustments for building permit submittal,this is a type II building so will have brackets of wood or ceramic;can add notes about detail,not change design; the rear two parking ramps are not covered because to do so would require a variance;yes the ramps could be covered and the area put to some use for the future residents with a variance,would be a problem with access from this area to the common open space because of the location of the 12 foot wide driveway and the size of the podium requiring two exit stairs, but possible; about 1,000 SF of common open space was-, removed to widen the driveways and fix parking dimensions. Continued public hearing comments: CA noted that because the applicant applied under the previous zoning, design review is not required as a part of the zoning in this case, but is required as a part of the 11 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes February 12, 2007 consistency with the general plan, so if the project is approved, the commission would not see it again; �- normally applicants submit a material board so that the Commission is more aware of how what they see will look when completed, this proposal's approach could be a problem for the Building plan check to know whether what is submitted was the size and materials approved. Applicant noted that there was no requirement for a materials board, adding details just adds time to the architects work and is not an advantage at the schematic plan stage. Commissioner noted that in the minutes of the last meeting on this item Commission asked the applicant to add notes on the size of trim,illustrations,etc.,was not done.There were no further comments. The public hearing was closed. Commissioner comments: On whole pretty good but agree that more detail is needed on the plans,see more detail on single family houses than provided here, for example,how big are the knee braces proposed, the canopy over then entry should be reconsidered it is presently 31 feet in the air over the entry, project is approvable except for the absence of details;agree want more detail so that the commission knows what it is approving;proj ect is close but not there—a materials board would help,would like to consider a variance for covering the rear ramps to create useable open space and a better living environment for the residents and neighbors, the enclosure would not affect the neighbors and would even enhance their properties, could cover wall with planters and climbing vines; preferred the original entry with the stairs to the first floor because it increased the sense of activity from this property along Trousdale, know that this requires a variance but it brings the building to the street and announces the true front door. Could support both of those variances,the unique condition on this site is the sewer easement which causes this major building to be moved over on the site and moved out of the ground, early on had concern about landscaping on the podium,putting living areas at grade causes a parking problem,need to bring people up to the living space, need some life on the street, variance findings could also include that the parking cannot go any deeper, could remove the extra 5 parking spaces and add a lobby and/or recreation space at the ground level. Chair Brownrigg made a motion to continue this project to the action calendar when the applicant has revised the plans based on the guidance of the Planning Commission. The motion was seconded by C. Terrones. Comment on the motion: for the entrance like the idea of the variances for replacement of the stairs also the enclosed driveway at the rear,would provide a nice useable space at the rear,not supportive of the removal of the extra five parking spaces, feel that there is a real need for more detailing on the design and identification of the building materials including a materials board. Chair Brownrigg called for a voice vote on the motion to continue the action on the Mitigated Negative Declaration,project proposal and tentative map,and to bring the application back to the Commission on the action calendar when the architect has made the changes to the plans,staff has plan checked them,and there is space on the Commission agenda. The motion passed on a voice vote 5-0-2 (Cers. Cauchi, Vistica absent). Because the action was continued the Commission's action is not subject to appeal. This item concluded at 9:35 p.m. IX. DESIGN REVIEW STUDY ITEMS 8. 815 LAUREL AVENUE,ZONED R-1—APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW FOR A FIRST AND �— SECOND STORY ADDITION(STEVEN RANDEL,CALIFORNIA HOME PLANS,INC.,APPLICANT AND ARCHITECT;PAT DELCHIARO,PROPERTY OWNER) (66 NOTICED)PROJECT PLANNER: ERICA STROHMEIER 12 DA4IONESCUARCHTCC 5&PiANN RS D I A P SAN FRANCISCO-SILICON VALLEY OSLO SHANGHAI BUENOS AIRES January 31, 2007 Maureen Brooks Planning Department City of Burlingame 501 Primrose Road Burlingame, CA 94010-3997 RE: 1800 Trousdale Drive Condominiums Planning Commissioners's comments Dear Mrs.Brooks, Following are the answers to the Planning Commissioner's Comments. Attached are the Planning Commissioners's comments for item number reference. 1- Drawings dated 06-08-06, submitted to the City for the EIR work and -� planning commissioner's review appear not to have the mentioned error. We would be happy to correct it, if it is shown to us, or maybe an earlier package was reviewed rather than the current one. 2- Garages have been redesigned according to Burlingame parking standards. Apparently, there is no more need for a special sewer service truck. 3- See point 2 above 4- See point 2 above. 5&6 - The sewer easement on the west side is 10'-0"wide. In the proposed revised design a 12'-0" driveway services the sewer manhole at the back of the property. Units on the ground level would have a 12'-0" driveway in front of them. The owner's marketing consultant was opposed to this design. Further, Trousdale Drive is a very wide street with the Peninsula Hospital entry in front of this proposed project. Units at the ground level RECEIVED be too much in close proximity to the hospital entry and a very wide street. Additionally the original design had a sunken garage. However, the active sewer easement identified at that time precluded half JAN 3 4 2007 level sunken type designs, if garage accesses are discretely positioned left CITY OF BURLINGAME and right of the building. PLANNING DEPT• -� 1611 BOREL PLACE #230 SAN MATEO, CA 94402 T 650.570.6681 F 650.570.6540 E ' DIONES@DIAP.COM WWW . D I A P . C 0 M GAN 10NESCU ARCH�ECT�S'&PIANNEPS DIAP NSCY OSLO SHANGHAI BUENOS AIRES From a different point of view, in order to avoid a big gapping hole of a garage entry facing the main street (altering the esthetics of the front elevation), the only apparent solution for this specific site is to create one way entry and exit right and left respectively of proposed building. However in the length of the western side sewer easement no ramp or lower level garage (s) can interrupt the sewer line and easement. Therefore, the ground level appears to service best a garage and not house residential units that would be fully surrounded by driveways. 7- See typical "proposed exterior materials" on the building on Sheet A3.1. The scale and size of the trim are on the drawings. The trim sizes vary based on the location. This item will be detailed on the Design Development phase. The drawings scale is 1/8"= V-0". 8- Elevations of the toilet building servicing the common open space have been revised. See sheets A2.1.1, A3.2 and A3.3. 9- The clear height of the ground level garage shall be no less than 8'-2" throughout. Podium slab for such building is generally+/- V-2"thick. `-' Plumbing, Piping, Conduits, etc, on the ceiling of such a garage need V-0" to l'-4" of space. Floor drainage requires up to 6" of slope from high to low points. All together this floor to floor height is anywhere from 10'-10" to 11'-2". All efforts will be made to lower this height as much as possible. 10- See the "Vesting tentative subdivision map" for PIV location. Please see Landscape drawings L1.1 &L2.1 for the PIV valve screening. 11- Original proposal, which was turned down, included the common open space at the residential level. Now the proposed common open space is located at grade on natural ground (no garage below). Residents can use the elevator or the west exit stair to access the common open space. Attractive paving will invite residents and visitors towards the common open space in the back. 12- See point 2 above RECEIVE® 13- See landscape drawings L1.1 and L2.1, and attached color rendering. JAN 3 1 2007 14- The "BMR" label was originally submitted on 06-08-06 on the CITY OF BUFUNGAME affordable units. See sheets A.2.2 and A2.3. For a larger scale see sheet PLANNING DEPT. �— A.5.7 ]611 BOREL PLACE #230 SAN MATEO, CA 94402 T 650.570.6681 F 650.570.6540 E : DIONES91DIAP.COM WWW . D I A P . C 0 M DAN 10Nv SCIJ AZCH'EC S&PLAMIERS 01AP _1*N SAN FRANCISCO-SILICON VALLEY OSLO SHANGHAI BUENOS AIRES 15- The program for the affordable units will be administered according to guidelines adopted by San Mateo County. 16- Original design proposal had an exterior stair in the front setback. That proposal was turned down. The current proposal requires no variances. 17-Public Works department will prepare their comments after they review the revised garage design. 18- See sheet A.1, attached EIR 3Dd color simulation. Best Regards, Rita Munoz-Boyle Project Architect -� DIAD -CESID JAN 3 1 2007 ".X€"'r OF BURLINGAME PLANNING DEPT. -� 1611 BOREL PLACE #230 SAN MATEO, CA 94402 T 650.570.6681 F 650.570.6540 E : DIONES@DIAP.COM WWW . D I AP - C 0 M PAGE 02/03 ,/10/2007 15: 36 6506963790 January 8, 2007 of Burlingame Planning(`;nmmitsion Unapproved Minutes VI. STUDY ITEMS E Dg)CVE, ZONED TW — ApPLTCATION k'OR�NVIITIGATED 1,;EGATIVE CONDONIlI�TILJMIV[AI', 1_ 1.800 TROUSD-k PERMIT,TENT DECLP,R ATION�DESIGN REV 1EW,CONDO)vIIM 7-STORY RESIDENTIAL. � SE PERMITT FOR HEIGI�T AND VARIANCES FOR PARKINGISLE WIDTH FOP, A 25-UNIT, TO SPACE DIMENSION, CONDITIONAL J DRTVEWAY WltDTH AND BACK-UP APPLICANT AND PROPERTY OWNER;AND DAN IONESCU KS CONDONIINTUNI(PAS-gOGATSI�Y, TS �.1VD PLANNERS, ARCHITECT}PROJECT PLANNER: MAURfiEN BROO ARC14 TEC PERNIIT, NIITiGA')'ED NEGATIVE DECLARATION, DESIGN R�NCE O aR pG SPACE a. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR HEIGHT AND DTIvIENS�[ON,DRIVEWAY WIDTH AND BACK-UP AISI;�E WIDTH; AND ENTA . CMDOMII3IUM MAP—PROJECT ENG R: VICTOR VOONG CP Monroe pres6.ted a summary of the staff report. Commissioners asked: t believe the rear n. there is no podium shown.at the rear of the building,however the top f gr thelot;co�ectly showat 53,10',please revise plans to accurately show tap of ■ e!�with the number of substandard parking condtttons,concerned with the proposed parking concern la out in6luding 8'/z foot wide stalls next to a wall,vehicles will.have a lot of difficulty maneuvering Y in and oii.t of the stalls; • traffic study notes that within parking areas the substandard conditions create tight matteuvertng or nd the study notes that vehicles would have to drive with caution,this is not something we vehicles�. want to dee; ■ concerndd that the driveway width was reduced from 12 further; feet, landscaping along the � width ev driveway edge will reduce the useable drivewayzoning is to encourage, ■ con that the parking is still at the street level, intent of the TW the parking rather than `� request that the applicant explain why pedestriAn activity at street level, housing br other pedestrian oriented use is at the stTect level; 6 why are there no residential units proposed on the ground floor; ■ clearly. identify the proposed exterior material s on the building,including scale and size of trim and ,7 architectural elements; M space is not articulated or detailed well,revise building the toiled room serving the common open elevation to clearly identify this room; t ■ oor to floor dimension for the garage Level, why does it have to be so conccrn6d with the 11 foot fl ically 8 tall., wh�.t is the extra space needed for,typ -2 is sufficient; provide plan ptr ■ an the location of the pvalve and backflow prevent clearly dhow on the site pler, p detail ort how these utilities will be screened or otherwise lend in;located at the ground level below the level of the units,do not see a �c proposed common open.space�s T Of good aches$ for the tenants from their units to the common open space area; mbe In (L ■ concerned with how deliveries will be made to the site give h size ann nu to address substandard proximity to the hospital. and its entrance and narrowdriveway — parkingiissues; i species of some plants are not identified on landscape plan, need to clearly identify sP � ,° all landscaj)ing 011 the landscape plan; clearly "identify which are the affordable units on the floor plans; SAN 3 1 2007 rry rip RF IRLINGAME 1/10/2007 15:36 6506963790 PAGE 03/03 Citv of.Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes January 8, 2007 I provide ah explanation of how the program for the affordable units will be administered,also should be includ6d in the conditions of approval; r if parking garage will be at street level, something will have to be incorporated into the design to make the�uildin.g more pedestrian oriented,enclosing the stairway does not meet this Intent,exterior stairway Nwould be acceptable if it is designed appropriately and is more elegant; (� provide most recent comments from Department of public Works regarding status of the sewer line easementland access situation; and )° this area was rezoned to allow high density residential, this project would be one of the first significatltly taller buildings in the area opposite the hospital, would like to see a 3D visual presentation showing the proposed building in context with the other buildings in area, with more detail on the project and adjoining buildings than just the abstract buildings as shown in the environmlental document. This item was sef for the regular action calendar when all the information has been submitted and reviewed by the Planning Department, and there is space on the agenda. This item concluded at 7:22 p.m. RE07-9 ED -- r.; 1 2007 r��;-�LINGAME `�,;NING DEPT. City of Burlingame Planning Commission Approved Minutes January 8, 2007 VI. STUDY ITEMS `1. 1800 TROUSDALE DRIVE, ZONED TW — APPLICATION FOR MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION, DESIGN REVIEW, CONDOMINIUM PERMIT, TENTATIVE CONDOMINIUM MAP, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR HEIGHT AND VARIANCES FOR PARKING SPACE DIMENSION, DRIVEWAY WIDTH AND BACK-UP AISLE WIDTH FOR A 25-UNIT, 7-STORY RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM(PAUL BOGATSKY,APPLICANT AND PROPERTY OWNER;AND DAN IONESCU ARCHITECTS AND PLANNERS,ARCHITECT)PROJECT PLANNER: MAUREEN BROOKS a. MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION, DESIGN REVIEW, CONDOMINIUM PERMIT, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR HEIGHT AND VARIANCES FOR PARKING SPACE DIMENSION, DRIVEWAY WIDTH AND BACK-UP AISLE WIDTH; AND b. TENTATIVE CONDOMINIUM MAP—PROJECT ENGINEER: VICTOR VOONG CP Monroe presented a summary of the staff report. Commissioners asked: ■ believe there is no podium shown at the rear of the building,however the top of grade is incorrectly shown at 53.10', please revise plans to accurately show top of grade at the rear of the lot; ■ concerned with the number of substandard parking conditions,concerned with the proposed parking layout including 8%foot wide stalls next to a wall,vehicles will have a lot of difficulty maneuvering in and out of the stalls; ■ traffic study notes that within parking areas the substandard conditions create tight maneuvering for vehicles and the study notes that vehicles would have to drive with caution,this is not something we want to see; ■ concerned that the driveway width was reduced from 12 feet to 9.5 feet, landscaping along the driveway edge will reduce the useable driveway width even further; ■ concerned that the parking is still at the street level, intent of the TW zoning is to encourage pedestrian activity at street level, request that the applicant explain why the parking rather than housing or other pedestrian oriented use is at the street level; ■ why are there no residential units proposed on the ground floor; ■ clearly identify the proposed exterior materials on the building,including scale and size of trim and architectural elements; ■ the toilet room serving the common open space is not articulated or detailed well, revise building elevation to clearly identify this room; ■ concerned with the 11 foot floor to floor dimension for the garage level,why does it have to be so tall, what is the extra space needed for, typically 8'-2" is sufficient; ■ clearly show on the site plan the location of the PIV valve and backflow preventer, provide plan detail on how these utilities will be screened or otherwise blend in; ■ proposed common open space is located at the ground level below the level of the units,do not see a good access for the tenants from their units to the common open space area; ■ concerned with how deliveries will be made to the site given the size and number of dwelling units, proximity to the hospital and its entrance and narrow driveway width;need to address substandard parking issues; ■ species of some plants are not identified on landscape plan, need to clearly identify species of all landscaping on the landscape plan; ■ clearly identify which are the affordable units on the floor plans; 2 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Approved Minutes January 8, 2007 ■ provide an explanation of how the program for the affordable units will be administered,also should be included in the conditions of approval; --� ■ if parking garage will be at street level, something will have to be incorporated into the design to make the building more pedestrian oriented,enclosing the stairway does not meet this intent,exterior stairway would be acceptable if it is designed appropriately and is more elegant; ■ provide most recent comments from Department of Public Works regarding status of the sewer line easement and access situation; and ■ this area was rezoned to allow high density residential, this project would be one of the first significantly taller buildings in the area opposite the hospital, would like to see a 3D visual presentation showing the proposed building in context with the other buildings in area,with more detail on the project and adjoining buildings than just the abstract buildings as shown in the environmental document. This item was set for the regular action calendar when all the information has been submitted and reviewed by the Planning Department, and there is space on the agenda. This item concluded at 7:22 p.m. II. 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. 2a. 1441-1445 BELLEVUE AVENUE,ZONED R-4—AMENDED APPLICATION FOR A NEW FOUR- STORY, 20-UNIT RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM (DALE MEYER, AIA, DALE MEYER ASSOCIATES, APPLICANT AND ARCHITECT; BELLEVUE ASSOCIATES, LLC C/O LITKE PROPERTIES,PROPERTY OWNERS)(141 NOTICED)PROJECT PLANNER:MAUREEN BROOKS a. APPLICATION FOR ADDENDUM TO MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND AMENDMENT TO PREVIOUSLY APPROVED CONDOMINIUM PERMIT AND SPECIAL PERMIT FOR FRONT SETBACK LANDSCAPING; AND b. AMENDMENT TO TENTATIVE CONDOMINIUM MAP AND TENTATIVE AND FINAL PARCEL MAP FOR LOT COMBINATION PROJECT ENGINEER: VICTOR VOONG 2b. 1123 BURLINGAME AVENUE,ZONED C-1,SUBAREA A—APPLICATION FOR COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW AMENDMENT FOR CHANGES TO A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW PROJECT (JOEL CAMPOS, LA CORNETA TAQUERIA, APPLICANT; J. MARK CRONANDER, ARCHITECT; KARIM A. SALMA) (37 NOTICED) PROJECT PLANNER: ERICA STROHMEIER Chair Brownrigg asked if anyone in the audience or on the Commission wished to call any item off the consent calendar. A Commissioner asked that item 2b. 1123 Burlingame Avenue be moved to the action calendar. C.Deal moved approval of the consent calendar item 2a, 1441-1445 Bellevue Avenue,based on the facts in the staff report,commissioners' comments and the findings in the staff report with recommended conditions -� in the staff report and by resolution. The motion was seconded by C. Cauchi. Chair Brownrigg called for a voice vote on the motion and it passed 7-0. Appeal procedures were advised. This item concluded at 7:25 p.m. 3 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes March 27, 2006 Chair Auran called for a five minute break. Commission reconvened at 9:45 p.m. 12. 1800 TROUSDALE DRIVE,ZONED TW— ENVIRONMENTAL SCOPING AND DESIGN REVIEW STUDY FOR AN APPLICATION FOR CONDOMINIUM PERMIT, TENTATIVE CONDOMINIUM MAP,CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR HEIGHT,AND SIX VARIANCES FOR: LOT COVERAGE, FRONT SETBACK,REAR SETBACK,PARKING SPACE DIMENSIONS,DRIVEWAY WIDTH AND COMMON OPEN SPACE MORE THAN 10' ABOVE GRADE, FOR A 25-UNIT, 7-STORY CONDOMINIUM STRUCTURE (PAUL BOGATSKY,APPLICANT AND PROPERTY OWNER;AND DAN IONESCU ARCHITECTS AND PLANNERS, ARCHITECT) (16 NOTICED) PROJECT PLANNER: MAUREEN BROOKS CP Monroe briefly presented the project description. Cers.Auran,Deal and Brownrigg noted that they had met with the architect to discuss this project,including the sewer situation. Commission asked staff why a driveway for a multiple family development is required to be 12 feet? Staff noted that when more than 30 cars are parked in a lot the code requires two 12 foot driveways or one 18 foot driveway in order to insure that there is adequate space for entering and exiting given the number of trips in and out which could occur at the same time and also in an emergency the 12 foot driveway could be used for both in ingress and egress; when there are fewer than 30 cars,one 12 foot driveway is required because the volume of traffic is less. It was also noted that 12 feet is a standard travel lane on a roadway;and sight lines can be a problem at corners where driveways are much narrower. Would a building of this size and shape be allowed under the previous C-3/R-4 zoning? Yes,about the same,the required front setback would be a little greater,the height would be allowed with a conditional use permit as this is,the rear setback would be 15 feet to the first floor and 20 feet to floors above. Could driveway be moved over to one side? Staff noted the applicant could answer. Difficulty in past getting approval for a multiple family building over 35 feet,this is a change from the old zoning,plan encourages taller buildings. When will the type of CEQA document be decided? CP noted that the type of CEQA document would be determined after the technical studies are identified in the initial study are completed. Chair Auran opened the public comment. Dan Ionescu, architect and Paul Bogatsky,property owner and project sponsor,were available to answer questions,noted will not give formal presentation and will do this the way applicants usually do it here in Burlingame. Could you explain about the sewer and the landscaping? There is a public sewer line on this site which requires a 10 foot easement and a lot of trees on the site, how did you balance? This neighborhood will change a lot in the next few years, look across the street at the hospital which is a big building, did all could to save existing trees,managed to save those on the left side and at the rear. For the sewer looked at option of sinking the garage below grade, then discovered that the sewer line is active and must be retained in a 10 foot easement,there is a 54 inch storm line in Trousdale which affects the depth of the sewer line, so it cannot be buried lower to accommodate a below grade garage, there is an easement noted on paper, but none in fact; have no money to relocate easement on adjacent properties, so dedicated 10 feet to sewer easement and put garage at grade level. Applicant is willing to determine the quality of the sewer line after the project is approved, unwilling to spend the money for that determination if the project is not going ahead. Tried to relocate sewer off the site, but required 500 feet of new sewer line,too expensive. What about the trees? Saved as many as could,all Cyprus were saved. You are asking for a number of variances,why? They are all related to the sewer line, the site coverage is less than 50%if you take the above grade lid off the garage,have used the added area on top of the garage lid for common open space. Setback variances, if the garage was lower the steps at the front of the building would not be an encroachment into the front setback. Design meets the intent of the requirements of the code,lifted the building to rise over the sewer,it improves the design by provided more open space; steps at the front are just to access the first floor. What about parking layout? Have designed 15 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes March 27, 2006 thousands of parking stalls,the standards all over the United States are smaller than Burlingame,do not see need for additional foot next to a wall, meet the standard 9'x 20'. Have provided a canopy over the front entrance which is in the front setback, will remove if you wish. Building is within the height allowances, driveways can be enlarged from 9'to 9'-6"if the trees are removed,lot coverage is increased to provide more open space. Commissioner's questions of applicant: Did you consider an 18 foot driveway on one side(where the sewer is) so enter and exit from same side, what are the advantages of putting the garage underground? City Engineer said that needed access to the manhole cover and access needs to be uncovered because of the height of the truck which has a boom on the top. Commissioner noted Engineering staff felt that could leave the 10 foot easement alone and build on the other side,it appears that if build outside of the easment and put the parking in the ground, all the variances go away;it does not make sense to discuss these variances,was told at meeting by applicant all complies,but now see that it doesn't.Applicant noted that this proposal is a better maneuver for the truck. Commissioner asked what right the applicant has to use the sewer easement for access. CA noted has not been involved in this particular issue, generally city must grant an encroachment permit for use of a sewer easement,nothing can block the ability to access,this appears to be a one way access so truck will have to back. Sr. Engineer noted that city would require the sewer capacity study so know condition and capacity of line. CP noted that the impact of future development in the area would have to be determined as well, so the ultimate size of the line and the service demands could be understood. Can the angle of the sewer line be changed? Applicant noted that because of the other pipes in Trousdale,they are stuck with the current elevation of the sewer line. Can't go under the storm main with a sewer line because of the sewer connection on the other side. How many properties does the sewer line serve? About 4. Commission summarized,that raising the building and the variances required help the city --� get better access to our own sewer line? Sounds more as if took advantage of the sewer easement to provide access to the garage and lift the building up. If dig down next to the sewer easement, less parking and remove all the trees. Applicant noted 18 foot driveway at the front and a separate easement would take street frontage for cars, would increase curb-cuts, the present proposal makes the building look nice for people. Commission questions continued: If garage underground, the open space would be less than 6 feet above grade,the proposed deck is 10 feet in the air,will look over all the adjoining properties,not favor the 5 foot rear set back variance, feel encroaching on adjoining properties. Undergrounding the garage would eliminate this issue. Applicant noted that by using landscaping the people would not be able to walk to the edge of the open space on the deck over the parking. Feel that the city has made the zoning flexible in this area,but this applicant is asking even more and that is a problem. Comments from the public: Pat Giorni, 1445 Balboa. Concerned about the driveway and the size of the parking spaces, city has standard and should be met; on a previous single family application this evening with a drive way next to a retaining wall,Commission required a wider driveway,there is always going to be a problem, should stick to the parking standards,cars are not going to get smaller. Height is a concern,the new Peninsula hospital is not as tall as the present hospital, they are building new structures nearby in Millbrae which are 65 feet tall,look massive,this would be better if you took two floors off. This is a windy place,know from experience on the Bayfront that wind can cause problems for pedestrians;the hospital is investing a lot of money in pedestrian pathways nearby, want to be sure not making them less useable by changing wind patterns; should do a wind study on Trousdale. Would also note that residents of the Trousdale area were concerned recently about the height of antenna on the roof of a single story building, should be concerned about height. 16 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes March 27, 2006 Commissioners continued questions: what will the building type be? Steel frame. Will the podium be concrete?The garage will be type I,and the building above type II. Concerned about the mass of stucco on �— this building. Applicant noted that there is not much context presently in this area. Think a more modern design would be too aggressive. Will you use EFS?No. Real stucco,stone or whatever.Will the HVAC be central or individual? Recommend a central boiler for heat,air conditioning unit will be hidden within the unit,don't know yet if there will be air conditioning. Applicant noted met with several groups,tried to meet with those on the north side, told on phone no problem. FAA has approved this proposed height. Commissioner noted a concern with the narrow corridors within the building. Would like them to be wider, more useable, asked to have building check corridor requirements. There were no further comments from the floor. The public hearing was closed. Commission commented on the environmental issues: ■ Concerned about the shadow pattern caste on adjacent properties. ■ Concerned about the treatment of the street, TW district tries to create a pedestrian active street, with wider sidewalks, how will raising this building off the ground impact the street and pedestrian environment(an aesthetic question). ■ Use of the access easement by the city,is the design safe,what will the impact of the city's use be on the access to the garage and safety. ■ Need a wind study to determine impact of height on the pedestrians. ■ Impact on traffic and patterns of movement. ■ Evaluate what the impacts are of making parking spaces 2 feet shorter and one foot narrower next to a wall. Address the precedent issue, if allow here in a new building how deny these dimensions to all other applicants;include evaluation of the impacts of the narrow driveways and the number of shortened parking spaces. ■ Need an arborist report and analysis of the condition of the existing trees including those to be retained, their longevity after construction e.g. at what point are they in their life span, can they be protected during construction, and what would be required, including during replacement of the sewer line. ■ Discuss the sewer problem, size of line needed with the project and cumulatively(when area built out), and how that will affect easement, trees, driveway use and blockage by public works' frequency of access; sewer study should include relocation of the line, determining what is involved. ■ Environmental impact of the height of the open space deck, impact on bulk,visibility into and by from other properties, impact on neighbors to rear and influence on properties to the rear. ■ In visual analysis should consider the recently approved project to the west,also would like some kind of idea about future projects in the area and the cumulative visual effect, create visual blocks relative to zoning to get a sense of ultimate density. ■ Distant views from the hills looking down on the project. Comments: recognize that 50 units to the acre will mean taller buildings;the front canopy is a nice design element; concerned with the number of variances especially with a new building, seems many could be designed out; architect has done a nice job of articulating the building above the podium. Reopened the Public Comment: Applicant noted that he understood that the sewer analysis would not be required until the project had been approved by the Planning Commission;this is a costly study and do not want to do it now, do not think that the size of the line would affect the trees. CA sewer issue needs to be worked through, the initial study and environmental document will drive this resolution. There were no other comments from the floor. The public comment was closed. 17 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes March 27, 2006 Commission comments on design: ■ Appearance of mass and bulk seems to be broken up enough, windows. ■ Concerned about the use of the podium in the design,not what expected with the TW design guidelines. ■ Better roof plans which show all the stuff on the roof and how it will be screened or designed into the roof structure. ■ Stucco is appropriate, but unusual in a building this tall, might consider a pre-cast skin, work better. ■ Street frontage should be treated as a continuum from what is happening from the project to the west and increased pedestrian activity, transition needs to be addressed. ■ Common open space should be provided with a functioning rest room and sink area. ■ Would like the variances to go away,lower the garage,conform to city's parking requirements,eliminate the rear setback variance. No reason and findings to grant a variance for a new building. ■ Important to bring the building envelop down. ■ Want to look closely at design when the revised project returns and focus on design details at that time. Chair Auran noted that there was no consensus to direct this project to a design reviewer and the environmental consultant and staff had made note of the environmental issues raised. Staff noted that the design changes should be made before the environmental document is completed so that there will not need to be a continual series of revisions to both the site plan and the studies in the environmental report. The Planning Commission's action is advisory and not appealable. This item concluded at 11:00 p.m. X. PLANNER REPORTS - Review of City Council regular meeting of March 20, 2006. CP Monroe reviewed the actions of the Council meeting of March 20, 2006. - FYI— 1512-1516 Floribunda Avenue--changes to approved residential condominium project. Commission discussed the proposed changes, concerned about the removal of the French doors which made that corner inviting,also concerned when reviewed originally about the small size of the public spaces, not want to see the lobby made any smaller;unit 2 has changed a lot,windows need to be looked at. Asked the architect to address these issues and return with a letter discussion. FYI was not approved. - FYI— 1031 Morrell Avenue—change to approved design review project. There were no comments on this request. It was approved. - FYI— 1216 Drake Avenue—As-built changes to an approved design review project. There were no comments on this request. It was approved. - FYI—Revised City Council Calendar CP Monroe noted that C.Vistica's term is up. The regular application process will be followed.Council has set a closing date of April 14,2006,for applications,they will interview the following week,and appoint at their first meeting in May. Commission chair will rotate at the Commission's first meeting in May. City Council will have two study sessions this week,Tuesday on the platforms at the Burlingame train station and Wednesday on the proposed Anza Point North and Rollins Road zoning. 18 FROM : DIAP INTERNATIONAL FAX NO. : 650 570-6540 Jun. 21 2005 11:31AM P2 Cily of Burlingame Planning Department 501 Primrose Road P(650)558-7250 1-(650)696-3790 myy,hurlin rt4lnc.ur� APPLICATION TO THE PLANING, COMMISSION N 'I'ype of application: Design Review Conditional use.I'ertnit__ Variance__X Special Permit_ Other Parcel Number: Project acfdretih: I Sao �/"-0�sDALE PROPERTY OWNER APPLICANT 0L 130 7 jtV �D� 4 $06:47SK Name:_ — Name: lqg /�4C/F/C INC . /G/69 �i9GIFLC /41JE Address: _,. Address: _ - -514111 FMA)Ch5Co MOW097 – S,4/) l=R��ISCO C .9(//09 City/State/Lip: City/State/Zip: _ Cf/�' 202_ Q6�o _ Phone (w):�� Phone (w):_ q/S 202 O(�_-, r W-la ; l- ( )= 2oz_0620 - -. ARCIYITECT/DESIGNER Name:--^ Address:_/� / J SoPEL, PL _ CE #230 �y M�9T�o C/�- yo2 N�ease indicate With an asterisk City/state/zip: SM _ �r 0 ,, 66�� the contact person for th>Is roj�ect. Phone (w):_ � 7 d `pipg " r k b u (h): 6So 570 -6SY0 AUG e 12005 0 C;TY�'F',c-'URL 4N(G-,,tAC PLANNING DEPT, �,� v� a ,Q j caNMi� � livM PROJECT DESCRIPTION._ ��r� ��`�1� �= AFFADA'VIT/SIGNATURE: I hereby certify under penalty of perjury that the information given herein is true and co r ct the best f y knowledge and belief. 9 Applicant's signature: _ /* Date: y -- ( know about the proposed application and hereby authorize the above applicant to submit this application to the Planning Col itis on. C Date, % Property owner's signature:_ --- O�' Date submitted: / �5 ?(.:API'.FKM City of Burlingame Planning Department 501 Primrose Road P(650)558-7250 F(650)696-3790 www.burlingame.org -04 CITY : �3r s�, ,��� '>�. �� a �r,�� 3' ^r�s � v�Wa� � i '�• ,U JJN v BURIJNGAME x r 'M F The Planning Commission is required by law to make findings as defined by the City's Ordinance (Code Section 25.54.020 a-d). 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. a. Describe the exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to your property which do not apply to other properties in this area. P-0 fer God- C'C64644�- b. Explain why the variance request is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right and what unreasonable property loss or unnecessary hardship might result form the denial of the application. C. Explain why the proposed use at the proposed location will not be detrimental or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity or to public health, safety,general welfare or convenience. d. How will the proposed project be compatible with the aesthetics, mass, bulk and character of the existing and potential uses on adjoining properties in the general vicinity? VARTRM DAN nNESCU ARCHf-ECTS&PLANNERS RECEIVED DIAP MAR 1-4 2007 SAN FRANCISCO-cItJCGN VALLEY OSLO SHANGHAI BUENOS AIRES CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING DEPT. Variance: Front Setback encroachment (As suggested and supported by the present Planning Commissioners) 1- Describe the exceptional or extraordinary circumstances applicable to your property which do not apply to other properties in this area. The original stair and canopy above provide a better relationship and presence to the street as well as a protected area for people waiting to enter the building. 2- Explain why the variance request is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property right and what unreasonable property loss or unnecessary hardship might result from the denial of the application. The building has proportionate and human scale dimensions. The entry stairs and canopy are proportionate with to building scale. 3- Explain why the proposed use at the proposed location will not be detrimental or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity or to the public heath, safety, general welfare or convenience Based on number 1 and 2 above the entry stair and canopy will be a useful and a needed addition for the entry of the building. 4- How will the proposed project be compatible with the aesthetics, mass, bulk and character of the existing and potential uses on adjoining properties in the general vicinity? The entry level of the project has been design to be compatible with the future neighboring buildings and character of the area. The proposed entry stair and canopy are an elegant complement of the entry, and at the same time functional. 4 1611 BOREL PLACE #230 SAN MATEO, CA 94402 T 650.570.6681 F 650.570.6540 E : DIONES@D IAP.COM WWW . D I A P . C 0 M DA.4 DNESC U ARCWTECTS&PLANNEFK RECEIVED MAR 1.4 2007 0 1 A SAN FRANCISCO-SILICON VALLEY OSLO SHANGHAI BUENOS AIRES CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING DEPT. Variance • Site Coverage-Landscaped podium over garage ramps (As suggested and supported by the present Planning Commissioners) 1- Describe the exceptional or extraordinary circumstances applicable to your property which do not apply to other properties in this area. The lower garage ramps covered by a landscaped podium for residents use is a better design and a better use of land and/or space. 2- Explain why the variance request is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property right and what unreasonable property loss or unnecessary hardship might result from the denial of the application. More open usable space is beneficial to all parties. 3- Explain why the proposed use at the proposed location will not be detrimental or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity or to the public heath, safety, general welfare or convenience. More landscaped areas are not detrimental to neighbors. 4- How will the proposed project be compatible with the aesthetics, mass bulk and character of the existing and potential uses on adjoining properties in the general vicinity? This proposed open usable space will further improve the standards of quality for this and other surrounding projects. 5 1611 BOREL PLACE #230 SAN MATEO, CA 94402 T 650.570.6681 IF 650. 570.6540 E : DIONES@DIAP.COM WWW . D I A P . C 0 M Active Sewer Line History E: 1800 Trousdale Dr. Subject: RE: 1800 Trousdale Dr. From: "PW/ENG-Voong, Victor" <vvoong@burlingame.org> --� Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2005 08:51 :00 -0700 To: "'Rita Munoz Boyle"' <rsmunoz@diap.com>, "PW/ENG-Murtuza, Syed" <SMurtuza@burlingame.org>, vgalura@macleodassociates.net, luxorinc@sbcglobal.net Hello Rita, The most recent proposed relocation of the sanitary sewer main dated July 14 , 2005 is not considerable functional for maintenance purposes by the Public Works Department . While preserving trees is a priority with the Parks Department , it does not help in the purposes of a functional sanitary sewer main. The proposed location reduces a ten-foot utility easement to an 18 " easement . That is not acceptable to the City . The City -requires a minimum easement of ten feet to provide adequate space for a maintenance truck to maintain the system. The truck also needs to be on top of the manhole for maintenance purposes . In the event that the pipe needs to be repair, it is impossible for the City to work within an 18 " trench. If the latest proposal is considered the best proposal , the City advises you to gather agreements with all property owners upstream of the sanitary sewer main to make this main "private . " These conditions were discussed at our first meeting . If you have any questions , please reply or call me directly at ( 650 ) 558-7242 . Victor - - - - -Original Message- - - - - From: Rita Munoz Boyle [mailto : rsmunoz@diap . coml Sent : Monday, July 18 , 2005 4 : 29 PM To : SMurtuza@burlingame . org; vgalura@macleodassociates . net ; vvoong@burlingame . org ; luxorinc@sbcglobal . net Subject : 1800 Trousdale Dr . Dear Syed, We were talking with Dan after your conversation with him over the phone and we just wanted to share some thoughts with you . Please keep in mind that at this moment there is no street curb cut at the west side (current easement ) of the property, and there are three existing fences (based on the survey) , which confirms that the current access to the existing manhole is from the back properties . In other words we feel that now we are proposing a really functional garage layout that allows to even save most of the existing trees . That will not be possible if we have to change the layout to accommodate the same number of cars . And based on the existing conditions of the site we feel that that latest layout that we sent to you does not affect/change the access/service to the manhole . Kind regards , Rita 7/19/2005 2:22 PM 00 Trousdale Dr. Subject: 1800 Trousdale Dr. From: Rita Munoz Boyle<rsmunoz@diap.com> �- Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2005 20:29:17 -0300 To: SMurtuza@burlingame.org, vgalura@macleodassociates.net, vvoong@burlingame.org, luxorinc@sbcglobal.net Dear Syed, We were talking with Dan after your conversation with him over the phone and we just wanted to share some thoughts with you. Please keep in mind that at this moment there is no street curb cut at the west side (current easement) of the property, and there are three existing fences (based on the survey) , which confirms that the current access to the existing manhole is from the back properties. In other words we feel that now we are proposing a really functional garage layout that allows to even save most of the existing trees. That will not be possible if we have to change the layout to accommodate the same number of cars. And based on the existing conditions of the site we feel that that latest layout that we sent to you does not affect/change the access/service to the manhole. Kind regards, Rita ON 7/18/2005 8:29 PM 00 Trousdale Subject: 1800 Trousdale From: "PW/ENG-Voong, Victor" <vvoong@burlingame.org> Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2005 16:20:07 -0700 To: "'vgalura@macleodassociates.net"' <vgalura@macleodassociates.net> CC: "'rsmunoz@diap.com"' <rsmunoz@diap.com>, "PW/ENG-Murtuza, Syed" <SMurtuza@burlingame.org> Hello Vergel, After reviewing your latest proposal, Syed and I have the following comments; 1. The rubber pad between the pipes is not acceptable. The 6" (six inch)clearance between pipes is required. The City standard separation is one foot minimum and the City is willing to accept six inches of separation. 2. Two feet of cover over the manhole within the property is not acceptable. The City standard cover is three feet minimum for storage capacity purposes in case of sewer backups. 3. It appears that the invert of the existing manhole will not be modified to be a drop manhole. 4. The slope of the new sewer line connecting to the manhole shall be 0.5% minimum. --� From your sketch, it appears that the proposed alignment may not be able meet the design criteria. The owner and the architect may look at another option, such as acquiring an easement for a new line or taking responsibility of the sewer lines as private lines. Victor 7/13/2005 8:31 PM „r i >VV 1r1jLLsudle Ur1ve Subject: 1800 Trousdale Drive From: Rita Munoz Boyle<rsmunoz@diap.com> Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2005 16:19:16 -0300 To: "PW/ENG-Voong, Victor" <vvoong@burlingame.org>, vvoong@burlingame.org, vgalura@macleodassociates.net, luxorinc@sbcglobal.net Hello Syed, Victor, I was wondering if you had a chance to look at the fax that Vergel sent yesterday July 14. It is another option for the sewer line. Please dont hesitate to call me or Vergel if you have any questions, Thanks Have a good weekend! Rita 7/15/2005 4:20 PM of 1 07/14/2005 09:31 FAX 6505938675 MacLeod and Associates IgJ001 H&cLCOD QHD ,nz SOMUVIES9 CIVIL ENGINEERING • LAND SURVEYING DATE: July 14;2005 Attention: Victor Vong(City of Burlingame) Fax 685-9310 Cc:Rita Munoz Fax 570-6540 From: Vergel P.Galura- MacLeod and Associates Fax No. (650)593-8675 Tel.No. (650)593-8580 Project: 1800 TROUSDALE DRIVT BURLINGAME CA. RE: PROPOSED SANITARY SEWER MAIN RELOCATION 1E Victor, Thank you for the a mail that you have sent yesterday.Attached is another alternative proposal that I would like you to review.As I remember correctly on our last meeting that the rear manhole is being access at rear of the property since the existing 10'wide sewer easement along the southwesterly side of the property is not accessible due to existing fences and non-existen"of driveway on Trousdale Drive:The new design will provide a new driveway and access to the easement and towards the rear manhole.If you have any questions please give us a call. Thanks, Vergel P. Galum Note: See attached sketches 965 CENTER STREET-SAN CARLOS•CA 94070•(650)593-8580•FAX(650)593-8675 07/14/2005 09 : 31 FAX 6505938675 MacLeod and Associates Q002 MacLEOD AND ASSOCIATES, .INC. 965 Center Street SHEET"o' of SAN CARLOS, CA 94070 CALOULAYeoer Vp 6 DATE '1 —01C (650) 593-8580 FAX (650) 593-8675 CHECKED BY OA?E SCALE s ; : ; i ___-J__..__J._.___.4•-___;_..-..y.._._....••.---•'-._.._._'.._.......'..__ _ ..__._-i.. _ __._ - .. 1 • I l , r 7 I �^xx ix.,• _;x ...»w'-. x »j i .. I I I I I ... • .. . � ---i-- j � - - i •-i- I �— .i.�{..._. I . i_.._.�..� -t--_--�--+--•;__.�_�_._:..�. ..-__. ._.._xi.»»..x»�x.•x_.», .„.,.x,.�.x.xx �xxx..x,.i..,.,.»,M_.».x,�...-,.x..� --I --�'----. _.---1--- -; -j - i - r---t - - j ! i i •97.-.-..r..�•_._._ i i , x'I , i •I , i -..._..._._. T . ....:........ + .. -.. — ' ._.._.. I.. • .IIr. I I I llo0tL1 lIH I�IM�s1�t/IM14 07/14/2005 09:32 FAX 6505938675 MacLeod and}Associates Q003 I ccP �••,��-moi' x �• I � _, J � j ^9 COL 1EMPORARY BENCHMARK! `� f0�cor V. UN DA ) r Jip rr.•COL. ►�'I� ��� O 'r p�t=44,CL `` n !k db r KC. PAVE. Iry i 07/J4/2005 09:32 FAX 8505938875 MacLeod and Associates % 0004 . S 45 49'09' E 4. til My1� I \ '' I I � Ly} CP' j Cn J 5 IS' RAND • O ` L� yy .� s y `+ A.C.PA4. • •, �?? C v x•y�I� e La� 4\ � � ;� �•��/ll/N y1 w •i •ASS •• � �,�° �'1 y`'• •1i��, • 10'SANITARY SEVER EA$EY!�' 3313 O.R�J76 1, S M ♦ A.C.PA B - ? •� 'a/A4= -Sc.C3 /w- - ¢Q. S 00 Trousdale Subject: 1800 Trousdale From: "PW/ENG-Voong, Victor" <vvoong@burlingame.org> Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2005 16:20:07 -0700 To: "'vgalura@macleodassociates.net"' <vgalura@macleodassociates.net> CC: "'rsmunoz@diap.com"' <rsmunoz@diap.com>, "PW/ENG-Murtuza, Syed" <SMurtuza@burlingame.org> Hello Vergel, After reviewing your latest proposal, Syed and I have the following comments; 1 . The rubber pad between the pipes is not acceptable. The 6" (six inch) clearance between pipes is required. The City standard separation is one foot minimum and the City is willing to accept six inches of separation. 2. Two feet of cover over the manhole within the property is not acceptable. The City standard cover is three feet minimum for storage capacity purposes in case of sewer backups. 3. It appears that the invert of the existing manhole will not be modified to be a drop manhole. 4. The slope of the new sewer line connecting to the manhole shall be 0.5% minimum. _ From your sketch, it appears that the proposed alignment may not be able meet the design criteria. The owner and the architect may look at another option, such as acquiring an easement for a new line or taking responsibility of the sewer lines as private lines. Victor 7/15/2005 4:19 PM 07/13/2005 16:11 FAX 6505938675 MacLeod and Associates Z001 H&(��LWU IND Q��OC�Ola4��9 D��o CIVIL ENGINEERING • LAND SURVEYING DATE: July 13,2005 Attention: Victor Vong(City of 8urfingame) Fax 685-9310 Cc:Rita Munoz Fax 570-6540 From: Vergel P.Galura- MacLeod and Associates Fax No. (650)593-8675 Tel.No. (650)593-8580 Project: 1800 TROUSDALE DRIVE RURLINGAIIIE CA. RE. SANITARY SEWER MAIN CROSSING IE Victor, Attached is a complete schematic plan(plan&profile)for the proposed sanitary sewer realignment.Kindly show it to Sayed and ifyou have any questions please give us a call. Thanks, Vergel P. Galura Note: See attached sketches 965 CENTER STREET•SAN CARLOS•CA 94070•(650)593-8580•FAX(650)593-8675 07/18/2005 16 : 11 FAX. 6505988675 MacLeod and Associates Ia002 II 7 tie J ti SrA44- lie rjN 40, J) A k ..��. GBAPEMC' SCAI4 24D � {-�� { suis ) % 1 r M 200L 7/k/Nl A16 ;r •F r♦/ 4a-- S. =�9tif,17 Ip •,A 07/13/2005 16:12 FAX 6505938675 MacLeod and As60clate6 Q003 i k i4 • J26MoV E ASF4A GFAIX jeFY(.S-r 210 LF- 0"PVC i �rrv240( ;-- hC 1.11 ! 1 &07•MNfAi6 92 f A. IP t 07/19/2005 16:12 FAX. 6505958675 MacLeod and Associates 004 _ 0 '{. /,Jv. tN } y i I I. M 3 I V y I •g L . 4•lf. oe/"• =r� i 1 G I yr v I ^ 37. z(mn prhirj I I trz 67071-/''i .o/z.4/� r ,• ._ � - c7 /12 fd'%.5 v%A P -Qcarrl oAi f� 6�� DiJLT I G I ALL) -P/ tQ7 '�IPLs F[Au�D py SAI-c,�. N�I Cstti►► �KjSTi N6 Lol�f►BA� kivD tt£]C�srfl X1.6 Dti_. �cT1 bhl r5VT K4)U,E.D CfcT►ON . OT/13/2005 10:52 FAX 8505938875 MacLeod and Associates 14001 HAcLG010 IND d°aWOOO TE09 OIt Q CIVIL ENGINEERING • LAND SURVEYING DAM Jtdq 13,2005 Attention: Vidor Vong(City of Bur}iugame) Fax 685-9310 Cc: Rita Mumz Fax 570-6540 From: vc%d P.0ahua- MacLeod and Associates Fax No. (650)5934675 Tel.No. (650)5934580 Projed: 1800 TROUSDALE DRM BURIX#GAME CA. RE: SANITARY SEWER MAIN CROSSINO IE Vidor, In addlfon to my fax letter dated July 12,2005,the existixlg on-site manhole located at the westerly oomer of the property WM be rcmoved and replaced with a shallow manhok as a part of the new design proposal. The new 8"sewer bne wID have a mmm =cover of two feet(2')at the manb0le location. If you have any questions please give us a calL Thank., Vogel P. Gahaa Note: See attached sketches 965 CENTER STREET • SAN CARLOS • CA 94070 • (650) 593-8580 • FAX (650) 593-8675 07/12/2005 16:13 PAX 6505938675 MacLeod and Associates R001 M%c LIR0 OD ASSOCUMES, ONC. CIVIL ENGINEERING • LAND SURVEYING DATE: July 12, 2005 Attention. Victor Vong (City of Burlingame) Fax 685-9310 Cc: Rita Munoz Fax 570-6540 From: Verge]P, Galura- MacLeod and Associates Fax No. (650) 593-8675 Tel. No. (650) 593-8580 Project: 1800 TROUSDALE DRIVE BURLINGAME CA. RE: SANITARY SEWER MAIN CROSSING Hi Victor, .Per our telephone conversation last week, please find attached sketch (cross section)to supplement our discussion regarding our proposal to lower the existing 8" sewer pipe_ It was our understanding that you need to talk to Sayed and get back to us in a timely =uner. If you have any questions please give us a call. Thanks, Vergel P. Galum Note: See attached sketches 965 CENTER STREET• SAN CARLOS • CA 94070 • (650) 593-8580 • FAX (650) 593-8675 07/12/2005 18:14 FAX 0505958075 MacLeod and Associates X002 ..1 ICA I �T 70 , Il G 07/05/2005 16 : 07 FAX 6505938675 MacLeod and Associates Z 001 _ �Q�L��a0 110 Q88aQb%71P 9 �llV�o CIVIL ENGINEERING • LAND SURVEYING DATE: July 5, 2005 Attention: Rita Munoz (DIA.P) Fax 570-6540 From: Vergel P. Galura- MacLeod and Associates Fax No. (650) 593-8675 Tel. No- (650) 593.8580 Project- 1800 TROUSD.ALE DRIVE BURLiNGAME CA. RE: SANITARY SEWER MAIN CROSSING IE Rita, Per our meeting today, I did a quick calculation to determine the top of pipe elevation of the existing 48" dia. storm drain and it came out to be at el. 38.46. Based on this elevation, the 8" sewer main coming from the property has approximatcly 12" clearance over the existing 48" storm drain pipe. Based on our discussion today, the 8" sewer pipe needs to be lowered to elevation 36.00 and as you can see on the attached sketch, that idea will not work. If you have any questions please give a call• Thanks, Vero P. Galura Note: See attached sketches 965 CENTER STREET • SAN CAR LOS • CA 94070 • (650) 593-8580 • FAX (650) 593-8675 i 07/05/2005 16:08 FAX 6505958675 MacLeod and Associates Q002 K/Ac LMOD IHO 188000AMM 0��0 CIVIL ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING yx�olj fit. 0 o 1� 07/05/2005 16 : 08 FAX 6505998675 MacLeod and asociates U003 LLI 1i. rte ; Q tJ� cM w� N % 1 Iwo r: \l - OF BURUNGI-ME LL- TJMj 04. } .. V) Cn 39.411 1 1� DK L C) rx� . "' f Project Comments Date: June 21,2006 To: d City Engineer ❑ Recycling Specialist (650)558-7230 (650)558-7271 ❑ Chief Building Official ❑ Fire Marshal (650)558-7260 (650)558-7600 ❑ City Arborist ❑ NPDES Coordinator (650)558-7254 (650)342-3727 ❑ City Attorney From: Planning Staff Subject: Request for environmental review, condominium permit and parking variances at 1800 Trousdale Drive, zoned TW, APN: APN: 025- 121-060(Revised Plans date stamped June 12,2006) Staff Review: 06/26/06 1. Sheet A2.1.1 of plans shows clear access width for sewer maintenance to be 9'6" which does not meet the minimum width required by current City maintenance vehicles. Applicant has indicated interests in purchasing a new maintenance vehicle for narrow access to this site. The Assistant Director of Public Works would accept this vehicle provided that it meets the City needs for maintenance. This vehicle would be in lieu of widening the width of the access clearance width. 2. Previous comments still apply to this project. Reviewed by: V V Date: 7/19/2006 PC Item # MEMORANDUM TO: PLANNING DEPART FROM: PUBLIC WO S DEPARTI - G ISION DATE: DECEMBER 29, 2005 RE: CONDOMINIUM PERMIT FOR 1800 TROII LE DRIVE CONDOMINIUM PERMIT After reviewing the revised plans from staff memorandum dated December 13, 2005, the following comments which need to be addressed prior to any action. 1 . Sanitary sewer analysis is required for this 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. The analysis shall include the anticipated flows from the proposed developments at 1840 Ogden Drive (45 Unit Condominium) and 1818 Trousdale Drive (79 Unit Assisted Living Facility). If any improvements are required from these three developments, this project shall pay its portion of the costs. 2. In addition to the large amount of sanitary sewer flows added by this project, the proposed driveway is to be constructed on top of the City sanitary sewer easement. The sanitary sewer main shall be televised to evaluate the condition of the existing pipe. The existing pipe shall be replaced by this project if the City Engineer determines that the condition of the existing pipe is bad or if the existing pipe will be damaged by the project construction. 3. From project plans, it appears that the proposed curb (property line parallel to Ogden Drive) for the median where new trees are proposed to be planted may obstruct sewer maintenance vehicles from accessing the existing manhole on site. Maintenance vehicles require a minimum horizontal clearance of 8.5 feet. 4. A tentative condominium map is required to be filed. The map shall conform to the Subdivision Map Act requirements. The latest preliminary title report of the subject parcel shall be submitted with the map. 1 Project Comments Date: 08/01/2005 To: d City Engineer ❑ Recycling Specialist ❑ Chief Building Official ❑ Fire Marshal ❑ City Arborist ❑ NPDES Coordinator ❑ City Attorney From: Planning Staff Subject: Request for environmental review, condominium permit, parking variance and lot coverage variance for a new, 7-story, 28-unit residential condominium at 1800 Trousdale Drive,zoned C-3(w/R- 4 overlay),APN:025-121-060 Staff Review: 08/08/2005 See attached. Reviewed by: V V Date: 8/24/2005 PC Item # MEMORANDUM TO: PLANNING DEPARTMENT FROM: CITY ENGINEER DATE: AUGUST 24, 2005 RE: CONDOMINIUM PERMIT FOR 28 UNITS, TENTATIVE CONDOMINIUM MAP - RESUBDIVISION OF 0.503 ACRE PORTION OF BLOCK 7, MAP OF MILLS ESTATE NO. 3 SUBDIVISION - 1800 TROUSDALE DRIVE CONDOMINIUM PERMIT I have the following comments which need to be addressed prior to any action. I GENERAL: 1 . Show proposed drainage system and indicate that all roof and site drainage shall go to street by gravity. Show direction of drainage on adjacent property to confirm that no drainage enters this site or else that drainage needs to be included in the on-site system. 2. If large trees are to be removed, other plantings shall be shown on plans to help ameliorate the removals with the approval of the Parks Department. 3. Show required seven foot(T)minimum clearances at parking garage floor areas not just floor to floor. Provide room for all pipings, ducts and fire sprinklers. Disabled parking shall have access and parking area at eight feet two inches (82") clear. 4. The proposed overhang (podium) does not allow the City sanitary sewer maintenance vehicles and equipment to access the easement. The minimum height clearance for the maintenance vehicles is 15 feet minimum for a 10 feet easement. Plans shall be revised accordingly. 5. All utilities to this site must be installed underground. Any transformers needed for this site must be installed underground or behind the front setback on this site. Transformers can not be located within the City easement as shown on sheet A2.1 . Plans shall be revised to remove the proposed transformer from the City easement. 6. Sanitary sewer analysis is required for this 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. The analysis shall include the anticipated flows from the proposed 1 developments at 1840 Ogden Drive(45 Unit Condominium)and 1818 Trousdale Drive(79 Unit Assisted Living Facility). If any improvements are required from these three developments,this project shall pay its portion of the costs. 7. In addition to the large amount of sanitary sewer flows added by this project, the proposed driveway is to be constructed on top of the City sanitary sewer easement. The sanitary sewer main shall be televised to evaluate the condition of the existing pipe. The existing pipe shall be replaced by this project if the City Engineer determines that the condition of the existing pipe is bad or if the existing pipe will be damaged by the project construction. 8. Sewer backwater protection certification is required. Contact Public Works -Engineering Division at(650) 558-7230 for additional information. II SITE AND LANDSCAPE PLANS: 1. Curb, street elevations and a detailed driveway profile are needed. For flood protection, the driveways to all below-grade parking areas must have a high point either at property line or on site that is 12 inches above proposed flow line of street. Back of sidewalk elevation must be at 2% from projected top of curb through driveway. Transitions both up and then down at the street are required as are transitions at the lower level. Driveway slopes along the sanitary sewer easement on sheet A2.1 and on the tentative map are not --� consistent. Revise the plans to show the correct driveway slope. 2. All irrigation systems and planting shall follow City's water conservation guidelines. 3. Show the location for the fire sprinkler connection that is proposed. All fire system work shall conform to the City's current procedures for underground water systems. 4. All on site catch basins and drainage inlets shall be stencilled. All catch basins shall be protected during construction so no debris will be dumped into them. The City will provide a stencil. III PARKING: 1. Show underground and at-grade parking slab elevations. Maximum slope in any parking space is 5%. Show drainage pattern. 2. Provide all on site drainage inlets or the sump pump basin for the underground garage with a petroleum absorbent system for treating all drainage flows from the automobile parking areas. 3. Provide a sequential dimensional layout of all parking spaces and show remaining structure dimensions (widths and lengths)to confirm structure's dimensions. 4. Guest parking has not been indicated. Indicate guest parking on plans. 2 5. Show callbox/intercom system to all units from driveway in front of security gate and at the top of the driveway so guests may have access to guest parking spaces. If no gate is planned, install conduit to all units so that if gate is installed in the future, the system may be easily installed. 6. Show which parking spaces belong to which unit. IV ARCHITECTURAL PLANS: 1. Show design of trashroom and indicate size of receptacles, including receptacles for recycling. Confirm sizes needed with BFI. 2. Elevator sump drainage shall go to sanitary sewer and shall be separate from groundwater system which is to go to the storm drainage system. 3. The sewer ejection system (shown in garage plans) does not indicate the pit,ventilation, etc. Sewer ejection system must be on the emergency generator also. 4. Individual unit climate controls as well as separate shutoffs for gas, electric and water are required. VI TENTATIVE MAPS: (FOR STUDY MEMO ONLY-SEPARATE MEMO FOR FINAL) 1. A tentative condominium map is required to be filed prior to issuance of the Building Permit. The map shall conform to the Subdivision Map Act requirements. The latest preliminary title report of the subject parcel shall be submitted with the map. 2. Add note that "#_Condominium Units are as shown, Architectural Plans prepared by_ 3. The CCR's for this map must be approved by the City Attorney and conform to all approval conditions and City Codes. N e c: Owner,Architect FAWP5ITa.ES\CONDOMAP.RVW(REVISED 04/9/98) 3 Project Comments — Date: 08/01/2005 To: ❑ City Engineer ❑ Recycling Specialist X Chief Building Official ❑ Fire Marshal ❑ City Arborist ❑ NPDES Coordinator ❑ City Attorney From: Planning Staff Subject: Request for environmental review, condominium permit, parking variance and lot coverage variance for a new, 7-story, 28-unit residential condominium at 1800 Trousdale Drive, zoned C-3 (w/ R- 4 overlay) , APN: 025-121-060 Staff Review: 08/08/2005 Page 1 of 2 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) Rooms that can be used for sleeping purposes must have at least one window or door that complies with the egress requirements. 4) Provide guardrails at all landings. 5) Provide handrails at all stairs where there are more than four risers. 6) Provide lighting at all exterior landings. 7) The fireplace chimneys must terminate at least two feet above any roof surface within ten feet. 8) Show the dimensions to adjacent structures 9) Show the distances to property lines or to assumed property lines 10)Provide an exit plan showing the paths of travel 11)Show compliance with all accessibility regulations found in the 2001 CBC, Chapter 11 , for existing buildings including: a. Accessible paths of travel b. Accessible countertops c. Accessible bathrooms d. Accessible parking 12)For applications received after July 1, 2005 the requirements of SB-1025 apply. This statute requires that 10% of all new covered multi-family dwelling units must be provided an accessible route of travel to the primary entry level entrance, public and common use areas and within the dwelling unit, and to one bathroom on the primary entrance level; accessible doors and doorways and; accessible kitchens and bathrooms, grab bar reinforcement around toilets. tubs and showers: and liaht switches within reach limitations. Project Comments Date: 08/01/2005 To: ❑ City Engineer ❑ Recycling Specialist X Chief Building Official ❑ Fire Marshal ❑ City Arborist ❑ NPDES Coordinator ❑ City Attorney From: Planning Staff Subject: Request for environmental review, condominium permit, parking variance and lot coverage variance for a new, 7-story, 28-unit residential condominium at 1800 Trousdale Drive, zoned C-3 (w/ R- 4 overlay) , APN: 025-121-060 Staff Review: 08/08/2005 Page 2 of 2 1) The accessible parking shown in the basement must comply with the accessibility requirements of the 2001 CBC. _ a. Specifically, per CBC 1129.B.1, three accessible parking spaces are required. Only two accessible parking spaces are shown on the plans. b. All entrances to and vertical clearances within the parking structure must have a minimum vertical clearance of 8' 2" where required for accessibility to accessible parking spaces. 2) Per CBC 3003.5, all structures four or more stories in height must have at least one elevator that can accommodate a stretcher. See the referenced code section for dimensions and other details. Reviewer Date: Project Comments — Date: 08/01/2005 To: ❑ City Engineer ❑ Recycling Specialist ❑ Chief Building Official m Fire Marshal ❑ City Arborist ❑ NPDES Coordinator ❑ City Attorney From: Planning Staff Subject: Request for environmental review, condominium permit, parking variance and lot coverage variance for a new, 7-story, 28-unit residential condominium at 1800 Trousdale Drive, zoned C-3 (w/ R- 4 overlay) , APN: 025-121-060 Staff Review: 08/08/2005 Provide fire apparatus access in accordance with §9-902.2.1, Title 24 CFC as adopted by BMC §17.04. Reviewed bv: % Date: `s� ..r- ��-`-- Alwx sno kip CQNTRAL COUNTY-FARE- DE-PARTMQNT COUNTYCENTRAL ervin te own oand tl e t orr urlin ame Serving Tr r I�Ihkorouh. 9 i FIRE Cy r� 9 September 3, 2006 Rita Munoz, Project Manager DIAP Companies 1611 Borel Place, Ste. 230 San Mateo, CA 94402-3505 RE: ALTERNATE MEANS OF PROTECTION — 1800 TRUESDALE DRIVE Dear Mrs. Munoz, I have reviewed your request for an Alternate Means of Protection to the proposed condominium project dated October 2nd, 2006. Due to the size of the proposed project and the restrictions associated with the property shape and size, you �- have asked relief from the requirement specific to fire apparatus access required by §902.2.1, Uniform Fire Code as adopted by Burlingame Municipal Code 17.04. In lieu of meeting this specific requirement you propose to extend the required Class I Standpipe outlets to garage stair landings in accordance with fire department approved locations. Additionally, the garage will be protected with Quick Response Sprinklers throughout. Taking into consideration the occupancy, construction type, and limited attic space in concert with your proposal; I am approving your request for Alternate Means of Protection. Please note that this approval in no way constitutes a precedent and all Alternate Means of Protection are considered on a "case by case" basis. If you have any further questions or require any further information, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Rocque J. Yballa Fire Marshal cc: Building Department RECEIVED Planning Department 0 C T - 5 2006 CITY OF BURUNGAME PLANNING DEPT. 13QQ Rollins Road, -pur111"game, CA 94010 (650) 558-7600 650) 344-QQ50 Project Comments -� Date: 08/01/2005 To: ❑ City Engineer X Recycling Specialist ❑ Chief Building Official ❑ Fire Marshal ❑ City Arborist ❑ NPDES Coordinator ❑ City Attorney From: Planning Staff Subject: Request for environmental review, condominium permit, parking variance and lot coverage variance for a new, 7-story, 28-unit residential condominium at 1800 Trousdale Drive,zoned C-3(w/R- 4 overlay),APN:025-121-060 Staff Review: 08/08/2005 Applicant shall submit a Waste Reduction Plan and Recycling Deposit for this and all covered projects prior to any demolition, construction or permitting. Reviewed by: g Date: YN6 U � CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING DEPARTMENT BURLINGAME 501 PRIMROSE ROAD , BURLINGAME, CA 94010 rp �' 016H16504325 TEL: (650) 558-7250 • (650) 696-3790 00 9AO www.burlingame.org '' L Mailed from tl4U iu US POSTAGE Site: 1800 TROUSDALE DRIVE The City of Burlingame City Council announces the following public PUBLIC HEARING hearing on Monday, April 16, 2007 at 7:00 p.m. in the City NOTICE Hall Council Chambers, 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, CA: Review of Planning Commission's decision on an application for mitigated negative declaration, design review, condominium permit, tentative condominium map, front setback and lot coverage variances and conditional use permit for height for a 25-unit, 7- story residential condominium at 1800 TROUSDALE DRIVE zoned TW. (APN 025-121-060) Mailed: April 6, 2007 (Please refer to other side) CITY OF BURLINGAME a- A copy of the application and plans for this project may be reviewed prior to the meeting at the Planning Department at 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, California. If you challenge the subject application(s) in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing, described in the notice or in written`correspondence delivered to the city at or prior to the public hearing. Property owners who receive this notice are responsible for informing their tenants about this notice. For additional 'information, please call (650) 558-7250. Thank you. Margaret Monroe City Planner PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE (Please refer to other side) �� ��4y�x s� vy F%"'.. � ��xc �`'r*�.. �,� �` " y yyy* 1 % i (Rs�� }� .. R �, ;� 4 � a°�a Yrs .:.Y S"� � sem• y A � 4 � oma• k a d; F t � .,�j,„, .ie. ' sa^T, 9 'y� �^.i�,y, :wd' ��ti._ :r y ` ^ � y, `�� .r' 'i• (R.: e�h. ''.{,�a"”, x•`":,�n f�� � " 4�'a 5. 1+.. .Fit �.f�C„4>, 1 �} � ;�` { ::, �'� -• .,. ! �a�' few > �� � a $ yX *• yr f�. r us > 31'x' • , +�, ' LLfx' i z�. • � yt� ♦ p tl • l y�' � b _ r .� �; a y.� ''"4k,. .'. �M _ _ � "1� 'fes, � A � • • +� l ,40 Sea-, �- � T x • w Vdfi " y , f� • �'' ���7 tsu 4 �tQ� /i� OY+• C r+ "1l x, A A a ` , s j 'C��_ ! rx `Y^ id"y.�.>•se � � jq � ` � �f Kn♦ �:q .f � _ d� 4J w. J�, e ,S, , a � r ' •♦ P J : c# ,ryrk` 3•r M, u ' - Y ".; � s FLS :. � � �4 y,R1""n"s-'.w' LSk •.f tf� ee„ `e = �I="*T '�`w.r' /t . � i•CX ^'4. � a �'X>^1 � �x"i•�a�� � y' � � .r"y R�r4�d 1,a4 x� 1r, , H • �'• °�. `✓i.° �.'y`V`� �' .t,3 .t� r"" 'k +,s k�^{ 4`' �'A�' • �P 4. � . •+ % •�+,� \�: / r r _ n £ , •fes 3 f r r S: J • v-Tdw40 t L T • Lr ro, '� r r,. `4f yC' `a°y � 3" 'SF2 /:.. � .. .��•".,- sem, �� � *' z �.�:' ��� � ty ��� -.. .. ,rte. � >.. '`-' '�`: % '� ., ,. �' C•a .Y 4,"^.' 'e' .� tl' Y� " `k A' '4: -1.'i.:`, .-, ` � �� ', RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPROVING MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION, DESIGN REVIEW, RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM PERMIT, FRONT SETBACK VARIANCE AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS FOR HEIGHT AND LOT COVERAGE RESOLVED, by the CITY COUNCIL of the City of Burlingame that: WHEREAS, an application has been made for mitigated negative declaration, design review, residential condominium permit tentative condominium map front setback and variance and conditional use permits for height and lot coverage for a new, seven-story, 25-unit residential condominium at 1800 Trousdale Drive zoned TW Paul Bogatsky, property owner, APN: 025-121 -060; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on said application on March 26, 2007, at which time said application was approved; WHEREAS, this matters was called up to City Council and a hearing was held on April 16, 20077 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 Council 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 a mitigated negative declaration, per Mitigated Negative Declaration NO. ND-543-P, is hereby approved. 2. Said design review, condominium permit, tentative condominium map, front setback variance and conditional use permits for height and lot coverage are approved, subject to the conditions set forth in Exhibit "A" attached hereto. Findings for the design review, condominium permit, tentative condominium map, front setback variance and conditional use permits for height and lot coverage 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 19 , DORIS MORTENSON, 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 16th day of April, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: �. ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: City Clerk EXHIBIT "A" Conditions of approval for mitigated negative declaration, design review, tentative condominium map, condominium permit, front setback variance and conditional use permits for height and lot coverage -� 1800 Trousdale Drive Effective April 16, 2007 1. that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department date stamped March 14, 2007, sheets A0.1, A.1, A2.1, A2.1.1, A2.2 through A2.7, A3.1 through A3.4, A4.1, A4.2, A5.1 through A5.9, Ground Floor Landscape Plan and Podium Level Landscape Plan, and Boundary and Topographic Survey Plan and Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map; and that the portions of the trellises on the front elevation shown to be 2x10's shall be increased to at least 4x 10 over the 6x6 posts; 2. that building materials for this project shall be stored on this property or managed from another property in the area as approved by the City Engineer; that all employee parking and equipment parking for this construction project shall be provided on the site or shall be provided on another site in the immediate area as approved by the City Engineer; that no mitigations proposed for materials storage, equipment storage and staging, or employee parking shall involve the Plaza Shopping Center parking or any of its facilities; 3. that the maximum elevation at the top of the roof ridge shall not exceed elevation 117.18" as measured from the average elevation at the top of the curb along Trousdale Drive (42.18') for a maximum height of 75'-0", and that the top of each floor and final roof ridge shall be surveyed and approved by the City Engineer as the framing proceeds and prior to final framing and roofing inspections. The lower level garage floor finished floor elevation shall be elevation 33.5'; at-grade garage level finished floor elevation shall be elevation 42.5'; first floor above garage finished floor shall be elevation 53.5% second floor finished floor shall be elevation 63.5% third floor finished floor shall be elevation 73.5% fourth floor finished floor shall be elevation 83.5% sixth floor loft finished floor shall be elevation 102.5'; and the top of ridge elevation shall be no more than 117.18'. Should any framing exceed the stated elevation at any point it shall be removed or adjusted so that the final height of the structure with roof shall not exceed the maximum height shown on the approved plans; 4. that any changes to the size or envelope of the building, which would include expanding the footprint or floor area of the structure, replacing or relocating windows or changing the roof height or pitch, shall be subject to Planning Commission review; 5. 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; 6. that the backflow prevention device and post indicator valve (PIV) shall be located and screened by landscaping so they will be hidden from both the street and project residents; 7. that the conditions of the City Engineer's June 21, 2006, memo, the Chief Building Official's August 2, 2005, memo, the Fire Marshal's August 12, 2005 and September 3, 2006 memos, the NPDES Coordinator's August 15, 2005, memo and the Recycling Specialist's August 8, 2005, -� memo shall be met; -2- EXHIBIT "A" Conditions of approval for mitigated negative declaration, design review, tentative condominium map, condominium permit, front setback variance and conditional use permits for height and lot coverage 1800 Trousdale Drive Effective April 16, 2007 8. that storage of construction materials and equipment on the street or in the public right-of-way shall be prohibited; 9. that prior to issuance of a building permit for the project, the applicant shall pay the first half of the North Burlingame Rollins Road Development fee in the amount of$12,593.70, made payable to the City of Burlingame and submitted to the Planning Department; 10. that prior to scheduling the final framing inspection for the condominium building, the applicant shall pay the second half of the North Burlingame Rollins Road Development fee in the amount of $12,593.70, made payable to the City of Burlingame and submitted to the Planning Department; 11. that prior to issuance of a building permit for the project, the applicant shall enter into an agreement with the City to establish the affordability of the three below market rate units required as a part of this project; the applicant shall also submit a below market rate housing plan which shall describe in detail the applicant's proposal for a third party to meet and manage the inclusionary housing requirements as required by Chapter 25.63 of the Burlingame Municipal Code; the applicant shall enter into an agreement with a third-party non-profit organization approved by the City to administer the program; �— 12. that 'guest parking stall' shall be marked on the three guest parking spaces and designated on the final map and plans, these stalls shall not be assigned to any unit, but shall be owned and maintained by the condominium association, and the guest stalls shall always be accessible for parking and not be separately enclosed or used for resident storage; and that in addition to the three guest parking stalls, and one service vehicle parking stall, 52 parking spaces shall be available on site for owners, and none of the on-site parking shall be rented, leased or sold to anyone who does not own a unit on the site; 13. that the Covenants Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs) for the condominium project shall require that the three guest parking stalls shall be reserved for guests only and shall not be used by condominium residents; 14. that the final inspection shall be completed and a certificate of occupancy issued before the close of escrow on the sale of each unit; 15. that the developer shall provide to the initial purchaser of each unit and to the board of directors of the condominium association, an owner purchaser manual which shall contain the name and address of all contractors who performed work on the project, copies of all warranties or guarantees of appliances and fixtures and the estimated life expectancy of all depreciable component parts of the property, including but not limited to the roof, painting, common area carpets, drapes and furniture; `. 16. that the trash receptacles, furnaces, and water heaters shall be shown in a legal compartment outside the required parking and landscaping and in conformance with zoning and California Building and Fire Code requirements before a building permit is issued; -3- EXHIBIT "A" Conditions of approval for mitigated negative declaration, design review, tentative condominium map, --� condominium permit, front setback variance and conditional use permits for height and lot coverage 1800 Trousdale Drive Effective April 16, 2007 17. that the security gate system across the right side entrance driveway shall be installed a minimum 20'-0' back from the front property line; the security gate system shall include an intercom system connected to each dwelling which allows residents to communicate with guests and to provide guest access to the parking area by pushing a button inside their units; 18. that prior to scheduling the foundation inspection a licensed surveyor shall locate the property corners, set the building envelope; 19. 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; 20. that prior to scheduling the framing inspection the project architect or residential designer, or another architect or residential design professional, shall provide an architectural certification that the architectural details shown in the approved design which should be evident at framing, such as window locations and bays, are built as shown on the approved plans; architectural certification documenting framing compliance with approved design shall be submitted to the Building Division before the final framing inspection shall be scheduled; 21. that prior to scheduling the roof deck inspection, a licensed surveyor shall establish the height of the roof ridge and provide certification of that height; 22. that trash enclosures and dumpster areas shall be covered and protected from roof and surface drainage and that if water cannot be diverted from these areas, a self-contained drainage system shall be provided that discharges to an interceptor; 23. that this project shall comply with the state-mandated water conservation program, and a complete Irrigation Water Management and Conservation Plan together with complete landscape and irrigation plans shall be provided at the time of building permit application; 24. that all site catch basins and drainage inlets flowing to the bay shall be stenciled. All catch basins shall be protected during construction to prevent debris from entering; 25. that project approvals shall be conditioned upon installation of an emergency generator to power the sump pump system; and the sump pump shall be redundant in all mechanical and electrical aspects (i.e., dual pumps, controls, level sensors, etc.). Emergency generators shall be housed so that they meet the City's noise requirement; 26. 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; 27. that in lieu of meeting the requirement specific to fire apparatus access required by Section 902.2.1, Uniform Fire Code, as adopted by Burlingame Municipal Code 17.04, the project applicant shall extend the required Class I Standpipe outlets to garage stair landings in accordance -4- EXHIBIT "A" Conditions of approval for mitigated negative declaration, design review, tentative condominium map, condominium permit, front setback variance and conditional use permits for height and lot coverage 1800 Trousdale Drive Effective April 16, 2007 with fire department approved locations, and install Quick Response Sprinklers throughout the garage; 28. that the proposed project shall comply with construction standards and seismic design criteria contained in the Building Code as adopted by the City; 29. that before construction of the proposed project, per the Building Code, the project applicant shall obtain a site-specific soils report that identifies any potentially unsuitable soil conditions (such as expansive, liquefiable, or compressive soils) and contains appropriate recommendations for foundation type and design criteria, including provisions to reduce the effects of expansive soils. The recommendations made in the soils report for ground preparation and earthwork shall be incorporated in the construction design. The soils evaluations shall be conducted by registered soil professionals, and the measures to eliminate inappropriate soil conditions must be applied. The design for soil support of foundations shall conform to the analysis and implementation criteria described in the Building Code, Chapters 16, 18, and A33; 30. that a site-specific evaluation of soil conditions required by the City shall be completed as part of the building permit process and shall contain recommendations for ground preparation and earthwork specific to the project site that would become an integral part the construction design. Recommendations shall be included in the excavation and construction plans for the proposed proj ect; 31. that although the proposed project would be exempt from preparing and implementing a project- specific SWPPP, because the City of Burlingame is a member of the STOPPP, the proposed project shall obtain coverage under STOPPP's Phase I Municipal Stormwater Permit and comply with performance standards set forth by STOPPP's Stormwater Management Plan. The City Storm Water Management and Discharge Control Ordinance (Municipal Code Chapter 15.14; Ordinance 1503 Section 1; June 20, 1994) would also be applied to the proposed project. In addition, the project applicants shall perform the following actions as uniformly required conditions of project approval, as identified by the City's NPDES Coordinator upon submittal of project applications to the City: • Implement appropriate stormwater best management practices (BMPs) to minimize pesticide usage in accordance with the City's New Development/Redevelopment Landscaping Fact Sheet. • Incorporate applicable structural source control measures to minimize stormwater pollutants in accordance with the City's Model List of Structural Source Control Measures. • Identify the responsible party who would be responsible for the operation and maintenance of the permanent post-construction stormwater treatment measure(s). Prior to issuance of a final building permit, submit a completed, notarized Stormwater Treatment Measure Maintenance Agreement; 32. that the proposed project shall comply with City grading requirements specified in Section 18.20 of the Municipal Code; -5- EXHIBIT "A" Conditions of approval for mitigated negative declaration, design review, tentative condominium map, condominium permit, front setback variance and conditional use permits for height and lot coverage 1800 Trousdale Drive Effective April 16, 2007 33. that the proposed project shall comply with the City's Model Efficient Landscape Ordinance (Municipal Code Section 18.17.001; Ordinance 1476 Section 1; January 4, 1993), thereby reducing the amount of project site runoff polluted by landscape chemicals; 34. that the project applicant shall ensure implementation of the following mitigation measures during project construction, in accordance with BAAQMD standard mitigation requirements: • Water all active construction areas at least twice daily. • Cover all trucks hauling soil, sand, and other loose materials or require all trucks to maintain at least two feet of freeboard. • Pave, apply water three times daily, or apply(non-toxic) soil stabilizers on all unpaved access roads, parking areas and staging areas at construction sites. • Sweep daily(with water sweepers) all paved access roads,parking areas and staging areas at construction sites. • Sweep streets daily(with water sweepers) if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent public streets; 35. that the project applicant shall prepare and implement a construction phasing plan and traffic management plan that defines how traffic operations would be managed and maintained during each phase of construction. The plan should be developed with the direct participation of the City of Burlingame. To the maximum practical extent, the plan should: • Detail how access will be maintained to individual properties where construction activities may interfere with ingress and egress. Any driveway closures shall take place during non- business hours. • Specify predetermined haul routes from staging areas to construction sites and to disposal areas of agreement with the City prior to construction. The routes shall follow streets and highways that provide the safest route and have the least impact on traffic. • During construction, require the contractor to provide information to the public using signs,press releases, and other media tools of traffic closures, detours or temporary displacement of left-turn lanes. • Identify a single phone number that property owners and businesses can call for construction scheduling,phasing, and duration information, as well as for complaints. • Identify construction activities that must take place during off-peak traffic hours or result in temporary road closures due to concerns regarding traffic safety or traffic congestion. Any road closures will be done at night under ordinary circumstances. If unforeseen circumstances require road closing during the day, the City of Burlingame should be consulted; -6- EXHIBIT "A" Conditions of approval for mitigated negative declaration, design review, tentative condominium map, condominium permit, front setback variance and conditional use permits for height and lot coverage 1800 Trousdale Drive Effective April 16, 2007 36. that in order to improve the ability of vehicles to turn from the lower level ramp to the driveway, the project has been revised so that the west driveway is 12 feet wide; 37. that the proposed project driveways shall be secured with an automatic gate system that would allow delivery vehicles to enter and exit the driveways with an opener. The entrance gate shall also provide an intercom system that would allow delivery vehicles to call from the entrance. Furthermore, rolling dumpsters shall be acquired by the project applicant, which can be maneuvered outside of the parking garage to the curb, to facilitate garbage pickup from Trousdale Avenue; 38. that the project applicant shall include in the proposed project a bicycle parking area that is 12 feet by 21 feet, in the lower level of the parking garage, as indicated in the site plan which is sufficient space for approximately 25 bicycles; 39. 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 should be conducted by a qualified wildlife biologist no earlier than 14 days prior to the removal of trees, shrubs, grassland vegetation, buildings, grading, or other construction activity. Survey results shall be valid for 21 days following the survey. 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; 40. that the trees proposed to be removed shall be evaluated by a licensed arborist whose report shall be reviewed by the City arborist to determine whether they are "protected trees" per Section 11.06.020 of the Burlingame Municipal Code and whether a tree removal permit is appropriate. If any trees proposed to be removed are protected trees, the City Arborist shall make a determination regarding the removal and replacement of these trees. As the proposed landscaping plan includes the planting of 16 new trees, the City Arborist may determine that the proposed landscaping plan is sufficient and no other replacement trees are required. • The Municipal Code includes the following requirements regarding replacement trees. • Replacement shall be three 15-gallon size, one 24-inch box size, or one 36-inch box size landscape tree(s) for each tree removed; and • Any tree removed without a valid permit shall be replaced by two 24-inch box size, or two 36-inch box size landscape trees for each tree removed; and Replacement of a tree may be waived by the director if a sufficient number of trees exists on the property to meet all other requirements of the Urban Reforestation and Tree Protection Ordinance; and -7- EXHIBIT "A" Conditions of approval for mitigated negative declaration, design review, tentative condominium map, --� condominium permit, front setback variance and conditional use permits for height and lot coverage 1800 Trousdale Drive Effective April 16, 2007 • Size and number of the replacement tree(s) shall be determined by the director and shall be based on the species, location and value of the tree(s) removed; and • If replacement trees cannot be planted on the property, payment of equal value shall be made to the City. Such payments shall be deposited in the tree-planting fund to be drawn upon for public tree planting; 41. that the project applicant 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; 42. that as required by BAAQMD Regulation 11, Rule 2, the proposed project shall implement preventative measures during demolition and removal of all asbestos containing materials (ACMs) to prevent emissions of asbestos into the air. The proposed project shall also remove and dispose of all asbestos and PCB-containing materials according to Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) regulations and comply with the Cal/OSHA guidelines for worker safety during removal; -8- EXHIBIT "A" Conditions of approval for mitigated negative declaration, design review, tentative condominium map, condominium permit, front setback variance and conditional use permits for height and lot coverage 1800 Trousdale Drive Effective April 16, 2007 43. that the project applicant shall abide by its declared building height as specified in the FAA determination for the proposed project. The project applicant shall also ensure that construction equipment for the proposed project (e.g. cranes) shall not exceed the maximum height restriction specified in the San Francisco Airport Land Use Plan for the project site; 44. that if markings or lighting are to be included in the proposed project, the project applicant shall ensure that they are installed and maintained according to FAA guidelines; 45. that the applicant shall incorporate the following practices into the construction documents to be implemented by the project contractor. These control measures, such as installation of noise control devices (e.g. mufflers), selection of quieter machinery, and other noise control measures (e.g. surrounding stationary equipment with noise barriers), all of which would not require major equipment redesign. a. Maximize 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. Prohibit 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 and schools, are avoided as much as possible. f. The project applicant shall designate a"disturbance coordinator" for construction activities. The coordinator would be responsible for responding to any local complaints regarding construction noise and vibration. The coordinator would determine the cause of the noise or vibration complaint and would implement reasonable measures to correct the problem. g. The construction contractor shall send advance notice to neighborhood residents within 50 feet of the project site regarding the construction schedule and including the telephone number for the disturbance coordinator at the construction site; -9- EXHIBIT "A" Conditions of approval for mitigated negative declaration, design review, tentative condominium map, --� condominium permit, front setback variance and conditional use permits for height and lot coverage 1800 Trousdale Drive Effective April 16,2007 46. that the project applicant shall incorporate the following practice into the construction documents to be implemented by the project contractor. The project applicant shall require that loaded trucks and other vibration-generating equipment avoid areas of the project site that are located near existing residential uses to the maximum extent compatible with project construction goals; 47. that the project applicant shall include in the final project design noise insulation features that would effectively maintain interior noise levels of 45 dBA or less; 48. that the existing sanitary sewer on site shall be examined by the City after project construction to evaluate the pipe's condition. If the City Engineer determines that the pipe is substandard or if the pipe has been damaged by project construction, the pipe shall be replaced or repaired by the project applicant to the City Engineer's satisfaction; 49. that if the project applicant does not provide a 12-foot wide driveway, the project applicant shall be required to purchase maintenance equipment for the City that can access the on-site sewer easement through the proposed 9.5-foot-wide driveway; 50. that per the City's Construction and Demolition Waste Recycling Requirement, the project applicant shall submit a waste reduction plan that demonstrates that at least 50 percent of the construction and demolition waste can be recycled; 51. that the project applicant shall design and locate all exterior lighting so that the cone of light and/or glare from the lighting elements is kept entirely on the project site on or below the top of any fence, hedge, or wall at the site's property line, as required by the Burlingame Municipal Code Section 18.16.030 (pertaining to light spillage off site in commercial or residential areas). All wall mounted up-lighting shall be excluded from the proposed project. All project lighting shall comply with requirements of the California Energy Commission and the Illuminating Engineering Society of North America for illumination levels; and 52. that the following provisions shall be incorporated into the grading and construction contracts to address the potential to encounter currently unknown cultural resources: a. Prior to the initiation of construction or ground-disturbing activities, all construction personnel shall receive environmental training that will include discussion of the possibility of buried cultural and paleontological resources, including training to recognize such possible buried cultural resources, as well as the procedure to follow if such cultural resources are encountered. b. Retain Project Archaeologist. Since the project area contains a portion of one recorded Native American archeological resource, and other previously unknown prehistoric or historic cultural deposits may be encountered elsewhere in the project site during excavations, the City shall retain the services of a qualified archaeological consultant --� meeting federal criteria under 36 CFR 61, and who has expertise in California prehistory and urban historical archaeology. -10- EXHIBIT "A" Conditions of approval for mitigated negative declaration, design review, tentative condominium map, condominium permit, front setback variance and conditional use permits for height and lot coverage 1800 Trousdale Drive Effective April 16, 2007 C. If potential historical or unique archaeological resources are discovered during construction, all work in the immediate vicinity 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. The immediate vicinity wherein work shall be suspended shall be approximately 50 feet from the discovery or within an appropriate distance to be determined by the archaeologist or cultural resources consultant. 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. d. If the find is determined to be an 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 archaeological or cultural resources consultant, and shall result in detailed technical reports. Such reports 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. e. 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. f. 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. -11- r/4 CITY STAFF REPORT It BURUNGAME AGENDA ITEM # 6c MTG. "•TE° 4UNE DATE April 16, 2007 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL SUBMI 44, BY DATE: April 6, 2007 A PROVED FROM: Jesus Nava, Finance Director/Treasurer 558-7222 SUBJECT: Resolution of the City Council of the City of Burlingame Approving the Master Fee Schedule for City Services for FY 2007-08 RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve the Resolution implementing adjustments to the City of Burlingame's Master Fee Schedule for FY 2007-08. BACKGROUND: The City Council held its annual Budget Policy Setting Session on Wednesday, February 28, 2007. At that time, the City Council directed that city staff adjust city fees to reflect the three percent (3%) increase in employee costs that was recommended for FY 07-08. The practice of making incremental annual increases in city fees was adopted by the City Council in 2003 with the understanding that increases would not be automatic but would require an annual review and approval by the City Council. In addition to the 3% fee adjustments, the following changes are also incorporated into the schedule: Community Development Department - Arborist review of building permit applications is increased by 5.75% to reflect actual cost of services. - Arborist review of landscaping plans is increased by 11 % to reflect actual cost of services. Public Works Department - Refundable bond for encroachment permits is added to the fee schedule for reference (not an actual fee). _Fire Department - "Knox-Box" fee is deleted because it is no longer sold locally for Fire Department use. Parks & Recreation Department - Field Use for Season By Burlingame Based, Non-profit, Youth Sports Groups o From $5 to $ 10 per player (Burlingame Resident) o From $25 to $30 per player (Non-Burlingame Resident) SAMaster Fee Schedu\Council Report - 2007 Master Fee Schedule.doc 1 4/6/2007 - Washington Park Main Ball field—Group C o From $45 to $50 per hour(Non-Burlingame Resident) - Washington Park Bullpen—Group C o From $5 to $20 per hour (Burlingame Resident) o From $10 to $20 per hour(Non-Burlingame Resident) - Field Lights (Washington Park Main Ball field, Murray Field & Bayside) o From $20 to $25 per hour - Small Picnic Area o From $75 to $50 (plus $50 refundable cleaning deposit) (Burlingame Resident) o No change (Non-Burlingame Resident) - Large Picnic Area o No Change in Rental, Refundable cleaning deposit from $50 to $100 (Burlingame Resident) o From $100 to $125 for Rental, Refundable cleaning deposit from $50 to $100 (Non- Burlingame Resident) - Recreation Classes Registration Fee o From $7.00 to $8.00 The revised Master Fee Schedule shall become effective on July 1, 2007 ATTACHMENTS: 1.) Resolution of the City Council of the City of Burlingame Approving The Master Fee Schedule for City Services for FY 2007-08 2.) City of Burlingame Master Fee Schedule for FY 2007-08 SAMaster Fee Schedu\Council Report-2007 Master Fee Schedule.doc 2 4/6/2007 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME APPROVING 2007 MASTER FEE SCHEDULE FOR CITY SERVICES WHEREAS,the City regularly reviews the fees that it charges to persons seeking specific services or use of City facilities; and WHEREAS, in order to ensure that the cost of such services is borne by the users in a fair and equitable manner, fees are adjusted to better reflect actual costs to the City and the City's taxpayers in providing those services and facilities; and WHEREAS,the increased fees to be charged by the Planning and Building Departments and the development fees charged by the Fire Department and the Engineering Division cannot go into effect for sixty (60) days after adoption of this Resolution pursuant to Government Code section 66017,so therefore,fee changes contained in the Master Fee Schedule shall become effective on July 1, 2006; and WHEREAS,while every effort has been made to establish a master schedule of fees,there may be existing fees in the Municipal Code or elsewhere that have been omitted and nothing in this resolution is intended to repeal those fees nor does this resolution affect in any way any taxes of any kind; and WHEREAS, certain fees proposed for water service to meters require adoption of an ordinance and are subject to the ordinance becoming effective, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: 1. The Master Fee Schedule contained in Exhibit A is approved and shall take effect on July 1, 2007. 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 , 2007, and was adopted thereafter by the following vote: 1 AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: City Clerk U:\FILES\RESO\masterfeesked2007.pin.wpd 2 � ITY 0, Q BURLINGAME �Hco 900 q ORATED JUNE 6 CI'* ty of B Master Fee Schedule Proposed for July 1, 2007 MASTER FEE SCHEDULE CITY-WIDE SERVICE CURRENT PROPOSED REFERENCE FEE FEE Returned Check $25.00 No change Resolution No. 31-2003 Copying of Routine Document $ .15 per page No change Resolution No. 31-2003 (Copies of sizes other than 8- %Z" by 11" or 8 - V2" by 14" or 11" by 17 or color copies will be charged at cost) To be paid in advance Audio tape copies (except for Police) If blank tape supplied $5.15 per tape $5.25 per tape Resolution No. 27-2006 If no tape supplied 1 $8.25 per tape $8.50 per tape Resolution No. 27-2006 CITY-WIDE FEES - 1 As ofAugust 21, 2006 MASTER FEE SCHEDULE ANIMAL CONTROL The following is found in Section 9.04.031 of the Burlingame Municipal Code(as of May 2, 2005): (a) License fees and penalties: (1)Unaltered dog (A) 1-year license $30.00 (which includes a$1.00 surcharge on all licenses for the Animal Population Trust Fund) (B) 3-year license $87.00 (C) 1-year license with senior discount $11.00 (D) 3-year license with senior discount $33.00 (2)Altered dog (A) 1-year license $12.00 (B) 3-year license $33.00 (C) 1-year license with senior discount $ 6.00 (D) 3-year license with senior discount $15.00 (3) Wolf-hybrid registration (A) Unaltered 1-year license $21.00 (B)Altered 1-year license $11.00 (4)Additional Penalties and Fees Dog/Wolf-hybrid (A) Late penalty $15.00 (B)Duplicate tag $ 5.00 (b)Redemption and shelter charges (1) Type A (large-size animals-horses, cows, etc.) (A) Impound cost $100.00 (B) Board cost per day $20.00 (C) Transportation cost $50.00 per animal (2) Type B (medium-size animals-hogs, sheep, etc.) (A) Impound cost $70.00 (B) Board cost per day $20.00 (C) Transportation cost $50.00 per use (3) Type C (dogs/wolf hybrids, cats) (A) Impound cost Altered/Unaltered (i)First offense, licensed &wearing tag $30.00/ 50.00 (ii) First offense, unlicensed or no tag $40.00/ 70.00 (iii) Second offense $60.00/ 80.00 (iv) Third offense $90.00/ 100.00 (v)Fourth offense $120.00/ 140.00 (vi) Fifth offense and up $150.00/ 170.00 ANIMAL CONTROL FEES - 1 As ofAugust 21, 2006 (B) Board costs (i) Dogs/wolf hybrids $15.00 per day (ii) Cats $13.00 per day (4) Type D (small-size animals-birds, hamsters, etc.) (A) Impound cost $15.00 (B) Board cost per day $ 5.00 (c) Adoption Fees Dogs $70.00 Cats $70.00 Rabbits $40.00 Mice $ 4.00 Rats $ 5.00 Guinea Pig $12.00 Hamster $ 8.00 Pigeon/Dove $ 3.00 Duck/Goose/Chicken $ 5.00 Turtle $ 5.00 Pigs $35.00 (d) Surrender, Euthanasia and Dead on Arrival Disposal Fees Surrender Euthanasia DOA Disposal Dog/Cat $20.00 $40.00 $20.00 Rabbit/Small Animal $20.00 $15.00 $20.00 Litter of three or more $30.00 $30.00 $20.00 Bird/Fowl $20.00 $10.00 $20.00 All Exotic Animals $20.00 $20.00 $20.00 Farm Animal $35.00 $50.00 - $100.00 $50.00 - $100.00 (to be determined (to be determined individually) individually) (e) Quarantine fee $35.00 (f) Dangerous animal permit fee $200.00 (g) Field return fee $35.00 (h) Property inspection fee $25.00 (i) Breeding permit fee $50.00 0)Fancier's permit fee $50.00 per household (k) The Division of Animal Control may establish license discounts for recognized animal rescue organizations and adoption discounts for senior citizens. ANIMAL CONTROL FEES - 2 As of August 21, 2006 MASTER FEE SCHEDULE BUILDING DIVISION SERVICE CURRENT PROPOSED REFERENCE FEE FEE BUILDING PERMIT FEES BASED ON TOTAL VALUATIONa ` , $1.00 to $500.00 $33.50 $34.50 Resolution No. 27-2006 $501.00 to $2,000.00 $33.50 for the $34.50 for the Resolution No. 27-2006 first $500.00 first $500.00 plus $4.65 for plus $4.80 for each each additional additional $100.00 or $100.00 or fraction fraction thereof to and thereof to and including including $2,000.00 $2,000.00 $2,001.00 to $25,000.00 $96.30 for the $99.20 for the Resolution No. 27-2006 first first $2,000.00 $2,000.00 plus $20.20 for plus $19.60 each additional for each $1,000.00 or additional fraction $1,000.00 or thereof to and fraction including thereof to and $25,000.00 including $25,000.00 BUILDING- 1 Proposed on April 16, 2007 SERVICE CURRENT PROPOSED REFERENCE FEE FEE $25,001.00 to $50,000.00 $540.25 for $556.45 for Resolution No. 27-2006 the first the first $25,000.00 $25,000.00 plus $14.40 plus $14.85 for for each each additional additional $1,000.00 or $1,000.00 or fraction fraction thereof to and thereof to and including including $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $50,001.00 to $100,000.00 $889.40 for $916.10 for Resolution No. 27-2006 the first the first $50,000.00 $50,000.00 plus $9.80 for plus $10.10 for each each additional additional $1,000.00 or $1,000.00 or fraction fraction thereof to and thereof to and including including $100,000.00 $100,000.00 $101,000.00 to $500,000.00 $1,372.00 for $1,413.20 for Resolution No. 27-2006 the first the first $100,000.00 $100,000.00 plus $8.25 for plus $8.50 for each each additional additional $1,000.00 or $1,000.00 or fraction fraction thereof to and thereof to and including including $500,000.00 $500,000.00 BUILDING- 2 Proposed on April 16, 2007 SERVICE CURRENT PROPOSED REFERENCE FEE FEE $501,000.00 to $1,000,000.00 $4,461.50 for $4,595.35 for Resolution No. 27-2006 the first the first $500,000.00 $500,000.00 plus $6.70 for plus $6.90 for each each additional additional $1,000.00 or $1,000.00 or fraction fraction thereof to and thereof to and including including $1,000,000.00 $1,000,000.00 More than $1,000,000.00 $7,743.50 for $7,975.80 for Resolution No. 27-2006 the first the first $1,000,000.00 $1,000,000.00 plus $5.15 for plus $5.30 for each each additional additional $1,000.00 or $1,000.00 or fraction fraction thereof thereof Inspections outside normal business hours $82.50 per $85.00 per Resolution No. 27-2006 (minimum charge is for four hours) hour hour Reinspection fees (minimum—one hour) $82.50 per $85.00 per Resolution No. 27-2006 hour hour PLAN REVIEW FEES , � t Basic Fee 65% of No change Resolution No. 104- Building 2002 Permit Fee Energy Plan Check Fee (where applicable) Additional No change Resolution No. 104- 25% of 2002 Building Permit Fee Disabled Access Plan Check Fee (where Additional No change Resolution No. 104- applicable) 35% of 2002 Building Permit Fee BUILDING - 3 Proposed on April 16, 2007 SERVICE CURRENT PROPOSED REFERENCE FEE FEE Planning Department Plan Check Fee (where Additional No change Resolution No. 104- applicable) (minimum fee of$80.00) 15% of 2002 Building Permit Fee Plan Revisions for Planning Department $82.50 $85.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Plan Revisions Subsequent to Permit Issuance $82.50 per $85.00 per Resolution No. 27-2006 hour plus hour plus Cost Cost of Any of Any Additional Additional Review Review Engineering Division Plan Review (where Additional No change Resolution No. 104- applicable) 25% of 2002 Building Permit Fee Imaging Fee Additional No change Resolution No. 104- 5%of 2002 Building Permit Fee Arborist Review Additional Additional Resolution No. 1-2005 5% of 5.75% of Building Building Permit Fee Permit Fee PLUMBING PERMIT FEES (these fees do note ',,rMv include connections fees, such as for seer i ;`3 i connections or water meter fees charged byWk other City departments nor any fees charged by public utility companies) : 'n f For issuance of each plumbing permit' $33.50 $34.50 Resolution No. 27-2006 New Residential Building - including all $0.09 per No change Resolution No. 27-2006 plumbing fixtures, connections and gas outlets square foot of for new single- and multi-family buildings habitable area 'Following items are in addition to basic permit issuance fee BUILDING - 4 Proposed on April 16, 2007 SERVICE CURRENT PROPOSED REFERENCE FEE FEE 1. Fixtures and vents- for each plumbing $14.00 $14.50 Resolution No. 27-2006 fixture or trap (including water and waste piping and backflow prevention) 2. Sewer and interceptors- For each building sewer $33.50 $34.50 Resolution No. 27-2006 For each industrial waste pretreatment $27.80 $28.65 Resolution No. 27-2006 interceptor (except kitchen-type grease traps) 3. Water Piping and Water Heaters For installation alteration or repair of water $6.75 each $6.95 Resolution No. 27-2006 piping or water-treatment equipment For each water heater including vent $17.50 $18.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 4. Gas Piping Systems For each gas piping system of one to five $9.25 $9.55 Resolution No. 27-2006 outlets Resolution No. 27-2006 For each additional outlet over five $2.00 $2.10 5. Irrigation Systems and Backflow Prevention Devices Irrigation systems including backflow $20.60 $21.25 Resolution No. 27-2006 device(s) Other backflow prevention devices: $20.60 $21.25 Resolution No. 27-2006 2 inches (50.8 mm) and smaller Over 2 inches (50.8 mm) $33.50 $34.50 Resolution No. 27-2006 6. Swimming Pools For each swimming pool or spa, all plumbing: Public pool $127.50 $131.35 Resolution No. 27-2006 Public spa $82.50 $85.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Private pool $82.50 $85.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Private spa $41.25 $42.50 Resolution No. 27-2006 BUILDING - 5 Proposed on April 16, 2007 SERVICE CURRENT PROPOSED REFERENCE FEE FEE 7. Miscellaneous For each appliance or fixture for which no $14.00 $14.40 Resolution No. 27-2006 fee is listed Inspections outside normal business hours $82.50 per $85.00 per Resolution No. 27-2006 (minimum charge is for four hours) hour hour Reinspection fees (minimum—one hour) $82.50 per $85.00 per Resolution No. 27-2006 hour hour Inspections for which no fee is specifically $82.50 per $85.00 per Resolution No. 27-2006 indicated (minimum charge is one-half hour) hour hour Imaging fee Additional No change Resolution No. 104- 5% of 2002 plumbing permit fee Arborist Review Additional Delete—not Resolution No. 1-2005 5% of used plumbing permit fee Plan review where plans are required Additional No change Resolution No. 104- 25% of 2002 plumbing permit fee MECHANICAL PERMIT FEES (these fees doWA not include connections fees, such as for seer a connections or water meter fees charged by other City departments nor any fees charged by public utility companies) For issuance of each mechanical permit's $33.50 $34.50 Resolution No. 27-2006 New Residential Building - including all $0.09 per No change Resolution No. 27-2006 mechanical work including appliances, exhaust square foot of fans, ducts, and flues habitable area ##Following items are in addition to basic permit issuance fee BUILDING- 6 Proposed on April 16, 2007 SERVICE CURRENT PROPOSED REFERENCE FEE FEE 1. Furnaces To and including 100 MBTU $21.00 $21.65 Resolution No. 27-2006 Over 100 MBTU $28.00 $28.85 Resolution No. 27-2006 2. Boilers, compressors, absorption systems To and including 100 MBTU or 3HP $21.00 $21.65 Resolution No. 27-2006 Over 100 MBTU or 3 HP $39.00 $40.20 Resolution No. 27-2006 3. Air Conditioners $21.00 $21.65 Resolution No. 27-2006 5. Air Handlers To 10,000 CFM including ducting $14.00 each $14.40 each Resolution No. 27-2006 Over 10,000 CFM $21.00 each $21.65 each Resolution No. 27-2006 6. Ventilation and Exhaust Each ventilation fan attached to a single duct $10.50 each $10.80 each Resolution No. 27-2006 Each hood including ducts $21.00 each $21.65 each Resolution No. 27-2006 7. Miscellaneous For each appliance or piece of equipment $21.00 each $21.65 each Resolution No. 27-2006 not specifically listed above Inspections outside normal business hours $82.50 per $85.00 per Resolution No. 27-2006 (minimum charge is for four hours) hour hour Reinspection fees (minimum-one hour) $82.50 per $85.00 per Resolution No. 27-2006 hour hour Inspections for which no fee is specifically $82.50 per $85.00 per Resolution No. 27-2006 indicated (minimum charge is one-half hour) hour hour Imaging fee Additional No change Resolution No. 104- 5% of 2002 mechanical permit fee Plan review where plans are required Additional No change Resolution No. 104- 25% of 2002 mechanical permit fee BUILDING - 7 Proposed on April 16, 2007 SERVICE CURRENT PROPOSED REFERENCE FEE FEE ELECTRICAL PERMIT FEES (these fees doo,"r� not include connections fees, such as for sewer connections or water meter fees charged by other City departments nor any fees charged by public utility companies) � .:�. w, . For issuance of each electrical permit..# $33.50 $34.50 Resolution No. 27-2006 New Residential Building- including all wiring $0.09 per No change Resolution No. 27-2006 and electrical devices in or on each building, square foot of including service habitable area ###Following items are in addition to basic permit issuance fee BUILDING - 8 Proposed on April 16, 2007 SERVICE CURRENT PROPOSED REFERENCE FEE FEE SYSTEM FEE SCHEDULE Swimming Pools 1. Public swimming pools and spas $82.50 $85.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 including all wiring and electrical equipment 2. Private pools for single-family residences $66.50 $68.50 Resolution No. 27-2006 Temporary Power 1. Temporary service pole including all $33.50 $34.50 Resolution No. 27-2006 attached receptacles 2. Temporary power pole and wiring for $50.00 $51.50 Resolution No. 27-2006 construction sites, Christmas tree lots, etc. OR UNIT FEE SCHEDULE Receptacle, switch and light outlets 1. First 20 units $33.50 $34.50 Resolution No. 27-2006 2. Each additional $1.00 $1.05 Resolution No. 61-2004 Residential Appliances For fixed residential appliances including $6.75 each $7.00 each Resolution No. 27-2006 cooktops, ovens, air conditioning, garbage disposals, and similar devices not exceedingl HP in rating (For other types of air conditioners or other motor-driven appliances having larger ratings, see Power Apparatus below) Nonresidential Appliances Self-contained factory-wired non-residential $6.75 each $7.00 each Resolution No. 27-2006 appliances not exceeding 1 HP, KW, or kVA in rating including medical and dental devices; food, beverage and ice cream cabinets; illuminated showcases; drinking fountains; vending machines; laundry machines; etc. (For other types of devices having larger electrical ratings, see Power Apparatus below) BUILDING- 9 Proposed on April 16, 2007 SERVICE CURRENT PROPOSED REFERENCE FEE FEE Power Apparatus For motors, generators, air conditioners and heat pumps and commercial cooking devices as follows (ratings in horsepower, kilowatts, kilovolt-amperes, or kilovolt-amperes-reactive): 1. Up to 10 $17.00 $17.50 Resolution No. 27-2006 2. Over 10 to and including 100 $38.60 $39.75 Resolution No. 27-2006 3. Over 100 $105.00 $108.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Notes: a. For equipment or appliances having more than one motor, transformer, heater, etc., the sum of the combined ratings may be used. b. These fees include all switches, circuit breakers, contractors, thermostats, relays, and other related control equipment. Photo voltaic systems Up to 3000 watts $300.00 $309.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Over 3000 watts Plan Check $82.50 per $85.00 per Resolution No. 27-2006 hour hour Permit $300.00 $309.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Busways For trolleys and plug-in type busways $10.30 for $10.60 for Resolution No. 27-2006 each 100 feet each 100 feet (30,500 mm) (30,500 mm) or fraction or fraction thereof thereof Signs, Outline Lighting and Marquees 1. Signs, outline lighting, or marquees $33.50 each $34.50 each Resolution No. 27-2006 supplied from one circuit 2. For additional branch circuits within the $6.75 each $7.00 each Resolution No. 27-2006 same sign, outline lighting, or marquee BUILDING- 10 Proposed on April 16, 2007 SERVICE CURRENT PROPOSED REFERENCE FEE FEE Services 1. 600 volts or less and not over 200 $38.60 each $39.75 each Resolution No. 27-2006 amperes in rating 2. 600 volts or less, over 200 amperes to $88.60 each $91.25 each Resolution No. 27-2006 1,000 amperes 3. Over 600 volts or over 1,000 amperes $166.00 each $171.00 each Resolution No. 27-2006 Miscellaneous For apparatus, conduits, and conductors for $28.00 $28.85 Resolution No. 27-2006 which a permit is required but for which no fee is set forth Inspections outside normal business hours $82.50 per $85.00 per Resolution No. 27-2006 (minimum charge is for four hours) hour hour Reinspection fees (minimum—one hour) $82.50 per $85.00 per Resolution No. 27-2006 hour hour Inspections for which no fee is specifically $82.50 per $85.00 per Resolution No. 27-2006 indicated (minimum charge is one-half hour) hour hour Imaging fee Additional No change Resolution No. 104- 5%of 2002 electrical permit fee Plan review where plans are required Additional No change Resolution No. 104- 25% of 2002 electrical permit fee GENERAL FEES Appeal Fee to Planning Commission from $135.00 $139.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Building Official Determination BUILDING - 11 Proposed on April 16, 2007 MASTER FEE SCHEDULE CITY CLERK SERVICE CURRENT PROPOSED REFERENCE FEE FEE Passport Application Acceptance $30.00 per Delete U.S. Department of application State Video recording of City Council meeting or $20.00 per No change Resolution No. 27-2006 other proceeding that has been video recorded VHS tape —to be paid in advance of copying recording $25.00 per No change Resolution No. 27-2006 DVD Audiotape of City Council meeting or other $5.15 per tape $5.25 per tape Resolution No. 27-2006 City proceeding that has been taped—to be if tape is if tape is paid in advance of copying tape supplied by supplied by requestor requestor $8.25 per tape $8.50 per tape Resolution No. 27-2006 if tape is not if tape is not supplied supplied All Certifications $5.15 each $5.25 each Resolution No. 27-2006 (new fee for other certifications) Filing of Nomination Papers $25.00 per No change Burlingame Municipal candidate Code section 2.20.020 (Ordinance No. 1703 (2003)) CITY CLERK- 1 Proposed on April 16, 2007 MASTER FEE SCHEDULE ENGINEERING SERVICE CURRENT PROPOSED REFERENCE FEE FEE ENCROACHMENT PERMITS Sewer Lateral Test $166.00 $170.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Sewer Lateral Replacement w/o Sidewalk $248.00 $256.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Water Service Connection w/o Sidewalk $331.00 $341.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Fire System Connection w/o Sidewalk $397.00 $409.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Curb Drain Installation $166.00 $170.00 plus Resolution No. 27-2006 $10.00 for (Sections 12.10.030/ every 10 12.08.020/ 12.04.030) square feet of sidewalk affected Sidewalk/Driveway up to 200 sf $298.00 plus $307.00 plus Resolution No. 27-2006 $.30 for each $.30 for each (Sections 12.10.030/ square foot square foot 12.08.020/ 12.04.030) over 200 over 200 Sidewalk Closure/Pedestrian Protection $176.00 $159.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Traffic Control $177.00 $182.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Block Party(includes up to 6 barricades) $50.00 plus No change Resolution No. 27-2006 $5.00 for each add't barricade over 6 Parking Permit $75.00 plus $80.00 plus Resolution No. 31-2005 $2/space per $2/space per (Section 13.32.020) day or meter day or meter rates rates ENGINEERING FEES - 1 Proposed on April 16, 2007 SERVICE CURRENT PROPOSED REFERENCE FEE FEE GENERALFEES Demolition Permit(in addition to any Building Department-issued Demolition or Construction Permit) Includes sewer and water replacement $877.00 $903.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Add fire line $221.00 $227.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Add curb drain $166.00 $170.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Add sidewalk closure $154.00 $159.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Add PG&E $221.00 $227.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Address Change $276.00 $284.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Transportation Fee $83.00 $85.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Building Moving $100.00 No change Section 18.07.030 Truck Terminal $250.00 No change Section 13.60.120 Hauling Permit $35.00 No change Section 13.60.080 application fee plus 1 cent per ton per mile SPECIAL ENCROACHMENT PERMITS Permanent structures, such as retaining walls, $359.00 $369.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 fences Right of Way User Fee based on square footage $2.00 per No change Resolution No. 31-2003 over 100 sf square foot Non-permanent installations, such as tables, $276.00 $284.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 chairs,planters DEPOSITS OR BONDS FOR ENCROACHMENT PERMIT WORK Openings in Public Right-of-Way not in $150 $300 Imposed on permit sidewalk or street conditions ENGINEERING FEES - 2 Proposed on April 16, 2007 SERVICE CURRENT PROPOSED REFERENCE FEE FEE Openings in Public Right-of-Way in sidewalk $8.00 per No change Imposed on permit (not in street) square foot in conditions sidewalk area, $300 minimum Street Roadway Opening(AC Pavement $8.00 per No change Imposed on permit Restoration) square foot in conditions paved area, $750 minimum Water Main Modification $1,500.00 per No change Imposed on permit connection conditions Sewer Main Modification $1,000.00 per No change Imposed on permit connection conditions Storm Drain Modification $1,000 per No change Imposed on permit connection conditions SUBDIVISION MAPS Lot Line Adjustment $474.00 $555.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 (Section 26.24.090) Lot Combination $52.00 $828.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 (Section 26.24.090) Subdivision Map $761.00 plus $1218.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 $107 for each plus $107 for (Sections 26.24.090/ additional lot each 26.16.151) over 5 additional lot over 5 Condominium Map $1,103.00 $1,765 plus Resolution No. 27-2006 plus $161.00 $265.00 for (Sections 26.24.090/ for each unit each unit 26.16.151) over 4 over 4 ZONING FEES TO BE COLLECTED BY PLANNING DEPARTMENT ENGINEERING FEES - 3 Proposed on April 16, 2007 SERVICE CURRENT PROPOSED REFERENCE FEE FEE Design Review Single Family Dwelling $94.00 $97.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 All others $129.00 plus $136.00 plus Resolution No. 27-2006 $350 if $350 if streetscape streetscape installation installation involved involved Environmental Review Traffic & Parking Studies $143.00 $148.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Creek Enclosures $607.00 $625.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Drainage and Utilities $143.00 $148.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 ENGINEERING FEES -4 Proposed on April 16, 2007 MASTER FEE SCHEDULE FINANCE DEPARTMENT SERVICE CURRENT PROPOSED REFERENCE FEE FEE Duplicate business license $10.00 No change Section 6.04.120 Application for first business license $35.00 No change Section 6.04.170 Submittal of surety bond for transient $150.00 for No change Resolution No. 27-2006 occupancy after expiration of bond every 15 days bond is late FINANCE FEES - 1 Proposed on April 16, 2007 MASTER FEE SCHEDULE FIRE SERVICE CURRENT PROPOSED REFERENCE FEE FEE CARE FACILITIES INSPECTION Pre-inspection of licensed community care $51.50-25 $53.00-25 Resolution No. 27-2006 facility persons or less persons or less $103.00 over $106.00 over 25 Resolution No. 27-2006 25 persons persons Residential Care Facilities $227.00 $233.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Large Family Day Care $113.50 $117.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Hospital/Institution $376.00 $387.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 RE-INSPECTIONS Second re-inspection $68.00 per $70.00 per Resolution No. 27-2006 inspection inspection Third and subsequent reinspections $103.00 per $106.00 per Resolution No. 61-2004 inspection inspection CONSTRUCTION FEES , Building or Planning Plan Check $113.50 per $117.00 per hour Resolution No. 27-2006 hour Expedite Building or Planning Check Fees $210.00 per $216.00 per hour Resolution No. 27-2006 (2 hour minimum) hour Consultation and Planning $149.50 per $154.00 per hour Resolution No. 27-2006 hour Fire Alarm Systems Permit for Monitoring System $57.00 $58.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Permit for Manual System $113.50 $117.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Permit for Automatic System $227.00 $233.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Permit for Combination System $273.00 $281.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 FIRE-1 Proposed on April 16, 2007 SERVICE CURRENT PROPOSED REFERENCE FEE FEE Fixed Extinguishing System Permit $227.00 $233.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Standpipe System Permit $227.00 $233.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Storage Tank (above or below ground) Permit $227.00 $233.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 SPRINKLER SYSTEMS One or two Family Dwelling Fire Sprinkler System (NFPA 13D) Permit $340.00 $350.00 (phase Resolution No. 27-2006 (phase inspections inspections billed at $117.00 billed at per hour) $113.50 per hour) Fire Pump Permit $113.50 $117.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Residential or Commercial Fire Sprinkler System (NFPA 13 or 13R) Permit— Single Story(incl. T.I.) $453.00 (phase $467.00 (phase Resolution No. 27-2006 Permit-Multi-story inspections inspections billed at billed at $117.00 $113.50 per per hour) hour) Fire Service Line Inspection $113.50 $117.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Alternate Means of Protection Review $149.50 per $154.00 per hour Resolution No. 27-2006 hour MISCELLANEOUS FEES AND PERMITS Now= Vegetation Management Inspection $227.00 + $233.00 + 20% Resolution No. 27-2006 20% of of contractor's contractor's fee fee FIRE-2 Proposed on April 16, 2007 SERVICE CURRENT PROPOSED REFERENCE FEE FEE Change of Use Inspection (usually triggered $62.00 $64.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 by new business license) Standby Service Firefighter $108.50 per $111.00 per hour Resolution No. 27-2006 hour (minimum of 3 (minimum of 3 hours) hours) Engine Company $309.00 per $318.00 per hour Resolution No. 27-2006 hour (minimum of 3 (minimum of 3 hours) hours) Photographs from investigations Cost of No change Resolution No. 61-2004 reproduction Fire Hydrant Flow Tests $113.50 per $117.00 per Resolution No. 27-2006 hydrant hydrant Work without a construction permit Double the No change Resolution No. 34-2005 permit fees Emergency Response Costs for Driving Costs No change Resolution No. 61-2004 under the Influence according to Personnel Schedule Below False Alarms $309.00 for 3 $318.00 for 3 to Resolution No. 27-2006 to 5 5 $463.50 for 6 $477.00 for 6 or or more more Hazardous Materials Clean-up/Response Costs No change Resolution No. 61-2004 according to Personnel Schedule Below plus actual equipment/ materials costs FIRE-3 Proposed on April 16, 2007 SERVICE CURRENT PROPOSED REFERENCE FEE FEE Personnel Costs Administration $51.50 per $53.00 per hour Resolution No. 27-2006 hour Firefighter $95.00 per $98.00 per hour Resolution No. 27-2006 hour Fire Captain $113.50 per $117.00 per hour Resolution No. 27-2006 hour Shift Inspector $98.00 per $101.00 per hour Resolution No. 27-2006 hour Fire Inspector $103.00 per $106.00 per hour Resolution No. 27-2006 hour Battalion Chief $124.00 per $127.00 per hour Resolution No. 27-2006 hour Fire Marshal $134.00 per $138.00 per hour Resolution No. 27-2006 hour Key Switch (Gate/Knox Box) $84.50 Delete Resolution No. 27-2006 GENERAL PERMITS r Christmas Tree Lot $68.50 $73.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Aerosol Products $182.00 $187.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Apartments, Hotels and Motels- 10 or less $ 83.00 $85.00 Resolution No. 61-2006 units Apartments, Hotels and Motels- 11 to 25 $101.00 $104.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 units Apartments, Hotels and Motels-26 or $137.00 $141.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 more units Asbestos removal $84.00 $86.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Automobile Wrecking Yard $182.00 $187.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Battery System $182.00 $187.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Carnivals and Fairs $328.00 $338.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Combustible Fiber Storage $133.00 $136.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Combustible Material Storage $182.00 $187.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 FIRE-4 Proposed on April 16, 2007 SERVICE CURRENT PROPOSED REFERENCE FEE FEE Compressed Gasses $182.00 $187.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Commercial Rubbish-Handling Operation $182.00 $187.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Cryogens $182.00 $187.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Dry Cleaning Plants $182.00 $187.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Dust-Producing Operations $182.00 $187.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Explosives or Blasting Agents $230.50 $237.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Fire Hydrants and Water Control Valves $113.50 $120.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Fireworks $190.50 $196.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Flammable or Combustible Liquids $377.25 $388.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Hazardous Materials $475.00 $489.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 High-Piled Combustible Storage-20,000 $268.00 $276.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 square feet or less High-Piled Combustible Storage-more $475.00 $489.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 than 20,000 square feet Hot-Work Operations $182.00 $187.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Liquefied Petroleum Gasses $182.00 $187.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Liquid- or gas-fueled Vehicles or $182.00 $187.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Equipment in Assembly Buildings Live Audiences $182.00 $187.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Lumber Yards storing in excess of 100,00 $279.50 $288.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 board Feet Magnesium Working $157.00 $162.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Mall, Covered-Display Booth $165.00 $170.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Mall, Covered-For Assembly Mall, Covered-With Open Flame $165.00 $170.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Mall, Covered-Display Fuel Powered $165.00 $170.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Equipment FIRE-5 Proposed on April 16, 2007 SERVICE CURRENT PROPOSED REFERENCE FEE FEE Motor Vehicle Fuel-Dispensing Stations $293.50 $302.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Open Burning $113.50 $117.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Organic Coating $182.00 $187.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Ovens, Industrial Baking and Drying $157.00 $162.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Parade Floats $165.00 $170.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Places of Assembly $353.00 $363.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Production Facilities $328.50 $338.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Pyrotechnical and Special Effects Material $293.50 $302.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Radioactive Materials $133.00 $136.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Refrigeration Equipment $279.50 $288.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Repair Garage $182.00 $187.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Spraying and Dipping $182.00 $187.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Tents, Canopies, and Temporary Membrane $190.50 $196.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Structures Tire Storage $157.00 $162.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Wood Products $157.00 $162.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 FIRE-6 Proposed on April 16, 2007 MASTER FEE SCHEDULE LIBRARY SERVICE CURRENT PROPOSED REFERENCE FEE FEE Photocopies $ .15 per page No change Resolution No. 31-2003 Internet/Database copies or printouts $ .15 per page No change Resolution No. 31-2003 Community Room Rental $75.00 No change Resolution No. 27-2006 Audio Visual Assistance When Requested $25.00 per No change Resolution No. 27-2006 hour Outside System Book Loan Cost charged No change Resolution No. 27-2006 by lending library PLS CONSORTIUM CONTROLLED FEES Hold Fee $ .75 per item No change PLS Overdue Fee for Adult $ .25 per item No change PLS Overdue Fee for Child $ .15 per item No change PLS Maximum Fee $6.00 per No change PLS book Lost Book Replacement Fee $5.00 per No change PLS item plus cost of replacement of item Replacement of Lost Card $1.00 No change PLS LIBRARY FEES - 1 Proposed on April 16, 2007 MASTER FEE SCHEDULE PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT Group Classifications for Purposes of Parks&Recreation Facilities Usage: Group A: Government agencies with Parks&Recreation service agreements with the City, such as Burlingame School District and SMUHSD Group B: Non-profit(501c(3))groups or organizations, such as AYSO, BYBA, Library Foundation. Group C: Private parties, commercial,business, and profit-making organizations, such as weddings, seminars, receptions FACILITY/SERVICE CURRENT FEE PROPOSED FEE REFERENCE INDOOR FACILITIES _; w�i ' Burlingame High School Main Gym Group A No charge No change Resolution No. 31-2003 Group B Burlingame Residents $15.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 61-2006 Non-residents $20.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 61-2006 Group C Burlingame Residents $30.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 27-2006 Non-residents $50.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 61-2006 Small Gym Group A No charge No change Resolution No. 31-2003 Group B Burlingame Residents $10.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 61-2006 Non-residents $15.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 61-2006 Group C Burlingame Residents $20.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 61-2006 Non-residents $25.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 61-2006 PARKS &REC - 2 Proposed on April 16, 2007 FACILITY/SERVICE CURRENT FEE PROPOSED FEE REFERENCE Other Indoor Facilities, except the Auditorium Group A No charge No change Resolution No. 31-2003 Group B Burlingame Residents $14.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 27-2006 Non-residents $18.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 27-2006 Group C Burlingame Residents $30.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 27-2006 Non-residents $36.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 27-2006 Auditorium Group A No charge No change Resolution No. 31-2003 Group B Burlingame Residents $30.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 27-2006 Non-residents $36.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 27-2006 Group C Burlingame Residents $77.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 61-2004 Non-residents $94.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 61-2004 Building Attendant' $22.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 27-2006 Weekend Custodian $80.00 No change Resolution No. 27-2006 Weekday Custodian $25.00 No change Resolution No. 31-2003 Extra,Non-Scheduled Hours $125 per hour No change Resolution No. 27-2006 Security Personnel` $60.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 27-2006 Tables/Chairs—up to 50 T$7.00 No change Resolution No. 31-2003 #Building Attendant or Security will be on duty 1 hour prior to andl hour after duration of activities at Recreation Center. Security fee will be charged for all private parties over 150 persons or serving alcoholic beverages. Building Attendant or Security will be on duty 1 hour prior to and 1 hour after duration of activities at Recreation Center. Security fee will be charged for all private parties over 150 persons or those serving alcoholic beverages. PARKS &REC - 3 Proposed on April 16, 2007 FACILITY/SERVICE CURRENT FEE PROPOSED FEE REFERENCE Tables/Chairs— 5 1-100 $15.00 No change Resolution No. 31-2003 Tables/Chairs—over 100 $20.00 No change Resolution No. 31-2003 Coffee Pots $10.00 per pot No change Resolution No. 31-2003 Wine/beer to be served $30.00 additional No change Resolution No. 31-2003 TV/VCR $10.00 No change Resolution No. 31-2003 Overhead Projector $10.00 No change Resolution No. 31-2003 Microphone $10.00 No change Resolution No. 31-2003 OUTDOOR FACILITIES Field Use for Season by $5 per resident $10 per resident Resolution No. 61-2006 Burlingame-based non-profit youth player per league; player per league; sports group $25/non-resident $30/non-resident player per league player per league PARKS &REC - 4 Proposed on April 16, 2007 FACILITY/SERVICE CURRENT FEE PROPOSED FEE REFERENCE Burlingame High School Stadium Field Group A No charge No change Resolution No. 31-2003 Group B Burlingame Residents $20.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 61-2006 Non-residents $30.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 61-2006 Group C Burlingame Residents $40.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 61-2006 Non-residents $50.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 31-2003 Stadium Track (Track only) Group A No charge No change Resolution No. 61-2006 Group B Burlingame Residents $10.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 61-2006 Non-residents $15.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 61-2006 Group C Burlingame Residents $20.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 61-2006 Non-residents $25.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 61-2006 Stadium Lights $25.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 61-2006 Burlinfzame High School Back Field Group A No charge No change Resolution No. 31-2003 Group B Burlingame Residents $15.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 61-2006 Non-residents $20.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 31-2003 Group C Burlingame Residents $20.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 61-2006 Non-residents $25.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 61-2006 PARKS &REC - 5 Proposed on April 16, 2007 FACILITY/SERVICE CURRENT FEE PROPOSED FEE REFERENCE Burlingame School Softball Field (#1 or#2) Group A No charge No change Resolution No. 31-2003 Group B Burlingame Residents $10.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 61-2006 Non-residents $15.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 31-2003 Group C Burlingame Residents $20.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 31-2003 Non-residents $25.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 31-2003 Burlingame HiO School Tennis Courts Group A No charge No change Resolution No. 31-2003 Group B Burlingame Residents $15.00 for 4 hours No change Resolution No. 61-2006 Non-residents $15.00 for 4 hours No change Resolution No. 61-2006 Group C Burlingame Residents $30.00 for 4 hours No change Resolution No. 61-2006 Non-residents $30.00 for 4 hours No change Resolution No. 61-2006 Franklin Field Group A No charge No change Resolution No. 31-2003 Group B Burlingame Residents $10.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 61-2006 Non-residents $15.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 61-2006 Group C Burlingame Residents $20.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 61-2006 Non-residents $25.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 61-2006 PARKS &REC - 6 Proposed on April 16, 2007 FACILITY/SERVICE CURRENT FEE PROPOSED FEE REFERENCE Osberg Field Group A No charge No change Resolution No. 31-2003 Group B Burlingame Residents $10.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 61-2006 Non-residents $15.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 61-2006 Group C Burlingame Residents $20.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 61-2006 Non-residents $25.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 61-2006 Bayside Ball Fields #1 or#2 Group A No charge No change Resolution No. 31-2003 Group B Burlingame Residents $10.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 61-2006 Non-residents $15.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 31-2003 Group C Burlingame Residents $20.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 31-2003 Non-residents $25.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 31-2003 Bayside Ball Fields #3 or#4 for softball or baseball No charge No change Resolution No. 31-2003 Group A Group B $7.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 61-2006 Burlingame Residents $10.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 61-2006 Non-residents Group C $15.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 61-2006 Burlingame Residents $20.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 61-2006 Non-residents PARKS &REC - 7 Proposed on April 16, 2007 FACILITY/SERVICE CURRENT FEE PROPOSED FEE REFERENCE Bayside Ball Fields #3 or#4 for soccer No charge No change Resolution No. 31-2003 Group A Group B $10.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 61-2006 Burlingame Residents $15.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 61-2006 Non-residents Group C $20.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 61-2006 Burlingame Residents $25.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 61-2006 Non-residents Cuernavaca Park Group A No charge No change Resolution No. 31-2003 Group B Burlingame Residents $10.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 61-2006 Non-residents $15.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 31-2003 Group C Burlingame Residents $20.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 31-2003 Non-residents $25.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 31-2003 Murray Field Group A No charge No change Resolution No. 31-2003 Group B Burlingame Residents $20.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 61-2006 Non-residents $30.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 61-2006 Group C Burlingame Residents $40.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 61-2006 Non-residents $50.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 61-2006 PARKS &REC - 8 Proposed on April 16, 2007 FACILITY/SERVICE CURRENT FEE PROPOSED FEE REFERENCE Ray Park Ball Fields #1 or#2 Group A No charge No change Resolution No. 31-2003 Group B Burlingame Residents $10.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 61-2006 Non-residents $15.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 31-2003 Group C Burlingame Residents $20.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 31-2003 Non-residents $25.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 31-2003 Ray Park Tennis Courts Group A No charge No change Resolution No. 31-2003 Group B Burlingame Residents $15.00 for 4 hours No change Resolution No. 61-2006 Non-residents $25.00 for 4 hours No change Resolution No. 61-2006 Group C Burlingame Residents $30.00 for 4 hours No change Resolution No. 61-2006 Non-residents $50.00 for 4 hours No change Resolution No. 61-2006 Washington Park Main Ball Field for baseball Group A No charge No change Resolution No. 31-2003 Group B Burlingame Residents $20.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 61-2006 Non-residents $30.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 61-2006 Group C Burlingame Residents $40.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 61-2006 Non-residents $45.00 per hour $50.00 per hour Resolution No. 61-2006 PARKS &REC - 9 Proposed on April 16, 2007 FACILITY/SERVICE CURRENT FEE PROPOSED FEE REFERENCE Washington Park Bullpen Group A No charge No change Resolution No. 31-2003 Group B Burlingame Residents $5.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 61-2006 Non-residents $10.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 61-2006 Group C Burlingame Residents $5.00 per hour $20.00 per hour Resolution No. 61-2006 Non-residents $10.00 per hour $20.00 per hour Resolution No. 61-2006 Washington Park Main Ballfield Outfield for Soccer Group A No charge No change Resolution No. 31-2003 Group B Burlingame Residents $20.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 61-2006 Non-residents $30.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 61-2006 Group C Burlingame Residents $40.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 61-2006 Non-residents $50.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 31-2003 Washington Park Small Ballfield Group A No charge No change Resolution No. 31-2003 Group B Burlingame Residents $7.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 61-2006 Non-residents $10.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 61-2006 Group C Burlingame Residents $15.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 61-2006 Non-residents $20.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 61-2006 PARKS & REC - 10 Proposed on April 16, 2007 FACILITY/SERVICE CURRENT FEE PROPOSED FEE REFERENCE Washington Park Tennis Courts Group A No charge No change Resolution No. 31-2003 Group B Burlingame Residents $30.00 for 4 hours No change Resolution No. 31-2003 Non-residents $50.00 for 4 hours No change Resolution No. 61-2006 Group C Burlingame Residents $30.00 for 4 hours No change Resolution No. 61-2006 Non-residents $50.00 for 4 hours No change Resolution No. 61-2004 Pool— 50 meter Group A Lifeguard cost No change Resolution No. 31-2003 Group B Burlingame Residents $125.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 31-2003 plus lifeguard Non-residents $188.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 27-2006 plus lifeguard Group C $225.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 31-2003 Burlingame Residents plus lifeguard $288.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 27-2006 Non-residents plus lifeguard Pool (small pool) Group A Lifeguard cost No change Resolution No. 31-2003 Group B Burlingame Residents $63.00 per hour plus No change Resolution No. 27-2006 lifeguard Non-residents $95.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 31-2003 plus lifeguard Group C Burlingame Residents $125.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 31-2003 plus lifeguard Non-residents $188.00 per hour No change Resolution No. 27-2006 plus lifeguard PARKS &REC - 11 Proposed on April 16, 2007 FACILITY/SERVICE CURRENT FEE PROPOSED FEE REFERENCE Pool Lanes (short) Group A Lifeguard cost No change Resolution No. 31-2003 Group B $10.00 per lane per No change Resolution No. 31-2003 hour Group C $16.00 per lane per No change Resolution No. 27-2006 hour Pool Lanes (long) Group A Lifeguard cost No change Resolution No. 31-2003 Group B $20.00 per lane per No change Resolution No. 31-2003 hour Group C $25.00 per lane per No change Resolution No. 31-2003 hour Lifeguard (minimum of 2 per $25.00 per guard per No change Resolution No. 31-2003 event) hour Field Lights (Washington Park $20.00 per hour $25.00 per hour Resolution No. 31-2003 Main Ballfield, Murray Field, Bayside) Infield dragging and lining (subject Fees to be No change Resolution No. 31-2003 to availability determined by Parks Division based on conditions Facility Maintenance Fee for Field $5 per player per No change Resolution No. 31-2003 User Groups league per season r Picnic Permit pay _ -- ��.r � .� � . ,spy 2a"�� �� a�c ���i'•- �.�.. , °I�diG. ,' Small Picnic Area Burlingame residents $75.00+ $50 $50.00 + $50 Resolution No. 61-2004 refundable cleaning refundable cleaning deposit deposit Non-residents $75.00+ $50 $75.00 + $50 refundable cleaning refundable cleaning deposit deposit PARKS & REC - 12 Proposed on April 16, 2007 FACILITY/SERVICE CURRENT FEE PROPOSED FEE REFERENCE Large Picnic Area Burlingame residents $100.00+ $50 $100.00 + $100 Resolution No. 61-2004 refundable cleaning refundable cleaning deposit deposit Non-residents $100.00 + $50 $125.00 + $100 refundable cleaning refundable cleaning delposity deposit 5,21 CLASSES Class Fees To be set based on No change Resolution No. 31-2003 class provider and materials/facilities provided Registration Fees $7.00 $8.00 Resolution No. 61-2004 Non-resident Fee on Classes Add 20% to class No change Resolution No. 31-2003 fee rounded to nearest dollar Senior discount—Burlingame 50% off class fee on No change Resolution No. 31-2003 residents age 65 and over classes held at Recreation Center under$75 Senior discount—non-residents age Waive non-resident No change Resolution No. 31-2003 65 and over fee Registration cancellation charge $5.00 per class or No change Resolution No. 31-2003 event TREE AND PARKS FEES Memorial tree plantings and $75.00 No change Resolution No. 31-2003 additional street tree plantings Protected Tree Removal $50.00 No change Resolution No. 1-2005 Applications Arborist's plan review for $125.00 No change Resolution No. 1-2005 landscaping requirements on planning applications (See also planning fee schedule) PARKS &REC - 13 Proposed on April 16, 2007 FACILITY/SERVICE CURRENT FEE PROPOSED FEE REFERENCE Arborist check of construction 5% of building 5.75% of building Resolution No. 1-2005 plans and inspection of landscape permit fee permit fee requirements on building permit submittals Appeal to City Council from $230.00 No change Resolution No. 26-2005 Beautification Commission decision (does not include noticing costs) Noticing, City Council appeal $25.00 No change Resolution No. 26-2005 PARKS & REC - 14 Proposed on April 16, 2007 MASTER FEE SCHEDULE PLANNING DEPARTMENT SERVICE CURRENT PROPOSED Reference FEE FEE PRE-APPLICATIONS Preliminary Plan Check, New Construction" $180.00 $185.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Preliminary Plan Check, Remodel" $120.00 $125.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 APPLICATIONS Antenna Exception $25.00 No change Resolution No. 31-2003 Ambiguity/Determination Hearing before $475.00 $490.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Planning Commission (applies to Planning, Fire, and Building requests) Amendment/Extension to Permits $215.00 $220.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Appeal to City Council from Planning $240.00 $250.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Commission decisions (does not include noticing costs) Conditional Use Permit $920.00 $950.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Condominium Permit, 4 Units or Less $980.00 $1,010.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Condominium Permit, 5 Units or More $1,190.00 $1,225.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Design Review, Addition $565.00 $580.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Design Review, Amendment $410.00 $425.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Design Review Deposit' $800.00 No change Resolution No. 27-2006 Design Review—Handling Fee $280.00 $290.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Fifty percent(50%)of fee will be credited toward required application fees if and when project is submitted as a complete application. Fifty percent(50%)of fee will be credited toward required application fees if and when project is submitted as a complete application. Minimum deposit. Formula for ultimate calculation is design review consultant fee times hours spent. Project not set for hearing until actual time paid. PLANNING FEES - 1 Proposed on April 16, 2007 SERVICE CURRENT PROPOSED Reference FEE FEE Design Review, Information Submittal to $150.00 $200.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Planning Commission Design Review, New Construction $575.00 $600.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Fence Exception $650.00 $670.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 General Plan Amendment $1,355.00 $1,400.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Minor Modification/Hillside Area Construction $240.00 $250.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Permit Rezoning $1,190.00 $1,225.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Second Unit Amnesty Permit Building Official Inspection Deposit $400.00 No change Resolution No. 27-2006 charged at $132 per hour Special Use Permit $920.00 $950.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Variance $920.00 $950.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 ENVIRONMENTAL - Environmental, Categorical Exception $55.00 $60.00 Resolution No. 31-2005 Environmental Initial Study $115.00 $120.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Environmental,Negative Declaration $1,300.00 $1,340.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Environmental, Mitigated Declaration and/or $1,520.00 $1,565.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 with a Responsible Agency Environmental Impact Report 35% of No change Resolution No. 31-2003 contract, deposit to be determined by City Planner Environmental Posting Fee,Negative $145.00 $150.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Declaration and EIR Fish & Game Fee for Negative Declaration, $1,275.00 $1,800.00 Fish & Game Code § whether mitigated or not 711.4 PLANNING FEES - 2 Proposed on April 16, 2007 SERVICE CURRENT PROPOSED Reference FEE FEE Fish & Game Fee for Environmental Impact $875.00 $2,500.00 Fish & Game Code § Report 711.4 County Clerk Processing Fee for Fish & Game $50.00 Fish & Game Code § 711.4 PARKS Arborist Review when Required $135.00 1 $150.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 NOTICING k Noticing, R1 and R2 $110.00 $115.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Noticing, All Other Districts $110.00 $115.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Noticing, R-1 Design Review, Residential $165.00 $170.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Noticing, Design Review, all other districts $165.00 $170.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Noticing, Minor Modifications, Hillside Area $165.00 $170.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Construction Permits Noticing, General Plan Amendment $1,045.00 $1,080.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Noticing, Rezoning $1,045.00 $1,080.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Noticing, Environmental Impact Report $1,055.00 $1,090.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Noticing, City Council Appeal $30.00 No change Resolution No. 27-2006 Noticing, Second Unit Amnesty $55.00 No change Resolution No. 61-2004 SIGNS - 50 SF or less $27.00 $28.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 over 50 SF and less than 200 SF $54.00 $56.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 over 200 SF $80.00 $82.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Sign Variance $980.00 $1,010.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Removal of Illegal Sign (Public Works cost) $50.00 per $52.00 per Resolution No. 27-2006 sign sign PLANNING FEES - 3 Proposed on April 16, 2007 SERVICE CURRENT PROPOSED Reference FEE FEE Bayfront Development Fee' Office $1,919/TSF Per ordinance Ord. No. 1739 (2004) Restaurant $7,726/TSF Per ordinance Ord. No. 1739 (2004) Hotel $629/room Per ordinance Ord. No. 1739 (2004) Hotel, Extended Stay $611/room Per ordinance Ord. No. 1739 (2004) Office/Warehouse/Manufacturing $2,908/TSF Per ordinance Ord. No. 1739 (2004) Retail—Commercial $7,063/TSF Per ordinance Ord. No. 1739 (2004) Car Rental $44,821/acre Per ordinance Ord. No. 1739 (2004) Commercial Recreation $13,910/acre Per ordinance Ord. No. 1739 (2004) All Other $1,546 per Per ordinance Ord. No. 1739 (2004) p.m. peak hour trip as det'd by traffic study 'Bayfront Development fee is charged to all new construction/development within the Bayfront Specific Plan Area on the east side of US 101. One-half of the fee is payable before issuance of a building permit and the balance is payable when certificate of occupancy is requested. Ordinance No. 1305 (1985), as amended,provides for annual adjustment based on the construction cost index published in the Engineering News Record(ENR)as of July 1 of each year. These fees are current as of August 2006,and will be updated in July 2007 when the ENR index is available. PLANNING FEES -4 Proposed on April 16, 2007 SERVICE CURRENT PROPOSED Reference FEE FEE North Burlingame/Rollins Road Development Feel' $0.43 per Per ordinance Ord. No. 1751 (2005) Rollins Road Area of Benefit square foot of building El Camino North Area of Benefit Multiple family dwelling or duplex use $0.43 per Per ordinance Ord. No. 1751 (2005) square foot of building Any use other than multiple family dwelling or duplex $0.54 per Per ordinance Ord. No. 1751 (2005) square foot of building nNorth Burlingame/Rollins Road Development fees are charged to all new construction/development within the North Burlingame/Rollins Road Specific Plan Area. One-half of the fee is payable before issuance of a building permit and the balance is payable when certificate of occupancy is requested. Ordinance No. 1715 (2005)provides for annual adjustment beginning in 2006,based on the construction cost index published in the Engineering News Record(ENR)as of July 1 of each year. These fees are current as of August 2006, and will be updated in July 2007 when the ENR index is available. PLANNING FEES - 5 Proposed on April 16, 2007 MASTER FEE SCHEDULE POLICE DEPARTMENT SERVICE CURRENT PROPOSED REFERENCE FEE FEE Vehicle Release $75.00 $77.25 Resolution No. 27-2006 Police Reports Report Copies $1.00 per page $1.00 per page Resolution No. 31-2003 up to $15.00 up to $16.00 maximum maximum Fingerprint Rolling Fee $19.00 $20.00 Livescan Fee Set by State of California Department of Justice Audio Tapes $28.00 $29.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 Videotapes/CD's/DVD's $42.00 $43.00 Resolution No. 31-2005 Photographs $28.00 per roll $29.00 per roll Resolution No. 27-2006 Clearance Letter $12.00 No change Resolution No. 27-2006 Overnight Parking Permit $10.00 No change Section 13.32.080 (Ord. No. 1783) Repossessed Vehicle $15.00 No change Gov't Code § 41612 Bicycle License No charge No change Resolution No. 31-2003 DUI Fees $110.00 per $113.00 per Resolution No. 27-2006 hour hour $110.00 per $11300 per Resolution No. 27-2006 blood test blood test $60.00 per $62.00 per Resolution No. 27-2006 breath or urine breath or urine test test $55.00 per $57.00 per Resolution No. 27-2006 refused blood refused blood test test POLICE FEES - 1 Proposed on April 16, 2007 SERVICE CURRENT PROPOSED REFERENCE FEE FEE Booking Fees As set by No change County Security Service (Outside Detail) $85.00 per $88.00 per Resolution No. 27-2006 hour hour Alarm Permits $49.50 per year No change Resolution No. 116-2003 (Section 10.10.110) False Alarm Charge 3 to 5 false alarms $50.00 each No change Resolution No. 116-2003 (Section 10.10.090) 6 or more false alarms $100.00 each No change Resolution No. 116-2003 (Section 10.10.090) Any false alarm for which no alarm $150 each plus No change Resolution No. 28-2006 permit has been issued false alarm fee Amusement/Entertainment Permit $105.00 $108.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 (Section 6.16.050) Solicitors $50.00 for $52.00 for Resolution No. 27-2006 investigation investigation (Section 6.24.030) plus plus fingerprinting fingerprinting fees fees Curb Painting $50.00 for $52.00 for Resolution No. 31-2003 investigation investigation Tanning Salon Application $150.00 No change Section 6.42.060 Sale or Transfer $100.00 No change Section 6.42.120 Renewal $75.00 No change Section 6.42.160 Massage Operator Application $250.00 No change Section 6.40.060 Sale or Transfer $150.00 No change Section 6.40.120 Renewal $100.00 No change Section 6.40.160 Massage Practitioner Application $250.00 No change Section 6.40.060 Renewal $100.00 No change Section 6.40.160 POLICE FEES - 2 Proposed on April 16, 2007 SERVICE CURRENT PROPOSED REFERENCE FEE FEE Model/Escort Service Application $150.00 No change Section 6.41.040 Sale or Transfer $100.00 No change Section 6.41.100 Renewal $75.00 No change Section 6.41.130 Private Patrol Company Application $150.00 No change Section 6.44.050 Renewal $75.00 No change Section 6.44.080 Taxi Operator Application $150.00 No change Section 6.36.050 Renewal $75.00 No change Section 6.36.190 Taxi Driver Application $150.00 No change Section 6.36.050 Renewal $75.00 No change Section 6.36.190 Valet Parking $150.00 No change Section 6.30.040 Concealed Weapon $50.00 for $52.00 for Resolution No. 31-2003 investigation investigation Fortune Teller $150.00 No change Section 6.38.060 Unruly Gathering Cost of Hours No change Section 10.70.070 of Officer Response Special Events/Street Closing Permit $115.00 $115.00 Resolution No. 27-2006 application fee application fee plus plus $340/day City $340/day City facility fee plus facility fee plus $85.00/hour $88.00/hour police officer police officer fee for traffic fee for traffic control control POLICE FEES - 3 Proposed on April 16, 2007 MASTER FEE SCHEDULE SEWER SERVICE FEE REFERENCE Sewer Connection Fees," Single-family and Duplex $194/unit Section 15.08.020 Multi-family $148/unit Section 15.08.020 Commercial/Retail $310/thousand square feet Section 15.08.020 (TSF) Office $67/TSF Section 15.08.020 Warehouse $87/TSF Section 15.08.020 Restaurant $767/TSF Section 15.08.020 Hotel with Restaurant $489/room Section 15.08.020 Hotel without Restaurant $302/room Section 15.08.020 Industrial Waste Discharge a.� - Fees..,> W a 2006-2007 2007-2008 2008-2009 REFERENCE Light Discharger, Annual $571.00 $588.00 $606.00 Ord. No. 1786 (2006) Moderate Discharger, Annual $1,565.00 $1,611.00 $1,660.00 Ord. No. 1786 (2006) Heavy Discharger, Annual $2,185.00 $2,251.00 $2,318.00 Ord. No. 1786 (2006) Non-Conventional Discharger, $1,168.00 $1,203.00 $1,239.00 Ord. No. 1786 (2006) Annual`**" H1Set by Engineering News Record(ENR)Building Index for San Francisco over 1982 and adjusted every January 1. These rates are for year shown on schedule. Discharge fees are subject to increase by CPI according to Ordinance No. 1717 if no further action is taken before July 1,2009. Fee covers two(2)samples;additional samples charged according to Analytical Processing Fee Schedule below. SEWER FEES - 1 Proposed on April 16, 2007 SERVICE FEE REFERENCE 2006-2007 2007-2008 2008-2009 REFERENCE Groundwater Discharger Non- Non- Non- Ord. No. 1786 (2006) conventiona conventional conventional 1 Fee plus Fee plus $6.77 Fee plus $6.98 $6.58 per per 1000 per 1000 1000 gallons gallons gallons discharged discharged discharged Application Processing Fee $150.00 $155.00 $160.00 Ord. No. 1786 (2006) Analytical FeesEnsue In-house Testing Cost Cost Cost Ord. No. 1786 (2006) Contract Lab Testing Cost plus Cost plus 15% Cost plus 15% Ord. No. 1786 (2006) 15% Bimonthly Sewer Service z Charges0 a � .. Single-family or duplex $6.90 per $7.55 per $8.27 per Section 15.08.070 thousand thousand thousand gallons; if gallons; if less gallons; if less less than than thousand than thousand thousand gallons, then gallons, then gallons, $15.11 $16.54 then$13.80 Multi-family residential $6.45 per $7.06 per $7.73 per Section 15.08.070 thousand thousand thousand gallons gallons gallons Restaurant, other commercial $18.35 per $20.09 per $22.00 per Section 15.08.070 food-related uses thousand thousand thousand gallons gallons gallons Moderate strength commercial $12.37 per $13.54 per $14.83 per Section 15.08.070 thousand thousand thousand gallons gallons gallons SEWER FEES - 2 Proposed on April 16, 2007 SERVICE FEE REFERENCE 2006-2007 2007-2008 2008-2009 REFERENCE Light strength commercial $7.62 per $8.34 per $9.13 per Section 15.08.070 thousand thousand thousand gallons gallons gallons Institutional $2.70 per $2.96 per $3.24 per Section 15.08.070 thousand thousand thousand gallons gallons gallons New Customers in Single-Family or Duplex Classification Number of Residents 1 $26.82 $29.36 $32.15 Section 15.08.072 2 $33.35 $36.52 $40.00 3 $40.82 $44.70 $48.95 4 $48.29 $52.88 $57.90 5 $55.13 $60.37 $66.11 6 $57.10 $62.53 $68.47 7 $62.10 $68.00 $74.45 8 $72.31 $79.18 $86.71 9 or more $84.77 $92.83 $101.65 SEWER FEES - 3 Proposed on April 16, 2007 MASTER FEE SCHEDULE WATER SERVICE FEE REFERENCE 2006-2007 2007-2008 2008-2009 REFERENCE Monthly Charge for Meters 5/8" and 3/4" meter $21.54 $24.12 $27.01 Ord. No. 1784 (2006) 1" meter $36.62 $41.01 $45.93 Ord. No. 1784 (2006) 1 - %" meter $71.09 $79.62 $89.17 Ord. No. 1784 (2006) 2" meter $114.16 $127.86 $143.20 Ord. No. 1784 (2006) 3" meter $215.41 $241.26 $270.21 Ord. No. 1784 (2006) 4" meter $359.73 $402.90 $451.25 Ord. No. 1784 (2006) 6" meter $717.30 $803.38 $899.78 Ord. No. 1784 (2006) 8" meter $1,148.12 $1,285.89 $1,440.20 Ord. No. 1784 (2006) Water Consumption Within the City $4.69 per $5.25 per $5.88 per Ord. No. 1784 thousand thousand thousand (2006) gallons gallons gallons Outside the City $5.22 per $5.85 per $6.55 per Ord. No. 1784 thousand thousand thousand (2006) gallons gallons gallons WATER FEES - 1 Proposed on April 16, 2007 SERVICE FEE REFERENCE Water Service Turn-on 8 a.m. to 3:15 p.m., Monday thru Friday No charge Ord. No. 1784 (2006) 3:16 p.m. to 3:30 p.m, Monday thru $20.00 Ord. No. 1784 (2006) Friday 3:31 p.m. to 7:59 a.m., Monday thru $60.00 Ord. No. 1784 (2006) Friday Saturday/Sunday/holiday. $60.00 Ord. No. 1784 (2006) Renewal Fee Not paid within 30 days of billing 1 - % %penalty Ord. No. 1784 (2006) 8 a.m. to 3:15 p.m., Monday thru Friday $35.00 Ord. No. 1784 (2006) 3:16 p.m. to 3:30 p.m., Monday thru $45.00 Ord. No. 1784 (2006) Friday 3:31 p.m. to 4:50 p.m., Monday thru $60.00 Ord. No. 1784 (2006) Friday Maintenance of Water in Fire Protection $1.00 per month per inch of Ord. No. 1784 (2006) System pipe diameter, with$2.00 minimum charge Flow Test 5/8" through 1" $50.00 Ord. No. 1784 (2006) 1 - %2" and 2" $80.00 Ord. No. 1784 (2006) Over 2" $100.00 minimum (if over Ord. No. 1784 (2006) $100, cost of testing plus 15%) Temporary Water Service Meter charges (does not include water $750 deposit Ord. No. 1784 (2006) consumption) $43.00 per month for 1-inch meter $85.00 per month for three- inch meters WATER FEES - 2 Proposed on April 16, 2007 SERVICE FEE REFERENCE Water Service Turn-on Deposit if $50.00 or 2 months estimated Ord. No. 1784 (2006) Delinquent on City Water Account in consumption, whichever is Previous 12 months greater Work on City Water System $60.00 permit Ord. No. 1784 (2006) $1,500.00 bond or deposit Water Line Installation(subject to CURRENT PROPOSED adoption of ordinance) 5/8" bypass meter $350.00 No change Ord. No. 1784 (2006) 3/4" service with meter $3,800.00 $4,100.00* Ord. No. 1784 (2006) 1" service with meter $3,840.00 $4,135.00* Ord. No. 1784 (2006) 1 - %2 " service with meter $4,580.00 $5,280.00* Ord. No. 1784 (2006) 2" service with meter $4,710.00 $5,420.00* Ord. No. 1784 (2006) If larger than 2" or a length of more than Cost plus No change Ord. No. 1784 (2006) 60 feet 15% Meter Upgrade To 3/4" meter $210.00 $223.00* Ord. No. 1784 (2006) To 1" meter $245.00 $254.00* Ord. No. 1784 (2006) * —Requires adoption of ordinance by City Council to become effective WATER FEES - 3 Proposed on April 16, 2007 Agenda 6d © Item Meeting BURLINGAME STAFF REPORT Date: April 16, 2007 C; SUBMITTED BY APPROVED BY TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL DATE: April 2, 2007 FROM: PUBLIC WORKS SUBJECT: ADOPT AN ORDINANCE FOR REVISIONS TO FEES FOR WATER SERVICE (WATER SERVICES AND METER INSTALLATIONS) RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that Council hold a public hearing to: A. Adopt proposed ordinance. B. Direct City clerk to publish a summary of the ordinance within 15 days of adoption. DISCUSSION: The current fees for water services and meter installations have not been updated in the last two years. The ordinance revises the fees to achieve full cost recovery for all labor and materials as indicated on the Cost Detail attachment. The proposed Burlingame fees are the lowest as compared to four neighboring jurisdictions. EXHIBITS: Ordinance, Cost Detail BUDGET IMPACT: This ordinance will not affect the operating budget as the costs incurred will be offset by the revenues received from water services and meter installations. S:\A Public Works Directory\Staff Reports\Water Service Fees Adopt Ordinance.doc l ORDINANCE No. ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME ADOPTING REVISIONS TO INSTALLATION FEES FOR WATER SERVICE 4 The CITY COUNCIL of the CITY OF BURLINGAME does hereby ordain as follows: 5 6 Section 1. The existing installation fees were affirmed in Ordinance No. 1784 adopted in 7 May 2006,which did not increase the fees established in Ordinance No. 1754 adopted in June,2005. 8 The costs of installation have increased due to labor, equipment, and material cost increases. The 9 fees adopted in this ordinance are not discriminatory or excessive. 10 11 Section 2. Subsection 6(h) of Ordinance No. 1784 (2006) is amended to read as follows: 12 (h) All domestic water service installations of sizes 3/4" to 2", inclusive, consisting of 1' corporation and curb cocks,service line,meter boxes and meters,may be furnished and installed by 14 the city from the water main to a point approximately one foot inside the curb line, or to a point 15 within 4'of the property being served from a water main in an easement,alley or other right-of-way 16 other than dedicated street, but not exceeding a total distance from water main connection to the 17 meter box of sixty feet(60') for the following fixed fees: 18 5/8" bypass meter............................. $350 19 3/4" service with meter.................... $4,100.00 20 1" service with meter....................... $4,135.00 21 1-1/2" service with meter................ $5,280.00 22 2" service with meter...................... $5,420.00 23 All domestic water service installations of a size larger than two inches (2") or longer than 24 sixty feet(60')or not covered by the circumstances described above may be furnished and installed 25 by the city for the cost of labor and material, plus a sum equal to fifteen percent (15%) of the 26 combined cost of labor and material, less a credit for any existing water meter. The sum to be paid 77 for any such installations shall be estimated by the public works department,and such sum shall be 78 deposited with the department before the work of installation commences. In the event that the 4/2/2007 I estimated cost of making the installation proves to be insufficient to pay for said installation as 2 hereinabove provided,an additional sum sufficient to pay such costs shall be charged. If the amount deposited exceeds the cost of installation as hereinabove provided, the excess shall be refunded. 4 5 Section 3. Subsection 6(i)to Ordinance No. 1784 (2006)is added to read as follows: 6 (i) An upgrade from a smaller meter to a larger meter shall be charged as follows: 7 To 3/4" meter $223.00 8 To 1" meter $254.00 9 10 Section 4. This ordinance shall be published as required by law. 11 12 13 Mayor 14 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 2"day of 15 April,2007,and adopted thereafter at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the day of , 2007, by the following vote: 16 AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: 17 NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: 18 19 20 City Clerk U AFILES\Water\2007fees.pwd.wpd 21 22 23 24 25 26 7 28 - 2 - 4/2/2007 Cost Detail Installation of a new 3/4" service and meter (Current Fee: $3,800) Labor Cost $2,285.28 Material Cost * $747.17 Equipment cost $1,068.00 Total $4,100.45 Proposed Fee $4,100.00 Installation of a new 1" service and meter (Current Fee: $3,840) Labor Cost $2,285.28 Material Cost * $782.17 Equipment cost $1,068.00 Total $4,135.45 Proposed Fee $4,135.00 Installation of a new 1 112" service and meter (Current Fee: $4,580) Labor Cost $2,285.28 Material Cost * $1,930.91 Equipment cost $1,068.00 Total $5,284.19 Proposed Fee $5,280.00 Installation of a new 2" service and meter (Current Fee: $4,710) Labor Cost $2,285.28 Material Cost * $2,065.91 Equipment cost $1,068.00 Total $5,419.19 Proposed Fee $5,420.00 3/4" Meter Upgrade (Current Fee: $210) New Meter Cost $132.00 1 hr Labor $64.77 1 hr for Truck $27.00 Total $223.77 Proposed Fee $223.00 1" Meter Upgrade (Current Fee: $245) New Meter Cost $162.37 1 hr Labor $64.77 1 hr for Truck $27.00 Total $254.14 Proposed Fee $254.00 "A key factor for the fee adjustment is the increased cost of copper and brass materials SAA Public Works Directory\Staff Reports\Water Fee Cost Detail.xls CITY G AGENDA 8a ITEM# BIJRLlNGAME STAFF REPORT MAG. DATE 4/16/2007 TO: Honorable Mayor and Council SUBMITTED , BY DATE: April 9, 2007 APPRO BY FROM: Larry E. Anderson, City Attorney SUBJECT: INTRODUCE ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT AND MAKING CONFORMING CHANGES TO THE MUNICIPAL CODE RECOMMENDATION: Introduce ordinance to establish community development department by: A. Requesting the City Clerk to read the title of the proposed ordinance. B. Waiving further reading of the ordinance. C. Introducing the proposed ordinance. D. Directing the City Clerk to publish a summary of the proposed ordinance at least 5 days before its proposed adoption. DISCUSSION: The City Manager has proposed reorganizing the City's oversight of land use in the City by moving the building division from the Public Works Department to a new Community Development Department, which would also include Planning. The position of City Planner would become the Director of Community Development, managing both building and planning divisions. The proposed ordinance would make these changes in the Municipal Code. Attachment Proposed Ordinance Distribution City Planner Human Resources Director I ORDINANCE NO. 2 ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME ESTABLISHING THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT AND MAKING CONFORMING 3 CHANGES TO THE MUNICIPAL CODE 4 5 The City Council of the City of Burlingame ordains as follows: 6 Section 1. This ordinance reorganizes the functions of planning and building in the City 7 by placing the two functions, which will now be divisions, in a community development 8 department for oversight and administration. 9 10 Section 2. Chapter 3.21 is amended to read as follows: 11 Chapter 3.21 12 DIRECTOR OF CO lU LNITY DEVELOPMENT 13 3.21.010 Department established. 14 The community development department of planning created and established. 15 3.21.020 Office established. 16 The office of director of community development the city pimmei is created and 17 established. 18 3.21.030 Appointment and removal. 19 The city pl-aimer director of community development shall be appointed, and may be 20 removed, by the city manager with the approval of the city comicil. 21 3.21.040 Powers and duties. 22 The director of community:development city p1mmet shall be head of the community 23 development department, consisting of planning and building divisions, of plarmingand shall be 24 responsible for all phases of planning and zoning. The director of community development-city 25 planner shall advise and consuft with the public on plarming mid zoning, administer title 25 26 (Zoning) of this code and shall: 27 (a) Enforce the provisions of title 25 (Zoning) of this code; 28 (b) Establish, with the approval of the city council and the city manager, and administer, 1 I rules for the conduct of the planning division department; 2 (c) Maintain records of documents and proceedings under title 25; 3 (d) Perform necessary research and planning studies and prepare reports for the planning 4 commission and the city council; 5 (e) Provide and maintain a continuing program of education and public information on 6 planning and zoning matters; 7 (f) Conduct such inspections of buildings, structures and use of land as are necessary to 8 determine compliance with the terms of title 25; 9 (g) Receive, review and transmit to the planning commission all applications for 10 variances, conditional use permits, special permits, amendments, environmental determinations 11 and other matters on which the commission is authorized to act under the provisions of this code; 12 (h) Review all applications for building permits and business licenses to determine 13 whether a proposed building or structure, or use, or business is in compliance with title 25.E 14 building permit or b-asiness ficense shall be issned until the city plamier has approved sur! 15 applications by his or her written approval on stich appficatiuns5 16 (i) Initiate review of the provisions of title 25 and report to the planning commission 17 proposed amendments, supplements, changes or repeal of the whole or any portion of title 25; 18 0) Guide and coordinate the physical development and redevelopment of the city 19 consistent with approved policies and the adopted general plan; seek to conserve the values of 20 property throughout the city and to protect the character and stability of residential, commercial 21 and manufacturing areas, and to promote the orderly and beneficial development of such areas 22 and to improve the quality of life for all people in the city; 23 (k) Maintain the general plan as an active policy guide by the preparation of additional 24 elements and periodically review and report on possible changes or amendments to the general 25 plan; 26 (1) Assist in preparing e a capital improvement program to implement city council 27 policies and the general plan; and 28 (m) Perform other professional services necessary to carry out the provisions of the State 2 I Planning and Zoning Law , 2 as the same may be amended from time to time. 3 (n) Have overall management responsibility for the conduct and operations of the 4 building division. 5 6 Section 2A. Subsection 3.20.010(b) is amended to read as follows: 7 (b) The director shall also be the supervisor and director of all divisions of public works 8 in the city, specified as follows: 9 (1) The director shall have supervision and direction of all work relating to grading, 10 paving, cleaning, lighting and repairing of streets and sidewalks; the building and repairing of 11 streets and sidewalks; the building and repairing of sewer and storm drains; the disposal of 12 sewage, garbage and rubbish. The director shall also act as the superintendent of streets of the 13 city. 14 (2) The director shall have supervision and control of all work in connection with and 15 relating to the water division of the city. 16 (3) The office and duties of the chief building official as defined in this code shall be 17 tinder the . . . md direction of the director of ptiblic works. 18 (4j- The director shall be the custodian of all city maps,plans,profiles, field notes and 19 other city records appertaining to the director's office with the indices thereof, and shall turn 20 them over to the director's successor who shall give a duplicate receipt therefor, one of which 21 shall be filed with the city clerk. 22 23 Section 3. Subsection 6.16.150(b) is amended to read as follows: 24 (b) The premises within which the entertainment business is located shall provide 25 sufficient sound-absorbing insulation so that noise generated inside the premises shall not be 26 audible anywhere on any adjacent property or public right-of-way or within any other building or 27 other separate unit within the same building and comply with all applicable city noise 28 regulations. The establishment shall measure the current twenty-four(24) hour ambient noise 3 I levels (L,o) at the exterior of the property along the public right-of-way using a methodology 2 approved by the city-planrnr director of community development before opening for business. 3 Upon request by the city, the establishment shall conduct noise measurements to determine 4 whether the noise from the establishment is exceeding the five (5) dBA standard for increases in 5 noise from the baseline as provided in the Burlingame General Plan, and shall report the 6 measurements to the city, and the establishment shall ensure that the five (5) dBA standard is not 7 exceeded. 8 9 Section 4. Section 6.16.200 is amended to read as follows: 10 6.16.200 Inspections. 11 An applicant or permittee shall permit representatives of the police department, health 12 department, fire department, community development p1mming department, or other city 13 departments to inspect the premises of an entertainment business for the purpose of insuring 14 compliance with the law and the development and performance standards applicable to 15 entertainment businesses, at any time it is occupied or opened for business. A person who 16 operates an entertainment business or his or her agent or employee is in violation of the 17 provisions of this section if he or she refuses to permit such lawful inspection of the premises at 18 any time it is occupied or open for business. 19 20 Section 5. Subsections 6.40.060(b) and (c) are amended as follows: 21 (b) Upon receipt of a complete operator's application, the license collector shall refer the 22 application to the director of community development city piarnier, building official, the fire 23 department and the police department, each of which within a period of thirty(30) days from the 24 date of filing the application shall inspect the premises proposed to be used as a massage 25 establishment, interview the applicant or any other person and make any other investigation 26 necessary to make a written recommendation to the police department; provided that the thirty 27 (30) days may be extended for such period as may be necessary to obtain fingerprint records from 28 the appropriate state agency. 4 I (c) Applications for massage practitioner permits shall be referred only to the police and 2 community development plamring departments. The community development plarming 3 department shall provide its findings to the police department within thirty(30) days of the filing 4 of a complete application. 5 6 Section 6. Section 6.41.040 is amended to read as follows: 7 6.41.040 Permit fee and investigation. 8 All applications for initial permits shall be accompanied by an investigation fee in the 9 sum of one hundred fifty dollars ($150.00) , no part of which shall be refundable. Additional fees 10 may be charged to cover costs of processing the applicant's fingerprints by the State of 11 California. Upon receipt of an operator's application, the license collector shall refer the 12 application to the director of community development city plarnier,building official, the fire 13 department, the police department and health officer, each of which within a period of thirty(30) 14 days from the date of filing the application shall inspect the premises proposed to be used as a 15 model studio and shall make a written recommendation to the police department provided that 16 said thirty(30) days may be extended for such period as may be necessary to obtain fingerprint 17 records from the appropriate state agency. Escort applications shall only be referred to the police 18 department. 19 20 Section 7. Section 6.42.060 is amended to read as follows: 21 6.42.060 Permit fee and investigation. 22 All applications for initial permits shall be accompanied by an investigation fee in the 23 sum of one hundred fifty dollars ($150.00), no part of which is refundable. Additional fees may 24 be charged to cover costs of processing the applicant's fingerprints by the State of California. 25 Upon receipt of an operator's application, the license collector shall refer the application to the 26 director of community development city building official, the fire department and the 27 police department, each of which within a period of thirty(30) days from the date of filing the 28 application shall inspect the premises proposed to be used as a tanning facility, interview the 5 I applicant or any other person and make any other investigation necessary to make a written 2 recommendation to the police department, provided that said thirty(30) days may be extended 3 for such period as may be necessary to obtain fingerprint records from the appropriate state 4 agency. Employee applications shall be referred only to the police department. 5 6 Section 8. Section 10.58.090 is amended to read as follows: 7 10.5 8.090 Inspection. 8 An applicant or permittee shall permit representatives of the police department,health 9 department, fire department, community development platming department, or other city 10 departments or state or county agencies to inspect the premises of an adult-oriented business for 11 the purpose of insuring compliance with the law and the development and performance standards 12 applicable to adult-oriented business, at any time it is occupied or opened for business. A person 13 who operates an adult-oriented business or the business's agent or employee is in violation of the 14 provisions of this section if permission for such lawful inspection of the premises is refused at 15 any time it is occupied or open for business. 16 17 Section 9. Section 18.18.040 is amended to read as follows: 18 18.18.040 Antenna exception. 19 (a) Any person may apply for an exception from the antenna ordinance by applying for 20 an antenna exception in accordance with the provisions of this section. 21 (b) Application for an antenna exception shall be made upon forms provided by the 22 director of community development cityplanner and shall include the following information: 23 (1) Name, address and telephone number of the applicant; 24 (2) Address and zoning district of the property on which the antenna is to be attached or 25 erected; 26 (3) Description of the proposed antenna, including location, height and width or 27 diameter, and general description of the proposed installation. 28 (4) Description of any existing antenna, including location, height and width or 6 I diameter. 2 (5) Site plan which shall include the dimensions of the property, setbacks, and location 3 of the proposed antenna and all structures, including any existing antennas. 4 (c) When the application requests an exception for a satellite antenna, the applicant shall 5 provide the following additional information, in addition to the information required pursuant to 6 subsection(b) of this section: 7 (1) The applicable circumstances and conditions existing on the property which 8 materially limit transmission or reception if the antenna is placed according to the standards in 9 section 18.18.025(b). 10 (2) Locations on the property where the antenna can be located so that satellite signals 11 can reasonably be received, including both placement and height. The director of community 12 development ewer,planning commission or city council shall have discretion to require 13 the applicant to submit a site study,prepared at the applicant's cost, identifying the locations 14 where an antenna can be installed without materially limiting transmission. 15 (3) The cost of purchase and cost of proposed installation of the proposed antenna. 16 (4) The cost of trimming trees or removing other obstacles to reception at locations that 17 meet the standards set forth in Section 18.18.025(b). 18 (5) Ways in which vegetation could be planted or trim-med to both provide screening 19 and maintain a line of sight to satellites. 20 (d) When the applicant requests an exception for a ham or CB antenna, the applicant 21 shall provide the following additional information, in addition to the information required 22 pursuant to subsection (b) of this section: 23 (1) The location and design of an antenna that will reasonably accommodate the 24 amateur's right to engage in ham radio transmissions while having the least visual intrusion on 25 the surrounding properties. 26 (2) The nature and extent of amateur communications in which the applicant engages, 27 including time, duration,places contacted and so forth. 28 (3) The director of community development ems,planning commission or city 7 I council shall have discretion to require the applicant to submit a site reception study,prepared at 2 the applicant's cost, to identify the locations and design of the antenna that will have the least 3 visual impact on surrounding properties, maximize public safety, and reasonably accommodate 4 the applicant's right to engage in amateur communications. 5 (e) When the applicant requests an exception for an antenna, other than a satellite, ham 6 or CB antenna, the applicant shall provide, in addition to the information required pursuant to 7 subsection(b) of this section, any other information relating to antenna configuration, network 8 design and site selection which affects the aesthetic impact of the antenna: 9 (f) The director of community development ewer shall charge a fee for an 10 antenna exception which shall be established by resolution of the city council and-shalfbe 11 consistent with the fees charged fbr sign exceptions. 12 13 Section 10. Subsection 25.16.140(b)(2) is amended to read as follows: 14 (2) That the proposed action will be taken by the director of community development 15 comer unless a hearing before the planning commission is requested within fifteen(15) 16 days after the date of said notice. If no response is received,the director of community 17 development city planner shall forthwith revoke, suspend or modify the variance or permit as set 18 forth in said notice. 19 20 Section 11. Section 25.16.145 is amended to read as follows: 21 25.16.145 Ambiguity of use. 22 If any ambiguity arises concerning the appropriate classification of a particular use within 23 the meaning and intent of this title, any person may apply to the director of community 24 development city plantier for a determination of the ambiguity, and the director's determination 25 planner's shall be subject to appeal pursuant to this chapter. 26 27 Section 12. Section 25.16.150 is amended to read as follows: 28 25.16.150 Request for determination of city planner's decision. 8 I Any applicant or citizen may request that a determination made by the director of 2 community development comer regarding interpretation of the zoning ordinance and/or 3 code enforcement be appealed to the planning commission within ten (10)working days of the 4 director's Plarmer'-s decision. Such determination shall not require a public notice,but shall have 5 a public hearing. The planning commission's decision on any determination shall be the final 6 action on the determination. The decision of the planning commission may be appealed by any 7 interested person to the city council within the same time and in the same manner as provided in 8 sections 25.16.070 through 25.16.090. 9 10 Section 13. Section 25.20.040 is amended to read as follows: 11 25.20.040 Permit for temporary tract sales office or other temporary buildings. 12 The director of community development city platrier may issue a permit for the 13 construction or maintenance of a temporary tract office for the sale of real estate or for temporary 14 buildings, tents or structures other than construction storage facilities as described in Section 15 25.20.030 above. Application for such permit shall be made in writing, shall state the date of 16 installation and removal, shall include a site plan showing the location, size, construction 17 material and covering of the temporary structure,parking layout and parking displacement, if 18 any, and floor plan layout noting exiting. All proposed structures must be approved by the 19 building division and fire departments. The permit may be granted or denied by the director of 20 community development city plamie without notice or after such notice as he or she may 21 determine. No permit shall be issued by the director of community development city pim-mer for 22 more than maximum of thirty(30) days. The director of community development city p1m mer 23 may grant one extension of thirty(30) days. The director of community development's city 24 plarmer's decision may be appealed to the planning commission. A fee determined by the city 25 council shall be charged for the filing of an application for such permit. A permit for the 26 construction or maintenance of such temporary building or structure shall state the date on or 27 before which such building or structure shall be removed together with such other conditions as 28 the director of cotmnunity development city piwrier shall fix and determine. 9 I Section 14. Subsection 25.36.042(f) is amended to read as follows: 2 (f) Review of Number of Food Establishment. When the total number of food 3 establishments in the Burlingame Avenue Commercial Area drops below forty(40) for a period 4 of more than twelve (12) consecutive months, the director of community development city 5 pl rmer shall report this to the planning commission and city council. 6 7 Section 15. Subsection 25.44.1 00(a)(4) is amended to read as follows: 8 (4) A landscaping plan and specifications, including irrigation, shall be submitted for 9 approval by the city arborist when construction plans are submitted to the building division 10 department for a building permit. 11 12 Section 16. Subsection 25.45.080(x)(2) is amended to read as follows: 13 (2) In addition, employee parking shall be provided on-site or within reasonable 14 proximity, in the judgment of the director of community development firmer, at the rate of 15 one car space for each one thousand(1,000) square feet of gross floor area. 16 17 Section 17. Subsection 25.47.080(a)(1)(B) is amended to read as follows: 18 (B) In addition, employee parking shall be provided on-site or within reasonable 19 proximity, in the judgment of the director of community development mer, at the rate of 20 one car space for each one thousand(1,000) square feet of gross floor area; 21 22 Section 18. Subsection 25.48.080(a)(1)(B) is amended to read as follows: 23 (B) In addition, employee parking shall be provided on-site or within reasonable 24 proximity, in the judgment of the director of community development city planner, at the rate of 25 one car space for each one thousand(1,000) square feet of gross floor area; 26 27 Section 19. Section 25.50.025 is amended to read as follows: 28 25.50.025 Expansion of nonconforming uses—R-1 zone. 10 I (a) This section shall only be applicable to R-1 zoned parcels which contain two (2) 2 detached nonconforming residential units. Only the primary residence, as determined by the 3 director of corm-unity development ewer, may be increased in footprint or in any exterior 4 dimension if the secondary detached unit is to be retained as a residential unit. A conditional use 5 permit pursuant to Chapter 25.16 shall be required for any such increase to a primary unit. Only 6 maintenance and repairs as defined by the Uniform Building Code may be made to any secondary 7 dwelling unit. The floor area or footprint of such a secondary unit shall not be expanded. 8 (b) Factors for determining the primary residence shall include, but not be limited to, 9 relative age, size and conformity with zoning requirements of the two (2)residences. The 10 property owner may request that the planning commission review any such determination by the 11 director of community development city-pl=me r. 12 13 Section 20. Section 25.55.020 is amended to read as follows: 14 25.55.020 Granting a minor modification. 15 Upon application of the property owner the director of community development city plairier 16 may grant no more than two (2)minor modifications and shall make the findings required by 17 section 25.54.020 for variances; a public hearing shall not be required. An application which 18 includes more than two (2)minor modifications or which also includes a variance, conditional 19 use permit, or special permit shall be processed pursuant to chapter 25.16. 20 21 Section 21. Section 25.55.030 is amended to read as follows: 22 25.55.030 Public notice for minor modification. 23 Notice of approval of minor modifications shall be mailed by the director of community 24 development city planner to owners of property within one hundred (100) feet of the exterior 25 boundaries of the subject property. The property owners shall be informed of their right of 26 appeal. 27 28 Section 22. Section 25.55.040 is amended to read as follows: 11 1 25.55.040 Appeals of minor modification determinations. 2 Appeals from the decision of the director of community development city pfmmer shall be 3 made to the planning commission within seven(7) days after the public notice of the action of 4 the director of community development cityplarme is mailed. Any member of the planning 5 commission or council may request a review of a minor modification by making such request to 6 the director of coinmuhity development city plamier within seven(7) days of the date of mailing 7 of the public notice. Upon receipt of an appeal, or a request for review by a commissioner or 8 council member, the director of community development mer shall forward the records 9 on the matter to the planning commission at the earliest available date and cause notice of such 10 hearing to be given as set forth in chapter 25.16. The planning commission shall consider the 11 matter in the same manner as an application for a variance. The decision of the director of 12 community development city shall be final seven (7) days after the mailing of the public 13 notice of the director of community development's Ems=s action, if no appeal is filed by 14 any person or if no council member or commissioner requests review of the decision within that 15 time. 16 17 Section 23. Section 25.57.020 is amended to read as follows: 18 25.57.020 Design review panel. 19 (a) With the approval of the planning commission, the director of community 20 development city shall appoint one or more design professionals to advise the director of 21 community development city-piaimer and the planning commission on applications in R-1 22 districts made under this chapter. The panel appointees shall be persons in the business of 23 residential design who have practiced their design profession involving residential designs in the 24 city and who are willing to contract with the city to provide advisory services under this chapter. 25 (b) For applications in the C-1 and C-2 districts, with the approval of the planning 26 commission, the director of community development city plarmer shall appoint one or more 27 design professionals who shall be persons in the business of commercial design and who are 28 willing to contract with the city to provide advisory services under this chapter. 12 I Section 24. Subsection 25.57.030(a) is amended to read as follows: 2 (a) Any person seeking approval of construction to be reviewed under this chapter shall 3 submit an application for design review to the director of community development city plarmer in 4 the same form and containing the same signatures as provided in section 25.16.040 of this title. 5 The schematic design plans submitted with the application shall demonstrate the architectural 6 details of the proposal, and in the case of an addition, of the existing structure and the addition. 7 8 Section 25. Subsection 25.57.030(c) is amended to read as follows: 9 (c) If the commission instead refers the application for further design review, the plans 10 submitted shall be referred by the director of community development city pl mer on a random 11 basis to the appointee professional described above for review and comment. The appointee's 12 analysis shall be forwarded to the planning commission. 13 14 Section 26. Section 25.59.040 is amended to read as follows: 15 25.59.040 Procedure. 16 (a) Any person owning a secondary dwelling unit that was built as a dwelling unit not 17 later than December 31, 1953, and that has been in substantially the same use and envelope since 18 that time may apply to the city, for a special permit to legalize the existence, use, and occupancy 19 of the secondary dwelling unit pursuant to this chapter. 20 (b) Applications for such a special permit shall be in writing and filed with the director 21 of community development city pla mer on a form approved by the director of community 22 development cityplamrer. In addition to the requirements for such an application, the application 23 shall contain a declaration under penalty of perjury detailing the history of the secondary 24 dwelling unit demonstrating that it was built before January 1, 1954, and that since that time, it 25 has been used as a dwelling unit in the same size and configuration as shown in the application. 26 (c) As established by council resolution, a fee will be charged for an application for a 27 special permit under this chapter. 28 (d) Upon application for a special permit pursuant to this chapter, the director of 13 I community development city plarmcr will review the application and determine if all of the 2 information required has been provided. If the application meets all of the requirements of this 3 chapter, the director of community development city planner shall approve the application with 4 those conditions necessary to ensure conformance with this chapter. If the application does not 5 meet all of the requirements of this chapter, the director of community development cityplarmer 6 shall deny the application. 7 (e) Notice of approval of a special permit pursuant to this chapter shall be mailed by the 8 director of community development city to owners of property within one hundred (100) 9 feet of the exterior boundaries of the subject property,with information regarding the right to 10 appeal the decision of the director of community developmentcity plarmer. 11 12 Section 27. Section 25.59.040 is amended to read as follows: 13 25.59.050 Appeals. 14 (a) Appeals from the decision of the director of community development city planner 15 shall be made in writing to the planning commission within seven(7) days after the public notice 16 of the decision of the director of community development city pharmer is mailed. Any member of 17 the planning commission or the city council may request a review of a decision of the director of 18 community development city pfmme by making such a request to the director of community 19 development city piarmcr within seven(7) days of the date of the mailing of the notice. 20 (b) Upon receipt of an appeal or a request for review, the planning commission will set 21 the application for hearing, and notice of the public hearing will be given as set forth in Chapter 22 25.16. 23 (c) The planning commission shall determine if the application meets the requirements 24 of this chapter. If the application meets all of the requirements of this chapter, the planning 25 commission shall approve the application with those conditions necessary to ensure conformance 26 with this chapter. If the application does not meet all of the requirements of this chapter, the 27 planning commission shall deny the application. 28 (d) The decision of the director of community development city p1mmer shall be final 14 I seven(7) days after the mailing of public notice of the director of community development's eitq 2 planner's decision if not appeal in writing has been filed by any person or if no request for review 3 has been made by any planning commission or city councilmember. 4 (e) A decision of the planning commission under this chapter is appealable pursuant to 5 the procedures contained in chapter 25.16. 6 7 Section 28. Section 25.61.040 is amended to read as follows: 8 25.61.040 Procedure when variance, conditional use permit, or special permit not required. 9 If such construction does not require a variance, conditional use permit, or special permit 10 the following procedures shall apply. Upon receipt of a completed application for a hillside area 11 construction permit, the director of community development city-piarmer shall give mailed notice 12 of the application to all owners of property within one hundred (100) feet of the exterior 13 boundaries of the subject property. They shall be informed of their right to request review under 14 section 25.61.050. Notice of the application shall also be mailed to the planning commission and 15 city council. 16 17 Section 29. Section 25.61.050 is amended to read as follows: 18 25.61.050 Review of application. 19 Any noticed property owner may request review of the application by written request to 20 the director of community development city plarmer within seven (7) days after the mailing of the 21 notice of application. Review of the application may be requested by any member of the planning 22 commission or council by making such request before the close of the meeting of the legislative 23 body at which the notice is received. Upon receipt of a request for review the director of 24 community development city plarmer shall thereafter process the application in the same manner 25 as an application for a conditional use permit. Unless review of the application is requested, the 26 hillside area construction permit shall be deemed approved upon the adjournment of the later of 27 the planning commission or city council meeting following notice of the application. 28 15 I Section 30. Subsection 25.63.040(b) is amended to read as follows: 2 (b) Design. The design and construction of the affordable dwelling units shall be 3 consistent with general plan standards; compatible with the design, unit layout, and construction 4 of the total project development in terms of appearance, construction materials, unit layout, and 5 finished quality and conform to general plan standards; and consistent with affordable residential 6 development standards that may be prepared by the planning division department as adopted by 7 the city council. 8 9 Section 31. Section 25.68.020 is amended to read as follows: 10 25.68.020 Excluded occupations. 11 Except as provided in Section 25.68.025 below,the following occupations and those 12 considered to be of similar character by the director of community development citypla mer shall 13 be specifically prohibited as home occupations: contractor's office where employees report or 14 assemble as a part of the job for other than administrative or bookkeeping purposes;barbershop; 15 beauty salon; massage studio; automobile repairing or painting; landscape contractor; clinic; 16 hospital; kennel or other boarding of pets; legal, medical, or dental offices. 17 18 Section 32. Section 25.68.025 is amended to read as follows: 19 25.68.025 Limited occupations. 20 The following occupations and those considered to be of similar character by the director 21 of community development comer may be carried on as home occupation subject to the 22 requirements of section 25.68.010 and the additional limitations set forth hereinafter: 23 accountants, attorneys, investment advisors or brokers,psychic services, insurance and real estate 24 agents. The additional limitations are: 25 (a) The applicant shall be the sole person engaged in the business; 26 (b) There shall be no other employees on-site or off-site; and 27 (c) No clients shall come to the site. 28 16 I Section 33. Section 25.68.030 is amended to read as follows: 2 25.68.030 Home occupation permits. 3 No person shall commence or carry on any home occupation, as set forth above, within 4 the city without first having procured a permit from the director of community development city 5 plarme . The director of community development city pl rmer shall issue a permit when the 6 applicant shows that the home occupation meets all requirements of section 25.68.010. Every 7 home occupation shall fully comply with all city, county and state codes, ordinances, rules and 8 regulations. 9 10 Section 34. Section 25.68.040 is amended to read as follows: 11 25.68.040 Permit applications—Form and content. 12 Applications for home occupation permits shall be filed, in writing, with the director of 13 community development cityplanmcr by the person who intends commencing or carrying on a 14 home occupation. The application shall be upon forms furnished by and in the same manner 15 prescribed by the director of community development city-pianner. Where the applicant is not the 16 owner of the lot on which the home occupation is proposed to be conducted, the application shall 17 be accompanied by the written consent of the owner or his or her agent. 18 19 Section 35. Section 25.68.060 is amended to read as follows: 20 25.68.060 Notices and appeals. 21 Within ten (10) working days after the filing of an application for a home occupation 22 permit, the director of community development°city planner shall either issue or deny the permit 23 and shall serve notice of such action upon the applicant by mailing a copy of such notice to the 24 applicant at the address appearing on the application. Appeals from the decision of the director of 25 community development city plarmer may be made to the planning commission within seven (7) 26 days after the action of the director of community development city plarmer. Upon receipt of an 27 appeal, the director of community development city planner shall forward the same, together with 28 the records on the matter, to the planning commission. The commission shall set the matter for 17 I hearing before the planning commission at the earliest available date. 2 3 Section 36. Section 25.68.070 is amended to read as follows: 4 25.68.070 Suspension, revocation and appeals. 5 (a) Any home occupation permit issued pursuant to the provisions of this chapter may be 6 suspended or revoked by the director of community development city plarmcr when it appears 7 that the home occupation authorized by the permit has been or is being conducted: 8 (1) In violation of any conditions of approval or of any city, county and/or state code, 9 ordinance, rule or regulation, including the provisions of this section; 10 (2) In a disorderly manner; 11 (3) To the detriment of the general public; 12 (4) When home occupation being carried on is different from that for which the permit 13 was issued; or 14 (5) The home occupation has not been carried on for more than ninety(90) days. 15 (b) Any home occupation permit which has been issued shall be revoked or suspended 16 by written notice from the director of community developmentcity planicr to the holder of the 17 permit. The notice shall contain a brief statement of the grounds for revoking or suspending the 18 permit; such notice shall be sent to the person to be notified at the address appearing on the 19 permit. Appeals to the planning commission shall be processed as set forth in section 25.16.060. 20 21 Section 37. Section 25.70.042 is amended to read as follows: 22 25.70.042 Requirements of other uses. 23 For uses not listed in the above schedule of required parking, spaces shall be supplied on 24 the same basis as provided for the most similar use, or as determined by the director of 25 community development city plarmer. For such determination such matters as type of use and 26 user, number of employees, number of visitors and similar factors shall be considered, in any 27 case, where the decision of the director of community development firmer is contested by 28 the applicant, his or her decision may be appealed to the planning commission. The commission 18 1 may approve, disapprove or modify the decision of the director of community development city 2 p1mmer. 3 4 Section 38. Subsection 26.32.050(b) is amended to read as follows: 5 (b) Specific information concerning the demographic characteristics of the project, 6 including but not limited to the following: 7 (1) Square footage and number of rooms in each unit, 8 (2) Rental rate history for each type of unit for previous two (2)years, 9 (3) Monthly vacancy rate for each month during the preceding two (2) years, 10 (4) Composition of existing tenant households, including household size, length of 11 residence, age of tenants, and whether receiving federal or state rent subsidies or number of 12 employees by tenant and rents charged for commercial, industrial, and office uses; 13 (5) Proposed sales price of units, 14 (6) Proposed homeowners association fee, 15 (7) Proposed financing, and 16 (8) Names and addresses of all tenants. 17 When the developer can conclusively demonstrate that some of this information is not available, 18 this requirement may be modified by the director of community development plarming 19 department; 20 21 Section 39. Subsection 26.32.050(e) is amended to read as follows: 22 (e) Any other information which, in the opinion of the director of community 23 development p1mming department, will assist in determining whether the proposed project will 24 be consistent with the purposes of this code. 25 26 Section 40. Section 26.32.060 is amended to read as follows: 27 26.32.060 Acceptance of reports. 28 The final form of the site plan, physical elements report and other submitted documents shall 19 I be as approved by the city. The reports in their accepted form shall remain on file with the 2 community development p1mming department for review by any interested persons. 3 4 Section 41. Subsection 26.32.080(b)(8) is amended to read as follows: 5 (8) Refurbishing and Restoration. All main buildings, structures, fences,patio 6 enclosures, carports, accessory buildings, sidewalks, driveways, landscaped areas and additional 7 elements as required by the community development Rlanning department shall be refurbished 8 and restored as necessary to achieve a high degree of appearance, quality and safety. 9 10 Section 42. Subsection 26.33.060(a) is amended to read as follows: 11 (a) Notice of Intent. A notice of intent to convert shall be delivered to each tenant. The 12 form of notice, shall be on a form prepared by the communitydevelopment planning department 13 and shall inform tenants of all rights provided under this section. It shall be mailed or otherwise 14 delivered within five (5) days of filing the application. 15 16 Section 43. This ordinance shall be published as required by State law. 17 18 Mayor 19 20 I, DORIS MORTENSEN, City Clerk of the City of Burlingame, do hereby certify that the 21 foregoing ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 22 day of , 2007, and adopted thereafter at a regular meeting of the City Council held on 23 the day of , 2007, by the following vote: 24 AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: 25 NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: 26 ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: 27 City Clerk 28 U:\FILES\Planning\communitydevelopment.ord.wpd 20 CITY 0 STAFF REPORT BURUNGAME AGENDA ITEM# 8b %IF o9 m MTG.00 DATE 4/16/07 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL SUBMITTED �,�Z� ���/ BY DATE: April 10,2007 APPROVE �( FROM: Jim Nantell 558-7205 BY J U SUBJECT: Policy Issues for Citizens Survey RECOMMENDATION: Recommend that the City Council discuss potential policy issue that they would like to include in the Citizens Survey that will be conducted this spring. BACKGROUND: At the December 4, 2006 meeting the Council concurred with a recommendation of the City Manager to participate in the ICMA National Citizen Survey as part of the California Regional Consortia. Just as the key for a successful business is customer satisfaction, the first and last measure of good government is citizen satisfaction. The International City Managers Association (ICMA) has teamed up with National Research Center Incorporated to create a low cost citizen survey service for local governments. The survey lets you survey citizen opinion for program planning, budgeting, goal and priority setting and benchmarking our performance. Staff can use the results to improve service, the Council can use it to set priorities and management can use the results too measure progress and chart the future. The City of Palo Alto, which has been involved in the program for a couple of years, has taken the initiative to form a consortia of peninsula cities as a way to get us more value for our money and to ensure data from other near by cities that can be used to compare our results. Each city is allowed to add three survey questions that would provide information relative to policy issues on which the Council would like to receive community feedback. Attached are some sample policy issue questions. We are looking for council direction on what policy issue questions you would like to see included in the survey. BUDGET IMPACT: The cost for participation in the survey is $8,400 which is available in the City Manager's budget due to our decision to delay replacing the intern position in the City Manager/City Attorney's office. ATTACHMENTS: A. Sample policy issue questions and template B. Sample Citizen Survey C. Policy Options for Consideration - National Citizen SurveyT"' Jurisdiction Name WORKSHEET 6 -- POLICY QUESTIONS (OPTIONAL) Part 1: Background and Examples The National Citizen SurveyTm is a tool with a set of customizable questions for all jurisdictions. However, there are often unique questions that each locale wishes to have answered. This worksheet allows you to design three policy questions to be included on your jurisdiction's survey. Please follow the guidelines specified. The following examples may be helpful. How likely or unlikely would you be to vote in favor of building bike lanes on Main Street? 0 Very likely 0 Somewhat likely 0 Neither likely nor unlikely 0 Somewhat unlikely 0 Very unlikely 0 Don't know To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement: "The overnight parking ban in Central Square should be lifted"? 0 Strongly agree O Somewhat agree 0 Neither agree nor disagree 0 Somewhat disagree 0 Strongly disagree 0 Don't know To what extent do you support or oppose legislation to increase sales tax by.6% If it would be put toward increasing recreation opportunities? 0 Strongly support 0 Somewhat support Neither support nor oppose 0 Somewhat oppose L 0 Strongly oppose M 0 Don't know W 0� C Some guidelines: C All response options will be measured using a fixed scale. No open-ended questions are Z permitted. gEach question cannot exceed 300 characters—including spaces. Response options are N not included in this character count. 0 oRemember the general population you will be addressing, and avoid questions that will only apply to a small group within your community. Each question does not need to be measured by the same scale or address the same issue. Feel free to vary the topics and scales. N _N U m c 0 Z 0 L Fax or send packet of completed worksheets to: National Research Center, Inc., 3005 30th Street Boulder, CO 80301 Fax(303)444-1145 -Phone(303)444-7863 Contact: Heather@n-r-c.com Page 6 of 30 • National Citizen SurveyTM Jurisdiction Name WORKSHEET 6 -- POLICY QUESTIONS (OPTIONAL) Part 2: Forming Policy Question 1 Follow the steps below to construct each of your three questions. For more information on how to design survey questions, please see chapter four in Citizen Surveys: How To Do Them, How To Use Them, What They Mean, by Miller, T.I. and Kobayashi, M.M. ►CMA, Washington, DC, 2000, which is being mailed to you. Policy Question 1 Step 1 — Design your question On the following lines, please provide the wording of your question, being as clear as possible. Remember to make it no more than 300 characters long. Count the characters, including spaces, before printing the question below. Step 2— Select your scale Choose Scale Name Response Options 0 Agree/Disagree Strongly agree, Somewhat agree, Neither agree nor disagree, Somewhat disagree, Strongly disagree, Don't know O Support/Oppose Strongly support, Somewhat support, Neither support nor oppose, Somewhat oppose, Strongly oppose, Don't know O Likely/Unlikely Very likely, Somewhat likely, Neither likely nor unlikely, Somewhat unlikely, Very unlikely, Don't know a) 0 Satisfied/Unsatisfied Very satisfied, Somewhat satisfied, Neither satisfied nor 2 unsatisfied, Somewhat unsatisfied, Very unsatisfied, Don't U) know O EGFP Excellent, Good, Fair, Poor, Don't know 0 Z O Other(specify) Response category 1: o Response category 2: N Response category 3: o Response category 4: N Response category 5: Response category 6.- Step :Step 3— Decide whether to omit "Don't know"as a response option. We recommend using"Don't know" as a response option for policy questions, but you may omit "Don't know" if you believe that respondents must know about or be familiar with the policy issue. U 0 0 Remove"Don't know"from the above scale Z a� L Fax or send packet of completed worksheets to: National Research Center,Inc., 3005 30th Street Boulder,CO 80301 Fax(303)444-1145 • Phone (303)444-7863 Contact: Heather@n-r-c.com Page 7 of 30 THE XYZ OF ABC 2007 CITIZEN SURVEY Please complete this questionnaire if you are the adult(age 18 or older) in the household who most recently had a birthday. The adult's year of birth does not matter. Please circle the response that most closely represents your opinion for each question. Your responses are anonymous and will be reported in group form only. 1. Please circle the number that comes closest to your opinion for each of the following questions: Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know How do you rate ABC as a place to live?..............................................1 2 3 4 5 How do you rate your neighborhood as a place to live?.......................1 2 3 4 5 How do you rate ABC as a place to raise children?..............................1 2 3 4 5 How do you rate ABC as a place to work?............................................1 2 3 4 5 How do you rate ABC as a place to retire?...........................................1 2 3 4 5 How do you rate the overall quality of life in ABC?...............................1 2 3 4 5 2. Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to ABC as a whole: Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Sense of community..............................................................................1 2 3 4 5 Openness and acceptance of the community towards people of diversebackgrounds.......................................................................1 2 3 4 5 Overall appearance of ABC...................................................................1 2 3 4 5 Opportunities to attend cultural activities...............................................1 2 3 4 5 Shopping opportunities..........................................................................1 2 3 4 5 Airquality ..............................................................................................1 2 3 4 5 Recreational opportunities.....................................................................1 2 3 4 5 Jobopportunities...................................................................................1 2 3 4 5 Access to affordable quality housing.....................................................1 2 3 4 5 Access to affordable quality child care..................................................1 2 3 4 5 Access to affordable quality health care................................................1 2 3 4 5 Access to affordable quality food...........................................................1 2 3 4 5 Ease of car travel in ABC ......................................................................1 2 3 4 5 Ease of bus travel in ABC......................................................................1 2 3 4 5 Ease of rail/subway travel in ABC .........................................................1 2 3 4 5 Ease of bicycle travel in ABC ................................................................1 2 3 4 5 Easeof walking in ABC.........................................................................1 2 3 4 5 Educational opportunities......................................................................1 2 3 4 5 Overall image/reputation of ABC...........................................................1 2 3 4 5 Overall quality of new development in ABC..........................................1 2 3 4 5 3. Please rate the speed of growth in the following categories in ABC over the past 2 years: Much Somewhat Right Somewhat Much Don't too slow too slow amount too fast too fast know Population growth............................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 6 Retail growth (stores, restaurants etc.)............................ 1 2 3 4 5 6 Jobsgrowth ..................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 XThe National Citizen SurveyTM Page 1 of 5 The XYZ of ABC 4. To what degree, if at all, are the following problems in ABC: Not a Minor Moderate Major Don't rop blem rop ble problem problem know Crime.....................................................................................................1 2 3 4 5 Drugs.....................................................................................................1 2 3 4 5 Toomuch growth...................................................................................1 2 3 4 5 Lackof growth ...................................................... ..............................1 2 3 4 5 Graffiti....................................................................................................1 2 3 4 5 Noise......................................................................................................1 2 3 4 5 Run down buildings, weed lots, or junk vehicles...................................1 2 3 4 5 Taxes.....................................................................................................1 2 3 4 5 Trafficcongestion..................................................................................1 2 3 4 5 Unsupervisedyouth..................................... .........................................1 2 3 4 5 Homelessness.......................................................................................1 2 3 4 5 Weeds....................................................................................................1 2 3 4 5 Absence of communications from the XYZ of ABC translated into languages other than English..........................................................1 2 3 4 5 Unwanted local businesses...................................................................1 2 3 4 5 Toxic waste or other environmental hazard(s)......................................1 2 3 4 5 5. Please rate how safe you feel from the following occurring to you in ABC: Very Somewhat Neither safe Somewhat Very Don't safe safe nor unsafe unsafe unsafe know Violent crime (e.g., rape, assault, robbery) ..................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 Property crimes(e.g., burglary, theft).............................. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Fire .................................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 6 6. Please rate how safe you feel: Very Somewhat Neither safe Somewhat Very Don't safe safe nor unsafe unsafe unsafe know In your neighborhood during the day............................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 In your neighborhood after dark........................... .......... 1 2 3 4 5 6 In ABC's downtown area during the day......................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 In ABC's downtown area after dark................................. 1 2 3 4 5 6 In ABC's parks during the day—........................ ............. 1 2 3 4 5 6 In ABC's parks after dark................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7. During the past twelve months, were you or anyone in your household the victim of any crime? 0 No 4 Go to question#9 0 Yes 4 Go to question#8 0 Don't know 8. If yes, was this crime (these crimes) reported to the police? O No O Yes 0 Don't know a� 9. In the last 12 months, about how many times, if ever, have you or other household members participated in the following activities in ABC? Once or 3 to 12 13 to 26 More than Never twice times times 26 times Used ABC public libraries or their services...........................................1 2 3 4 5 0 Used ABC recreation centers................................................................1 2 3 4 5 M Participated in a recreation program or activity z P P 9 Y.....................................1 2 3 4 5 0 Visited a neighborhood or XYZ park......................................................1 2 3 4 5 N Ridden a local bus within ABC ..............................................................1 2 3 4 5 b Attended a meeting of local elected officials or other local public N meeting............................................................................................1 2 3 4 5 Watched a meeting of local elected officials or other local public meeting on cable television.............................................................1 2 3 4 5 v Recycled used paper, cans or bottles from your home.........................1 2 3 4 5 Volunteered your time to some group/activity in ABC...........................1 2 3 4 5 U) Read ABC Newsletter............................................................................1 2 3 4 5 N Used the Internet for anything...............................................................1 2 3 4 5 0 FU Used the Internet to conduct business with ABC..................................1 2 3 4 5 Purchased an item over the Internet.....................................................1 2 3 4 5 0 Z a� r f-- The National Citizen SurveyTm Page 2 of 5 The XYZ of ABC 10. How do you rate the quality of each of the following services in ABC? Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Policeservices.......................................................................................1 2 3 4 5 Fireservices..........................................................................................1 2 3 4 5 Ambulance/emergency medical services..............................................1 2 3 4 5 Crime prevention...................................................................................1 2 3 4 5 Fire prevention and education...............................................................1 2 3 4 5 Traffic enforcement................................................................................1 2 3 4 5 Garbagecollection.................................................................................1 2 3 4 5 Recycling...............................................................................................1 2 3 4 5 Yardwaste pick-up................................................................................1 2 3 4 5 Streetrepair...........................................................................................1 2 3 4 5 Streetcleaning.......................................................................................1 2 3 4 5 Streetlighting.........................................................................................1 2 3 4 5 Snowremoval ......................................................................................1 2 3 4 5 Sidewalk maintenance...........................................................................1 2 3 4 5 Traffic signal timing................................................................................1 2 3 4 5 Amountof public parking.......................................................................1 2 3 4 5 Bus/transit services................................................................................1 2 3 4 5 Stormdrainage.................................. ............................................1 2 3 4 5 Drinkingwater........................................................................................1 2 3 4 5 Sewerservices......................................................................................1 2 3 4 5 XYZparks..............................................................................................1 2 3 4 5 Recreation programs or classes............................................................1 2 3 4 5 Range/variety of recreation programs and classes...............................1 2 3 4 5 Recreation centers/facilities...................................................................1 2 3 4 5 Accessibility of parks.............................................................................1 2 3 4 5 Accessibility of recreation centers/facilities...........................................1 2 3 4 5 Appearance/maintenance of parks........................................................1 2 3 4 5 Appearance of recreation centers/facilities...........................................1 2 3 4 5 Land use,planning and zoning............................................................1 2 3 4 5 Code enforcement(weeds,abandoned buildings,etc)........................1 2 3 4 5 Animalcontrol .......................................................................................1 2 3 4 5 Economic development.........................................................................1 2 3 4 5 Healthservices.............._....... _..._......................................................1 2 3 4 5 Servicesto seniors................................................................................1 2 3 4 5 Servicesto youth...................................................................................1 2 3 4 5 Services to low-income people..............................................................1 2 3 4 5 Public library services............................................................................1 2 3 4 5 2 Variety of library materials.....................................................................1 2 3 4 5 Public information services....................................................................1 2 3 4 5 Municipalcourts....................................................................................1 2 3 4 5 Publicschools........................................................................................1 2 3 4 5 Cabletelevision.....................................................................................1 2 3 4 5 N rr 11. Overall,how would you rate the quality of the services provided by each of the following? Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know 4 TheXYZ of ABC....................................................................................1 2 3 4 5 Z The Federal Government......................................................................1 2 3 4 5 8 The State Government..........................................................................1 2 3 4 5o ry 0 12. Have you had any in-person or phone contact with an employee of the XYZ of ABC within the last 12 months (including police,receptionists,planners or any others)? O No 4 Go to question#14 O Yes 4 Go to question#13 13.What was your impression of employees of the XYZ of ABC in your most recent contact?(Rate each characteristic below.) Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know .ti Knowledge.....................................................................................1 2 3 4 5 0 Responsiveness..............................................................................1 2 3 4 5 Courtesy..........................................................................................1 2 3 4 5 Overallimpression..........................................................................1 2 3 4 5 Z v ,jrThe National Citizen Survey- Page 3 of 5 The XYZ of ABC 14. Please rate the following statements by circling the number that most clearly represents your opinion: Strongly Somewhat Neither agree Somewhat Strongly Don't agree agree nor disagree disagree disagree know I receive good value for the XYZ of ABC taxesI pay ...................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 am pleased with the overall direction that the XYZ of ABCis taking............................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 6 The XYZ of ABC government welcomes citizen involvement ............................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 The XYZ of ABC government listens to citizens.............. 1 2 3 4 5 6 15. What impact, if any, do you think the economy will have on your family income in the next 6 months? Do you think the impact will be: 0 Very positive 0 Somewhat positive 0 Neutral 0 Somewhat negative 0 Very negative 16. Please check the response that comes closest to your opinion for each of the following questions: a. Policy Question #1 Policy Question #1 Policy Question #1 Policy Question #1 Policy Question #1 Policy Question #1 Policy Question #1 Policy Question #1 Policy Question #1 Policy Question #1 Policy Question #1 Policy Question #1 Policy Question #1 Policy Question #1 Policy Question #1 Policy Question #1 Policy Question #1 Policy Question #1 0 Scale point 1 0 Scale point 3 0 Scale point 5 0 Scale point 2 O Scale point 4 0 Scale point 6 b. Policy Question #2 Policy Question #2 Policy Question #2 Policy Question #2 Policy Question #2 Policy Question #2 Policy Question #2 Policy Question #2 Policy Question #2 Policy Question #2 Policy Question #2 Policy Question #2 Policy Question #2 Policy Question #2 Policy Question #2 Policy Question #2 Policy Question #2 Policy Question #2 O Scale point 1 0 Scale point 3 0 Scale point 5 0 Scale point 2 0 Scale point 4 0 Scale point 6 c. Policy Question #3 Policy Question #3 Policy Question #3 Policy Question #3 Policy Question #3 Policy Question #3 Policy Question #3 Policy Question #3 Policy Question #3 Policy Question #3 Policy Question #3 Policy Question #3 Policy Question #3 Policy Question #3 Policy Question #3 Policy Question #3 Policy Question #3 Policy Question #3 0 Scale point 1 O Scale point 3 0 Scale point 5 0 Scale point 2 0 Scale point 4 0 Scale point 6 d. OPTIONAL [See Worksheets for details and price of this option] Open-Ended Question Open-Ended Question 0 Open-Ended Question Open-Ended Question Open-Ended Question Open-Ended Question Open-Ended Question Open-Ended Question Open-Ended Question Open-Ended Question Open-Ended Question Open- Ended Question N U r U i (6 N N N fD C O Z r 0 0 N O O N E r a N Z 7 U) C N N Y U m C 0 w m Z N t XThe National Citizen SurveyTm Page 4 of 5 The XYZ of ABC Our last questions are about you and your household.Again,all of your responses to this survey are completely anonymous and will be reported In group form only. 17. Do you live within the XYZ limits of the XYZ of 24.Are you or any other members of your ABC? household aged 65 or older? 0 No O Yes O No O Yes 18. Are you currently employed? 25. Does any member of your household have a O No 4 Go to question#19 physical handicap or is anyone disabled? O Yes 4 Go to question#18a 0 No 0 Yes 118a-What one method of transportation do you 26.What is the highest degree or level of school you usually use(for the longest distance of your have completed?(mark one box) commute)to travel to work? 0 12th Grade or less,no diploma O Motorized vehicle(e.g.car,truck,van, 0 High school diploma motorcycle etc...) 0 Some college,no degree O Bus,Rail,Subway,or other public O Associate's degree(e.g.AA,AS) transportation 0 Bachelor's degree(e.g.BA,AB,BS) O Walk O Graduate degree or professional degree O Work at home 0 Other 27. How much do you anticipate your household's total income before taxes will be for the current 18b.if you checked the motorized vehicle(e.g. year?(Please include in your total income car,truck,van,motorcycle,etc.)box in 18a, money from all sources for all persons living in do other people(adults or children)usually your household.) ride with you to or from work? 0 Less than$24,999 0 No O Yes 0 $25,000 to$49,999 0 $50,000 to$99,999 19. How many years have you lived in ABC? 0 $100,000 or more 0 Less than 2 years O 11-20 years 0 2-5 years 0 More than 20 years 28.Are you Spanish/Hispanic/Latino? 0 6-10 years O No 0 Yes 20.Which best describes the building you live in? 29.What is your race?(Mark one or more races to 0 One family house detached from any other indicate what race you consider yourself to be) houses 0 American Indian or Alaskan native 0 House attached to one or more houses(e.g.,a 0 Asian or Pacific Islander duplex or townhome) O Black,African American 0 Building with two or more apartments or 0 White/Caucasian — condominiums 0 Other O Mobile home 0 Other 30.In which category is your age? 0 18-24 years 0 55-64 years 21.Is this house,apartment,or mobile home... O 25-34 years 0 65-74 years 0 Rented for cash or occupied without cash O 35-44 years 0 75 years or older payment? O 45-54 years O Owned by you or someone in this house with a z mortgage or free and clear? 31.What is your sex? 0 Female O Male 8 22. Do any children 12 or under live in your household? 32.Are you registered to vote in your jurisdiction? 8 O No O Yes 0 No 0 Yes 0 Don't know 23. Do any teenagers aged between 13 and 17 live in 33. Did you vote in the last election? a your household? O No O YesO Don't know 0 No 0 Yes 34.Are you likely to vote in the next election? O No 0 Yes 0 Don't know Thank you for completing this survey.Please return the completed survey In the postage paid envelope to: o National Research Center,Inc.,3005 30th St.,Boulder,CO 80301 i z ,XThe National Citizen Survey- Page 5 of 5 F Policy Options for Consideration Here are some potential policy questions for the Council consideration. In a couple of cases there two optional ways of phrasing the question. We can work on the actual phrasing of the question based on Council feedback on which issues you would like to include and what option is more consistent with your preference. 1 . Over night parking a. To what extent do you agree with this statement: "Over night on street parking is a problem in residential neighborhoods and the city council should enforce a city ordinance to discourage over night parking on city streets." i. Strongly agree ii. Somewhat agree iii. Neither support or oppose iv. Somewhat disagree v. Strongly disagree vi. Don't know b. To what extent do you agree with this statement: "Over night on street parking is a problem in residential neighborhoods and the city council should enforce a city ordinance to discourage over night parking on city streets by limiting the number of over night street parking permits." i. Strongly agree ii. Somewhat agree iii. Somewhat disagree iv. Neither support or oppose v. Strongly disagree vi. Don't know 2. Tree Maintenance a. Select the statement that most closely reflects your feelings about the issue of removing the Eucalyptus tree in front of the Easton Branch Library sometime referred to as Tom the Tree. i. The time and money invested in considering how to save the tree was appropriate given the value of trees in our community. ii. The time and money invested in considering how to save the tree was in excess of what I believe was appropriate. iii. Every tree is important to the quality of live in Burlingame and the city's policy should be to do all we can to prevent the removal of a tree prematurely (prior to disease or stability risks occurs). iv. The City's urban forest is a key element of what makes Burlingame special and the city should manage the trees to ensure that neighborhoods will always have mature trees even if that means allowing some trees to be removed and replaced to achieve that age variety. v. None of the above. 3. Public Information a. If the City periodically sent newsletters out through the water bill how likely would you review it? i. Very likely ii. Somewhat likely iii. Neither likely nor unlikely iv. Very unlikely v. Don't know b. What are your primary (at least twice a month) means of getting information about local news? Check all that apply: i. Daily free newspapers ii. Daily subscription newspapers iii. Website blogs iv. Public agency websites v. Internet 4. Neighborhood Traffic a. To what extent do you agree with this statement: "Neighbor traffic and unsafe driving is a problem in our community and City should increase police resource dedicated to enforcing traffic laws." i. Strongly agree ii. Somewhat agree iii. Neither support or oppose iv. Somewhat disagree v. Strongly disagree vi. Don't know 5. Infrastructure a. To what extent do you agree with this statement: "The under investment in the city's storm drains and roadways is a concern and I would seriously consider increasing taxes to address this probelm." i. Strongly agree ii. Somewhat agree iii. Neither support or oppose iv. Somewhat disagree v. Strongly disagree vi. Don't know 6. Location of Community Center a. Select the statement that most closely reflects your feelings about the issue of where to locate a new community center. i. The passive areas of Washington Park have been too heavily impacted by active areas so any decision replace the current community center should plan on moving it out of the park regardless of the cost associated with purchasing additional land. ii. The passive areas of Washington Park have been too heavily impacted by active areas so would support plans replace the current community center by moving it out of the park as long as the cost to purchase additional land does not exceed $10 million. iii. I am comfortable with the balance of passive and active use areas in Washington Park and I would support placing a new/expanded community center in the park as the most cost effective way to address future community recreation programs. iv. I believe that spending any money to purchase new land for a community center is not a financially appropriate option. v. None of the above. Agenda Item # 9a Meeting BURLINGAME STAFF REPORT Date: A r' 16 2007 SUBMITTED BY OfAPPROVED BY TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL DATE: April 3, 2007 FROM: PUBLIC WORKS SUBJECT: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING MILLS TANK SEISMIC RETROFIT PROJECT, CITY PROJECT NO. 80950 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that Council approve the attached resolution accepting the construction of the Mills Tank Seismic Retrofit project in the amount of $1,079,327. BACKGROUND: A seismic analysis of all storage tanks in the City's water system was completed by G&E Engineering in January 2003, and it was determined that Mills Tank required seismic retrofitting. The project included demolishing the existing concrete dome, extending the existing footing, wrapping the existing tank walls with pre-stressing wire, covering the walls with shotcrete, and constructing a new aluminum dome. DISCUSSION: On October 17, 2005, the project was awarded to Anderson Pacific Engineering Construction in the amount of $981,000. After commencement of the work, conditions in the field were found to be substantially different than the record drawings reflected. Major structural revisions were required and an additional $98,327 of work was negotiated. BUDGET IMPACT: Construction contract $1,079,327 Construction management 132,400 Special Inspection and Testing 9,000 Staff administration and oversight 50,000 Total $1,270,727 There are sufficient funds available in the CIP budget to cover this work. EXHIBITS: Resolution c: City Clerk, City Attorney, Anderson Pacific Engineering Construction SAA Public Works Directory\Staff Reports\80950 Staff Report-Construction Acceptancedoc.doc RESOLUTION NO. - ACCEPTING IMPROVEMENTS - MILLS TANK SEISMIC RETOFIT PROJECT BY ANDERSON -PACIFIC ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION CITY PROJECT NO. 80950 RESOLVED by the CITY COUNCIL of the City of Burlingame,California,and this Council does hereby find, order and determine as follows: 1. The Director of Public Works of said City has certified the work done by G&E ENGINEERING under the terms of its contract with the City dated OCTOBER 17,2005, has been com- pleted in accordance with the plans and specifications approved by the City Council and to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. 2. Said work is particularly described as City Project No. 80950. 3. Said work be and the same hereby is accepted. 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 , 2007, and was adopted thereafter by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: City Clerk Agenda 9b Item # BURLINGAME STAFF REPORT Meeting Date: April 2007 SUBMITTED BY APPROVED BY TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL DATE: April 2, 2007 FROM: PUBLIC WORKS SUBJECT: RESOLUTION APPROVING PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH METCALF & EDDY FOR THE TROUSDALE PUMP STATION SUPPLY PIPELINE DESIGN, CITY PROJECT NO. 80910 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that Council approve the attached resolution for a professional services agreement with Metcalf & Eddy in the amount of $153,134. BACKGROUND: A water system master plan was completed in April 2004 which identified that the existing Trousdale Pump Station near Franklin School had reached the end of its useful life and was incapable of delivering peak consumer flow and fire protection flow simultaneously. In order to provide sufficient pressure and flows, it is necessary to replace the pump station and install a new supply pipeline between the SFPUC turnouts at Magnolia Drive and Marco Polo Way and the pump station. DISCUSSION: Staff has negotiated a fee of $153,134 for this pipeline design. This fee represents approximately 9% of the estimated $1,700,000 construction cost and is within the normal industry range for the scope and complexity of the project. (The Council previously approved an agreement for the design of the pump station.) Construction of the supply pipeline is scheduled for the fall of 2007. EXHIBITS: Resolution, Professional Services Agreement, Map BUDGET IMPACT: There are sufficient budgeted funds available through the 2006-07 water bond proceeds. c: City Clerk, City Attorney, Metcalf& Eddy, Erler & Kalinowski, Inc. A Public Works Directory\Staff Reports\80910TROUSDALESUPPLY.WPD.doc RESOLUTION NO. AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES WITH METCALF &EDDY FOR THE TROUSDALE PUMP STATION SUPPLY PIPELINE DESIGN CITY PROJECT NO. 80910 RESOLVED, by the CITY COUNCIL of the City of Burlingame, California and this Council does hereby FIND, ORDER and DETERMINE AS FOLLOWS: 1. The public interest and convenience require execution of the agreement cited in the title above. 2. The City Manager be, and he is hereby, authorized to sign said agreement for and on behalf of the City of Burlingame. 3. The City Clerk is hereby ordered and instructed to attest such signature. Mayor I,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 , 2007 and was adopted thereafter by the following vote. AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: City Clerk San Pablo Bay r4 nc " r \ 4 80 IAN PrP RAFAEL RICHMOND - - _ 580 24 Millbrae -25 OAKLAND - \ 10180 ` SAN FRA ISCO SBO i ° t IORWECT WE LY CITY 101 Sart=ranciace p Pacific Bay Ocean SAN NATSO' 92 / Proposed Project Site \ ,4- 280 Y N- Z. J fr 1 o f Hillsborough E � A b Burlingame Proposed Project FIGURE 1 p Prujea North FO0 750 1,500 Unincorporated Burlingame -Trousdale Pump Station PROJECT LOCATION I � I J Weiland,pond,or bay Discharge Piping Feet ■ Alcazar Tanks Suction PipingIT-- Trousdale Pump Station and 1 inch equals 1,500 feet Son ta:US census,Cary Boundaries,July 2000; . Donnelly Tanks&Pump Station Transmission Main Pro l ect TIGER 2K Traospormion,2000;USGS i7 Hydrography Dec.1998;ED'Assoc;ues,Pmpa Z 1'..6—Turte 2005 and GIS Pm til.coos. Note:All locations are approximate. Burlingame, CA Agenda 9c Item Meeting BURLINGAME STAFF REPORT Date: A W16 2007 SUBMITTED BY APPROVED BY �"✓� TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL DATE: March 30, 2007 FROM: PUBLIC WORKS SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING CONTINUED PARTICIPATION IN THE CITY/COUNTY ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS OF SAN MATEO COUNTY (C/CAG) AND APPROVAL OF THE JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that Council approve the attached resolution authorizing continued participation in the City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County (C/CAG) and approve the attached Joint Powers Agreement. BACKGROUND: C/CAG was founded in 1991 and renewed in 1995, 1999 and 2003. The current Joint Powers Agreement that provides C/CAG its legal basis is in effect until December 1 , 2007. Therefore, it is necessary to consider reauthorization. All the City and the County are currently members of C/CAG. Burlingame approved participation and the Joint Powers Agreement in 2003. DISCUSSION: C/CAG Role: The role of C/CAG is to provide a forum for all agencies to work together on common issues including transportation, solid waste, NPDES, airport land use, abandoned vehicle abatement and legislation (see attachments). C/CAG educates, and elevates the decision making of local elected officials and technical professional staffs to address countywide concerns in their local decisions. It also develops consensus on the common issues of concern to the general public, solutions and applicable funding recommendations/priorities as well as acts as Program Manager for Congestion Management Plan Transportation funds and Air Quality funds. C/CAG Performance: C/CAG has had very significant accomplishments including the Congestion Relief Plan, AB 1546 C/CAG DMV Fee and the Transit Oriented Development Incentive Program (see attachment). Numerous County, Regional, State and National awards SAA Public Works Directory\Staff Reports\CCAG Continued Participation.doc have been received. The C/CAG FY 2006-07 Budget member dues/fees ($2,024,645)are leveraged 3.9 times for total revenue and 14.3 times for controlled transportation funds. Utilization of two direct staff and contract staff has minimized the resources necessary to meet the program requirements. This staffing approach enables C/CAG to meet the program requirements in a cost-effective manner. C/CAG Benefits: Benefits of C/CAG to the member agencies include: • Provides a forum to share ideas and solutions among agencies for common issues • Enables all agencies to have a vote in the distribution of State and Federal Transportation funds ($70-80M every two years) allocated to San Mateo County • Provides support to assist agencies in obtaining and maintaining transportation funds ■ Provides cost-effective programs to assist member agencies in meeting mandates ■ Provides active intergovernmental support for San Mateo County and the member agencies in the region ■ Provides additional information to agency staff on the systemwide transportation impacts of proposed developments that better local decision making • Provides lobbyist support in Sacramento • Provides proactive advocation at the State level for additional funding such as AB 1546. Joint Powers Agreement: The attached agreement is essentially identical to the one adopted by Burlingame in 2003.Key changes include: 1. Section 12.dates changed to reflect reauthorization: "Effective Date/Termination Date.This agreement shall be effective on July 2, 2007, or upon its execution by the County and by at least eleven (11) cities representing the majority of the population of the County, whichever is later. This agreement shall automatically terminate on December 1, 2011, unless renewed in writing by the County and by at least eleven (11)cities containing a majority of the population of the County. Upon such termination, the provisions of Sections 10 and 11 apply." 2. Section 17. Fixed Self-Insured Retention limit. 'Insurance. The County shall add C/CAG to its existing excess liability insurance coverage and shall maintain such coverage in full force and effect during the life of this agreement. Said excess liability insurance coverage includes a has a—$26&990 self-insured retention. Unless the Board of Directors decides otherwise, County shall provide for the defense of any claims or litigation with the amount of the$260,000 self-insured retention. Legal representation by the County will ordinarily be provided by the Office of the County Counsel. Any out-of-pocket expenses or loss, by way of SAA Public Works Directory\Staff Reports\CCAG Continued Participation.doc judgement or settlement, arising out of the operation of this agreement, within the limits of the County's $2-50,089 self-insured retention shall be shared by the parties in accordance with the formula set forth in Section 6. Expenses shall not include salaries or office expenses of any county employee, including any attorneys from the Office of the County Counsel." 3. Section 24. Added to reflect a new legislated program. "AB 1546 Transportation/Environmental Vehicle Registration Fee Program. C/CAG shall serve as the overall program manager for the San Mateo County Transportation /Environmental Program which programs up to a $4 motor vehicle fee in accordance with Chapter 2.65 (commencing with Section 65089.11) to Division 1 of Title 7 of the Government Code and Section 9250.5 of the Vehicle Code." EXHIBITS: Resolution, Agreement, List of Accomplishments, C/CAG Programs/Plans, C/CAG Program Analysis SAA Public Works Directory\Staff Reports\CCAG Continued Participation.doc RESOLUTION NO. - A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME AUTHORIZING CONTINUED PARTICIPATION IN THE CITY/COUNTY ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS OF SAN MATEO COUNTY (C/CAG) AND APPROVAL OF THE JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE THE JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT RESOLVED by the CITY COUNCIL of the City of Burlingame, California, that, WHEREAS the City of Burlingame is currently a member of the City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County (C/CAG); and WHEREAS the City of Burlingame approved and executed the Joint Powers Agreement in 1999 continuing C/CAG for four years; and WHEREAS C/CAG has achieved significant accomplishments, including the Countywide Transportation Plan and the Transit Oriented Development Incentive Program; and WHEREAS C/CAG has received numerous County, Regional, State and National awards for its programs; and WHEREAS C/CAG provides programs to address State Mandates in a cost effective manner; and WHEREAS participation in C/CAG provides the City of Burlingame a voice in the programming of over $I OOM in transportation funds; and WHEREAS the City of Burlingame desires to continue participation in C/CAG; and WHEREAS the City of Burlingame desires to execute the Joint Powers Agreement; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mayor of the City of Burlingame is hereby authorized and directed to execute the Joint Powers Agreement for and on behalf of the City of Burlingame, subject to approval as to form by the City Attorney. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED THIS 16`h DAY OF April, 2007. Mayor I, Doris Mortenson, 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 2007, and was adopted thereafter by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: City Clerk ATTEST: by Clerk of Town Council Mayor CITY OF DALY CITY ATTEST: by Clerk of City Council Mayor CITY OF EAST PALO ALTO ATTEST: by Clerk of City Council Mayor CITY OF FOSTER CITY ATTEST: by Clerk of City Council Mayor CITY OF HALF MOON BAY ATTEST: by Clerk of City Council Mayor TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH C/CAG JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT(JPA) 15 REVISED:MARCH,2007 ATTEST: by Clerk of Town Council Mayor CITY OF MENLO PARK ATTEST: by Clerk of City Council Mayor CITY OF MILLBRAE ATTEST: by Clerk of City Council Mayor CITY OF PACIFICA ATTEST: by Clerk of City Council Mayor TOWN OF PORTOLA VALLEY ATTEST: by Clerk of Town Council Mayor CITY OF REDWOOD CITY C/CAG JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT(JPA) 16 REVISED:MARCH,2007 ATTEST: by Clerk of City Council Mayor CITY OF SAN BRUNO ATTEST: by Clerk of City Council Mayor CITY OF SAN CARLOS ATTEST: by Clerk of City Council Mayor CITY OF SAN MATEO ATTEST: by Clerk of City Council Mayor CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO ATTEST: by Clerk of City Council Mayor TOWN OF WOODSIDE ATTEST: C/CAG JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT(JPA) 17 REVISED:MARCH,2007 by Clerk or Town Council Mayor F:\USERS\C CAG\WPDATA\JPA\2007\JPA07DRF'T 02/23/07 C/CAG JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT(JPA) 18 REVISED:MARCH,2007 JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT Continuing Establishment of the City/County Association of Governments THIS AGREEMENT,by and between the COUNTY OF SAN MATEO(hereinafter referred to as"County")and those cities within the County of San Mateo who become signatories to this agreement(hereinafter referred to as"Cities"or"City"as the context requires),is made in light of the following recitals: A. The County and the Cities have authority to perform a variety of functions in their respective communities and desire to establish a City/County Association of Governments(C/CAG) within the County of San Mateo whereby the parties will prepare, review,adopt,monitor and facilitate implementation by the member agencies county-wide state mandated plans as specified in 3(c)below. Local land-use decisions,except as they are affected by state-mandated county-wide plans,will remain solely within the cognizant local jurisdiction. B. The parties are authorized to contract with each other for the joint exercise of any common power pursuant to Government Code Sections 6500 through 6518. NOW,THEREFORE,the County and the Cities,in consideration of the mutual promises and agreements contained herein,AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1. Establishment of City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County. The parties hereby create an entity to be known as the City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County(hereinafter referred to as"C/CAG")for the preparation,review, adoption,monitoring and facilitation of implementation by the member agencies of county-wide state mandated plans. C/CAG shall be an entity which is separate from the parties to this agreement and shall be responsible for the administration of this agreement. Except as provided herein, the debts, liabilities, and obligations of C/CAG shall be the debts, liabilities, and obligations of the entity and not the debts, liabilities, and/or obligations of the parties to this agreement. C/CAG shall have the power and is authorized to do any or all of the following: (a) To make and enter contracts; (b) To employ agents and employees; (c) To lease, maintain, manage, acquire, construct or operate any building, works or improvements; (d) To acquire, hold, or dispose of property; (e) To incur debts, liabilities, or obligations; (f) To sue and be sued in its own name; 2. Board of Directors. The Board of the City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County (C/CAG) shall consist of a member of the City Council of each participating City to be selected by that City and one (1) member of the Board of Supervisors to be selected by the Board of Supervisors. Each City Council and the Board of Supervisors may select one (1) alternate member from its body who shall participate when the regular member is absent. In addition, there shall be two (2) non-voting ex-officio members: a representative of the San Mateo County Transit District Board of Directors selected by the Board of Directors and a representative of the San Mateo County Transportation Authority selected by the Authority. Additional Ex-Officio members may be established by Board action in accordance with the special voting procedures identified in 4 (c). Regular attendance by the designated representative or alternate at the C/CAG Board and C/CAG JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT(JPA) 2 REVISED: MARCH, 2007 Subcommittee meetings shall be encouraged by the C/CAG Board and member agencies. 3. Purposes and Activities. C/CAG is established to fulfill the following purposes operating through the Board of Directors for control, direction, and administration: (a) Plan, organize, and maintain the work of C/CAG and be responsible for its overall operation. (b) Advise City Councils and the Board of Supervisors of all significant activities of C/CAG. (c) Prepare, review, adopt, monitor and facilitate implementation by the member agencies the following state-mandated county-wide plans: (1) Congestion Management Plan (as the designated Congestion Management Agency including enforcing compliance with the Congestion Management Plan); (2) Integrated Solid Waste Management Plan(as the designated Local Task Force); (3) Airport Land Use Plan (as the designated Airport Land Use Commission); (4) Hazardous Waste Management Plan; (5) NPDES - Stormwater Management Plan. (d) Perform such additional county-wide planning activities as approved by or directed by two-thirds (2/3) of the members representing two-thirds(2/3)of the population of the County. Final adoption of any such plans shall only be after the plan has been C/CAG JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT(JPA) 3 REVISED:MARCH,2007 introduced at a prior meeting held at least twenty-five (25) days earlier. (e) Perform any additional County-Wide activities as set forth in this agreement (Sections 20., 21., 22., and 23.). (f) Utilize and establish advisory subcommittees wherever necessary,including but not limited to: (1) Airport Land Use Committee (2) Congestion Management and Air Quality Committee (3) Congestion Management Plan(CMP) Technical Advisory Committee (4) Solid Waste Advisory Committee(Local Task Force) (5) Hazardous Waste Management Plan Advisory Committee (6) Bikeways and Pedestrian Advisory Committee (7) Finance Committee (8) NPDES Committee (9) NPDES Technical Advisory Committee (10) Legislative Committee Subcommittees may be established by Board action in accordance with the ficial voting procedures identified in 4 (c). Subcommittee membership may include persons who are not members of the Board of Directors,including other elected officials or public members. (g) Adopt By-laws and such other rules of procedure as may be deemed necessary. The duties, responsibilities or obligations of C/CAG, as set forth in this Agreement, are not intended, and shall not be interpreted,to expand or diminish any legal duties, C/CAG JOINT POW ERS AGREEMENT(JPA) 4 REVISED:MARCH,2007 responsibilities or obligations that any city or county member of C/CAG has, or may in the future have,under any provision of State or Federal law. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in any other provision of this Agreement,C/CAG shall have no authority and/or obligation to implement or enforce the provisions of any County-wide plan except when C/CAG is functioning as an agency specifically designated by state or federal law as having the authority and/or obligation to implement or enforce such County- wide plan. 4. Voting Procedures. The parties intend to strive for consensus following full discussion but in the event consensus cannot be reached the following voting procedures shall be utilized. (a) A quorum shall consist of at least a majority of the voting members and shall be required for all meetings of C/CAG. (b) All decisions and actions shall be by majority vote of those present unless the decision involves the adoption of a county-wide plan or any one (1) member requests the use of the special voting procedures hereinafter set forth. (c) The special voting procedures shall be utilized upon the request of any one(1) member. Addition of Ex-Officio members to the Board,the establishment of Subcommittees, and the final adoption of county-wide plans shall require the special voting procedures. Special voting procedures shall be as follows: for a motion to be successful it must receive the votes of a majority of the members representing a majority of the population of the County. In determining the population of local governments,the population shall be utilized as set forth in a C/CAG JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT(JPA) 5 REVISED:MARCH,2007 resolution adopted by the Board of Directors pursuant to Section 19. 5. Budget. The Board annually shall adopt, by a date C/CAG designates by resolution,an operating budget for C/CAG setting forth anticipated expenses,financing sources and proposed service levels necessary to carry out the purposes of this agreement. C/CAG shall establish its fiscal year by resolution. Immediately after approving the annual budget, the Board shall recommend the budget to the governing bodies of the members for the purpose of securing from each of them contributions and/or appropriations in accordance with each party's obligations as set forth in Section 6 below. It is expressly agreed and understood that the Board has no authority to bind any governing board to make the recommended contribution and/or appropriation and that this decision rests solely with each governing body. Each party shall deposit its monetary contribution to the budget with the C/CAG Treasurer on or before the date C/CAG designates by resolution. 6. Contribution of Parties. In consideration of the mutual promises contained herein,the parties agree that they shall make the following annual contributions towards maintaining the program of C/CAG. Each member's contribution shall be its pro-rata share of the revenue needed for the annual budget as adopted by the Board of Directors. The pro-rata share of each agency shall be based upon its population as set forth in a resolution adopted by the Board of Directors pursuant to Section 19. By use of the special voting procedures under special circumstances the Board of Directors may waive contributions. If a member fails to pay its annual contribution,it shall forfeit its voting rights as provided in Paragraph 10 and there shall be no further recourse against it for nonpayment. C/CAG JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT(JPA) 6 REVISED:MARCH,2007 7. Treasurer. The Board of Directors shall select a Treasurer from one of its member entities who shall be the depository and have custody of all the money and property of C/CAG from whatever source. The duties of the C/CAG Treasurer shall include those set forth in the Government Code Section 6500 et seq., Joint Exercise of Powers. 8. Controller. The Board of Directors shall select a Controller from one of its member entities who shall perform the functions of auditor and/or controller for C/CAG. The duties of the C/CAG Controller shall include those set forth in Government Code Section 6500 et seq., Joint Exercise of Powers. 9. Staffing. It is understood that C/CAG may require the support of its own administrative staff. When deemed necessary, the Board of Directors may employ an Executive Director. The Board shall have responsibility for all employment decisions regarding said Executive Director who shall serve at the pleasure of the Board of Directors. The Executive Director shall be responsible for the day-to-day administration of C/CAG under the direction of the Board of Directors. The Executive Director shall seek advice and assistance from the Administrators' Advisory Committee. The Executive Director shall have the authority to employ administrative staff consistent with the approved budget of C/CAG. There shall be an Administrators'Advisory Committee. The Committee will be advisory to the C/CAG Board of Directors and Executive Director to assist them to most effectively accomplish the objectives of C/CAG by giving advice on agenda matters,monitoring outcomes of activities,assisting with identifying and allocating resources,and communicating with all members. C/CAG JoiNT PowERs AGREEMENT(JPA) 7 REVISED:MARCH,2007 The Committee members shall be: the City Managers from cities that contract staff to C/CAG,the County Manager, the General Manager of SamTrans, one (1) City Manager appointed by the City Managers'Association,and,the Chair and Vice-Chair(s)and Legal Counsel of C/CAG as ex-officio members. Committee Chairs and staff who have items for discussion at the Committee will be invited to participate. The definition and membership of this Committee may be revised by Board action in accordance with the ficial voting_procedures identified in 4(c). It is understood that C/CAG may employ personnel, utilize existing County, SamTrans or City staff, or retain professional consultants to perform any necessary staff work in meeting its goals and objectives. It is further understood that no County,SamTrans or City staff will be utilized without the consent of the employing agency. 10. Withdrawal. Any party may withdraw from this agreement by filing written notice of intention to do so with the Chair of the governing board by September 30th of each year,or by another date C/CAG designates by resolution. The rights and obligations of such party shall terminate at the end of the first full fiscal year for which the withdrawing party has made its contribution following such notice having been given. The withdrawal of any party from this agreement shall in no way affect the rights and obligations of the remaining parties. If a party withdraws from this agreement,such party shall not be entitled to the return of any funds contributed to C/CAG nor to the return in cash or in kind of any materials or supplies until termination of this agreement. If a party fails to make its contribution in accordance with Section 6 of this agreement, that agency shall forfeit its voting rights during the period of such non-payment. However,if one of the Cities or the County wishes to rejoin after forfeiting its membership by non-payment of its contribution, it may do so by paying the designated amount. C/CAG JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT(JPA) 8 REviSED:MARCH,2007 11. Termination and Disposition of Property. This agreement shall be deemed terminated when the number of Cities participating in this agreement contain less than a majority of the population of the County,or are fewer than eleven(11)in number. Upon termination,equipment and all other assets shall be distributed to the parties hereto in proportion to the contributions of the parties during the life of C/CAG including distribution to parties which may have withdrawn at an earlier date. Upon termination, any surplus money on hand shall be returned to the parties in proportion to the contributions of the parties during the life of C/CAG including distribution to parties which may have withdrawn at an earlier date. 12. Effective Date Termination Date. This agreement shall be effective on July 1, 2007,or upon its execution by the County and by at least eleven(11)cities representing the majority of the population of the County,whichever is later. This agreement shall automatically terminate on December 1,2011,unless renewed in writing by the County and by at least eleven cities containing a majority of the population of the County. Upon such termination,the provisions of Sections 10 and 11 apply. 13. Meetings. Monthly meetings of the C/CAG Board of Directors shall be held in accordance with the Brown Act, Government Code Section 54950 et sea. The Board of Directors shall establish a regular time and place for the required meetings. In addition,the Board of Directors shall have such other meetings as are deemed necessary. 14. Notice of Agreement. Pursuant to Government Code Section 6503.5,C/CAG C/CAG JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT(JPA) 9 REVISED:MARCH,2007 shall, within thirty (30) days after the effective date of this agreement, cause a notice of the agreement to be prepared and filed with the Office of the Secretary of State. 15. Other Associations. Participation in C/CAG is not intended to preclude member entities from entering into similar agreements with other jurisdictions. 16. Legal Counsel. Unless the Board of Directors determines otherwise,the County Counsel shall serve as legal counsel to C/CAG and provide all routine legal advice and service necessary including attendance at Board of Directors meetings. 17. Insurance. The County shall add C/CAG to its existing excess liability insurance coverage and shall maintain such coverage in full force and effect during the life of this agreement. Said excess liability insurance coverage includes a has x$250;088 self-insured retention by the County. Unless the Board of Directors decides otherwise, County shall provide for the defense of any claims or litigation within the amount of the$250,000 self-insured retention. Legal representation by the County will ordinarily be provided by the Office of the County Counsel. Any out-of-pocket expenses or loss,by way of judgment or settlement, arising out of the operation of this agreement, within the limits of the County's $250,000 self-insured retention shall be shared by the parties in accordance with the formula set forth in Section 6. Expenses shall not include salaries or office expenses of any county employees, including any attorneys from the Office of the County Counsel. 18. Amendments. This Joint Powers Agreement may be amended at any time with C/CAG JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT(JPA) 10 REVISED:MARCH,2007 the agreement of the majority of the members representing a majority of the population of the County, except as provided in 3(d). 19. Adiustment of Population Figures. The Board of Directors shall establish by resolution the population figures to be utilized in determining the population of local governments under this agreement based on the results of the decennial federal census or population figures provided by the State Department of Finance, and may revise the population figures at any time by resolution. 20. Clean Air Vehicle Registration Fee Program. C/CAG shall serve as the overall program manager for the San Mateo County under Health and Safety Code Section 44241 for funds made available by the increase in motor vehicle registration fees that the Bay Area Air Quality Management District is authorized to levy under A.B. 434, (1991 Statutes, Chapter 807.) 21. Storm Water Discharge Plan and Permit. The City/County Association of Governments shall assume responsibility for the following activities under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System(NPDES) Program(40 CFR 122): (a) Ratify submission of a county-wide storm water discharge permit application and accept permit on behalf of the County and Cities in the County, as co- permittees. (b) Prepare preliminary draft and final draft storm water management plan describing existing activities the County and Cities are conducting to help minimize the discharge of pollutants to storm water, describing new pollution C/CAG JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT(IPA) 11 REvIsED:MARCH,2007 measures that will be undertaken during the initial five year period of the NPDES permit,and containing other matters C/CAG determines are necessary or desirable. (c) Identify and recommend alternatives for implementation of a revenue program. (d) Enter into contracts with the County, the Cities, the County Flood Control District, and other entities to implement the revenue program and the storm water management plan. (e) Perform additional county-wide activities in connection with the NPDES program as set forth in the storm water management plan approved by, or as directed,by the Board of Directors. (f) Provide coordination and overall management of the NPDES program and advice to the County and the Cities on implementation. The County and each City shall be solely responsible for complying with NPDES permit conditions and all federal, state,and local laws and regulations,relating to discharges from the storm sewers in its jurisdiction and under its control. The County and each City shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless every other party to this agreement, and its officers and employees, from all claims, suits, actions, fines, penalties, damages, or liability of every name, kind, and description arising in any way out of the negligent or intentional acts of that County or City in complying or failing to comply with NPDES permit conditions, and all federal, state, and local regulations applicable to that County or City. 22. Service Authority for Abatement of Abandoned Vehicles. C/CAG shall be the service authority for the abatement of abandoned vehicles under Vehicle Code Section 22710. C/CAG JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT(JPA) 12 REVISED:MARCH,2007 t C/CAG shall impose a service fee of one dollar ($1) on vehicles registered to an owner with an address in San Mateo County as authorized by Vehicle Code Sections 9250.7 and 22710. As provided in Vehicle Code Section 22710(b),C/CAG may contract and undertake any act convenient or necessary to carry out any law relating to its duties as the service authority. 23. Programming State and Federal Transportation Funds. C/CAG acting as the Congestion Management Agency shall be responsible for programming State and Federal Transportation Funds allocated to San Mateo County. These funds include but are not limited to State Transportation Improvement Program, Transportation Equity Act for the 21rst Century, and Transportation Development Act Article 3. 24. AB 1546 Transportation/Environmental Vehicle Registration Fee Program. C/CAG shall serve as the overall program manager for the San Mateo County Transportation/ Environmental Program which programs up to a $4 motor vehicle fee in accordance with Chapter 2.65(commencing with Section 65089.11) to Division I of Title 7 of the Government Code and Section 9250.5 of the Vehicle Code. IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the parties hereto by their duly authorized representative,have affixed their hands on this day of , 2007. COUNTY OF SAN MATEO ATTEST: by Clerk of the Board President of the Board of Supervisors C/CAG JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT(JPA) 13 REVISED:MARCH,2007 TOWN OF ATHERTON ATTEST: by Clerk of Town Council Mayor CITY OF BELMONT ATTEST: by Clerk of City Council Mayor CITY OF BRISBANE ATTEST: by Clerk of City Council Mayor CITY OF BURLINGAME ATTEST: by Clerk of City Council Mayor TOWN OF COLMA C/CAG JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT(JPA) 14 REVISED:MARCH,2007 C/CAG ACCOMPLISHMENTS Major Policy Adoption • Intelligent Transportation System Plan • Ramp metering study and implementation • 2020 Gateway Study Initiated (San Mateo and Santa Clara) • El Camino Real Incentive Program • Congestion Management Plans (2003 and 2005) Fiscal Mann eg ment • C/CAG sponsored AB 1546 became law that provides $8.75M over 3.5 years • Raised $800-1000 K in partnerships for various projects • Leveraged Member Assessments by 3.9 (Revenue) and 14.3 (Controlled) • Additional funds of$4.5 M for US 101/Ralston Interchange • Programmed $ 59.6 M in State and Federal Transportation Funds • Programmed $ 4.3 M in Transportation Funds for Clean Air Intergovernmental (Region/ State/Federal) • 2020 Gateway Study (San Mateo and Santa Clara Counties) • Pursued and granted $4.5M in STIP funding for US 101-Ralston Interchange • Supported Transportation Authority (TA) in the extension of Measure A • Legislative Advocacy at State Level - C/CAG sponsored AB 1546 became law CONGESTION MANAGEMENT PROGRAM/ COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN PURPOSE: • To develop a consensus on countywide transportation issues and to manage congestion to allow for orderly economic growth in San Mateo County. • To educate and broaden the professional staff and elected officials such that their local decisions will benefit the county as a whole. • To collectively develop local and countywide transportation plans to minimize congestion. • To provide information to local agencies on the cumulative impact of local decisions • To relate land use and transportation decisions. • To maximize transportation funding for San Mateo County projects. BENEFITS: • Promotes countywide transportation planning among all agencies. • Involvement of elected officials and staff technical professionals will broaden their view such that individual decisions are more beneficial to all agencies in the region. • Better information is available to individual agencies to make land use decisions that will benefit congestion management. C/CAG BOARD ROLE: • Establish vision and long-term(twenty year)goals for resolving mobility and congestion issues in San Mateo County. • Program State and Federal funding to implement the vision and long-term goals. NPDES STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN PURPOSE: The Federal Clean Water Act mandates the NPDES- Storm Water Management Plan. San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) was charged with the permitting authority. The objective of the program is to minimize the pollutants in the water sources through non-point sources. C/CAG is the administrative and policy- making authority responsible for implementation and compliance with the Countywide NPDES Municipal, Stormwater Discharge Permit. The permit was issued on July 1999 and remains in effect until September 2004 when it must be renewed. BENEFITS: • Achieves compliance with the Federal Mandate. • Reduces materials discharged into the Bay. • Assists and trains agencies on compliance with RWQCB requirements. • Educates the public on their role in reducing discharges into the Bay. C/CAG BOARD ROLE: • Oversee compliance with the regional permit. • Adopt and oversee the implementation of programs and services to accomplish the conditions of the regional permit. • Establish a budget, determine revenues, and allocate resources to support regional programs under the permit. ABANDONED VEHICLE ABATEMENT PROGRAM PURPOSE: The objective of the Abandoned Vehicle Abatement program is the abatement of abandoned vehicles. C/CAG acts as the San Mateo AVA Service Authority. Reimbursement is provided to participating agencies through revenues provided from vehicle registration fees. BENEFITS: • Cars Removed from San Mateo County Streets 2,257(2001 estimate) • Agency Cost Reimbursement $702,477(18 Agencies) • Air Quality Emissions Reduction(Note 1) 18-26 Tons(2001 estimate) Note 1-Assumptions included:a-1.1%of the cars abated were towed,destroyed and operating(295),b-the vehicle was replaced with a newer model and driven the same number of miles(4000)and c-abated cars were 1975-1981. Based on these assumptions BAAQMD calculated the emissions reduction. C/CAG BOARD ROLE: • Sponsor the program on behalf of the participating local jurisdictions in San Mateo County. • Distribute State funding to local jurisdictions participating in the program. AB 434 - TRANSPORATION FUND FOR CLEAN AIR (TFCA) PURPOSE: The Bay Area Air Quality Management District's Transportation Fund for Clean Air program utilizes DMV fees to fund projects with the primary objective being to reduce emissions into the air. C/CAG as the Program Manager for San Mateo County administers the program. San Mateo County has the dual goal to both reduce air emissions and improve congestion. BENEFITS: • Elimination of hydrocarbons and nitrogen oxides from the air 62.82 Tons C/CAG BOARD ROLE: • Establish annual program priorities for the use of the regional funds. • Contract for services with local agencies and monitor the outcomes of these projects. • Allocate funds and provide fiscal oversite. AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION/ PLAN PURPOSE: State law requires every county with public use airports, to establish an airport land use commission to address airport/ land use compatibility issues (i.e. aircraft noise issues, height of structures and safety issues). A comprehensive Airport Land Use Plan (CLUP) for each public use airport in the County is prepared and adopted. There are three public use airports in San Mateo County: Half Moon Bay Airport (general aviation), San Carlos Airport (general aviation), and San Francisco International Airport (commercial service airport). BENEFITS: • Maintains compliance with State law, re: airport/ land use compatibility planning. • Educates local planning staffs, elected officials, and others about airport/ land use planning issues and concerns at each airport in San Mateo County. • Provides a current Comprehensive Airport Land Use Plan (CLUP) to evaluate proposed local agency land use policy actions in the vicinity of the airports in San Mateo County. C/CAG BOARD ROLE: • Function as the designated Airport Land Use Committee for San Mateo County. • Adopt and revise as needed, a Comprehensive Airport Land Use Plan for San Mateo County. • Review and comment on land use developments that fall within the parameters of the Plan. TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT ACT (TDA) FUND MANAGEMENT PURPOSE: C/CAG receives federal funds each year under the Transportation Development Act (TDA). The TDA program provides funding for pedestrian and bicycle projects. The C/CAG Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee(BPAC)is responsible for evaluating and recommending to C/CAG those projects to be funded by Transportation Development Act(TDA)Article 3 revenues. BENEFITS: • Facilitate investment in bicycle and pedestrian facilities. • Increased bicycle and pedestrian use can improve congestion and air quality. • Bicycle map will facilitate use of bicycle for use both for commute and recreation. C/CAG BOARD ROLE: • Determine long-range goals for bicycle and pedestrian improvements in San Mateo County. • Solicit projects to accomplish these goals and make recommendations to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission for the allocation of funds. SAN MATEO COUNTYWIDE CONGESTION RELIEF PLAN PURPOSE: C/CAG receives funds from the Cities and County through a special assessment to fund the Congestion Relief Plan. The Congestion Relief Plan is composed of seven programs whose goal is to move San Mateo County forward to meet the Countywide Transportation Plan requirement to increase transit ridership from 6%to 20%and reduce automobile usage from 94 to 80%. The plan focuses on the operating efficiency of the transportation system through shuttles, Transportation Demand Management, Intelligent Transportation Systems and creating incentives for the cities and County to develop transportation friendly land use. A total of$7.1M a year for four years is provided by the plan. This includes $2.3 M a year in new money from the Cities and County. SamTrans and the Transportation Authority will be asked to provide matching funds of$1.8 M a year. State/Federal sources will provide $3 M a year. Planned annual funding for the seven programs are: 1- Employer shuttles- $1.0 M, 2- Local Service - $2.0 M, 3- Countywide Transportation Demand Management- $0.45 M, 4- Try Transit-$0.05 M, 5- Intelligent Transportation System Study - $0.4 M, 6- Highway 101 Ramp Metering Study- $0.2 M, and 7- Transit Oriented Development Land Use Incentive Program - $3 M. BENEFITS: • Funds committed by the Cities and County is leveraged by other sources. • Provide a matching program for unique local shuttle services. • Expands the number of Employer based shuttles • Funds a Peninsula Corridor Ramp Metering Study. • Funds a Countywide Intelligent Transportation System Study. • Provides funding for Countywide Transportation System Management(TSM). • Continues Transit Oriented Development Incentive Programs. C/CAG BOARD ROLE: • Review and approve implementation of the Congestion Relief Program. • Program funding to projects to implement the Congestion Relief Plan. • Pursue additional funding. AB 1546 TRANSPORTATION/ ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAM ($4 DMV FEE) PURPOSE: Assemblymember Simitian introduced AB 1546 on behalf of C/CAG in 2003. This bill was adopted by the Legislature on August 18, 2004, and signed into law by the Governor on September 29, 2004. It took effect on January 1, 2005 as Chapter 2.65 (commencing with Section 65089.11)to Division 1 of Title 7 of the Government Code and Section 9250.5 of the Vehicle Code,relating to local government. The law provides authorization for the City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County to impose an annual fee of up to $4 on motor vehicles registered within San Mateo County for a program for the management of traffic congestion and stormwater pollution within San Mateo County. Proceeds from the fee must only be used for programs that bear a relationship or benefit to the motor vehicles that will pay the fee. This includes motor vehicle congestion and stormwater pollution prevention programs that directly address the negative impacts on creeks, streams,bays, and the ocean caused by motor vehicles and the infrastructure supporting motor vehicle travel On December 9, 2004 the C/CAG Board unanimously approved the imposition of a four dollar($4.00) fee for motor vehicles registered in San Mateo County, a corresponding program of services, and a budget for the expenditure of the fees. BENEFITS: • Provides $8.75M in funding to Cities/County in San Mateo County. • 50%of Funds to Cities/County for Congestion and Stormwater Projects. • 50%of Funds for Countywide Congestion and Stormwater Projects. • Congestion and Environmental Benefit. C/CAG BOARD ROLE: • Review and approve implementation of the Transportation/Environmental Program. • Program funding to projects to implement the Transportation/Environmental Program. • Pursue renewal or extension of the Pilot Program. C/CAG LEGISLATIVE ADVOCACY PURPOSE: C/CAG established a formal Legislative Committee and has employed a lobbyist on a pilot basis to increase the C/CAG legislative advocacy. The purpose is to be more proactive on legislation and to provide a strong effort on specific key legislation. This effort may also include the pursuit of C/CAG sponsored bills. The C/CAG legislative advocacy includes the following functions. • Monitor bills of potential interest to C/CAG and select those to be tracked. • Develop recommended positions on bills. • Identify new bills of interest through regular review of bulletins and contact with other associations such as the Metropolitan Transportation Commission,the Association of Bay Area Governments,the Bay Area Air Quality Management District,the League of California Cities,the County Supervisors Association of California, and various national organizations. • Identify bills to be referred to the lobbyist for specific action. • Monitor the work of the C/CAG lobbyist. • Define potential C/CAG sponsored legislation. BENEFITS: + Increase the effectiveness of C/CAG advocacy. • Lobbying support provided to the Cities/County with minimal cost to each agency. • Vehicle provided to pursue C/CAG sponsored legislation. • Coordinate and facilitate cities/county response on key legislation. C/CAG BOARD ROLE: • Identify legislative policy positions. • Identify 8-10 primary legislative items to focus on for lobbyist. • Support lobbying effort in Sacramento. • Measure and monitor performance of lobbyist. • Pursue additional funding. C/CAG PROGRAMS ANALYSIS Programs Category Must Provides Penalty Program Funds County/Agency Perform Funding % Paid Source %Paid Source Benefit Transportation CMP Voluntary/Mandate X W/H Gas Tax 40-50 MTC 50-60 Gas Tax Short Term Plan CTP Voluntary X None 40-50 MTC 50-60 Agencies Long Term Plan State/Federal Voluntary X X None 100 MTC Fund Projects Programming Congestion Countywide Relief Plan Voluntary X None 100 Agency 100 Agencies Programs AB 434 TFCA Voluntary X X None 100 DMV Fund Air Projects AB 1546 Voluntary X None 100 DMV Funds Congestion and NPDES Projects NPDES State/Federal Mandate X to$10,000/Day 85 Sewer/Agency15 Agencies Meets legal obligation No fines. Abandoned Vehicle Voluntary X X None 100 DMV Less abandoned cars ALUC Mandate X None 20-30 Grants 70-80 Agencies Meets legal obligation Solid Waste State Mandate X to$10,000/Day 90 County 10 Agencies Meets legal obligation (AB939) No fines. Legislative Voluntary None 100 Agency 100 Agencies Provides and Protects Advocacy Local Revenue NOTES 1- On CMP it is voluntary for the County to opt out. If elect in then there are mandates that must be met and penalties. 2- The "Must Perform"category also includes those programs necessary to bring funds to San Mateo County. AWARD CONTRACT TO KEVIN GARDINER&ASSOCIATES FOR PREPARATION OF THE DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN. April 16,2007 Budget Impact: There will be no impact on the General Fund with this work program. In the Spring of 2006 the City Council directed that a Downtown Specific Plan should be prepared and funded from the Parking Enterprise Fund. The council allocated $450,000 for this program. The $250,000 for the consultant to prepare the plan will be taken from this allocation. From the original $450,000 allocation the city has already funded the preparation of the Economic Base Study for Downtown by William Lee of Economic Research Associates for$64,000 and assistance in preparation of the Scope of Work with Neil Martin and Associates for about $7,500. In addition there will be an additional fee of about $75,000 for the preparation of the environmental document on the Specific Plan. The residual from the initial funding will be used to provide Planning Department staff to support the downtown planning program and to prepare the zoning ordinances to implement the adopted Downtown Specific Plan. EXHIBITS: Agreement for Planning Consultant Services between the City of Burlingame and Kevin Gardiner & Associates fro Development of the Burlingame Avenue Specific Plan with attachments: a. Map of the Downtown Specific Plan Planning Area b. Proposal for Downtown Specific Plan for the City of Burlingame c. Revised Project Time Line Resolution of the City of Burlingame Approving Agreement with Kevin Gardiner &Associates to prepare a Specific Plan for the Burlingame Avenue Commercial Area and Authorize the City Manager to Execute the Agreement on Behalf of the City INNOW sed Planning Area for the ame Downtown Specific Plan 410, NMI iG � o Ill►1�� iii-t �► � .., � ♦ 01� DO. ♦� t� ♦ . ♦ �� ��� O♦ir�� iii ��` � �� Opp:�� �;��� mit♦� ♦♦♦♦�. •.,���'�j eej� ��1 ♦ ���� �0�� ���!�� •� ,j O.I. .�,�►�� eeiieei. IN � Oj•���I� ♦ ��%9i moi, �► ,I G AGREEMENT FOR PLANNING CONSULTANT SERVICES BETWEEN THE CITY OF BURLINGAME AND KEVIN GARDINER & ASSOCIATES FOR DEVELOPMENT OF THE BURLINGAME AVENUE SPECIFIC PLAN AREA THIS AGREEMENT is entered into this 16th day of April, 2007, by and between the City of Burlingame, State of California, herein called the "City", and Kevin Gardiner & Associates, a sole proprietorship, engaged in providing advanced planning and related consulting services, herein called the "Consultant". RECITALS A. The City is considering undertaking activities to prepare and see though adoption a Downtown Specific Plan for the Burlingame Avenue Commercial Area bounded by Peninsula Avenue, El Camino Real, Oak Grove Avenue, and east of the CalTrain tracks to Anita Road. B. The City desires to engage a planning consultant to provide consulting services in conjunction with preparing a specific plan for the downtown Burlingame area as described in the Scope of Work, because of Consultant's experience and qualifications to perform the desired work. C. The Consultant represents and affirms that it is qualified and willing to perform the desired work pursuant to this Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, THE PARTIES HERETO AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1 . Scope of Work. The scope of services to be provided are documented in the proposal for the preparation of the Downtown Specific Plan for the City of Burlingame prepared by Kevin Gardiner & Associates with Metropolitan Planning Group contained in Exhibit A hereto and made a part of this Agreement. The scope of services shall include the services of the following members of the technical team: Metropolitan Planning Group Carey & Company Inc, architects for historic resources survey Sandis Civil Engineers, including a LEED certified Civil Engineer Economic Research Associates, William Lee, Economist Wilbur Smith Associates, Bill Hurrell, P.E. In addition, in identifying and incorporating infrastructure needs and environmental constraints and parameters, Consultant shall provide an infrastructure analysis, coordinate with the City's environmental consultant, and develop a set of community standards to support the adopted plan which can be used in future environmental evaluation for projects located in the planning area. The proposed public out reach and input program should be evaluated at established points in the planning program to determine how effective it is at drawing broad-based participation into the planning process. The Consultant shall be flexible within the agreed-to public participation budget to adjust the program, if as a result of any of the evaluations of the outreach/input program, it is determined that the program should be changed. 2. Time of Performance. The services of the Consultant are to commence upon the execution of this Agreement with completion of the planning program and adoption of the Downtown Specific Plan in eighteen(18)months from commencement of this Agreement, and as provided in Exhibit A hereto. 3. Compliance with Laws. The Consultant shall comply with all applicable laws, codes, ordinances, and regulations of governing federal, state and local laws. Consultant represents and warrants to City that it has all licenses,permits, qualifications and approvals of whatsoever nature which are legally required for Consultant to practice its profession. Consultant represents and warrants to City that Consultant shall, at its sole cost and expense,keep in effect or obtain at all times during the term of this Agreement any licenses, permits, and approvals which are legally required for Consultant to practice its profession. Consultant shall maintain a City business license. 4. Sole Responsibility. Consultant shall be responsible for employing or engaging all persons necessary to perform the services under this Agreement. 5. Information/Report Handling. All documents furnished to Consultant by the City and all reports and supportive data prepared by the Consultant under this Agreement are the City's property and shall be delivered to the City upon the completion of Consultant's services or at the City's written request. All reports, information, data, and exhibits prepared or assembled by Consultant in connection with the performance of its services pursuant to this Agreement are confidential until released by the City to the public, and the Consultant shall not make any of the these documents or information available to any individual or organization not employed by the Consultant or the City without the written consent of the City before such release. The City acknowledges that the reports to be prepared by the Consultant pursuant to this Agreement are for the purpose of evaluating a defined project, and City's use of the information contained in the reports prepared by the Consultant in connection with other projects shall be solely at City's risk, unless Consultant expressly consents to such use in writing. City further agrees that it will not appropriate any methodology or technique of Consultant which is and has been confirmed in writing by Consultant to be a trade secret of Consultant. 6. Compensation. Compensation for Consultant's professional services shall not exceed $250,000; and payment shall be based upon consultant documentation and City approval of each task. The estimated costs for each task in the planning process provided in Exhibit A are for reference only and do not bind either the City or the Consultant to the estimates provided. Billing shall be accompanied by a detailed explanation of the work performed by whom, at what rate, and on what date. The submittal shall include the following: �.. A. A narrative progress report of specific accomplishments during the billing period, problems encountered or anticipated, plans for resolving problems, accomplishments scheduled during the next billing period, and results of any significant activities. B. A cost report for each task showing: (i) Current period and cumulative expenditures to date; (ii)Estimated cost at completion; (iii) Estimate date of completion; (iv) Approved contract amount and task budgeting; and (v) Comparison of task budgeting with the estimated costs to show any variations. Also,plans, specifications,documents or other pertinent materials shall be submitted for City review, even if only in partial or draft form. 7. Availability of Records. Consultant shall maintain the records supporting this billing for not less than three(3)years following completion of the work under this Agreement. Consultant shall make these records available to authorized personnel of the City at the Consultant's offices during business hours upon written request of the City. 8. Project Manager. The Project Manager for the Consultant for the work under this Agreement shall be Kevin Gardiner. 9. Assignability and Subcontracting. The services to be performed under this Agreement are unique and personal to the Consultant. No portion of these services shall be assigned or subcontracted without the written consent of the City. The subconsultants listed in Paragraph 1 `— above have received the written consent of the City by execution of this Agreement. 10. Notices. Any notice required to be given shall be deemed to be duly and properly given if mailed postage prepaid, and addressed to: To City: Director of Community Development City of Burlingame 501 Primrose Road Burlingame, CA 94010 To Consultant: Kevin Gardiner Kevin Gardiner&Associates 2809 Market Street San Francisco, CA 94114 or personally delivered to Consultant to such address or such other address as Consultant designates in writing to City. 11. Independent Contractor. It is understood that the Consultant, in the performance of the work and services agreed to be performed, shall act as and be an independent contractor and not an agent or employee of the City. As an independent contractor, Consultant and Consultant's employees and subconsultants shall not obtain any rights to retirement benefits or other benefits which accrue to City employee(s). With prior written consent, the Consultant may perform some obligations under this Agreement by subcontracting,but may not delegate ultimate responsibility for performance or assign or transfer interests under this Agreement. 12. Litigation. Consultant agrees to testify in any litigation brought regarding the subject of the work to be performed under this Agreement. Consultant shall be compensated for its costs and expenses in preparing for, traveling to, and testifying in such matters at its then current hourly rates of compensation,unless such litigation is brought by Consultant or is based on allegations of Consultant's negligent performance or wrongdoing. 13. Conflict of Interest. Consultant understands that its professional responsibilities is solely to the City. The Consultant has and shall not obtain any holding or interest within the City of Burlingame. Consultant has no business holdings or agreements with any individual member of the Staff or management of the City or its representatives nor shall it enter into any such holdings or agreements. In addition, Consultant warrants that it does not presently and shall not acquire any direct or indirect interest adverse to those of the City in the subject of this Agreement, and it shall immediately disassociate itself from such an interest should it discover it has done so and shall, at the City's sole discretion, divest itself of such interest. Consultant shall not knowingly and shall take reasonable steps to ensure that it does not employ a person having such an interest in this performance of this Agreement. If after employment of a person, Consultant discovers it has employed a person with a direct or indirect interest that would conflict with its performance of this Agreement, Consultant shall promptly notify City of this employment relationship, and shall, at the City's sole discretion, sever any such employment relationship. 14. Equal Employment Opportunity. Consultant warrants that it is an equal opportunity employer and shall comply with applicable regulations governing equal employment opportunity. Neither Consultant nor its subconsultants do and neither shall discriminate against persons employed or seeking employment with them on the basis of age, sex, color, race,marital status, sexual orientation, ancestry,physical or mental disability,national origin,religion, or medical condition,unless based upon a bona fide occupational qualification pursuant to the California Fair Employment&Housing Act. 15. Insurance. A. Minimum Scope of Insurance: i. Consultant agrees to have and maintain, for the duration of the contract, General Liability insurance policies insuring him/her and his/her firm to an amount not less than: one million dollars ($1,000,000) combined single limit per occurrence for bodily injury,personal injury and property damage in a form at least as broad as ISO "Occurrence" Form CG 0001. ii. Consultant agrees to have and maintain for the duration of the contract, an Automobile Liability insurance policy ensuring him/her and his/her staff to an amount not `.- less than one million dollars ($1,000,000) combined single limit per accident for bodily injury and property damage. iii. Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the City. At the option of the City, either: the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self-insured retentions as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers; or the Contractor shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim administration, and defense expenses. B. General and Automobile Liability Policies: i. The City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers are to be covered as insured as respects: liability arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of the Consultant;products and completed operations of Consultant,premises owned or used by the Consultant. The endorsement providing this additional insured coverage shall be equal to or broader than ISO Form CG 20 10 11 85 and must cover joint negligence, completed operations, and the acts of subcontractors ii. The Consultant's insurance coverage shall be endorsed to be primary insurance as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insurances maintained by the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers shall be excess of the Consultant's insurance and shall not contribute with it. iii. Any failure to comply with reporting provisions of the policies shall not affect coverage provided to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. iv. The Consultant's insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom a claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the limits of the insurer's liability. C. In addition to these policies, Consultant shall have and maintain Workers' Compensation insurance as required by California law. Further, Consultant shall ensure that all subconsultants employed by Consultant provide the required Workers' Compensation insurance for their respective employees. D. All Coverages: Each insurance policy required in this item shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be suspended, voided, canceled, reduced in coverage or in limits except after thirty(30) days'prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested,has been given to the City. Current certification of such insurance shall be kept on file at all times during the term of this agreement with the City Clerk. E. Acceptability of Insurers. Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a Best's rating of no less than A-:VII and authorized to do business in the State of California. F. Verification of Coverage. Upon execution of this Agreement, Contractor shall furnish the City with certificates of insurance and with original endorsements effecting coverage required by this clause. The certificates and endorsements for each insurance policy are to be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. The certificates and endorsements are to be on forms approved by the City. All certificates and endorsements are to be received and approved by the City before any work commences. The City reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, at any time. 16. Indemnification. To the fullest extent permitted by law, the Consultant shall save, keep and hold harmless indemnify and defend the City, its officers, agent, employees and volunteers from all damages, liabilities,penalties, costs, or expenses in law or equity, including but not limited to attorneys' fees, that may at any time arise,result from,relate to, or be set up because of damages to property or personal injury received by reason of, or in the course of performing work which may be occasioned by a willful or negligent act or omissions of the Consultant, or any of the Consultant's officers, employees, or agents or any subconsultant. This provision shall not apply if the damage or injury is caused by the willful misconduct or sole negligence of the City, its officers, agents, employees, or volunteers. 17. Waiver. No failure on the part of either party to exercise any right or remedy hereunder shall operate as a waiver of any other right or remedy that party may have hereunder, nor does waiver of a breach or default under this Agreement constitute a continuing waiver of a subsequent breach of the same or any other provision of this Agreement. 16. Governing Law. This Agreement, regardless of where executed, shall be governed by and construed to the laws of the State of California. Venue for any action regarding this Agreement shall be in the Superior Court of the County of San Mateo or Santa Clara. 17. Termination of Agreement. The City and the Consultant shall have the right to terminate this agreement with or without cause by giving not less than fifteen(15) days written notice of termination. In the event of termination,the Consultant shall deliver to the City all plans, files, documents, reports,performed to date by the Consultant. In the event of such termination, City shall pay Consultant an amount that bears the same ratio to the maximum contract price as the work delivered to the City bears to completed services contemplated under this Agreement,unless such termination is made for cause, in which event, compensation, if any, shall be adjusted in light of the particular facts and circumstances involved in such termination. 18. Amendment. No modification, waiver,mutual termination, or amendment of this Agreement is effective unless made in writing and signed by the City and the Consultant. 19. Disputes. In any dispute over any aspect of this Agreement,the prevailing party shall be entitled to reasonable attorney's fees, as well as costs not to exceed$7,500 in total. 20. Entire Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the complete and exclusive statement of the Agreement between the City and Consultant. No terms, conditions,understandings or agreements purporting to modify or vary this Agreement,unless hereafter made in writing and signed by the party to be bound, shall be binding on either party. .. IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the City and Consultant have executed this Agreement as of the date indicated on page one (1). CITY OF BURLINGAME KEVIN GARDINER&ASSOCIATES BY Kevin Gardiner ATTEST: City Clerk Approved as to form: City Attorney Cad f oOr�� ' CalTrain � .Rh F Y II to"—a F X33 R � i F 3 y 0 A AL A l 3/h ` ..€ t yM a n0 R a t PROPOSALFOR DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN FOR THE CITY OF BURLINGAME Kevin Gardiner & Associates with Metropolitan Planning Group Quick Reference Packet: • Community Involvement Program • Scope of Work • Cost Proposal This pull -out packet has been provided for quick- reference convenience. The included items are identical to those found in the bound proposal . KEVIN GARDINER & ASSOCIATES METROPOLITAN PLANNING GROUP COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT PROGRAM For the Downtown Burlingame Specific Plan, the Consultant Team proposes a series of small and large-scale public involvement, visioning, and consensus-building activities to allow the plan vision to emerge though a participatory process and build a "constituency" for the plan. Among the elements of the Community Participation / Civic Engagement Plan: • An ambitious outreach program featuring leaflets, posters, handouts, door-to-door invitations, neighborhood association meetings, press releases, and web- site presence; • A Citizens Advisory Committee featuring representatives of key area stakeholders including neighborhood groups, homeowners associations, businesses or business associations, schools, at ideally one Planning Commissioner. CAC meetings will be "touchstones" throughout the process to ensure that the issues and goals of the community are addressed and represented and will provide a forum for resolving issues together. Members of the CAC's will serve as "conduits" between the planning process and their constituencies, helping it stay on a realistic path while building support through a gradual, transparent process. • Large-Format Meetings and Workshops including public forums and a charrette, with presentations, question/answer sessions, breakout sessions, and opportunities for community members to talk to city staff and consultant team members more informally • Smaller-scale, more focussed activities such as focussed discussion groups and individual interviews. The smaller groups will allow discussion of more specific, detailed issues, and where needed can be tailored to the interests of a specific group. These smaller groups can also "road test" concepts and ideas and provide the opportunity for refinement and follow-up for presentation in the larger forums. • Community Studio — "Studio on The Avenue" will be a unique undertaking where during the formative stages of the planning process a temporary "studio" will be set up in a highly visible downtown location, allowing community members to drop in informally and participate in the drafting of the plan. We have found that this combination of large and small-scale outreach and consensus building has been successful because it allows the vision concept and plan alternatives to be developed over time, and allows participants to revisit issues throughout the process to allow refinement and build constituency. It provide a range of settings to allow the opportunity for community members to participate and provide input in an environment they are most comfortable in. E e 3 i v_F Vic' r au Small-format focussed discussion group t Xv Large-format community workshop KEVIN GARDINER&ASSOCIATES METROPOLITAN PLANNING GROUP ��, SCOPE OF WORK Kevin Gardiner and Associates and Metropolitan Planning Group ("The Consultants") proposes the following work scope for the Downtown Specific Plan for the City of Burlingame ("The City"): Task l: Project Kick- Off and Civic Engagement 1.1 Planning Meeting& Project Kick-Off Initial meeting with staff to identify concerns and issues,review established goals and policies,gather information,and to discuss the overall project schedule,expectations,and products. Members from all consultant team firms will be in attendance. The meeting will include a visit of the project area and surrounding areas to get a clear visual picture of the urban design,market,parking,and circulation contexts. City staff willassist in developing the exact itinerary for the area tour. 1.2 Base Map Development Using CAD/GIS data provided by the City as a starting point,the KGA consultant team will prepare a series of base maps that will be used throughout the project. Diaps will show key features such as street right-of- ways,parcel lines and sidewalks,topography and significant landscape features,building fooq)rints,parking areas,bike paths and walkways,and other significant existing and planned features. 1.3 Identify Community Interests and Stakeholders Members of the KGA Consultant team will meet with City staff to present information obtained and identify members of the community,property owners, transit users,restaurant,services and shopping patrons,clubs and houses of worship,and other Burlingame interested parties for contact and participation in subsequent' involvement. List and documentation will be compiled and shared with staff throughout and at end of project. 1.4 City Council Kick-Off Meeting A study session will be held the City Council to get its general direction on the project,including the Public Outreach/Ci-.Tic Engagement Plan. Feedback will be gathered for use in refiring the work plan (including the community participation elements) and in identifying key issues for the planning process. 1.5 Public Outreach/Civic Engagement Plan KGA/MGroup will design and implement a community outreach program to generate interest and create awareness for the planning process. The approach will be very "hands-on"with direct involvement of indi- viduals involved in the project. While specific strategies and options will be discussed with planning depart- ment staff at the Scoping Meeting&Project Irick-Off (Task 1.1), tentative outreach tasks would include: a. Leaflets/announcements—The consultant team will prepare leaflets to be distributed at community meetings,the library,and possibly through local schools (policies permitting). Leaflets will provide background information about the planning process,meeting dates,and sources for additional in formation. b. Post Card Mading—The consultant team will prepare post cards to be sent to area residents,property owners, and area merchants. The consultant team will design the post cards,and after review by project staff,arrange the printing and mailing. c. Posters—KG A/MGroup will design posters to be displayed in a variety of highly visible locations in the community. Products aU include posters that can be displayed on notice boards and store windows, possibly with the ability to include flyers that people can take with them. Two or three project team members (including the Project Manager)willvisit downtown stores to distribute the posters,which will provide an opportunity to meet merchants and invite them to participate in the planning. KEVIN GARDINER&ASSOCIATES METROPOLITAN PLANNING GROUP d. Saturday afternoon door-to-door distribution of announcements—Like in many places,Saturday afternoons are a time when many Burlingame residents are out in the neighborhood,chatting with neighbors and running errands. This provides an opportunity for project team members to informally meet members of the community and invite them to participate in the planning.Two or three project team members (including the consultant team Project;Manager)will distribute door-hanger leaflets on a Saturday afternoon,taking the opportunity to explain the planning project to residents in the process. e. . Neighborhood ,association announcements—The consultant team will distribute announcements to area neighborhood associations,community groups,and houses of worship so that the planning process may be announced in the newsletters and websites of the groups. The Project Manager will attend up to three regularly scheduled neighborhood association or community group meetings to make an announcement that provides an overview of the planning process. Nfembers in attendance will be encouraged to attend, and invite neighbors. Ideally,members of the Planning Department would also be in attendance for the announcement. Additionally,phone calls could be made. f. Press releases—Press releases and display advertisements/announcements will be prepared for the Burlin,game Voice and other local newspapers and newsletters. Project team members will be available to answer questions news staff may have. g. Web site and links—The project team will prepare content for the Planning Department's community planning web site,including text,diagrams,and photographs. An easily remembered web domain name (such as"downtownburhingameplan.net")will be registered by the consultant team and linked to the Planning Department site. The web address will appear on all leaflets and posters. The consultant team can design the web site in lieu of,or to supplement the Planning Department's site. h. Community Studio—A Community Studio,open to the public,will operate for a week during the development of plan alternatives. Ideally,the Community Studio will be located in a highly visible and accessible location,such as a downtown storefront or a mobile unit in one a city parking lot. i. "Full Circle"engagement—1\Iake certain that all participants have been acknowledged and invited throughout the process. Each event or activity will be summarized in progress notes showing contributions,which will be available to all participants via the project website and mailed or faxed to those without computer access. This will include a follow-up with all participants regarding final decisions. J. Sensitivity--An effort will be made to identify the comfort level for various participants and groups they may identify with,thus allowing for alternatives to large traditional meetings,which allow for more discussion and group consensus and ownership of the plan. This can include small-format discussion groups,and also allow for more convenient times such as weekends,in addition to larger-format meetings where ideas can be brought together en masse. :all outreach materials including leaflets,posters,press releases and web pages will be presented to the Planning Department for review prior to distribution. 1.6 Citizen Advisory Committee Meeting#1 The Consultant team with the City Planning Departnnent will assemble a Citizen,advisory Committee (CAC), to meet periodically during die planning process. Committee members may include city residents, property owners, business owners, developers,real estate brokers, transit customers,as well as members of Citizens for a Better Burlingame, the Chamber of Commerce, the Downtown Business Improvement District,and the petitioner group for a new Safeway store. In attendance at this meeting will also be City staff from key departments and agencies,such as public works and engineering to answer questions the group may, have. The committee will act in an advisory capacity to City staff, consultants, and the Planning Commission and the City Council as the project moves forward, and act as conduits to their respective orga- nizations. The Consultant Team and City Planning staff will share facilitation of meetings as appropriate for the subject under discussion. KEVIN GARDINER&ASSOCIATES METROPOLITAN PLANNING GROUP The fust CAC meeting will focus on reviewing the Civic Engagement Plan,including goals and objectives for involving the community in the planning process. Specific issues to be addressed and resolved will be identified. Task 1 Deliverables • Scoping Meeting Project I:a'ck off • Base Maps • City Council kick-off Meeting • Citic Eng ;ement Plan • Cititien Advisory Committee llleeting#1 Task 2: Opportunities and Constraints Analysis 2.1 Review and Analyze Existing Studies, Plans, and Documents The consultant team will review existing studies,plans, and documents related to the downtown. This will provide an overview of development opportunities and constraints in the study area, and provide a start- ing point for further analysis in this phase of work,including subsequent civic engagement,property owner interviews and the existing conditions analysis. Kevin Gardiner&Associates (KGA) and Metropolitan Planning Group (MGroup)will review planning and urban design issues. Review will include identifying precedents and consistencies with other planning initia- tives such as die City's General Plan, South of Burlingame Charrette,El Camino Real Grand Boulevard ini- tiative,Burlingame avenue Area Streetscape Beautification Master Plan, and Burlingame Commercial Design Guidebook. Review will also include compilation of successful examples of similar planning initiatives else- where both on the Peninsula and further afield. Wilbur Smith Associates (DCIS A) will obtain from the City any recent traffic counts and data for the Downtown study area. There is much parking data available from the past studies and updates prepared by WSA. WS_-1 will also collect from the City any available data on pedestrian/bicycle accidents.in the Downtown. Information on the availability and utilization of the existing transit services will also be assem- bled. WS_-1 will conduct PM peak hour traffic counts at up to five intersections in the Downtown counting vehicles and pedestrians. A limited parking inventory and occupancy survey will be performed to compare current parking conditions with those recorded over the past seven years. The existing conditions infor- mation will be presented on appropriate tables,graphics, and map in technical paper for use by the project team. Sandis will review existing studies and plans provided by the City's engineering and public works depart- ments to develop a general assessment of the constraints and opportunities of the existing downtown infra- structure. The existing conditions information would be presented on appropriate tables,graphics, and map in technical paper for use by the project team. Copies of each subconsultant report will be distributed to City staff for review as they become available. KEVIN GARDINER&ASSOCIATES METROPOLITAN PLANNING GROUP � EY ,T i 2.2 Historic Resources Overview The City of Burlingame will provide Carey&Co.with existing information about the downtown area, including assessor's parcel maps,existing studies,and other documents that might contain historic resources information,such as EIRs and past historic surveys. Carey&Co will review the existing information and,if necessary,develop a research work program for conducting archival research at local repositories. In particular,Carey&Co.,Inc.will review the 1982 Preliminary Historic Inventory for its applicability towards creating polices for conserving historic resources as part of the Downtown Specific Plan. For guidance, Carey&Co.will also evaluate criteria for evaluation and related procedures used in other cities and recommended by state and federal governments. Carey&Co.will propose Criteria for Evaluation to be used for determining the historic significance of downtown buildings. 2.3 Inventory of Historic Resources Through field reconnaissance work and archival research, Carey&Co.will verify the status of any previously identified historic resources within the plan area, as well as identify potential additional historic resources in the plan area. Carey&Co.will classify these resources according to the specified significance criteria devel- oped in Task 1.2(a). 2.4 Draft Existing Conditions Analysis Members of the KGA Consultant team will meet with City staff to review the findings of the planning, urban design,circulation,infrastructure,and historic resources analyses,as well as prior market and parking analyses. Data will be supplemented with additional site analysis as.needed,based on input from City staff and consultant team members. The analysis will synthesize land use and development patterns,transportation (vehicular, transit and pedes- trian),market issues,historic conservation issues, and public improvements for the project area. Further site evaluation will map those special uses, features and patterns,which have particular potential. The inventory of existing conditions and relevant policies will identify factors that may act as current constraints to physical development as well as opportunities for shaping land use patterns and circulation patterns within the area. The evaluation will include,but not limited to: • Existing and Planned Circulation (Transit,Streets,Pedestrians,Bicycles,Etc.) • Existing and Planned Land Uses and Planned Development Projects • Economic and Market factors,utilizing ERA's previous economic studies • Optimal mixture of uses • Existing Zoning, and whether it supports or limits particular uses • Massing and scale of surrounding development and other structures. • Existing Physical and Environmental Constraints of the Project area `. 0 Historic resource and conservation factors KEVIN GARDINER&ASSOCIATES METROPOLITAN PLANNING GROUP • Parcel and Property Ownership Patterns • View corridors and important vistas • Gateways and other entry defining features • Community perception issues of the downtown,if any • Important elements noted by the City staff, stakeholders and community • Potential for change and creating catalysts and influencing future development This analysis will culminate in an Existing Conditions Analysis Report that will include a discussion of opportunities and constraints for the project area,with particular attention to how these issues may be rel- evant to the subsequent planning process. The report will also include a series of mapping/diagrams to graphically illustrate the opportunities and constraints. The report will be a workbook format that can be used for subsequent civic engagement activities,with an emphasis on clear,attractive and easily understand- able analysis that can be synthesized by a wide range of interested parties. Copies of the Draft Existing Conditions:analysis will be distributed to staff by email at least one week prior to the subsequent staff meeting (Task 1.6) to allow staff review and edits informed for reporting at the meeting. 2.5 Staff Meeting The meeting with staff will accomplish three primary objectives: 1. Review Draft Existing Conditions findi�t�ys:This will include emphasis of land use,goals for inclusion of particular land uses,relation to transit,relationship to other area planning initiatives,and other policies as outlined by the City,property owners,and community.Review of Existing Conditions will provide parameters within which development concepts can be formed. 2. EstaMsh para>neters for Vision phase of work:The work plan for the upcoming Vision exercises (public open house, focus groups,CAC, charrette)will be refined based on findings of the Existing Conditions Analysis. Content of presentations and desired goals for each exercise will be discussed. 2.6 Final Existing Conditions Analysis Based on comments received at the staff meeting, any additional subconsultant additions and editing for appearance and flow will be made to the document. A single sheet double-sided summary of the Existing Conditions:analysis will also be prepared for mass dis- tribution at meetings, organizations,businesses, and other interested parties. Task 2 Deliverables • Draft Existing ConditionsAnalysir Repan • Existing Conditions Ana�lysis Report and Summary 0 Inventory of Historic Resources KEVIN GARDINER&ASSOCIATES METROPOLITAN PLANNING GROUP Task 3: Downtown Vision 3.1 Open House (Public Workshop #1) The visions phase will be initiated by a public open house,which will provide an overview of the planning process and be structured to provide open,creative input. The issues that we will be asking community members to consider may include: • What types of land uses are desirable? Downtown development can come in many shapes and forms, with the underlying land uses shaping the form and character of the development. • Where should particular uses be located? Should certain uses be focussed on one main street such as Burlingame Avenue,or should there be a more equal distribution that also includes side streets? • What form should downtown development take? With an area as large as the project area, development can take a range of shapes and forms. Uses can be mixed broadly over a wide area,or concentrated in more closely defined centers. Uses can be mixed vertically or horizontally,and can take on a variety of development intensities. • What sort of street should Burlingame Avenue be? What about the surrounding streets? The nature of these will depend on the concept for the street as a whole. Is the priority to maximize pedestrian movements,or minimize congestion and speed auto traffic? What about on-street parking? • Streetscape Design. Should the existing streetscape plan be implemented or revisited? What type of streetscape would be appropriate for Burlingame.venue and the surrounding side streets? • Parking.Downtown Burlingame has a number of municipal parking lots located throughout downtown, N_ representing an important and valuable resource.But how does the existing parking supply relate to the future of downtown? What are the overall community goals that will influence parking strategies, including zoning requirements, shared parking,parking supply,parking pricing and other demand management strategies. Findings will draw from the thorough Wilbur Smith parking studies done recently. • Historic Resources. It has been nearly twenty years since the issue of historic resources has been addressed in Burlingame. There are a number of approaches that can be taken to build on the existing documentation,and alternative policy approaches to conservation. V`hich is appropriate for downtown Burlingame? The event will have a"town hall meeting" format with a presentation followed by a question/answer ses- sion,and more informal discussion. The presentation will provide an overview of the planning process and existing conditions and constraints, followed by an overview of opportunities that may be considerations in the vision process. The opportunities will been informed by prior meetings with City staff and interviews with property owners. The discussion of these will be intended to provide a structure for an open exchange of ideas and engender consideration for a range of possibilities. after the group question/answer/com- ments session, City staff and consultant team members will be available for individual conversations with community members. 3.2 Discussion Groups The consultant team,with the assistance of City, staff,will conduct sessions for up to five focussed discussion groups;to discuss issues and ideas-with specific individuals in a small-format setting. Potential groups may include property owners,developers,community groups,business owners,and transit customers. Our intention will be to have open exchange of ideas,with emphasis on particular issues of interest to each group. KEVIN GARDINER&ASSOCIATES METROPOLITAN PLANNING GROUP 3.3 Economic and Market Alternatives ERA will use its background and market analysis findings to help the planning team begin to shape some alternative planning program options. 3.4 Citizen Advisory Committee Meeting#2 The second CAC meeting rill focus on setting an agenda for the concept plans,including goals and objectives. ER:-'s Economic and Market Alternatives will be utilized as part of the discussion,with alternative options for downtown to begin forming into plan alternatives. Specific issues to be addressed and resolved will be identified. The committee will also consider issues to be discussed in the upcoming feedback workshop (Task 3.4). 3.5 Community Studio—Studio on"The Avenue" The Community Studio will open.concurrently with the development of the downtown concepts. Tdeally, the Community Studio will be located in a highly visible and accessible location.,such as a vacant downtown storefront (the City Planning Department can assist In securing the space). Consultant team members will work in the studio at regular intervals through a one-week period,with posted hours,so that community members will be able to know when team members will be present. As the prime consultant,KGA/I\-f Group staff will be present in the Community Studio regularly. Ideally the timing would be linked to the Input Workshop/Charrette to develop public awareness of the workshop prior,and allow wrap up and processing after the workshop. 3.6 Input Workshop/Charrette (Public Workshop #2) The consultant team,with assistance from City staff,will conduct an interactive input workshop to articulate the plan vision. As opposed to the open house(Task 3.1),which had a structure more similar to a town hall meeting,the feedback workshop will include a series of activities intended to solicit discussion and input, such as visual preference surveys and breakout groups. It will have the structure of a charrette,with the goal of articulating and refining a range of issues and opportunities that can be further explored in the subsequent plan concept alternatives. Task 3 DeAverables • Open.House (Public 117orkshop #1) • Discussion Groups • Economic and Market Alternatives • CA Meeting#3 • Communit'.Staulio • Input TT%rkshop/Charrette (Public Workshop#2) Task 4: Plan Alternatives 4.1 Draft Alternative Plans (3) Following the C_-�C Meeting,the Consultant Team will prepare three concept plan alternatives, along with an analysis of the implications for each alternative. These concepts will reflect the input gathered from the con- cept plan exercises,including the community's goals for downtown. The concepts will demonstrate suffi- ciently three different approaches to development in the study area. These provide a genuine set of options, with three realistic and viable choices for future development to consider. Variations between concepts may include: • Land use options • Economic development and market options KEVIN GARDINER&ASSOCIATES METROPOLITAN PLANNING GROUP • Relationship of development to transit facilities • I-Appropriate mit of uses • Pedestrian,vehicle,and transit access options • Parking options • Open space options • Historic conservation options The Team will provide analysis of potential implications for each alternative. This analysis will check the alternatives closely against the current and the long-term goals,described in the concept process.The Team will evaluate each alternative's implementation feasibility, and will suggest implementation strategies for each. ERA will prepare a fiscal model and analyze three downtown planning alternatives using the model. W'S:A will participate in the study team efforts to develop and test alternative land use, circulation, and park- ing plans for the Downtown study area. Once the alternatives have been formulated,WS-A wrill evaluate each one in terms of its traffic,parking, transit, and pedestrian/bicycle components. The parking demand model that WS A has developed for Downtown Burlingame will be useful in determining the appropriate amounts of parking that should be provided for any new development projects in the Downtown. Where appropriate improvements to the transportation infrastructure will be proposed and tested. The results of this analysis and evaluation will be presented in a brief technical paper. Sandis will evaluate each plan alternative in terms of its implications on existing infrastructure. Where appropriate improvements to the infrastructure will be proposed and tested. The results of this analysis and N.— evaluation will be presented in a brief technical memorandum. Carey& Co.will refine up to two selected historic preservation program alternatives,which may or may not correspond to specific plan alternatives. These alternatives will incorporate procedures drawn from various city, state and federal standards. Carey& Co.will also work with the City to establish an official list of identi- fied historic resources within the plan area. 4.2 Preservation Guidelines Carey& Co.will develop a series of guidelines for the rehabilitation,restoration and preservation of historic resources in the Plan-Area based on the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties. These guidelines will include a description of preservation goals and policies,as well as incentives and opportunities for the historic structures determined to be significant to the character,of the Plan Area. These guidelines will provide the City with a model for (1) reviewing changes to buildings with historic char- acter and (2) reviewing the design of new construction adjacent to such buildings. 4.3 Citizen Advisory Committee Meeting#3 This meeting will review die feasibility,assets and liabilities of each conceptual alternative,based on the concept statements,policies and community goals. Qualitative comparisons will be made of the characteristics of the alternatives,based on market,urban design,environmental,traffic and political considerations,including. • City and community goals for downtown and the surrounding area • Nfarket and financial feasibility • Parking supply • Circulation and transit accessibility • Consistency with other planning initiatives `" 0 Phasing and implementation considerations. KEVIN GARDINER&ASSOCIATES METROPOLITAN PLANNING GROUP 4.4 Refinement of Draft Plan Alternatives Following CAC Meeting#3,the Consultant Team will prepare detailed refinements of the Draft Plan Alternatives,which address the key issues of land use, design,parking,and historic preservation. Economic Research associates and WSA will provide a detailed professional (non-technical) analysis of the economic and parking implications of each alternative. This analysis will be a "cumulative"version of the analysis, addressing private sector development economics,parking, and fiscal financial parameters. KGA/MGroup will further refine the Plan alternatives based on input from the CAC and will provide detailed analysis of the implications as appropriate for each.Prototypes will be developed for each alternative to illustrate the physical implications of optional concepts to land use,development standards,design,and parking. Draft Design Guidelines will be developed for the alternatives during this Task,and included as a bulleted recommendation list(not illustrated). 4.5 Draft Alternatives Workbook Following the CAC Meeting and refinement of the alternatives,the Team will assemble the alternatives into an alternatives Workbook. The report will contain drawings,maps and diagrams,as appropriate, to illustrate the alternatives,and related detailed analyses of these alternatives. 4.6 Final Alternatives Workbook Following Staff Review of the Draft alternatives Workbook, the Team will refine the alternatives and edit the report as appropriate, to prepare the alternatives Workbook for public distribution and comment. A single sheet double-sided summary of the Alternatives Workbook will also be prepared for mass distribution at meetings, organizations,businesses, and other interested parties. Task 4 Deliverables • Draft Alternative Plans(3) • Citi en Advisog Committee Afeeting#3 • Beened Alternative Plans(3) • Draft Alternatives lk'orkbook • PinalAlternalives TVorkbook and Summag Phase 5: Preferred Alternative: The Specific Plan 5.1 Public Workshop#3 Using the alternatives Workbook, the three refined concept plans vvill be presented to the community during an interactive workshop, similar to Public Workshop #2. The meeting will provide a range of opportunities for engaging public discussion and input on the alternatives,provide for refinement of plan concepts. Then based on that input,we will provide recommendations for a preferred alternative. 5.2 Planning Commission& City Council Joint Study Session A joint study session will be held with the Planning Commission& City Council to review the results of the civic engagement process, the Plan alternatives, and the results of the Public Workshop #3. Feedback will be gathered for use in developing a single preferred plan,possibly using straw votes to gain clarity on key planning and policy directions. 5.3 Draft Specific Plan—Staff Review Draft The Consultant Team will document the feedback received in Public Workshop #3 and the Joint Planning Commission/City Council Study Session to prepare a single, final Preferred Plan. The Preferred Plan may include a combination of elements from several alternative Plans. I _ KEVIN GARDINER&ASSOCIATES METROPOLITAN PLANNING GROUP Key elements of the plan will be summarized in a memorandum that can be used to initiate the environmen- tal review (the environmental review shall be managed by scaf�. The memorandum will include a descrip- tion of elements of the preferred plan,as well as concept diagrams such as sections and elevations,massing diagrams,circulation diagrams, and character sketches. KGA/I\iGroup will refine the preferred plan to reflect the desired outcome based on input from staff,the C_-�C and Council to create the Preferred Solution updates to the Specific Plan. Elements of the update for each area include Development Strategy,Development Standards,Design Guidelines, and Development Prototypes. The plan will be further refined based on the environmental review ERA will provide the financial strategies for Specific Plan implementation. WS.A will work with the project team to develop the transportation element of the specific plan. For each phase of the plan's implementation.WSA will identify the required transportation infrastructure improve- ments. These will be in the form of the traffic,parking,transit, and pedestrian/bicycle improvements than would be associated with each phase of the implementation. tSA will also assist in developing the required guidelines,policies and standards for streets,pedestrian ways,bicycle facilities, and parking to support the plan. Sandis will work with die project team to develop the infrastructure element of the specific plan. For each phase of the plan's implementation Sandis will identify the required infrastructure improvements. Sandis will also coordinate with WS,k with regards to the traffic,parking,transit, and pedestrian/bicycle improvements than will be associated with each phase of implementation. Following City review,Carey&Co.will develop, for inclusion in the Specific Plan, final versions of (1) the Criteria for Evaluation, (2) the Inventory of Historic Resources, and (3) the Preservation Guidelines. Elements of the Specific Plan will include all state-mandated statutory elements including but not limited to: • Goals and Policies • Land Use • Circulation and Infrastructure • Development Standards and Design Guidelines • Development Framework • Historic Preservation and Conservation • Implementation 5.4 Citizen Advisory Committee Meeting#4 A CAC meeting will be held as the preferred plan is developed to review the various plan elements and pro- vide timely input. There will also be discussions related to implementation of the plan. 5.5 Planning Commission Study Session ,-�Planning Commission study session will be held as the preferred plan is developed to review tine t>arious plan elements and provide timely input. There will also be discussions related to implementation of the plan. 5.6 Public Review Draft Specific Plan Based on feedback from the CAC meeting,the Consultant Team will revise the Specific Plan draft for public review. A single sheet double-sided summary of the Specific Plan will also be prepared for mass distribution at meetings,organizations,businesses, and other interested parties. KEVIN GARDINER&ASSOCIATES —'s, METROPOLITAN PLANNING GROUP 5.7 Public Workshop #4 The public review draft of the Specific Plan will be presented in a town hall meeting/open house format similar to Public Workshop #1,with a presentation providing an overview of the recommendations and project prioritization, followed by a question/answers session. City staff and consultant team members will also be available for individual conversations with community members. 5.8 Planning Commission Study Session The consultants and staff will meet with the Planning Commission for a study session to review the Public Review Draft. .A.presentation will be made reviewing the key principles of the plan,focussing on the issues, goals and strategies behind each. The actual standards,guidelines and diagrams will be the second level of discussion. The purpose is to receive practical input as to how the Commission interprets the issues and goals relative to how it will be able to use the plan. There will also be a summary of feedback and input from the Public Workshop. The meeting will conclude with agreement on changes that should be made to the plan prior to adoption. 5.9 Revisions to the Specific Plan The consultant will prepare draft revisions to the plan,per the suggestions of the Planning Commission. These revisions will not be incorporated into the plan,but rather summarized and"mocked up"for ultimate review by the City Council. This summary and mock-up will allow the time spent revising and reformatting the guidelines to be minimized in the event the City Council is not in agreement with some of the changes. 5.10 Planning Commission Adoption The consultants and staff will meet with the Planning Commission to gain recommendations for adoption --� of the Specific Plan. A presentation will be made to focus on the revisions that have been invade to the document,as a response to the previous study session. The Commission then may adopt the plan, subject to anv conditions;these conditions (if any)will be presented to the City Council for consideration. 5.11 City Council Study Session The consultants and staff will meet with the City Council for a study session to review the Public Review Draft and any revisions suggested by the Planning Commission. :\s with the earlier Planning Commission study session,a presentation will be made reviewing the key principles of the plan,focussing on the issues, goals and strategies behind each. The actual standards,guidelines and diagrams will be the second level of discussion. The purpose of this session is to receive practical input,on how the Council interprets the issues and goals,relative to how it-will be able to use the plan. The Council will also be asked to provide feedback in regard to any revisions recommended by the Planning Commission. The document will then be modified or refined relative to the comments on this presentation. 5.12 Revisions to Specific Plan .1 final set of.revisions to the plan will be prepared,based on direction provided by the City Council. 5.13 City Council Adoption The consultants and staff will meet with the City Council to receive final approval of the Specific Plan, including any and all revisions. 5.14 Revisions/preparation of final document The consultants will revise the Specific Plan to reflect the direction provided by the City Council. The revisions to be made will be agreed upon with staff prior to making the revisions. This will include a separate meeting with staff. KEVIN GARDINER&ASSOCIATES METROPOLITAN PLANNING GROUP 5.15 Wrap Up To "wrap up"the plan and ensure participants have been involved through the entire process,there will be a series of follow-up/wrap-up activities such as phone calls, email, fax and snail correspondence, and other communication. There may be a final celebration event if desired. Phase 3 Deliverables • Public Workshop#3 • Planniq Commission and City CoundlToint Study Session • Draft Speczfic Plan ' Staff Review Draft • Commumi v Adnsog Committee Meeting#4 • Public Review Draft Spedfic Plan and Summary • Public lVorkshop#4 • Plannin,g Commission Study Session &Adoption • Gy Council Study Session &Adoption • Final Spedfic Plan document WORK PRODUCTS KG 3 uses the following PC-based programs for its work products: • Microsoft Word for text-based drafts and documents • Nlicrosoft Excel for spreadsheets • Adobe InDesign for layout of workbooks and flyers • _-adobe Photoshop and Illustrator for graphic exhibits • AutoCAD for base maps KGA is flexible in its use of applications. We are accustomed to adapting our work products to the specifications of each jurisdiction we work with,and are confident we can and can meet the needs of Burlingame. Each work product will be delivered in the following formats: • 50 printed copies,including PowerPoint presentations • 1 copy-ready master,with all graphics in black and white so that copies are readable • High-resolution pdf, suitable for printing • Screen-resolution pdf, suitable for posting on websites • Text saved to Word document so that it may be cut and pasted into other documents such as staff reports • 10 CD-ROM's including all electronic files listed above,as well as all image and map files KEVIN GARDINER&ASSOCIATES METROPOLITAN PLANNING GROUP 3. COST PROPOSAL KGA and NfGroup propose a total not-to-exceed project cost of$250,000 for the scope of work outlined in this proposal. WSA- CAREY AND KGA/ ERA- PARKING AND SANDIS- COMPANY- TASK MGROUP ECONOMICS TRAFFIC INFRASTURCTURE HISTORIC TOTALS RESOURCES Tasfit 1,.;£xtstan 1.1 Striping Meeting&Project Hick-Off $ 1,300 $ 1,280 $ 1,280 $ 720 S 600 $ 5,180 1.2 Base Map Development $ 2,375 8 f E $ $ 2,375 1.3 Identify Community Interests and Stakeholders $ 1,250 S $ i $ f 1,250 1.4 Gty Council Kickoff Meeting $ 1,000 1.4 Civic Engagement Plan $ 10,500 $ S $ $ S 10,500 1.5 CAC Meeting#1 $ 1,300 $ 524 $ 524 S 720 $ 400 $ 3,468 Subtotals-Task 2 $ 17,725 $ 1,804 $ 4804 E 4440 $ 1,000 $ 22,773 Task•:i �si3rin 'wCvrirtlttt7n%Anal sts. 1. � b ,�'�. �z�...�3'�,�,'� :, � ��. �. 21 Review and Analyze Existing Studies,Plans,and $ 3,650 $ $ 9,720 8 8,000 $ $ 21370 Documents 2.2 Historic Resources Overview $ $ $ $ 11,750 $ 11,750 2.3 Inventory of Historic Resources $ $ 8 $ 4,400 S 4,400 2.4 Draft Existing Condition Analysis $ 6,000 $ - $ $ $ - $ 6,000 25 Staff Meeting $ 1,300 S $ S $ $ 1,300 2.6 Final Existing Conditions Anal Kis $ 2.250 $ $ $ S $ 2,250 Subtotals-Task 2 $ 13,200 $ $ 9,720 $ 8,000 $ 16,150 $ 47,070 TOk.3 Ff36wrtt6orhlc6ttte ts` .a w, x,�, r .: R -- 3.1 Open House(Public Workshop#1 $ 1,300 $ $ f f $ 1,300 3.2 Discussion Groups(5 total) $ 6,000 8 - S - $ $ - $ 6,000 3.3 Economic and Market Alternatives $ 5,000 $ $ $ $ 5,000 3.4 CAC Meeting#2 $ 500 $ 524 $ 524 $ 720 $ 400 $ 2,668 3.5 Community Studio $ 3,000 $ 524 $ 524 S 720 $ 400 S 5,168 3.6 Feedback Workshop/Ch-erte(Public Workshop#2) S 1,800 S 1,280 $ 1,280 $ 720 $ 600 $ 5,680 Subtotals-Task 3 $ 12,600 S 7,328 $ 2,328 $ 2,160 $ 1,400 $ 25,816 Td51r 4.1 Draft Alternative Plans(3) $ 9,325 S 18,000 8 5,060 $ 8,000 $ 3,600 $ 43,985 4.2 Preservation Guidelines-Optional Task $ $ $ $ 3,800 f 3,800 4.3 CAC Meetin #3 $ 1,300 S $ $ $ $ 1,300 4.4 Refinement of Draft Plan Alternatives $ 4,000 $ $ $ $ $ 4,000 45 Draft Alternatives Workbook $ 6,075 $ $ $ $ $ 6.075 4.6 Final Alternatives Workbook $ 1,000 $ $ $ $ $ 1,000 Subtotals-Task 4 $ 21,700 $ 18,000 $ 5,060 $ 8,000 $ 7,400 $ 60,160 Task 5�. ;Ptefien'�il�Jt��rna'ctste:'3:. � ,:Z�x, , ,.,. :.� �t M..,u �� ,��'��. k _a- ����.:�,. � �� �„ �. .,� � .. .�. �•< 5.1 Public Workshop#3 $ 1,480 f $. S S f 1,480 5.2 Planning Commission&City Council Joint $ 1,000 $ 1,280 $ 1,280 ; 720 $ 600 $ 1,880 Study Session 5.3 Draft Specific Plan-Staff Review Draft $ 21,400 $ 12,000 $ 4,580 f 13,000 $ 2,400 $ 53,380 5.4 Citizen Advisory Committee Meeting#4 $ 1,300 ; $ $ S $ 1,300 5.5 Planning Commission Study Session $ 1,000 5.6 Public Review Draft Specific Plan $ 2,625 $ $ f $ $ 2,625 5.7 Public Workshop#4 $ 1,300 $ $ f $ $ 1,300 5.8 Planning Commission Study Session $ 500 $ 524 $ 524 $ 720 $ 400 $ 2,668 5.9 Revisions to the Specific Plan $ 2,000 ; E $ E $ 2,000 5.10 Planning Commission Adoption $ 500 $ 524 $ 524 $ 720 $ 400 $ 2,668 5.11 Ci Council Study Session $ 500 $ 1,280 $ 1,280 $ 720 $ 600 $ 4,380 5.12 Revision to Specific Plan $ 2,000 f $ $ $ E 2,000 5.13 City Council Adoption $ 500 $ 524 $ 524 $ 720 $ 400 $ 2,668 5.14 RevLions/prcparation of final document E 2,000 $ $ $ S $ 2,000 5.15 Wrap U $ 2,000 $ ; $ f $ 2,000 Subtotals-Task 5 is 40,105 1$ 16,132 $ 8,712 $ 16,600 1$ 4,800 S 85,349 Subtotals-All Phases ..pkv Direct Cosa/Reimbursables $ 6,612 f 1,200 $ 350 S 670 $ 8,832 KEVIN GARDINER&ASSOCIATES METROPOLITAN PLANNING GROUP Hourly Rates Kevin Gardiner&Associates Metropolitan Planning Group Principals $1.25/hour Associate Planners $100/hour _assistant Planners $75/hour Planning Tech $50/hour Intern $35/hour Economic Research Associates William Lee $320/hour Jade Shipman $131/hour Wilbur Smith Associates Principal $230/hour Project l-lanager $95/hour Transportation Planner $80/hour Technical Support $75/hour Field Employees $18/1.-iour Sandis Principal $180/hour _associate Principal/ Senior Project Manager $150/hour Project Manager $135/hour Project Engineer Level I $85.00/hour Level II $95.00/hour- Level III $110.00/hour Design Engineer Level I $65.00/hour Level II $75.00/hour Level III $85.00/hour Computer/Engineer Technician Level I $55.00/hour Level II $70.00/hour Level III $85.00/hour Clerical $50/Dour Carey& COMRapy,Inc. Principal $150/hour Project Planner $100/hour Architectural Historian $75/hour RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME APPROVING AGREEMENT WITH KEVIN GARDINER & ASSOCIATES TO PREPARE A SPECIFIC PLAN FOR THE BURLINGAME AVENUE COMMERCIAL AREA AND AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE AGREEMENT ON BEHALF OF THE CITY RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Burlingame: WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to proceed with the development and preparation of a specific plan for the Burlingame Avenue Commercial Area; and WHEREAS,the City distributed a request for proposals, received seven submittals, and interviewed four of the firms that submitted proposals; and WHEREAS,the interview committee of citizens has considered the submittals and the interviews and recommended that Kevin Gardiner&Associates be awarded the contract for preparation of the specific plan based on the firm's qualifications, experience, submittal, and understanding of the desires and needs of the community, NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS RESOLVED AND ORDERED: 1. The City Council approves the award of contract to Kevin Gardiner& Associates to prepare the specific plan for the Burlingame Avenue Commercial Area as described in Attachment A hereto. 2. The City Manager is authorized and directed to execute the Agreement with Kevin Gardiner&Associates as contained in Attachment A hereto. 3. The Clerk is directed to attest to the signature of the Manager. 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 2007, and was adopted thereafter by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: CITY CLERK 4 41 CITY ,� STAFF REPORT BURUNGAME AGENDA 9e ITEM # iy0oq< ,000 MTG. RATED DYNE 4 DATE 4/16/07 r TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL SUBMITTED BY DATE: April 9, 2007 APPROVED FROM: Doris Mortensen, City Clerk By 650-558-7203 SUBJECT: Recommendation to Adopt the Revised 2007 City Council Calendar RECOMMENDATION: To review, make changes if necessary and approve the Revised 2007 Burlingame City Council Calendar reflecting the cancellation of two summer-time meetings scheduled for July 2 and August 6, 2007, the addition of the Joint Council and Traffic, Safety and Parking Commission Meeting on May 7 and the Joint Council and Beautification Commission Meeting on June 18, and the date change of the Joint Council and Chamber of Commerce Meeting to May 21 , 2007. EXHIBITS: Revised 2007 Burlingame City Council Calendar ffl0.Ft41.ri9NM.9 War6p, REVISED 2007 BURLINGAME CITY COUNCIL CALENDAR City Council meetings are held on the first and third Monday of each month. When Monday is a holiday,the meeting is usually held on Tuesday or Wednesday. Study meetings are held as scheduled. Meetings begin at 7:00 p.m.at City Hall, 501 Primrose Road,and are open to the public. Regular Council meetings are televised live via Burlingame's Cable Channel 26 for RCN subscribers and Channel 27 for Comcast subscribers. For more information,please view the City's website at www.bgElin ag me.org or call the City Clerk at 650-558-7203. REGULAR MEETINGS Tuesday, January 2 Monday, July 2 (canceled) Tuesday, January 16 Monday, July 16 Monday, February 5 Monday, August 6 (canceled) Wednesday, February 21 Monday, August 20 Monday, March 5 Tuesday, September 4 Monday, March 19 Monday, September 17 Monday, April 2 Monday, October 1 Monday, April 16 Monday, October 15 Monday, May 7 Monday, November 5 Monday, May 21 Monday, November 19 Monday, June 4 Monday, December 3 Monday, June 18 Monday, December 17 (tentative) STUDY MEETINGS AND OTHER DATES Saturday, January 27 2007/08 Goals Session, 9 a.m., Recreation Center Wednesday, February 28 2007/08 Budget Session, 6 p.m., Lane Room, Main Library Friday, March 9 Commissioner's Dinner Saturday, March 24 Joint meeting with Planning Commission, 9 a.m. Monday, May 7 Joint meeting with Traffic &Parking Commission, 6 p.m. Monday, May 21 Joint meeting with Chamber of Commerce, 6 p.m. Wednesday, May 30 Budget Study Session, 6 p.m., Lane Room, Main Library Monday, June 4 Joint meeting with Parks & Recreation Commission, 6 p.m. Wednesday, June 13 City Manager's fiscal year-end review, 5:30 p.m. Monday, June 18 Joint meeting with Beautification Commission, 6 p.m. Wednesday, December 5 City Manager's fiscal mid-year review, 5:30 p.m. 4/5/2007 3:14 PM Agenda Item # 9f Meeting BURLINGAME STAFF REPORT Date: Aril 16, 2007 i. 0 SUBMITTED BY APPROVED BY TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL DATE: April 11, 2007 FROM: JIM NANTELL 558-7205 SUBJECT: APPOINTMENT OF COUNCIL MEMBER TO BAWSCA BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND BAY AREA REGIONAL WATER SYSTEM FINANCING AUTHORITY (RFA) RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that Council appoint Vice Mayor O'Mahony to a second four year term as a member of Bay Area Water Supply and Conservation Agency (BAWSCA) Board of Directors and Bay Area Regional Water System Financing Authority (RFA). BACKGROUND: In 2003 Council member O'Mahony was appointed to the newly created Bay Area Water Supply and Conservation Agency Board of Directors and to the Financing Authority for the regional water system as the representative for the City of Burlingame. She has many years of experience working in the very complicated area of water management and is currently serving as the Chair for BAWSCA. Because her term will end on June 30, 2007, staff recommends that Council reappoint her to a second four year term. ATTACHMENT: April 3, 2007 Letter from BAWSCA requesting appointment of representative EMMFJSCAL Bay Area Water Supply&Conservation AgencyD E C E � x E April 3, 2007 APR 9 2007 10] The Hon. Terry Nagel, MayorCITY OF BURLINGAME City of Burlingame MANAGER'S OFFICE 501 Primrose Road Burlingame CA 94010 Subject: Appointment of a Director to the Boards of the Bay Area Water Supply & Conservation Agency and the Bay Area Regional Water System Financing Authority Dear Mayor Nagel: The initial four-year term of Ms. Rosalie O'Mahony as a member of the board of directors of the Bay Area Water Supply& Conservation Agency(BAWSCA)will end on June 30, 2007, as will her term on the Bay Area Regional Water System Financing Authority(RFA). Ms. O'Mahony is currently the chair person of both BAWSCA and the RFA. The enabling acts for both agencies allow the City to reappoint its director for an unlimited number of terms or to replace him or her at the end of each term. The appointment will be for a four-year term. Hence,whomever you select will serve through June 2011. The statutory qualifications for appointment to either board are modest: • The appointee must be a resident of,and a registered voter in,the City. • He or she may, but need not, be a member of your City Council. The mechanics of the appointment process are also simple: • The appointments must be made at a public meeting of the City Council and be properly agendized. • The appointments must be made by action of the full City Council, rather than by unilateral action of the Mayor. • The appointments do not need to be memorialized in a resolution;a motion duly passed and recorded in the minutes of the meeting is sufficient. • When the appointment has been made,the appointed director may take the oath of office. A form of the oath of office for BAWSCA and the RFA is enclosed for your convenience. When the forms have been signed,please mail the original oath of office forms to the BAWSCA office using the enclosed self-addressed stamped envelope. A copy of the record of the council action making the appointment would also be appreciated 155 Bovet Road, Suite 302 San Mateo, CA 94402 ph 650 349 3000 fx 650 349 8395 www.bawsca.org Mayor Nagel April 3,2007 Page 2 The two questions most frequently asked about an appointment are: • Should the appointee be an elected member of the appointing agency's governing board? • Should the same person be appointed to the boards of both agencies? Both of these are matters of policy left entirely to the discretion of your council. I offer the following observations, based on BAWSCA's experience over the past three years, for whatever use they may be. • The great majority of cities and districts which are participants in BAWSCA and the RFA did select a member of their city council or governing board to serve on the BAWSCA and RFA boards. One advantage of appointing a currently serving or former elected member of your council to the board is the stature that his or her presence gives BAWSCA in its dealings with San Francisco, regulatory agencies and legislators. Another is the familiarity and experience he or she already has in addressing policy matters for the City. The governing body of each individual agency is, of course, in the best position to evaluate these, and other relevant considerations. • With very few exceptions, cities and districts have appointed the same individual to both the BAWSCA and RFA boards. Appointing one person to represent the City on both boards offers an advantage because, although the two agencies have distinct roles,they are closely related. The familiarity with the issues gained through service on one board will be useful in participating on the other. Additionally, having the same person appointed to both boards assures greater continuity in presenting your agency's perspective. The enabling acts for both agencies require that a vacancy on their boards be filled no later than 90 days from the date the vacancy occurs. As applied,the statutes require action by your Council no later than September 30,2007. However,we strongly encourage your agency to make the appointments before June 30,effective July 1, so that a quorum of both boards can be ensured and so that your agency is continuously represented. I hope you find this information helpful. I may be reached at(650) 349-3000 if you have any questions. Sincerely,/ a,, 4 Arthur R.Jensen General Manager Enclosures cc: Rosalie O'Mahony,Board Member Jim Nantell, City Manager George Bagdon, Technical Advisory Committee Representative $1,934,067.36 Ck. No. 24398- 24879 Excludes Library Checks 24579-24619 RECOMMENDED FOR PAYMENT APPROVED FOR PAYMENT Payroll for March 2007 $2,305,165.63 Ck. No. 168107- 168319 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 n CD C 0 a 00 � o m CD 3 r S:\FINEXCEL\MISCELLANEOUS\COUNCILCKS.XLS CITY OF BURLINGAME 04-06-200 W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 11 FUND RECAP - 06-07 NAME FUND AMOUNT GENERAL FUND 101 66,606.00 PAYROLL REVOLVING FUND 130 5 ,941 .40 CENTRAL COUNTY FIRE 201 13, 175 .32 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS FUND 320 7, 458.83 WATER CAPITAL PROJECT FUND 326 17,484.47 SEWER CAPITAL PROJECT FUND 327 51 ,858.43 WATER FUND 526 174,387.83 SEWER FUND 527 7, 244. 12 SOLID WASTE FUND 528 7, 757.28 PARKING ENTERPRISE FUND 530 42 .92 SELF INSURANCE FUND 618 18, 086. 04 FACILITIES SERVICES FUND 619 3,656.36 EQUIPMENT SERVICES FUND 620 54,936.31 INFORMATION SERVICES FUND 621 14,894.94 FIRE MECHANIC SERVICES FUND 625 1 ,475 .83 OTHER LOCAL GRANTS/DONATIONS 730 330 .56 PUBLIC TV ACCESS FUND 738 8,655 .00 UTILITY REVOLVING FUND 896 Q TOTAL FOR APPROVAL ` ' $484, 284 . 26 HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL : THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE CLAIMS LISTED ON PAGES NUMBERED FROM 1 THROUGH 11 INCLUSIVE , AND/OR CLAIMS NUMBERED FROM 24871 THROUGH 24999 INCLUSIVE , TOTALING IN THE AMOUNT OF $484, 284 .26, 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 1 04/06/07 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 24871 CALIFORNIA PARK & RECREATION 01726 300.00 TRAINING EXPENSE 300.00 101 68020 260 2100 24872 L. N. CURTIS & SONS 02027 311.27 FIRE APPARATUS MAINT. 311.27 201 65200 203 24873 EWING IRRIGATION PRODUCTS 02157 107.35 MISCELLANEOUS 107.35 101 68020 192 2200 24874 W.W. GRAINGER, INC. 02248 2,111.91 TRAINING EXPENSE 167.17 526 69020 260 MISC. SUPPLIES 527.26 619 64460 120 5120 MISC. SUPPLIES 98.16 619 64460 120 5110 MISC. SUPPLIES 568.71 619 64460 120 5180 SMALL TOOLS 750.61 619 64460 130 - 24875 KAVANAGH ENGINEERING 02665 4,000.00 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 4,000.00 320 81720 210 % ?t 'm � �� �� 03054 �r�.. ��rr XPENSE 20,151.33 896 20280 24877 SANDRA POBE 03175 2,016.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 2,016.00 101 68010 220 1644 IN w N FRANCISCO WATER DEPT. 03353 mmmwv WATER PURCHASES 153,671.44 526 69020 171 24879 TIMBERLINE TREE SERVICE, INC. 03760 684.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 684.00 320 76350 220 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 2 04/06/07 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 24880 BURLINGAME REC. DEPT./PETTY CASH 03910 4,971.90 MISCELLANEOUS 568.00 101 36330 000 1422 MISC. SUPPLIES 11.27 101 68010 120 1114 MISC. SUPPLIES 508.11 101 68010 120 1521 UNIFORMS AND EQUIPMENT 298.02 101 68020 140 2200 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 150.00 101 68020 210 2200 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 12.00 101 68010 220 1660 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 180.00 101 68010 220 1647 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 953.00 101 68010 220 1644 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 186.00 101 68010 220 1646 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 275.00 101 68010 220 1331 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 150.00 101 68010 220 1645 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 431.73 101 68010 220 1349 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 120.00 101 68010 220 1648 TRAVEL & MEETINGS 4.00 101 68020 250 2200 TRAVEL & MEETINGS 194.01 101 68020 250 2100 TRAVEL & MEETINGS 234.00 101 68020 250 2300 TRAVEL & MEETINGS 366.20 101 68010 250 1100 MISC. SUPPLIES 330.56 730 69583 120 24881 WEST GROUP PAYMENT CTR. 03964 412.20 MISC. SUPPLIES 412.20 101 64350 120 09079 LLANEOUS 7,800.00 618 64520 604 24883 SIERRA PACIFIC TURF SUPPLY 09459 758.83 MISC. SUPPLIES 758.83 101 68020 120 2300 24884 WINGFOOT COMMERCIAL TIRE SYSTEMS 11316 152.95 FIRE APPARATUS MAINT. 152.95 201 65200 203 24885 CHIEF DON DORNELL 11568 1,654.47 MISC. SUPPLIES 36.33 201 65200 111 MISC. SUPPLIES 54.95 201 65200 120 UNIFORMS AND EQUIPMENT 35.73 201 65200 140 COMMUNICATIONS 32.46 201 65200 160 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 110.00 201 65200 240 TRAINING EXPENSE 230.00 201 65500 260 TRAINING EXPENSE 1,155.00 201 65200 260 24886 WECO INDUSTRIES, INC. 11640 1,362.01 MISC. SUPPLIES 1,362.01 527 66520 120 24887 ELECTRO-MOTION INCORPORATED 14007 387.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 387.00 619 64460 220 5240 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 3 04/06/07 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT *� Denotes Hand Written Checks 24888 ALL CITY MANAGEMENT 15595 3,264.30 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 3,264.30 101 65100 220 16148 PROFESSIONA ALIZED S 9,799.90 618 64520 210 24890 MOSS RUBBER & EQUIPMENT CORP. 16225 75.18 TRAINING EXPENSE 75.18 526 69020 260 24891 SYDNEY MALK00 16347 81.18 SMALL TOOLS 81.18 620 66700 130 NTENANCE 16629 L EQUIPMENT 53,933.40 620 66700 800 24893 SHERWIN-WILLIAMS 17224 24.02 MISC. SUPPLIES 24.02 619 64460 120 24894 COLORPRINT 17497 270.63 MISC. SUPPLIES 134.82 101 65300 120 MISC. SUPPLIES 135.81 526 69020 120 24895 HI-TECH EMERGENCY VEHICLE 17546 136.32 FIRE APPARATUS MAINT. 136.32 625 65213 203 24896 LEE & ASSOCIATES 17568 12.50 FIRE APPARATUS MAINT. 12.50 201 65200 203 24897 SAN DIEGO POLICE EQUIPMENT CO 17646 4,432.09 POLICE--SUPPLIES 4,432.09 101 65100 126 24898 DON CHESNEY 18143 395.00 TRAINING EXPENSE 395.00 201 65200 260 24899 BAY ALARM 18854 279.00 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 111.00 619 64460 210 5230 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 168.00 619 64460 210 5180 24900 CALIFORNIA MUNICIPAL 18915 220.00 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 220.00 101 64250 240 24901 ACCESS UNIFORMS & EMBROIDERY 18990 278.00 UNIFORMS AND EQUIPMENT 278.00 527 66520 140 24902 PEGGY GUARALDI 19044 270.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 270.00 101 68010 220 1660 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 4 04/06/07 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 24903 LIEBERT CASSIDY WHITMORE 19095 52.00 TRAINING EXPENSE 52.00 101 64420 260 24904 BURTON'S FIRE, INC. 19366 1,785.11 MISC. SUPPLIES 38.85 201 65200 120 FIRE APPARATUS MAINT. 406.75 201 65200 203 FIRE APPARATUS MAINT. 1,339.51 625 65213 203 19564 " r SIGNAL & SP IZED S 5,404.64 528 66600 210 24906 DON DORNELL 19617 560.00 MISCELLANEOUS 560.00 101 65200 031 24907 CREATIVE INTERCONNECT 19768 228.36 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 228.36 201 65200 220 24908 PENINSULA CORRIDOR JOINT 20060 4,066.00 RENTS & LEASES 4,066.00 526 69020 180 24909 AFFINITEL COMMUNICATIONS 20246 334.93 COMMUNICATIONS 334.93 621 64450 160 s S 20501 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 5,400.00 327 75170 210 24911 BRIDGE WIRELESS 20633 837.79 COMMUNICATIONS 837.79 620 66700 160 24912 BAYSIDE BUILDING MATERIALS INC. 20650 21.63 SMALL TOOLS 21.63 527 66520 130 24913 RENEE RAMSEY 21136 510.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 510.00 101 68010 220 1331 WIN ,¢w 21177 now ACTUAL SERVICES 8,655.00 738 64580 220 24915 CIR 21211 1,435.55 MISC. SUPPLIES 1,435.55 527 66520 120 24916 THYSSENKRUPP ELEVATOR-042 21240 550.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 550.00 619 64460 220 5130 24917 CDW GOVERNMENT, INC. 21482 268.73 OFFICE EXPENSE 268.73 101 64150 110 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 5 04/06/07 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT *� Denotes Hand Written Checks 24918 SKYHAWKS SPORTS ACADEMY 21741 2,478.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 2,478.00 101 68010 220 1372 24919 TOM LEYDEN 21940 300.00 DEPOSIT REFUNDS 300.00 101 22520 24920 TOWNE FORD SALES, INC. 22146 227.70 MISCELLANEOUS 143.76 618 64520 604 _ SUPPLIES 83.94 620 15000 24921 ROBERTS AND BRUNE 22178 2,836.56 MISC. SUPPLIES 2,836.56 526 69020 120 24922 C&H DISTRIBUTORS INC 22371 191.66 MISCELLANEOUS -9.90 101 23611 BLDG. &GROUNDS MAINT. 201.56 101 68010 190 1106 24923 COMMUTER CHECK CORP-SF BAY AREA 22485 1,495.20 MISCELLANEOUS 1,495.20 101 15400 24924 FIRE SERVICE SPECIFICATION&SUP 22705 60.62 GAS, OIL&GREASE 60.62 201 65200 201 24925 A&B TRAILER HITCH CO. 22998 178.11 MISC. SUPPLIES 32.36 101 68020 120 2200 EQUIPMENT MAINT. 145.75 101 68020 200 2200 24926 JDH CORROSION CONSULTANTS, INC. 23184 3,000.00 PROFESSIONAL&SPECIALIZED S 3,000.00 101 66210 210 24927 CALIFORNIA SPECIALIZED TRAINING 23220 2,875.00 TRAINING EXPENSE 2,875.00 201 65500 260 24928 MAUREEN SUPANICH 23291 152.00 MISCELLANEOUS 152.00 101 36330 000 1521 24929 OFFICE MAX 23306 417.62 OFFICE EXPENSE 125.41 101 66100 110 OFFICE EXPENSE 292.21 101 68010 110 1101 24930 DATASAFE 23410 326.94 OFFICE EXPENSE 64.99 101 64200 110 OFFICE EXPENSE 36.95 101 64420 110 BANKING SERVICE FEES 225.00 101 64250 120 24931 RECALL- TOTAL INFORMATION MGMT 23411 105.00 MISCELLANEOUS 105.00 101 22518 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 6 04/06/07 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT - AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 24932 SCOTT WITH 23570 3,000.00 MISCELLANEOUS 3,000.00 101 22546 24933 MCMASTER-CARR SUPPLY CO. 23611 204.28 MISCELLANEOUS 61.73 526 69020 233 MISC. SUPPLIES 142.55 619 64460 120 5130 24934 JIM KLEEBAUER 23722 1,125.00 MISCELLANEOUS 1,125.00 101 22546 24935 SCS FIELD SERVICES 23727 2,352.64 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 2,352.64 528 66600 210 23728 nmwww-cCMMUNI 18.31 101 68020 160 UTILITY EXPENSE 9,029.69 896 20281 24937 WINZLER & KELLY CONSULTING ENGIN 23992 2,750.00 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 2,750.00 320 80520 210 24938 QUILL 24090 84.11 OFFICE EXPENSE 84.11 621 64450 110 24939 FLORA ROBELET 24167 50.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 50.00 101 48010 220 1521 24940 ERIC GATTMAN 24169 _ 198.40 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 198.40 101 68010 220 1521 24941 DOUG BELL 24189 24.83 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 24.83 320 80520 210 24942 FASTLANE TEK INC. 24304 3,875.00 MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSE 3,875.00 526 69020 290 24943 ALERT-ALL 24392 514.19 MISC. SUPPLIES 514.19 201 65200 120 24944 BEACON FIRE & SAFETY 24535 285.32 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 285.32 619 64460 210 24945 IMEDD INCORPORATED 24550 342.38 MISCELLANEOUS 342.38 618 64520 234 EDY/JENKS CONSULTANTS 24570 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 5,488.50 326 81470 210 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 11,995.97 326 80950 210 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 7 04/06/07 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT *� Denotes Hand Written Checks twommm" a � 24793 5,941 .40 130 20014 mm 24948 S AND S SUPPLIES & SOLUTIONS 24963 8.76 MISC. SUPPLIES 8.76 527 66520 120 25007Now �tELLANEOUS 5,823.71 101 68010 115 1101 24950 DE LAGE LANDEN 25057 609.37 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 23.08 101 65150 220 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 414.94 101 65100 220 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 171 .35 201 65200 220 24951 SHARON JACKSON 25099 275.35 TRAVEL & MEETINGS 275.35 101 64250 250 24952 GCC ENTERPRISES 25128 4,640.00 DEPOSIT REFUNDS 4,640.00 101 22520 24953 OFFICE DEPOT 25244 61 .66 OFFICE EXPENSE 35.70 101 65100 110 OFFICE EXPENSE 25.96 101 65150 110 24954 TOM WHITE 25293 3,000.00 MISCELLANEOUS 3,000.00 101 22546 24955 MERCY HIGH SCHOOL 25350 100.00 MISCELLANEOUS 100.00 101 22593 24956 ROBIN KNIFSEND 25597 100.00 MISCELLANEOUS 100.00 101 22593 24957 LARSON CONSULTING 25732 3,957.93 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 3,957.93 527 66520 210 24958 KEVIN REYES 25970 270.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 270.00 101 68010 220 1789 24959 CONNIE GRAVAGNO 25997 150.00 MISCELLANEOUS 150.00 101 36330 000 1370 24960 CAROLYN HORRIGAN-WAY 26009 2,925.00 MISCELLANEOUS 2,925.00 101 22546 24961 ADCOM/BHS 26024 85.15 UNIFORMS AND EQUIPMENT 85.•15 101 65150 140 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 8 04/06/07 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 24962 LAUREL TANG 26121 495.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 495.00 101 68010 220 1349 24963 CINGULAR WIRELESS 26161 42.92 COMMUNICATIONS 42.92 530 65400 160 26205 CONTRACTUAL SfR 1 CES 46,458.43 327 81510 220 24965 RANDY SCHWARTZ 26206 507.00 MISCELLANEOUS 507.00 101 68010 031 24966 TERESA SILVESTRI 26266 450.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 450.00 101 68010 220 1349 24967 VISION INTERNET PROVIDERS INC 26294 200.00 CITY HALL MAINTENANCE 200.00 621 64450 220 24968 UNDERWRITERS LABORATORIES INC 26304 875.00 FIRE APPARATUS MAINT. 875.00 201 65200 203 26520 wommomw CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 9,498.94 526 69020 800 24970 ICC PENINSULA CHAPTER 26732 300.00 MISCELLANEOUS 300.00 101 22515 24971 MARTIN REYES 26820 498.75 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 498.75 101 68010 220 1660 24972 SKYLINE BUSINESS PRODUCTS 26825 292.69 OFFICE EXPENSE 21.70 101 64350 110 OFFICE EXPENSE 32.11 101 64150 110 OFFICE EXPENSE 10.43 101 64350 110 OFFICE EXPENSE 10.43 101 64420 110 MISC. SUPPLIES -5.95 101 66210 120 OFFICE EXPENSE 180.24 527 66520 110 OFFICE EXPENSE 43.73 619 64460 110 24973 PDSI 26853 596.26 SMALL TOOLS -16.26 201 65200 130 FIRE APPARATUS MAINT. 612.52 201 65200 203 24974 CINGULAR WIRELESS 26896 106.84 COMMUNICATIONS 106.84 201 65200 160 24975 CINGULAR WIRELESS 26899 66.92 COMMUNICATIONS 66.92 101 64150 160 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 9 04/06/07 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 24976 CINGULAR WIRELESS 26901 138.56 COMMUNICATIONS 138.56 101 65300 160 24977 CINGULAR WIRELESS 26910 285.84 COMMUNICATIONS 285.84 101 66100 160 24978 CINGULAR WIRELESS 26912 64.38 COMMUNICATIONS 64.38 101 65100 160 24979 ALICE MCCARTY 27006 117.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 117.00 101 68010 220 1660 27007 kOFES5T1N7kh°"& SPECIALIZED S 9,000.00 101 64420 210 24981 CINGULAR WIRELESS 27019 1,111.60 UTILITY EXPENSE 1,111.60 896 20281 24982 COUNTY OF SAN MATEO 27057 390.00 TRAINING EXPENSE 390.00 101 64420 262 24983 BAKER & TAYLOR ENTERTAINMENT 27091 217.04 LIBRARY CATALOGING EXPENSE 70.40 101 67500 124 LIBRARY--RECORDS AND CASSETT 146.64 101 "67500 125 24984 LE CROISSANT 27286 40.00 MISC. SUPPLIES 40.00 101 64420 120 27306 MISCELLANEOUS 14,275.90 621 64450 400 24986 MR/MRS ISAACSON 27381 208.00 MISCELLANEOUS 208.00 101 36330 000 1331 24987 MR/MRS MUNDHRA 27382 104.00 MISCELLANEOUS 104.00 101 36330 000 1331 24988 AARON SATO 27383 104.00 MISCELLANEOUS 104.00 101 36330 000 1331 24989 WENDY MCARDLE 27384 104.00 MISCELLANEOUS 104.00 101 36330 000 1331 24990 MR/MRS TRAGOUTSIS 27385 104.00 MISCELLANEOUS 104.00 101 36330 000 1331 24991 MR/MRS ROSEN 27386 45.00 MISCELLANEOUS 45.00 101 36330 000 1660 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 10 04/06/07 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 24992 EILEEN & MARK KIM 27387 45.00 MISCELLANEOUS 45.00 101 36330 000 1660 24993 ROBERT HIGHSMITH 27388 100.00 MISCELLANEOUS 100.00 101 22593 24994 ECMS INC 27389 4,200.00 TRAINING EXPENSE 4,200.00 201 65200 260 24995 BROADWAY GRILL 27390 4,000.00 MISC. SUPPLIES 4,000.00 101 64100 120 24996 MARK MCDANIEL 27391 75.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 75.00 101 68010 220 1785 24997 JOHNNY LIU 27392 75.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 75.00 101 68010 220 1785 24998 FLEETPRIDE 27393 575.91 FIRE APPARATUS MAINT. 575.91 201 65200 203 24999 MR/MRS NAVES 27394 150.00 MISCELLANEOUS 150.00 101 36330 000 1891 TOTAL $484,284.26 CITY OF BURLINGAME 03-23-2007 W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 9 FUND RECAP - 06-07 NAME FUND AMOUNT GENERAL FUND 101 45,412.22 PAYROLL REVOLVING FUND 130 998.50 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS FUND 320 13,379.59 WATER CAPITAL PROJECT FUND 326 14,710.83 SEWER CAPITAL PROJECT FUND 327 649,390.93 WATER FUND 526 50,697.94 SEWER FUND 527 5,451.90 SOLID WASTE FUND 528 120.48 PARKING ENTERPRISE FUND 530 1,862.18 SELF INSURANCE FUND 618 11,990.50 FACILITIES SERVICES FUND 619 2,043.29 EQUIPMENT SERVICES FUND 620 647.16 INFORMATION SERVICES FUND 621 2,580.25 OTHER LOCAL GRANTS/DONATIONS 730 346.16 BURLINGAME TRAIN SHUTTLE PROGRAM 736 1,669.18 UTILITY REVOLVING FUND 896 645.62 TOTAL FOR APPROVAL C$801,946.73 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 24620 THROUGH 24723 INCLUSIVE,TOTALING IN THE AMOUNT OF $801,946.73, 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 03/23/07 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 24718 TRISH J MCGONIGLE 27355 150.00 MISCELLANEOUS 75.00 101 22593 MISCELLANEOUS 75.00 101 36330 000 1216 24719 JOSE SANTIAGO 27356 100.00 MISCELLANEOUS 100.00 101 22593 24720 LINDA TONG 27357 100.00 MISCELLANEOUS 100.00 101 22593 24721 GUNTHER SCHUBERT 27361 34.00 MISCELLANEOUS 34.00 101 36330 000 1521 24722 ANTHONY RICCOMINI 27362 249.00 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 249.00 130 20015 24723 PAUL DRISCOLL 27363 100.00 MISCELLANEOUS 50.00 101 22593 MISCELLANEOUS 50.00 101 36330 000 1216 TOTAL $801,946.73 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 7 03/23/07 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT *� Denotes Hand Written Checks 24704 NICHOLAS BELLAFATTO 25625 800.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 800.00 101 68010 220 1331 24705 CINTAS FIRST AID & SAFETY 25729 120.48 TRAINING EXPENSE 120.48 528 66600 260 24706 WELLS FARGO FINANCIAL LEASING 25820 153.22 RENTS & LEASES 153.22 526 69020 180 24707 ED BARTON 25850 140.00 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 140.00 130 20060 24708 AKOP VETSIKYAN 26305 110.00 MISCELLANEOUS 110.00 101 36330 000 1781 24709 GSWAW 26520 38,683.59 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 37,995.75 526 69020 220 MISCELLANEOUS 687.84 526 69020 233 24710 SKYLINE BUSINESS PRODUCTS 26825 676.97 OFFICE EXPENSE 153.18 101 65300 110 MISC. SUPPLIES 417.93 101 66210 120 MISC. SUPPLIES 95.04 526 69020 120 OFFICE EXPENSE 10.82 527 66520 110 24711 MCNAMARA AND SMALLMAN CONSTRUCTI 26911 617,802.30 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 617,802.30 327 81500 220 24712 AVERY ASSOCIATES 27007 8,487.14 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 1,587.14 101 64420 210 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 6,900.00 526 69020 210 24713 CINGULAR WIRELESS 27040 33.18 COMMUNICATIONS 33.18 101 65100 160 24714 MICHAEL GONG 27171 4,500.00 MISCELLANEOUS 4,500.00 101 22546 24715 KAY MCBRIDE 27293 45.00 MISCELLANEOUS 45.00 101 36330 000 1641 24716 JOEL CAMPOS 27353 659.00 MISCELLANEOUS 359.00 101 36310 DEPOSIT REFUNDS 300.00 101 22520 24717 GETTLER RYAN INC 27354 1,036.77 MISCELLANEOUS 1,036.77 101 31510 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 6 03/23/07 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT *� Denotes Hand Written Checks 24689 S&J SALES 24194 854.40 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 854.40 101 65150 220 24690 CALIFORNIA WATER SERVICE COMPANY 24249 648.00 MISCELLANEOUS 648.00 526 69020 233 24691 JC WHITLAM MANUFACTURING 24369 1,326.15 MISCELLANEOUS -93.93 101 23611 BLDG. & GROUNDS MAINT. 1,420.08 101 68020 190 2200 24692 SUSAN MCKEE 24442 688.50 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 688.50 101 68010 220 1661 24693 GRETCHEN LOTT 24452 1,046.25 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,046.25 101 68010 220 1661 24694 DIAMOND SECURITY SOLUTIONS 24659 120.00 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 120.00 619 64460 210 5120 24695 CWEA SFBS 24794 150.00 TRAINING EXPENSE 150.00 527 66520 260 24696 FRED FIRESTONE 24866 585.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 585.00 101 68010 220 1331 24697 S AND S SUPPLIES & SOLUTIONS 24963 582.73 MISC. SUPPLIES 556.59 527 66520 120 TRAINING EXPENSE 26.14 527 66520 260 24698 DAVID WRIGHT CONSTRUCTION 25041 150.00 DEPOSIT REFUNDS 150.00 101 22520 24699 JAMES MURPHY 25080 1,506.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,506.00 101 68010 220 1661 24700 DALE ROYAL 25082 129.50 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 129.50 130 20060 24701 OFFICE DEPOT 25244 159.84 OFFICE EXPENSE 30.30 101 65150 110 OFFICE EXPENSE 129.54 101 65100 110 24702 PAT KERRISK 25322 15.69 PERSONNEL EXAMINATIONS 15.69 101 64420 121 24703 CALPERS 25370 1,000.00 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 1,000.00 101 64420 210 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 5 03/23/07 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 24677 TLC ADMINISTRATORS 23156 175.00 MISCELLANEOUS 175.00 101 64420 031 24678 OFFICE MAX 23306 420.94 OFFICE EXPENSE 88.51 101 64250 110 OFFICE EXPENSE 108.74 101 68010 110 1101 OFFICE EXPENSE 86.66 101 66100 110 OFFICE EXPENSE 121.72 101 68010 110 1101 OFFICE EXPENSE 15.31 621 64450 110 24679 HOME DEPOT 23384 327.00 MISC. SUPPLIES 182.67 619 64460 120 5180 MISC. SUPPLIES 144.33 619 64460 120 24680 KAREN SCHEIKOWITZ 23507 692.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 692.00 101 68010 220 1661 24681 ERLER AND KALINOWSKI,INC. 23531 14,710.83 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 14,710.83 326 81690 210 24682 BKF ENGINEERS 23641 30,624.63 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 29,788.63 327 81500 210 PUMP EQUIPMENT REPAIR 836.00 527 66520 230 24683 JANNETTE GREER 23769 288.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 288.00 101 68010 220 1648 24684 SFPUC WATER QUALITY BUREAU 23846 3,225.00 MISCELLANEOUS 3,225.00 526 69020 233 24685 DEWEY SERVICES, INC. 23902 430.00 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 5160 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 70.00 619 64460 210 5180 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 55.00 619 64460 210 5150 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 70.00 619 64460 210 5120 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 55.00 619 64460 210 5170 24686 DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 23905 1,744.00 MISCELLANEOUS 1,712.00 101 23620 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 32.00 101 64420 210 24687 CHOICE POINT BUSINESS AND GOVERN 23935 250.00 POLICE INVESTIGATION EXPENSE 250.00 101 65100 292 24688 UNIVERSAL BUILDING SERVICES 23941 12.30 MISC. SUPPLIES 12.30 619 64460 120 5121 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 4 03/23/07 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 24661 AFFINITEL COMMUNICATIONS 20246 2,467.26 COMMUNICATIONS 2,467.26 621 64450 160 24662 LYNX TECHNOLOGIES 20501 1,800.00 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 1,800.00 327 75170 210 24663 CWEA - CALIFORNIA WATER 20631 645.00 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 645.00 527 66520 240 24664 RENEE RAMSEY 21136 1,035.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,035.00 101 68010 220 1331 24665 QUICK MIX CONCRETE 21140 1,664.35 MISC. SUPPLIES 1,664.35 527 66520 120 24666 CDW GOVERNMENT, INC. 21482 129.53 MISC. SUPPLIES 87.09 101 65300 120 OFFICE EXPENSE 42.44 527 66520 110 24667 HILLYARD/SAN FRANCISCO 21658 524.61 MISC. SUPPLIES 524.61 101 68020 120 2200 24668 TURBO DATA SYSTEMS, INC. 21767 7,043.87 MISCELLANEOUS 7,043.87 101 37010 24669 JORGENSON, SIEGEL, MCCLURE & FLE 22144 9,660.00 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 9,660.00 618 64520 210 24670 TOWNE FORD SALES, INC. 22146 269.55 SUPPLIES 269.55 620 15000 24671 TENNANT 22621 135.53 SUPPLIES 135.53 620 15000 24672 TURF STAR 22682 96.65 EQUIPMENT MAINT. 96.65 101 68020 200 2200 24673 UNITED RENTALS 22736 130.48 TRAINING EXPENSE 130.48 527 66520 260 24674 SAN MATEO REGIONAL NETWORK, INC. 22759 435.00 UTILITY EXPENSE 435.00 896 20281 24675 JONES AND MAYER 22818 96.00 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 96.00 101 64350 210 24676 MIKE COFFEY 23009 480.00 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 480.00 130 20015 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 3 03/23/07 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 24647 HANNON CONSTRUCTION 17514 300.00 DEPOSIT REFUNDS 300.00 101 22520 24648 CENTRAL BUSINESS EQUIPMENT 18011 45.00 EQUIPMENT MAINT. 45.00 101 65100 200 24649 COUNTY OF SAN MATEO 18565 400.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 400.00 101 64560 220 24650 LYNNE FIRESTONE 18746 720.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 720.00 101 68010 220 1331 24651 ROXANN LOOSE 18776 300.00 MISCELLANEOUS 300.00 101 22593 24652 DEAN'S AUTO BODY & 18795 2,330.50 MISCELLANEOUS 2,330.50 618 64520 604 24653 PREFERRED ALLIANCE 19025 202.40 PERSONNEL EXAMINATIONS 202.40 101 64420 121 24654 ANG NEWSPAPERS 19083 206.18 MISC. SUPPLIES 51.66 101 64400 120 PUBLICATIONS & ADVERTISING 154.52 101 64200 150 24655 PRIORITY 1 19239 368.17 SMALL TOOLS 297.81 526 69020 130 SUPPLIES 70.36 620 15000 24656 ARROWHEAD MOUNTAIN SPRING WATER 19330 139.86 OFFICE EXPENSE 60.11 101 64250 110 MISC. SUPPLIES -17.93 620 66700 120 OFFICE EXPENSE 97.68 621 64450 110 24657 WILSEY & HAM 19397 11,195.48 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 11,195.48 320 81740 210 24658 MONICA OLSEN 19832 147.20 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 147.20 101 68010 220 1661 24659 PENINSULA CORRIDOR JOINT 20060 1,669.18 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,669.18 736 64570 220 24660 GE CAPITAL 20216 379.75 OFFICE EXPENSE 94.93 101 68020 110 2100 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 284.82 101 68010 220 1100 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 2 03/23/07 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 24633 SAN MATEO COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFC. 09433 586.50 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 372.50 101 65100 220 PRISONER EXPENSE 214.00 101 65100 291 24634 CALLANDER ASSOCIATES 09461 1,434.11 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 1,434.11 320 81090 210 24635 SAN MATEO LAWN MOWER SHOP 09560 244.30 EQUIPMENT MAINT. 136.40 101 68020 200 2300 SMALL TOOLS 107.90 526 69020 130 24636 MARGARET KRAMER 09612 1,620.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,620.00 101 68010 220 1661 24637 GARY M. OLSON, PH.D. 09902 600.00 PERSONNEL EXAMINATIONS 600.00 101 64420 121 24638 BARKER BLUE REPROGRAPHICS 09990 195.69 MISC. SUPPLIES 195.69 730 69593 120 6030 24639 MEYERS, NAVE, RIBACK, SILVER 11101 857.26 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 857.26 101 64350 210 24640 WECO INDUSTRIES, INC. 11640 906.57 MISC. SUPPLIES 906.57 527 66520 120 24641 RADIOSHACK CORPORATION 11749 181.92 POLICE INVESTIGATION EXPENSE 43.28 101 65100 292 MISC. SUPPLIES 77.90 527 66520 120 EQUIPMENT MAINT. 57.50 530 65400 200 MISC. SUPPLIES 3.24 619 64460 120 24642 PARKIN SECURITY CONSULTANTS 15250 134.00 PERSONNEL EXAMINATIONS 134.00 101 64420 121 24643 ALL CITY MANAGEMENT 15595 1,994.85 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,994.85 101 65100 220 24644 MOSS RUBBER & EQUIPMENT CORP. 16225 580.96 TRAINING EXPENSE 516.50 526 69020 260 SUPPLIES 64.46 620 15000 24645 SYDNEY MALK0O 16347 27.05 SMALL TOOLS 27.05 620 66700 130 24646 COLORPRINT 17497 554.78 MISC. SUPPLIES 226.24 101 66210 120 MISC. SUPPLIES 328.54 527 66520 120 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 1 03/23/07 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT *� Denotes Hand Written Checks 24620 BAYSHORE INTERNATIONAL TRUCKS 01236 98.14 SUPPLIES 98.14 620 15000 24621 EWING IRRIGATION PRODUCTS 02157 789.76 MISCELLANEOUS 118.61 101 68020 192 2200 MISCELLANEOUS 671.15 101 68020 400 2200 24622 W.W. GRAINGER, INC. 02248 1,354.77 TRAINING EXPENSE 485.44 101 68020 260 2200 MISC. SUPPLIES 70.88 526 69020 120 MISC. SUPPLIES 798.45 619 64460 120 5121 24623 MILLBRAE LUMBER CO. 02898 269.96 BLDG. & GROUNDS MAINT. 9.50 101 68020 190 2200 SIDEWALK REPAIR EXPENSE 25.92 101 66210 219 TRAFFIC CONTROL MATERIALS 121.88 101 66210 222 SIDEWALK REPAIR EXPENSE 70.36 527 66520 219 MISC. SUPPLIES 42.30 619 64460 120 24624 AT&T 03080 210.62 UTILITY EXPENSE 210.62 896 20281 24625 R & S ERECTION OF 03234 310.00 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 310.00 619 64460 210 5150 24626 ROSS RECREATION EQUIPMENT 03271 750.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 750.00 320 81790 220 24627 INFORMATION SERVICES DEPT. 03378 1,962.75 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,962.75 101 65150 220 24628 U S POSTAL SERVICE 03821 3,000.00 MISCELLANEOUS 3,000.00 101 64250 114 24629 WEST GROUP PAYMENT CTR. 03964 461.92 MISC. SUPPLIES 461.92 101 64350 120 24630 FASTSIGNS 09136 150.47 MISC. SUPPLIES 150.47 730 69593 120 6030 24631 RD OFFICE SOLUTIONS 09213 6.71 MISC. SUPPLIES 6.71 527 66520 120 24632 POM INC. 09248 1,804.68 EQUIPMENT MAINT. 1,804.68 530 65400 200 CITY OF BURLINGAME 03-15-2007 W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 17 FUND RECAP - 06-07 NAME FUND AMOUNT GENERAL FUND 101 216,707.67 CENTRAL COUNTY FIRE 201 11,151.62 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS FUND 320 23,355.00 WATER CAPITAL PROJECT FUND 326 80,394.71 WATER FUND 526 9,222.61 SEWER FUND 527 210,404.98 SOLID WASTE FUND 528 2,771.02 PARKING ENTERPRISE FUND 530 3,299.53 SELF INSURANCE FUND 618 10,767.00 FACILITIES SERVICES FUND 619 38,042.15 EQUIPMENT SERVICES FUND 620 4,868.56 INFORMATION SERVICES FUND 621 36,742.59 FIRE MECHANIC SERVICES FUND 625 785.74 OTHER LOCAL GRANTS/DONATIONS 730 237.63 TRUST AND AGENCY FUND 731 1,824.85 TOTAL FOR APPROVAL $650,575.66 HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL: THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE CLAIMS LISTED ON PAGES NUMBERED FROM 1 THROUGH 17 INCLUSIVE, AND/OR CLAIMS NUMBERED FROM 24398 THROUGH 24578 INCLUSIVE,TOTALING IN THE AMOUNT OF $650,575.66, 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 16 03/15/07 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT *� Denotes Hand Written Checks 24578 NATIONAL CITIZEN SURVEY 27351 4,200.00 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 4,200.00 101 64150 210 TOTAL $650,575.66 3��a CITY OF BURLINGAME WARRANT REG I ST ER PAGE 15 03/15/07 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 24562 KAREN KELLER 27335 97.00 MISCELLANEOUS 97.00 101 36330 000 1782 24563 AHNNA MARIE DUDLEY 27336 81.00 MISCELLANEOUS 81.00 101 36330 000 1782 24564 EVE CHAN 27337 97.00 MISCELLANEOUS 97.00 101 36330 000 1782 24565 MARGARITA MORROW 27338 194.00 MISCELLANEOUS 194.00 101 36330 000 1782 24566 MR MRS MACALUSO 27339 81.00 MISCELLANEOUS 81.00 101 36330 000 1782 24567 JOY CHUNG 27340 162.00 MISCELLANEOUS 162.00 101 36330 000 1782 24568 JENNIFER ROYER SULLIVAN 27341 150.00 MISCELLANEOUS 150.00 101 36330 000 1644 24569 MEAGHAN SCHAEFER 27342 52.00 MISCELLANEOUS 52.00 101 36330 000 1646 24570 NICOLE ROSSO 27343 81.00 MISCELLANEOUS 81.00 101 36330 000 1782 24571 IAN MILNE 27344 81.00 MISCELLANEOUS 81.00 101 36330 000 1782 24572 NANCY COCHRAN 27345 90.00 MISCELLANEOUS 90.00 101 36330 000 1422 24573 MR MRS MCFADDEN 27346 90.00 MISCELLANEOUS 90.00 101 36330 000 1422 24574 MR MRS MEISTER 27347 90.00 MISCELLANEOUS 90.00 101 36330 000 1422 24575 CINDY MURPHY 27348 90.00 MISCELLANEOUS 90.00 101 36330 000 1422 24576 KATHLEEN JOHNSTON 27349 1,125.00 MISCELLANEOUS 1,125.00 101 22546 24577 TOM LOGAN 27350 3,000.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,500.00 101 68010 220 1646 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,500.00 101 68010 220 1644 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 14 03/15/07 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 24546 COUNTY OF SAN MATEO 27057 445.00 TRAINING EXPENSE 445.00 101 64420 262 24547 STAN SMITH 27058 2,699.29 CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 2,699.29 526 69020 800 24548 FLOOR EFFECTS 27178 1,780.00 MISCELLANEOUS 1,780.00 619 64460 804 24549 DONOVAN BOYLE 27196 70.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 70.00 101 68010 220 1780 24550 DOXIE MALEK 27249 15.00 MISCELLANEOUS 15.00 101 36330 000 1660 24551 INTERSTATE BATTERY SYSTEM OF SAN 27283 1,044.49 FIRE APPARATUS MAINT. 1,044.49 201 65200 203 24552 JADE DECOU 27307 60.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 60.00 101 68010 220 1780 24553 MR/MRS KWAN 27313 148.00 MISCELLANEOUS 148.00 101 36330 000 1785 24554 VANESSA BERTOTTI 27327 81.00 MISCELLANEOUS 81.00 101 36330 000 1782 24555 CHRISTINA IP-TDMA 27328 81.00 MISCELLANEOUS 81.00 101 36330 000 1782 24556 LORI REDDY 27329 194.00 MISCELLANEOUS 194.00 101 36330 000 1782 24557 YIN LAU 27330 194.00 MISCELLANEOUS 194.00 101 36330 000 1782 24558 RAFFY SISON 27331 100.00 MISCELLANEOUS 100.00 101 22593 24559 NBS 27332 5,063.12 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 5,063.12 101 64560 220 24560 GALL HOUSE 27333 340.99 OFFICE EXPENSE 340.99 101 65100 110 24561 MARYANN OLEARY 27334 90.00 MISCELLANEOUS 90.00 101 36330 000 1422 1 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 13 03/15/07 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 24533 PFSA 26197 30.00 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 30.00 620 66700 240 24534 J.P. COOKE CO. 26207 19.43 OFFICE EXPENSE 19.43 101 64250 110 24535 EAC 26296 75.00 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 75.00 101 64420 240 24536 ROCQUE YBALLA 26311 162.00 MISCELLANEOUS 162.00 101 36330 000 1782 24537 CHERYL BOWER 26321 100.00 MISCELLANEOUS 100.00 101 22593 24538 GSWAW 26520 901.88 CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 901.88 526 69020 803 24539 CHEESE PLEASE 26635 439.70 PERSONNEL EXAMINATIONS 439.70 101 64420 121 24540 AMERICAN MESSAGING 26822 64.22 COMMUNICATIONS 21.40 101 66210 160 COMMUNICATIONS 21.41 526 69020 160 COMMUNICATIONS 21.41 527 66520 160 24541 SKYLINE BUSINESS PRODUCTS 26825 990.90 OFFICE EXPENSE 145.84 101 64400 110 OFFICE EXPENSE 67.22 101 64350 110 OFFICE EXPENSE 19.38 101 64400 110 OFFICE EXPENSE 226.42 101 64350 110 OFFICE EXPENSE 162.64 101 64400 110 OFFICE EXPENSE 36.26 101 65300 110 OFFICE EXPENSE 333.14 101 64400 110 24542 BUREAU VERITAS 26854 37,867.29 MISCELLANEOUS 37,867.29 101 22515 24543 CINGULAR WIRELESS 26900 55.05 COMMUNICATIONS 55.05 101 64250 160 24544 COUNTY PRINT 26909 529.00 MISC. SUPPLIES 529.00 101 65300 120 24545 PEDDAABBULU DULAPALLI 26937 18.00 MISCELLANEOUS 18.00 101 36330 000 1422 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 12 03/15/07 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 24517 S AND S SUPPLIES & SOLUTIONS 24963 1,411.52 MISC. SUPPLIES 1,411.52 101 66210 120 24518 LAURA MARSH 24964 720.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 720.00 101 68010 220 1646 24519 NEOPOST 24987 57.37 OFFICE EXPENSE 57.37 101 64250 110 24520 CATHY FOXHOVEN 25088 522.75 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 522.75 101 68010 220 1646 24521 SOPHIE OBERSTEIN 25112 450.00 MISCELLANEOUS 450.00 101 36330 000 1646 24522 OFFICE DEPOT 25224 213.90 OFFICE EXPENSE 213.90 201 65200 110 24523 MERCY MARTIN 25270 800.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 800.00 101 68010 220 1661 24524 JOHN SHANLEY 25331 5,182.50 MISCELLANEOUS 5,182.50 101 22546 24525 LORAL LANDSCAPING 25394 160.00 BLDG. & GROUNDS MAINT. 160.00 101 66210 190 24526 FRANK GONZALEZ 25453 3,000.00 MISCELLANEOUS 3,000.00 101 22546 24527 CHRISTOPHER MAFFEI 25908 2,700.00 MISCELLANEOUS 2,700.00 101 22546 24528 MAYA TOGASHI 25940 27.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 27.00 101 68010 220 1644 24529 BRIAN STUBBS 26014 216.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 216.00 101 68010 220 1644 24530 AMERICAN BLINDS AND DRAPERIES 26025 14,042.56 MISCELLANEOUS 14,042.56 619 64460 804 24531 PRISTINE AUTO DETAIL 26046 25.00 EQUIPMENT MAINT. 25.00 101 65100 200 24532 LANCE BAYER 26156 1,912.50 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 1,912.50 101 64350 210 TRAINING EXPENSE 367.95 201 65200 cod SMALL TOOLS 107.73 526 69020 130 TRAINING EXPENSE 102.55 526 69020 260 TRAINING EXPENSE 340.00 527 66520 260 SUPPLIES 450.00 620 15000 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 169.00 620 66700 210 OFFICE EXPENSE 35.98 621 64450 110 MISC. SUPPLIES 112.00 730 69583 120 MISC. SUPPLIES 125.63 730 69533 120 MISCELLANEOUS 100.57 731 22554 MISCELLANEOUS 503.00 731 22542 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 11 03/15/07 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 24516 I.M.P.A.C. GOVERNMENT SERVICES 24752 23,556.36 OFFICE EXPENSE 7.00 101 64250 110 OFFICE EXPENSE 150.55 101 67500 110 OFFICE EXPENSE 55.58 101 66100 110 OFFICE EXPENSE 56.70 101 65100 110 MISC. SUPPLIES 326.54 101 68010 120 1111 MISC. SUPPLIES 1,973.40 101 67500 120 MISC. SUPPLIES 95.60 101 66100 120 MISC. SUPPLIES 184.58 101 64150 120 MISC. SUPPLIES 348.94 101 65100 120 MISC. SUPPLIES 48.68 101 68020 120 2200 MISC. SUPPLIES 17.28 101 68010 120 1781 MISC. SUPPLIES 6.51 101 64350120 MISC. SUPPLIES 358.78 101 68010 120 1101 MISC. SUPPLIES 73.59 101 68010 120 1891 MISC. SUPPLIES 634.47 101 68010 120 1521 MISC. SUPPLIES 45.94 101 68010 120 1330 MISC. SUPPLIES 567.22 101 67500 120 MISC. SUPPLIES 49.50 101 68010 120 1423 MISC. SUPPLIES 91.69 101 68010 120 1370 PERSONNEL EXAMINATIONS 24.64 101 64420 121 LIBRARY--BOOKS AND MAPS 521.03 101 67500 129 SMALL TOOLS 21.18 101 65300 130 SMALL TOOLS 166.12 101 68020 130 2300 PUBLICATIONS & ADVERTISING -120.00 101 64420 150 COMMUNICATIONS 1,095.65 101 65100 160 BLDG. & GROUNDS MAINT. 328.95 101 67500 190 EQUIPMENT MAINT. 55.80 101 65100 200 EQUIPMENT MAINT. 32.44 101 68020 200 2300 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 50.00 101 68010 220 1370 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 27.00 101 66100 240 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 51.40 101 64420 240 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 27.00 101 65100 240 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 255.00 101 68010 240 1100 TRAVEL & MEETINGS 548.08 101 68020 250 2100 TRAVEL & MEETINGS 144.19 101 64150 250 TRAVEL & MEETINGS 157.30 101 64250 250 TRAVEL & MEETINGS 1,595.00 101 68010 250 1100 TRAVEL & MEETINGS 19.00 101 69537 250 TRAVEL & MEETINGS 490.00 101 64400 250 STAFF & MEETINGS 16.00 101 67500 252 TRAINING EXPENSE 1,551.80 101 65100 260 TRAINING EXPENSE 2,100.00 101 64420 262 POLICE INVESTIGATION EXPENSE 1,026.08 101 65100 292 OFFICE EXPENSE 1,149.09 201 65200 110 MISC. SUPPLIES 40.11 201 65200 111 SUPPLIES 2,150.28 201 65200 112 SMALL TOOLS 824.80 201 65200 130 BLDG. & GROUNDS MAINT. 649.45 201 65200 190 VEHICLE MAINT. 960.48 201 65200 202 FIRE APPARATUS MAINT. 43.56 201 65200 203 TRAVEL & MEETINGS 47.97 201 65200 250 CITY OF BURLINGAME WARRANT REG I ST ER PAGE 10 03/15/07 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 24514 DIAMOND SECURITY SOLUTIONS 24659 375.00 PROFESSIONAL&SPECIALIZED S 375.00 619 64460 210 5130 24515 SPRI NGERWEST LLL 24704 900.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 900.00 101 68010 220 1660 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R - PAGE 9 03/15/07 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT *� Denotes Hand Written Checks 24503 UNIVERSAL BUILDING SERVICES 23941 17,889.66 MISC. SUPPLIES 166.56 101 68010 120 1112 MISC. SUPPLIES 434.10 526 69020 120 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 4,101.00 619 64460 220 5180 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 2,892.00 619 64460 220 5240 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 516.00 619 64460 220 5170 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 2,140.00 619 64460 220 5110 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 2,246.00 619 64460 220 5130 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 150.00 619 64460 220 5230 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 2,873.00 619 64460 220 5120 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 902.00 619 64460 220 5190 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 480.00 619 64460 220 5121 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 989.00 619 64460 220 5210 24504 NEHTEL COMMUNICATIONS 23946 440.37 COMMUNICATIONS 280.40 101 68020 160 2300 COMMUNICATIONS 159.97 619 64460 160 24505 RONALD AUGUST FAATZ 24004 1,400.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,400.00 101 68010 220 1781 24506 FLORA ROBELET 24167 50.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 50.00 101 68010 220 1521 24507 ERIC GATTMAN 24169 416.80 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 416.80 101 68010 220 1521 24508 KUMUDINI MURTHY 24210 1,425.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,425.00 101 68010 220 1660 24509 14AYBELLE PINSON 24419 360.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 360.00 101 68010 220 1644 24510 JOE DITO 24460 600.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 600.00 101 68010 220 1781 24511 KENNEDY/JENKS CONSULTANTS 24570 74,634.71 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 1,160.72 326 80950 210 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 5,365.09 326 81470 210 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 10,796.52 326 80950 210 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 969.50 326 81470 210 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 56,342.88 326 80950 210 24512 BARTEL ASSOCIATES LLC 24574 21750.00 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 2,750.00 101 64560 210 24513 BRYAN ROSENBERG 24631 378.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 378.00 101 68010 220 1780 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 8 03/15/07 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT *� Denotes Hand Written Checks 24491 PENINSULA UNIFORM & EQUIPMENT 22899 1,888.48 UNIFORMS AND EQUIPMENT 1,606.40 101 65100 140 UNIFORMS AND EQUIPMENT 108.14 530 65400 140 MISCELLANEOUS 173.94 731 22554 24492 OFFICE MAX 23306 586.58 OFFICE EXPENSE 0.03 101 65300 110 OFFICE EXPENSE 586.55 101 68010 110 1101 24493 WILCO SUPPLY 23333 78.84 MISC. SUPPLIES - 78.84 619 64460 120 24494 POWERPLAN 23335 38.54 SUPPLIES 38.54 620 15000 24495 CRESCO EQUIPMENT RENTALS 23470 64.95 MISC. SUPPLIES 64.95 101 66210 120 24496 LIEBERT GLOBAL SERVICES 23551 694.00 CITY HALL MAINTENANCE 694.00 621 64450 200 24497 REFRIGERATION SUPPLIES DISTRIBUT 23639 458.95 MISC. SUPPLIES 229.48 619 64460 120 5110 MISC. SUPPLIES 229.47 619 64460 120 5130 24498 SCS FIELD SERVICES 23727 1,972.55 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 1,972.55 528 66600 210 24499 AT&T/MCI 23728 26.46 COMMUNICATIONS 26.46 621 64450 160 24500 GEORGE TAN 23749 243.00 MISCELLANEOUS 243.00 101 36330 000 1782 24501 DAVE CREAMER 23876 900.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 900.00 101 68010 220 1644 24502 DUNBAR ARMORED 23925 2,573.28 BANKING SERVICE FEES 586.98 101 64250 120 MISC. SUPPLIES 1,986.30 530 65400 120 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 7 03/15/07 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT *� Denotes Hand Written Checks 24476 DU-ALL SAFETY 21613 3,531.25 TRAINING EXPENSE 1,177.08 101 66210 260 TRAINING EXPENSE 1,177.09 526 69020 260 TRAINING EXPENSE 1,177.08 527 66520 260 24477 WESTERN HIGHWAY PRODUCTS, INC. 21680 2,492.23 TRAFFIC CONTROL MATERIALS 2,492.23 101 66210 222 24478 EILEEN P. GOLDENBERG 21846 840.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 840.00 101 68010 220 1646 24479 IEDA 21981 2,688.25 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 2,688.25 101 64420 210 24480 JIM STOCKWELL 22048 700.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 700.00 101 68010 220 1781 24481 MARK MEYERS 22051 600.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 600.00 101 68010 220 1781 24482 TOWNE FORD SALES, INC. 22146- 81.11 SUPPLIES 81.11 620 15000 24483 ROBERTS AND BRUNE 22178 T77.08 MISC. SUPPLIES 647.96 526 69020 120 MISC. SUPPLIES 129.12 527 66520 120 24484 YEV PHILOPOVITCH 22217 - 5,760.00 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 5,760.00 326 81230 210 24485 HELENE RENE 22366 87.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 187.00 101 68010 220 1660 24486 ANZA ENGINEERING 22634 70,000.00 DITCH & CREEK CLEANING EXPEN 60,000.00 101 66210 223 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 10,000.00 320 78520 220 24487 ROBERTA RESTANI 22828 157.50 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 157.50 101 68010 220 1645 24488 CARL DEOUANT 22842 600.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 600.00 101 68010 220 1781 24489 SCOTT SHAFFER 22845 90.00 MISCELLANEOUS 90.00 101 36330 000 1422 ?4490 ATHENS ADMINISTRATORS 22851 10,476.00 CLAIMS ADJUSTING SERVICES 10,476.00 618 64520 225 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 6 03/15/07 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT *� Denotes Hand Written Checks 24462 AFFINITEL COMMUNICATIONS 20246 1,072.50 COMMUNICATIONS 1,072.50 621 64450 160 _ 24463 DAPPER TIRE CO., INC. 20464 1,293.62 SUPPLIES 1,293.62 620 15000 24464 FRANKLIN OFFICE SUPPLIES 20523 294.61 OFFICE EXPENSE 294.61 101 64420 110 24465 EIP ASSOCIATES 20526 129.63 DEPOSIT REFUND 129.63 101 22590 24466 SPRINT PCS 20724 322.34 MISCELLANEOUS 322.34 731 22554 24467 CATHERINE J.M. NILMEYER 20801 725.00 MISCELLANEOUS 725.00 731 22525 24468 RENEE RAMSEY 21136 1,815.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,815.00 101 68010 220 1331 24469 GEORGE BAGDON 21174 684.74 MISCELLANEOUS 684.74 101 66210 031 24470 CEB 21210 141.56 MISC. SUPPLIES 141.56 101 64350 120 24471 THYSSENKRUPP ELEVATOR-042 21240 2,464.07 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,474.91 619 64460 220 5120 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 742.71 619 64460 220 5230 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 246.45 619 64460 220 5130 24472 SPARTAN TOOL LLC 21329 599.83 MISC. SUPPLIES 599.83 527 66520 120 24473 AUTOMATIC CONTROLS 21336 - 284.00 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 284.00 619 64460 210 5120 24474 OLEN SIMON 21477 600.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 600.00 101 68010 220 1781 24475 CDW GOVERNMENT, INC. 21482 781.85 MISC. SUPPLIES 87.09 101 65300 120 OFFICE EXPENSE 257.87 527 66520 110 OFFICE EXPENSE 436.89 621 64450 110 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 5 03/15/07 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT *� Denotes Hand Written Checks 24449 STANDARD REGISTER 17495 474.76 CITY HALL MAINTENANCE 474.76 621 64450 200 24450 COLORPRINT 17497 1,205.09 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 1,205.09 530 65400 210 24451 PENINSULA DIGITAL IMAGING 17534 2,285.44 OFFICE EXPENSE 2,285.44 526 69020 110 24452 ASSOCIATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL 17763 55.00 OFFICE EXPENSE 55.00 101 64400 110 24453 STADAM & ASSOCIATES 18275 4,794.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 4,794.00 101.68010 220 1780 24454 RALF SINGER 18476 1,160.25 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,160.25 101 68010 220 1660 24455 PENINSULA CONFLICT 18633 7,779.50 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 7,779.50 101 64560 220 24456 ACCESS UNIFORMS & EMBROIDERY 18990 259.73 UNIFORMS AND EQUIPMENT 196.35 527 66520 140 UNIFORMS AND EQUIPMENT 63.38 619 64460 140 24457 PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY 19027 1,104.86 UNIFORMS AND EQUIPMENT 243.80 101 66210 140 . UNIFORMS AND EQUIPMENT 355.70 526 69020 140 UNIFORMS AND EQUIPMENT 243.73 527 66520 140 UNIFORMS AND EQUIPMENT 17.47 528 66600 140 UNIFORMS AND EQUIPMENT 33.92 619'64460 140 UNIFORMS AND EQUIPMENT 210.24 620 66700 140 24458 ANG NEWSPAPERS 19083 - 177.80 PUBLICATIONS & ADVERTISING 177.80 101 64200 150 24459 BURTON-S FIRE, INC. 19366 365.54 FIRE APPARATUS MAINT. 365.54 625 65213 203 24460 KATHY KARAS 19812 288.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 288.00 101 68010 220 1644 24461 UTILITY AERIAL INC 19990 3,069.42 EQUIPMENT MAINT. 3,069.42 101 68020 200 2300 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 4 03/15/07 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 24435 GARY M. OLSON, PH.D. 09902 300.00 TRAINING EXPENSE 300.00 201 65200 260 24436 ANA FITZGERALD 09975 429.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 249.00 101 68010 220 1646 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 180.00 101 68010 220 1647 24437 LEONA MORIARTY 09979 3,780.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 3,780.00 101 68010 220 1644 24438 AUGUST SUPPLY, INC 10256 954.77 MISC. SUPPLIES 954.77 201 65200 111 24439 BURLINGAME POLICE DEPT 13720 1 ,079.77 MISC. SUPPLIES 188.56 101 65100 120 COMMUNICATIONS 245.95 101 65100 160 EQUIPMENT MAINT. 173.00 101 65100 200 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 75.00 101 65100 240 TRAINING EXPENSE 397.26 101 65100 260 24440 ADAMSON POLICE PRODUCTS 14414 568.33 EQUIPMENT MAINT. 568.33 101 65100 200 24441 RECHARGE'EM 14523 135.31 OFFICE EXPENSE 135.31 201 65200 110 24442 MICHAEL LENNON 15302 700.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 700.00 101 68010 220 1781 24443 VALLEY OIL CO. 15764 337.74 SUPPLIES 337.74 620 15000 24444 TEAM CLEAN 15827 191 .02 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 191 .02 201 65200 220 24445 CINTAS CORP. #464 16911 680.80 UNIFORMS AND EQUIPMENT 680.80 101 68020 140 2200 24446 GOLDEN NURSERY 17128 25.72 MISC. SUPPLIES 25.72 526 69020 120 24447 SHERWIN-WILLIAMS 17224 133.58 MISC. SUPPLIES 133.58 619 64460 120 5110 24448 METRO MOBILE COMMUNICATIONS 17402 148.77 EQUIPMENT MAINT. 148.77 101 65100 200 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 3 03/15/07 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 24425 B.E.I. ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES 09072 660.13 SMALL TOOLS 99.35 201 65200 130 MISC. SUPPLIES 447.46 619 64460 120 5250 MISC. SUPPLIES 77.49 619 64460 120 5170 MISC. SUPPLIES 7.07 619 64460 120 5110 MISC. SUPPLIES 19.20 619 64460 120 5260 MISC. SUPPLIES 9.56 619 64460 120 5180 24426 MUFFIE CALBREATH 09125 312.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 312.00 101 68010 220 1891 24427 LYNGSO GARDEN MATERIALS 09143 378.71 SIDEWALK REPAIR EXPENSE 378.71 101 66210 219 24428 RD OFFICE SOLUTIONS 09213 26.47 MISC. SUPPLIES 26.47 527 66520 120 24429 CITY OF MILLBRAE 09234 6,305.64 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 6,305.64 101 64350 210 24430 SIERRA PACIFIC TURF SUPPLY 09459 930..95 BLDG. & GROUNDS MAINT. 930.95 101 68020 190 2200 24431 NOEL L. MILLER, INC, 09499 1,376.02 VEHICLE MAINT. 1,269.69 201 65200 202 SUPPLIES 106.33 620 15000 24432 ABAG - LIABILITY 09518 98.00 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 98.00 618 64520 210 24433 OLE'S 09626 75.08 SUPPLIES 75.08 620 15000 24434 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWARE 09670 1,316.43 MISC. SUPPLIES 3.33 101 66210 120 MISC. SUPPLIES 115.35 101 68020 120 2200 SMALL TOOLS 135.24 101 68020 130 2200 BLDG. & GROUNDS MAINT. 134.43 101 68020 190 2200 EQUIPMENT MAINT. 82.92 101 68020 200 2200 TRAFFIC CONTROL MATERIALS 112.13 101 66210 222 SMALL TOOLS 31.90 201 65200 130 BLDG. & GROUNDS MAINT. 26.25 201 65200 190 FIRE APPARATUS MAINT. 134.01 201 65200 203 MISC. SUPPLIES 463.74 526 69020 120 MISC. SUPPLIES 36.18 619 64460 120 MISC. SUPPLIES 40.95 619 64460 120 5120 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 2 03/15/07 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT '*3 Denotes Nand Written Checks 24411 RONDA CAINE ALCANTARA 02873 193.00 CLAIMS PAYMENTS 193.00 618 64520 601 24412 PACIFIC NURSERIES 03041 404.86 MISC. SUPPLIES 404.86 101 68020 120 2200 24413 P. G. &E. 03054 10.23 GAS&ELECTRIC 10.23 527 66520 170 24414 PATTERSON PARTS, INC 03106 22.14 SMALL TOOLS 22.14 620 66700 130 24415 PERSONAL AWARDS, INC. 03145 422.18 MISC. SUPPLIES 422.18 101 68010 120 1780 24416 SANDRA POBE 03175 720.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 720.00 101 68010 220 1646 24417 R&S ERECTION OF 03234 124.08 MISC. SUPPLIES 124.08 619 64460 120 5150 24418 DOROTHY RADYK 03235 726.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 726.00 101 68010 220 1644 24419 SAN MATEO COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL 03380 781.00 MISC. SUPPLIES 781.00 528 66600 120 24420 TIMBERLINE TREE SERVICE, INC. 03760 10,855.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 10,855.00 320 76350 220 24421 WITMER-TYSON IMPORTS, INC. 03788 350.00 TRAINING EXPENSE 350.00 101 65100 260 24422 U S POSTAL SERVICE 03821 2,500.00 MISCELLANEOUS 2,500.00 101 68010 114 1101 24423 WEST GROUP PAYMENT CTR. 03964 66.24 MISC. SUPPLIES 66.24 101 64350 120 24424 JEAN BUCKS 09019 - 546.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 546.00 101 68010 220 1644 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 1 03/15/07 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT *� Denotes Hand Written Checks 24398 BAYSHORE INTERNATIONAL TRUCKS 01236 107.50 SUPPLIES 107.50 620 15000 24399 BURLINGAME AUTO SUPPLY 01507 1,753.94 GAS, OIL & GREASE 17.26 201 65200 201 VEHICLE MAINT. 104.56 201 65200 202 FIRE APPARATUS MAINT. 294.20 201 65200 203 SUPPLIES - 904.75 620 15000 SMALL TOOLS 12.97 620 66700 130 FIRE APPARATUS MAINT. 420.20 625 65213 203 24400 BURLINGAME STATIONERS 01676 36.43 OFFICE EXPENSE 36.43 101 64400 110 24401 EDWARD COMERFORD 01756 112.50 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 112.50 101 68010 220 1660 24402 WESTERN POWER AND EQUIPMENT 01857 340.42 SUPPLIES 340.42 620 15000 24403 CITY OF REDWOOD CITY 01862 34,081.46 OFFICE EXPENSE 79.46 101 64250 110 COMMUNICATIONS 300.00 621 64450 160 CITY HALL MAINTENANCE 33,702.00 621 64450 220 24404 ANASTASIA COLE 01945 1,815.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,815.00 101 68010 220 1644 24405 L. N. CURTIS & SONS 02027 101.22 SMALL TOOLS 101.22 201 65200 130 24406 VEOLIA WATER 02110 - 207,343.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 207,343.00 527'66530 .220 24407 EWING IRRIGATION PRODUCTS 02157 182.77 MISCELLANEOUS 182.77 101 68020 192 2200 24408 PENINSULA BATTERIES 02625 721.57 MISC. SUPPLIES 32.45 619 64460 120 SUPPLIES 689.12 620 15000 24409 K & W DISCOUNT LIGHTING & SUPP 02645 144.33 MISC. SUPPLIES 59.89 527 66520 120 MISC. SUPPLIES 84.44 619 64460 120 5240 24410 KAVANAGH ENGINEERING 02665 2,500.00 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 2,500.00 320 81400 210 1400 Columbus Avenue Burlingame, CA 94010 APR 4 2007 3 April 2007 CITY Of RuRLINGAw MANAGERS OffICE Burlingame City Council Members c/o City Clerk Doris Mortensen: Cathy Baylock, Russ Cohen, Ann Keighranr Terry Nagel, Rosalie O'Mahony, We respectfully request the Council to set an appeal date for a hearing regarding the proposed construction of an C1 dwelling by Kendrick Li for 2212 Hillside Drive. ( FYI: Mr. Liu has previously developed and constructed a Burlingame home at 715 Howard Avenue.) Enclosed please find $270 to facilitate this appeal. Honorable Mayor & City Council Very truly yours, Please schedule an appeal hearing for 2212 Hill ziclk�- Drive to be heard at the May 7 , 2007 Council I meeting . Delores and Dennis Huajardo City Clerk BURLINGAME BEAUTIFICATION COMMISSION APRIL 5, 2007 The regularly scheduled meeting of the Beautification Commission was called to order at 5:30 p.m. by Chairperson McQuaide. ROLL CALL Present: Chairperson McQuaide, Carney, Ellis, Lahey, and Wright Absent: Commissioner O'Connor Staff: Superintendent Richmond, Supervisor Disco, and Secretary Harvey Guests: Nancy Locke, Anna Klonoff, and Arlene Klonoff(2958 Arguello Dr.) MINUTES — The Minutes of the March 1, 2007 Beautification Commission Meeting, were approved as submitted. CORRESPONDENCE Beautification Commission Award Draft submitted by committee persons, Lahey and Wright. Letter to Mrs. Evelyn Reed, 2022 Trousdale Drive, informing her that her appeal to the Council of the Commission's denial of her appeal for the removal of the two private Redwood trees at 2022 Trousdale Drive would be heard at the March 19"'City Council meeting. Letter to the Beautification Commission from Fiona Hamilton requesting the Commission consider the planting of a small "Centennial Grove"to be a part of the Centennial celebrations in 2008. Letter to the Garden Study Club of the Peninsula, thanking them for their contribution towards the Arbor Day tree planting. Letter to John Melvin, California Department of Forestry & Fire Protection, thanking him for his participation in the Arbor Day Ceremony at Cuernavaca Park on March 5, 2007. Letter to Mark Manual, Comcast, thanking him for video taping and televising the Arbor Day Ceremony at Cuernavaca Park. FROM THE FLOOR— Former Beautification Commissioner Nancy Locke, updated the Commission on the work she and other former commissioner, Jill Lauder, have been doing on the landscape at the Broadway/101 interchange (triangle), that was adopted by them several years ago. She is hoping to enlist the help of the Commission to recruit more volunteers for trash and litter pickup on the "triangle" on a monthly basis. She noted that a brief training, conducted by her, would be necessary but that the cleanup would only take about an hour or two each month. She encouraged the Beautification Commission to spread the word to service clubs and other groups and to have them contact her if they are interested in helping to maintain this entrance to the City. Chairperson McQuaide thanked Ms. Locke. Commissioner Wright noted that she would be willing to notifi some of the service clubs; i.e. SIRS, Lions, Rotary, Kiwanis, etc. about this volunteer opportunity. Superintendent Richmond noted that he and Commissioner Lahey are on the city's "Cleanup Committee''and that they would report this need to the committee. Commissioner Grandcolas noted that the issue of litter consistently comes up at the Beautification Commission meetings, and believes the source of the litter needs to be addressed, and wondered if the Burlingame Police Department ever issues fines to people for littering. 1 NEW BUSINESS Easton Drive Reforestation Plan— Tree Hazard Evaluation Form Approval Superintendent Richmond noted that the Tree Hazard Evaluation form has been developed by the International Society of Arborists, and is commonly used in the field of arboriculture. Staff proposes and requests the Commission adopt this form to be used during the next evaluation of the Easton Drive trees as well as on other city-owned trees throughout the City of Burlingame. Following the Commission's review and discussion and further input from Supervisor Disco regarding the Tree Hazard Evaluation form, Commissioner Lahey moved that the Commission adopt the Tree Hazard Evaluation form for use in evaluating city-owned trees in Burlingame; seconded, Commissioner Grandcolas. Motion carried 6— 0— 1 absent(O'Connor). OLD BUSINESS Street Tree Reforestation Proiect— Commissioners List of Blocks with Few Trees Chairperson McQuaide reported that Commissioner Lahey submitted a comprehensive list of blocks with few trees from her designated area and that there are still several Commissioners who need to submit lists. Chairperson McQuaide then suggested that the Street Tree Reforestation project and the Centennial tree planting could be a combined project and submitted a proposed draft of a letter that could be sent to residents. After reading the proposed draft, she stated that staff had suggested that the two projects be kept separate. She stated that Supervisor Disco and Secretary Harvey had discussed a plan for two separate projects. Supervisor Disco stated that if the Commission wanted a separate centennial tree planting, the planting could be conducted in the month March of 2008, the month of the City's Arbor Day ceremony. This would give residents ample time to donate $100 and choose a tree from a list of trees specifically chosen to be planted as "centennial"trees. He also suggested that a small emblem could be placed in the sidewalk designing the tree as a "centennial" tree and that the trees could be monitored and tracked as such in the street tree computer management system. Alternatively, Supervisor Disco stated that Fiona Hamilton had an idea of the planting of a small grove on the island between Stacks and Comcast on California Drive. Supervisor Disco explained that the Street Tree Reforestation project could then follow in the Fall of 2008 with the Centennial Tree Planting as the promotional kick off for the Street Tree Reforestation project of planting trees on streets with few trees. This would then become an ongoing program tied into the regular street tree planting that occurs several times each year. Secretary Harvey left the meeting at 6:30 pm. The Commission further discussed whether to combine the two programs. It was the consensus that the best approach would be to separate a Centennial Tree planting from the Street Tree Reforestation project. The Commission also recognized that there are very few places where a Centennial Grove might be planted. Supervisor Disco suggested that perhaps a single, very significant tree, could be planted on the island at Bellevue and California Drive; and that; a specie such as a Coast Live Oak (in excess of a 48 inch box size tree) could be planted in that central location as the "Centennial Tree", with a ceremony accompanying the planting. He added that the planting of a tree of that size would require the use of a crane, but would be an interesting spectacle to watch. The Commission was favorably impressed with the idea and saw it as a good alternative to multiple Centennial plantings throughout the City, which would be very difficult to administer. Chairperson McQuaide asked that Supervisor Disco bring more specific information on cost, availability, size, and possible species to the May meeting. 2 OLD BUSINESS–Contd. Landscape Award Commissioners Lahey and Wright reported that they would like to re think the scope of the proposed award. They believe that the original schedule they had proposed is too constrictive; that the whole concept needs more thought. They plan to investigate a similar award that is given in Redwood City and plan to meet with committee members from that program. They have also scheduled additional meetings with individuals who may be able to assist in award designs. They are also in contact with local artist Dale Perkins concerning award ideas. The Committee will report back to the June meeting, believing that two months are needed to develop ideas and recommendations. Chairperson McQuaide agreed to place the item on the June agenda. Superintendent Richmond reminded the Commission that at some point funding would need to be discussed. Arbor Day 2008–Centennial Planning The Commission discussed the 2007 event that was held at Cuernavaca Park. The Commission then discussed what they would like to have happen for 2008, the Centennial year. Commissioners discussed the possibility of making the Centennial Tree planting event (discussed earlier) also be the Arbor Day 2008 celebration. Commissioners suggested ways that this could be a special Arbor Day—perhaps include a school band performance, seek participation from the Chamber of Commerce, and consider changing the time of the event for one year. Chairperson McQuaide asked that the item be placed on the May agenda for further discussion. Rescheduled Meeting with Council The Commission agreed to the rescheduled meeting date with Council—June 18 at 6 p.m. Superintendent Richmond suggested that the Commission use that time to discuss with Council any current plans that the Commission is formulating. The Centennial Arbor Day proposal would be an appropriate item to discuss, as would the Commission's desire to reinstitute the Landscape Award, and that this is an excellent opportunity to make sure that the Commission's goals are in line with those of the Council. The item will be placed on the May agenda for further discussion. REPORTS Disco Supervisor Disco reported that arrangements have been made for the full evaluation of the Easton Library Eucalyptus Tree as per Council direction. The Evaluation will be performed by a team of arborists led by Kevin Kielty. It will begin with a full evaluation of the crown of the tree, followed by a root evaluation which will include extensive excavation. A full report will be prepared. Kielty will be available to Council to answer any questions about his team's evaluation. Supervisor Disco also reported that he had met with Senior Planner Maureen Brooks and the Landscape Architect from the hospital project on the changes that have been made to the El Camino median islands and the plans for relandscaping. In those meetings, he stressed the need for something other than piecemeal repairs to the landscaping. He also reported to the Commission about what he had learned with regard to the hospital tree plantings along the El Camino frontage. Supervisor Disco further reported that he had been receiving e-mail reports from the PG&E contractor specifying where his crews would be working and that this has been very helpful. Richmond 1. Director Schwartz met twice with Cal Trans reps regarding tree replacement and the maintenance of trees on ECR. He clearly stated our historical agreement for a 2 for 1 replacement plan concerning removals. The meetings were prompted by the removal of Elms on El Camino with no plans for replacements. Thanks to Commissioner O'Connor for her assistance through Assemblyman Mullin's office and to Jen Pfaff who accompanied Director Schwartz at the meeting. 2. Tree Crew completed Sycamore pruning in this year's section. 3. Trees in Broadway Business District were pruned by City contractor. Project jointly funded by City and BID. 3 REPORTS—Richmond— Contd. 4. City Staff is treating City trees with chronic aphid/elm leaf beetle problems with soil injected pesticide. 5. 2007 looks to be a dry year; it will be critical for property owners to water trees fronting their properties, especially the newly planted trees. 6. Council denied appeal of denial for permit to remove two private Redwood trees at 2022 Trousdale. 7. There will be a Burlingame Lagoon Cleanup on Saturday, April 21 from 9 a.m. to Noon. Assembly point will be at the Lagoon Trail head at 250 Anza Blvd. Chairperson McQuaide Chairperson McQuaide reported her continuing interest in making Easton Drive an historic street. Commissioner Grandcolas Commissioner Grandcolas reported an encounter with a PG&E pruning crew in which he succeeded in having the Supervisor alter the type of pruning they were doing for line clearance. He also reported an ivy covered tree at Adeline and Cortez. Commissioner Lahey Commisioner Lahey reported that the Cleanup Task Force will have its first cleanup day on Sunday, April 29 from 8 a.m. to 10 a.m. The project will target parking lots off Broadway and Burlingame Ave. Refreshments will be supplied by Broadway Grill. Commissioner Wright Commissioner Wright reported having seen outstanding downtown plantings and exceptional cleanliness in Santa Barbara and Tucson. Meeting adjourned at 7:42 p.m. Respectfully submitted, i KarIene Harvey Recording Secretary Tim Richmond Superintendent of Parks 4 CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION UNAPPROVED MINUTES 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, CA April 9, 2007 Council Chambers I. CALL TO ORDER Chair Brownrigg called the April 9, 2007, regular meeting of the Planning Commission to order at 7:00 p.m. II. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Auran,Brownrigg,Deal, Terrones and Vistica; C. Osterling arrived at 7:02 p.m.; C. Cauchi arrived at 7:12 p.m., Absent: Commissioners: none Staff Present: City Planner, Margaret Monroe; Senior Planner, Maureen Brooks; City Attorney, Larry Anderson. III. MINUTES The minutes of the March 26, 2007 regular meeting of the Planning Commission were amended page3,paragraph 2,"Chair Brownrigg noted that the house plans appear to be resolved sempleted ,... Commissioners also noted that page 3, paragraph 5 should be amended, line 5, to read: "The applieapA submitted proposed revisiens to the Genffnissien- The applicant submitted a single copy of a reduced sheet of new proposed revisions at the public hearing. " The minutes for the March 26, 2007 meeting were approved as amended. The minutes for the Joint City Council/Planning Commission meeting,March 24, 2007, were approved as mailed. IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA There were no changes to the agenda. V. FROM THE FLOOR Pat Giorni, 1445 Balboa Avenue,noted concern about basements and ways to discourage future use as second units; chimney at 1505 Balboa could be lowered more;on Study Item on Adrian Road,feels badminton facility would be an asset to the city. VI. STUDY ITEMS 1. 1611 ADRIAN ROAD, ZONED RR — APPLICATION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND PARKING VARIANCE FOR A COMMERCIAL RECREATION USE (INDOOR BADMINTON FACILITY)(JEFF LEA,DAROSA&ASSOCIATES,APPLICANT&DESIGNER;AND JOEY LO AND FRANCES HUANG PROPERTY OWNERS)PROJECT PLANNER: RUBEN HURIN C. Cauchi arrived at 7:12 p.m. CP Monroe presented a summary of the staff report. Commissioners asked that the following items be �'' addressed before this item returns: City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes April 9, 2007 Parking • Prepare additional parking layouts one using code allowed compact parking spaces and one usin€ unistall parking dimensions, how would that affect the amount of parking on-site; • There is an inconsistency between the business plan included in the staff report and the staffing chart provided for the traffic study and planning review,particularly number of employees/staff/coaches on site during different times of day; these are not included in the parking demand study or the trip generation study, all these people should be included as staff in these analyses; • Utility pole in the new parking area is not shown on the plans, and will affect parking layout; • Clarify how the loading dock will be used,diagram how the trucks would enter,exit and maneuver on the site,remove any parking areas which will conflict with the truck access and loading dock access on site; • Parking spaces are located in front of the building utility box for the site, is this allowed; • Can additional parking be located in the PUE, as the neighbor appears to do? • Because of the impact on the AM peak hour in the area,the badminton use should not begin until 9:30 a.m.; • The deficiencies in the parking and traffic study identified by staff should be addressed by the applicant's parking/traffic consultant,city standards should be used including parking standards and a.m. and p.m.peak hours as identified in the North Burlingame/Rollins Road and Bayfront Specific Plans which affect the Broadway/Rollins Road intersection;the traffic study should also address the parking and traffic impacts of badminton tournaments on the site; • ADA accessible parking should be distributed on both sides of the building,particularly close to the ADA ramp; •Court Use • What is the maximum number of people who can use a badminton court at one time, and what is the turn over of courts (time between uses); • Tournaments should be limited to week-ends and holidays; • Will there be bleachers or designated viewing areas inside for people to watch,will these be present all the time or only for tournaments; • How frequently will tournaments be scheduled at this site each year, what time of year, how many players will participate at each tournament, how many spectators will attend each tournament from how far away will the players come (local, regional, state, international); Site Development • The slope on the ADA ramp should be reduced to 1:15 or 1:20, to provide more useable access; • Provide a floor plan which includes the entire first floor of the building, identify where the wall dividing the office/warehouse use from the badminton use will be located; • Description includes a gymnasium, does this mean that there will be training equipment such as weights etc. on this premise, if so how much and where will it be located? • How will the 2,000 SF of office space be used,by whom and during what hours; • How will the future use of the office/warehouse use remaining on the site be limited to insure compatibility with the badminton use? • Should provide a planting plan, irrigation system at the front looks good,but the plant material has died out; • Use should be limited to badminton only, no other commercial recreation use should be allowea because the parking demands and impacts are different; • Staff should provide the applicant with a copy of the proposed sign code regulations. 2 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes April 9, 2007 Noticing • Notice for this conditional use permit should include all property owners on Adrian Road and Adrian Court, as well as all property owners within 300 feet as required by law. This item was set for the regular action calendar when all the information has been submitted and reviewed by the Planning Department and the appropriate environmental document has been prepared. This item concluded at 7:35 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 Brownrigg asked if anyone in the audience or on the Commission wished to call any item off the consent calendar. There were no requests. 2a. 1456 DRAKE AVENUE, ZONED R-1 — APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW AND SPECIAL PERMIT FOR DECLINING HEIGHT ENVELOPE FOR A FIRST AND SECOND STORY ADDITION (CHIWA HUNG, APPLICANT AND PROPERTY OWNER; JD & ASSOCIATES, DESIGNER) (67 NOTICED) PROJECT PLANNER: ERICA STROHMEIER 2b. 1473 CORTEZ AVENUE,ZONED R-1—APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW FOR A NEW,TWO- STORY SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING AND DETACHED GARAGE(JASON AND DENISE PAYNE, APPLICANTS AND PROPERTY OWNERS; CHU DESIGN & ENGR., INC., DESIGNER) (63 NOTICED) PROJECT PLANNER: LISA WHITMAN C.Deal noted that he had a business relationship with the applicant at 1456 Drake and would recuse himself from voting on that item. C. Osterling moved approval of the consent calendar, 1456 Drake Avenue and 1473 Cortez Avenue,based on the facts in the staff reports, commissioners' comments and the findings in the staff reports with recommended conditions in each staff report and each by resolution. The motion was seconded by C. Cauchi. Chair Brownrigg called for a voice vote on the motion to approve. Item 2a, 1456 Drake Avenue, passed on a 6-0-1 (C. Deal abstaining) voice vote. Item 2b, 1473 Cortez Avenue, passed on a 7-0 voice vote. Appeal procedures were advised. This item concluded at 7:38 p.m. VIII. REGULAR ACTION ITEM 3. 1605 QUESADA WAY, ZONED R-1 — APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW AND FRONT SETBACK VARIANCE FOR A FIRST AND SECOND STORY ADDITION TO A SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING(CHARLES AND LARA CAMMARATA,APPLICANT AND PROPERTY OWNER;AND SUZANNE DEHNE DESIGNER) (57 NOTICED)PROJECT PLANNER: LISA WHITMAN Reference staff report 4/09/07,with attachments. SP Brooks presented the report,reviewed criteria and staff comments. Thirteen conditions were suggested for consideration. 3 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes April 9, 2'007 Chair Brownrigg opened the public hearing. Charles and Laura Cammarata, 1605 Quesada Way,represented the project; discussed changes made to plans based on commission comments. There were no further -� comments and the public hearing was closed. Commissioners comments: prefer to see square columns on porch using 4 x 4 posts with cladding and terminus at top and bottom with trim; specify 6x corbels above the garage; would like to see taller shrubs such as pittosporum along the right hand side of the house; add a Bay Laurel tree between the driveway and the walkway,can be 15 gallon size;bump out above garage could be deeper,could come out an additional 4 inches;okay to keep stone at front; findings for the variance are the unusual curvature at the front of the lot. C. Deal moved to approve the application, by resolution, with the following amended conditions: (1) that the proj ect shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department date stamped March 27,2007,sheets A0.0,A1.0,A2.0,A2.1,A4.0 through A4.3,A5.0,and L1.0,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 porch columns shall be square 4 x 4 posts with cladding and terminus at the top and bottom with trim; 6x corbels shall be used above the garage; and if the applicant chooses,the second floor element can extend an additional 4"from the front of the house; (3) that a 15 gallon Bay Laurel tree shall be planted at the front of the house between the driveway and the walkway to the front door; (4) that the conditions of the Chief Building Official's November 27, 2006 memo, the City Engineer's November 29, 2006 memo, the Fire Marshal's November 28, 2006 memo,the Recycling Specialist's November 27, 2006 memo, and the NPDES Coordinator's November 27, 2006 memo shall be met; (5) that if the structure is demolished or the envelope changed at a later date the front setback variance as well as any other exceptions .� to the code granted here will become void; (6) that the skylight above the stairwell shall be operable fot light and ventilation; (7) 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; (8) that any changes to the size or envelope of the 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; (9) that prior to scheduling the framing inspection the project architect or residential designer, or another architect or residential design professional, shall provide an architectural certification that the architectural details shown in the approved design which should be evident at framing, such as window locations and bays, are built as shown on the approved plans; architectural certification documenting framing compliance with approved design shall be submitted to the Building Division before the final framing inspection shall be scheduled; (10) 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; (11) 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; (12) 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; (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; (14) 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 (15) that the applicant shall comply with Ordinance 1503, the City of Burlingame Storm Water Management and Discharge Control Ordinance. The motion was 4 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes April 9, 2007 seconded by C. Auran. Chair Brownrigg called for a voice vote on the motion to approve. The motion passed on a 7-0 vote. Appeal procedures were advised. This item concluded at 7:57 p.m. 4. 1141 ROSEDALE AVENUE,ZONED R-1—APPLICATION FOR FLOOR AREA RATIO VARIANCE AND AMENDMENT TO DESIGN REVIEW FOR CHANGES TO A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED FIRST AND SECOND STORY ADDITION (VINCENT C. WONG, APPLICANT AND ARCHITECT; AND ANDREW AND FLORENCE HASKELL,PROPERTY OWNERS)(67 NOTICED)PROJECT PLANNER: RUBEN HURIN Reference staff report 4/09/07,with attachments. SP Brooks presented the report,reviewed criteria and staff comments. Fourteen conditions were suggested for consideration. Chair Brownrigg opened the public.hearing. Andrew Haskell, 1141 Rosedale Avenue, represented the project;and Pat Giorm, 1445 Balboa spoke. Issues noted: variance requested is for roof covering,provides better appearance overall,roof landing would provide safer exit from second floor window;commission had requested changes to the original design that resulted in increases in floor area. There were no further comments and the public hearing was closed. Commissioner comment: Concern with floor area ratio variance,does not want to set precedent;difficult to consider future changes when original project goes to the maximum FAR;agree that it is more aesthetically pleasing; it breaks up the wall, this is not enclosed living space, can place a condition that the area underneath the roof shall never be enclosed; roof covering facilitates safety of egress from second floor. C. Deal moved to approve the application,by resolution, with the following amended conditions: (1) that the proj ect shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department date stamped March 28, 2007, sheets Al through A5, 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 added roof element at the rear of the exterior side wall shall never be enclosed to create habitable floor space;and that if the structure is demolished or the envelope changed at a later date the floor area ratio variance granted here will become void; (3) 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; (4) the existing windows in the garage,dining room and living room shall remain; (5) a new window shall be added at the second floor below the vent to the closet along the east elevation; and a built in bay type window shall replace the pre-fabricated green house window at the kitchen; and all new windows shall be simulated true divided light windows with three dimensional wood mullions; and traditional stucco mold shall be used on all windows except those being retained; (6) the first floor roof at the rear shall be hipped to match the roof over the garage; (7) three landscape trees shall be added in the side yard along Rosedale including one tree on each side of the entry walk and one closer to the driveway; (8) 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; (9) 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; (10) that prior to final inspection,Planning Department staff will inspect and note compliance of the 5 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes April 9, 1007 architectural details(trim materials,window type,etc.)to verify that the project has been built according to the approved Planning and Building plans; (11) that all air ducts, plumbing vents, and flues shall bF 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; (12) that the conditions of the Chief Building Official's December 2, 2005, memo,the City Engineer's December 15,2005,memo,the City Arborist's December 14,2005,memo, and the Fire Marshal's, Recycling Specialist's and NPDES Coordinator's December 5, 2005, memos, and the NPDES Coordinator's, memo shall be met; (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; (14) 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; and (15) 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. The motion passed on a 7-0 vote. Appeal procedures were advised. This item concluded at 8:12 p.m. 5. 1560 COLUMBUS AVENUE,ZONED R-1—APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW AND SPECIAL PERMITS FOR BUILDING HEIGHT, BASEMENT CEILING HEIGHT AND DIRECT EXIT FROM A BASEMENT FOR A NEW SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING AND DETACHED GARAGE (ROBERT AND CYNTHIA GILSON,APPLICANTS AND PROPERTY OWNERS;JAMES CHU,CHU DESIGN& ENGINEERING DESIGNER) (57 NOTICED)PROJECT PLANNER: RUBEN HURIN Commissioner Auran indicated he has a business relationship with the applicant,recused himself from the discussion and left the chambers. C. Brownrigg lives within 500 feet of the property,recused himself, and left the chambers. Chair Brownrigg passed the gavel to Vice Chair Deal before he left. Reference staff report 4/09/07, with attachments. CP Monroe presented the report, reviewed criteria and staff comments. Fifteen conditions were suggested for consideration. Chair Brownrigg opened the public hearing. James Chu, Chu Design & Engineering, and Bob Gilson, property owner,represented the project; and Pat Giorni, 1445 Balboa,spoke. Issues raised: hired drainage engineer to address drainage issues,existing fence at left and rear will be retained;concerned with future use of a basement with outdoor egress and bathroom. There were no more comments from the floor. The public hearing was closed. Commissioner comment: would like to see an electric gate in driveway far enough back so a car can park in front, drainage will be required to go to the street, this will be a pleasant addition to the neighborhood. C. Osterling 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 28, 2007, sheets A.1 through A.8 and L1.0, 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 an electric gate shall be provided across the driveway at least 20 feet back from the front property line so there is adequate room in front to park a car•, (3) that the conditions of the Chief Building Official's, City Engineer's, Fire Marshal's and NPDES Coordinator's March 19, 2007 memos shall be met; (4) that 6 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes April 9, 2007 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; (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 and architectural features or changing the roof height or pitch,shall be subject to Planning Commission review; (6) that prior to scheduling the foundation inspection a licensed surveyor shall locate the property corners and set the building footprint; (7) 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; (8) that prior to scheduling the framing inspection the project architect or residential designer, or another architect or residential design professional, shall provide an architectural certification that the architectural details shown in the approved design which should be evident at framing, such as window locations and bays, are built as shown on the approved plans; architectural certification documenting framing compliance with approved design shall be submitted to the Building Division before the final framing inspection shall be scheduled; (9) 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; (10) 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; (11) 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; (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; (14) 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, (15) that the applicant shall comply with Ordinance 1503,the City of Burlingame Storm Water Management and Discharge Control Ordinance; and (16) 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. Cauchi. Chair Brownrigg called for a voice vote on the motion to approve. The motion passed on a 5-0-2 vote(Crs. Brownrigg and Auran abstaining). Appeal procedures were advised. This item concluded at 8:25 p.m. Crs. Brownrigg and Auran returned to the chambers and took their seats. Chair Brownrigg took the gavel back. 6. AMENDMENT TO THE MUNICIPAL CODE TO UPDATE TITLE 22, SIGNS, TO ESTABLISH NEW REGULATIONS FOR SIGNS-PROJECT PLANNER:MAUREEN BROOKS(20 NOTICED AND NOTICED IN SAN MATEO COUNTY TIMES) Reference staff report 4/09/07,with attachments. SP Brooks presented the report, reviewed the proposed sign update and staff comments. Commissioners asked how news rack signage is addressed. Staff noted that there is a separate section of the code which addresses news racks,including what can be displayed on the news rack. Clarify that off premise advertising is currently prohibited by the existing code? Yes. Chair Brownrigg opened the public hearing. Mark Hudak,216 Park Road,Wayne Levenfeld,representing property at 1250 Bayshore Highway, and Dennis Zell, 1800 Ashton, spoke. Issues raised: proposed sign 7 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes April 9, 2007 code does not address all situations such as an existing pole sign advertising two properties when the property is divided, can no longer advertise both businesses; suggest that language be added that would -� grandfather such existing signs; sign at 1250 Bayshore was installed in 1960's when original hotel and restaurant were built; be sure revised sign code addresses first amendment protected speech issues. There were no further comments and the public hearing was closed. Commissioner comment: concerning issue of shared pole signage being limited to one business if property is divided is a unique situation; would not want to see more clutter by adding more signs, might consider expanding the area where pole signs are allowed to areas adjoining freeway interchanges;there appears to be a consensus that the work done on the sign code update is well done and the current proposal should move ahead; thank the members of the subcommittee for all the hard work they have put into this; should go forward with ordinance and send the issue of this particular situation back for more study,including whether a special area for pole signs should be considered near freeway off ramps. C.Brownrigg moved to recommend approval of the negative declaration and the proposed sign code update to the City Council for action. The motion was seconded by C. Deal. Chair Brownrigg called for a voice vote on the motion to approve. The motion passed on a 7-0 vote. Appeal procedures were advised. This item concluded at 9:04 p.m. 7. DETERMINATION ON THE DESIGNATION OF FRONT YARD ON CORNER LOTS WHICH CAN AFFECT SETBACKS IN THE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AREAS AND PLACEMENT OF ACCESSORY STRUCTURES (28 NOTICED) PROJECT STAFF: LARRY ANDERSON AND MARGARET MONROE Reference staff report April 9,2007,with attachments. CA Anderson presented the staff report,noting two issues to resolve: determine if a variance is required to place an accessory structure in the front setback of a property in the area between the main entrance to the main building and the nearest lot line; and direct staff on drafting changes to the Zoning Code to more clearly describe regulations regarding accessory structures. Commission questions: variety of approaches in different cities some allow rear entrances, some allow developers to choose the lot front on corner lots,and on corner lots some cities make the choice on a case by case basis; for Burlingame on a corner lot of equal sides the initial property owner decides the primary entrance and front setback,cannot change later,on all other lots the front is the shorter street frontage. Why are we here,play structure does not require a building permit. CA noted that this structure was bigger and triggered accessory structure requirements,has been reduced;concerned about precedent,not want a garage in the front yard of a corner lot 7 feet from property line,breaking the open space line for the neighborhood on the street frontage. There were no further questions of staff from the Commission. Chair Brownrigg opened the public hearing. Dennis Zell, 1800 Ashton Drive spoke. Problem definition of accessory structure so broad it includes play structures; permit cost discourages homeowners from complying with the law; OK to put on the front lawn at the entrance of house(which is the long side of the lot or side yard by city definition)but not in what is `commonly' understood my side yard(the short side of his corner lot which is the front yard by city definition), not benefit the neighborhood; current height of structure generally complies with code,trees will screen in future;not feel that city will create a precedent if regulations address location of play structures only on corner lots;need hillside area construction permit,but if not in front of house does not need conditional use permit or variance. Commissioner asked if any part of the accessory structure would be used for `recreational' purpose? Believe code is referring to living space when making the requirement for a conditional use permit for recreational use;CA noted under current code 8 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes April 9, 2007 this structure is not in the side setback,different requirements would apply if it was. There were no further comments from the floor. The public hearing was closed. Commission comment: Feel that a play structure is a unique situation which Commission should address;on corner lots if front is on long side and rear opposite, the resulting area available for construction will be about 20 feet wide, a narrow house; regulation addressing structures `in front main structure' was for lots where the house was set back close to the rear property line so the garage had to be located at the front; purpose of the design guidelines to protect the pattern of development and open space,the front of a building does not have to include the front door;would benefit thinking through corner lots, currently Commission believes that such construction in a front setback does require a conditional use permit and variance, to rewrite the regulations for corner lots would be a lot of work because it would set a precedent for the entire city; maybe the zoning should have a special consideration for play structures on corner lots;could address practical concerns without changing the way we calculate the front of a lot or house. CA noted could look at play structures on corner lots in the same way the Commission evaluated trellises in the front setback; know the neighbors will not like an 8 foot to 10 foot play structure on property line,so should not invade the side setback. Chair Brownrigg noted in conclusion that there is a consensus that the Commission does not want to change how the front of the house or setbacks are determined; however, the Commission should consider an exemption for play structures on corner lots similar to regulations for trellises. This issue should be referred to the Neighborhood Consistency Subcommittee for further consideration of how to address play structures on corner lots including the fee structure for any required permits. CA noted that the code enforcement on this property would be held in abeyance while the Commission considered regulatory changes. This item concluded at 9:50 p.m. IX. DESIGN REVIEW STUDY ITEMS 8. 160 CHAPIN LANE,ZONED R-1—APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW AND SPECIAL PERMIT FOR DECLINING HEIGHT ENVELOPE FOR A FIRST AND SECOND STORY ADDITION TO A SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING (RANDY GRANGE, TRG ARCHITECTS, APPLICANT AND ARCHITECT; AND BRIAN AND JENNIFER BESWICK, PROPERTY OWNER) (57 NOTICED) PROJECT PLANNER: LISA WHITMAN CP Monroe briefly presented the project description. There were no questions of staff. Chair Brownrigg opened the public comment. Randy Grange, TRG Architects, represented the project. There were no comments from the floor and the public hearing was closed. C.Vistica made a motion to place this item on the consent calendar as submitted. This motion was seconded by C. Osterling. Chair Brownrigg 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. Commissioners noted that the illustration on Sheet 1 of the plans is for illustrative purposes only and is not to be considered a part of plans for any future action. The Planning Commission's action is advisory and not appealable. This item concluded at �-- 10:00 P.M. 9 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes April 9, x'007 9. 2724 MARTINEZ DRIVE,ZONED R-1—APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW,HILLSIDE AREA CONSTRUCTION PERMIT, FRONT SETBACK VARIANCE AND SPECIAL PERMIT FOR AN ATTACHED GARAGE FOR SUBSTANTIAL CONSTRUCTION AND FIRST AND SECOND STORY ADDITION TO A SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING - (JESSE GEURSE, GEURSE CONCEPTUAL DESIGN,APPLICANT AND DESIGNER;AND WAYNE PAN,PROPERTY OWNER)(41 NOTICED) PROJECT PLANNER: LISA WHITMAN CP Monroe briefly presented the project description. There were no questions of staff. Chair Brownrigg opened the public comment. Jesse Geurse, Geurse Conceptual Design, 405 Bayswater represented the project; Bruce and JoAnn Thompson commented. Issues noted: concerned with view obstruction from addition of master bedroom suite,privacy. There were no other comments from the floor and the public hearing was closed. Commissioners had the following comments regarding the project: ■ because this is hillside area, have to consider views from neighboring properties, story poles will be required to be installed and surveyed to show the impact to long distant views; ■ This is a hard Craftsman style in an area that does not have that style, lots of eclectic styles and ranch styles in neighborhood,not any others like this;but think it will fit in,there are homes on Mills Canyon that this fits in with; ■ Reconsider the walls along the front steps,propose massive walls, almost two feet wide,bring down in scale, consider wood railing; ■ Mass of walls will be broken up by landscaping,the landscape plan shows good mix of deciduous and evergreen; -� ■ There is area to park two cars inside the garage,but no room to park in the driveway,concerned that the retaining wall to the left is so close,will not be able to get a car door open,driveway area is so cramped that cars will park on the street; concur on parking; ■ Will be taking out a black acacia and pine in the rear, neighbor will appreciate open views, trees to be put in should be types that will not block view, landscape plan shows new trees will be medium scale and are spaced for enough apart so will not block views; ■ Give some thought to minimizing master bedroom if view is impacted; could push that wing closer to the front; if propose different option it could be shown in story poles so not have to redo; ■ Staff provide contact info from Thompsons so can look at view impact when story poles are installed; ■ Provide a section which represents the relationship between the two properties and illustrates the view points from adjoining property. C. Brownrigg made a motion to place this item on the regular action calendar at a time when the above revisions have been made and plan checked and story poles have been installed and surveyed. This motion was seconded by C. Osterling. 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 and story poles installed. The motion passed on a voice vote 7-0. The Planning Commission's action is advisory and not appealable. This item concluded at 10:20 p.m. 10. 1351 HOWARD AVENUE, ZONED C-1, SUBAREA B — APPLICATION FOR COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW FOR A SUBSTANTIAL REMODEL OF AN EXISTING COMMERCIAL BUILDING (LYNN BETEAG, APPLICANT; TODD LEVINE, POLLACK ARCHITECTURE, ARCHITECT; AND STANLEY LO PROPERTY OWNER) (32 NOTICED) PROJECT PLANNER: RUBEN HURIN SP Brooks briefly presented the project description. There were no questions of staff. 10 Cify of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes April 9, 2007 Chair Brownrigg opened the public comment. Todd Levine, Pollack Architecture, 1111 Maiden Lane, represented the project;Pat Giorni, 1445 Balboa Avenue,commented. Issues noted: extent of the changes to the fagade, should spruce up,will property owner make changes if tenant does not. There were no other comments from the floor and the public hearing was closed. Commissioners had the following comments regarding the project: ■ As proposed, looks like 1950 San Joaquin Valley strip mall architecture; ■ Use is fine, something has to be done with fenestration to improve the storefront; ■ Could do something to enhance the fagades; look at fagades on Burlingame Avenue and do something along those lines; ■ Awning being proposed replaces the same form as the roof structure that is there now, could do something that would enhance the fagade;want more than throwing up an awning and using the cheapest storefront; ■ Should consider the use of exterior lighting on the facade; ■ Show a painted wood door for access to electrical closet right on the street,this could be changed so that the access is from the inside; ■ Finish materials on blank area along Primrose are not called out; ■ Since the building is built right to the property line,may be limited on the finishes that could be applied, but need to break up the painted block look; even decorative wall painting would break up the fagade; ■ A lot of the storefronts in the area have a tile wainscot along the base below the windows, could be carried around to the Primrose side; ■ Should not use the bright aluminum windows, look at other options; ■ Not sure if more windows are needed along Primrose,might want to look at a trellis or awning structure; ■ Should consider adding street trees along the Primrose frontage; and ■ Like the photo simulation representation of the changes,would like to see the same presentation when the project comes back. C. Vistica made a motion to send this project to a design reviewer with the comments made. This motion was seconded by C. Deal. Chair Brownrigg called for a vote on the motion to refer this item to a design review consultant. The motion passed on a voice vote 7-0. The Planning Commission's action is advisory and not appealable. This item concluded at 10:40 p.m. X. COMMISSIONER'S REPORTS There were no Commissioner's Reports for review. XI. PLANNER REPORTS City Council regular meeting of April 2, 2007 CP Monroe reviewed the actions taken by the Council at their March 26,2007 meeting. She noted that in approving the minutes for the Joint City Council/Planning Commission meeting the Council approved the Planning Work Program for FY 2007-2008. - FYI: 1505 Balboa Avenue—changes to a previously approved design review project Planning Commission acknowledged the proposed changes. 11 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes April 9, 2007 - FYI: 2518 Hillside Drive—changes to a previously approved design review project Commission wished to make a comment. C. Deal, who has a business relationship with the applicant, left the dais and the chamber. Commissioners noted that the two car garage door is dominant on this structure,would like to see a better door including glass with mullions or a design which is consistent with the architecture, rather than a stock roll up door. - FYI: 904 Azalea Drive—changes to a previously approved design review project Planning Commission acknowledged the proposed changes. XI. ADJOURNMENT Chair Brownrigg adjourned the meeting at 11:00 p.m. Respectfully submitted, David Cauchi, Secretary VAMINUTESWinuteslunapproved 04.09.07.doc 12 . City of Burlingame MARCH PERMIT ACTIVITY * The permit activity for March 2007 was nearly identical to the activity in March 2006. The permit activity year-to-date is much lower(about 23%)than the same time last year mostly due to a decrease in the value of non-residential alterations. *" No pre-application meetings were requested during the month of March. THIS MONTH THIS MONTH LAST YEAR DIFF F. Y. 2007 F. Y.2006 DIFF Permit Type # # % # # % WATER HEATER 5 9,100 8 9,777 -7 37 56,692 51 48,067 18 SWIMMING POOL 2 86,500 5 103,800 -17 SIGN 4 9,700 3 10,040 -3 38 219,595 26 70,177 213 ROOFING 19 165,567 13 143,144 16 210 2,789,704 190 2,337,732 19 RETAINING WALL 3 274,020 6 254,017 8 PLUMBING 10 34,472 21 76,035 -55 130 385,928 317 1,115,346 -65 NEW SFD 8 4,169,000 12 4,345,000 -4 NEW COMMERCIAL NEW 5 UNIT APT OR CO 1 3,500,000 NEW 3 OR 4 UNIT APT MECHANICAL 4 143,540 2 18,500 676 43 547,598 33 152,865 258 KITCHEN UPGRADE 3 74,283 5 124,000 -40 29 938,753 25 630,594 49 FURNACE 5 67,235 3 8,650 677 17 129,996 29 105,451 23 ELECTRICAL SERVICE 3 4,600 15 36,750 6 65,400 -44 City of Burlingame MARCH PERMIT ACTIVITY THIS MONTH THIS MONTH LAST YEAR DIFF F. Y. 2007 F. Y.2006 DIFF Permit Type # # % # # % ELECTRICAL 5 54,400 12 36,915 47 37 348,045 62 220,532 58 BATHROOM UPGRADE 6 134,800 3 28,000 381 33 486,500 37 630,363 -23 ALTERATION RESIDENTI 31 2,807,335 34 1,363,933 106 240 12,393,441 317 11,831,028 5 ALTERATION NON RES 10 542,500 7 2,235,231 -76 63 9,372,774 69 24,212,897 -61 Totals: 105 4,047,532 111 4,054,225 0 906 35,735,296 1,185 46,123,269 -23 CITY °6 AGENDA ITEM# CLOSED SESSION BURLINGAME STAFF REPORT MAG. � DATE 4/16/2007 TO: Honorable Mayor and Council SUBMITTE BY DATE: April 9, 2007 APPROVE BY � FROM: Larry E. Anderson City Attorney SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF POSSIBLE EXCHANGE OF REAL PROPERTY OF FRONTAGE ROAD ALONG EL CAMINO REAL IN FRONT OF 1766 EL CAMINO REAL FOR PROPERTY ALONG SOUTHEAST SIDE OF POLICE STATION RECOMMENDATION: Discuss Council interest in possible exchange of property: a portion of the frontage road along El Camino Real in front ofl 766 El Camino Real in exchange for property interest in area on 1766 El Camino Real to the southeast of Burlingame Police Department at 1111 Trousdale Drive. DISCUSSION: Certosa, Inc. owns the property at 1766 El Camino Real and would like to develop the property with a residential or mixed-use project. The North Burlingame/Rollins Road Specific Plan provides that the City will consider vacating the frontage road in the area when proposals come forward that appear to meet community standards and needs. It may be possible to exchange the City's interest in the frontage road for an interest in 1766 El Camino Real that would allow future expansion of parking or facilities at the police station, which is at 1111 Trousdale Drive. This closed session is to discuss the parameters of any such negotiation. Attachment Aerial of Property Vicinity