HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet - CC - 2015.01.05Monday, January 5, 2015
City of Burlingame
Meeting Agenda - Final
City Council
7:00 PM
STUDY SESSION - 6:00 p.m. - Council Chambers
a. Housing Policy Options
BURLINGAME CITY HALL
501 PRIMROSE ROAD
BURLINGAME, CA 94010
Council Chambers
Note: Public comment is permitted on all action items as noted on the agenda below and in the
non -agenda public comment provided for in item 7.
Speakers are asked to fill out a "request to speak" card located on the table by the door and
hand it to staff, although the provision of a name, address or other identifying information is
optional. Speakers are limited to three minutes each; the Mayor may adjust the time limit in
light of the number of anticipated speakers.
All votes are unanimous unless separately noted for the record.
1. CALL TO ORDER - 7:00 p.m. - Council Chambers
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG
3. ROLL CALL
4. REPORT OUT FROM CLOSED SESSION
5. UPCOMING EVENTS
6. PRESENTATIONS
a. There are no Presentations.
7. PUBLIC COMMENTS, NON -AGENDA
Members of the public may speak about any item not on the agenda. Members of the public wishing to
suggest an item for a future Council agenda may do so during this public comment period. The Ralph M.
Brown Act (the State local agency open meeting law) prohibits the City Council from acting on any matter
that is not on the agenda.
8. APPROVAL OF CONSENT CALENDAR
Consent calendar items are usually approved in a single motion, unless pulled for separate discussion.
Any member of the public wishing to comment on an item listed here may do so by submitting a speaker
slip for that item in advance of the Council's consideration of the consent calendar.
City of Burlingame Page 1 Printed on 1213012014
City Council Meeting Agenda - Final January 5, 2015
a. Approve City Council Meeting Minutes of December 15, 2014
Attachments: 12-15-14 Unapproved Minutes
b. Adoption of Resolutions Awarding a Construction Contract to K.J. Woods Construction
Inc.. for the Airport Boulevard Force Main and Carolan Avenue Utility Improvements
Proiect, City Proiect No. 83670: and Approving a Professional Service Agreement with
Hatch Mott MacDonald for the Construction Management Services Related to the
Proiect
Attachments: Staff Report
Resolution Awarding Construction Contract
Resolution Approving a Professional Service Agreement
Bid Summary
Proiect Location Map
Construction Contract Agreement
Professional Services Agreement
C. Recommendation to Confirm Mayor's Council Assignments for 2015
Attachments, Council Assignments 2015 Revised 12-30-14
Adoption of a Resolution Authorizing Amendment of the City Manager's Employment
Agreement to Provide a Salary Increase of 3% and a 2% Contribution to a Deferred
Compensation Plan
Attachments: Staff Report
Resolution
Goldman Employment Agreement
Goldman Salary Amendment
e. Adoption of a Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Side Letter
Agreement with AFSCME Local 2190 to Establish an Emergency Contact Procedure
for Parks and Recreation Staff
Attachments: Staff Report
Resolution
Side Letter
9. PUBLIC HEARINGS (Public Comment)
a. Adoption of an Urgency Moratorium on New Applications for Marijuana Dispensaries
Collectives, Growing Operations, and Related Uses
Attachments: Staff Report
Urgency Ordinance
City of eudingame Page 2 Printed on 72/30/2014
City Council Meeting Agenda - Final January 5, 2015
b. Adoption of an Urgency Moratorium on New Applications for Massage Establishments
Attachments: Staff Report
Urgency Ordinance
C. Public Hearing and Action to Consider Adoption of a Resolution of Approval of the
2015-2023 Housing Element Update - Negative Declaration and Amendment to the
General Plan
Attachments: Staff Report
CEQA Resolution
Housing Element Update Resolution
Negative Declaration
Revised Draft 2015-2023 Housing Element dated November 25 2014
Letter from HCD dated November 25, 2014
Council Staff Report dated September 2 2014
Council Staff Report dated August 18 2014
Notice of Public Hearin - Published on December 3 2014
10. STAFF REPORTS AND COMMUNICATIONS (Public Comment)
a. Adoption of an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Burlingame Amending
Chapter 25.63 of the Burlingame Municipal Code to Comply with State Law Requiring
Incentives or Concessions for Qualifying Developments (Density Bonus Ordinance)
Attachments: Staff Report
Ordinance
November 17, 2014 City Council Staff Report
November 17, 2014 City Council Minutes
Prototypical Development Scenarios
b. Adoption of a Resolution Authorizing the CitV Manager to Execute a Professional
Services Agreement with MIG for Preparation of an Update of the City's General Plan
and Zoning Ordinance with Accompanying Environmental Impact Report (Project
Name: "Burlingame 2040")
Attachments: Staff Report
Proposed Resolution
Draft Agreement
City of Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Update Work Program
11. COUNCIL COMMITTEE AND ACTIVITIES REPORTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS
Council Members report on committees and activities and make announcements.
City of Burlingame Page 3 Prinfed on 1213012014
City Council Meeting Agenda - Final January 5, 2015
12. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
13. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
a. Commission Minutes: Traffic. Safety & Parking October 9 & 23 2014
14. 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.burliiigalne.org. Agendas and
minutes are available at this site.
NEXT CITY COUNCIL MEETING - Next Regular City Council Meeting - Tuesday, January
20, 2015
VIEW REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING ONLINE AT WWW.BURLINGAME.ORG - GO TO
"CITY COUNCIL VIDEOS"
Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the City Council regarding any item on this
agenda will be made available for public inspection at the Water Office counter at City Hall at 501
Primrose Road during normal business hours.
City of Burlingame Page 4 Printed on 12/30/2014
C'
o
"
z
U
LO
zoo
co
0
�
U
S
T
U
W
0
0
U)
Qi
�
Q
J
U
•L
J
=
m
C'
o
"
z
LO
zoo
co
0
cn
U
W
0
0
U)
U_
�
Q
J
U
0=0
J
=
�
z
z
Q
D
0
M
i
n
F
U)
C:
0
-1�-j
CL
0
>
0
0
n
0
/3
=3
m
\
S
c
0
m
%
/
\
E
.-
/
\
J
:
m
C/)
C:
2
_0
E
m
@
2
U2
%
/
2
U)
§
0
®
-0
@
\
\
�o
¥
O
§>15§4e
E
E
@
5
'0
q
y
s
3
m
°'>
E
EELS
0-0
.
$
_0
@
\
§
/
/
E
m
ym(DL)
m
/
@
/
2
m
'0
7
7
22&7
@
c
m
m }
52
f&±
c±0}
o
>
t
o
=
�
Q
�
m
2
o
=
%
E
%
E
�)
_@
�f
o>
j
E
C=5t
k>
0 \
a)
M/
2
2$
0
@
E
§
n
2
2
•�
C)E
ƒ
2
E
%
$
/.E=
g
we
0
0
\
/
\
u
\
o
�/
0
U)Eco
0
E
>
-
ƒ
/
/
}
/
\
4-0
\)
m2-0
f
Q
@
E
o
.
e <
Z:
2
£
.
2
.
f \
0
/
=3
\
0
m
/
k
E
%
®
m
\
\
�o
¥
O
E
E
@
5
.g
"
Q
c>t>
@
°'>
E
EELS
.
0/§
ym(DL)
2
m
"•E
22&7
@
c
m
m }
52
c±0}
-0
o
m
@
E
E <
2
o
=
om
»
j
k
k
k>
0 \
L/
E
c
U
/ \
C)E
2
§
/.E=
'5'f
s
o>
e
2\
�/
U)Eco
k
U)
/
�
\)
f
Q
@
E
o
.
e <
a
z
o/
2
U
f \
0 2
E § k _0
� (D»
ƒ 2
>; w
%m 2 ± »
E% o E Q o
ƒ bE %
U) E 2@ x E
2 @ 5
c E0�/¥ O
§ 5 = « '� E E
2 • 0
> 0 cm
@5� ¢
4-0 k E @ § / 2 §> )
ƒ 2
0 �/f k /
/ k § 2 k k 0- 4
@ m Q)0
o eg±0
-0 o g.g _0 2 2 § _ 3
§ E t E = 3@�%
D e
\ __ @/2 2 E±\
L) 0% 2 § = w § m
\ 6 _@ G E a) CU CU
E 7 G
E �/ �/0. %m2k\2
@ 3 O
% _0/ > / ƒ / _ § E
\ cu / / % @ / / $ t § d S U 2
U) m E $/ 2 2/ k o a) E \�
ee 00.\m?E55'�a
�� \2Co0 0) �Ecu
E \ R f k 2/" k±
7 3: � 2/ $mo o/% 2 o e
R \o s@27o@Iow=U�
�
O
N
�
�
L
N
O
L
O
O
L
O
U)
N
Ca
O
U
O
O
Q
U
C6
C
�O
L
U)
O
0
co
—
0—
U
O
c�
a)
to
O
Q
U
QJ
L
O
N
I
W
-L
m
70
U)^
, W
U)
W
2
LOu
V'
U
AJ
0 0 -> +. 41 m U C O C O Co p
C0 -0 (D a) a) 4- a) C
N C OL O .0 O E U L N .L E C D
O U f2. a) CU -C U C" iZ a) +-" N
ll cn Lcu L "0 O_ O c/) O a) O Q
U
C
cu w
+J .L•�'' O
oa)O Q Q U
�Sb ,Y"
.: ONC) 4 OE �� 0
Qa)
O C.:m Oa)N C
U� U� �n U V +� NN N C
a,�a)CM 3 aim
>, �' L C C .� CAO
OL 0 O cTs O T ` C U.— N
"O U CZ'6 a) U c NO p) CTJ Q- a)
U) E N E n O .L N M . cu
a) to CZS c�
}j O p N i� p O_ a) a O U L a) m C(0 t6
> O C CT O L �
O N O— 'i_ L m ?i O a) .L L U
N Ui L C C "-' a) -p c -O N E U O;. L
w' p cnO L La) Na)m L O
3 Cin a C •(n LA O i fn E O C
LLL..VVL O O a) �+ a) uJ m m � N> C J.
iA N m d a) U 4-- O C � U) a C
i—+ -0 (D tf L . V t� m N N O a) O E N O L N p a)
L C LZ N �,+L' �' N O_
�cu
� Qm a) a) � O O �M OC LO 1
Q. m 0aa)) E a) 0 u) M m m cm (D E a) m�
E cy) _cn oU c �— 0
p M (D.— m a) a C: 0) a-
m C6 i p N O L U = L -p L .c (B "p
�V Qo �Co �p M� ++ y�L (� a�E
CD
° � (D U) 46 (n a) a) � 0 c U) fn L S O
U) �C-O CL >, N i --p a) — O a) 0'0-a 0 0 �
O U a) cts ZT a a N= N m a .c +J ,T+ O a) N
:: o '� N :/� a) (is a) a) N T a) ca U U n
s� (ULNE. p)C- L } "mEa)a) ate) C
V' O c e rn O- a) O) O-0 C -p C M_
>o 00 C0"—oa)0-6�>c
a C L a) a) cis E O_0� C w
_ p p C-0 _ C C L N O L 4) O '—
• L a) M to C "O a) .� m �, U) C. O C C a) a)
O E •U) 7 j� O a) Q N O O O 3 O 3� C
W 2-40 >,O NaC.0 a) m >,>,O U 0 a) �O o L�
a (0 N p N C: C(D U Q) L C_ a)
L U O .V 0 L o C O n C6 C E O C6 0 U
I- m aaU ° 0)Q (n I- o.E n x-00 a�= o'0
L o
M
M (D (PD E E
O � •V Q
-.•- M
a)O ;
:3 a-0
�� U � C: V U
m co: N
Z. a� a) o 0
co >,
a)
Lid Q. (6 N M U
0 Q U) •Q
L
.L Q m �
LL Q.�-C CM
,V X (A
L ! � C
O E4-0
L m o
— L o 4- U
42 Q) 0-L N
N
'�- U L � N M
•L ,� ! 1 L N
m o 0-� o �70
Q = � '� o
I— -0 cn
-0 0
•U
4--i
L
.C:
O
OU)
C
Cli
E
.0
O
Q
`•
O
m
C
O
O
>
.�
L
L
IE5
V
U)
o
-N
O
70
_0
.0
.�
Q)
N
O
>
O
O
^�
Vi
-f-.j
O
�
L
U��_0°�
'E
.�
70
0
O
N
Q
L
L
O
_O
�� ciTr o
BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME CITY COUNCIL
Unapproved Minutes
Regular Meeting of December 15, 2014
1. CALL TO ORDER
AGENDA ITEM 8a
MEETING DATE: 1/5/15
A duly noticed regular meeting of the Burlingame City Council was held on the above date in the City Hall
Council Chambers. Mayor Brownrigg called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG
The pledge of allegiance was led by Supervisor Dave Pine.
3. ROLL CALL
MEMBERS PRESENT: Brownrigg, Keighran, Nagel, Ortiz, Root
MEMBERS ABSENT: None
4. REPORT OUT FROM CLOSED SESSION
CA Kane advised that Council met in Closed Session, direction was given and there was no reportable action
at this time.
5.
Mayor Brownrigg reviewed the upcoming events taking place in the City.
6. PRESENTATIONS
There were no presentations.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Burlingame residents Brian Glick and Louise Bekins spoke about second hand smoke in their condominium
buildings and requested that smoking in multi -unit residential buildings be prohibited. Burlingame resident
Tanya Gonzalez spoke about parking permits on Floribunda Avenue. There were no further comments from
the floor.
8. CONSENT CALENDAR
Mayor Brownrigg asked if any Councihnembers wished to remove any items from the Consent Calendar and
there were no requests.
Burlingame City Council December 15, 2014
Unapproved Minutes
Councilmember Keighran made a motion to adopt the Consent Calendar; seconded by Vice Mayor Nagel.
The motion was approved unanimously by voice vote, 5-0.
a. APPROVE THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF DECEMBER 1, 2014
CC Kearney requested Council approve the City Council meeting minutes of December 1, 2014.
b. RECOMMENDATION TO ADOPT 2015 CITY COUNCIL CALENDAR
CC Kearney requested Council approve the 2015 City Council calendar.
c. ADOPTION OF RESOLUTIONS RELATED TO THE CITY COUNCIL'S ACTION WITH
RESPECT TO LINDA RYAN'S APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S OCTOBER
27, 2014 ACTIONS AMENDING THE DESIGN REVIEW PERMIT FOR 1521 CABRILLO
AVENUE
CDD Meeker requested that Council adopt Resolution No. 108-2014 finding that approval of an amendment
to a previously approved design review permit for construction of a single-family residence at 1521 Cabrillo
Avenue is categorically exempt from review pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
pursuant to section 15303(A) of the CEQA guidelines.
CDD Meeker further requested that Council adopt Resolution No. 109-2014 modifying the Planning
Commission's October 27, 2014 approval of amendments to a design review permit for single-family
residence located at 1521 Cabrillo Avenue, situated within a single-family (R-1) zone.
d. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A GRANT APPLICATION TO THE
CALIFORNIA ENERGY COMMISSION FOR UNDERTAKING AN ENERGY STUDY FOR
CITY FACILITIES
DPW Murtuza requested Council adopt Resolution No. 110-2014.
e. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTIONAUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXCUTE A
CONTRACT FOR FINANCIAL ADVISORY SERVICES WITH PUBLIC FINANCIAL
MANAGEMENT (PFM), INC.
FinDir Augustine requested Council adopt Resolution No. 111-2014.
9. PUBLIC HEARINGS
There were no public hearings.
10. STAFF REPORTS AND COMMUNICATIONS
There were no staff reports.
11. COUNCIL COMMITTEE AND ACTIVITIES REPORTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS
Council reported on various events and committee meetings they each attended on behalf of the City.
2
Burlingame City Council December 15, 2014
Unapproved Minutes
12. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
13. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
a. Department Reports: Building, November 2014
14. CEREMONIAL
a. ROTATION OF MAYOR AND VICE MAYOR
Mayor Brownrigg introduced Supervisor Dave Pine and former Mayor Cathy Baylock and thanked them for
attending the meeting.
Mayor Brownrigg spoke and said that he has enjoyed interacting with the community this past year as
Mayor. Mayor Brownrigg commented on the highlights of his year as Mayor and thanked fellow
Councilmembers, City staff and Commissioners for their expertise and support. Mr. Brownrigg also thanked
his family for their support.
Mayor Brownrigg noted that there is a lot of vitality in the City and said he is looking forward to the
development of Burlingame Point on the Bayfront and the Post Office property.
Mayor Brownrigg explained the Rotation of Council Officers process, introduced the new Mayor Terry
Nagel, and turned the meeting over to Mayor Nagel. Mayor Nagel presented outgoing Mayor Brownrigg
with a plaque commemorating his year as Mayor.
Mayor Nagel opened the meeting for public comment and former Mayor Cathy Baylock presented Mayor
Brownrigg with a commendation from the Burlingame Historical Society for his efforts in dealing with
Caltrans representing the City in defense of the trees at Floribunda Avenue. Burlingame resident Cynthia
Cornell and members of the Burlingame Advocates for Renters Protection (BARP) presented Mayors
Brownrigg and Nagel with gifts. Burlingame resident Cynthia Wukotich spoke and said she and the BARP
members look forward to working with the Council next year.
Mayor Nagel spoke and praised outgoing Mayor Brownrigg for his great year as Mayor and thanked her
fellow Councilmembers, Commissioners, and City staff for their dedication and commitment to the City.
Mayor Nagel also thanked her family for their support.
Mayor Nagel invited everyone to join her and the Councilmembers for refreshments in the lobby.
14. ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Nagel adjourned the meeting at 7:54 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Mary Ellen Kearney
City Clerk
Burlingame City Council December 15, 2014
Unapproved Minutes
aSTAFF REPORT AGENDA NO: 8b
MEETING DATE: January 5, 2015
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
Date: January 5, 2015
From: Syed Murtuza, Director of Public Works — (650) 558-7230
Subject: Adoption of Resolutions Awarding a Construction Contract to K.J. Woods
Construction, Inc., for the Airport Boulevard Force Main and Carolan
Avenue Utility Improvements Project, City Project No. 83670; and
Approving a Professional Services Agreement with Hatch Mott MacDonald
for the Construction Management Services Related to the Project
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached resolutions as follows:
(1) Award a construction contract to K. J. Woods Construction, Inc., for the Airport Boulevard
Force Main and Carolan Avenue Utility Improvements Project in the amount of
$1,128,000, and authorize the City Manager to execute the same; and
(2) Approve a professional services agreement with Hatch Mott MacDonald (HMM) in the
amount of $175,320 for the construction management services related to the project, and
authorize the City Manager to execute the same.
BACKGROUND
Airport Boulevard Sewer Force Main System
The sewer force main system on Airport Boulevard has experienced multiple failures/collapses in
the last few years. The latest failure occurred last summer, and an emergency repair was made
to continue providing sewer services to the businesses and hotels in the Bayfront area. The force
main system was originally constructed in the early 1960s. It has served its intended design life
and needs to be upgraded to prevent future failures and disruption of sewer services to the
businesses and hotels in the Bayfront area.
The project consists of rehabilitating approximately 3,100 linear feet of existing 8 -inch diameter
asbestos cement sanitary sewer force main using cured -in-place pipe.
Carolan Avenue Water and Sewer Main System
The water and sewer main systems on Carolan Avenue are approximately 60 and 100 years old,
respectively. These utilities have served their design life cycle and are in need of replacement.
The rehabilitation of these utilities was originally planned for construction in FY2015-16.
1
Construction Contract Award to K.J. Woods Construction Inc., January 5, 2015
for the Airport Boulevard Force Main and Carolan Avenue Utility Improvements Project,
and Professional Services Agreement with HMM for the Project Construction Management Services
However, due to the accelerated schedule of the Carolan Avenue Complete Streets Project, the
sewer and water main rehabilitation work had to be advanced ahead to ensure that the
underground utilities are installed prior to the beginning of street construction work and to ensure
there are no construction conflicts between these projects.
The project consists of upgrading approximately 1,300 linear feet of 6 -inch and 8 -inch diameter
sanitary sewer main, and upgrading approximately 770 linear feet of existing 6 -inch diameter
water main.
DISCUSSION
Construction Contract: The construction project was advertised for bids on November 18, 2014.
The sealed bids were opened on December 18, 2014, and four bid proposals were received
ranging from $1,128,000 to $1,507,709. K. J. Woods Construction, Inc. is the lowest responsible
bidder with its bid amount of $1,128,000, which is approximately 25.6% lower than the engineer's
estimate of $1,517,000. Staff has reviewed the contractor's bid proposal and believes the
contractor has met all the project requirements, and has a good track record of successfully
performing similar work for the City and other public agencies.
Professional Services Contract: HMM was selected from a list of qualified consultants for the
construction management services for the water system Capital Improvement Program.
Additionally, HMM has performed the project engineering design, and is familiar with the project
requirements. Staff has negotiated the following scope of professional services with HMM for the
project construction management work in the amount of $175,320:
• Review, process, and approve pre -construction project drawings and submittals;
• Attend and manage pre -construction meetings between the City and Contractor;
• Review and advise the City on Contractor's overall and weekly construction schedule;
• Perform daily construction inspections and provide construction management services for
75 of the construction working days;
• Prepare daily written construction reports and a photographic record of the project;
• Attend weekly construction progress meetings, perform necessary field engineering work,
and perform quality assurance assessments;
• Perform project close out inspections and develop final punch list;
• Review and respond to requests for information and contract change orders requests and
process construction progress payments;
• Negotiate claims, liquidated damages, and final payment; and
• Prepare final project recording drawings.
The professional service fee amount represents approximately 15.5% of the total construction
cost. The amount is consistent with the industry standards for construction management and
inspection services based on the scope and complexity of the project involving various methods
of pipeline installation. The construction is anticipated to begin in February 2015 and anticipated
to be completed by August 2015.
2
Construction Contract Award to K.J. Woods Construction Inc., January 5, 2015
for the Airport Boulevard Force Main and Carolan Avenue Utility Improvements Project,
and Professional Services Agreement with HMM for the Project Construction Management Services
FISCAL IMPACT
Estimated Project Expenditures:
The following are the estimated project construction expenditures:
Construction Contract $ 1,128,000
Construction Management and Inspection $ 175,320
Contract Administration and Testing $ 88,585
Contingency (15%) $208,695
Total $1,600,000
Estimated Funding Availability:
There are adequate funds available in the Sewer and Water Capital Improvement Programs to
complete the project as follows:
Treatment Plant and Force Main Upgrade (83670) $700,000
Sanchez Sewer Phase 4 (82623) $500,000
Emergency Water Main Replacement (81230) $400,000
Total $1,600,000
Exhibits:
• Resolution Awarding a Construction Contract
• Resolution Approving a Professional Services Agreement
• Bid summary
• Project location map
• Construction Contract Agreement
• Professional Services Agreement
3
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME
AWARDING A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO K.J. WOODS CONSTRUCTION, INC. FOR
THE AIRPORT BOULEVARD FORCE MAIN AND CAROLAN AVENUE UTILITY
IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, CITY PROJECT NO. 83670; AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY
MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
WHEREAS, on November 18, 2014, the City issued notice inviting sealed bid proposals
for the AIRPORT BOULEVARD FORCE MAIN AND CAROLAN AVENUE UTILITY
IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, CITY PROJECT NO. 83670; and
WHEREAS, on December 18, 2014, all proposals were received and opened before the
City Clerk and representatives of the Public Works Department; and
WHEREAS, K. J. WOODS CONSTRUCTION, INC., submitted the lowest responsible
bid for the project in the amount of $1,128,000.
NOW, THEREFORE, be it RESOLVED, and it is hereby ORDERED, that the Plans and
Specifications, including all addenda, are hereby approved and adopted; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the bid proposal of K. J. WOODS CONSTRUCTION,
INC., for said project in the amount of $1,128,000, and the same hereby is accepted; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THERETO that a contract be entered into between the
successful bidder hereinabove referred to and the City of Burlingame for the performance of
said work, and that the City Manager be, and hereby is, authorized for and on behalf of the City
of Burlingame to execute said contract and to approve the faithful performance bond and the
labor materials bond required to be furnished by the contractor.
Mayor
I, MARY ELLEN KEARNEY, 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 5T"
day of JANUARY, 2015, and was adopted thereafter by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
City Clerk
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME APPROVING A
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH HATCH MOTT MACDONALD (HMM)
FOR THE CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT SERVICES RELATED TO THE AIRPORT
BOULEVARD FORCE MAIN AND CAROLAN AVENUE UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS
PROJECT, CITY PROJECT NO. 83670; AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO
EXECUTE THE AGREEMENT
WHEREAS, it is necessary for the City of Burlingame to employ the services of an
engineering consulting firm to perform construction management work related to the Airport
Boulevard Force Main and Carolan Avenue Utility Improvements Project; and
WHEREAS, HMM was competitively selected from a list of qualified engineering
consultants to perform construction management services for the water system capital
improvements projects; and
WHEREAS, HMM has also performed the project engineering design for Airport
Boulevard Force Main and Carolan Avenue Utility Improvements Project, and is familiar with
the project requirements; and
WHEREAS, the Burlingame Public Works Department has negotiated the scope of
work for construction management services in the amount of $175,320.
NOW, THEREFORE, be it RESOLVED, and it is hereby ORDERED, that the scope of
services under the above cited professional services agreement, including all addenda, are
hereby approved and adopted; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the professional services fee proposal of HMM, for
said project in the amount of $175,320 and the same hereby is accepted; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THERETO that the City Manager be, and hereby is,
authorized for and on behalf of the City of Burlingame to execute said agreement.
Mayor
I, MARY ELLEN KEARNEY, 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
5T" day of January, 2015 and was adopted thereafter by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
City Clerk
$m
mmm88
$
0
000
$8885
m$mm8855
0
O
o8,8S
W
E
0
i
g8$5
elm
w788��$�
IMS9999
We
MINI
F
�3o3
ww
ww
N
122021$$
Ncm
�»$N»»
2MEN
Vy
wan
_
0
ENS
l
wmw
.NNN...
w»N
w
p
w
«
««wwp.NNw
w.N...............
=
S$w
m�sm
'gwsww8
8w
mN$
88$5555$
8I
mmmNmw$qw
ammp
$
_
5
m
ME8=
F�Ug55
wS
«5$w«o$
N
w
w
w
wwwww«pxp«««nwpN
w88888
wwpwxpN
O_'w
$w
TiwwYSS�mN
S
�x
qy
�i3
Sow
imm�5$RvE
Q
Vw
Q
41
J
wwp
pp
«xwww
wwpN»
w
w
w
www««wp
wwwwwpNNw
ww
xxwNww
yo85
5
88mm$m$
mm
2
0
$�w
�m
$m�SN
Sm
N
m
s
N$$5
pJ�
ri
Sq.
85
m��$8883R
RBr^
yo
3w
YN
g
««p
x
o0
wp»»ww»
08888go
w»
x»
x
o
w
m
«
o
pppNw»w»»N»w»»
m
m
o
885885
»x«
«pw»»»»»w
0
G�
uy"''mg$
wS858w
Nm
$
q
3_
$
88$80"8
rwwrvYiu
g$8885
S85
mFm
NU
zV3~
5N
oa
Fw
N
8:
wwww
_
N$mSia
w
ww
Qw w
"w�e$w5
Qpw
N'a
NNN
ww$$a
w
ww
;l
�N
y
J
1
o
m
S
585850
........
888888SSom
oo8So0
do
o8�NR
$8
03<
oBm�R$$5
mNON
SSSS
y
W
xx«
w»wpwww
px
ww
x
«
w
wwwnww
wN»w
wwp
wwwwwwwqq
m
$
XIS
w$gw
$o�FF$u9$5
qw qw
$Y,
gwwx
Y,w
W
Vf
n-
NN
..
wwpwww
..
N<<
Np
www
N
w
N
wwwwwwww
<
w»w
ww
xwxwwxNw»w«
E_
Y�F
Nwo
0
n
o'
U
m
c
c
d
q
n
m9c
L
�
U
�
v
a
8
mFm
o^
a`
E'uziz
55
0
C
��mQ�
p
um
U6
LJfE�
3
3
N
m
N
m�Fc
>-
m�u
m
c
ms
o�T°
C
.c9c>
w3
�P
W
N
NpU
22w
�FmF
ccn
&
vc-
.F
inm
`x
m€
2�
TO m'E3
EEa
f
a
m
O
w,m
LL
n.v�c
xmm
c
c
c
�V
Yp
15-
Cerm
j
zac
�
=y€c2
,a mN
mc00
u'upm
334!LLm_
u�drcN�un
3vz
o
mm
m
r��Nc
w
-
a
a
'N�€fuuare`E8m
of
a3x33�38
mv�
�m`"'rc
rc
rc
aig�=ouin
odi
aCEf2a zm�y°nvNE
0Exuw9�
3
�rcrc�.u�rc
s
m
u�:l'u�ly�oOm
wui$_llm
f5
zaw
yC`„
>m>morcao
i
i
gs5s«om«�w
°onc
mEEo`5c
:zccaoFv`vi
xcccE
EEE
E
E-w33333u"""Ft9O
3=o;.c
cmoo'i
ON.
mozEummC.rcrc'¢nrcrc
QE,
amuurcrc�rc
m'rcorc
rcrc
mazimmmmuuuuuua`
--��3u°�rc�rc
9 u.�mmm
mmmmmmm
mmmmm
xmmmm
VICINITY MAP
NTS
AIRPORT BOULEVARD FORCE MAIN AND CAROLAN AVENUE
UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS
CITY PROJECT NO. 83670
AIRPORT BOULEVARD FORCE MAIN AND CAROLAN AVENUE
UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT
CITY PROJECT NO. 83670
THIS AGREEMENT, made in duplicate and entered into in the City of
Burlingame, County of San Mateo, State of California on 2015, by and
between the CITY OF BURLINGAME, a Municipal Corporation, hereinafter called "City",
and K.J. Woods Construction. Inc., a California Corporation hereinafter called
"Contractor,"
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, City has taken appropriate proceedings to authorize construction of
the public work and improvements herein provided for and to authorize execution of this
Contract; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to State law and City requirements, a notice was duly
published for bids for the contract for the improvement hereinafter described; and
WHEREAS, on January 5, 2015, after notice duly given, the City Council of
Burlingame awarded the contract for the construction of the improvements hereinafter
described to Contractor, which the Council found to be the lowest responsive,
responsible bidder for these improvements; and
WHEREAS, City and Contractor desire to enter into this Agreement for the
construction of said improvements,
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS AGREED by the parties hereto as follows:
1. Scope of work.
Contractor shall perform the work described in those Contract Documents
entitled: AIRPORT BOULEVARD FORCE MAIN AND CAROLAN AVENUE UTILITY
IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, CITY PROJECT NO. 83670
AGREEMENT -1
2. The Contract Documents.
The complete contract between City and Contractor consists of the following
documents: this Agreement; Notice Inviting Sealed Bids, attached hereto as Exhibit B;
the accepted Bid Proposal, attached hereto as Exhibit C; the provisions contained in the
contract book titled "Airport Boulevard Force Main and Carolan Avenue Utility
Improvements Project, City Project No. 83670" attached as Exhibit A; the complete
General Provisions and Special Provisions set forth in the State of California Standard
Specifications for Construction of Local Streets and Roads, July 2006 edition, as
promulgated by the California Department of Transportation; prevailing wage rates of
the State of California applicable to this project by State law; and all bonds; which are
collectively hereinafter referred to as the Contract Documents. All rights and obligations
of City and Contractor are fully set forth and described in the Contract Documents,
which are hereby incorporated as if fully set forth herein. All of the above described
documents are intended to cooperate so that any work called for in one, and not
mentioned in the other, or vice versa, is to be executed the same as if mentioned in all
said documents.
3. Contract Price.
The City shall pay, and the Contractor shall accept, in full, payment of the work
above agreed to be done, the sum of one million one hundred twenty-ei-ght thousand
dollars (_$1,128,000.00), called the "Contract Price". This price is determined by the lump
sum and unit prices contained in Contractor's Bid. In the event authorized work is
performed or materials furnished in addition to those set forth in Contractor's Bid and the
Specifications, such work and materials will be paid for at the unit prices therein
contained. Said amount shall be paid in progress payments as provided in the Contract
Documents.
4. Termination
At any time and with or without cause, the City may suspend the work or any
portion of the work for a period of not more than 90 consecutive calendar days by notice
in writing to Contractor that will fix the date on which work will be resumed. Contractor
will be granted an adjustment to the Contract Price or an extension of the Time for
Completion, or both, directly attributable to any such suspension if Contractor makes a
claim therefor was provided in the Contract Documents.
The occurrence of any one or more of the following events will justify termination
of the contract by the City for cause: (1) Contractor's persistent failure to perform the
AGREEMENT -2
work in accordance with the Contract Documents; (2) Contractor's disregard of Laws or
Regulations of any public body having jurisdiction; (3) Contractor's disregard of the
authority of the Engineer; or (4) Contractor's violation in any substantial way of any
provision of the Contract Documents. In the case of any one or more of these events,
the City, after giving Contractor and Contractor's sureties seven calendar days written
notice of the intent to terminate Contractor's services, may initiate termination
procedures under the provisions of the Performance Bond. Such termination will not
affect any rights or remedies of City against Contractor then existing or that accrue
thereafter. Any retention or payment of moneys due Contractor will not release
Contractor from liability. Contractor's services will not be terminated if Contractor
begins, within seven calendar days of receipt of such notice of intent to terminate, to
correct its failure to perform and proceeds diligently to cure such failure within no more
than 30 calendar days of such notice.
Upon seven calendar days written notice to Contractor, City may, without cause
and without prejudice to any other right or remedy of City, terminate the Contract for
City's convenience. In such case, Contractor will be paid for (1) work satisfactorily
completed prior the effective date of such termination, (2) furnishing of labor, equipment,
and materials in accordance with the Contract Documents in connection with
uncompleted work, (3) reasonable expenses directly attributable to termination, and (4)
fair and reasonable compensation for associated overhead and profit. No payment will
be made on account of loss of anticipated profits or revenue or other economic loss
arising out of or resulting from such termination.
5. Provisions Cumulative.
The provisions of this Agreement are cumulative and in addition to and not in
limitation of any other rights or remedies available to the City.
6. Notices.
All notices shall be in writing and delivered in person or transmitted by certified
mail, postage prepaid.
Notices required to be given to the City shall be addressed as follows:
AGREEMENT -3
Donald Chang, P.E., Sr. Civil Engineer
CITY OF BURLINGAME
501 Primrose Road
Burlingame, California 94010
Notices required to be given to Contractor shall be addressed as follows:
Kieran Woods, President
K.J. Woods Construction, Inc.
1485 Bayshore Blvd, #149
San Francisco, CA 94124
7. Interpretation
As used herein, any gender includes the other gender and the singular includes
the plural and vice versa.
8. Waiver or Amendment.
No modification, waiver, mutual termination, or amendment of this Agreement is
effective unless made in writing and signed by the City and the Contractor. One or
more waivers of any term, condition, or other provision of this Agreement by either party
shall not be construed as a waiver of a subsequent breach of the same or any other
provision.
9. Controlling Law.
This Agreement is to be governed by and interpreted in accordance with the laws
of the State of California.
10. Successors and Assignees.
This Agreement is to be binding on the heirs, successors, and assigns of the
parties hereto but may not be assigned by either party without first obtaining the written
consent of the other party.
11. Severability.
If any term or provision of this Agreement is deemed invalid, void, or
unenforceable by any court of lawful jurisdiction, the remaining terms and provisions of
AGREEMENT -4
the Agreement shall not be affected thereby and shall remain in full force and effect.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, two identical counterparts of this Agreement,
consisting of five pages, including this page, each of which counterparts shall for all
purposes be deemed an original of this Agreement, have been duly executed by the
parties hereinabove named on the day and year first hereinabove written.
CITY OF BURLINGAME,
a Municipal Corporation
By
Lisa K. Goldman, City Manager
Approved as to form:
Kathleen Kane, City Attorney
MAIN a1:619
Mary Ellen Kearney, City Clerk
"CONTRACTOR"
Print Name:
K.J. Woods Construction. Inc.
AGREEMENT -5
AGREEMENT FOR CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT SERVICES
WITH HATCH MOTT MACDONALD
FOR AIRPORT BOULEVARD FORCE MAIN AND
CAROLAN AVENUE UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT
CITY PROJECT NO. 83670
THIS AGREEMENT is entered into this day of 20_, by and
between the City of Burlingame, State of California, herein called the "City", and HATCH
MOTT MACDONALD engaged in providing PROFESSIONAL CONSTRUCTION
MANAGEMENT services herein called the "Consultant'.
RECITALS
A. The City is considering conducting undertaking activities for the consultant
construction management services for Airport Boulevard Force Main and
Carolan Avenue Utility Improvements Project.
B. The City desires to engage a professional construction management consultant to
provide construction period services because of Consultant's experience and
qualifications to perform the desired work, described in Exhibit A.
C. The Consultant represents and affirms that it is qualified and willing to perform the
desired work pursuant to this Agreement.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PARTIES HERETO AGREE AS FOLLOWS:
1. Scope of Services. The Consultant shall provide professional construction
management services such as on-site inspections, documentation of construction
activities, review of submittals and request for information, production of record
drawings, and as detailed in `Proposed Tasks" of the attached Exhibit A of this
agreement.
2. Time of Performance. The services of the Consultant are to commence upon the
execution of this Agreement with completion of all work as set forth in Exhibit A.
Page 1 of 8
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 of Burlingame business license.
4. Sole Responsibility. Consultant shall be responsible for employing or engaging
all persons necessary to perform the services under this Agreement.
5. Information/Report Handling. All documents furnished to Consultant by the City
and all reports and supportive data prepared by the Consultant under this
Agreement are the City's property and shall be delivered to the City upon the
completion of Consultant's services or at the City's written request. All reports,
information, data, and exhibits prepared or assembled by Consultant in connection
with the performance of its services pursuant to this Agreement are confidential
until released by the City to the public, and the Consultant shall not make any of
these documents or information available to any individual or organization not
employed by the Consultant or the City without the written consent of the City
before such release. The City acknowledges that the reports to be prepared by
the Consultant pursuant to this Agreement are for the purpose of evaluating a
defined project, and City's use of the information contained in the reports prepared
by the Consultant in connection with other projects shall be solely at City's risk,
unless Consultant expressly consents to such use in writing. City further agrees
that it will not appropriate any methodology or technique of Consultant which is
and has been confirmed in writing by Consultant to be a trade secret of Consultant.
6. Compensation. Compensation for Consultant's professional services shall not
exceed $175.320.00; and payment shall be based upon City approval of each
task.
Billing shall include current period and cumulative expenditures to date and shall
be accompanied by a detailed explanation of the work performed by whom at what
rate and on what date. Also, plans, specifications, documents or other pertinent
materials shall be submitted for City review, even if only in partial or draft form.
Page 2 of 8
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 Tracie Sakakihara, P.E., Principal Project Manager.
9. Assignability and Subcontracting. The services to be performed under this
Agreement are unique and personal to the Consultant. No portion of these
services shall be assigned or subcontracted without the written consent of the City.
10. Notices. Any notice required to be given shall be deemed to be duly and properly
given if mailed postage prepaid, and addressed to:
To City: Donald Chang, P.E.
Senior Civil Engineer
City of Burlingame
501 Primrose Road
Burlingame, CA 94010
To Consultant: Tracie Sakakihara, P.E.
Hatch Mott MacDonald
181 Metro Drive, Suite 510
San Jose, CA 95110
or personally delivered to Consultant to such address or such other address as
Consultant designates in writing to City.
11. Independent Contractor. It is understood that the Consultant, in the performance
of the work and services agreed to be performed, shall act as and be an
independent contractor and not an agent or employee of the City. As an
independent contractor he/she shall not obtain any rights to retirement benefits or
other benefits which accrue to City employee(s). With prior written consent, the
Consultant may perform some obligations under this Agreement by
subcontracting, but may not delegate ultimate responsibility for performance or
assign or transfer interests under this Agreement.
Page 3 of 8
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.
12. Conflict of Interest. Consultant understands that its professional responsibilities
is solely to the City. The Consultant has and shall not obtain any holding or
interest within the City of Burlingame. Consultant has no business holdings or
agreements with any individual member of the Staff or management of the City or
its representatives nor shall it enter into any such holdings or agreements. In
addition, Consultant warrants that it does not presently and shall not acquire any
direct or indirect interest adverse to those of the City in the subject of this
Agreement, and it shall immediately disassociate itself from such an interest
should it discover it has done so and shall, at the City's sole discretion, divest itself
of such interest. Consultant shall not knowingly and shall take reasonable steps
to ensure that it does not employ a person having such an interest in this
performance of this Agreement. If after employment of a person, Consultant
discovers it has employed a person with a direct or indirect interest that would
conflict with its performance of this Agreement, Consultant shall promptly notify
City of this employment relationship, and shall, at the City's sole discretion, sever
any such employment relationship.
13. Equal Employment Opportunity. Consultant warrants that it is an equal
opportunity employer and shall comply with applicable regulations governing equal
employment opportunity. Neither Consultant nor its subcontractors do and
neither shall discriminate against persons employed or seeking employment with
them on the basis of age, sex, color, race, marital status, sexual orientation,
ancestry, physical or mental disability, national origin, religion, or medical
condition, unless based upon a bona fide occupational qualification pursuant to the
California Fair Employment & Housing Act.
14. Insurance.
A. Minimum Scope of Insurance:
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
Page 4 of 8
i
I
($1,000,000) combined single limit per occurrence and two million
dollars ($2,000,000) aggregate for bodily injury, personal injury and
property damage in a form at least as broad as ISO "Occurrence"
Form CG 0001.
ii. Consultant agrees to have and maintain for the duration of the
contract, an Automobile Liability insurance policy ensuring him/her
and his/her staff to an amount not less than one million dollars
($1,000,000) combined single limit per accident for bodily injury and
property damage.
iii. Consultant agrees to have and maintain, for the duration of the
contract, professional liability insurance in amounts not less than two
million dollars ($2,000,000) each claim/aggregate sufficient to insure
Consultant for professional errors or omissions in the performance of
the particular scope of work under this agreement.
iv. Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and
approved by the City. At the option of the City, either: the insurer
shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self-insured retentions
as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers;
or the Contractor shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of
losses and related investigations, claim administration, and defense
expenses.
B. General and Automobile Liability Policies:
i. The City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers are to be
covered as insured as respects: liability arising out of activities
performed by or on behalf of the Consultant; products and completed
operations of Consultant, premises owned or used by the
Consultant. The endorsement providing this additional insured
coverage shall be equal to or broader than ISO Form CG 20 10 11 85
and must coverjoint negligence, completed operations, and the acts
of subcontractors. This requirement does not apply to the
professional liability insurance required for professional errors and
omissions.
ii. The Consultant's insurance coverage shall be endorsed to be
primary insurance as respects the City, its officers, officials,
Page 5 of 8
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 subcontractors employed by Consultant
provide the required Workers' Compensation insurance for their respective
employees.
D. All Coverages: Each insurance policy required in this item shall be
endorsed to state that coverage shall not be canceled except after thirty
(30) days' prior written notice by mail, has been given to the City (10 days
for non-payment of premium). Current certification of such insurance shall
be kept on file at all times during the term of this agreement with the City
Clerk.
E. Acceptability of Insurers: Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a
Best's rating of no less than A -:VII and authorized to do business in the
State of California.
F. Verification of Coverage: Upon execution of this Agreement, Contractor
shall furnish the City with certificates of insurance and with original
endorsements effecting coverage required by this clause. The certificates
and endorsements for each insurance policy are to be signed by a person
authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. The certificates
and endorsements are to be on forms approved by the City. All certificates
and endorsements are to be received and approved by the City before any
work commences. The City reserves the right to require complete,
certified copies of all required insurance policies, at anytime.
Page 6 of 8
15. Indemnification. To the fullest extent permitted by law, (including without
limitation, California Civil Code sections 2782 and 2782.6), Consultant shall save,
keep and hold harmless indemnify and defend the City, its officers, employees,
authorized agents and volunteers from all damages, liabilities, penalties, costs, or
expenses in law or equity, including but not limited to attorneys' fees, that may at
any time arise, result from, relate to, or be set up because of damages to property
or personal injury received by reason of, or in the course of performing work which
arise out of, pertain to, or relate to, directly or indirectly, in whole or in part, the
negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of Consultant, or any of the
Consultant's officers, employees, or agents or any subconsultant. This provision
shall not apply if the damage or injury is caused by the sole negligence, active
negligence, or willful misconduct of the City, its officers, agents, employees, or
volunteers.
16. Waiver. No failure on the part of either party to exercise any right or remedy
hereunder shall operate as a waiver of any other right or remedy that party may
have hereunder, nor does waiver of a breach or default under this Agreement
constitute a continuing waiver of a subsequent breach of the same or any other
provision of this Agreement.
17. Governing Law. This Agreement, regardless of where executed, shall be
governed by and construed under the laws of the State of California. Venue for
any action regarding this Agreement shall be in the Superior Court of the County of
San Mateo.
18. Termination of Agreement. The City and the Consultant shall have the right to
terminate this agreement with or without cause by giving not less than fifteen (15)
days written notice of termination. In the event of termination, the Consultant
shall deliver to the City all plans, files, documents, reports, performed to date by
the Consultant. In the event of such termination, City shall pay Consultant an
amount that bears the same ratio to the maximum contract price as the work
delivered to the City bears to completed services contemplated under this
Agreement, unless such termination is made for cause, in which event,
compensation, if any, shall be adjusted in light of the particular facts and
circumstances involved in such termination.
19. Amendment. No modification, waiver, mutual termination, or amendment of this
Agreement is effective unless made in writing and signed by the City and the
Consultant.
Page 7 of 8
20. Disputes. In any dispute over any aspect of this Agreement, the prevailing party
shall be entitled to reasonable attorney's fees, as well as costs not to exceed
$7,500 in total.
21. Entire Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the complete and exclusive
statement of the Agreement between the City and Consultant. No terms,
conditions, understandings or agreements purporting to modify or vary this
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
By
Lisa K. Goldman
City Manager
Approved as to form:
Kathleen Kane
City Attorney
ATTEST:
Mary Ellen Kearney
City Clerk
"Consultant"
Hatch Mott MacDonald
Print Name: L cc- 4 � rarer g pll
Title: Principal
Page 8 of 8
Hatch Mott
MacDonald
Exhibit "A"
Proposed Scope of Construction Period Services
Airport Boulevard Force Main and Carolan Avenue Utility Improvements Project
City Project No. 83670
City of Burlingame, California
Project Understanding and Overview
Hatch Mott MacDonald (HMM) will provide Construction Period Services for the rehabilitation of the City of
Burlingame's (the City) wastewater collection system identified in the Contract Documents for the Airport
Boulevard Force Main and Carolan Avenue Utility Improvements Project. The general scope items included in
this proposal are the following:
• Preconstruction Phase Services
• Construction Phase Services
• Construction Completion and Closeout Services
The Contract Documents provide for an 85 working day construction period during which an estimated 75 days
will require an inspector. We assume our inspector will be paid for every hour he works on the project, even if in
excess of 8 per day or 40 per week. The fee for construction services assumes 75 inspection days with the
availability to use the contingency if the additional construction days are approved.
Proposed Tasks
The proposed scope of services will include the tasks outlined within this section.
A. Preconstruction Phase
Contract Documents
Prior to the start of construction, HMM's inspector will review the final Contract Documents. This is essential for
those team members not involved in the design to gain a comprehensive understanding of the Project. HMM's
inspector will also coordinate with the City's Department of Public Works inspection personnel in order to
understand City procedures and philosophies.
Per the construction Contract Documents, authority for approving and executing change notices and change
orders will be established. HMM's inspector will consult with the City's representative on specific issues as they
arise. This will ensure that the will of the City is properly communicated to the Contractor.
Bid Review
At the request of the City, HMM will provide the necessary expertise to evaluate bids received for the Project.
Document Review and Processing Procedures
HMM's Document Control System (DCS) will be used on this Project and incorporate existing procedures which
the City uses to manage public works projects. Where the City already has forms in use, these will be
incorporated into the system. The DCS will utilize an electronic database and incorporate electronic transmission
of documents wherever possible
Hatch Mott
MacDonald
Preconstruction Conference
A preconstruction conference is recommended as a means for formally introducing the project principals to each
other. Meeting invitees should include all those with an interest in the project so that they can become informed
at an early stage. The meeting should be structured so that outside parties, such as utilities and other agencies
which may be impacted by the construction of the project need to attend only the fust half of the meeting where
the project overview, anticipated schedule, communication and notification protocols, and similar non -
construction related issues are reviewed.. The second part can then be more detailed for the benefit of those most
closely involved, namely the City, the Contractor, and HMM.
B. Construction Phase
On -Site Inspection
The HMM inspector will be on-site for the construction activities by making visits to the site at intervals
appropriate to the various stages of construction to observe the progress and quality of the executed work of the
Contractor. Based on observations during the inspection services, HMM shall determine in general if such work
is proceeding in accordance with the Contract. Inspection is required primarily to ensure that the project is
constructed in substantial conformance with the Contract Drawings and Specifications. The inspector will include
comments and observations pertaining to the Contractors' performance with daily reports including logging work
force and equipment used in the work each day as further described under Reports and Logs below. In this
manner, a body of information will be compiled that will be useful in measuring progress and schedule
compliance and will also serve as a baseline should a claim situation arise.
HMM will not supervise, direct or have control over the Contractors' work. Nor shall HMM have authority over
or responsibility for the following: the means, methods, techniques, sequences or procedures of construction
selected by the Contractor, the safety precautions or safety programs incident to the work of the Contractor or for
site safety generally, or for any failure of the Contractor to comply with laws, rules, regulations, ordinances, codes
or orders applicable to the Contractor furnishing and performing their work.
As the on-site representative for the City, the HMM inspector will respond to questions from residents in a
manner agreed to by the City ahead of time. The HMM inspector will monitor the Contractor for conformance
with the contract requirements for notifying residents of construction activities.
Health and Safety
The Contractor is solely responsible for site safety on the Project, including public health and safety. IIMM will
review the Phase I and 2 Injury Illness Prevention Plan (IIPP) designed solely for our personnel. The IIPP will be
updated for Phase 3 based on the specific type of construction.
Reviewing Contractor's Project Master CPM Schedule
A primary goal for the HMM team as the CM is to foster completion of the project on time. HMM will review
the Contractors' schedules, monitor the work, and track the Contractors' schedule updates and revisions.
Records and Logs
Written records will be primarily in the form of standard reports, which will ensure consistency and continuity of
approach. Notes will be taken in the field and these will provide the basis of formal reports, as needed. Notes
will be filed in the form of daily reports in a template sent to the City for approval ahead of construction. These
daily reports will be prepared after the completion of each work shift but normally no later than the end of the
following working day. A hard copy of the report will be signed by the inspector, filed, and included in the
weekly correspondence file.
Hatch Mott
MacDonald
In addition to keeping written records of the work, the inspector will maintain a photographic record of the
project. The Contractor is solely responsible for site condition surveys while the inspector's photographs are
considered complementary to the daily reports. Photographs will be taken at intervals throughout the shift and be
appended to the daily reports. Photographs should record operations during the shift, and conditions of interest,
particularly where they involve damage or poor practices. The photographs will be cataloged with an entry
detailing the photographer, date and time taken, location, and description of the content. For some operations, a
video may be preferable to still photographs. Videos will be cataloged with similar information.
Submittals/Requests for Information
The Contract requires the submission of various types of submittals. The work to which each applies cannot be
started until the submittal has been reviewed. This process has the potential to delay the work if the submittal is
not received in a timely fashion, is incomplete, or fails to meet the specification. To ensure no significant delay in
this area, HMM will track a full schedule of what submittals are required under the Contract. The Contractor will
also be encouraged to prepare his own master list of submittals. The submittal schedule will be coordinated with
the Contractor's approved construction schedule so that sufficient time is allowed for the review process.
Submittals will be checked to ensure that they are complete and contain the correct references before being
entered into the system. Thereafter, their progress through the system will be tracked to keep all parties aware of
the submittal's status and the need to maintain schedule. The submittals will be reviewed for conformance with
the design.
RFIs will be handled similarly. RFIs questioning the design or with the potential to impact design, will be
reviewed by the design team who will issue responses. Others will be dealt with at the site. An RFI log will be
maintained daily. Should the response to an RFI appear to have the potential to impact the contract schedule or
cost, the issue will be immediately addressed with the City. Where appropriate, alternatives will be suggested and
explored.
JAMM's team will at all times be mindful of the need to meet the contractual obligations for return of submittal
and RFI documents. Wherever possible, we will attempt to expedite the response so that the Contractor has the
maximum time at his disposal to process the information provided and to factor it into his schedule. Where
necessary, responses to submittals and RFIs will be formalized with a directive such as a change notice or field
instruction if there are implications to the scope of work.
Under the terms of the contract, notification of any changes or potential changes will need to be given by the
Contractor. HMM will coordinate with the City and then respond on both the condition cited for the request and
possible impacts on the Contractors' operations. In this manner, information will be gathered that will allow for a
determination of merit on the request and quantification of the Contractors' losses, if any. HMM will make a
preliminary assessment of the situation to identify whether additional resources or measures will be necessary for
the process. These might include such things as testing for hazardous waste or additional compaction testing. All
issues that have the potential to impact the time and cost of the Project will be given issue status and be addressed.
Weekly Meetings
The weekly progress meetings will be the main forum for dialog between HMM, the City and the Contractor. The
prime focus at the meetings will be on safety, quality, performance, and schedule. The object of the meeting will
be to encourage open communications during the meetings and to engender a spirit of collaboration. Seeking
consensus and maintaining cooperation between the parties will foster a successful Project. This can be most
effectively achieved by approaching issues in a constructive fashion.
The Contractors' progress since the previous meeting will be reviewed against the last schedule update. If the
schedule has slipped, the reasons will be identified and discussed to assess measures to avert further delays of the
Hatch Mott
MacDonald
same nature and to identify ways of recovering lost time. The Contractors' schedule for the following three-week
period will be further reviewed in light of these discussions to determine whether or not the projections are
realistic. All aspects of the project will be open for discussion in the meetings so that the parties are each
fulfilling their commitments and that all issues are receiving due attention.
Quality Assurance
The HMM Inspector will confirm that quality control is being performed by the Contractor. The HMM Inspector
will observe the work and record his observations as described above.
A key element of the inspection process will be the acceptance or rejection of work. Work will generally be
acceptable if workmanship has been in substantial conformance with the technical specifications and if the results
of materials or equipment tests confirm compliance with applicable performance levels. Compaction testing will
be performed by the City's testing firm. The remaining testing will be performed by the Contractor.
In the event that a situation arises whereby there is non-compliance, either real or potential, the initial focus will
be on correcting the non-compliance without recourse to formal procedures. However, if the Contractor does not
resolve or correct the problem within a reasonable period of time or if the Contractor further compounds the
problem, the HMM Inspector will issue a Non -Conformance Notice (NCN) to the Contractor. The NCN will
require the Contractor to propose a method for rectification.
Document Control
The Document Control System (DCS) described in the Preconstruction Phase will include a filing system. This
will also acknowledge existing protocol within the City. Files will be maintained at HMM's San Jose office for
reference.
Progress Payments
In order to process progress payments, the Contractor will need to provide verification of quality and a breakdown
of lump sums and quantities of the various bid items. This will be used to agree on progress payments. IBM
will review the Contractors' invoices and provide feedback to the City. This review will include quality control
test results and quantities of measured work to establish the correct billing amount for the month. Review of pay
requests will be very much tied to the requirements of the Contract. The City will perform review of the
Contractors' certified payroll.
C. Construction Completion and Closeout
The closeout process will be performed in accordance with the City's closeout procedures and is briefly described
below. HMM will discuss closeout procedures with the City and agree upon the final output before the end of
construction.
Field Activity Closeout
The HMM team will develop a final punchlist. In addition, permitting jurisdictions and stakeholder agencies will
be requested to perform a final inspection and joint walk through, so their concerns can be heard and a final
punchlist developed. A functional test of field systems shall be performed in the presence of the appropriate
jurisdiction. Photographic documentation of post construction conditions will be performed.
Permanent Records
Final project records will be assembled in accordance with the City's filing system for archiving. The HMM team
will also prepare the comprehensive closeout binder which gives a snapshot of the project construction record.
Negotiate Claims, Liquidated Damages and Final Payment
After acceptance of the contract, the HAM team will prepare the Proposed Final Estimate (PFE), which includes
payment for all work performed under the contract and approved change orders. In accordance with the contract,
the Contractor shall submit his exceptions to the proposed final estimate, including substantiation for all
additional payments. HMM will assist the City to resolve formal claims, if any.
Closeout Procedures and As -built Plans
The Contractor is responsible for incorporating all deviations from Contract Drawings into redline drawings. The
deviations to be recorded shall include change orders, field modifications, differing site conditions, etc. At the
end of the project, redlines will be incorporated into the CAD files, in accordance with City requirements.
Items Excluded from Scope of Work
The following items are not included in H AM's proposed Scope of Work:
• Material testing
• Assessment of environmental characteristics at the project sites, particularly those involving hazardous
substances
• Review of certified payroll (performed by the City)
• Supervision of Contractor's safety procedures
Fees for Proposed Services
The foregoing proposed scope of services will be performed on a time and materials, reimbursable, not to exceed
fee basis per the attached Hourly Rate Schedule. Expenses will be invoiced at costs plus a 10% handling fee. The
fees proposed to perform the services described above amount to $175,320.
The City will be invoiced monthly based on actual hours and costs completed during each billing cycle. Invoices
are due and payable within 30 days of presentation.
Proposed Schedule
The foregoing proposed scope of services will be completed within 5 months of the Contractor's date of
authorization of Notice to Proceed.
Hatch Mott
MacDonald
Schedule of Charges
Hatch Mott Hatch Mott MacDonald
MacDonald Hourly Rates
Senior Project Manager
Senior Project Engineer (Technical Expert
Senior Engineer
Project Engineer
Inspector
Staff
a
$ 268.00
$ 246.00
$ 246.00
$ 210.00
$190.00
$170.00
$152.00
$135.00
$119.00
$103.00
$ 84.00
an ele.,uov.m.
nw per- work
PPo°XBoulewJ fere. M.ln mtl Cwlx Plnnm
uulM npm�rl
WP4-1
mry pprlugo
Impwtivn.n<Can.Wetivn BuppeXlmlm
Naecl�Mon
m
Mm;d.n:eM
'u*Kamw°10
nw per- work
_
W
mea
m
Faop.mmew�lelewp
Y`o�au
Agenda Item F,.--
Meeting
cMeeting Date tl S
CITY OF BURLINGAME
2015 COUNCIL ASSIGNMENTS— Revised 12-30-14
Committee
Schedule
Comments
Bold names are
members, alternates in
parentheses.
1
ABAG — City Delegate
Quarterly
Brownrigg (Ortiz)
2
Airport Land Use Commission
Quarterly meetings
C/CAG
Ortiz (Keighran)
held at Burlingame City
subcom-
Hall
mittee
3
Airport Round Table
Meets quarterly on V
Ortiz (Brownrigg)
Wednesday each
month, 7 p.m.
4
Audit Committee
Meets 2-3 times per
Ortiz & Root
year, including once in
December
5
Bay Area Water Supply and Conservation
Meets 3rd Thurs of
O'Mahony
Agency (BAWSCA)
every other month,
starting January
6
I
Caltrain Modernization Policymaker Group
Monthly
Root (Ortiz)
7
Central County Fire Board
For 2015, meetings
Minimum 2-
Brownrigg & Keighran
begin at 4 p.m. on:
year terms.
Feb. 11 at Burlingame
Brownrigg
Apr. 8 at Hillsborough
joined in Dec.
Sept. 9 at Burlingame
2011,
Dec. 9 at Hillsborough
Keighran
joined in
Mar. 2013
8
Chamber of Commerce Liaison
25d Tuesday of each
Keighran & Root
month, noon -1:30 p.m.
9
City/County Association of Governments
2"d Thursday of each
Nagel (Ortiz)
(C/CAG)
month, 6:30 p.m.
10
City/Schools Liaison Committee
3 times a year, usually
Keighran & Ortiz
midweek at 9 a.m.
11
Civic Engagement Subcommittee
As needed
Nagel & Keighran
12
Community Center Master Plan Advisory
As needed
Keighran & Ortiz
Committee
-6
Downtown Plan Implementation
As needed
Brownrigg & Keighran
14
Economic Development Subcommittee
4th Wednesday of the
Brownrigg & Ortiz
month
15
Emergency Services Council (quarterly)
3rd Thursday in January,
Nagel (Ortiz)
April, June and
September, 5:30 p.m.
at Hall of Justice in
Redwood City
16
Fire ALS Joint Powers Authority
Twice annually as
Root (Brownrigg)
group agrees, usually
at 6 p.m.
17
Grand Boulevard Task Force
Quarterly, 10 a.m:
Root (Ortiz)
noon, location varies
18
Housing Endowment and Regional Trust
Quarterly on Wed at 3
Keighran (Ortiz)
(H EART)
p.m.
19
Peninsula Cities Consortium
Quarterly, 8:15 a.m.
Brownrigg (Ortiz)
(location rotates
among 6 cities)
20
Peninsula Congestion Relief Alliance (now
Every other month on
Root (Ortiz) .
called Commute.org)
Tues. or Thurs. at 8
a.m.
21
South Bay Waste Management Authority
Quarterly, 2 pm,
Brownrigg (Root)
Thursdays
Members Elected or Selected to the Following, Not Appointed by Mayor
22
San Mateo County Transportation Authority
1st Thursday of month,
Elected
Nagel
5 p.m., SamTrans
through Dec.
building, San Carlos
2015
23
Peninsula Health Care District Long Term
6 x/ year, generally
Selected
Brownrigg & Ortiz
Planning Committee
Tues evenings
All Council Members Invited to Following Committees/Groups
24
Peninsula Division League of California Cities
4 dinner meetings per
All
year, plus January
reception for newly
elected council
members
25
Council of Cities
Usually 4th Friday of
All
month, rotating city
STAFF REPORT AGENDA NO: 8d
a MEETING DATE: January5, 2015
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
Date: January 5, 2015
From: Leslie Loomis — (650) 558-7209
Subject: Adoption of a Resolution Authorizing Amendment of the City Manager's
Employment Agreement to Provide a Salary Increase of 3% and a 2%
Contribution to a Deferred Compensation Plan
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached resolution authorizing the Mayor to
execute an amendment to City Manager Lisa Goldman's employment agreement to increase her
salary by 3% and to contribute 2% of her monthly salary into a deferred compensation account
effective the first pay period in January 2015.
BACKGROUND
City Manager Lisa Goldman began her service with the City of Burlingame on December 27,
2012. In December 2013, the City Council reviewed her performance and authorized a 2.25%
increase effective the first pay period beginning after her anniversary date. On December 3,
2014, the City Council met with Ms. Goldman in closed session to review her performance after
her second year in office. The City Council also met in closed session with Human Resources
Director Leslie Loomis to review City Managers' compensation in cities of a similar size to
Burlingame and to discuss increasing the City Manager's salary.
DISCUSSION
During the December 3rtl closed session, the City Council decided to increase the City Manager's
salary by 3% in recognition of her successful completion of her second year and to contribute 2%
of her salary into a deferred compensation plan to keep her salary and benefits package within
the labor market norm. In order to increase her salary, Section 5 of the employment agreement
must be amended to increase the monthly salary from $18,233.69 per month to $18,780.70. The
Council also authorized an additional payment of 2% of salary, which amounts to $364.67 per
month, into a City sponsored deferred compensation plan. This change will be effective beginning
with the first pay period in January 2015.
FISCAL IMPACT
The financial impact for the remainder of this fiscal year is approximately $5500. The City
Manager's Office budget can absorb this amount using existing funds.
1
Amendment to the City Manager's Employment Agreement January 5, 2015
Exhibits:
• Resolution
• Agreement Between the City of Burlingame and Lisa K. Goldman for Employment as City
Manager of the City of Burlingame
• Second Amendment to City Manager's Employment Agreement
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME
AUTHORIZING AMENDMENT OF THE CITY MANAGER'S EMPLOYMENT
AGREEMENT TO PROVIDE A SALARY INCREASE OF 3% AND A CONTRIBUTION
OF 2% TO A DEFERRED COMPENSATION ACCOUNT
WHEREAS, City Manager Lisa K. Goldman began her service with the City on
December 27, 2012; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has conducted performance evaluations for Ms.
Goldman upon completion of each year with the City, both of which have been positive;
and
WHEREAS, the City Council determined, following the evaluation on December
3, 2014, that a salary increase of 3% was warranted in recognition of Ms. Goldman's
successful performance, effective at the beginning of the first pay period in January
2015; and
WHEREAS, the City Council also agreed to increase the City's contribution into a
deferred compensation account by 2% of Ms. Goldman's salary; and ,
WHEREAS, all other terms and conditions of Ms. Goldman's employment are to
remain as provided in her original employment agreement;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of
Burlingame does hereby authorize the Mayor to execute the attached Second
Amendment to Ms. Goldman's City Manager Employment Agreement, to increase Ms.
Goldman's gross salary by 3%, and to contribute an amount equal to 2% of her gross
salary into a deferred compensation account, effective the first pay period in January
2015, and leaving all other terms and conditions of employment as provided in the City
Manager Employment Agreement.
Terry Nagel, Mayor
I, Mary Ellen Kearney, 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 5th day of January, 2015, and was adopted thereafter by the following vote:
AYES:
Councilmembers:
NOES:
Councilmembers:
ABSENT:
Councilmembers
Mary Ellen Kearney, City Clerk
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF BURLINGAME
AND LISA K GOLDMAN FOR EMPLOYMENT AS CITY MANAGER
OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME
THIS AGREEMENT is entered into this day of , 2012, by and
between the City of Burlingame, a Municipal Corporation existing under the laws of the State of
California, herein called the "City", and Lisa K. Goldman ("Ms. Goldman").
RECITALS
A. The City is seeking a new City Manager and desires to employ Ms. Goldman in that position
pursuant to the terms and conditions of this Agreement and consistent with Chapter 3.04 of the
Burlingame Municipal Code.
B. Ms. Goldman has the education and experience for the position of City Manager and is willing
and able to assume the duties and responsibilities of that position pursuant to the terms and
conditions of this Agreement.
AGREEMENT
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PARTIES HERETO AGREE AS FOLLOWS:
1. Employment and Duties. Ms. Goldman shall serve as City Manager of the City and as an
employee of the City for all purposes as provided in Burlingame Municipal Code, Chapter 3.04,
the California Government Code, and other applicable ordinances, resolutions, and laws. Ms.
Goldman shall also serve as Executive Director of the Burlingame Financing Authority. Ms.
Goldman shall perform such further duties as the City may direct.
2. Time of Performance. Ms. Goldman shall begin employment with the City no later than January
1, 2013.
3. Devotion to Duties. During such time as Ms. Goldman is employed pursuant to this Agreement,
Ms. Goldman shall not accept or undertake any employment which would interfere with, conflict
with, or be inconsistent with her duties and obligations under this Agreement or which would
interfere with, conflict with or be inconsistent with her duties under any State, Federal or City
laws or regulations.
4. Nonassignabilitv. The services to be performed under this Agreement are unique and personal to
Ms. Goldman, and she is being employed solely because of her personal qualifications, qualities,
and character. No portion of these services shall be assigned or subcontracted in any way.
5. Monthly Compensation. Upon beginning employment with the City, City shall pay
Ms. Goldman a salary of $17,833.33 per month. This compensation shall be paid on the
same payment schedule as City Department Heads, which is currently biweekly.
6. Deferred Compensation Contribution. City shall contribute the same amount per year to Ms.
Goldman's 457 deferred compensation account as for the City Department Heads.
7. Employment Benefits. Except as expressly amended by this Agreement, City shall provide Ms.
Goldman with the same benefits, including retirement, holidays, medical, dental, long-term
disability, vision, life insurance, professional development, unreimbursed health, and
administrative leave benefits, as provided to the City Department Heads.
8. Vacation Accrual. Upon employment pursuant to this Agreement, Ms. Goldman shall accrue
fifteen (15) vacation days per year. Except as provided in this paragraph, Ms. Goldman's
vacation leave shall be the same rules as for the City Department Heads.
9. Service Club Participation. City shall reimburse Ms. Goldman for her membership and necessary
participation in one service club in Burlingame of Ms. Goldman's choosing.
10. Professional Memberships and Training. In addition to the benefits provided by the Professional
Development/Umeimbursed Health Account benefit should such benefits be reinstated, City shall
pay for Ms. Goldman's membership in the International City Managers Association. It is the
intention of the parties that Ms. Goldman's department budget shall include Ms. Goldman's
attendance at professional associations, city associations, and professional training, and that Ms.
Goldman's expenses in connection with those associations and training shall be paid for or
reimbursed pursuant to that budget and City policies governing travel and reimbursement.
11. Performance Review. At least once per year, the City Council shall meet with Ms. Goldman and
review her performance. During this performance review, the City Council and Ms. Goldman
may agree on performance objectives and priorities for the coming year for Ms. Goldman.
12. Termination of Agreement by Ms. Goldman. Ms. Goldman may terminate this Agreement at any
time upon giving at least sixty (60) days written notice to the City.
13. Termination of Agreement by Citv.
a. Pursuant to the Burlingame Municipal Code, the City may terminate this Agreement at any
time, with or without cause, pursuant to the provisions of the Burlingame Municipal Code.
In. Except as required by State or Federal law, no further payment to Ms. Goldman shall be
required pursuant to this Agreement if the City terminates this Agreement for the following
reasons:
i. If Ms. Goldman dies.
ii. If Ms. Goldman is convicted of a felony or misdemeanor involving moral turpitude or
personal gain from public employment.
iii. If the City Council determines that Ms. Goldman has violated City policy regarding
sexual harassment or drug or alcohol usage, or has violated State or Federal law with
regard to civil rights, and the City Council determines that termination from City
employment is the appropriate sanction.
iv. If the City Council determines that Ms. Goldman has stolen public monies.
c. In the event that the City terminates this Agreement for a reason not stated in subparagraph
(b) above and Ms. Goldman is still willing and able to perform her duties under this
Agreement, City shall pay to Ms. Goldman upon termination of the Agreement an amount
equal to six (6) months of then -current monthly compensation, in addition to the payment of
the accrued benefits as provided to the City Department Heads upon resignation or
termination.
19. . 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: City Clerk
City of Burlingame
501 Primrose Road
Burlingame, CA 94010
To Ms Goldman: Ms. Lisa Goldman
20. 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.
21. Binding Effect. This Agreement was negotiated and drafted by both parties. This Agreement is
binding on the heirs and executors, administrators, and conservators of Ms. Goldman.
22. Governing Law. This Agreement, regardless of where executed, shall be governed by and
construed according to the laws of the State of California. Venue for any action regarding this
Agreement shall be in the Superior or Municipal Court of the County of San Mateo or Santa
Clara.
23. Non -Liability of Officials and Employees. No official or employee of the City shall be
personally liable for any default or liability under this Agreement except Ms. Goldman.
24. No Rights in Third Parties. Nothing contained in this Agreement is intended to nor shall it be
construed to create any right of action of any kind in any third parry.
25. Amendment. No modification, waiver, mutual termination, or amendment of this Agreement is
effective unless made in writing and signed by the City and Ms. Goldman.
26. Entire Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the complete and exclusive statement of the
Agreement between the City and Ms. Goldman. 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 Ms. Goldman have executed this Agreement as of the date
indicated on page one (1).
CITY OF BURLINGAME
Ann Keighran, Mayor
Michael Brownrigg, Vice Mayor
Cathy Baylock, Council Member
Terry Nagel, Council Member
Jerry Deal, Council Member
LISA K. GOLDMAN
ATTEST:
Mary Ellen Kearney, City Clerk
Approved as to Form:
Gus Guinan, City Attorney
SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF
BURLINGAME AND LISA K. GOLDMAN FOR EMPLOYMENT AS CITY MANAGER
OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME
This amendment is entered into this
day of
2015,
by and between the City of Burlingame, a Municipal Corporation existing under the laws of the
State of California, herein called the "City," and Lisa K. Goldman ("Ms. Goldman"), as follows:
RECITALS:
A. Ms. Goldman is currently serving as City Manager for the City of Burlingame pursuant to
that contract denominated "Agreement Between the City of Burlingame and Lisa K.
Goldman for Employment as City Manager of the City of Burlingame" (`Employment
Agreement"), entered into on November 19, 2012, and amended on January 6th, 2014.
B. Ms. Goldman has successfully completed her second year with the City. Subsequent to a
performance evaluation, the City Council determined that her salary should be increased
by 3%. An additional 2% of her adjusted gross salary will be contributed into a City -
sponsored deferred compensation plan on Ms. Goldman's behalf, effective with the first
pay period in January 2015.
C. Both parties are amenable to this change and desire that all other terms and conditions of
the existing Employment Agreement remain in full force and effect.
AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PARTIES HERETO AGREE AS FOLLOWS:
1. Paragraph 5, Monthly Compensation, of the Employment Agreement shall be amended to
provide that the City shall pay Ms. Goldman a salary of $18,780.70 per month and to
provide that an amount equal to 2% of Ms. Goldman's salary shall be contributed into a
deferred compensation plan, effective with the first pay period in January 2015.
2. All other terms and conditions of the Employment Agreement shall remain in full force
and effect.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City and Ms. Goldman have executed this Amendment as of the
date indicated above.
CITY OF BURLINGAME
Terry Nagel, Mayor
ATTEST:
Mary Ellen Kearney, City Clerk
LISA K. GOLDMAN
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Kathleen Kane, City Attorney
BURL,INGAME STAFF REPORT AGENDA NO: He
MEETING DATE: January5, 2015
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
Date: January 5, 2015
From: Leslie Loomis, Human Resources Director — (650) 558-7209
Subject: Adoption of a Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Side
Letter Agreement with AFSCME Local 2190 to Establish an Emergency
Contact Procedure for Parks and Recreation Staff
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached resolution authorizing the City
Manager to amend the AFSCME Local 2190 Memorandum of Understanding to include the
attached side letter agreement related to an emergency contact procedure for Parks and
Recreation staff. City Council authorization is needed to adopt the side letter attached to the
resolution.
During emergencies, the Parks and Recreation Department needs to contact Parks staff to
respond to emergency calls for service during non -business hours. In the past, the Police
Department Communications Dispatch Center has been responsible for finding a staff member
from the Parks Division to return to work to handle an emergency call. Typically, these calls
require staff to remove fallen trees or branches, work that the Police Department is not equipped
to handle. Because it is often difficult for the Dispatcher to find an employee who is available to
return to work, the Police Department asked the Parks and Recreation Department to figure out a
more efficient method to manage these calls for response. As a result, the City met with
representatives from AFSCME Local 2190 to work on the issue of determining an efficient way to
handle Parks emergency calls. The City and AFSCME 2190 have reached agreement on a
solution to this problem, and this agreement has been memorialized in the attached side letter.
The agreement can be terminated at any time if the solution does not work.
DISCUSSION
The side letter provides an incentive to Parks staff to be on a monthly call out list for emergency
response. One person will be designated as the "Emergency Contact Person'. This person will
be issued a City cell phone and will be responsible for answering all the calls and for handling the
emergencies. Assignments to the "Emergency Contact Person" list will be made on a voluntary
basis and rotated once a month. The staff member serving the assignment will be paid $50 for
that month only.
1
Resolution Regarding AFSCME Side Letter
FISCAL IMPACT
January 5, 2015
Funding for the minimal cost of $50 per month for an "Emergency Contact Person" can be
absorbed in the current Parks and Recreation budget.
Exhibits:
1. Resolution
2. December 22, 2014 Side Letter Between AFSCME Local 2190 and the City
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
BURLINGAME AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A
SIDE LETTER AGREEMENT WITH AFSCME LOCAL 2190 TO
ESTABLISH AN EMERGENCY CONTACT PROCEDURE FOR PARKS
AND RECREATION STAFF
WHEREAS, representatives for the City of Burlingame and representatives for the
American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME 2190) have
met and agreed to modify the Memorandum of Understanding between the parties,
which expires on June 30, 2015, through the adoption of a side letter agreement for a
specific situation only, on a non -precedent setting basis; and
WHEREAS, the City and AFSCME have agreed on a method for contacting Park
staff to return to work to handle emergency calls; and
WHEREAS, the side letter may be revoked by either party at any time if it is not
an effective solution; and
WHEREAS, the cost of the "Emergency Contact Procedure" is $50.00 per month,
and there are sufficient funds in the Parks and Recreation Department budget to cover
this cost.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Burlingame
does hereby authorize the City Manager to execute the attached side letter agreement
with AFSCME 2190 effective with the beginning of the first pay period following January
1, 2015.
Terry Nagel, Mayor
I, MARY ELLEN KEARNEY, 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 5th day of January, 2015, and was adopted thereafter by the
following vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Mary Ellen Kearney, City Clerk
CSIDE LETTER AGREEMENT
BETWEEN
AFSCME LOCAL 2190
AND
THE CITY OF BURLINGAME
December 22, 2014
Representatives for the City of Burlingame and representatives for American Federation
of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) Local 2190 have met and agree to
modify the Memorandum of Understanding between the parties, which expires on June
30, 2015, for the following specific situation only:
Background
The Parks and Recreation Department needs a system to contact employees when there is
the need for employees to return to work to handle emergencies during off duty hours.
AFSCME representatives and the City met and agreed to enter into a six month pilot
program to provide a communication link between the Dispatch Center and the
Department. Both parties agree that the City may cancel the program at any time if it is
not working.
Program
When the City Dispatch Center receives call for emergency service, the Dispatch center
will call the person designated as the "Emergency Contact Person" who will have a City
cell phone. This person is responsible for responding to the call and for contacting
additional staff if the situation requires additional staff to resolve.
The "Emergency Contact Person" will serve for a minimum of one month at a time. To
be eligible, employees in the Parks Corporation Yard must be qualified to handle the calls
for service, be off probation, live within a 30 minute response time, based on google
maps, from the Parks Building, and be willing to answer the City cell phone during non-
business hours, 7 days a week for a month. When assigned as the "Emergency Contact
Person" employees may not take vacation of compensation time. In the event they are ill,
on bereavement leave or jury duty, they are responsible for giving the City cell phone to
appropriate personnel so the Dispatcher can reach the cell phone at all times.
Assignments to the "Emergency Contact Person" are voluntary.
The monthly compensation for carrying the cell phone is $50.00 per month.
If the foregoing is in accordance with your understanding, please indicate your approval
and acceptance in the space provided below.
Approved and Accepted:
For AFSCME Local 2190
For City of Burlingame
Date: 1-2, 12C c Date:
STAFF REPORT AGENDA NO: 9a
a MEETING DATE: January 5, 2015
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
Date: January 5, 2015
From: Kathleen Kane, City Attorney — (650) 558-7204
Subject: Adoption of an Urgency Moratorium on New Applications for Marijuana
Dispensaries, Collectives, Growing Operations, and Related Uses
Staff recommends that the City Council consider adoption of an urgency moratorium on new
applications for marijuana dispensaries, collectives, growing operations, and related uses. In
order to do so, the Council should:
• Receive the staff report and ask any clarifying questions.
• Ask the Clerk to read the title of the proposed ordinance.
• By motion, waive further reading and introduce the ordinance.
• Hold a public hearing.
• Discuss the ordinance and determine whether to adopt it.
• By motion, approve the temporary moratorium. This motion would require 4 affirmative
votes.
BACKGROUND
Planning staff has been approached on a periodic basis with proposals to open marijuana
dispensaries and collectives within Burlingame. Currently, the City's Zoning Code does not
address marijuana -related establishments. Under Section 25.04.070 of the Code, uses that are
not listed as permitted or conditional are prohibited. Therefore, the Community Development
Department has indicated that marijuana -related land uses are not permissible in the city. This
approach is consistent with both the letter of the Code and its usual application by Planning staff.
This item is being brought to Council because although such uses are generally prohibited under
the Zoning Code's catch-all provision, increasing ambiguity exists under state law and recent
court decisions regarding marijuana -related uses and how they may be regulated as a matter of
local jurisdictions' police and zoning powers.
Local jurisdictions have in some cases enacted total bans on marijuana -related land uses, finding
that the public safety implications of such uses warrant their prohibition. Other jurisdictions have
opted to allow certain marijuana -related uses under varying degrees of regulation and special tax
structures. However, jurisdictions permitting marijuana -related land uses have observed the need
I
Marijuana Moratorium January 5, 2015
for increased public safety services associated with those uses. State case law is rapidly evolving
on what kinds of regulation are permissible and what findings must be made in order to support
them.
On a local level, Burlingame is undertaking a major revision of its General Plan, which will include
a thorough re-examination of the Zoning Code and land use regulation in the city. The City
should avoid taking an action regarding marijuana -related uses that may be in conflict with
policies currently under review and development.
Under these circumstances, and to provide clarity to prospective applicants for marijuana -related
land uses, the attached moratorium would give the City time to assess what, if any, regulation of
marijuana -related uses should be adopted as part of a permanent Zoning Code revision.
Cities are empowered to enact temporary urgency moratoria as an extension of their powers to
regulate land use, where such moratoria are necessary to protect the public safety, health and
welfare. See California Government Code § 65858. Such moratoria may prohibit "any uses that
may be in conflict with a contemplated general plan, specific plan, or zoning proposal that the
legislative body, planning commission, or planning department is considering or studying or
intends to study within a reasonable time." Id. The initial urgency moratorium requires a four-
fifths vote of the legislative body and shall be in effect for 45 days; the moratorium may be
extended following additional notice and hearing. The maximum extension possible under the
statute is 22 months. Should Council determine a direction on medical marijuana land uses
before the expiration of the moratorium or any extension, the moratorium can be repealed in favor
of any permanent approach to regulation.
In the case of marijuana -related land uses, the City needs the opportunity to study such uses in
conjunction with the General Plan review that is currently being undertaken. Additionally, the
experience of other jurisdictions permitting such uses has demonstrated that the public safety,
health, and welfare require planning for potential crime and safety-related impacts of permitting
marijuana -related establishments. Medical marijuana dispensaries and collectives have been
associated with increased risks of robberies, identity falsification, fraudulent resale of marijuana,
and loitering. Should the City choose to allow marijuana -related establishments, proper planning
for regulation, monitoring, and public safety staffing will be necessary to mitigate any negative
ancillary effects on neighboring properties and the public.
Nothing in the proposed urgency ordinance is intended to affect the rights of individuals as
established by the Compassionate Use Act of 1996, otherwise known as Proposition 215 and
enacted at California Health and Safety Code §11362.5 et seq., and as elaborated under the
Medical Marijuana Program Act, Health and Safety Code § 11362.7, et seq. The attached
ordinance is limited to any marijuana -related uses that would require business licenses, home
occupancy permits, or permits or entitlements under Burlingame's Zoning Code. It does not
affect individuals possessing a valid prescription, or healthcare facilities that provide in-patient or
residential care.
2
Marijuana Moratorium
January 5, 2015
The adoption of the moratorium is not a project per California Environmental Quality Act
Guidelines Section 15378 because it has no potential for resulting in physical change to the
environment; -directly or indirectly. It is a temporary limitation only on certain approvals and will
not change the status quo of the de facto prohibition currently in place. Any permanent changes
in land use regulations taken following the proposed moratorium would have to be separately
evaluated regarding whether they would require analysis under the Act.
Should the Council adopt the attached urgency moratorium, the City Attorney will return with a
report addressing the measures taken to alleviate the conditions identified as creating the need
for the moratorium, per Government Code § 65858(d).
FISCAL IMPACT
None.
Exhibit:
• Proposed Urgency Ordinance
,F,
ORDINANCE NO.
AN INTERIM ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME
PROHIBITING THE ESTABLISHMENT AND OPERATION OF MARIJUANA
DISPENSARIES, COLLECTIVES, GROWING OPERATIONS, AND OTHER
RELATED USES WITHIN THE CITY
WHEREAS the City has received inquiries regarding the potential for opening medical
marijuana collectives and dispensaries; and
WHEREAS the City's Zoning Code currently does not specifically address
marijuana -related uses within the City; and
WHEREAS the Zoning Code prohibits those uses which are not specifically permitted
or allowed conditionally; and
WHEREAS greater clarity for prospective applicants for marijuana -related uses
would be advantageous; and
WHEREAS the City is undertaking a comprehensive review and update of its
General Plan and Zoning Code; and
WHEREAS the City does not want to take actions that could become inconsistent
with such updated General Plan and Zoning Code; and
WHEREAS marijuana dispensaries, collectives, and growing operations have been
associated in other jurisdictions with increased crime and risk to neighboring
properties and persons; and
WHEREAS the public health, safety, and welfare require that the City be afforded
adequate time to assess and plan for any impacts associated with permitting
marijuana -related uses;
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Burlingame does hereby find
and declare as follows:
Section 1: Council Findines
A. The City Council finds and declares that the potential establishment of
medical marijuana -related uses including dispensaries, collectives, and growing
operations, or any such related uses that would require a business license or permits
or approvals under the City's Zoning Code, poses a current and immediate threat to
the public health, safety, and welfare, and that without the adoption of this interim
urgency ordinance, the City Council will not have sufficient time and ability to study
the complex legal and practical issues surrounding medical marijuana in order to
develop a viable long-term regulatory approach.
B. The City Council finds that the City of Burlingame is currently undertaking a
comprehensive review and revision of its General Plan and Zoning Code, and that
the General Plan Update may generate guidance on permanent approaches to the
regulation of medical marijuana -related uses in the City.
C. State and Federal law on medical marijuana are currently in conflict, and
State law is rapidly evolving through legislation, administrative guidance, and court
decisions regarding local governments' regulation of medical marijuana -related uses.
D. The City has received multiple inquiries related to opening medical
marijuana -related establishments such as collectives and dispensaries.
E. This urgency moratorium is necessary at this time in order to study the
impacts on public health, safety, and welfare of medical marijuana -related uses and
to evaluate appropriate regulatory approaches.
Section 2: Imposition of Moratorium.
In accordance with the authority granted to the City by California Government Code
Section 65858, and pursuant to the findings stated herein, from and after the date of
this ordinance, no use permit, variance, building permit, business license, or other
applicable entitlement shall be approved or issued for the establishment of a
marijuana collective, dispensary, growing operation, or other medical marijuana -
related use for a period of forty-five days.
A. "Establishment" of a medical marijuana -related use means and includes any
of the following: the opening or commencement of a marijuana -related use as a new
business or establishment; the conversion of an existing business or establishment to
function as a marijuana dispensary, collective, or growing operation; and the
addition of a medical marijuana dispensary, collective, or growing operation to an
existing business or establishment.
B. Prohibited medical marijuana uses under this moratorium include any use or
operation that would require a business license or permit or entitlement under the
City's Zoning Code.
C. This moratorium does not affect the rights of individuals as established by
State law to possess or use medical marijuana.
D. This moratorium does not affect the establishment or operation of clinics and
health care facilities licensed pursuant to Division 2 of the California Health and
Safety Code. This moratorium does not affect residential care facilities for persons
with life-threatening illnesses licensed pursuant to Chapter 3.01 of Division 2 of the
Health and Safety Code, nor residential care facilities for the elderly licensed
pursuant to Chapter 3.2 of Division 2 of the Health and Safety Code. This
moratorium does not affect the establishment or operation of a residential hospice,
nor of a home -health agency licensed pursuant to Chapter 8 of Division 2 of the
Health and Safety Code, provided it complies with all applicable State law
provisions.
E. "Marijuana" means all parts of the plant Cannabis sativa L., whether
growing or not; the seeds thereof; the resin extracted from any part of the plant; and
every compound, manufacture, salt, derivative, or mixture prepared therefrom. It
includes marijuana or cannabis infused in foodstuffs.
F. The penalties for violation of this ordinance are as provided in Burlingame
Municipal Code Chapter 1.12.
Section 3. The City Council hereby finds and determines that this interim urgency
ordinance is necessary as an emergency measure pursuant to Government Code
Section 65 85 8 for preserving the public health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of
the City of Burlingame.
Section 4. This interim urgency ordinance shall take immediate effect upon adoption
by four-fifths vote of the City Council. The interim urgency ordinance shall
continue in force and effect for forty-five days from the date of its adoption and shall
thereafter be of no force and effect unless, after notice pursuant to Government Code
Section 65090 and a public hearing, the City Council extends this urgency
ordinance.
Section 5. The City Attorney shall review and consider options for the regulation of
medical marijuana -related uses in the City and provide to the City Council a report
describing the measures that the City has taken to address the conditions which led
to the adoption of this interim urgency ordinance.
Section 6. The City Clerk shall publish this urgency ordinance in the manner
required by law.
Section 7. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance is
for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the
remaining portions of this Ordinance. The Council hereby declares that it would
have adopted the Ordinance and each section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase
thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences,
clauses or phrases be declared invalid.
Terry Nagel, Mayor
I, MARY ELLEN KEARNEY, City Clerk of the City of Burlingame, do hereby
certify that the foregoing ordinance was introduced and adopted at a regular meeting
of the City Council held on the
day of 2015, by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ATTEST:
MARY ELLEN KEARNEY, City Clerk
BURLINGAME STAFF REPORT
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
Date: January 5, 2015
From: Kathleen Kane, City Attorney — (650) 558-7204
AGENDA NO: 9b
MEETING DATE: January 5, 2015
Subject: Adoption of an Urgency Moratorium on New Applications for Massage
Establishments
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council consider adoption of an urgency moratorium on new
applications for massage establishments. In order to do so, the Council should:
• Receive the staff report and ask any clarifying questions.
• Ask the Clerk to read the title of the proposed ordinance.
• By motion, waive further reading and introduce the ordinance.
• Hold a public hearing.
• Discuss the ordinance and determine whether to adopt it.
• By motion, approve the temporary moratorium. This motion would require 4 affirmative
votes.
BACKGROUND
In 2009, the State legislature enacted sweeping revisions to local governments' ability to regulate
massage establishments. Last year, the Council adopted an ordinance to come into compliance
with that law. In essence, the 2009 legislation prevented local governments from exercising
significant regulatory authority over any massage establishment where practitioners were
licensed by the newly created California Massage Therapy Council.
The impacts of the 2009 legislation were large. Many cities experienced a proliferation of
massage establishments, some of which operated as cover for illicit activities. Acknowledging
pressure from local jurisdictions, the State legislature recently altered the regulatory landscape for
the massage industry again — this time restoring some, but not all, of the powers previously
exercised by local government in regulating massage establishments. The new law, known as
AB 1147, went into effect on January 1, 2015.
Under AB 1147, cities again have land use authority to regulate the massage industry. However,
that authority is limited in some areas and unclear in others. Across the state, cities are
evaluating the new law and enacting a range of ordinances in response. Several are enacting or
considering moratoria.
7
Massage Establishment Moratorium January 5, 2015
Cities are empowered to enact temporary urgency moratoria as an extension of their powers to
regulate land use, where such moratoria are necessary to protect the public safety, health and
welfare. See California Government Code § 65858. Such moratoria may prohibit "any uses that
may be in conflict with a contemplated general plan, specific plan, or zoning proposal that the
legislative body, planning commission, or planning department is considering or studying or
intends to study within a reasonable time." Id. The initial urgency moratorium requires a four-
fifths vote of the legislative body and shall be in effect for 45 days; the moratorium may be
extended following additional notice and hearing. The maximum extension possible under the
statute is 22 months. However, staff does not propose a moratorium of long duration for new
massage establishments. Instead, staff contemplates a short moratorium in order to be able to
evaluate the approaches taken by Burlingame's neighbors in the region and determine the best
course of action to yield robust regulation without impeding legitimate businesses in the city.
The public health, safety, and welfare are directly affected by illicit activities, including prostitution
and human trafficking, that can occur under the guise of massage businesses. The new state law
removes one structure for regulating massage businesses without establishing a clear substitute.
Criminal and human rights violations with a direct impact on public safety and welfare could occur
in the regulatory void created by the change in state mandates unless the proposed moratorium
is enacted. The moratorium would give the City time to ensure that Burlingame's approach takes
into account regional responses to the legislation and the City's own assessment of its zoning
and public safety needs. The City has an interest in conducting this review in an expedited
manner, in order to ensure a minimum of disruption to legitimate massage businesses seeking to
locate in the City. A short moratorium consisting of the initial 45 -day period and a potential
minimal extension should be sufficient for this review.
The adoption of the moratorium is not a project, as defined by California Environmental Quality
Act Guidelines Section 15378, because it has no potential for resulting in physical change to the
environment, directly or indirectly. It is a temporary limitation only on certain approvals. Any
permanent changes in land use regulations taken following the proposed moratorium would have
to be separately evaluated regarding whether they would require analysis under the Act.
Should the Council adopt the attached urgency moratorium, the City Attorney will return with a
report addressing the measures taken to alleviate the conditions identified as creating the need
for the moratorium, per Government Code § 65858(d).
FISCAL IMPACT
None.
Exhibit:
• Proposed Urgency Ordinance
2
MHAD]Io/.1104[]go01[0
AN INTERIM ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME
PROHIBITING THE ESTABLISHMENT AND OPERATION OF NEW
MASSAGE ESTABLISHMENTS WITHIN THE CITY
WHEREAS California State law changed in 2009 to remove most local governmental
authority to regulate the massage industry; and
WHEREAS the City enacted changes to its Municipal Code in 2013 to bring it in
alignment with those changes; and
WHEREAS the State legislature recently passed AB 1147, which was signed by the
Governor and went into effect as of January 1, 2015; and
WHEREAS AB 1147 restored some but not all powers to local governments to
regulate the massage industry; and
WHEREAS the recent legislation contains ambiguities regarding the extent of the
regulatory authority conferred; and
WHEREAS other cities in the immediate region are currently grappling with how
to implement the new legislation; and
WHEREAS many massage establishments provide completely legitimate services
to the public, while others function as a cover for illicit activities such as
prostitution and human trafficking; and
WHEREAS the change in State mandates could create a regulatory void in which
such illicit uses could proliferate if the City is not afforded the opportunity to
evaluate the new legislation and respond with appropriate implementing
regulations; and
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Burlingame does hereby find
and declare as follows:
Section 1: Council Findings
A. The City Council finds and declares that the potential establishment of new
massage businesses in the interim between the recent enactment of AB 1147 and the
adoption of a new regulatory scheme by the City poses a current and immediate
threat to the public health, safety, and welfare, and that without the adoption of this
interim urgency ordinance, the City Council will not have sufficient time and ability
to study the new legislation and enact effective implementing regulations.
B. The City Council finds that the current Chapter 6.39 of the Burlingame
Municipal Code must be amended to reflect recent changes in State law and in order
to provide effective regulation of massage establishments within the City.
C. The City receives inquiries and applications on a routine basis for the
establishment of new massage businesses.
D. While most massage businesses provide legitimate services to the public,
some such establishments act as a cover for illicit activities including prostitution
and human trafficking.
E. Prostitution and human trafficking are serious crimes with immediate and
detrimental impact on both the victims of such crimes and on the citizens of the
surrounding community, including ancillary effects such as increased risk of
robbery.
F. This urgency moratorium is necessary at this time in order to study the
impacts on public health, safety, and welfare of the establishment of new massage
businesses and to evaluate appropriate regulatory approaches under recently enacted
State law.
Section 2: Imposition of Moratorium.
In accordance with the authority granted to the City by California Government Code
Section 65858, and pursuant to the findings stated herein, from and after the date of
this ordinance, no use permit, variance, building permit, business license, or other
applicable entitlement shall be approved or issued for the establishment of a new
massage business or related use for a period of forty-five days.
A. `Establishment" of a new massage business means and includes any of the
following: the opening or commencement of a massage use as a new business or
establishment; the conversion of an existing business or establishment to function as
a massage business; and the addition of a massage operation to an existing business
or establishment.
B. Prohibited new massage uses under this moratorium include any use or
operation that would require a business license or permit or entitlement under the
City's Zoning Code.
C. This moratorium does not affect existing massage businesses within the City
or those whose applications for relevant entitlements have been completed as of the
date of adoption of this moratorium.
D. This moratorium does not affect the provision of massage services incidental
to a clinic or health facility use, including physical therapy and related services.
E. The penalties for violation of this ordinance are as provided in Burlingame
Municipal Code Chapter 1.12.
Section 3. The City Council hereby finds and determines that this interim urgency
ordinance is necessary as an emergency measure pursuant to Government Code
Section 65858 for preserving the public health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of
the City of Burlingame.
Section 4. This interim urgency ordinance shall take immediate effect upon adoption
by four-fifths vote of the City Council. The interim urgency ordinance shall
continue in force and effect for forty-five days from the date of its adoption and shall
thereafter be of no force and effect unless, after notice pursuant to Government Code
Section 65090 and a public hearing, the City Council extends this urgency
ordinance.
Section 5. The City Attorney shall review and consider options for the regulation of
massage establishments in the City and provide to the City Council a report
describing the measures that the City has taken to address the conditions which led
to the adoption of this interim urgency ordinance.
Section 6. The City Clerk shall publish this urgency ordinance in the manner
required by law.
Section 7. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance is
for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the
remaining portions of this Ordinance. The Council hereby declares that it would
have adopted the Ordinance and each section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase
thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences,
clauses or phrases be declared invalid.
Terry Nagel, Mayor
[Certification on next page]
I, MARY ELLEN KEARNEY, City Clerk of the City of Burlingame, do hereby
certify that the foregoing ordinance was introduced and adopted at a regular meeting
of the City Council held on the
day of
2015, by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ATTEST:
MARY ELLEN KEARNEY, City Clerk
a
STAFF REPORT AGENDA NO: 9C
MEETING DATE: January5, 2015
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
Date: January 5, 2015
From: William Meeker, Community Development Director— (650) 558-7255
Subject: Public Hearing and Action to Consider Adoption of a Resolution of
Approval of the 2015-2023 Housing Element Update — Negative Declaration
and Amendment to the General Plan
RECOMMENDATION
The City Council should:
1. Conduct a public hearing and consider all public testimony related to the
approval of a Negative Declaration and adoption of the 2015-2023 Housing
Element as an amendment to the Burlingame General Plan.
2. Following conclusion of the public hearing, consider adoption of a "Resolution of
the City Council of the City of Burlingame finding that there is no substantial
evidence that the adoption of the 2015-2023 Housing Element Update as an
amendment to the General Plan will have a significant effect on the environment
under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Article 6 of
the CEQA Guidelines'; and
3. Consider adoption of a "Resolution of the City Council of the City of Burlingame
adopting the 2015-2023 Housing Element Update as an Amendment to the
General Plan".
BACKGROUND
By State mandate, each city and county in the Bay Area Region of California is required to plan
for the housing needs for its share of the expected new households over the next eight years as
well as for the housing needs of all economic segments of each jurisdiction's population. This
planning is being done in Burlingame by updating the City's adopted 2009-2014 Housing Element
of the General Plan. The Housing Element serves as a guiding document for new housing
development, how the City allocates resources for new housing, and housing -related services
during the period from 2015-2023.
The draft Housing Element was reviewed in public hearings before both the Planning
Commission and the City Council. At its August 18, 2014 meeting, the City Council directed staff
to make specific changes to the document (refer to attached Council staff report dated August 18,
1
Negative Declaration and 2015-2023 Housing Element Update January 5, 2015
2014). The revised document including the requested changes was considered by the City
Council on September 2, 2014 (refer to attached Council staff report dated September 2, 2014 for
a summary of the changes). Following discussion, the Council authorized the Community if
Development Department to submit the revised document to the State Department of Housing
and Community Development (HCD) for review and certification.
DISCUSSION
The Draft Housing Element includes a Housing Inventory Sites list that demonstrates how the
City could accommodate its Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) of 863 units, and
contains policies and programs to encourage developers in the production of housing. The sites
selected are concentrated in the Downtown Burlingame area near the Caltrain station and in the
North Burlingame area, near the Millbrae Intermodal Station. Since the adoption of the most
recent Housing Element and the Downtown Specific Plan, implementing zoning is now in place so
that all of the identified potential housing sites can be accommodated within the existing zoning
for these sites.
It is important to note that Housing Element law only requires a community to provide residential
zoning opportunities to accommodate its RHNA allocation. It does not require the City to approve
or construct such housing. A housing development proposed for one of the sites on the Housing
Inventory would be obligated to follow the same development review process and receive the
same level of environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as
any other residential development project. The advantage of adopting a compliant Housing
Element is that the community can proactively identify locations suitable for accommodating its
future housing needs, and furthermore be eligible for many State housing, transportation and
infrastructure funding programs available to local governments that require a certified Housing
Element as one of the eligibility criteria. The State's Sustainable Communities law (known as SB
375) to reduce greenhouse gases contains further incentives for cities to submit compliant
Housing Elements by conditioning key transportation grants to compliant elements and by
extending the housing cycle for cities with certified elements.
On September 30, 2014, the Draft Housing Element was submitted to the State Department of
Housing and Community Development (HCD) for review and determination that it complies with
State Housing Element Law. HCD provided comments requesting changes to the draft Housing
Element, and City staff submitted revisions to address these HCD comments. On November 25,
2014, HCD found that the Revised Draft Housing Element will comply with State Housing
Element law when it is adopted and submitted to HCD for certification (refer to attached Revised
Draft Housing Element dated November 25, 2014 and compliance letter from HCD dated
November 25, 2014). The next step in the process is to hold a public hearing and consider
adoption of the Housing Element update as an amendment to the General Plan. Once the
Housing Element update is adopted, the final document will be submitted to HCD for certification.
HCD Comments: As a part of the HCD review process, the Draft Housing Element has been
modified to comply with State requirements based on comments received from HCD staff. The
following is a summary of the changes made based on this review.
2
Negative Declaration and 2015-2023 Housing Element Update January 5, 2015
Homeless Shelters (Pape 51) — Added information about the availability of
properties that could potentially accommodate a homeless shelter with the
required performance criteria within the adopted zoning overlay in the RR zoned
area, per the requirements of State law.
• Development Fees (Pape 57) — Added a table that provides a breakdown of the
entitlement fees for both single family and multiple family projects.
• Public Facilities Impact Fees (Pape 59) — Added a statement that the City does
not have a Quimby Act fee because the community is largely built out and there
are limited opportunities to acquire lands for adding parkland. The Quimby Act
authorizes cities to pass ordinances requiring that developers set aside land,
donate conservation easements, or pay fees for park improvements. The City's
Public Facilities Impact Fee for Parks and Recreation has been a source of
funding for improvements to existing parks in the community. In addition, a
statement was added that if a project includes open spacelrecreational amenities
on site, a waiver of the Public Facilities Impact fee can be requested. Waivers
would be based on a finding that the provision of these amenities would be
available for the use of residents, and the project would not create an impact to
existing parks.
• Site Inventory (Pape 95) — Added a footnote that clarifies that low and very low
income units are provided through unit density. There are no density limits in the
R-4 or Downtown Specific Plan zoning districts.
• Program H(8-1) - Public awareness of anti -discrimination laws and policies
(Page 122) — Added a note that information about anti -discrimination laws will be
posted at public locations, such as City Hall, the library and the recreation center.
Program H(C-2) - Provide incentives for developers to include affordable units in
new residential projects (Page 124) — Added information regarding the schedule
for adoption of the Density Bonus Ordinance.
• Secondary Dwelling Units (Page 128) — Clarified the existing provision to allow
waiver of on-site parking for low and moderate income secondary dwelling unit
renters, and recommended additional incentives for smaller units.
Goal F: Achieve Increased Affordability of Housing (Page 131) — Added Policy
H(F-9): Encourage the development of a variety of housing types that are
atmrdable to very low and extremely low income households.
Program H(F-5 — Second Unit Amnesty (Page 133) — Added information on the
number of units approved. There have been ten units approved through the
second unit amnesty program since its adoption in 2001. In addition, there have
been three new units approved under the ordinance allowing new second units
that was adopted in 2011.
Program H(F-6) - To expand the stock of affordable housing (Page 133) — Added
a statement that the City will issue a Request for Proposals (RFP) for
redevelopment of City -owned parking lots with affordable housing within one year
of Housing Element adoption (the RFP was since issued on December 4, 2014).
3
Negative Declaration and 2015-2023 Housing Element Update
January 5, 2015
• Program H(F-10) — Housinq for Very Low Income Households (Pape 135
Added Program H(F-10) to identify ways to encourage development of housing
for low and extremely low income households, such as smaller units, grant
opportunities, joint development with non-profit developers, additional incentives,
and prioritizing impact fees toward affordable housing.
• Program H(F-11) — Anti -displacement Strategies (Pape 135) — Added Program
H(F-11) to acknowledge the issue of tenant displacement and to investigate
mitigations such as legislative barriers, and establish or modify strategies as
appropriate. The study session scheduled for January 5, 2015 is directly related
to this program.
• Table VI -2: Quantified Summary of 2009 — 20142015-2023 Housing Element
Work Program (Page 137) — Added objectives for rehabilitation and conservation
of housing units through code enforcement, rehabilitation loans and second unit
amnesty program.
Comprehensive Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Pape 49): In addition to the changes made
in response to comments from HCD, a paragraph was added to indicate that the City/County
Association of Governments of San Mateo County (C/CAG) has found the 2015-2023 Housing
Element consistent with the policies established in the Comprehensive Airport Land Use
Compatibility Plan (November 2012). Policies that govern the safety of critical airways from
obstructions beneath the calculated ascent and descent profiles are found under section 4.5.4
(Airspace Protection Policies) in the Plan. Proposed projects in Burlingame must be compliant
with policies as established in the Plan, including: 1) notification and filing requirements (4.5.4,
AP -1); 2) design recommendations from findings in FAA aeronautical studies (4.5.4, AP -2); 3)
height restriction and filing requirements (4.5.4, AP -3); and 4) C/CAG review and project
consistency with FAA regulations for land uses that may cause flight hazards (4.5.4, AP -4).
Public Process: Broad-based community participation is essential to preparing an implementable
and locally meaningful housing policy and action program. After compiling data on Burlingame's
housing needs and demographics, the City held two community workshops to receive input from
the community about Burlingame's housing needs and potential housing sites. Summaries of the
two workshops are included in the Draft Housing Element document. The City also participated in
the San Mateo County "21 Element" program, which included engagement with a range of area
stakeholder groups including affordable housing advocates, special needs populations, and both
affordable and market -rate housing developers.
Environmental Review Status: An Initial Study was prepared for the Draft 2015-2023 Housing
Element. Based upon the findings of the Initial Study, a Negative Declaration was prepared for
consideration by the City Council. It has been determined that the proposed adoption of the
Housing Element can be addressed by a Negative Declaration since the Initial Study did not
identify any adverse environmental impacts resulting from the adoption of the Housing Element.
The Negative Declaration was circulated for public review on December 3, 2014 for 30 days. The
30 -day review period ends on January 5, 2015.
n
Negative Declaration and 2015-2023 Housing Element Update
January 5, 2015
Next Steps: Once the 2015-2023 Housing Element is adopted by the City Council, a copy will be
forwarded to the State Department of Housing and Community Development for certification. This
will bring Burlingame's Housing Element into compliance with State Housing Element Law.
FISCAL IMPACT
None.
Prepared by:
Kevin Gardiner
Planning Manager
Exhibits:
• CEQA Resolution
• Housing Element Update Resolution
• Negative Declaration
• Revised Draft 2015-2023 Housing Element dated November 25, 2014
• Letter from HCD dated November 25, 2014
• Council Staff Report dated September 2, 2014
• Council Staff Report dated August 18, 2014
• Notice of Public Hearing —Published in the San Mateo County Times on December 3,
2014 and mailed December 11, 2014
G
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME FINDING THAT
THERE IS NO SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE THAT THE APPROVAL OF THE 2015-2023
HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE WILL HAVE A SIGNIFICANT EFFECT ON THE
ENVIRONMENT UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA)
PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 6 OF THE CEQA GUIDELINES
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME hereby finds as follows:
Section 1. On the basis of the Initial Study and the documents submitted and
reviewed, and comments received and addressed by this Council, 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 Negative Declaration, per Negative Declaration ND -578-P, is hereby
approved.
Mayor
I, Mary Ellen Kearney, City Clerk of the City of Burlingame, do hereby certify that the foregoing
resolution was introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 5th
day of January, 2015, by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
City Clerk
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME
ADOPTING THE 2015-2023 HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE AS AN
AMENDMENT TO THE GENERAL PLAN
RESOLVED, BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME THAT:
WHEREAS, California Government Code Article 10.6 requires that the General Plan
shall include a Housing Element consisting of standards and plans for the improvement of
housing, for the provision of adequate sites for housing, and for regional housing needs; and
requires that the Housing Element shall be updated every eight years; and
WHEREAS, the 2015-2023 Housing Element update has been reviewed by the State
Department of Housing and Community Development and on November 25, 2014, it has been
found to be in compliance with State Housing Element law; and
WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing on January 5, 2015; considered
all information contained in the written and oral staff reports, the environmental assessment of
the project, and all written and oral testimony received during the public hearing. Following the
conclusion of the public hearing, the City Council moved to adopt the 2015-2023 Housing
Element update as an amendment to the General Plan.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS RESOLVED AND DETERMINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL THAT:
Said 2015-2023 Housing Element Update, an amendment to the General Plan, dated
November 25, 2014 is approved by the City Council. Findings for adoption of the 2015-2023
Housing Element update are set forth in the staff report, minutes, and recording of said
meeti ng.
Mayor
I, Mary Ellen Kearney, City Clerk of the City of Burlingame, do hereby certify that the foregoing
resolution was introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 5th
day of January, 2015, by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
City Clerk
1 of 1
CITY OF BURLINGAME euwunGARE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
Planning Division
City Hall — 501 Primrose Road PH (650) 558-7250
Burlingame. California 94010-3997 FAX: (650) 696-3790
NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT A NEGATIVE DECLARATION
To: Interested Individuals From: City of Burlingame
County Clerk of San Mateo Community Development Department
Planning Division
501 Primrose Road
Burlingame, CA 94010
Subject: Notice of Intent to Adopt a Negative Declaration (ND -578-P)
For the 2015-2023 Burlingame Housing Element Update
Project Location: City-wide — City of Burlingame, San Mateo County, California
Project Description: The project consists of the update of the City of Burlingame's Housing Element, a mandated element of
the General Plan. The document includes programs and policies which address the housing needs of the community. New
policies and programs in the updated Housing Element include recommendations for the creation of incentives to encourage
development of a variety of housing types, allowing fee waivers for affordable rehabilitation, and consideration of residential
and commercial in -lieu fees to contribute towards the supply of low- and moderate -income housing. Any future changes in
regulations, zoning changes and development of housing will be subject to environmental review per the requirements of the
California Environmental Quality Act, and subject to public review and hearings prior to implementation.
The specific recommendations for implementation of the goals and policies are outlined in the Draft Housing Element. There
are no major changes proposed to the goals and policies of the current 2009-2014 Housing Element, and no changes to any
land use or zoning designations. The City of Burlingame is a mature community with very little vacant land available for
development. Most of the sites selected for housing are infill sites which are now underdeveloped and could be redeveloped
at higher densities under existing zoning regulations. Three areas of the City are specifically identified for development
opportunities: Downtown Burlingame, North Burlingame, and sites along Carolan Avenue. Since the Housing Element update
is an amendment to the General Plan, the analysis of environmental impacts is being done on a broad scale. All of the
programs and policies can be implemented through the zoning code now in place. Analysis of the housing element update will
assume development will occur under the existing code as well as the recommended code revisions, which will likely occur
within the first year of implementation.
In accordance with Section 15072(a) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, notice is hereby given of
the City's intent to adopt a Negative Declaration for the project listed above. A negative declaration is prepared for a project
when the initial study has identified no potentially significant effect on the environment, and there is no substantial evidence
in the light of the whole record before the public agency that the project may have a significant effect on the environment.
The City of Burlingame has completed a review of the proposed project, and on the basis of an Initial Study, finds that the
project will not have a significant effect upon the environment. The City has prepared a Negative Declaration and Initial Study
that are available for public review at City Hall, 501 Primr^se Read, Burlingame, California, 94010.
As mandated by State Law, the minimum comment period for this document is 30 (thirty) days and begins on December 3,
2014. Comments may be submitted during the review period and up to the end of the 30 -day review on January 5, 2015.
Persons having comments concerning this project, including objections to the basis of determination set forth in the Initial
Study/Negative Declaration, are invited to furnish their comments summarizing the specific and factual basis for their
comments, in writing to: William Meeker, Community Development Director, City of Burlingame Community Development
Department, Planning Division, 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, CA 94010-3997, Fax: (650) 696-3790; Email:
wmeeker(@burlingame.org. Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21177, any legal challenge to the adoption of the
proposed Initial Study/Negative Declaration will be limited to those issues presented to the City during the public comment
period described above.
Public Hearing: The City of Burlingame City Council will hold a public hearing to consider adoption of the proposed 2015-2022
Housing Element Update and the Negative Declaration for this project on Monday, January 5, 2015 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council
Chambers, Burlingame City Hall, 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame CA 94010. Published and Posted: December 3, 2014
2015-2023 HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE
INITIAL STUDY AND ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA)
1. Project Title: 2015-2023 Housing Element Update — General Plan
Amendment to Update the Housing Element
2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Burlingame
501 Primrose Road
Burlingame, CA 94010
3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Kevin Gardiner, Planning Manager
Telephone: (650) 558-7250
E -Mail: kgardiner@burlingame.org
4. Project Location: The 2015-2023 Housing Element is a Planning document
that provides guidance for new housing development
throughout the City of Burlingame. Burlingame is located
in central San Mateo County, as shown on Figure 1.1-1,
Regional Map. It is bordered by the City of Millbrae to the
north, the Town of Hillsborough and Freeway 280 to the
west, the City of San Mateo to the south, and San Francisco
Bay to the east, as shown on Figure 1.1-2, Vicinity Map.
5. Project Sponsors Name and Address: City of Burlingame
Community Development Department
501 Primrose Road
Burlingame, CA 94010
7, General Plan Designation: Within the City of Burlingame adopted General Plan,
including the adopted Specific Plans, there are a variety of
Residential and Mixed Use land use designations that allow
residential uses at a variety of densities. The 2015-2023
Housing Element will update the General Plan as a required
Element as outlined in State law. It is intended to provide
an evaluation of the existing and projected housing needs
of the community, provide an inventory of sites available
for development to meet the City's share of the regional
housing needs, and update the ecals and policies to
address the housing needs and remove or reduce
constraints to the production and maintenance of housing.
S. Zoning: There are a variety of residential and mixed-use zoning
districts within the City of Burlingame that provide
opportunities for development of housing projects at a
variety of densities. A detailed description of the zoning
and an inventory of sites available for housing
development are contained in Chapter V. of the Housing
Element, Community Resources and Opportunities.
2015-2023 Housing Element Update Initial Study
City of Burlingame
9. Description of Project:
The project consists of the update of the City of Burlingame's Housing Element, a mandated element of `
the General Plan. The document includes programs and policies which address the housing needs of the jl
community. New policies and programs in the updated Housing Element include recommendations for
changes in the land use regulations pertainingto residential development neartransit stations and along
transit corridors, the creation of incentives to encourage development of a variety of housing types,
allowing fee waivers for affordable rehabilitation, and consideration of residential and commercial in -
lieu fees to contribute towards the supply of low- and moderate -income housing. Any future changes in
regulations and development of housing will be subject to environmental review per the requirements
of the California Environmental Quality Act, and subject to public review and hearings prior to
implementation. None of the housing sites identified in the updated Housing Element would require
rezoning to allow the proposed residential uses.
The specific recommendations for implementation of the goals and policies are outlined in the Draft
Housing Element. There are no major changes proposed to the goals and policies of the current 2009-
2014 Housing Element.
The City of Burlingame is a mature community with very little vacant land available for development.
Most of the sites selected for housing are infill sites which are currently underdeveloped and could be
redeveloped at higher densities. Three areas of the City are specifically identified for development
opportunities: Downtown Burlingame, North Burlingame, and sites along Carolan Avenue. Since the
Housing Element update is an amendment to the General Plan, the analysis of environmental impacts is
being done on a broad scale. Many of the programs and policies can be implemented through the
zoning code now in place. Analysis of the housing element update will assume development will occur
under the existing code as well as the recommended code revisions, which will likely occur within the
first year of implementation.
2015-2023 Housing Element Update Initial Study
City of Burlingame ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Contents
SECTION 1
INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE....................................................................................1
Figure 1.1-2:
SECTION 2
PROJECT DESCRIPTION..................................................................................................4
Potential Housing Sites..
SECTION 3
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLISTAND DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS.....................................6
3.1 AESTHETICS.......................................................................................................6
3.2 AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES.............................................................................8
3.3 AIR QUALITY.....................................................................................................9
3.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES................................................................................12
3.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES...................................................................................15
3.6 GEOLOGY AND SOILS......................................................................................16
3.7 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS.......................................................................21
3.8 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS.......................................................24
3.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY...............................................................27
3.10 LAND USE........................................................................................................31
3.11 MINERAL RESOURCES.....................................................................................34
3.12 NOISE..............................................................................................................35
3.13 POPULATION AND HOUSING..........................................................................39
3.14 PUBLIC SERVICES............................................................................................40
3.15 RECREATION...................................................................................................42
3.16 TRANSPORTATION..........................................................................................43
3.17 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS...................................................................45
3.18 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE....................................................47
SECTION 6
AUTHORS.....................................................................................................................SO
FIGURES
Figure 1.1-1:
Regional Map .................
Figure 1.1-2:
Vicinity Map ...................
Figure 1.1-3:
Potential Housing Sites..
2015-2023 Housing Element Update
City of Burlingame
................................................................................. 2
................................................................................. 3
................................................................................. 4
Initial Study
SECTION 1 INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE
This Initial Study of environmental impacts is being prepared to conform to the requirements of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations 15000
et. seq.), and the regulations and policies of the City of Burlingame. By State mandate, each city and
county in California is required to plan for the housing needs for its share of the expected new
households over the next eight years, as well as for the housing needs of all economic segments of each
jurisdiction's population. This planning is being done in Burlingame by updating the City's adopted 2009-
2014 Housing Element of the General Plan. The Housing Element serves as a guiding document for new
housing development, how the City allocates resources for new housing, and housing related services
during the period from 2015 through 2023.
This Initial Study evaluates the potential environmental impacts which might reasonably be anticipated
to result from planning for the potential development of 863 new housing units in various locations
throughout the City. The City of Burlingame is the Lead Agency under CEQA and has prepared this Initial
Study to address the impacts of updating the Housing Element of the General Plan.
2015-2023 Housing Element Update 1 Initial Study
City of Burlingame
f
Figure 1.1-1: Regional Map
2015-2023 Housing Element Update 2 Initial Study
City of Burlingame
Figure 1.1-2: Vicinity Map
T
N
E
M
C)
LSJ
4—
Q
Y
A
0
m
`o m
3�
U � Z
110
2015-2023 Housing Element Update 3 Initial Study
City of Burlingame
Figure 1.1-3: Potential Housing Sites Map
2015-2023 Housing Element Update 4 Initial Study
City of Burlingame
C
O i
y
Le
N
W+
jF.
p
N
N
I
U
O
a
C
f�
2015-2023 Housing Element Update 4 Initial Study
City of Burlingame
C
O i
y
Le
N
W+
p
N
U
?_+
a
C
'D
a'i
tf'a
!
m
Q
O
m
°
CL
Y
0
o
w
CDT
c
O
O
N
N
L6
L
O
N
N
N
2015-2023 Housing Element Update 4 Initial Study
City of Burlingame
SECTION 2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
2.1 Project Description
The project consists of the update of the City of Burlingame's Housing Element, a mandated element of
the General Plan. The document includes programs and policies which address the housing needs of the
community. New policies and programs in the updated Housing Element include recommendations for
the creation of incentives to encourage development of a variety of housing types, allowing fee waivers
for affordable rehabilitation, and consideration of residential and commercial in -lieu fees to contribute
towards the supply of low- and moderate -income housing. Any future changes in regulations and
development of housing will be subject to environmental review per the requirements of the California
Environmental Quality Act, and subject to public review and hearings prior to implementation. None of
the housing sites identified in the updated Housing Element would require rezoning to allow the
proposed residential uses. The specific recommendations for implementation of the goals and policies
are outlined in the Draft Housing Element. There are no major changes proposed to the goals and
policies of the current 2009-2014 Housing Element.
f
The City of Burlingame is a mature community with very little vacant land available for development.
Most of the sites selected for housing are infill sites which are currently underdeveloped and could be
redeveloped at higher densities and would be reused. Three areas of the City are specifically identified
for development opportunities. These sites include Downtown Burlingame, North Burlingame, and sites
along Carolan Avenue. Since the Housing Element update is an amendment to the General Plan, the
analysis of environmental impacts is being done on a broad scale. Many of the programs and policies
can be implemented through the zoning code now in place. Analysis of the housing element update will `
assume development will occur under the existing code as well as the recommended code revisions, 1`
which will likely occur within the first year of implementation.
2.1.1 Surrounding land Uses and Setting
The Housing Element update involves the entire City of Burlingame, a community with a population of
28,806 located about 16 miles south of San Francisco in San Mateo County. The City is bordered by the
City of Millbrae to the north, the Town of Hillsborough to the west, the City of San Mateo to the south,
and the San Francisco Bay to the east. A major freeway, U.S. 101, and a State Highway, S.R. 82 (EI
Camino Real) run north/south through the City of Burlingame. Interstate 280 runs along the western
border of the City. The topography of Burlingame ranges from steep hillsides on the western side of the
City to relatively flat parcels to the east. The City of Burlingame encompasses an area of approximately
6.1 square miles, of which 1.7 square miles are under the waters of San Francisco Bay. Several creeks
traverse the City, and geologic constraints are not uncommon in the hillside areas. Time San Andreas
Fault is located west of Burlingame, running along San Andreas Lake and Crystal Springs reservoir, less
than %2 mile from Burlingame's boundary along Skyline Boulevard.
2.1.2 Other Public Agencies Approvals Required
• The California State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD)
• City/County Association of Governments (as Airport Land Use Commission for San Mateo County)
2015-2023 Housing Element Update 5 Initial Study
City of Burlingame
SECTION 3 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST AND DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS
This section describes the existing environmental conditions on and near the project area, as well as
environmental impacts associated with the proposed project. The environmental checklist as
recommended in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, identifies environmental
impacts that could occur if the proposed project is implemented.
The right-hand column in the checklist lists the source(s) for the answer to each question. The sources
cited are identified at the end of this section. Mitigation measures are identified for all significant project
impacts. Measures that are standard and required by the City or law are categorized as `Standard
Measures." Measures that are required to reduce significant impacts to a less than significant level are
categorized as "Mitigation Measures."
3.1 AESTHETICS
3.1.1 Setting
As shown on the potential housing sites maps, the potential development sites are within the fully
developed area of Burlingame. Three areas of the City are specifically identified for development -
opportunities. These sites include Downtown Burlingame, North Burlingame, and sites along Carolan
Avenue. Visually, in all of the areas the potential sites are surrounded by predominantly similar
residential uses or commercial uses. In the North Burlingame Area, underutilized sites face the Caltrain
railroad tracks and are bordered by commercial uses. The Carolan Avenue opportunity sites face the
railroad tracks and US Highway 101, and are bordered by residential uses.
The potential project sites are not located near a scenic highway or scenic vista.
3.1.2 Environmental Checklist and Discussion of Impacts
AESTHETICS
Less Than
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
No
Information
Significant
With
Significant
Impact
Source(s)
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Incorporated
Would the project:
1) Have a substantial adverse effect
❑
❑
®
❑
1,2
on a scenic vista?
2) Substantially damage scenic
❑
❑
®
❑
1,2
resources, including, but not
limited to, trees, rock
outcroppings, and historic
buildings within a state scenic
highway?
2015-2023 Housing Element Update 6 Initial Study
City of Burlingame
AESTHETICS
Less Than
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
No
Information
Significant
With
Significant
Impact
Source(s)
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Incorporated
Would the project:
3) Substantially degrade the
❑
❑
®
❑
1
existing visual character or
quality of the site and its
surroundings?
4) Create a new source of substantial
❑
❑
®
❑
1
light or glare which would
adversely affect day or nighttime
views in the area?
The adoption of the Housing Element update will have no impact on aesthetics. Any future housing
development will be required to comply with the zoning code requirements and applicable design
guidelines regulating mass, bulk height, and design of buildings, and therefore would be compatible with
the areas in which they would be developed.
3.1.3 Conclusion
The proposed project would not result in significant, adverse visual or aesthetic impacts. [Less Than
Significant Impact]
2015-2023 Housing Element Update 7 Initial Study
City of Burlingame
f
3.2 AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES
3.2.1 Setting
According to the City of Burlingame General Plan Land Use Map, there is no agricultural land in
Burlingame. The California Department of Conversation, San Mateo County Important Farmland 2010
Map categorizes land within Burlingame as primarily Urban and Built -Up Land. Specifically, the proposed
housing sites are currently in an urban setting.
3.2.2 Environmental Checklist and Discussion of Impacts
AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES
Potentially
Less Than
Less Than
Information
Significant Significant
With
Significant
No
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Impact
Source(s)
Incorporated
Would the project:
1) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique
❑
❑
❑
®
1,2,10
Farmland, or Farmland of
Statewide Importance (Farmland),
as shown on the maps prepared
pursuant to the Farmland Mapping
and Monitoring Program of the
California Resources Agency, to
non-agricultural use?
2) Conflict with existing zoning for
❑
❑
❑
®
1,2,3
agricultural use, or a Williamson
Act contract?
3) Involve other changes in the
❑
❑
❑
®
1,2
existing environment which, due
to their location or nature, could
result in conversion of Farmland,
to non-agricultural use?
None of the potential housing sites are located in a "Prime Farmland", "Unique Farmland", or "Farmland
of Statewide Importance" area, as shown on the maps prepared for the Farmland Mapping and
Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agencies. The sites are not designated for agricultural
uses by the Burlingame Genera! Plan, nor are they zoned for agricultural use or regulated by the
Williamson Act. The potential housing sites are not currently used for agricultural purposes, and are
located within a fully developed urban area and have no impacts on forest or timberland. For these
reasons, a proposed project would not result in a significant impact on agricultural resources.
3.2.3 Conclusion
A proposed project on identified Housing Inventory Sites would not result in impacts to agricultural
resources. [No Impact]
2015-2023 Housing Element Update 8 Initial Study
City of Burlingame
3.3 AIR QUALITY
3.3.1 Setting
3.3.1.1 Local and Regional Air Quality
Air quality and the amount of a given pollutant in the atmosphere are determined by the amount of
pollutant released and the atmosphere's ability to transport and dilute the pollutant. The major
determination of transport and dilution are wind, atmospheric stability, terrain, and for photochemical
pollutants, sun light.
The potential project sites are within the San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin. The Bay Area Air Quality
Management District (BAAQMD) has the primary responsibility for ensuring that the San Francisco Bay
Area Basin attains and maintains compliance with federal and state ambient air quality standards. This
regional agency regulates air quality through its permit authority over most types of stationary emission
sources and through its planning and review process.
Both the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the California Air Resources Board have established
ambient air quality standards for common pollutants. These ambient air quality standards are levels of
contaminants which represent safe levels that avoid specific adverse health effects associated with each
pollutant. The ambient air quality standards cover what are called "criteria" pollutants because the
health and other effects of each pollutant are described in criteria documents. The major criteria
pollutants are ozone, carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide (NOx) sulfur dioxide, and particulate matter.
The Bay Area 2010 Clean Air Plan is the current control strategy to reduce ozone, particulate matter
(PM), air toxins, and greenhouse gases (GHGs) for the City of Burlingame. The 2010 Clean Air Plan was
based on the ABAG population and employment projections for the San Francisco Bay area, including
growth that would be accommodated under each City's General Plan. The BAAQMD monitors air quality
at several locations in the San Francisco Bay Air Basin. Historically, problematic criteria pollutants in
urbanized areas include ozone, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide. Combustion of fuels and
motor vehicle emissions are a major source of each of these three criteria pollutants. Burlingame is
within the San Francisco Bay Area Air Ozone non -attainment area as delineated by the U.S. EPA.
As noted below, the development of potential housing sites would not result in a significant increase in
emissions of particulate matter or ozone precursors during operation. Because construction activities
require permits from the BAAQMD and Burlingame to regulate emissions, construction emissions would
also not result in significant emissions of particulate matter or ozone precursors. Therefore, the
proposed project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the BAAQMD's air quality plans
to -b ing the Air Basin into attainment for particulate matter and ozone, resulting in a less -than -
significant impact.
Sensitive Receptors
BAAQMD defines sensitive receptors as facilities where sensitive receptor population groups (children,
the elderly, the acutely ill and the chronically ill) are likely to be located. These land uses include
residences, school playgrounds, childcare centers, retirement homes, convalescent homes, hospitals and
medical clinics. The Mills -Peninsula Hospital is in close proximity to one of the potential project areas.
2015-2023 Housing Element Update 9 Initial Study
City of Burlingame
3.3.2 Environmental Checklist and Discussion of Impacts
AIR QUALITY
Less Than
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
Significant
With
Significant
No
Information
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Impact
Source(s)
Incorporated
Would the project:
1)
Conflict with or obstruct
❑
❑
®
❑
1,4
implementation of the applicable
air quality plan?
2)
Violate any air quality standard or
❑
❑
®
❑
1,4
contribute substantially to an
existing or projected air quality
violation?
3)
Result in a cumulatively
❑
❑
®
❑
1,4
considerable net increase of any
criteria pollutant for which the
project region is classified as
non -attainment under an
applicable federal or state
ambient air quality standard
including releasing emissions
which exceed quantitative
thresholds for ozone
precursors?
4)
Expose sensitive receptors to
❑
❑
®
❑
1,4
substantial pollutant
concentrations?
5)
Create objectionable odors
❑
❑
®
❑
1
affecting a substantial number of
people?
2015-2023 Housing Element Update 10 Initial Study
City of Burlingame
3.3.2.1 Long Term Air Quality Impacts `
BAAQMD has established thresholds for what would be considered a significant addition to existing air /l
pollution. According to the BAAQMD CEQA guidelines, a project that generates more than 80 pounds
per day of ozone precursors (i.e., reactive organic gases (ROG) and nitrogen oxides) is considered to
have a potentially significant impact on regional air quality. On an annual basis, the threshold is 15 tons
per year. The potential operational air quality impacts of future residential projects would be associated
with motor vehicle trips generated by the proposed development. Since most of the identified Housing
Inventory Sites would be redeveloped, the increase in the number of vehicle trips is not expected to be
significant. Any minor increase in vehicle trips generated would only marginally increase daily emissions
of ozone precursors and PM10 and would be well below BAAQMD established thresholds for
consideration of a significant impact. Consequently, the project would not affect air quality in the region
or conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable Air Quality Attainment Plans. Any
stationary sources on site would be subject to the BAAQMD Rules and Regulations. Compliance with
BAAQMD Rules and Regulations would ensure that the project would not conflict with or obstruct
implementation of the applicable air quality plans.
3.3.2.2 Short -Term Air Quality Impacts
Construction -related air quality impacts associated from a proposed project would be the result of dust
creating activities, exhaust emissions of construction equipment and the use of typical construction
materials such as asphalt and other construction materials that tend to volatilize into the atmosphere.
Due to the negligible amount and short duration of these impacts, all are considered to be less than
significant, except forthe activities generating dust.
Construction activities such as excavation and grading operations and construction vehicles driving over
and wind blowing over exposed earth, generate fugitive particulate matter that will affect local and
regional air quality. The effects of these dust generating activities will be increased dustfall and locally
elevated levels of PM,, downwind of construction activity. Construction dust also has the potential for
creating a nuisance at nearby properties.' If uncontrolled, dust generated by construction activities
could be a significant impact. Any future project's construction -related activities will be required to
comply with BAAQMD and Burlingame regulations, which include implementation of all feasible dust
control measures. Compliance with these regulations will reduce construction impacts to a level that is
less than significant.
3.3.3 Conclusion
Increased density can result in increased traffic and consequent impacts on air quality. However, the
areas proposed for residential development are in already d&ieloped urban areas, so the new uses
would be replacing uses that already generate traffic. In addition, the Housing Inventory Sites are all
within one-half mile of major transit hubs (Caltrain or BART) or along a transit corridor. It is expected
that the increase in density will be offset both by the fact that the new residential uses would replace
existing uses and by the increased use of transit, thus reducing any potential impact on air quality.
Future development resulting from implementation of the housing element would not result in
significant long-term regional or local air quality impacts. [Less Than Significant Impact]
' The word nuisance is used in this Initial Study to mean "annoying, unpleasant or obnoxious" and not in its legal
sense.
2015-2023 Housing Element Update 11 Initial Study
City of Burlingame
3.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
3.4.1.1 Existing Habitat
Special status plants include those listed as "Endangered," "Threatened," or "Candidate for Listing' by
the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), that
are included in the California Rare Plant Rank, or that are considered special -status in local or regional
plans, policies, or regulations. Special status animals include those listed as "Endangered,"
"Threatened," or "Candidate for Listing' by the CDFW or the USFWS, that are designated as "Watch
List," "Species of Special Concern," or "Fully Protected" by the CDFW, or that are considered "Birds of
Conservation Concern" by the USFWS.
According to the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB), there are occurrences of plant and
animal species with special -status within the city limits. However, the areas of Burlingame identified for
potential housing development are located within a fully developed urban community with very little
native plant and animal life, and there is no record of any rare, unique or endangered species of plants
or animals in these specified areas. Any future projects would be evaluated to determine the presence
of any special -status plant and animal species within or adjacent to a specific development site.
Compliance with federal and State laws, including the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, Clean Water Act,
Federal and California Endangered Species Acts, and California Native Plant Protection Act would ensure
that any impacts to special -status species associated with potential future development would be less
than significant.
There is no farmland in Burlingame. Because the areas identified as Housing Inventory Sites have already
been disturbed through urban development, no significant changes are anticipated in the diversity or
number of species of plants or animals, or in the deterioration of existing wild life habitat.
The potential development sites are surrounded by office, commercial and residential development with
limited cover and foraging habitat for wildlife. No Habitat Conservation Plans, Natural Community
Conservation Plans, or other local, regional, or state habitat conservation plans apply to the potential
housing sites.
3.4.1.2 Trees and Impacts to Mature Trees
Any trees present on potential development sites would be evaluated on a case by case basis at the time
of development. A tree removal permit is required for removal of protected size trees, as outlined in
Chapter 11.06 of the Burlingame Municipal Code, Urban Reforestation and Tree Protection.
2015-2023 Housing Element Update 12 Initial Study
City of Burlingame
3.4.2 Environmental Checklist and Discussion of Impacts
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Less Than
Potentially
Significant
Less Than No
Information
Significant
With
Significant Impact
Source(s)
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Incorporated
Would
the project:
1)
Have a substantial adverse effect,
❑
❑
® ❑
1,2,5
either directly or through habitat
modifications, on any species
identified as a candidate,
sensitive, or special status species
in local or regional plans, policies,
or regulations, or by the California
Department of Fish and Game or
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
2)
Have a substantial adverse effect
❑
❑
® ❑
1,2
on any riparian habitat or other
sensitive natural community
identified in local or regional
plans, policies, regulations, or by
the California Department of Fish
and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service?
3)
Have a substantial adverse
❑
❑
❑ ®
1,2
effect on federally protected
wetlands as defined by Section
404 of the Clean Water Act
(including, but not limited to,
marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.)
through direct removal, filling,
hydrological interruption, or
other means?
4)
Interfere substantially with the
❑
❑
® ❑
1,2,5
movement of any native
resident or migratory fish or
wildlife species or with
established native resident or
migratory wildlife corridors,
impede the use of native wildlife
nursery sites?
5)
Conflict with any local policies or
❑
❑
® ❑
1,2
ordinances protecting biological
resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance?
2015-2023 Housing Element Update 13 Initial Study
City of Burlingame
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than No
Information
Significant With Significant
Impact
Source(s)
Impact Mitigation Impact
Incorporated
Would the project:
6) Conflict with any applicable
❑ ❑ ® ❑
1,2
Habitat Conservation Plan, or
other approved local, regional, or
state habitat conservation plan?
3.4.3 Conclusion
Future development resulting from implementation of the Housing Element would not result in any
biological impacts. [Less Than Significant Impact]
2015-2023 Housing Element Update 14 Initial Study
City of Burlingame
3.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES
3.5.1 Setting
The types of cultural resources that meet the definition of historical resources under CEQA generally
consist of districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects that are significant for their traditional,
cultural, and/or historical associations. Commonly, the two main resource types that are subject to
impact, and that may be impacted by potential future development, are historical archaeological
deposits and historical architectural resources, as discussed below.
Cultural resources are protected by federal and State regulations and standards, including, but not
limited to, the National Historic Preservation Act, the California Public Resources Code, and CEQA. If the
potential future development underthe proposed Project or adjacent properties are found to be eligible
for listing on the California Register, the development would be required to conform to the current
Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for Preserving;
Rehabilitating, and Restoring Historic Buildings, which require the preservation of character defining
features which convey a building's historical significance, and offers guidance about appropriate and
compatible alterations to such structures.
Historical and pre -contact archaeological deposits that meet the definition of historical resources under
CEQA could be damaged or destroyed by ground -disturbing activities associated with potential future
development. Should this occur, the ability of the deposits to convey their significance, either as
containing information important in prehistory or history, or as possessing traditional or cultural
significance to Native American or other descendant communities, would be materially impaired.
Since any sites proposed for development have already been disturbed, it is not expected that future
projects would have an impact on prehistoric or historic archeological resources.
3.5.1.1 Prehistoric and Historic Resources
There is no evidence of recorded historic and/or prehistoric archaeological resources inside or
immediately adjacent to the areas identified for potential housing sites.
3.5.2 Environmental Checklist and Discussion of Impacts
CULTURAL RESOURCES
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than No
Information
Significant With Significant Impact
Source(s)
Impact Mitigation Impact
Incorporated
Would the project:
1) Cause a substantial adverse
❑ ❑ ® ❑
1
change in the significance of an
historical resource as defined in
§15064.5?
2015-2023 Housing Element Update 15 Initial Study
City of Burlingame
2) Cause a substantial adverse
❑
N
❑
❑
1
change in the significance of an
archaeological resource as defined
in §15064.5?
3) Directly or indirectly destroy a
❑
❑
®
❑
1
unique paleontological resource
or site, or unique geologic
feature?
4) Disturb any human remains,
❑
®
❑
❑
1
including those interred outside of
formal cemeteries?
3.5.2.1 Buried Prehistoric and Historic Resources
Based on relevant archaeological reports for the immediate area, adoption of the updated Housing
Element and any future housing development should have no effect on archaeological resources.
Although it is unlikely that buried cultural materials would be encountered, standard conditions for
excavation activities would be applied to a potential project as described below.
As required by County ordinance, any future project will incorporate the following guidelines. Pursuant
to Section 7050.5 of the Health and Safety Code, and Section 5097.94 of the Public Resources Code of
the State of California, for all future projects, if during grading and construction activities, any
archaeological or human remains are encountered, construction shall cease and a qualified
archaeologist shall visit the site and address the find. The San Mateo County Coroner shall be notified to
provide proper direction on how to proceed. If the Coroner determines that the remains are not subject
to his authority, he shall notify the Native American Heritage Commission who shall attempt to identify
descendants of the deceased Native American. If no satisfactory agreement can be reached as to the
disposition of the remains pursuant to this State law, then the land owner shall re -inter the human
remains and items associated with Native American burials on the property in a location not subject to
further subsurface disturbance.
3.5.3 Conclusion
Since any sites proposed for development have already been disturbed, it is not expected that future
projects would have an impact on prehistoric or historic archeological resources. In addition, the
protocol established in State law will be followed for any future residential development projects.
The proposed project would not result in significant impacts to cultural resources. [Less Than Significant
Impact]
2015-2023 Housing Element Update 16 Initial Study
City of Burlingame
3.6 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
3.6.1 Setting
3.6.1.1 On -Site Geologic Conditions
Seismicity
The San Francisco Bay Area is one of the most seismically active regions in the United States. Natural
seismic hazards exist in Burlingame because of the City's proximity to two major active earthquake
faults: the San Andreas Fault running north to south through the hills to the west; and the Hayward
Fault, fifteen miles to the east. Earthquakes cause damage, but the risks of loss of life and property can
be reduced with a willingness to require high standards of new construction and a careful review of
older buildings, existing hazards and emergency action procedures.
San Andreas Fault is one of the more active in California and stretches for 650 miles north -to -south. Its
position just west of Burlingame avoids the hazard of surface rupture within the city, but threatens
major ground shaking and ground failure in the future.
Hayward Fault lies about fifteen miles to the east of Burlingame at the base of the East Bay hills.
Historically, this fault has produced the most moderate-sized earthquakes in the Bay Area and future
earthquakes could be sharply felt in Burlingame.
Serra Fault is a minor thrust fault that runs from Millbrae through Burlingame, passing under the
western end of Mariposa Drive. Considered to have common roots with the San Andreas Fault, it is
assumed to be potentially active and poses future problems of surface rupture and damage to any
structure built over its path. Little risk to life is anticipated.
The major cause of damage during an earthquake is ground shaking, with frequency and amplitude of
motion dependent on local geologic conditions. Sites on bedrock tend to have sharp, high frequency
jolts with little amplitude, while sites on deep alluvium receive lower frequency shocks but suffer
movement with high amplitude.
Regional studies have suggested that the response of certain soils such as baymuds to earthquakes will
also vary according to the depth of soil and the magnitude of the quake. Thus,. ground accelerations of
smaller quakes are magnified as much as three times over the underlying bedrock, whereas ground
accelerations of a large quake (7.5 or more on the Richter scale) would be reduced to a value below that
of the underlying bedrock.
Burlingame's industrial area and waterfront commercial district are on fill over baymud and may be
subject to both unequal settlement and increased accelerations from most local earthquakes. The
additional potential for damage from liquefaction and sliding is also present for those buildings with
inadequate foundations. There is no housing proposed in these areas.
Landslides
Many of the natural factors that promote landsliding, such as steep slopes, poorly consolidated bedrock,
and occasional heavy rainfall, are present in Burlingame's western hills. Some recent land developments
may have increased the natural hazards; adding structures and fill to marginally stable slopes, removing
2015-2023 Housing Element Update 17 Initial Study
City of Burlingame
natural vegetation, improperly handling rainwater runoff or simply watering lawns on unstable slopes
will increase the danger of a landslide. In general, where slopes are steepened ortheir moisture content
increased, a higher landslide potential is created. An area with a history of landsliding should be of
special concern, as most landslide activity seems to recur within or adjacent to such areas. None of the
potential housing sites are within Burlingame's western hills.
Liquefaction
Soil liquefaction is a condition where saturated granular soils near the ground surface undergo a
substantial loss of strength during seismic events. Loose, water -saturated soils are transformed from a
solid to a liquid state during ground shaking. Liquefaction can result in significant deformations. Soils
most susceptible to liquefaction are loose, uniformly graded, saturated, fine-grained sands that lie close
to the ground surface.
Under seismic conditions most Burlingame soils are reasonably stable. Exceptions include the Baylands
and the limited areas of the hills where unstable slopes and possible surface rupture from the Serra
Fault make local hazardous conditions. Incomplete information makes it difficult to establish the extent
of the possible hazard on the alluvium plains and baylands from liquefaction, where a loss of strength
suddenly occurs because of excess pore pressure under seismic shock conditions: this hazard is limited
to alluvial soils underlain by lenses of water -bearing sands and gravels. None of the proposed housing
sites are within either the Baylands area or in the west Burlingame hills.
Lateral Spreading
Lateral spreading is a type of ground failure related to liquefaction. It consists of the horizontal
displacement of flat -lying alluvial material toward an open area, such as a steep bank of a stream
channel. There are no stream channels on or adjacent to the potential housing sites that would be
subject to substantial lateral spreading.
2015-2023 Housing Element Update 18 Initial Study
City of Burlingame
3.6.2 Environmental Checklist and Discussion of Impacts
GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Less Than
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
No
Information
Significant
With
Significant
Impact
Source(s)
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Incorporated
Would
the project:
1)
Expose people or structures to
potential substantial adverse
effects, including the risk of loss,
injury, or death involving:
a) Rupture of a known earthquake
❑
❑
®
❑
1,5
fault, as described on the most
recent Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning Map
issued by the State Geologist
for the area or based on other
substantial evidence of a
known fault? (Refer to Division
of Mines and Geology Special
Publication 42.)
b) Strong seismic ground shaking?
❑
❑
®
❑
1,5
c) Seismic -related ground failure,
❑
❑
®
❑
1,5
including liquefaction?
d) Landslides?
❑
❑
❑
®
1
2)
Result in substantial soil erosion or
❑
❑
®
❑
1,5
the loss of topsoil?
3)
Be located on a geologic unit or
❑
❑
®
❑
1,5
soil that is unstable, or that will
become unstable as a result of
the project, and potentially
result in on- or off-site landslide,
lateral spreading, subsidence,
liquefaction or collapse?
4)
Be located on expansive soil, as
❑
❑
®
❑
1,5
defined in Table 18-1-B of the
Uniform Building Code (1994),
creating substantial risks to life
or property?
5)
Have soils incapable of adequately
❑
❑
❑
®
1,5
supporting the use of septic tanks
or alternative wastewater disposal
systems where sewers are not
available for the disposal of
wastewater?
2015-2023 Housing Element Update 19 Initial Study
City of Burlingame
The potential housing sites are located in a mapped liquefaction hazard zone, and soils in the area have
a moderate potential for expansion. These sites are not located within a fault rupture zone or landslide
hazard zone.
The project area is located in a seismically active region
Proposed development will be required to submit geologic reports, where necessary, and construct
buildings pursuant to the California Building Code.
3.6.3 Conclusion
Some areas of the City of Burlingame are impacted by geological constraints such as expansive soils and
susceptibility to ground shaking. However, the areas proposed for new housing in the Housing Element
update are primarily areas which are on level land and have previously been subdivided and developed
with urban uses, and are not located on Bay fill.
Any new construction will be required to comply with the California Building Code and meet any
geological and earthquake standards of the current code. [Less Than Significant Impact]
2015-2023 Housing Element Update 20 Initial Study
City of Burlingame
3.7 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
3.7.1 Setting
3.7.1.1 Background Information
In 2006, California adopted Assembly Bill 32 (AB 32), the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006. AB 32
established a statewide GHG emissions reduction goal to reduce statewide GHG emissions levels to 1990
levels by 2020. Assembly Bill 32 established a legislative short-term (2020) mandate for State agencies in
order to set the State on a path toward achieving the long-term GHG reduction goal of Executive Order
S-03-05 to stabilize carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions by 2050. The City of Burlingame adopted a 2009
Climate Action Plan to ensure consistency with statewide efforts to reduce GHG emissions under AB 32
in 2009.
The San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin (SFBAAB) is currently designated as a nonattainment area for state
and national ozone standards and national particulate matter ambient air quality standards. SFBAAB's
nonattainment status is attributed to the region's development history. Past, present and future
development projects contribute to the region's adverse air quality impacts on a cumulative basis. By its
very nature, air pollution is largely a cumulative impact. No single project is sufficient in size to, by itself,
result in nonattainment of ambient air quality standards. Instead, a project's individual emissions
contribute to existing cumulatively significant adverse air quality impacts. If a project's contribution to
the cumulative impact is considerable, then the project's impact on air quality would be considered
significant.
3.7.2 Environmental Checklist and Discussion of Impacts
GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Less Than
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
No
Information
Significant
With
Significant
Impact
Source(s)
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Incorporated
Would the project:
1) Generate greenhouse gas
❑
❑
®
❑
1,4
emissions, either directly or
indirectly, that may have a
significant impact on the
environment?
2) Conflict with any applicable plan,
❑
❑
®
❑
1,4
policy or regulation of an agency
adopted for the purpose of
reducing the emissions of
greenhouse gases?
3.7.3 Thresholds of Significance
The Bay Area Air Quality Management District's (BAAQMD) approach to developing a Threshold of
Significance for Green House Gas (GHG) emissions is to identify the emissions level for which a project
would not be expected to substantially conflict with existing California legislation adopted to reduce
2015-2023 Housing Element Update 21 Initial Study
City of Burlingame
statewide GHG emissions needed to move us towards climate stabilization. If a project would generate
GHG emissions above the threshold level, it would be considered to contribute substantially to a
cumulative impact, and would be considered significant.
The Thresholds of Significance for operational -related GHG emissions are:
• For land use development projects, the threshold is compliance with a qualified GHG reduction
Strategy; or annual emissions less than 1,100 metric tons per year (MT/yr) of CO2e; or 4.6 MT
CO2e/SP/yr (residents + employees). Land use development projects include residential,
commercial, industrial, and public land uses and facilities.
• For stationary -source projects, the threshold is 10,000 metric tons per year (MT/yr) of CO2e.
Stationary -source projects include land uses that would accommodate processes and equipment
that emit GHG emissions and would require an Air District permit to operate. If annual emissions of
operational -related GHGs exceed these levels, the proposed project would result in a cumulatively
considerable contribution of GHG emissions and a cumulatively significant impact to global climate
change.
The BAAQMD has established project level screening criteria to assist in the evaluation of impacts. If a
project meets the screening criteria and is consistent with the methodology used to develop the
screening criteria, then the project's air quality impacts may be considered less than significant. Below
are some screening level examples taken from the BAAQMD CEQA Air Quality Guidelines, 06/2010
(Table 3-1, Operational -Related Criteria Air Pollutant and Precursor Screening Level Sizes).
Land Use Type
Operational GHG Screening Size **
Single-family
56 du
Apartment, low-rise
78 du
Apartment, mid -rise
87 du
Condo/townhouse, general
78 du
City park
600 acres
Day-care center
11,000 sf
General office building
53,000 sf
Medical office building
22,ODO sf
Office park
50,000 sf
Quality restaurant
9,OD0 sf
**If project size is => screening size, then it is considered significant.
State Housing Element law requires that each jurisdiction plan for the anticipated housing needs of the
community. The Association of Bay Area Governments provides an estimate for the housing needs for
the San Frcncisco Bay Area, which are assigned to ewt city and county through a Regional Housing
Needs Allocation (RHNA) process. The RHNA for each community represents the housing need that it
must plan for during the 2015-2023 period for the Housing Element. The total allocation for Burlingame
is 863 housing units, which would serve the needs of all income levels from very low-income households
to above moderate -income households.
Any future development project that is submitted will be reviewed to analyze its impact on greenhouse
gas emissions and the established thresholds of the BAAQMD. If a project does not meet the criteria
established in the BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines, additional analysis will be required. If it is determined that
a project's impacts are significant, mitigation measures will be developed to reduce the air quality
impacts to the extent feasible. As noted in the discussion regarding air quality, most of the identified
2015-2023 Housing Element Update 22 Initial Study
City of Burlingame
Housing Inventory Sites are in areas that are fully developed, and are close to major transit hubs or
along transit corridors. It is expected that any potential increase in traffic generation and associated air
quality impacts will be offset by the availability of transit hubs and corridors to accommodate some of
the transportation needs of future residents.
3.7.4 Conclusion: The adoption of the Housing Element will not result in a significant impact
on greenhouse gas emissions. [Less Than Significant Impact]
2015-2023 Housing Element Update 23 Initial Study
City of Burlingame
3.8 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
3.8.1 Setting
3.8.1.1 Background Information
Hazardous materials encompass a wide range of substances, some of which are naturally -occurring and
some of which are man-made. Examples of hazardous materials include pesticides, herbicides,
petroleum products, metals (e.g., lead, mercury, arsenic), asbestos and chemical compounds used in
manufacturing. Determining if such substances are present on or near project sites is important because
exposure to hazardous materials above certain thresholds can result in adverse health effects on
humans, as well as harm to plants and wildlife.
Due to the fact that these substances have properties that, above certain thresholds, are toxic to
humans and/or the ecosystem, there are multiple regulatory programs in place that are designed to
minimize the chance for unintended releases and/or exposures to occur. Other programs establish
remediation requirements for sites where contamination has occurred.
3.8.2 Environmental Checklist and Discussion of Impacts
HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Less Than
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
No
Information
Significant
With
Significant
Impact
Source(s)
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Incorporated
Would the project:
1) Create a significant hazard to the
❑
❑
®
❑
1
public or the environment through
the routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials?
2) Create a significant hazard to the
❑
❑
®
❑
1
public or the environment through
reasonably foreseeable upset and
accident conditions involving the
release of hazardous materials
into the environment?
3) Emit hazardous emissions or
❑
❑
®
❑
1
handle hazardous or acutely
hazardous materials,
substances, or waste within one-
quarter mile of an existing or
proposed school?
2015-2023 Housing Element Update 24 Initial Study
City of Burlingame
HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Less Than
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
No
Information
Significant
With
Significant
Impact
Source(s)
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Incorporated
Would
the project:
4)
Be located on a site which is
❑
❑
®
❑
1
included on a list of hazardous
materials sites compiled
pursuant to Government Code
Section 65962.5 and, as a result,
would it create a significant
hazard to the public or the
environment?
5)
For a project located within an
❑
❑
®
❑
1
airport land use plan or, where
such a plan has not been
adopted, within two miles of a
public airport or public use
airport, would the project result
in a safety hazard for people
residing or working in the
project area?
6)
For a project within the vicinity
❑
❑
❑
®
1
of a private airstrip, would the
project result in a safety hazard
for people residing or working in
the project area?
7)
Impair implementation of, or
❑
❑
❑
®
1,2
physically interfere with, an
adopted emergency response
plan or emergency evacuation
plan?
8)
Expose people or structures to a
❑
❑
❑
®
1,10
significant risk of loss, injury or
death involving wildland fires,
including where wildlands are
adjacent to urbanized areas or
where residences are intermixed
with wildlands?
3.8.2.1 On -Site Sources of Contamination
Each potential development site will be evaluated at the time of development proposal. If sites are
determined to contain contaminants, proper remediation will be required.
2015-2023 Housing Element Update 25 Initial Study
City of Burlingame
J
3.8.2.2 Other Hazards
The identified project sites are within the boundaries of the San Mateo County Airport Land Use Plan,
and the plan is subject to review by the San Mateo County Airport Land Use Committee (ALUC) for
consistency with the Comprehensive Airport Land Use Plan. The potential housing sites in North
Burlingame are within an area designated for development in the Comprehensive Airport Land Use Plan
forthe San Francisco International Airport.
The housing sites within the North Burlingame area are located in the San Francisco International
Airport Vicinity Special Use Zone (SUZ) which is an area of frequent aircraft overflight but relatively low
accident risk. Multi -family residential uses in this area are conditionally compatible when they meet the
required criteria. These criteria include a fair disclosure statement noting the presence of the property
within the Airport Influence Area and the potential for aircraft overflights, noise and related affects that
is to be recorded by the project sponsor. Project sponsors may also be required to file Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) form 7460-1 "Notice of Proposed Construction or Alteration" with the FAA,
depending on the architectural characteristics of the proposal.
A small section in the northwest corner of the North Burlingame, near Murchison and Ogden Drives, is
designated an Approach Zone (AZ). This area is subject to occasional arrival overflights at low altitude
and more frequent departure overflights. Accident data show a tendency for aircraft accidents to occur
in these areas, although the pattern is less dense than in the Runway Protection Zone (RPZ) and the
Centerline Zone (CLZ), indicating a lower accident risk. Multi -family residential, offices and retail uses in
this area are conditionally compatible when meeting required criteria, including height restrictions and a
fair disclosure statement noting the presence of the property within the Airport Influence Area and the
potential for aircraft overflights, noise and related affects that is to be recorded by the project sponsor.
Criteria may also include that the project sponsor file FAA form 7460-1, "Notice of Proposed
Construction or Alteration' with the FAA, depending on the architectural characteristics of the proposal.
For residential uses, there is an additional criterion stating that clustering to provide relatively large
areas of open space shall be considered. Compliance with these criteria is required by the North
Burlingame/Rollins Road Specific Plan.
The sites are not located within a designated evacuation route for San Francisco International Airport.
Portions of the City are located near areas subject to wildfires, however the potential development sites
are not located in a fire threatened area .2
3.8.3 Conclusion
The proposed project will not result in hazardous materials impacts to workers and future users of the
site. (Less Than Significant Impact)
2 Association of Bay Area Governments. (ABAG). Wildfire Hazard Maos and Information. November 2004. 8 May
2008. htto'//www aban ca oov/bavarea/eoma os/wildfire/.
2015-2023 Housing Element Update 26 Initial Study
City of Burlingame
3.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
3.9.1 Setting
3.9.1.1 Hydrology and Flooding
According to the Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM),
the potential housing sites are not located within a flood zone. There are no dams or levee systems in
the areas of the potential housing sites. While there are locations within the City that are susceptible,
the areas where there are potential housing sites are not subject to inundation from a seiche, tsunami,
or muciflow.
3.9.1.2 Storm Drainage
The City of Burlingame owns and maintains the municipal storm drainage system within the City. This
system serves the potential housing sites.
3.9.1.3 Water Quality
The federal Clean Water Act and California's Porter -Cologne Water Quality Control Act are the primary
laws related to water quality. Regulations set forth by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
and the State Water Resources Control Board have been developed to fulfill the requirements of this
legislation. EPA's regulations include the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
permit program, which controls sources that discharge pollutants into waters of the United States (e.g.,
streams, lakes, bays, etc.). These regulations are implemented at the regional level by water quality
control boards, for the Burlingame area the responsible agency is the San Francisco Bay Regional Water
Quality Control Board (RWQCB).
Proposed projects are required to comply with Provision C.3 of the City's NPDES permit and the City's
local polices and ordinances regarding urban runoff and water quality. In practical terms, the C.3
requirements seek to reduce water pollution by both reducing the volume of stormwater runoff and the
amount of pollutants that are contained within the runoff. The methods used to achieve these
objectives vary from site to site, but can include measures such as a reduction in impervious surfaces,
onsite detention facilities, biofiltration swales, settlement/debris basins, etc.
3.9.2 Environmental Checklist and Discussion of Impacts
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Would the project:
1) Violate any water quality
standards or waste discharge
Potentially Less Than Less Than
Significant With
Significant MSignificant
Mitigation
Impact Incornorated Impact
No I Information
Impact I Source(s)
❑
❑
®
❑
1,2
2015-2023 Housing Element Update 27 Initial Study
City of Burlingame
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Potentially
Less Than
Less Than
Significant
Significant With
Significant No
Information
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Impact
Source(s)
Incorporated
Would the project:
2)
Substantially deplete groundwater
❑
❑
_[IM
1,2
supplies or interfere substantially
with groundwater recharge such
that there would be a net deficit in
aquifer volume or a lowering of
the local groundwater table level
(e.g., the production rate of pre-
existing nearby wells would drop
to a level which would not support
existing land uses or planned uses
for which permits have been
granted)?
3)
Substantially alter the existing
❑
❑
1,2
drainage pattern of the site or
area, including through the
alteration of the course of a
stream or river, in a manner
which would result in substantial
erosion or siltation on -or off-
site?
4)
Substantially alterthe existing
❑
❑
® ❑
1,2
drainage pattern of the site or
area, including through the
alteration of the course of a
stream or river, orsubstantially
increase the rate or amount of
surface runoff in a manner
which would result in flooding
on -or off-site?
5)
Create or contribute runoff
❑
❑
®
1,2
water which would exceed the
capacity of existing or planned
storm water drainage systems or
provide substantial additional
sources of polluted runoff?
6)
Otherwise substantially degrade
❑
❑
® El
1,2
water quality?
2015-2023 Housing Element Update 28 Initial Study
City of Burlingame
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Potentially
Less ThanLess
Significant With
Than
No
Information
Significant
Mitigation
Significant
Impact
Source(s)
Impact
Incorporated
Impact
Would the project:
7) Place housing within a 100 -year
❑
❑
®
❑
1,2,6
flood hazard area as mapped on
a Federal Flood Hazard
Boundary or Flood Insurance
Rate Map or other flood hazard
delineation map?
8) Place within a 100 -year flood
❑
❑
®
❑
6
hazard area structures which
would impede or redirect flood
flows?
9) Expose people or structures to a
❑
❑
❑
®
1
significant risk of loss, injury, or
death involving flooding,
including flooding as a result of
the failure of a levee or dam?
10) Be subject to inundation by
❑
❑
❑
®
1,2
seiche, tsunami, or mudflow?
3.9.2.1 Drainage and Flooding
The potential housing sites are not within flood prone areas. Therefore, implementation of the project
would not result in people or structures being exposed to any significant flood risk.
3.9.2.2 Water Quality
Construction activities on site could temporarily generate dust, sediment, litter, oil, paint, and other
pollutants that could contaminate runoff from the site. All future housing development projects would
be required to include stormwater quality best management practices such as directing site runoff into
vegetated swales in conformance with requirements in the City of Burlingame's Municipal NPDES
Permit. Vegetated swales may be located in or adjacent to trees and shrubs, but must include only
vegetation consistent with their function.
All future housing projects will be required to comply with building codes that address flood safety
issues. Development projects are required to implement Best Management Practices (BMPs) for
construction activities as specified by the California Storm Water Best Management Practices Handbook
and the Manual for Standards for Erosion and Sediment Control Measures. The BMPs include measures
guiding the management and operation of construction sites to control and minimize the potential
contribution of pollutants to storm runoff from these areas. These measures address procedures for
controlling erosion and sedimentation and managing all aspects of the construction process to ensure
control of potential water pollution sources. All development projects are required to comply with all
City, State and Federal standards pertaining to storm water run-off and water quality. Best Management
2015-2023 Housing Element Update 29 Initial Study
City of Burlingame
Practices for each project would typically include measures for reducing impacts such as silt
fences/straw waddles around the perimeter of the site, regular street cleaning and inlet protection.
3.9.3 Conclusion
The proposed project would not result insubstantial adverse flooding or drainage impacts. With
implementation of the required Best Management Practices during construction, water quality impacts
would be less than significant. [Less Than Significant Impact]
2015-2023 Housing Element Update 30 Initial Study
City of Burlingame
3.10 LAND USE j
3.10.1 Setting t
The potential housing sites are generally located within the areas of Downtown Burlingame, North
Burlingame, and along Carolan Avenue. These sites are currently designated and zoned for residential
and mixed uses. None of the potential housing sites will require rezoning to accommodate residential
uses at the densities proposed.
3.10.1.1 Existing General Plan and Zoning
General Plan Land Use Designation
The Burlingame General Plan designates a certain portion of the community for residential use, and
anticipates new residential growth within these areas. The existing Housing Element adopted in 2010
proposed the addition of up to 650 housing units to Burlingame's housing stock. Since the adoption of
the 2010 Housing Element, 77 new units have been built. The 2015-2023 Housing Element update
proposes to accommodate 863 housing units, pursuant to the Regional Housing Needs Allocation for the
City. This is well within the growth anticipated by the General Plan. The 2010 Census identified 12,869
housing units in Burlingame. The addition of 863 housing units, which would represent an increase of
6.7 percent, is not considered to be substantial.
The Housing Element update proposes to create incentives for development to promote residential uses
in areas that are now primarily office and commercial. The Housing Element update also proposes
changes to the zoning code regulations for housing development near transit hubs. None of the
proposed changes require amendments to the land use element of the general plan. Any future
development projects on potential housing sites will require additional environmental review when they
are considered for approval.
The General Plan, in addition to designating the land uses allowed in particular areas, includes goals and
policies for Burlingame. The general plan goals which relate to the need for housing are as follows:
GOALS: To assure that Burlingame will continue to be a "well-rounded" City with residences, schools,
business, industry, and space and facilitiesforsocial, recreational and cultural facilities.
• To maintain and enhance the identity of the City and encourage a maximum sense of
identification by residents with the City.
• To encourage mixed commercial uses to provide a transition between districts fully commercial
or residential and to provide housing opportunities for those dependent on transit and desiring a
pedestrian -oriented living environment.
Implementing Objectives:
Maintain or increase the variety in uses of land in the City; Encourage assembly of small lots in suitable
locations to provide largersites for apartments, office buildings and commercial enterprises;
• Keep codes and standards free of arbitrary or obsolete provisions that would tend to inhibit
construction of sound buildings in suitable locations to house a variety of uses.
2015-2023 Housing Element Update 31 Initial Study
City of Burlingame
• Maintain and enhance rational relationships among functional parts of the City (residential
areas, business districts, industrial areas, public areas, transportation, etc.).
Zoning Designation
The potential housing sites are all zoned for residential and/or mixed residential and commercial/office
uses. Modifications to the zoning to add development incentives are proposed with the Housing
Element Update.
3.10.2 Environmental Checklist and Discussion of Impacts
LAND USE
Less Than
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
No
Information
Significant
With
Significant
Impact
Source(s)
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Incorporated
Would the project:
1) Physically divide an established
❑
❑
❑
®
1,2
community?
2) Conflict with any applicable land
❑
❑
®
❑
1,2,3
use plan, policy, or regulation of
an agency with jurisdiction over
the project (including, but not
limited to the general plan,
specific plan, local coastal
program, or zoning ordinance)
adopted for the purpose of
avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect?
3) Conflict with any applicable
❑
❑
❑
®
1,2,3
habitat conservation plan or
natural community conservation
plan?
3.10.2.1 Proposed General Plan and Zoning
All of the potential housing sites already have zoning in place to achieve new resi-i^ntial development.
No additional action is required to accommodate residential development on any of the Housing
Inventory Sites. In order to improve the opportunities on existing residential sites, the
following actions are required.
Amend the Zoning Code to Offer Additional Incentives for Affordable Housing and Transit Oriented
Development. In areas near a transit hub, zoning code changes will be considered to:
• Provide incentives for affordable housing;
• Outside of Downtown, provide for reduced parking and increased height for development within
one-third mile of a transportation hub or corridor;
2015-2023 Housing Element Update 32 Initial Study
City of Burlingame
• Provide incentives such as reduced parking requirement for efficiency units if all units are
affordable;
• Amend the zoning code regulations to provide opportunities for live/work units and mixed use
projects in areas outside Downtown;
• Provide incentives for lot consolidation in areas where there are small underdeveloped lots and/or
residential development design would benefit from larger lots;
• Provide multiple incentives, such as reduced parking requirements and increased height, for
projects that propose units affordable to Extremely Low Income (ELI) households.
3.10.2.2 Land Use Compatibility
Land use conflicts can arise from two basic causes: 1) a new development or land use may cause impacts
to persons or the physical environment in the vicinity of the project site or elsewhere; or 2) conditions
on or near the project site may have impacts on the persons or development introduced onto the site by
the new project. Both of these circumstances are aspects of land use compatibility. Potential
incompatibility may arise from placing a particular development or land use at an inappropriate
location, or from some aspect of the project's design or scope.
Depending on the nature of the impact and its severity, land use compatibility conflict can range from
minor irritation and nuisances to potentially significant effects on human health and safety. The
discussion below distinguishes between potential impacts from the proposed project upon people and
the physical environment, and potential impactsfrom the project's surroundings upon the project itself.
Impacts from a Potential Project
Any proposed housing project could change the character of the project site. The proposed housing
sites, however, are located in areas where there are currently residential or mixed
commercial/residential uses. Therefore, it is not anticipated that there will be land use compatibility
impacts from any proposed housing project.
Impacts to a Potential Project
Any proposed housing project would develop either vacant or underutilized sites. Proposed
development would be compatible with both the existing and planned land uses in the area. Some of
the sites are adjacent to railroad and highway corridors. Appropriate analysis regarding noise and
vibration at the time of development proposal would be required. No on-going land use conflicts with
adjacent uses are anticipated.
3.10.3 Conclusion
The proposed project would not result in significant, adverse land use impacts. [Less Than Significant
Impact]
2015-2023 Housing Element Update 33 Initial Study
City of Burlingame
3.11 MINERAL RESOURCES
3.11.1 Setting
The potential housing sites do not contain any known or designated mineral resources.
3.11.2 Environmental Checklist and Discussion of Impacts
MINERAL RESOURCES
Potentially
Less Than
Significant With
Less Than
Significant
Mitigation
Significant
Im
Impact
Incorporated
Impact
Would the project:
Jpact
1) Result in the loss of availability of
❑
❑
❑
a known mineral resource thatwould
be ofvalueto the region
and the residents of the state?
2) Result in the loss of availability of
❑
❑
❑
a locally -important mineral
resource recovery site delineated
on a local general plan, specific
plan or other land use plan?
The project would not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource, and no mineral
excavation sites are present within the general area. Therefore, the adoption of the Housing Element
Update and subsequent residential development would not result in impacts to known mineral
resources.
3.11.3 Conclusion
The proposed adoption of the Housing Element update would not result in impacts to known mineral
resources. [No Impact]
2015-2023 Housing Element Update 34 Initial Study
City of Burlingame
3.12 NOISE
3.12.1 Setting
3.12.1.1 Noise Background
The City of Burlingame is impacted by noise from five major traffic arteries - Bayshore Freeway (SR 101),
Southern Pacific Railroad (including Caltrain service), California Drive, EI Camino Real and the Junipero
Serra Freeway (SR 280). There is also the potential that residential areas may be adversely impacted by
airport noise. During worst case months in the winter and early spring, when flight paths are directed
over North Burlingame, airport noise would potentially impact some residential areas. Residential and
public facilities (schools, parks, hospitals) land uses adjacent to the City's major traffic arteries are
impacted by noise with the area adjacent to Bayshore Freeway being impacted to the greatest degree.
Noise in these areas immediately adjacent to the arterials may be unacceptable from both a hearing
conservation and land use compatibility standpoint unless mitigation is provided. Noise levels in
commercial areas are generally acceptable except in those areas immediately adjacent to major traffic
arteries. Noise levels in industrial areas are generally acceptable.
Noise is defined as unwanted sound. Noise can be disturbing or annoying because of its pitch or
loudness. Pitch refers to relative frequency of vibrations, higher pitch signals sound louder to people.
A decibel (dB) is measured based on the -relative amplitude of a sound. Ten on the decibel scale marks
the lowest sound level that a healthy, unimpaired human ear can detect. Sound levels in decibels are
calculated on a logarithmic basis such that each 10 decibel increase is perceived as a doubling of
loudness. The California A -weighted sound level, or dBA, gives greater weight to sounds to which the
human ear is most sensitive.
Sensitivity to noise increases during the evening and at night because excessive noise interferes with the
ability to sleep. Twenty-four hour descriptors have been developed that emphasize quiet -time noise
events. The Day/Night Average Sound Level, L&, is a measure of the cumulative noise exposure in a
community. It includes a 10 dB addition to noise levels from 10:00 PM to 7:00 AM to account for human
sensitivity to night noise.
3.12.1.2 Applicable Noise Standard
The Noise Element of the City of Burlingame's General Plan identifies noise and land use compatibility
standards for various land uses (General Plan Table 4-1). The City establishes 55 dB Ldp as the outside
noise limit to protect public health and welfare. The indoor noise limit is 45 dB Ld,,.
2015-2023 Housing Element Update 35 Initial Study
City of Burlingame
3.12.2 Environmental Checklist and Discussion of Impacts
NOISE
Less Than
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
Significant
With
Significant
No
Information
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Impact
Source(s)
Incorporated
Would the project result in:
1)
Exposure of persons to or
❑
®
❑
❑
1,2
generation of noise levels in
excess of standards established in
the local general plan or noise
ordinance, or applicable standards
of other agencies?
2)
Exposure of persons to, or
❑
®
❑
❑
1
generation of, excessive
groundborne vibration or
groundborne noise levels?
3)
A substantial permanent increase
❑
❑
®
❑
1
in ambient noise levels in the
project vicinity above levels
existing without the project?
4)
A substantial temporary or
❑
❑
®
❑
1
periodic increase in ambient noise
levels in the project vicinity above
levels existing without the
project?
5)
For a project located within an
❑
❑
❑
®
1,2
airport land use plan or, where
such a plan has not been
adopted, within two miles of a
public airport or public use
airport, would the project
expose people residing or
working in the project area to
excessive noise levels?
6)
For a project within the vicinity of
❑
❑
❑
®
1
a private airstrip, would the
project expose people residing or
working in the project area to
excessive noise levels?
3.12.2.1 Noise Exposure Impacts to a Potential Project
Many of the potential Housing Inventory Sites are located either near the railroad tracks serving Caltrain
and the Southern Pacific Railroad, or near EI Camino Real, a major transportation corridor. Existing noise
levels at these locations may exceed noise standards considered suitable for outdoor activities
2015-2023 Housing Element Update 36 Initial Study
City of Burlingame
associated with residential development. Current building code insulation standards would provide !
adequate noise insulation for indoor noise levels. Although noise levels for an individual project may (i
exceed the standards for outdoor public uses, the project's design could locate any areas for outdoor
activities, such as play areas and common open space, away from the noise source. With the proper
project -level mitigation, it is not expected that a future housing project would expose people to high
levels of noise for any length of time that would result in a significant impact.
3.12.2.2 Noise Impacts from Project Traffic
The potential housing sites are located in areas of existing commercial, mixed use and residential uses.
Traffic increases due to a potential project would need to be analyzed at the project level to determine
impacts from traffic noise.
3.12.2.3 Noise Impacts from Construction
The construction of a proposed project would generate noise, and would temporarily increase noise
levels at adjacent land uses. The significance of noise impacts during construction depends on the noise
generated by various pieces of construction equipment, the timing and duration of noise generating
activities, and the distance between construction noise sources and noise sensitive receptors.
Construction activities generate considerable amounts of noise, especially during the construction of
project infrastructure when heavy equipment is used. Typical hourly average construction generated
noise levels are about 75 dBA to 80 dBA measured at a distance of 100 feet from the source during busy
construction periods (e.g., earth moving equipment, impact tools, etc.). Construction generated noise
levels drop off at a rate of about six dBA per doubling of distance between the source and receptor. `
Construction noise impacts are more significant when construction occurs during noise -sensitive times t
of the day (early morning, evening, or nighttime hours near residential uses), the construction occurs in
areas immediately adjoining noise sensitive land uses, or when construction lasts extended periods of
time. Construction activities may result in annoyances to existing uses adjacent to the project site. In
addition, the project will be required to comply with the applicable provisions related to construction
activities in the City of Burlingame Municipal Code, including limitations on construction hours. The
construction hours established by the Municipal Code are from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. on weekdays,
from 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Saturdays, and from 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Sundays and holidays.
All development, including construction activities, are required to comply with the construction hours
outlined in Burlingame Municipal Code Section 18.07.110 which restricts the timing associated with
construction activity. Short-term temporary construction noise that complies with the municipal code
would result in impacts that are expected to be less than significant. The proposed Housing Inventory
Sites are located in established residential and mixed use commercial/residential districts near major
transportation hubs and corridors, including railroads and EI Camino Real. The existing noise conditions
are not quiet, and with compliance to the City's construction hours, the temporary construction
activities will not create any new significant noise impacts.
3.12.3 Conclusion
Individual housing projects will be required to assess any potential noise impacts to a project to comply
with the noise insulation requirements of the building code. For those projects located adjacent to
existing noise sources, project level analysis of noise impact will be required. With the proper project
2015-2023 Housing Element Update 37 Initial Study
City of Burlingame
level mitigation, it is not expected that a project would expose people to high level of noise for any
length of time that would cause a significant impact. Because future projects would be required to
comply with the City's construction hours, possible construction noise impacts would be reduced to a
less than significant level. [Less than Significant Impact]
2015-2023 Housing Element Update 38 Initial Study
City of Burlingame
3.13 POPULATION AND HOUSING
3.13.1 Setting
Implementation of the 2015-2023 Housing Element would allow the development of up to 863 housing
units on various sites in the City of Burlingame. According to the Association of Bay Area Government's
Projections 2013, the City of Burlingame had an estimated total of 29,540 jobs and 14,880 employed
residents in 2010, resulting in a jobs/housing ratio of 1.98 jobs per employed resident.
3.13.2 Environmental Checklist and Discussion of Impacts
POPULATION AND HOUSING
Potentially Significant
Less Than
With
Less Than
No
Information
Significant
Mitigation
Significant
Impact
Source(s)
Impact
Incorporated
Impact
Would the project:
1) Induce substantial population
❑
❑
❑
®
1,2
growth in an area, either directly
(for example, by proposing new
homes and businesses) or
indirectly (for example, through
extension of roads or other
infrastructure)?
2) Displace substantial numbers of
❑
❑
❑
®
1,2
existing housing, necessitating
the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere?
3) Displace substantial numbers of
❑
❑
❑
®
1,2
people, necessitating the
construction of replacement
housing elsewhere?
According to the California Department of Finance, the population of Burlingame was 29,685 as of
January 1, 2014. The Association of Bay Area Governments projects that the population of Burlingame
will increase by about 2000 people by the year 2020. Based on an average household size of 2.75
persons, the 863 additional units proposed in the Housing Element would accommodate the anticipated
population growth. T.^= addition of housing in Burlingame would induce population growth in the City
and alter the City's jobs/housing ratio, resulting in a jobs/housing ratio closer to 1.0, therefore resulting
in a less than significant impact. A potential housing development project is not likely to displace
housing or residents since the majority of identified housing sites are currently developed with
underutilized commercial buildings.
3.13.3 Conclusion
The proposed project would not result in significant population or housing impacts. The potential impact
on the jobs/housing balance is a positive one. [Less Than Significant Impact]
2015-2023 Housing Element Update 39 Initial Study
City of Burlingame
3.14 PUBLIC SERVICES
3.14.1 Settin
The City of Burlingame is a built out community and could only add housing through infill development.
The City is currently adequately served by public services and facilitates such as parks and schools.
3.14.2 Environmental Checklist and Discussion of Impacts
PUBLIC SERVICES
Potentially
Less Than
Less Than
Significant
Significant With
Significant
NoInformation
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Impact
Sources)
Incorporated
Would the project:
1) Result in substantial adverse
physical impacts associated with
the provision of new or physically
altered governmental facilities, the
need for new or physically altered
governmental facilities, the
construction of which could cause
significant environmental impacts,
in orderto maintain acceptable
service ratios, response times or
other performance objectives for
any of the public services:
Fire Protection?
❑
❑
X
❑
1
Police Protection?
❑
❑
®
❑
1
Schools?
❑
❑
®
❑
1
Parks?
❑
❑
®
❑
1
Other Public Facilities?
❑
❑
®
❑
1
3.14.2.1 Public Services Impacts
Implementation of the Housing Element could result in an increase in the population of Burlingame by
approximately 2,300 persons. An increase in housing development would not adversely impact Police
and Fire response times since Burlingame is a built out community and new development would be infill.
Proposed development on the identified sites would be reviewed by the City of Burlingame Police and
Fire Departments prior to project approval.
Potential projects could generate population growth in certain areas, resulting in the increased use of
public park facilities in the City by new residents. The Parks and Recreation Department would review all
new project proposals and determine if the project has an impact on park facilities.
Potential projects could generate new students resulting in an increase in school population or result in
the need for new or modified school facilities. Each project would be evaluated on a case by case basis
depending on the size and location of the project. The Burlingame School District and San Mateo High
School District collect school impact fees on new residential and commercial construction within District
2015-2023 Housing Element Update 40 Initial Study
City of Burlingame
boundaries. Therefore, any proposed residential development would contribute through the payment of
fees to offset the cost of facilities for any increase in school population.
3.14.3 Conclusion
Implementation of the 2015-2023 Housing Element and providing the potential for new housing units
would not result in significant impacts to public facilities. Any new projects would be reviewed at time of
application. [Less Than Significant Impact]
2015-2023 Housing Element Update 41 Initial Study
City of Burlingame
3.15 RECREATION
3.15.1 Setting
The City of Burlingame General Plan states that access for residents to parks and open space is of great
importance to the City. The City's recreational system is augmented by local school facilities, which are
available to the general public.
3.15.2 Environmental Checklist and Discussion of Impacts
RECREATION
Potentially
Less Than
Less Than
Significant Significant
With
Significant
No
Information
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Impact
Source(s)
Incorporated
Would the project:
1) Increase the use of existing
❑
❑
®
❑
1,2
neighborhood and regional parks
or other recreational facilities such
that substantial physical
deterioration of the facility would
occur or be accelerated?
2) Does the project include
❑
❑
®
❑
1,2
recreational facilities or require
the construction or expansion of
recreational facilities which might
have an adverse physical effect on
the environment?
Additional housing could increase usage of nearby parks and recreation facilities, however, it is expected
that the increase in population from any new housing units can be accommodated by the existing park
and recreation facilities in Burlingame. None of the proposed housing sites would displace any
recreation facilities and would not have an impact on these facilities such that adverse physical effects
would result.
3.15.3 Conclusion
The proposed project would not result in significant impacts to parks and recreational facilities. [Less
Than Significant Impact]
2015-2023 Housing Element Update 42 Initial Study
City of Burlingame
3.16 TRANSPORTATION
3.16.1 Settin
3.16.1.1 Existing Roadway Network
The potential housing sites are located within a mile of Highway 101 and can also be accessed from EI
Camino Real, California Drive as well as smaller collectors and minor arterial streets.
3.16.1.2 Existing Transit Service
Transit service in the area includes local bus service provided by the San Mateo County Transit District
(SamTrans), train service from the CalTrain commuter rail line, and Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) at the
north end of Burlingame, at the Millbrae multimodal transit station.
3.16.1.3 Existing Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities
Pedestrian facilities comprise sidewalks, crosswalks, and pedestrian signals. Sidewalks are abundant
around all of the proposed housing sites.
Bicycle facilities comprise paths (Class 1), lanes (Class II), and routes (Class III). Bicycle paths are paved
trails that are separate from roadways. Bicycle lanes are lanes on roadways designated for bicycle use by
striping, pavement legends, and signs. Bicycle routes are roadways designated for bicycle use by signs
only.
3.16.2 Environmental Checklist and Discussion of Impacts
TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC
Potentially
Less ThanLess
Significant With
Than
No
Information
Significant
Mitigation
Significant
Impact
Source(s)
Impact
Incorporated
Impact
Would the project:
1) Cause an increase in traffic which
❑
❑
®
❑
1
is substantial in relation to the
existing traffic load and capacity of
the street system (i.e., result in a
substantial increase in either the
number of vehicle trips, the
volume to capacity ratio of roads,
or congestion at intersections)?
2) Exceed, either individually or
❑
❑
®
❑
1
cumulatively, a level of service
standard established by the
county congestion management
agency for designated roads or
highways?
2015-2023 Housing Element Update 43 Initial Study
City of Burlingame
TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC
Potentially
Less Than
Less Than
Significant
Significant With
Significant
No
Information
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Impact
Source(s)
Incorporated
Would the project:
3)
Result in a change in airtraffic
❑
❑
❑
®
1
patterns, including either an
increase in traffic levels or a
change in location that results in
substantial safety risks?
4)
Substantially increase hazards due
❑
❑
❑
®
1
to a design feature (e.g., sharp
curves or dangerous intersections)
or incompatible land uses (e.g.,
farm equipment)?
5)
Result in inadequate emergency
❑
❑
❑
®
1
access?
6)
Result in inadequate parking
❑
❑
❑
®
1
capacity?
7)
Conflict with adopted policies,
❑
❑
❑
®
1
plans, or programs supporting
alternative transportation (e.g.,
bus turnouts, bicycle racks)?
3.16.2.1 Transportation Impacts
A proposed housing project could generate new trips to the site and in the area, depending on the
previous use of the site. Traffic impacts would be evaluated at the project proposal stage.
Infill housing development could potentially increase ridership of public transit, especially at those sites
located near transit opportunities. Most of the sites are located near the Burlingame Train Station, the
Millbrae BART/Caltrain Multimodal station, or along transit corridors (EI Camino Real and California
Drive) with frequent SamTrans bus service.
New projects would be required to install or upgrade pedestrian or bicycle facilities, where appropriate.
These requirements would be evaluated at the project proposal stage.
The potential housing sites are located along major transportation corridors. Emergency access would
be provided to each housing site via existing or proposed public right-of-way. New projects would be
evaluated by emergency service providers at the project proposal stage.
3.16.3 Conclusion
Any proposed project would be evaluated for transportation impacts at the time of submittal.
Implementation of the Housing Element would not result in significant transportation impacts. [Less
Than Significant Impact]
2015-2023 Housing Element Update 44 Initial Study
City of Burlingame
3.17 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
3.17.1 Setting
Water and sewer services are provided by the City of Burlingame. The City owns and maintains the
municipal storm drainage system which would serves the potential housing sites. Solid waste collection
in the City of Burlingame is provided by Recology San Mateo County through a contract with the City.
3.17.2 Environmental Checklist and Discussion of Impacts
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Potentially
Less Than
Significant With
Less Than
No
Information
Significant
Mitigation
Significant
Impact
Source(s)
Impact
Incorporated
Impact
Would
the project:
1)
Exceed wastewater treatment
❑
❑
®
❑
1
requirements of the applicable
Regional Water Quality Control
2)
Board?
Require or result in the
❑
❑
®
❑
1
construction of new water or
wastewater treatment facilities or
expansion of existing facilities, the
construction of which could cause
significant environmental effects?
3)
Require or result in the
❑
❑
®
❑
1
construction of new storm water
drainage facilities or expansion of
existing facilities, the construction
of which could cause significant
environmental effects?
4)
Have sufficient water supplies
❑
❑
®
❑
1
available to serve the project from
existing entitlements and
resources, or are new or expanded
entitlements needed?
5)
Result in a determination by the
❑
❑
®
❑
1
wastewater treatment provider
which serves or may serve the
project that it has adequate
capacity to serve the project's
projected demand in addition to
the provider's existing
commitments?
6)
Be served by a landfill with
❑
❑
®
❑
1
sufficient permitted capacity to
accommodate the project's solid
waste disposal needs?
2015-2023 Housing Element Update 45 Initial Study
City of Burlingame
61
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Potentially
Less Than Less Than
Significant
Significant With Significant No
Information
Impact
Mitigation Impact
Impact
Source(s)
Incorporated
Would the project:
7) Comply with federal, state, and
❑
❑ ® ❑
1
local statutes and regulations
related to solid waste?
Any proposed project will be served by existing utilities in place in the area, or will be required to
connect to these systems. The City of Burlingame is substantially built out and public facilities in place
are adequate to serve existing and proposed development identified in the Housing Element update.
Most of the housing sites are now developed with other uses, and it is anticipated that there will be no
significant increase in the demand on existing utilities and service systems or impacts to these services.
There have been two major public improvement projects involving upgrades to the sanitary sewer
system and wastewater treatment plant which have been completed in the last 15 years which have
removed any constraints to new residential development, particularly at the north end of the city. Many
of the sites identified are located in the northern portion of the City.
3.17.4 Conclusion
Implementation of the Housing Element update would not exceed the capacity of existing utilities and
service systems that serve the community. [Less Than Significant Impact]
2015-2023 Housing Element Update 46 Initial Study
City of Burlingame
3.18 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
3.18.2 , Discussion
With the implementation of policies in place and avoidance measures required by the City of Burlingame
and other agencies as described in the specific sections of this report (refer to Section 3. Environmental
Checklist and Discussion of Impacts), on pages 6 through 44 of this Initial Study, the implementation of
the Housing Element would not result in significant environmental impacts.
A
2015-2023 Housing Element Update 47 Initial Study
City of Burlingame
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than No
Significant With Significant Impact
Impact Mitigation Impact
Incorporated
Information
Source(s)
1) Does the project have the potential to
❑ ❑ ® ❑
1-10
degrade the quality of the
environment, substantially reduce the
habitat of a fish or wildlife species,
cause a fish or wildlife population to
drop below self-sustaining levels,
threaten to eliminate a plant or
animal community, reduce the
number or restrict the range of a rare
or endangered plant or animal or
eliminate important examples of the
major periods of California history or
prehistory?
2) Does the project have impacts that
❑ ❑ ® ❑
1-10
are individually limited, but
cumulatively considerable?
("Cumulatively considerable" means
that the incremental effects of a
project are considerable when viewed
in connection with the effects of past
projects, the effects of other current
projects, and the effects of probable
future projects)?
3) Does the project have the potential to
❑ ❑ ® ❑
1-10
achieve short-term environmental
goals to the disadvantage of long -ter
environmental goals?
4) Does the project have environmental
❑ ❑ ® ❑
1-10
effects which will cause substantial
adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
3.18.2 , Discussion
With the implementation of policies in place and avoidance measures required by the City of Burlingame
and other agencies as described in the specific sections of this report (refer to Section 3. Environmental
Checklist and Discussion of Impacts), on pages 6 through 44 of this Initial Study, the implementation of
the Housing Element would not result in significant environmental impacts.
A
2015-2023 Housing Element Update 47 Initial Study
City of Burlingame
3.18.3 Conclusion
Each potential housing project will be evaluated with regard to the mandatory findings of significance.
The implementation of the Housing Element update is not expected to have impacts that are
cumulatively considerable. [Less Than Significant Cumulative Impact]
2015-2023 Housing Element Update 48 Initial Study
City of Burlingame
Checklist Sources
1. CEQA Guidelines - Environmental Thresholds (Professional judgment and expertise and review
of document).
2. City of Burlingame, City of Burlingame General Plan.
3. City of Burlingame, Municipal Code, Title 25, Zoning Ordinance and Title 18, Building
Construction.
4. Bay Area Air Quality Management District, CEQA Guidelines, Updated May, 2012.
5. California Department of Conservation, Geologic Map of the San Francisco -San Jose Quadrangle,
1990.
6. Federal Emergency Management Agency, Flood Insurance Rate Map, Community Panel Nos.
055019 000-0004,2009.
7. Association of Bay Area Governments, Dam Failure Inundation Hazard Map for
Burlingame/Millbrae/Hillsborough, 1995. http://www.abag.ca.gov/cgi-bin/pickdamL.Pi
8. Association of Bay Area Governments, Projections 2013, December 2013.
9. Association of Bay Area Governments. (ABAG). Wildfire Hazard Maps and Information.
November 2004. 8 May 2008. http7//www.abag.ca.gov/bayarea/`egmaps/wildfire/.
10. California Department of Conservation, 2010, San Mateo County Important Farmland 2D10,
ftp://ftp.consrv.ca.gov/pub/dlrplFMMP/pdf/2010/smtlO.pdf
2015-2023 Housing Element Update 49 Initial Study
City of Burlingame
/ SECTION 6 AUTHORS
Authors: City of Burlingame
Maureen Brooks, Project Manager
Kevin Gardiner, Planning Manager
William Meeker, Community Development Director
2015-2023 Housing Element Update 50 Initial Study
City of Burlingame
kaY j
Burlingame Housing Element
Table of Contents
I. Executive Summary ................................................................................................
5
II. Introduction.........................................................................................................
7
III. Profile of the Community.....................................................................................11
BURLINGAMETODAY.............................................................................................11
HOUSINGNEEDS ASSESSMENT..............................................................................12
1. Demographic Profile........................................................................................12
2. Employment and Travel Patterns......................................................................17
3. Household Profile............................................................................................22
4. Special Needs Populations................................................................................25
S. Housing Stock Characteristics..........................................................................34
6. Regional Housing Needs..................................................................................45
IV. Housing Constraints.............................................................................................47
GOVERNMENTAL CONSTRAINTS..............................................................................47
1. Land Use Regulations....................................:.................................................47
2. Building Codes...............................................................................................53
3. NPDES (National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System) Requirements
...............53
4. On and Off -Site Improvements.........................................................................54
5. Environmental Requirements............................................................................54
6. Fees and Exactions.........................................................................................55
7. Process and Permitting Procedures....................................................................61
8. Constraints to Housing for Persons with Disabilities.............................................63
NON-GOVERNMENTAL CONSTRAINTS......................................................................65
1. Environmental................................................................................................65
2. Land and Construction Costs............................................................................65
3. Financing and Affordability...............................................................................66
V. Community Resources and Opportunities.................................................................6;
LAND INVENTORY AND SITE IDENTIFICATION..........................................................67
PROPERTIES WITH POTENTIAL FOR DEVELOPMENT...................................................67
SITEINVENTORY...................................................................................................70
ZONING TO ACCOMMODATE HOUSING FOR LOWER INCOME HOUSEHOLDS ...............106
SUMMARY OF SITES TO MEET RHNA......................................................................108
ACTIONS REQUIRED/ZONING CHANGES................................................................108
PUBLIC FACILITY CAPACITY..................................................................................110
Table of Contents Page i
ENERGY CONSERVATION OPPORTUNITIES..............................................................112
VI. Housing Goals, Policies and Action Programs: 2015-2023 .......................................115
VII. Data Sources...................................................................................................139
Appendices............................................................................................................. AO
APPENDIX A - WORKSHOP SUMMARIES.................................................................. Al
Outreach Summary: Workshop #1......................................................................... Al
Outreach Summary: Workshop #2......................................................................... A2
Table of Figures
Table III -1: Population Growth and Projections............................................................14
TableIII -2: Age Trends.............................................................................................15
Table III -3: Race and Ethnicity...................................................................................16
Table III -4: Commute Characteristics of Burlingame Residents.......................................17
Table III -5: Burlingame's Major Employers................d..................................................18
Table III -6: Jobs in Burlingame by Industry .................................................................19
Table III -7: Jobs Held by Residents by Industry...........................................................20
Table III -8: Workforce Age, Salary and Education.........................................................21
Table III -9: Number of Households.............................................................................22
Table III -10: Average Size of Households, County and State Comparisons .......................22
Table III -11: Household Type, between 2000 and 2011 .................................................23
Table III -12: Household Type, County and State Comparison.........................................23
Table III -13: Median Household Income......................................................................24
Table III -14: Senior Householder Age.........................................................................25
Table III -15: Elderly Households by Income.................................................................26
Table III -16: Elderly Households by Income, Tenure, and Age.......................................26
Table III -17: Age and Type of Disability......................................................................27
Table III -18: Living Arrangements of Persons with Developmental Disabilities ..................
29
Table III -19: Estimated Housing Need for Persons with Developmental Disabilities
...........29
Table III -20: Female Headed Households....................................................................30
Table III -21: Female Headed Households, County and State Comparison ........................30
Table III -22: Households of 5 or More by Tenure and Housing Problems ..........................31
Table III -23: Housing Units by Bedroom and Tenure.....................................................31
Table III -24: Number of Overcrowded Units.................................................................32
Table III -25: Income Limits.......................................................................................33
Table III -26: Number of Housing Permits Issued between 2007 and 2013 by Affordability.34
Table III -27: Housing Units by Type...........................................................................36
Table III -28: Housing Units by Type and Tenure...........................................................36
Table III -29: Housing Units by Type, County and State Comparison...............................37
Table III -30: Households by Tenure............................................................................37
Table III -31: Age of Housing Stock as of 2010.............................................................38
Table III -32: Median Home Sales Prices, 2005 -2012 .....................................................39
Table I1I-33: Ability to Pay for For -Sale Housing...........................................................40
Table of Contents Page
Table III -34: Average Rents in Burlingame..................................................................41
Table III -35: Countywide Median Rental Rates.............................................................41
Table III -36: Households Overpaying..........................................................................42
Table III -37: Households Overpaying by Tenure...........................................................42
Table III -38: Overpayment among Low Income Households..........................................43
TableIII -39: Overcrowding........................................................................................44
Table III -40: Housing Problems — Cost Burdens...........................................................44
Table III -41: Projected Housing Need by Income Category ............................................46
Table IV -1: Burlingame Planning Fees............................................................................................55
Table IV -2: Burlingame Development Fees....................................................................................56
Table IV -3: Example of Single Family and Multiple Family Project Fees ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,57
Table IV -4: Burlingame Public Facilities Impact Fees...................................................................59
Table V-1: Vacant or Underused Sites...................................:.....................................70
Table V-2: Sites with Projects Approved or Under Construction......................................96
Table V-3: 2009-2014 Housing Element Sites No Longer Available................................105
Table V-4: Zoning for Lower Income Households ........................................................106
Table V-5: Site Capacity to Meet the RHNA................................................................108
Table of Contents Page iii
[This page intentionally left blank]
Table of Contents Page iv
I. Executive Summary
INTRODUCTION
By state mandate each city and county in California is required to plan for the housing
needs for its share of the expected new households in the Bay Region over the next five to
eight years as well as for the housing needs of all economic segments of the city's
population. This planning will be done in Burlingame by updating the City's 2009-2014
Housing Element of the General Plan. Broad based community participation is essential to
preparing an implementable and locally meaningful housing policy and action program. The
programs included in this document evolved from the participation and experience of local
residents and representatives of agencies which provide housing and other social service
assistance to city, county and regional residents.
PROFILE OF THE COMMUNITY
Research on Burlingame community demographics identifies some themes of change
through the years. While the city's total population has remained fairly stable over the past
40 years there has been an increase in ethnic diversity and number of children living at
home as well as growth in the population approaching retirement. The median income in
2011 was $88,915 (in 2013 inflation adjusted numbers). The median prices of single-family
homes ($1,400,000) and multiple -family homes ($650,000) in 2012 reflected the rising
home prices in a recovering housing market. More than three-quarters of the city's housing
stock is over 50 years old, but most remain well maintained as exemplified by the number
of building permits issued for improvements during the previous planning period.
HOUSING CONSTRAINTS
Residential developers looking to build in Burlingame face zoning regulations and fees
comparable to those in other San Mateo cities. Like all cities in the state, but particularly
because of our location on the edge of San Francisco Bay, the regulations of outside
agencies have come to play an increasing role. These regulations tend to increase both
processing time and cost of new residential development. Since, like our San Francisco
Peninsula neighbors, the city is essentially "built out," scarcity of land and high construction
costs increase the cost of housing. While energy is a critical parameter to future growth
throughout California today, Burlingame has been aggressive in implementing local
conservation and recycling legislation as well as providing information on energy
conservation programs offered by other agencies.
COMMUNITY RESOURCES
The city began as a small settlement centered on the Burlingame Train Station (designated
a State Historic Landmark). In a sense, this was an early example of what urban planners
now refer to as "transit villages," though at the time it was simply a reflection of the
transportation and development patterns of the time. Later the City of Burlingame annexed
the Broadway train station and the settlement adjacent to it. A century later, the Millbrae
train station just to the north of Burlingame was expanded to provide both Caltrain and
BART (Bay Area Rapid Transit) service, as well as SamTrans bus service, creating a robust
regionally -oriented transit hub within proximity to Burlingame's northern neighborhoods.
Over these same decades, EI Camino Real developed with the city's highest -density
Profile of the Community Page 5
residential uses - a pattern distinctly different from other cities on the Peninsula, where it
developed as a commercial corridor.
Because the land area of Burlingame is primarily built -out, the majority of new housing
opportunities will have to replace existing development. In the proposed planning program
the key sites for residential reuse follow the compact, transit -oriented pattern of our past,
building on the transit access opportunities offered at the northern end of the city, in
Downtown and along EI Camino Real. Beyond these areas, additional sites in "buffer areas"
offer opportunities to improve compatibility between low -scale residential and other land
uses. The site selection program evaluated residential densities and affordability, and these
opportunities were influenced by community goals such as situating housing within
proximity to transit and providing sensitive transitions between existing lower -scale
residential neighborhoods and other uses. An infrastructure study and program confirmed
that services are available through collection and processing facilities that are in place to
support these programs.
Implementation of the 2009-2014 Housing Element demonstrated the effectiveness of using
local legislation to achieve housing policy. Zoning changes were implemented to incorporate
high density residential and mixed use zoning in the Downtown area, with incentives such
as reduced parking and increased height. Continuing the single family residential design
review process effectively conserved neighborhood character while supporting maintenance
of an older housing stock. A new second unit ordinance was implemented to allow second
units on some R-1 zoned lots when certain development standards are met. The Second
Unit Amnesty program was continued to legalize and preserve older second units in the
single family zoned areas.
COMMUNITY OPPORTUNITIES
The 2009-2014 Housing Element set the foundation for policies and programs that provide
the best opportunities to meet the City's fair share of housing needs. Starting with the areas
already identified for housing opportunities in the Downtown and North Burlingame areas,
additional opportunities were added within these areas and along the EI Camino Real Priority
Development Area. The most effective programs from the 2009-2014 Housing Element have
been carried forward, as well as new programs which will expand opportunities for zoning
incentives to the transportation corridors as well as the transit hubs.
EVALUATION OF THE 2009-2014 HOUSING ELEMENT
There were several key programs which were most successful in implementing the goals
and policies of the 2009-2014 Housing Element. These include the following:
1) Zoning Implementation for the Downtown Specific Plan, which created new multi-
family and mixed use zoning districts within the Downtown area, and provided for
reduced parking requirements for properties within this transit oriented area;
2) Adding a residential overlay zone in an older commercial area between two existing
residential communities to allow for high density residential use;
3) Providing opportunities for emergency shelters for the homeless and for supportive
and transitional housing as outlined in State law;
4) Adopting a Reasonable Accommodations for Accessibility Ordinance to establish a
process by which an individual with a disability may request modification to
development standards to install improvements such as ramps, handrails or lifts,
necessary to accommodate the disability; and
5) Allowing for new secondary dwelling units subject to performance standards on some
single family residential lots.
Profile of the Community Page 6
Other programs that continued successfully throughout the planning period, which include: f
1) Continuation of the second unit amnesty program which allows nonconforming l
second units which meet certain criteria to become a permanent part of the city's
housing stock; and
2) Residential design review to provide for compatibility of additions and new
construction with existing neighborhoods.
All of these programs are being used as a basis for development of the 2015-2023 work
program where the following is also proposed:
1) Additional incentives be offered in a wider area (along the EI Camino Real and
California Drive transit corridors);
2) Consider adoption of a commercial impact in -lieu fee based on a nexus impact fee
study and a residential in -lieu fee as an alternative to providing affordable units on
site; and
3) Implement an outreach program for persons with disabilities.
HOUSING GOALS, POLICIES AND ACTION PROGRAM
The Housing Element's goals and policies describe the City's land use and development
parameters for residential land uses. The action program for each policy describes the
specific means and targets for each program to implement the City's housing policies
between 2015 and 2023. The Housing Element is unique because a quantified eight-year
program is required. Each action program also has a specific time frame. These
requirements form the basis of the annual progress report provided to the City Council.
II. Introduction
ROLE AND ORGANIZATION OF HOUSING ELEMENT
Each city and county in California is required to plan for the housing needs of all economic
segments of its population. California Government Code Section 65400 sets forth
requirements for a Housing Element, one of the seven mandatory elements of a local
general plan. Communities in the nine Bay Area counties are required to update their
Housing Elements by January 31, 2015.
The law sets guidelines for the preparation and adoption of a Housing Element. Local
governments are required to "make a diligent effort" to involve all economic segments of
their population in development of the Housing Element. The future local housing needs
numbers for Burlingame which are to be addressed in the housing element were developed
by the twenty-one cities within San Mateo County, as well as the County itself, with the help
of the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG). The twenty-one cities, organized as
the 21 Elements Technical Advisory Committee, determined a methodology for housing unit
allocation specific to their region. Local governments are also directed by the government
code to address housing needs by lowering barriers and encouraging the construction of
housing for all economic segments of the population; but local governments are not
required by State mandate to build housing directly or commit the City's operating funds to
the effort of building housing.
Profile of the Community Page 7
Burlingame's Housing Element identifies strategies and programs that focus on:
• Preserving and improving housing and neighborhoods;
• Providing adequate housing sites;
• Assisting in the provision of affordable housing;
• Removing governmental and other constraints to housing investment; and
• Promoting fair and equal housing opportunities.
The City's Housing Element consists of the following major components:
• An analysis of the city's demographic, household and housing characteristics and
related housing needs.
• A review of potential market, governmental, and infrastructure constraints to
meeting Burlingame's identified housing needs.
• An evaluation of residential sites, financial and administrative resources available to
address the City's housing goals.
• The Housing Element Work Program for addressing Burlingame's housing needs,
including housing goals, policies and programs.
The Burlingame Housing Element is a statement of community housing goals and policies. It
outlines the strategies that will be pursued to implement the community's housing
objectives during the planning period (2015-2023). The action program identifies the
strategies to be pursued in conserving and improving the existing housing stock, in
providing adequate sites for future housing; in assisting in developing affordable housing, in
removing government constraints which might affect housing production and cost; and in
promoting housing opportunities within the community. The goals, policies and action
program for the 2015-2023 Burlingame Housing Element is included in this report as its own
section.
SOURCES OF INFORMATION
Burlingame's current Housing Element was prepared in 2009 and was certified by the
California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) the same year. The
present document is an update of the 2009-2014 Housing Element. In preparing the
Housing Element, various sources of information are consulted. Demographic, economic,
and housing data, prepared by 21 Elements, became the basis for analysis. It was
supplemented by additional data from the U.S. Census and American Community Survey.
This updated element uses population data and housing and employment data from the
2000 and 2010 Census; the 2009-2011 American Community Survey; income limits from
the Department of Finance; projections from the Association of Bay Area Governments
Projections 2013 forecasts for tir;:: San Francisco Bay Area; ABAG's Certified Final 2013
Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA); and current local perspectives and opportunities
related to housing collected from local sources as referenced in the text. A list of all the data
sources used in preparation of Burlingame's 2015-2023 Housing Element is included at the
end of the document.
Profile of the Community Page 8
CIVIC ENGAGEMENT
To create an inclusive process in the development of housing policy, the City of Burlingame
hosted two community workshops, along with Planning Commission and City Council
meetings open to the public. The workshops were publically advertised, and attendees
comprised Burlingame residents, local organizations and affordable housing providers.
Planning Commission and City Council meetings that discussed the Public Review Draft prior
to initial submittal to the Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD)
provided opportunities for additional public input, as did adoption hearings to approve the
Final Housing Element.
City staff created an open process that allowed residents to learn more about the Housing
Element process and comment on housing issues (see the Appendix A). In the two
community workshops, informational materials were available in hardcopies at the meetings
and posted on the City's website www.burlingame.org, under the Community Development
Department webpage. Attendees were given opportunities to ask questions and make
comments during the meeting. City staff was also available to speak with residents after the
meeting. The public was invited to attend Planning Commission and City Council meetings
prior to submittal of documents to HCD. Through these avenues, the City established open
channels to provide information and gather input.
The key discussion points in the community workshops reflected the nature of development
opportunities available in a built -out community such as Burlingame, located in a region
with ever-increasing housing prices. In the first community workshop, audience members
were given the opportunity to comment on housing issues after hearing an overview of
demographic and housing characteristics of the city. They voiced support for mixed use
development, expressed concern about rising housing prices in the city and around the `
region and discussed whether developers would be attracted to constructing smaller units. l
In the second community workshop, City staff opened discussion about opportunity sites for
development. Those who attended the meeting expressed general agreement with the sites
proposed by City staff, which were selected largely from sites identified in the existing
Housing Element and expanded to include new parcels largely near those sites. Other
discussions covered issues about areas that were no longer available for housing, the
challenges of developing sites where the parcels are owned by different parties, the
requirements for second unit development and the existing constraints on sites that were
not included in the proposed opportunity sites.
CONSISTENCY WITH OTHER GENERAL PLAN ELEMENTS
The Burlingame General Plan provides the long-range policy direction for future land use
and development within the city. The General Plan is made up of nine elements, one of
which is the Housing Element. It is essential that the goals and policies of all of the General
Plan elements should be internally and mutually consistent. If the Housing Element as
adopted makes other elements of the general plan inconsistent, those elements should be
adjusted.
While the Housing Element is the primary document regarding housing, the other elements
establish goals, policies, objectives and actions that have a relation or directly affect
housing. The Land Use Element establishes categories of net residential density which are
confirmed on the plan diagram: low density up to 8 dwelling units per acre; medium density
9 to 20; medium high density 21- 50; and high density over 50 dwelling units per acre. In
Profile of the Community Page 9
addition, Specific Plans for the North Burlingame/Rollins Road area, the Bayfront Area, and
the Downtown area near the Burlingame Train Station have been adopted. These Specific
Plans are refinements of the General Plan and also specify residential densities.
Areas of the city identified as having potential for residential development include the North
Burlingame area between EI Camino Real and the railroad tracks, and along Trousdale Drive
between Magnolia Avenue and Ogden Drive; in the Downtown area along Howard Avenue
and California Drive; and on Carolan Avenue, south of the Northpark Apartments. These
areas were identified for future housing development in the 2009-2014 timeframe and
continue to be areas of housing opportunity for the 2015-2023 Housing Element.
A review of the policies, objectives and actions of the other elements indicates that the
proposed policies and implementing actions of this Housing Element are also consistent with
the intent of these other elements in the General Plan as well as local and regional planning
documents. Compliance with the San Mateo County Comprehensive Airport Land Use Plan,
as amended, for San Francisco International Airport: Government Code Section 65302.3
requires that a local agency general plan and/or any affected specific plan must be
consistent with the applicable airport/land use compatibility criteria in the relevant adopted
airport land use plan (CLUP). The housing policies, goals, programs, and any other
provisions to accommodate future housing development, as specified herein, do not conflict
with the relevant airport/land use compatibility criteria contained in the San Mateo County
Comprehensive Airport Land Use Plan, as amended, for San Francisco International Airport.
PREPARATION OF THE HOUSING ELEMENT
The Housing Element was prepared in house by the Burlingame Community Development
Department staff with technical assistance provided by Metropolitan Planning Group.
The Housing Element programs were developed building on the lessons learned through the
implementation of the 2009-2014 Housing Element and by widening the scope of the
successful Housing Element programs.
Profile of the Community Page 10
III. Profile of the community
BURLINGAME TODAY
Burlingame's residential population has experienced only a modest growth over the past
twenty years. The city's population in 2010 was 28,806, which is only a 2.3 percent increase
from the 2000 population of 28,158 and a 7.48 percent increase from the city's 1990
population of 26,801.
Despite these measures of growth, the region as a whole is projecting population growth in
the coming decades and a share of this growth will look to be accommodated in Burlingame.
The Association of Bay Area Governments' population projections predict an increase from
28,806 residents in 2010 to 31,700 in 2020, a further increase to 34,800 in 2030, and
finally an increase to 38,400 in 2040. This amounts to about a 10 percent population
increase each decade between 2010 and 2040.
The demographic of the city's population has been steadily changing since 2000:
• The White population, which had accounted for 76.9 percent of the population in
2000, had decreased to 67.7 percent in 2010, with gains from all other groups;
• Age groups that experienced growth included school age residents (under 20) and
older adults (45 to 74);
• The population of adults between 20 and 44 years decreased as a whole; and
• The median age of the population increased from 38.4 in 2000 to 40.5 in 2010.
Burlingame's housing stock consists of 13,027 dwelling units, of which 48 percent are
multiple family structures, 4 percent are single family attached structures (such as
townhomes), and 48 percent are single family detached structures. Fifty-one percent of the `
housing stock in 2011 was occupied by renters. This proportional distribution is contrasted t
with the rest of San Mateo County in which 59 percent of housing units in 2011 were owner -
occupied and 41 percent were occupied by renters.
The following are characteristics of the city's households:
• In 2011, there were 12,137 households in Burlingame. The average household size
was 2.3 persons. Owner -occupied units had an average household size of 2.6
persons, larger than the average household size of 2.1 persons in renter -occupied
units. These figures were slightly lower than the San Mateo County average
household size of 2.7 persons (2.8 persons in owner -occupied units and 2.7 in
renter -occupied units);
• Families constituted more than half of the households (56 percent) in Burlingame.
Those families with children made up about 29 percent of all households. Four
percent of househcl^s had a female head of household caring for children alone; and
• In owner -occupied units, the vacancy rate was 1.3 percent, while the rate was 4.5
percent for renter -occupied units.
The workforce and jobs in the city are projected to grow by 2040 together with (and in
likelihood influencing) the population growth, based on the following trends:
• The unemployment rate was 3.6 percent in 2013, compared 5.0 percent in San
Mateo County;
• In Burlingame, about 54 percent of households earned more than $75,000 and 19
percent earned less than $35,000;
Profile of the Community Page 11
Professional, Scientific, Management, and Administrative and Waste Management
Services was the industry group that employed the most residents (19.4 percent).
Educational Services, Health Care and Social Assistance employed the second largest
percent of residents (19.0 percent); and
ABAG projects a growth of jobs to 37,780 by 2040, a 27.9 percent increase from
29,540 jobs in 2010.
Since Burlingame is a built out community, the total number of housing units has remained
fairly stable.
• In 2010 there were 13,027 housing units in Burlingame;
• Nearly three-quarters of the city's housing units were more than 50 years old (built
before 1960), and almost two-thirds were more than 60 years old;
• The median cost of a single family dwelling was $1,384,000. The median cost of a
multiple family dwelling was $654,000; and
• Average monthly rent for a 2 bedroom, 1 bathroom unit in 2013 was $2,346.
HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
Fundamental to Burlingame's housing policies and programs is an assessment of the
components of the city's housing stock and the residents' needs. To determine the size and
appropriate programmatic approaches, the needs assessment is divided into segments:
household conditions, housing stock conditions, housing needs of special segments of the
resident population, and evaluation of potential conversion of 'affordable" units to market
rate.
1. Demographic Profile
The type and amount of housing neede
population growth and other demographic
occupation, and income level combine to
ability to afford housing.
Population Growth and Trends
d in a community are largely determined by
variables. Factors including age, race/ethnicity,
influence the type of housing needed and the
Over the past 40 years, Burlingame's population has remained fairly stable in terms of total
population. In 1970, the population was 27,320. It declined in 1980 to 26,171 and
increased again in 1990 to 26,666, to 28,158 in 2000, and 28,806 in 2010. This represents
an increase of 5.4 percent since 1970, including a 2.3% increase in the decade from 2000
to 2010.
The Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) predicts a growing population over the
next 30 years in the Bay Area, including Burlingame. Between 2010 and 2040, ABAG
projects Burlingame to see an addition of nearly 10,000 new residents. The forecast
anticipates a consistent percentage change of about 10 percent each decade.
The growth anticipated in the ABAG projections would represent a significant departure from
historic trends in Burlingame, however, with an assumption that the population will increase
much faster than it had in previous years. During the past thirty years from 1980 to 2010
the Burlingame population increased by 2,635 (approximately 10 percent over thirty years),
whereas ABAG anticipates an increase of 9,594 over the next thirty years from 2010 to
2040 (approximately 33 percent over thirty years).
Profile of the Community Page 12
For comparison, the State Department of Finance (DOF) issues population estimates each f
year for all California cities. These estimates are based on annual housing unit change data l
that are supplied by local jurisdictions and the U.S. Census Bureau. Household population
estimates are derived by multiplying the number of occupied housing units by the current
persons per household. The persons per household estimates are based on 2010 census
benchmark data and are adjusted by raking the current county population series into these
estimates. From 2010 to 2014, the DOF estimates the population of Burlingame to have
grown by 901 (3 per cent), for an average annual growth rate of 7.5%. DOF does not
provide population growth projections on a city level, but anticipates the population of San
Mateo County to grow approximately 18 percent between 2010 and 2040.
Some explanation for the variation between the ABAG projections compared to historic
trends and DOF data and projections would be assumptions about the location and nature of
future development. ABAG anticipates a significant amount of development in the region
over the next thirty years to be in infill locations within close proximity to transit and
services. In many cities, this would represent a change in approach to development over
the past thirty years. Burlingame is served by an existing rail station (Burlingame Caltrain),
a regional multi -modal station (Millbrae BART/Multimodal), and frequent express bus service
on EI Camino Real. Furthermore the Broadway Caltrain station is anticipated to return to full
service by the end of the decade. Given that a significant portion of Burlingame is situated
within proximity to transit and services, the ABAG assumption that future development in
the region will focus on such areas would imply an increase in the city's rate of growth
compared to historical trends. Furthermore, historical trends and DOF forecasts are based
on existing housing stock, whereas ABAG forecasts account for projected employment
growth in the region that will put pressure on the housing supply.
This assumption presents challenges for Burlingame, however. Through its history,
Burlingame's densest neighborhoods have developed in areas served by transit and
services, so those areas assumed for future infill development are already developed with
multiple family residential housing at relatively high densities. Typically infill projects in
Burlingame involve replacing an existing use with a new, slightly more intensive new use.
While new projects typically result in an increase in the number of units compared to the
buildings being replaced, the net increase is less than if the sites were vacant or less
intensively developed.
Profile of the Community Page 13
T�hln TTT_t • Dr.nnlatinn rrnwth and PrniPrtinnc
50000
30000
Burlingame
20000
—4--Ccu my Average
1000'9
0
2DOD
2010 2020
2030 2040
Population
Difference
Percent Change
2000 (Census)
28,158
2010 (Census)
28,806
648
2.3%
2020 (Projected)
31,700
2,894
10.0 /0
2030 (Projected)
34,800
3,100
9.8%
2040 (Projected)
1 38,400
3,600
10.3%
Source: ABAG Projections 2013
The Housing Element is the General Plan document that articulates the City's plan to
accommodate a growing population. While each population projection uses its own
methodology and takes different growth factors into account, a certain amount of population
growth is likely with a corresponding necessity to plan for future housing needs.
Profile of the Community Page 14
Age Characteristics
Median Age
The median age is the midpoint of the city's population distribution. Burlingame's median
age in 2010 (40.5) increased from the median in 2000 (38.4). The growing number of
residents who aged into the 45 to 74 year range, coupled with the decrease of residents in
the 20 to 44 year range, contributed to the rising median age. Table ITI-2 shows the
population changes between 2000 and 2010.
Source: Census 2000 and 2010
Children
Between 2000 and 2010, the school age population increased. Table III -2 shows that the
number of residents under 20 accounted for 23.0 percent of the population in 2010, an
increase from 20.7 percent in 2000. Over a decade, the group of children under the age of 5
increased by 19.3 percent and the group in the 5 to 9 year range increased by 23.7 percent.
These trends show an expanding school age population that may place extra demand on
school facilities. As children age the pressure to accommodate them throughout their
education will be a continuing challenge.
Profile of the Community Page 15
2000
2010
Difference
2000-2010
Percent
Change000-2
2000-2010.
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
Under 5 years
1,574
5.6%
1,877
6.5%
303
19.3%
5 to 9 years
1,516
5.4%
1,875
6.5%
359
23.7%
10 to 14 years
1,494
5.3%
1,591
5.5%
97
6.5%
15 to 19 years
1,230
4.4%
1,309
4.5%
79
6.4%
20 to 24 years
1,150
4.1%
1,100
3.8%
-50
-4.3%
25 to 34 years
5,105
18.1%
3,933
13.7%
-1,172
-23.0%
35 to 44 years
5,277
18.7%
4,939
17.1%
-338
-6.4%
45 to 54 years
4,062
14.4%
4,691
16.3%
629
15.5%
55 to 59 years
1,356
4.8%
1,905
6.6%
549
40.5%
60 to 64 years
1,107
3.9%
1,540
5.3%
433
39.1%
65 to 74 years
1,818
6.5%
1,940
6.7%
122
6.7%
75 to 84 years
1,698
6.0%
1,308
4.5%
-390
-23.0%
85 years and
over
771
2.7%
798
2.8%
27
3.5%
Total
28,158
100°/%
28,806
100%
648
2.3%
Median Age
38.4
40.5
Source: Census 2000 and 2010
Children
Between 2000 and 2010, the school age population increased. Table III -2 shows that the
number of residents under 20 accounted for 23.0 percent of the population in 2010, an
increase from 20.7 percent in 2000. Over a decade, the group of children under the age of 5
increased by 19.3 percent and the group in the 5 to 9 year range increased by 23.7 percent.
These trends show an expanding school age population that may place extra demand on
school facilities. As children age the pressure to accommodate them throughout their
education will be a continuing challenge.
Profile of the Community Page 15
Elderly
Although persons of retirement age (65 and older) had decreased between 2000 and 2010,
a growing segment of the population had been entering age groups on the verge of
retirement, as shown in Table III -2. An overall decrease in the retirement age population
was attributed to a significant decline of residents between ages 75 and 84, which
decreased by 23 percent over a decade. Populations approaching retirement age had grown,
however. Residents nearing retirement (age 60 to 64) comprised 3.9 percent of the
population in 2000, growing 39 percent over a decade to 5.3 percent of the population in
2010. The population of older adults approaching retirement age - residents ages 55 to 59
- grew more than 40 percent over the same period of time. This trend of aging citizens
coupled with a decrease in the working -age population between 20 and 44 years could
impact the dynamics of the community in the coming years.
Gender
In 2010, 52 percent of residents were male and 48 percent female. Demographic
characteristics related to female heads of household are described later in the document
under Special Needs Populations.
Ethnic Diversity
Burlingame is becoming a more diverse city. Between 2000 and 2010, the number and
proportional distribution of the White population had decreased while the population of all
other groups had increased. The Asian/ Pacific Islander population saw the largest increase,
ahead of all other groups with an addition of nearly 2,000 residents over a decade and
enough to expand their proportional distribution from 14.3 percent of the population to 20.8
percent. Between 2000 and 2010, the Hispanic population had also grown, with nearly
1,000 new Hispanic residents added to Burlingame's population, representing a 32.4
percent increase. This contributed to a changing demographic where the Hispanic population
now represents 13.8 percent of the Burlingame community.
T.M. TTT-2• Para nnrd Fthniritv
source: Census 2000 and 2010
Profile of the Community Page 16
2000
2010
Difference
2000-2010
Percent
Change
Persons
Percent !PersonsPercent
White
21,648
76.9%
19,510
67.7%
2,138
-9.9%
Black
296
1.1%
360
1.2%
64
21.6%
Asian/ Pacific Islander
4,016
14.3%
5,980
20.8%
1,964
48.9%
Other
1,084
3.8%
1,525
5.3%
441
40.7%
More than One Race
1,114
4.0%
1,431
5.00/0
317
28.50/a
Hispanic
2,995
10.6%
3,966
13.8%
971
32.4%
Not Hispanic
25,163
89.4%
24,840
86.2%
-323
-1.3%
Total population
28,158
1000/0
28,806
1000/0
source: Census 2000 and 2010
Profile of the Community Page 16
2. Employment and Travel Patterns
The 2007-2011 American Community Surveys estimates that there were more than 14,700
employed residents in the city. According to U.S. Census OnTheMap 2011, there were
approximately 35,600 jobs in Burlingame. Despite the large number of jobs relative to the
number of residents employed, most residents actually worked outside of the city.
• 12 percent of employees worked and lived in the city;
• 22 percent worked in other cities around San Mateo County;
18 percent of Burlingame residents worked in San Francisco;
10 percent worked in Santa Clara County; and
7 percent worked in the East Bay.
The small percentage of residents who worked and lived in Burlingame suggests that, for a
number of Burlingame's employees, finding housing affordable and suitable for their
households in the city is a significant challenge.
The commute patterns of Burlingame residents show that car travel was the predominant
mode of transportation but other modes, including public transportation, were viable
options. The average commute time was 25.4 minutes in 2011. More than 72 percent of
residents drove to work alone. About 22 percent found alternative transportation options,
including 11 percent who used public transportation, as shown in Table III -4. Between 2000
and 2011, Burlingame had an increasing percentage of residents using public transportation
and a decreasing percentage driving to work. Despite these changes, driving alone remains
the predominant means for the commute. Since most residents worked outside of
Burlingame, driving and spending an hour on the road continue to be expected parts of the
daily commute.
Table III -4: Commute Characteristics of Burlingame Residents
Source: Census 2000 and ACS 2UU/-2u11
Profile of the Community Page 17
2000
2011
Drive Alone
77%
72%
Carpool
7%
6%
Public Transportation
8%
11%
Walked
2%
3%
Other Means
10/(
20X
Worked at Home
Source: Census 2000 and ACS 2UU/-2u11
Profile of the Community Page 17
Burlingame's 2012 Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports identifies the top 10 employers
in the city. Virgin America was the largest employer in 2012, followed by Wright Medical
Technology Inc. The remaining eight were comparable in their workforce sizes - from 460 to
555 employees.
Table III -5: Burlinaame's Maior Emolovers
Source: City of Burlingame, 2012
Profile of the Community Page 18
NUMBER & EMPLOYEES
Virgin America, Inc
2,056
Wright Medical Technology Inc
1,200
United Natural Foods
555
Critchfield Mechanical, Inc
517
California Teachers Association
500
Getinge USA
500
Wine Warehouse
483
Hyatt Regency San Francisco Airport
467
Berkeley Farms
463
ECC Remediation Services Corp
460
Source: City of Burlingame, 2012
Profile of the Community Page 18
The largest industry in Burlingame was Transportation and Warehousing and Utilities, which
categorized nearly one-third of the jobs in the city. The Professional, Scientific, /
Management, Administrative, and Waste Management Services sector employment made up
more than 16 percent of jobs in the city. Educational, Health, and Social Services sector
employment made up nearly 15 percent of jobs in the city. More than 11 percent of jobs
were in Arts, Entertainment, Recreation, Accommodation, and Food Services. Table III -6
shows the breakdown of employment industries.
T�klo TTT_p- Tnhc in Rnrlinnam P. by Inclustry
Source: 2011 U.S. Census OnThe Map
The ABAG projects continued employment growth between 2010 and 2040 in Burlingame
and San Mateo County. In their 2013 projections, ABAG used a base employment number of
29,540 jobs to forecast an employment figure of 37,780 in 2040. This 28 percent increase is
comparable to the 29 percent increase projected in San Mateo County. Although
employment figures and forecasts are expected to change over time, and ABAG will
continue to adjust their predictions, Burlingame is expected to experience continued growth
in employment.
Profile of the Community Page 19
2011
Number
Percent
Transportation and Warehousing,
and Utilities
11,243
31.5%
Professional, Scientific,
Management, Administrative, and
Waste Management Services
5,859
16.4%
Educational, Health, and Social
Services
5,238
14.7%
Arts, Entertainment, Recreation,
Accommodation, and Food Services
4,145
11.7%
Retail Trade
2,094
5.9%
Finance, Insurance, Real Estate,
and Rental and Leasing
1477
4.2%
Manufacturing
1,269
3.6%
Wholesale Trade
1,245
3.5%
Other Services (except Public
Administration)
1,116
3.1%
Construction
1,075
3.0%
Information
485
1.4%
Public Administration
363
1.0%
Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and
Hunting, and Mining
0
0.0%
Total Jobs
35,609
100.0%
Source: 2011 U.S. Census OnThe Map
The ABAG projects continued employment growth between 2010 and 2040 in Burlingame
and San Mateo County. In their 2013 projections, ABAG used a base employment number of
29,540 jobs to forecast an employment figure of 37,780 in 2040. This 28 percent increase is
comparable to the 29 percent increase projected in San Mateo County. Although
employment figures and forecasts are expected to change over time, and ABAG will
continue to adjust their predictions, Burlingame is expected to experience continued growth
in employment.
Profile of the Community Page 19
The Professional, scientific, management, administrative and waste management services
occupations were held by 2,858 residents in 2011. The second largest sector, with jobs held
by 2809 residents, was Educational, health, and social services. The former experienced a
decrease of 1.5 percent since 2000, whereas the latter experienced an increase of 21.2
percent. Educational, health, and social services had the largest growth in the number of
jobs since 2000. The Information sector underwent the largest decline with 431 fewer
residents holding jobs in the sector, or more than half of the number reported in 2000.
Manufacturing had the second largest decrease with 342 jobs.
T,1.1.. TTT-7• 1�kc 41.1A 6v Ouci.inntc by Tnrluctry
Source: Census 2000 and ACS ZUU/-ZU11
Profile of the Community Page 20
2000
2011
Difference
Percent'
2000-2011 '
Change
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
Professional, Scientific,
Management,
Administrative, and
2,902
18.9%
2858
19.4%
-44
-1.5%
Waste Management
Services
Educational, Health,
2,317
15.1%-
2809
19.0%
492
21.2%
and Social Services
Retail Trade
1,712
11.1%
1431
9.7%
-281
-16.4%
Arts, Entertainment,
Recreation,
1,236
8.0%
1372
9.3%
136
11.0%
Accommodation, and
Food Services
Finance, Insurance,
Real Estate, and Rental
1,564
10.2%
1358
9.2%
-206
-13.2%
and Leasing
Construction
863
5.6%
1031
7.0%
168
19.5%
Manufacturing
1,223
7.9%
881
6.0%
-342
-28.0%
Other Services (except
653
4.2%
875
5.9%
222
34.0%
Public Administration
Transportation and
Warehousing, and
1,053
6.8%
722
4.9%
-331
-31.4%
utilities
Wholesale Trade
626
4.1%
658
4.5%
32
5.1%
Information
801
5.2%
370
2.5%
-431
-53.8%
Public Administration
412
2.7%
369
2.5%
-43
-10.4%
Agriculture, Forestry,
Fishing and Hunting,
23
0.1%
32
0.2%
9
39.1%
and Mining
Employed Civilian
Population 16 years
15,385
100%
14,766
100%
-619
-4.0%
and Over
Source: Census 2000 and ACS ZUU/-ZU11
Profile of the Community Page 20
Table III -8• Workforce Age, Salary and Education
Jobs by Worker Age
Age 29 or Younger
16%
Age 30 to 54
59%
Age 55 or Older
25%
Salaries Paid by Jurisdiction Employers -
$1,250 per Month or Less
12%
$1,251 to $3,333 per Month
30%
More than $3,333 per Month
59%
Jobs by Worker Educational Attainment
Less than High School
9%
High school or Equivalent, No College
15%
Some College or Associate Degree
27%
Bachelor's Degree or Advanced Degree
33%
Educational Attainment Not Available
16%
source: 2011 U.S. Census OnTneMap, via u
Unemployment Rate
According to the California Employment Development Department (EDD) the unemployment
rate in San Mateo County was 5.0 percent in 2013. Of the 16,200 members of Burlingame's
work force, 600 (3.6%) were unemployed at that time. This range is within what is
considered "full employment" (typically defined as somewhere between 3 percent and 4
percent, reflecting the normal ebb and flow of the workforce as people transition between
jobs).
Page 21
Profile of the Community
3. Household Profile
Household type and size, income levels, and the presence of special needs populations all
affect the type of housing needed by residents. This section details the various household
characteristics affecting housing needs in Burlingame.
Household Size
Burlingame had 12,137 households in 2011. More than half of households were renters,
continuing a trend from 2000. The total number of households actually decreased from
2000. Table III -9 provides a summary of household data.
T�hle TTT_O• Numhnr of Hnncnhnldc
Source: 2000 US Census St -1, zUU9-ZU11 American Community purvey
In 2011, Burlingame's average household size was 2.3 persons per household, smaller than
the County size of 2.7 persons and State size of 2.9 persons. The size of households was
larger for owners (2.6) than for renters (2.1).
Tahlo TTT-1 n• AvPranP Rimae of Hnucehnlds_ Countv and State Comnarisons
2000
2011
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
Owner
5,987
47.9%
5,960
49.1%
Renter
6,524
52.1%
6,177
50.9%
Total
12,511
100%
12,137
100%
Source: 2000 US Census St -1, zUU9-ZU11 American Community purvey
In 2011, Burlingame's average household size was 2.3 persons per household, smaller than
the County size of 2.7 persons and State size of 2.9 persons. The size of households was
larger for owners (2.6) than for renters (2.1).
Tahlo TTT-1 n• AvPranP Rimae of Hnucehnlds_ Countv and State Comnarisons
Source: 2000 US Census SFl, 2UU9-tu11 American Community Survey, via a riements
Profile of the Community Page 22
Burlingame
County
State
Average Household Size
2.2
2.7
2.9
2000
percent Owners
48%
61%
57%
Percent Renters
52%
39%
43%
Average Household Size
2.3
2.7
2.9
Owners Average Household Size
2.6
2.8
3.0
2011
Renters Average Household Size
2.1
2.7
2.9
Percent Owners
49%
59%
56%
Percent Renters
51%
41%
44%
Source: 2000 US Census SFl, 2UU9-tu11 American Community Survey, via a riements
Profile of the Community Page 22
Household Type
Burlingame has undergone some change in its household types since 2000. The city had an 1
increase in families without children and a corresponding decrease in families with children.
In 2011, families without children increased to 27.4 percent of the population from 24.1
percent in 2000. Table III -10 shows the proportional distribution of household types for
2000 and 2011. Over that period of time, single person households did not experience much
change in terms of their population distribution. The trend indicates that while people have
been forming family households with relative consistency, fewer of these households have
children.
Despite an increasing number of households without children, Burlingame still had a lower
percentage than the County and the State in 2011, as shown in Table III -12. San Mateo
County and the State as a whole also had lower percentages of single persons. This
comparison suggests that more residents in Burlingame were in single person households
rather than families compared to those in the County and the State.
rohln TTT_1 I . Mniicehnid Tvne. between 2000 and 2011
Source: 2009-2011 American Community Survey, via 21 Elements, supplemented with Census 2000
r 1.1.. rrr_1'f. Llnucuhn1A rvna Cnnnty and State Comparison
2000
2011 '
Single person
35.6%
35.8%
Family no children
24.1%
27.4%
Family with children
31.5%
28.7%
Multi -person, nonfamily
8.8%
8.2%
Total
100%
100%
Source: 2009-2011 American Community Survey, via 21 Elements, supplemented with Census 2000
r 1.1.. rrr_1'f. Llnucuhn1A rvna Cnnnty and State Comparison
Source: 2009-2011 American Community purvey, via a oemenu
Profile of the Community Page 23
3
Burlingame ,
County
State
Single person
35.8%
25.2%
24.3%
Family no children
27.4%
36.7%
35.5%
Family with children
28.7%
31.3%
33.0%
Multi -person, nonfamily
8.2%
6.9%
7.2%
Total households
12,137
256,305
12,433,049
Source: 2009-2011 American Community purvey, via a oemenu
Profile of the Community Page 23
3
Household Income
The median income in Burlingame was $83,098 according to the 2009-2011 American
Community Survey. When adjusted for inflation to 2013 dollars, the median income for
Burlingame was $88,915 in 2011. Approximately 19 percent of households earned less than
$35,000. Households that earned more than $75,000 made up more than half (54%) of the
households in the city. San Mateo County had a similar composition of households earning
more than $75,000 (56%).
Table III -13: Median Household Income
Source: ABAG, via 21 Elements
Profile of the Community Page 24
Burlingame
County
State
Under $25,000
12%
12%
21%
$25,000 to $34,999
7%
6%
9%
$35,000 to $49,999
13%
10%
13%
$50,000 to $74,999
141/b
16%
17%
$75,000 to $99,999
139/b
12%
12%
$100,000+
41%
44%
28%
Poverty Rate
7.2%
7.4%
16%
Total
12,137
256,305
12,433,049
Median Income 2000
(adjusted for inflation to
2013 dollars
$92,510
$95,606
$64,116
Median Income 2011
(adjusted for inflation to
2013 dollars
$88,915
$91,958
$63,816
Source: ABAG, via 21 Elements
Profile of the Community Page 24
4. Special Needs Populations
Housing is a basic necessity of life for everyone. However, the search for decent affordable `
housing is greatly complicated for many individuals because of various barriers, including
disability, advanced age, and life crisis. The City has identified several special populations
that are in need of particular housing services and are most likely to be in the Extremely
Low -Income category: seniors, persons with disabilities, large families, single -parent
households, college students, and families and persons in need of emergency shelter.
(Given Burlingame's urban location, farmworkers are not considered a population with
special needs, but a short description is provided below.)
Senior Households
Seniors, the persons over the age of 65, have four primary concerns:
1) Income: People over 65 are usually retired and living on a fixed income;
2) Health Care: Because the elderly have a higher rate of illness and dependency,
health care and supportive housing is important;
3) Transportation: Many seniors use public transit. However, a significant number of
seniors have disabilities and require alternatives to transit;
4) Housing: Many seniors live alone and rent.
Approximately 4,000 residents 65 years or older live in the city of Burlingame, representing
14 percent of the population. There were 2,343 senior households, more than 81 percent of
which are homeowners. l
rahla rrr-ta- Ceninr Householder Aae
Source: 2009-2011 American t,ommunay purvey
Seniors who live on fixed and limited incomes may encounter difficulties in finding
affordacle housing. Nearly one-third of senior households in Burlingame have incomes
under $30,000. About half have incomes under $49,000. Generally, persons 75 and older
who are heads of household are homeowners, but there are many who are in the Low, Very -
Low and Extremely -Low Income categories.
Profile of the Community Page 25
Owner HH
Renter HH
65 to 74
932
256
75 to 84
585
87
85 and over
387
96
Total
1904
439
Source: 2009-2011 American t,ommunay purvey
Seniors who live on fixed and limited incomes may encounter difficulties in finding
affordacle housing. Nearly one-third of senior households in Burlingame have incomes
under $30,000. About half have incomes under $49,000. Generally, persons 75 and older
who are heads of household are homeowners, but there are many who are in the Low, Very -
Low and Extremely -Low Income categories.
Profile of the Community Page 25
Table III -15: Elderly Households by Income
Source: 2009-2011 American Communities Survey, via 21 Elements
Table III -16: Elderly Households by Income, Tenure, and Age
Burlingame
County
State
Below Poverty Level
3%
6%
10%
Income under $30,000
27%
28%
38%
$30000-$49,000
18%
19%
20%
$50,000-$74,999
14%
16%
16%
$75,000-$99,999
16%
11%
9%
$100,000+
24%
26%
17%
Total Seniors
2,343
55,093
2,474,879
Source: 2009-2011 American Communities Survey, via 21 Elements
Table III -16: Elderly Households by Income, Tenure, and Age
Source: CHAS Data 2006-2010, via 21 Elements
Profile of the Community Page 26
Extremely
Very I
Lower
Above
Low
Low
Low
Moderate
Median
<30% of
50% of
80% of
Median
Median
Median
100% of
>100% of
Median
Median
Income
Income
Income
Owner
41%
46%
35%
46%
59%
All Ages
Renter
59%
54%
65%
54%
41%
Total
1,400
11075
2,000
1,380
5,685
Owner
44%
59%
57%
77%
85%
Age 62-74
Renter
56%
41%
43%
23%
15%
Total
135
135
305
300
555
Owner
72%
95%
80%
100%
97%
Age 75+
Renter
28%
5%
20%
0%
3%
Total
460
290
255
145
390
Source: CHAS Data 2006-2010, via 21 Elements
Profile of the Community Page 26
Persons with Disabilities
A disability is defined as a long lasting condition that impairs an individual's mobility, ability l
to work, or ability to care for themselves. Persons with disabilities include those with
physical, mental, or emotional disabilities. Disabled persons have special housing needs
because of their fixed income, shortage of affordable and accessible housing, and higher
health costs associated with their disability.
The 2009-2011 American Community Survey reported that 1,835 persons in Burlingame
had one or more disabilities, accounting for roughly 7 percent of the population. Table III -
17 shows the age and types of disabilities. It is important to note that a person may have
multiple disabilities.
T,I 1- TTT-19. Aran �nA Tvnn of nicnhiiifv
Source: Zoog-Zoll Amencan Lommuni y Juwey, via a oeumnu
The living arrangements for persons with disabilities de, end on the severity of the disability.
Many persons live at home in an independent environment with the help of other family
members. To maintain independent living, disabled persons may require assistance. This
can include special housing design features for the physically disabled, income support for
those who are unable to work, and in-home supportive services for persons with medical
conditions. Accessible housing can also be provided via senior housing developments.
Developmentally Disabled: Persons with developmental disabilities are a separate population
identified by the State of California, with differing housing needs from others with
disabilities. The Lanterman Developmental Disabilities Act ensures that "patterns and
Profile of the Community Page 27
Number
Percent
Burl!ngame
County,
State
Burlingame `-
County
State
Under 18 with
82
3,270
280,649
1.3%
2.1%
3.0%
Disabilit
Age 18-64 with
856
23,231
1,8-43,497
3.0%
5.0%
7.9%
Disability
Age 65 + with
897
28,703
1,547,712
26%
31%
37%
Disability
Any Age with Any
1,835
55,204
3,671,858
6%
8%
10%
Disability
Any Age With
500
15,651
1,022,928
1.8%
2.2%
2.8%
Hearing Disability
With Vision
259
8,199
685,600
0.9%
1.1%
1.9%
Disability
With Cognitive
532
19,549
1,400,745
1.9%
2.7%
3.8%
Disability
With Ambulatory
888
29,757
1,960,853
3.1%
4.2%
5.3%
Disability
With Self Care
388
12,819
862,575
1.4%
1.8%
2.3%
Disability
With Independent
658
22,735
1,438,328
2.3%
3.2%
3.9%
LivingDisability
Source: Zoog-Zoll Amencan Lommuni y Juwey, via a oeumnu
The living arrangements for persons with disabilities de, end on the severity of the disability.
Many persons live at home in an independent environment with the help of other family
members. To maintain independent living, disabled persons may require assistance. This
can include special housing design features for the physically disabled, income support for
those who are unable to work, and in-home supportive services for persons with medical
conditions. Accessible housing can also be provided via senior housing developments.
Developmentally Disabled: Persons with developmental disabilities are a separate population
identified by the State of California, with differing housing needs from others with
disabilities. The Lanterman Developmental Disabilities Act ensures that "patterns and
Profile of the Community Page 27
conditions of everyday life which are as close as possible to the norms and patterns of the
mainstream of society" are available to these individuals. Furthermore, the Olmstead v. L.0
and E.W. United States Supreme Court case required an "Integration Mandate" that "States
are required to place persons with mental disabilities in community settings rather than
institutions ... when determined to be appropriate." Despite these laws, people with
developmental disabilities are finding it increasingly difficult to find affordable, accessible,
and appropriate housing that is inclusive in the local community.
A developmental disability is defined by the State as "a lifelong disability caused by a
mental and/or physical impairment manifested prior to the age of 18 and are expected to be
lifelong." The conditions included under this definition include:
• Mental Retardation,
• Epilepsy,
• Autism, and/or
• Cerebral Palsy, and
• "Other Conditions needing services similar to a person with mental retardation."
Source: Background Report, 2008, Developmental Disabilities Board Area 5
According to the Golden Gate Regional Center, the entity designated to provide all services
for people living with developmental disabilities in the San Mateo County area, there are
138 persons with developmental disabilities living in Burlingame. According to the
Department of Social Services — Community Care Licensing Division (April 2014), the city
has 4 adult day care facilities, with a total capacity of 150 persons, capable of serving
persons with developmental disabilities. Two adult residential facilities and one group home
have the ability to accommodate persons with developmental disabilities and can serve up
to 24 individuals at maximum capacity.
The housing needs of persons with developmental disabilities can vary from person to
person. Many live with parents or guardians. Some can live independently or in community
care facilities. A prediction of housing needs for the developmentally disabled was calculated
based on the living arrangement distributions presented in Table III -18 and estimates of
population growth using ABAG population forecasts. Table III -19 shows the estimated
housing need.
Profile of the Community Page 28
1 -LI- TTr.-1Q. I :. w A---AOMOntC of Parcnnc with Develnomental Disabilities
.......... ..tea ...... _.�... .... _.. __ ______
__ ---
Number
-
Percent
Lives with
Burlingame
County
Burlingame
County
Parents/Legal Guardian
105
2,289
76%
66%
Community Care Facility (1-6 Beds)
18
532
13%
15%
Community Care Facility (7+ Beds)
0
73
0%
2%
Independent/Supportive Living
12
349
9%
10%
Intermediate Care Facility
0
191
0%
5%
All Others
3
60
2%
2%
Total:
138
3,494
1 100%
100°/%
Source: Golden Gate Regional Center, via a tiemenis
_a_.a Ll......:.... IJeeri Fnr ocrannc with navainnmPntal nkahllities
Source: ABAG, Projections ZU1d; boiaen bare Kegionai Uernni, via 11 EIMIII�JIL>
* Projections based on the proportion of persons with developmental disabilities to the 2010 City pop.
** Based on the proportion of persons not living with parents/guardians (24%) in Table III -17: Living
Arrangements of Persons with Developmental Disabilities.
Accessible Accommodations: Both the Federal Fair Housing Act and the California Fair
Employment and Housing Act impose an affirmative duty on local governments to make
reasonable accommodations (i.e. modifications or exceptions) in their zoning and other land
use regulations when such accommodations may be necessary to afford disabled persons an
equal opportunity to use and enjoy a dwelling. For example, it may be a reasonable
accommodation to allow covered ramps in the setbacks of properties that have already been
developed in order to accommodate residents with mobility impairments. The Burlingame
zoning ordinance has been amended to provide a process to request reasonable
accommodations for these types of physical improvements to a residence.
The City does not require special building codes or onerous project review to construct,
improve, or convert housing for persons with disabilities. Residential care facilities with six
or fewer persons are permitted by right in all residential zoning districts and several
commercial districts. Care facilities with seven or more persons are also permitted in
residential districts and several commercial districts, subject to a conditional use permit.
Profile of the Community Page 29 `,
20102020`
2030
2040'
Population
28,806
31,700
34,800
38,400
Persons with Developmental Disabilities*
138
152
167
184
Housing Need**
33
36
40.
44
Source: ABAG, Projections ZU1d; boiaen bare Kegionai Uernni, via 11 EIMIII�JIL>
* Projections based on the proportion of persons with developmental disabilities to the 2010 City pop.
** Based on the proportion of persons not living with parents/guardians (24%) in Table III -17: Living
Arrangements of Persons with Developmental Disabilities.
Accessible Accommodations: Both the Federal Fair Housing Act and the California Fair
Employment and Housing Act impose an affirmative duty on local governments to make
reasonable accommodations (i.e. modifications or exceptions) in their zoning and other land
use regulations when such accommodations may be necessary to afford disabled persons an
equal opportunity to use and enjoy a dwelling. For example, it may be a reasonable
accommodation to allow covered ramps in the setbacks of properties that have already been
developed in order to accommodate residents with mobility impairments. The Burlingame
zoning ordinance has been amended to provide a process to request reasonable
accommodations for these types of physical improvements to a residence.
The City does not require special building codes or onerous project review to construct,
improve, or convert housing for persons with disabilities. Residential care facilities with six
or fewer persons are permitted by right in all residential zoning districts and several
commercial districts. Care facilities with seven or more persons are also permitted in
residential districts and several commercial districts, subject to a conditional use permit.
Profile of the Community Page 29 `,
Female Headed Households
Single -parent households typically have a special need for such services as childcare and
health care, among others. Female -headed households with children in particular tend to
have lower incomes, which limits their housing options and access to supportive services.
Female -headed households comprised 3,548 of 12,137 households in 2011, or 29.2 percent
of all households. Most of these households were females living alone. Female -headed
family households represented 8.4 percent of Burlingame's households according to the
2009-2011 American Community Survey, an increase in households since 2000. In
particular, the percentage of single mother households increased from 3.5 to 4.4 percent. If
a trend towards more female headed households with children continues, these households
may require special services to meet their specific needs.
Table III -20: Female Headed Households
Source: 2009-2011 American Community Survey, via 21 Elements, supplemented by Census 2000 SFS & SF3
Table III -21: Female Headed Households, County and State Comparison
2000
2011
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
Female living with own children, no husband
436
3.5%
534
4.4%
Female living with other family members, no
husband
531
4.2%
483
4.0%
Female living alone
2,615
20.9%
2,531
20.9%
Total female -headed households
3,582
28.6%
3,548
29.2%
Total Households
12,511
1000%
12,137
100%
Source: 2009-2011 American Community Survey, via 21 Elements, supplemented by Census 2000 SFS & SF3
Table III -21: Female Headed Households, County and State Comparison
Source: 2009-2011 American Community Survey, via 21 Elements
Profile of the Community Page 30
Burlingame
County
State
Number
Percent
Percent
Percent
Female living with own children, no husband
534
4.4%
4.4%
7.3%
Female living with other family members, no
husband
483
4.0%
6.0%
6.2%
Female living alone
2,531
20.9%
14.5%
13.5%
Total female -headed households
3,548
29.2%
25.0%
27.0%
Total Households
12,137
100%
100%
100%
Female Households Below Poverty Level
NA
8.0%
7.8%
16.5%
Source: 2009-2011 American Community Survey, via 21 Elements
Profile of the Community Page 30
Large Households
Large households (those with five or more persons) often have special housing needs due to
their income and the lack of adequately sized, affordable housing. As a result, large
households often live in overcrowded conditions. The lack of large units is especially evident
among rental units.
Based on the CHAS (Comprehensive Housing and Affordability Strategy) Databook prepared
by HUD, Burlingame's large renter households suffer from one or more housing problems,
including housing overpayment, overcrowding and/or substandard housing conditions.
Burlingame had 850 large households, accounting for approximately 7 percent of all
households. There were 575 owner -occupied units with large households and 275 renter -
occupied units with large households. Of all large households, about one-third were renters.
_u_ .e ....
m--- k— and Hnneinn Prnhlamc
Source: ZUUb-ZULU I.HAJ Ua[a, via a ociucuu
Burlingame had more than 6,000 rental units, of which 725 (12%) have more than 3
bedrooms. A breakdown detailing the number of bedrooms in occupied units is shown in
Table III -23. Given that the city had 275 large renter households, in theory there should be
an adequate supply of rental units to accommodate the city's large families. However, 4.1%
of rental units were either overcrowded or extremely overcrowded, as shown in Table III -
24, indicating that some larger families may not necessarily be renting the larger units.
Tahla TTT-774• Housina Units by Bedroom and Tenure
Burlingame
Number' Percent
County.
Percent
State
Percent
Owner occupied
Housing Problems
275
48%
59%
61%
o 0
No Housing Problems 300 SZ /0 41 /0
0
39 /o
Renter -occupied
Housing Problems
180
65%
84%
81%
No Housin Problems 95 35% 16%
19%
Source: ZUUb-ZULU I.HAJ Ua[a, via a ociucuu
Burlingame had more than 6,000 rental units, of which 725 (12%) have more than 3
bedrooms. A breakdown detailing the number of bedrooms in occupied units is shown in
Table III -23. Given that the city had 275 large renter households, in theory there should be
an adequate supply of rental units to accommodate the city's large families. However, 4.1%
of rental units were either overcrowded or extremely overcrowded, as shown in Table III -
24, indicating that some larger families may not necessarily be renting the larger units.
Tahla TTT-774• Housina Units by Bedroom and Tenure
Source: 2009-2011 American Uommunicy purvey
Profile of the Community Page 31
Units
Total:
12,137
Owner occupied:
5 -19 -6 -0 -
960No
No bedroom
0-
1 bedroom
264
2 bedrooms
5203
1-1-52-0-
3 bedrooms
2,356
4 bedrooms
1,365
5 or more bedrooms
455
Renter occupied:
6,177
No bedroom
611
1 bedroom
3,053
Z bedrooms
1,78-8
3 bedrooms
552
4 bedrooms
97
5 or more bedrooms
76
Source: 2009-2011 American Uommunicy purvey
Profile of the Community Page 31
T.M. TTT-94• Numhar of nuprcrnwded 11nits
Source: 2009-2011 American Community Survey, via Zl dements
Homeless
The number of homeless persons and families has been increasing nationally and in the Bay
Area. The demographics of the homeless also have been changing, from predominately
single persons often with substance abuse or mental illness to an increasing number of
families unable to afford high rents.
According to the San Mateo County Homeless Census and Survey, there were 2,281
homeless people in Santa Mateo County counted in 2013. Approximately 43 percent of
these individuals were found in shelters; 57 percent were unsheltered. In the city of
Burlingame, 13 persons were counted during this survey; all of whom were unsheltered.
Although these numbers represent small fractions of the total population (less than one
percent at both the city and county level), the shelter and care needs of homeless
individuals are great.
Farmworkers
Farmworkers are traditionally defined as persons whose primary incomes are earned
through seasonal agricultural work. Farmworkers have special housing needs because they
earn lower incomes than many other workers and move throughout the season from one
harvest to the next. The USDA 2012 Census of Agriculture found that 1,722 farmworkers
were hired in San Mateo County. However there are no farms in Burlingame, and ABAG
reported only 20 Burlingame residents working in Agriculture and Natural Resources ]obs,
representing less than 0.01 percent of the population. This low percentage, combined with
the fact that there are no agricultural lands or farm labor housing within or adjacent to the
City's limits, indicates that the number of actual farm workers in Burlingame is very small
and, therefore, the -City has no specialized housing programs targeted to this group beyond
overall programs for housing affordability.
Profile of the Community Page 32
Occupied Homes
Burlingame
Percent
Burlingame
County
State
Not overcrowded
5,896
99%
96%
96%
Owner
Overcrowded
52
0.9%
3%
3%
Extremely overcrowded
12
0.2%
1%
1%
Not overcrowded
5,923
96%
86%
86%
Renter
Overcrowded
95
1.5%
8%
8%
Extremely overcrowded
159
2.6%
5%
6%
Source: 2009-2011 American Community Survey, via Zl dements
Homeless
The number of homeless persons and families has been increasing nationally and in the Bay
Area. The demographics of the homeless also have been changing, from predominately
single persons often with substance abuse or mental illness to an increasing number of
families unable to afford high rents.
According to the San Mateo County Homeless Census and Survey, there were 2,281
homeless people in Santa Mateo County counted in 2013. Approximately 43 percent of
these individuals were found in shelters; 57 percent were unsheltered. In the city of
Burlingame, 13 persons were counted during this survey; all of whom were unsheltered.
Although these numbers represent small fractions of the total population (less than one
percent at both the city and county level), the shelter and care needs of homeless
individuals are great.
Farmworkers
Farmworkers are traditionally defined as persons whose primary incomes are earned
through seasonal agricultural work. Farmworkers have special housing needs because they
earn lower incomes than many other workers and move throughout the season from one
harvest to the next. The USDA 2012 Census of Agriculture found that 1,722 farmworkers
were hired in San Mateo County. However there are no farms in Burlingame, and ABAG
reported only 20 Burlingame residents working in Agriculture and Natural Resources ]obs,
representing less than 0.01 percent of the population. This low percentage, combined with
the fact that there are no agricultural lands or farm labor housing within or adjacent to the
City's limits, indicates that the number of actual farm workers in Burlingame is very small
and, therefore, the -City has no specialized housing programs targeted to this group beyond
overall programs for housing affordability.
Profile of the Community Page 32
Extremely -Low Income and Very -Low Income Households and Housing Provided
The CHAS 2006-2010 database reported 1,405 extremely -low income (ELI) households, l
representing 11.6 percent of the total households (12,137) in the city of Burlingame. In
addition, 1,075 households were defined as very -low income, representing another 8.9
percent of total households. Assuming the same proportions over time (i.e. no change in
income) and utilizing ABAG projections of 13,620 households by 2020 and 14,890
households by 2030, it is estimated that there will be approximately 1,577 ELI households
and 1,206 very -low income households by 2020, and 1,724 ELI and 1,319 very low income
households by 2030. For the purposes of meeting the RHNA, half of the very -low income
units are assumed to be needed by ELI households. This is consistent with the proportion
determined by the CHAS data and HCD provisions. Table III -25 shows the income limits for
various income categories.
T ki TTT_OC• 1 imita
Source: HCD State Income Limits 2013, via 21 Elements
Profile of the Community Page 33
Extremely
Very Low
Low
Moderate
Above
Moderate
Low -
<30% of
50070 of
800/0 of
120010 of
>120%
Median
Median
Median
Median
of Median
Family Size
Income,
Income
Income
1
$23,750
$39,600
$63,350
$86,500
>$86,500
2
$27,150
$45,250
$72,400
$98,900
>$98,900
3
$30,550
$50,900
$81,450
$111,250
>$111,250
4
$33,950
$56,550
$90,500
$123,600
>$123,600
5
$36,650
$61,050
$97,700
$133,500
>$133,500
6
$39,400
$65,600
$104,950
$143,400
>$143,400
Source: HCD State Income Limits 2013, via 21 Elements
Profile of the Community Page 33
S. Housing Stock Characteristics
This section identifies the characteristics of Burlingame's physical housing stock. This
includes an analysis of housing growth trends, housing conditions, housing prices and rents,
and housing affordability.
Number of Housing Units
Since Burlingame is a built out community, the total number of housing units has remained
fairly stable. There were 13,027 units identified in the 2010 Census. The 2000 Census
identified 12,869 housing units in Burlingame. Between 2007 and 2013, an additional 77
housing units were added. This is an average of 11 new units per year. As an older
community with little remaining vacant residential land for new development, housing
growth in recent years has primarily been attributable to infill on small residential sites.
Table III -26: Number of Housing Permits Issued between 2007 and 2013 by
ALL
sa
40
Very Loc.
30
q. Lose
20
_ .. .
Moderate
s Above
;0
LL
__
Fioesrate
a
2007 2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
Affordability
2007
2008
2009
2010
2io
2012
2013
Total.
Very Low
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Low
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Moderate
1
1
0
1
5
0
8
Above Moderate
6
4
6
9
44
0
69
Annual Total
7
S
6
10
0
49
0
1 77
source: city or Buninganle, Ann uai tiennem rruyiese rceNuii wi nEJuci ny L CIE ICIIL nupi JIICuI Uu.nI �..�. ��...
Profile of the Community Page 34
Increase in Housing Stock
Burlingame has had an incremental increase in new housing units over the past several
Housing Element cycles:
• Between 1994 and 1998, 152 housing units were built in the city. Of these 152 new
units, 102 units were multifamily, 2 units were single family, and the remaining 48
units were in an elderly housing development.
• Between 1999 and 2007, 111 housing units were added to the city's housing stock,
38 market rate units and 73 moderately affordable units.
• From 2008 to 2012, 7 moderate and 63 above moderate units were added.
Housing developments under construction or in the building permit review phase are
primarily comprised of condominium and apartment projects:
• 1459 Oak Grove Ave is a 3 -unit condominium project (all market rate) that replaces
a single family dwelling unit.
1321 EI Camino Real replaces a single family dwelling with a 5 -unit apartment
building containing 1 moderate income unit.
• 904 Bayswater Ave is a 6 -unit condominium project that replaces 5 existing units;
one of the new units is a moderate income unit.
• 1800 Trousdale Drive features a new 25 unit condominium (22 market, 3 moderate
income) that replaces an office building.
• 1225 Floribunda Ave (5 market rate, 1 moderate income, replacing 2 existing units)
has submitted an application for building permits and is expected to be completed
within the planning period.
Cumulatively, these projects would result in 45 new units, with 39 market rate and 6 deed -
restricted affordable units, replacing 9 units and an office building.
In addition to projects under construction, several pending proposals could add a number of
units to the housing stock:
• 1509 EI Camino is a 15 -unit condominium project (13 market rate, 2 moderate
income) that would replace 11 existing units.
• 556 EI Camino Real is a 25 -unit project (22 market, 3 moderate income) that would
replace 14 existing units.
• 1433 Floribunda Ave is a 10 -unit project (9 market rate, 1 moderate income) that
would replace 5 units.
• 21 Park Road proposes 8 units (7 market rate, 1 moderate income) that would
replace an existing commercial use on the site.
These projects could add up to 58 new units to the city, with 51 market rate units and 7
deed -restricted affordable units, while replacing 30 units and a commercial use.
Housing Type and Tenure
Table III -27 presents the mix of housing types in Burlingame. Typical of a built out
community, the overall distribution of housing types in the city has remained relatively
stable. Of the city's more than 13,000 housing units in 2010, 48 percent were single-family
homes and 50 percent were multi -family units. The remaining 2-3 percent of units
(approximately), are made up of "attached" single-family units. Burlingame has no mobile
home units.
Profile of the Community Page 35
Single Family Homes Vs Multiple Family Units
Single-family detached homes made up 48 percent of Burlingame's housing stock. Single-
family attached units were 4 percent of the housing stock. Multiple family units were 48
percent of the housing stock and are occupied predominantly by renters. The housing
composition in Burlingame is contrasted with the greater prevalence of single family
detached homes in the County (57%) and the State (58%). The high percentage of multiple
family units in Burlingame gives the community a unique character and different range of
housing opportunities compared to the greater proportion of single family housing stock
found in many jurisdictions in the County and around the State.
TahlP TII-27: Housing Units by Tvoe
Type
Percent.
Number'
Single Family Detached
48%
6,246
Single Family Attached
4%
543
2 units
3%
354
3 or 4 units
6%
842
5 to 9 units
12%
1,530
10 to 19 units
13%
1,660
20 or more units
14%
1,764
Mobile Home or Other
1%
88
Total
100%
13,027
Source: Percentages from 2009-2011 American Community Survey, via 21 Elements, supplemented by Census
2010 housing counts
Tnhlo iii-7Re Hnucinn llnitc by Tvoe and Tenure
Source: 2009-2011 American Community Survey
Profile of the Community Page 36
Owner -
Renter
Number
Percent
Number
Percent'
1, detached or attached
5,330
44%
1,088
9%
2 to 9 units
161
1%
2,321
19%
10 or more units
402
3%
2,748
23%
Mobile home and all other types of units
67
1%
20
<1%
Sub total
5,960
49%
6,177
51%
Total households
12,137
100%
Source: 2009-2011 American Community Survey
Profile of the Community Page 36
Table III -29. Housin Units b T e, Count and State Comparison
Source: ZUU9-tu11 Amencan lAmmun EY Jurvey, via a cicuicii I
Renter Vs Owner Occupied
Housing tenure refers to whether a housing unit is owned, rented or is vacant. Tenure is an
important indicator of the housing climate of a community, reflecting the relative cost of
housing opportunities, and the ability of residents to afford housing. Tenure also influences
residential mobility, with owner units generally exhibiting lower turnover rates than rental
housing. According to the 2009-2011 American Community Survey, 49 percent of
Burlingame's households were homeowners.
The 2009-2011 American Community Survey indicates that of Burlingame's occupied units,
49 percent were owner occupied and 51 percent were renter occupied. The number of
owner occupied units has increased from 48 percent in 2000.
Thin TTT_gn• Mnucehnldc by Tenure
--.----
Burling ame
County
State
Single Family Detached
48%
57%
58%
Single Family Attached
4%
9%
7%
2 units
3%
2%
3%
3 or 4 units
6%
5%
6%
5 to 9 units
12%
6%
6%
10 to 19 units
13%
6%
5%
20 or more units
14%
14%
11%
Mobile Home or Other
1%
1%
4%
Source: ZUU9-tu11 Amencan lAmmun EY Jurvey, via a cicuicii I
Renter Vs Owner Occupied
Housing tenure refers to whether a housing unit is owned, rented or is vacant. Tenure is an
important indicator of the housing climate of a community, reflecting the relative cost of
housing opportunities, and the ability of residents to afford housing. Tenure also influences
residential mobility, with owner units generally exhibiting lower turnover rates than rental
housing. According to the 2009-2011 American Community Survey, 49 percent of
Burlingame's households were homeowners.
The 2009-2011 American Community Survey indicates that of Burlingame's occupied units,
49 percent were owner occupied and 51 percent were renter occupied. The number of
owner occupied units has increased from 48 percent in 2000.
Thin TTT_gn• Mnucehnldc by Tenure
--.----
-"..-Percent,.
Owners
48%
2000
Renters
52%
Owners
49%
2011
Renters
51%
Source: 2009-2011 American Community Survey, via 21 Elements
Vacancy Rate
A vacancy rate measures the overall housing availability in a community and is often a good
indicator of how efficiently for -sale and rental housing units are meeting the current
demand for housing. A vacancy rate of five percent for rental housing and two percent for
ownership housing is generally considered healthy and suggests that there is a balance
between the demand and supply of housing. A lower vacancy rate may indicate that
households are having difficulty finding housing that is affordable, leading to overcrowding
or households having to pay more than they can afford.
F.,
Profile of the Community Page 37
The 2010 Census reports a homeowner vacancy rate of 1.3 and a rental vacancy rate of 4.5.
The vacancy rate had increased for owners since 2000, when the homeowner rate was 0.4
and the rental rate was 4.5.
Housing Age and Condition
The age of a community's housing stock can provide an indicator of overall housing
conditions. Typically housing over 30 years in age is likely to have rehabilitation needs that
may include new plumbing, roof repairs, foundation work and other repairs.
Condition of Housing Stock
Based on building permit activity, with many new homes replacing older homes, second
floor additions and remodels, the overall condition of the housing stock in Burlingame has
been improving. Between 2007 and 2013, the City has issued 99 permits for new single
family dwelling units and 2,165 permits for residential alterations. The City has also issued
347 permits for bathroom upgrades and 279 permits for kitchen upgrades, most of which
were for residential units.
In 2000, the number of housing units in the city was 12,858. The 2010 Census reported
13,027 units. Approximately 87 percent of these units were built prior to 1980. Typically,
structures over 30 years old may be in need of major repairs, however, discussions with the
City's Code Enforcement Officer revealed that no units have been cited for property upkeep
or identified as unfit for human habitation in the past seven years.
Tahle TTT-31: Aae of Housino Stock as of 2010
�-urce: Percentages from 2009-2011 American Community Survey, via 21 Elements, supplemented by Census
2010 housing count.
Profile of the Community Page 38
Percent
Units
Built in 2000 or more recently
4%
529
Built in 1990s
5%
598
Built in 1980s
4%
512
Build in 1970s
14%
1,819
Built in 1960s
15%
1,892
Built 1950s or earlier
59%
7,676
100%
13,027
�-urce: Percentages from 2009-2011 American Community Survey, via 21 Elements, supplemented by Census
2010 housing count.
Profile of the Community Page 38
Housing Cost and Affordability
The cost of housing is directly related to the extent of housing problems in a community. If
housing costs are relatively high in comparison to household income, there will be a higher
prevalence of overpayment and overcrowding. This section summarizes the cost and
affordability of the housing stock to Burlingame residents.
Housing Costs
The median price of a single-family home ranged from $1.2 million to $1.6 million between
2005 and 2012. During this period the price peaked to $1,652,000 for single-family homes
and $771,000 for multiple family homes in 2007, before a steep drop during the housing
crisis and recession. After a decline in prices between 2007 and 2011, single-family and
multiple family home prices rose in 2012. With the recovering housing market in the region,
Burlingame may see an increase in median sale prices in following years.
r,�i.. rrr_oo. Mi. A!-- ur.ma Coln. Drirac_ 7nnR-7M 7
_ -
Single Family
Multi Family
Burlingame
County
State
Burlingame
County
State
2005
$1,575,029
$939,148
$576,436
$0
$586,432
$498,848
2006
$1,617,477
$961,170
$636,410
$747,500
$625,140
$534,980
2007
$1,652,134
$935,536
$594,272
$771,288
$600,432
$493,920
2008
$1,485,802
$865,512
$485,784
$672,840
$554,364
$412,776
2009
$1,402,284
$749,304
$365,580
$618,300
$465,696
$337,716
2010
$1,321,072
$762,910
$359,948
$576,998
$449,507
$333,733
2011
$1,296,534
$691,439
$330,527
$551,050
$390,576
$300,142
2012
$1,384,217
$660,944
$305,727
$654,480
$360,065
$271,185
Source. San Mateo County ASSOciate OT Keamors, Aa]u5Luu iur wuauuu w'uio wuai o, via a
There is a significant difference between the maximum affordability price of a home and the
actual median values of single family homes and condominiums. The maximum affordable
home price is based on annual income. Table ITI-33 shows a large disparity between a
maximum affordable price and the median price in San Mateo County. A median -priced
single family home for a single person earning the median income is more than four times
the person's maximum afr-rdable price. A median -priced condominium is more than twice
the maximum affordable price. For persons who earn less than the median income, the
affordability gap becomes even larger and a median priced home becomes more than four
times their maximum affordable home price.
Profile of the Community Page 39
TahlP IIT -33: Abilitv to Pav for For -Sale Housino
Source: Baird+Driskell Community Planning; San Mateo County Association of Realtors, via 21 Clements
Renter Vs Owner Occupied:
Since 2010, rents in Burlingame and San Mateo County have been increasing. In 2010, the
average rent for a two-bedroom, one -bath apartment in Burlingame was $1,847. The
average rent rose to $2,364 in 2013. In 2010, the median rent in San Mateo County was
$1,760 for a two-bedroom unit. The rent for a two-bedroom unit in 2013 grew to $2,234.
The rental prices in 2013 were the highest recorded over the past decade. Affordability of
rental units will continue to be a concern for lower income families.
Profile of the Community Page 40
Median
Affordability
Maximum
Priced
Gap for
Median Priced
-
Affordability
Annual
Affordable
Single
Single
Townhouse
Gap for
Income
Home
Family
Family
or
Condo
Price
Detached
Home
Condominium
Home
Single Person
Extremely
$23,750
$97,114
$1,384,217
-$1,287,103
$654,480
-$557,366
Low Income
Very Low
$39,600
$161,925
$1,384,217
-$1,222,292
$654,480
-$492,555
Income
Low Income
$63,350
$259,039
$1,384,217
-$1,125,178
$654,480
-$395,441
Median
$72,100
$294,818
$1,384,217
-$1,089,399
$654,480
-$359,662
Income
Moderate
$86,500
$353,699
$1,384,217
$1,030,518
$654,480
$300,781
Income
Four Person
Extremely
$33,950
$138,822
$1,384,217
-$1,245,395
$654,480
$515,658
Low Income
Very Low
$56,550
$231,233
$1,384,217
-$1,152,984
$654,480
-$423,247
Income
Low Income
$90,500
$347,655
$1,384,217
-$1,036,562
$654,480
-$306,825
Median
$103,000
$370,055
$1,384,217
-$1,014,162
$654,480
-$284,425
Income
Moderate
$123,600
$505,402
$1,384,217
-$878,815
$654,480
-$149,078
Income
Source: Baird+Driskell Community Planning; San Mateo County Association of Realtors, via 21 Clements
Renter Vs Owner Occupied:
Since 2010, rents in Burlingame and San Mateo County have been increasing. In 2010, the
average rent for a two-bedroom, one -bath apartment in Burlingame was $1,847. The
average rent rose to $2,364 in 2013. In 2010, the median rent in San Mateo County was
$1,760 for a two-bedroom unit. The rent for a two-bedroom unit in 2013 grew to $2,234.
The rental prices in 2013 were the highest recorded over the past decade. Affordability of
rental units will continue to be a concern for lower income families.
Profile of the Community Page 40
Tahle TTT-34e Averaae Rents in Burlinaame
Source: RealFacts Annual Trends Report (adjusted for inflation to 2013 dollars), via 21 Elements
Table III -35: Countvwide Median Rental Rates
Studio
1 Bdrm 1 Bath.
2 Bdrm i Bath
3 Bdrm 2 Bath
2003
Price
Percent
Increase
Price
Percent.,
Increase
Price
Percent
Increase
Price
Percent
Increase
2005
$1,102
x
$1,467
x
$1,784
1 x
$2,642
x
2006
$1,206
9%
$1,505
3%
$1,777
0%
$2,798
6%
2007
$1,287
7%
$1,612
7%
$1,857
5%
$3,046
9%
2008
$1,426
11%
$1,703
6%
$2,029
9%
$3,304
8%
2009
$1,331
-7%
$1,730
2%
$1,882
-7%
$2,943
-11%
2010
$1,253
-6%
$1,592
-8%
$1,847
-2%
$3,399
16%
2011
$1,381
10%
$1,772
11%
$2,069
12%
$3,306
-3%
2012
$1,635
18%
$1,964
11%
$2,397
16%
$3,557
8%
2013
$1,686
3%
$1,931
-2%
$2,346
1 -2%
$3,345
-6%
Source: RealFacts Annual Trends Report (adjusted for inflation to 2013 dollars), via 21 Elements
Table III -35: Countvwide Median Rental Rates
Source: San Mateo County Department of Housing, via 21 Elements
Second units can provide an affordable rental option for households. Based on a survey of
39 secondary dwelling units on Craigslist, prepared by 21 Elements in December 2013, the
median price of secondary rental units in San Mateo County was $1,350. Rents ranged from
$500 to $2,650, and unit sizes var =j from studios to two-bedroom units. Alth _gh the
survey was based on a small sample, some information was gleaned about the breakdown
of second unit rental affordability:
• 3 percent was affordable to extremely low income one and two person households.
• 12 percent was affordable to very low income one and two person households.
57 percent was affordable to low income one person households.
0 64 percent was affordable to low income two person households.
• 18 percent was affordable to moderate income one person households.
0 16 percent was affordable to moderate income two person households
Profile of the Community Page 41
ibr
Yearly
Increase
ir
26r
Yearly
Increase'
2003
$1,580
-9.2%
$1,916
-7.9%
2004
$1,503
-4.9%
$1,806
-5.8%
2005
$1,472
-2.1%
$1,698
-6.0%
2006
$1523
3.4%
$1714
0.9%
2007
$1628
7.0%
$1,840
7.4%
2008
$1,715
5.30%
$1,957
6.3%
2009
$1,672
-2.5%
$1,871
-4.4%
2010
$1555
-7.0%
$1,760
-5.9%
2011
$1,600
2.9%
$1,818
3.3%
2012
$1,824
14%
$2,087
15%
2013
$1,954
7.1%
1 $2,234
1 7.1%
Source: San Mateo County Department of Housing, via 21 Elements
Second units can provide an affordable rental option for households. Based on a survey of
39 secondary dwelling units on Craigslist, prepared by 21 Elements in December 2013, the
median price of secondary rental units in San Mateo County was $1,350. Rents ranged from
$500 to $2,650, and unit sizes var =j from studios to two-bedroom units. Alth _gh the
survey was based on a small sample, some information was gleaned about the breakdown
of second unit rental affordability:
• 3 percent was affordable to extremely low income one and two person households.
• 12 percent was affordable to very low income one and two person households.
57 percent was affordable to low income one person households.
0 64 percent was affordable to low income two person households.
• 18 percent was affordable to moderate income one person households.
0 16 percent was affordable to moderate income two person households
Profile of the Community Page 41
Overpayment
With the high cost of housing in and around the city, households often spend a large portion
of their income on housing. According to CHAS data from the U.S. Department of Housing
and Urban Development, overpayment is defined as households that spend more than 30
percent of income on housing. More than 40 percent of households in the city were either
overpaying or severely overpaying for housing. About 29 percent of all households in the
city were categorized in the low or very low income range and experienced some level of
housing overpayment. Table III -36 shows households overpaying by income category.
Overpayment and severe overpayment greatly affect very low to low income renter
households and moderate to above moderate owner households, as shown in Table III -37.
Table III -36: Households Overoavina
Source: CHAS 2006-2010 based on Acs, via ABAG 1013 Data for Bay Area Housing Elements
Table III -37: Households Overoavino by Tenure
Overpaying
(30-500/o of HH Income)
Severely Overpaying
(>50% of HH Income)
Number
Percent ofPercent
_ Total HH
Number
of
Total HH"
Very Low Income <_50% of HAMFI
655
6%
1,435
12%
Low Income 50- 80%
935
8%
350
3%
Moderate 80 to 120%
435
4%
250
Z%
Above Moderate 1200/0+
555
5%
190
2%
Total
2,580
.22%
2,ZZ5
19%
Source: CHAS 2006-2010 based on Acs, via ABAG 1013 Data for Bay Area Housing Elements
Table III -37: Households Overoavino by Tenure
oource: UHAs 20ub-Lu10 Oasea on ACS, via ABAG 2013 Data for Bay Area Housing Elements
Overpayment disproportionately affects younger households (between 15 and 24 years old)
and older households (65 years and above). For younger households, this is likely due to
the fact that they recently purchased homes at high prices and are stretching their incomes
to pay monthly costs. For older households, this is likely due to the fact that residents in
this age group may be retired and receive fixed incomes.
Profile of the Community Page 42
Overpaying
(30-50% of HH Income)
Severely Overpaying
(>50% of HH Income)
Owner
Renter
Owner
Renter
Very Low Income :550% of HAMFI
180
475
595
840
Low Income 50- 80%
140
795
295
55
Moderate 80 to 120%
265
170
250
0
Above Moderate 120%+
545
10
190
0
Total by Tenure
1,130
1,450
1,330
895
Total Units paying 30-50%
2,580
2,225
oource: UHAs 20ub-Lu10 Oasea on ACS, via ABAG 2013 Data for Bay Area Housing Elements
Overpayment disproportionately affects younger households (between 15 and 24 years old)
and older households (65 years and above). For younger households, this is likely due to
the fact that they recently purchased homes at high prices and are stretching their incomes
to pay monthly costs. For older households, this is likely due to the fact that residents in
this age group may be retired and receive fixed incomes.
Profile of the Community Page 42
According to the 2006-2010 CHAS Data Query Tool from the Department of Housing and 6
Urban Development, a high percentage of low income households were overpaying for t
housing. Overpayment affects about 88 percent of extremely low income households, 79
percent of very low income households, and 64 percent of low income households. The
majority of owner households in all lower income categories that overpaid for housing were
contributing more than 50 percent of their incomes. Most extremely low income renter
households paid more than 50 percent of their incomes to housing. The majority of very low
and low income renter households paid between 30 and 50 percent towards housing. Table
III -38 shows the percentage of households overpaying at different income categories.
T�L1.. TTT-'f a, e I ^xa, Tnr^mP iinmicPhniric
Source: CHAS 2006-2010 Data Query Tool, via HUD
Overcrowding
Overcrowded housing is defined as units where the number of occupants is greater than the
number of rooms. An overcrowded unit has greater than 1 and up to 1.5 persons per room.
An extremely overcrowded unit has more than 1.5 persons per room. In Burlingame, about
150 households were living in overcrowded conditions and about 170 households were living
Profile of the Community Page 43
Owner
Renter
Total
Percent
PercentPercent
in HH
in HH
in HH
#
Income`
#
Income
#
Income
Level
Level
Level
Overpaying
120
21%
95
12%
215
15%
(30-50% of Income)
Extremely
Severely Overpaying
360
62%
660
80%
1020
73%
Low
(>50% of Income)
Income
Total Overpaying
480
83%
755
92%
1235
88%
HH
Total Extremely Low
580
100%
825
100%
1405
100%
Income HH
Overpaying
55
11%
380
65%
435
40%
(30-50% of Income)
Very Low
Severely Overpaying
235
48%
180
31%
415
39%
Income
(>50% of Income)
HH
Total Overpaying
290
59%
560
96%
850
79%
Total Very Low
490
100%
585
1000/a
1075
100%
Income HH
Overpaying
140
20%
795
61%
935
47%
(30-50% of Income)
Low
Severely Overpaying
295
42%
55
4%
350
17%
Income
(>50% of Income)
HH
Total Overpaying
435
62%
850
65%
1285
64%
Total Low Income
705
100%
1300
100%
2005
100%
HH
Source: CHAS 2006-2010 Data Query Tool, via HUD
Overcrowding
Overcrowded housing is defined as units where the number of occupants is greater than the
number of rooms. An overcrowded unit has greater than 1 and up to 1.5 persons per room.
An extremely overcrowded unit has more than 1.5 persons per room. In Burlingame, about
150 households were living in overcrowded conditions and about 170 households were living
Profile of the Community Page 43
in extremely overcrowded units. A greater number of renter households faced overcrowded
conditions than owner households. Although overcrowding was not an issue among the
majority of residents, it did affect a number of residents, especially renter households where
1.5 percent lived in overcrowded conditions and 2.6 percent lived in extremely overcrowded
conditions.
Overcrowding may be associated with housing problems that affect the quality of life. The
cost burden of housing affected more than 90 percent of extremely low and very low income
renter households. Owner households that experience cost burdens included 83 percent of
extremely low income households and 59 percent of very low income households. Cost
burden was an issue for more than 60 percent of low income households, for both renters
and owners.
Table III -39: Overcrowding
Source: Z009-2011 American Community Survey, via 21 Elements
Table III -40: Housina Problems - Cost Burdens
Number
Percent-
Extremely Low Income
Not overcrowded
5,896
990/0
Owner
Overcrowded
52
0.90/0
15%
Extremely overcrowded
12
0.2%
73%
Not overcrowded
5,923
96%
Renter
Overcrowded
95
1.5%
0%
Extremely overcrowded
159
2.6%
Source: Z009-2011 American Community Survey, via 21 Elements
Table III -40: Housina Problems - Cost Burdens
source: unAa uaca zuub-2uiu, via a tiemenis
Profile of the Community Page 44
Total
Renters
Total Total
Owners Households
Extremely Low Income
Percent without adequate kitchen or plumbing
9%
0%
5%
Cost Burden >30% to 49% of income
12%
21%
15%
Cost Burden >50% of income
80%
62%
73%
Total
825
580
1405
Very Low Income
Percent without adequate kitchen or plumbing
0%
0%
0%
Cost Burden >30%
96%
59%
79%
Total
585
490
1075
Low Income
Percent without adequate kitchen or plumbing
0%
0%
0%
Cost Burden >30%
65%
62%
64%
Total
1300
705
2005
source: unAa uaca zuub-2uiu, via a tiemenis
Profile of the Community Page 44
Assisted Housing at Risk of Conversion
The State Housing Element law and HUD Consolidated Plan regulations require cities to
prepare an inventory including all assisted multi -family rental units which are eligible to 1
convert to non -low-income housing uses due to termination of subsidy contract, mortgage
prepayment, or expiring use restrictions. State Housing Element law requires this inventory
to cover a ten-year evaluation period following the statutory due date of the Housing
Element (January 31, 2015); whereas the HUD regulation requires the inventory to cover
only the five-year planning period of the Consolidated Plan.
According to a study conducted by the California Housing Partnership Corporation published
in August 2008, the city of Burlingame has no HUD subsidized properties (with HUD 236 and
221 (d)(3) mortgages and/or Section 8). In 2014, CHPC confirmed again that there were no
HUD subsidized affordable housing properties in the city. This means that there are no units
at risk of conversion to market rate. While the City does maintain over 100 Section 8
contracts, those contracts are tied to individual households, not units.
6. Regional Housing Needs
State law requires that a housing element quantify existing and projected housing needs for
persons of all income levels within each community, including the community's share of the
regional housing need by income level. The Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) is
responsible for preparing estimates of local and regional housing need based on factors
prescribed by State Law (Section 65884 or Article 10.6). The factors included in the division
of the regional housing need into individual community assignment are: market demand for
housing, availability of suitable sites and public -facilities, commuting patterns, housing type
and tenure, and housing needs of farm workers. In addition ABAG looks at regional and L
local vacancy rates and at housing values and rents as indicators of market demand. l
Household projections are based on employment opportunities, availability of sites and
commuting patterns. Type of housing is based on census data and regional projections.
Existing Housing Needs
The projected housing need obligation for the 2015 to 2023 planning period is 863 units. Of
these units, the city will need to accommodate 420 low to extremely low income housing
units. From 2009 to 2013, 59 above moderate income and 6 moderate income units have
been built. No low or very low income units were constructed during that period.
Eight -Year Projected Housing Need
State law requires that each community consider the housing needs of people of all income
levels. In addition, State law requires that the regional housing needs should be balanced
throughout the region so that communities will not be impacted with relatively high
proportions of lower income housing. In considering existing need, we also should give
attention to the number of existing units needed to replace substandard structures or
substandard living conditions generally marked by overcrowding and overpayment.
ABAG has the responsibility of projecting the housing needs for the 2015-2023 period based
on the factors identified in State law. The eight-year housing need numbers include market
rate housing as well as units for those with lower incomes. The projected need number is
Profile of the Community Page 45
the number of dwelling units needed to provide for the total expected household growth and
Burlingame's share of the projected regional housing need. For this cycle, the 21 cities
within San Mateo County, and the County as well, combined efforts to develop a housing
allocation for the sub -region. The projected need number for the planning period (2015-
2023) for Burlingame is 863 dwelling units.
Following are the projected housing need numbers for 2015 through 2023 for the City of
Burlingame by income category:
Table III -41: Proiected Housing Need by Income Cateaory
Income Category
Definition
Income for
No. ofFamily
of 4
Units
Extremely Low
Household income up to
$33,950
138
o
0-30% of AMI
Very Low
Household income up to
$56,550
138
31-50% of AMI
Low
Household income up to
$90,500
144
51-80% of AMI
Median Income
Area Median Income
$03,000
AMI
Moderate
Household income up to
$123,600
155
81-120% of AMI
Above Moderate
Household income above
Market Rate
288
120% of AMI
Total Current need
863
Average Yearly
Need
108
Source: ABAG, Final ZU14-Z0Z2 Kegional Housing Need Allocation by county, via 21 Elements; Income for
family of 4 from HCD State Income Limits 2013, via 21 Elements
Profile of the Community Page 46
IV. Housing Constraints
One of the roles of the Housing Element is to identify possible constraints to the creation of
affordable housing. Constraints can be government policies, financial burdens, market
trends, environmental factors, and more. This section will discuss potential constraints, both
governmental and non-governmental to the production of housing.
GOVERNMENTAL CONSTRAINTS
1. Land Use Regulations
General Plan: The General Plan establishes land uses and land use densities for the city of
Burlingame. Residential densities and corresponding zoning designations are as follows:
single family uses (up to 8 dwelling units per acre) R-1; medium density (duplex at 9 to 20
units per acre) R-2; medium high (21 to 50 units per acre); and high density (51 plus units
per acre) R-44.
Specific Planning Areas:
North Burlingame/Rollins Road Specific Plan: The North Burlingame/Rollins Road Specific
Plan, adopted in 2004, specifies areas in North Burlingame for multiple family residential
uses with a maximum density of 40 units per acre. Mixed uses projects with a residential
component are also allowed, with a maximum density of 40 units per acre for the residential
portion of the project.
To implement the North Burlingame/Rollins Road Specific Plan, the TW (Trousdale West)
and ECN (EI Camino North) zoning designations have been established. The TW zone
district allows by right both stand-alone multifamily residential development or mixed office `
and residential development. It is also required that at least one-half of the floor area be in t
residential use. In a mixed use building, the maximum residential density is 30 units per
acre, and a stand-alone multi -family residential development would have a maximum
density of 40 units per acre. The zoning requires a minimum building height of 3S feet, and
a maximum height which varies from 62 to 75 feet, depending on the street frontage. The
zoning also encourages reduced setbacks, requiring a front build -to line of ten feet. These
standards would encourage development at the upper ranges of density, and would also
encourage re -use of sites that are now developed with smaller office buildings. There are
many single story offices that were built in the 1960's and 1970's in this area.
The ECN zone district allows by right both stand-alone multi -family residential development
or mixed office/retail and residential development. The density for both stand-alone and
mixed use residential is 40 units per acre, and the mixed use project must include a
r-Sidential component. In this zone, there is a minimum building height of 35 to 48 feet,
depending on the street frontage, and maximum allowed heights of between 62 and 75 feet.
Depending on the street frontage, structures are required to be constructed at a front build -
to -line, in some cases with no setback. Density bonuses are given to a development when
the project includes lot consolidation.
Downtown Specific Plan: The Burlingame Downtown Specific Plan was adopted by the City
Council on October 4, 2010, and the implementing zoning for the plan was adopted by the
Council on September 19, 2011. Downtown Burlingame is divided into a series of Planning
Areas, and each planning area or district provides for a different mix of uses and intensities.
Multi -family residential uses are permitted in eight of the twelve areas, both on the ground
floors and upper floors of buildings. The zoning districts within the Downtown Specific Plan
area where multi -family residential uses are permitted are HMU (Howard Mixed Use), CAR
Housing Constraints Page 47
(California Auto Row), MMU (Myrtle Mixed Use), BMU (Bayswater Mixed Use) as well as the
R-3 and R-4 zoned properties within the Downtown Area. The adopted zoning for the
downtown area includes parking reductions for sites within the downtown area based on the
fact that they are within walking distance to the transit centers. Additional incentives
outside of the Downtown Specific Plan regulations would apply for affordable housing and lot
consolidation.
The CR zone is for a very small area along California Drive with through lots to Edgehill
Drive. The mixed use zone provides for retail commercial development on California Drive,
combined with residential development fronting on Edgehill. The residential development
standards are similar to the R-2 standards which apply to other properties along Edgehill
Drive. Although there has been one project built within this zone within the last 10 years,
there are no opportunity sites identified within this district.
Zoning Ordinance: The City of Burlingame's Zoning Ordinance sets forth requirements that
can affect the type, appearance and cost of housing built in Burlingame. The zoning
ordinance sets the standards for lot size, use, lot coverage, floor area ratio, setbacks,
height, open space and parking. In Burlingame, there are four residential zoning districts.
With implementation of the North Burlingame/Rollins Road and Downtown Specific Plans,
there are also several mixed use districts (C-R, TW, ECN, HMU, CAR, MMU and BMU),
allowing all multi -family residential or mixed commercial/residential use. All of these mixed
use zoning districts are close to the city's major transportation corridors, encouraging
residential development in these locations.
The minimum residential lot size in Burlingame is 5,000 square feet. There are some areas
in the city, mostly hillside areas, where the minimum lot size is 7,000 and 10,000 square
feet. There are also some nonconforming 3,000 and 4,000 square foot parcels in the city's
older subdivisions. The lot coverage allowed for single-family development is 40%, and 50%
coverage is allowed for multiple family development. Lot coverage on corner lots in R-3 and
R-4 zoning districts is 60%. Side setback requirements are based upon lot width, range
from 4 to 7 feet, and are required for all residential developments. The minimum front and
rear setback requirement is 15 feet. Private and shared open space are required only for
residential condominium developments. These requirements are on a per unit basis, with 75
square feet of private open space required per unit, and 100 square feet of common open
space required per unit. Floor area ratio pertains only to single-family projects and depends
on the lot size, location and placement of the house.
Unlike other cities in San Mateo County, over half of Burlingame's housing stock is multi-
family units. The densities of the multi -family units vary from 20 units per acre, to over 50
units per acre. Except for the addition of residential condominium requirements for multiple
family units in the 1970s, the zoning regulations for multi -unit developments have, not
changed much over the years.
Burlingame does not have density limits (units per acre) established by zoning in the
residential zoning districts, except for a density limit of 40 units per acre is required in the
residential mixed use zoning districts (ECN and TW) in North Burlingame. Within the
Downtown Specific Plan, there is an average maximum unit size of 1,250 square feet per
unit (meaning the average unit size of all units cannot exceed 1,250 square feet), which in
effect serves as a minimum density.
In practice, the number of parking spaces that can be accommodated on a site is the
ultimate determination of the maximum number of units on a multiple family zoned lot. The
parking requirement in Burlingame is based upon the number of bedrooms, per unit. One
Housing Constraints Page 48
and one-half spaces are required for each studio or one -bedroom unit; two parking spaces
required for a two bedroom unit; two and one-half spaces required for a three or more
bedroom unit. Within the Downtown Burlingame area, the parking requirement for multi-
family districts is reduced based on the area's proximity to the Caltrain station and regional
bus routes. Within Downtown Burlingame, one space is required for each studio or one
bedroom unit; one and on -half spaces for each two bedroom unit; and two spaces for units
with three bedrooms or more. Guest parking is required only for multiple family
condominium projects and is required based upon the project size. Guest parking is not
required for projects within the Downtown Specific Plan area.
Parking is one of the major limiting factors in developing high-density housing in
Burlingame. Often parking in below grade structures is used to increase the dwelling unit
densities in multi -family developments, through typically only one level of underground
parking is financially feasible for projects. The Code allows group residential facilities for the
elderly to be built with 25% of the required parking per unit. Except within the Downtown
Specific Plan area, there are currently no provisions for reduced parking for multi -family
development near mass transit, although some compact spaces are allowed.
The height limit for residential structures in the R-1 and R-2 zoning districts is two and one-
half stories or 30 feet, and can be increased to 36 feet to accommodate design features of
certain architectural styles. The R-3 zoning district has a height limit of four stories or 55
feet and the R-4 zoning district is six stories or 75 feet in height. A conditional use permit is
required for any multiple family structure over 35 feet in height. However, the inclusionary
zoning regulations contain an incentive which allows heights up to 46 feet (4 stories) by
right for any project which complies with the inclusionary zoning provisions. In addition,
heights of between 62 and 75 feet are allowed by right for residential uses in the TW and
ECN zones (North Burlingame). In the Downtown Specific Plan area, heights up to 55 feet
are allowed by right in the HMU and R-4 Incentive areas; within the MMU and BMU zoned
areas, heights up to 35 feet are allowed by right and up to 45 feet (MMU) or 55 feet (BMU)
are allowed with a Conditional Use Permit. At the north end of the city near the BART
station in Millbrae, there are height limits imposed by the FAA and SFO Airport. The
maximum height in the portions of this area affected by the flight paths is limited based on
the Height Restrictions specified in the San Mateo County Comprehensive Airport Land Use
Plan.
Comprehensive Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan: The City/County Association of
Governments of San Mateo County (C/CAG) has found that the Burlingame 2015-2023
Housing Element is consistent with the policies established in the Comprehensive Airport
Land Use Compatibility Plan (November 2012). Policies that govern the safety of critical
airways from obstructions beneath the calculated ascent and descent profiles are found
under section 4.5.4 (Airspace Protection Policies) in the Plan. Proposed projects in
Burlingame must be compliant with policies as established in the Plan, including: 1)
notification and filing requirements (4.5.4, AP -1); 2) design recommendations from findings
in FAA aeronautical studies (4.5.4, AP -2); 3) height restriction and filing requirements
(4.5.4, AP -3); and 4) C/CAG review and project consistency with FAA regulations for land
uses that may cause flight hazards (4.5.4, AP -4).
Federal Aviation Administration: All future housing development in the city of Burlingame,
within the area bounded by Murchison Drive, Sequoia Avenue, Quesada Way, Davis Drive,
Dufferin Avenue and California Drive will require formal FAA review, per the FAA Form 7460-
1 review process. The project sponsor is responsible for this requirement, at or before the
time of project submittal to the City. The City considers the FAA's evaluation and
recommendation (s), as part of its review of the proposed project.
Housing Constraints Page 49
In areas where there are airport height restrictions, the FAA requires that an applicant
obtain a "Determination of No Hazard to Air Navigation." In the North Burlingame area, the
airport height restrictions generally extend higher than the 75 foot height limit of the ECN
and TW zone districts. However, since it is a sloped surface, there is the potential for the
project to be affected. The applicant submits the proposed project plans to the FAA, the FAA
staff reviews the height proposed by the project and compares it to the obstruction
standards of the FAA regulations. This process is an administrative process, and generally
takes about 30 days for a determination. Of the four projects reviewed by the FAA within
the North Burlingame area, none have exceeded the FAA's obstruction standards.
Conditional Use Permits: A Conditional Use Permit (CUP) is a regulatory mechanism to allow
the proper integration into the community, uses which may be suitable only in specific
locations in a zoning district, or only if such uses are designed or arranged on the site in a
particular manner. Per the City of Burlingame Zoning Ordinance, the Planning Commission
may impose such requirements and conditions with respect to location, construction,
maintenance, operation, site planning, traffic control and time limits for the use permit as it
deems necessary for the protection of adjacent properties and the public interest.
The Planning Commission may grant a Conditional Use Permit if, from the application or the
facts presented at the public hearing, it finds:
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. (Ord.
1378 § 8 (part), (1988))
In 2011, the City Council adopted zoning implementation for the Housing Element which
includes definitions for emergency shelters, transitional housing, supportive housing and
temporary housing. The code indicates that the uses are permitted by right in any zone that
allows residential uses, subject to the same restrictions as other residential uses of the
same type in the same zone.
Second Units: A second unit amnesty program was adopted by the City Council to legalize
existing second units on single family zoned (R-1) lots. The program was originally adopted
for two years, and has since been made a permanent program. Burlingame first adopted a
zoning code in 1921 when second units were allowed on R-1 zoned lots. In January 1954,
R-1 district regulations were revised to allow only one dwelling on an R-1 zoned lot. Many of
the older second units were originally built during the housing crisis associated with World
War II, and the program sought to retain existing units as a legal part of Burlingame's
housing stock. The units are usually smaller, more affordable, and are suitable for single or
elderly people with limited incomes. The intent of the program was also to make these units
safe and sanitary for the current and future tenants.
In order for a second unit to qualify for the amnesty program it must meet certain criteria,
including being able to conform to the requirements of the California Health and Safety
Code. The amnesty process is primarily administrative and includes an inspection by the
Building Inspector and notification to neighbors within 100 feet of the property. Any appeals
Housing Constraints Page 50
are resolved by the Planning Commission. If all the criteria are met and no appeals are filed,
the unit is granted amnesty. With the grant of amnesty for a second unit, some limitations
are placed on the property including future expansion of the second unit and a requirement
that one of the two units on-site be owner occupied.
In 2011, the City Council amended the zoning code to also allow construction of new second
units on certain properties subject to complying with performance standards. The new
second dwelling unit is required to be on a lot with a minimum lot size of 6,000 square feet,
there shall be no more than one secondary unit on a lot with one primary dwelling, one of
the units shall be occupied by the property owner, the secondary unit shall be a studio or
one -bedroom unit limited to a maximum unit size of 640 square feet, and shall comply with
the other measurable standards of the zoning.
Residential Design Review: Design review is required for second story additions, new
construction and first floor additions which involve substantial construction in the residential
zoning districts. The intent of the design review is to preserve the original and unique
patterns of the distinct residential neighborhoods in Burlingame. Design review is required
for both single family and multi -family projects.
Concurrent Processing: When a project requires more than one type of application (such as
Design Review and a Conditional Use Permit), the applications are processed concurrently,
which reduces the overall timeline for processing.
Factory -Built and Mobilehome Units: Factory built housing or mobilehome units would be
considered similar in use as a single-family use. These units are permitted in all residential
zones, and if a new structure, would require Design Review consistent with any new single-
family home. Approval of factory built or mobilehome unit would not require additional
regulatory requirements over and above similar uses in the same zone.
Homeless Shelters: The zoning ordinance provides the opportunity for homeless shelters in
the R-3, R-4, C-1 and C-2 zoning districts. These districts allow temporary homeless
shelters in conjunction with a church or nonprofit institution on those properties located
along a transportation corridor. Most of the properties along EI Camino Real are zoned R-3,
and many of the community's churches are located along this corridor. Conditional use
permits have been granted at several local churches along the EI Camino Real corridor for
the Interfaith Hospital Network program which provides shelter at the churches to homeless
families on a rotating basis.
In 2011, the City Council adopted zoning implementation for the Housing Element which
allows homeless shelters by right subject to performance standards in the northern part of
the RR (Rollins Road) zoning district.
The City of Burlingame had identified the northern portion of the Rollins Road area as the
appropriate zone to accommodate emergency shelters. In addition to being near transit, this
area is appropriate for this type of facility because it is located near support services
including the new Peninsula Hospital and grocery stores.
There are about 70 properties in the RR zoned area with the zoning overlay allowing
homeless shelters subject to performance criteria. These properties range in size from 0.35
acres to 13.63 acres. It is anticipated that a smaller homeless shelter could be
accommodated on a site between 0.5 and 1.0 acres, and a larger homeless shelter would fit
on a parcel between 1.0 and 2.0 acres in size. There are 20 properties in this area between
0.5 and 1.0 acre in size, and there are 22 properties between 1.0 and 2.00 acres. Most of
Housing Constraints Page 51
these properties are now developed with older light industrial or warehouse buildings which
may be suitable for conversion, or could be replaced with a new building.
The identified area can accommodate a shelter large enough to have capacity for the City's
unmet homeless need. The 2013 San Mateo County Homeless Census and identified 13
unsheltered persons in Burlingame. Depending on the size of site required, and other
amenities provided in a homeless shelter, an adequately sized facility could be
accommodated in this zone. While the majority of the sites are less than one half acre,
there are opportunities for site consolidation, as well as sites that are one acre or more.
Transitional and Supportive Housing: This type of facility is longer term than a temporary
shelter and generally provides housing for people with specific needs for six months or
longer to allow them time to rehabilitate, save money, and search for permanent housing
and jobs. These types of facilities are often located in converted apartment buildings.
In 2011, the City Council adopted zoning implementation for the Housing Element which
includes clear definitions for transitional and supportive housing as outlined in State law,
and provides that these uses are allowed by right in all zones which allow residential uses,
only subject to those restrictions that apply to other residential uses of the same type in the
same zone.
InnVision Shelter Network, a non-profit organization which operates programs providing
both emergency shelter and transitional housing throughout San Mateo County, now
operates four transitional housing facilities for families and one facility for shingle adults.
The facility located in Daly City serves northern San Mateo County with housing and
services for 14 families, the facility in Menlo Park serves southern San Mateo County with
services for 23 families, and the facility in Redwood City serves central San Mateo County
from Burlingame to Redwood City with housing and services for nine families. There is also
a facility in the City of San Mateo which offers transitional housing for 39 families. The
facility for single adults in Redwood City serves 75 persons. Other programs also provide
support for persons facing homelessness, such as the Housing First Program, which provides
financial assistance for permanent housing to persons who are homeless but have reliable
incomes, and the Bridges Program, which provides transitional housing while formerly
homeless individuals enroll in schools to obtain job skills. The City of Burlingame contributes
financial support to InnVision Shelter Network in its annual budget as well as other
programs to increase housing options such as HIP Housing, Samaritan House and Samaritan
House Safe Harbor — Winter Shelter.
As noted above, pursuant to Senate Bill 2, the City of Burlingame has amended its zoning
code to require that an application for supportive and transitional housing will be treated
equal to any other multifamily residential project application in process and review. See
Housing Element Policy H(D-5).
Single -Room Occupancy (SRO) Units: SRO Units would be considered similar in use to a
multi -family development, permitted in multi -family residential zones in a new
development, subject to Environmental Review. Any new building or multi -family residential
use requires these same entitlements; therefore approval of SRO housing would not require
additional regulatory requirements over and above similar uses in the same zone.
Burlingame Fair Property Rights Ordinance. In 1987, the voters of Burlingame passed an
Ordinance called the Burlingame Fair Property Rights Ordinance (`Measure T"). This
ordinance contains the provision that an owner of real property has the right to establish
the price for which that property may be sold, leased, rented, transferred or exchanged. The
ordinance further states that the City of Burlingame shall enact no law which imposes
Housing Constraints Page 52
restrictions on the price for which real property may be sold, leased, rented, transferred or
exchanged. Therefore, in order to implement a program that includes rent control, the
matter would have to be brought to the voters of the City of Burlingame to repeal the t
provisions of this ordinance that might be in conflict with the anticipated rent control
program.
2. Building Codes
The City of Burlingame applies the 2013 California Building Code (CBC) and California Fire
Code (CFC) to review minimum health and safety standards for residential and commercial
construction projects. There are local amendments that require more restrictive standards
for certain items. The local amendments that apply to housing include a requirement for the
installation of automatic fire sprinkler systems in all residential developments larger than
2,000 square feet in area and for structures taller than two stories. For all structures,
residential included, all storm water roof drainage must be collected and conveyed to the
public storm water system. There are seismic standards applied, and extra engineering may
be required for structures in the hillside areas. Because Building and Fire Code standards
are established for life safety reasons, it is not reasonable to consider not complying with
the Code in order to reduce housing costs.
Burlingame enforces energy conservation standards enacted by the State. The standards
may increase initial construction costs, but will reduce household costs over the long term
by reducing energy costs. In addition, for residential remodels and new construction,
applicants are required to complete a Build It Green "Green Points" checklist to document
what measures have been incorporated in the project to promote healthy, durable, energy
and resource efficient buildings.
Burlingame code enforcement is distributed among Planning, Building, Public Works, and
City Attorney personnel. In each case, the most applicable department leads enforcement
based on the nature of the nature of the issue. Most of the code enforcement in Burlingame
is complaint driven, but there is some active enforcement initiated by staff based upon
observation. It is unlikely that the code enforcement in Burlingame would have a negative
impact on the long term affordability of the city's housing stock.
3. NPDES (National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System) Requirements
Burlingame is located at the foot and along the east side of the coastal ridge between the
Pacific Ocean and San Francisco Bay. Seven creeks drain the area directly into San
Francisco Bay. For these reasons, runoff and water quality are important considerations in
development and construction. The Clean Water Act of 1972 prohibits the discharge of
stormwater into United States waters tm�less the discharge is in compliance with a National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES). To meet its mandate from the State, the
City of Burlingame has joined with the other cities in San Mateo County, to obtain a regional
discharge permit from the State Water Quality Control Board (SWQCB) for stormwater
water discharge. In order to reduce non -point pollution sources, each construction project is
required to implement "best management practices" on job sites to minimize erosion, stop
contaminated run-off and control construction site pollution. NPDES requirements also
encourage site planning including swales, detention ponds and other design elements that
can be incorporated into project design to reduce storm water run-off and contamination.
The City of Burlingame requires stormwater run-off to be collected and channeled into a
public storm water system. Current regulations focus on solutions that encourage on-site
retention and recharge of stormwater, so that all drainage does not have to enter the storm `
Housing Constraints Page 53 l
drain system. This can result in a more affordable solution for accommodating storm water
runoff.
The impact of the current requirements will require additional site planning, post
construction controls and maintenance that will likely result in additional time and expense
to developers.
4. On and Off -Site Improvements
On and off-site improvements also add to the cost of development projects, and are usually
required before a building permit can be signed off for occupancy of a structure. Residential
developments in the city of Burlingame are required to meet City standards for curb cuts,
which is a width not exceeding 25% of the lot dimension or 16 feet for a two -car garage. As
stated above, all storm water roof drainage must be collected and conveyed to the public
storm water system. Sewer laterals are required to be tested upon sale and replaced all the
way from the house to the city clean out for all new residential buildings. For single family
residential and duplex projects, the City's urban reforestation ordinance requires that one
landscape tree be planted on-site for each 1,000 square feet of floor area. For multiple
family residential projects, one tree is required for each 2000 square feet of floor area.
These trees can be 15 gallon up to 24" box size when planted. For properties along EI
Camino Real (State Route 82), sidewalk and curb cut changes require Caltrans approval.
Communal amenities are also considered on-site improvements within a new housing
development. While amenities such as swimming pools, club houses, on-site laundry
facilities, etc. are not required, they are encouraged. If a new project proposes such an
amenity, this would be seen as a positive aspect to the project which could attract potential
tenants. Program H(B-3) encourages provision of communal amenities in new housing
developments, but specifically states only where feasible and provision of which does not
impair achievement of maximum densities or the financial feasibility of developing housing
affordable to lower-income households.
S. Environmental Requirements
Burlingame is mandated to follow the procedures set forth in the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA). Since two square miles of the city is under San Francisco Bay water, the
city has a substantial bay edge. Four creeks drain the coastal range to the bay through the
city. Sites that have unusual topography and/or sensitive habitat may require in-depth
review and special studies to evaluate the environmental impacts of a proposed project.
This can add additional costs to a project. Residential properties containing a creek that are
proposing significant alterations or culverting of a creek are also required to obtain approval
from the California Department of Fish and Game and the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers.
Potential development sites with sensitive habits, endangered species, or significant
environment problems are generally not recommended sites for affordable housing. For
example, steeply sloping sites in the Burlingame Hills that may be available for housing
would be quite expensive to develop because of geotechnical problems.
Housing Constraints Page 54
6. Fees and Exactions
The costs involved with development in the city of Burlingame include planning and building
plan check and permit fees; utility service fees, school fees and a recycling fee. The City
does not have park dedication fees or bedroom tax, as do many cities. The City has no
exactions on residential developers to provide public art or sound walls.
Although the fees established for the Planning permit process have been increased in the
past few years to recover as much as possible of the costs to process the applications,
Burlingame's planning processing fees are below the average for communities in San Mateo
County.
Planning Fees: The Planning Department fees required for residential development include
the following:
Table IV -1: Burlingame Planning Fees
unusea pomon or oeposa ws ae remnoe.
Handling fee wdl be refunded It pmject does not get referred to a
design review consultant.
' 50% of preliminary plan check fee will be credited toward required
application fees if and wren project is submitted as a complete
apolicedon.
Source: Burlingame Planning Department, 2014
Housing Constraints Page 55
Other development fees associated with new construction include:
Table IV -2: Burlingame Development Fees
Sewer Connection Fee as of July 2013:
(updated annually and payable at the fee amount in
effect at the time of request for connection):
Single Family & Duplex
$237/unit
Multi -Family
$180/unit
Commercial/Retail
$377/TSF'
Office
$82/TSF*
Warehouse
$105/TSF*
Restaurant
$932/TSF-
Hotel w/Restaurant
$595/room
Hotel w10 Restaurant
$368/room
Bayfront Development Fee
As Of July, 2013:
Applies to development within the Burlingame
Bayfront Specific Plan Area. One-half of the fee
shall be paid with submittal of project application
and one-half shall be paid prior to the approval of
final framing of buildings or additions. The fees
are adjusted annually to reflect the increase or
decrease in the latest Engineering. News Record
Highway Construction Cost Index as of July 1st
of eachear.
Office $2,362IrSF
Restaurant $9,51 01T
Hotel $774/room
Hotel, Extended Stay $752/room
OfficeNJarehouse/
Manufacturing $3,580/TSF*
Retail — Commercial $8,6941TSF
Car Rental $55,175/acre
Commercial Rec. $17,123/acre
All Other $1,780/trip*
*TSF =Thousand Square Feet
per p.m_ peak hour trip as determined by
Traffic Study approved by City
Source: Burlingame Planning Department, 2014
Burlingame School District/San Mateo
High School District Fees:
(current fees, collected by the City of Burlingame
at the time of issuance of building ermds
Residential, 500 SF or more $3.06/SF
Commercial or Industrial $0.49/SF
Mini -storage $0.01/SF
Note: Sixty percent of the School Fee is collected for
the Elementary School District and Forty percent of
the fee is collected for the High School District,
North Burlingame/Rollins Road
Development Fee As Of July, 2013:
Applies to development within the North
Burlingame/Rollins Road Specific Plan Area.
One-half of the fee shall be paid with submittal of
project application and one-half shall be paid
prior to the approval of final framing of buildings
or additions. The fees are adjusted annually to
reflect the increase or decrease in the latest
Engineering News Record Highway Construction
Cost Index, as of July 1st of each year
Ei Camino Real North Subarea
Multi Family Dwelling or Duplex
$0.52 per SF
Any Other Use
$0.66 per SF
Rollins Road Subarea
All uses 1 $0.52 per SF
Curbs, gutters and sidewalks: New construction
and certain actions such as mapping will require
replacement of frontage street improvements
Housing Constraints Page 56
Burlingame's Planning Department is only partially funded by fees, with the remaining costs
covered by the general fund. The cost of planning is partially subsidized in Burlingame, with `
the fees collected for projects not entirely covering the cost of staff time to process such l
projects.
rabi. ry_,z. Firamnla of Cinnle Family and Multiple Family Proiect Fees
* Single family home is assumed to be a new home on an empty lot in an existing neighborhood, with no
complicating factors.
"Multiple family development is assumed to be 96 units, 145,500 square foot construction, requiring General
Plan and Zoning Amendments, and tentative map.
Housing Constraints Page 57
Fees/Costs
Single
Family*
Multiple
Family**
Design Review
1,071
1,071
Engineering Plan Review
218
218
Arborist Review
172
172
Noticing
261
1,254
CEQA Categorical Exemption
84
GP Amendment
-
2,612
Entitlement
Rezoning
-
2,612
Fees
EIR (estimate)
-
200,000
EIR Handling Fee (35% of
contract
-
70,000
Environmental Posting Fee41,806
265
County EIR Fish & Game Fee
2,969
Condominium Map
50,137
Subtotal
331,310
Buiding Permit
29,000
1,400,000
Fire Sprinkler Permit
600
5,000
Construction
Fees
Utility Connection
2,800
25,000
Alarm Permit
-
1,000
Subtotal
32,400
1,431,000
General Facilities and Equipment
2,756
157,056
Libraries
2,283
135,840
Police
24,864
Parks and Recreation
590
33,600
Impact Fees
Streets and Traffic
E437
1,573
106,080
Fire
642
' 36,576
Storm Damage
781
37,536
Subtotal
9,062
531,552
Total
43,268
2,293,862
* Single family home is assumed to be a new home on an empty lot in an existing neighborhood, with no
complicating factors.
"Multiple family development is assumed to be 96 units, 145,500 square foot construction, requiring General
Plan and Zoning Amendments, and tentative map.
Housing Constraints Page 57
Building Fees: Building permit fees are charged on a sliding scale that is based upon the
valuation of the project, plus plan check fees. The estimated valuation of a project is
checked against a minimum valuation per square foot for residential development. The basic
plan check fee is 65% of the building permit fee. The energy plan check fee (when
applicable) is an additional 25% of the building permit fee. The basic fee for electrical,
plumbing and mechanical permits is $25 dollars, with additional fees charged on a line item
basis.
Public Impact Fees: Ordinance No. 1830 was adopted in 2008 by the Burlingame City
Council in order offset the impacts of new development projects on City facilities. In
establishing the fees, the City had a study conducted that provided information on the
nexus between development projects and impacts on City facilities and set out a formula of
fees that would serve to offset some of those impacts. Public Impact Fees applicable to new
residential development are shown on Table IV -4 below.
Housing Constraints Page 58
T -til. T11 -d.- Rnrlinnn mo puhlir Farilities Tmnact Fees
Service Area -
Single Family
Fee per Dwelling Unit
Multifamily
Fee per Dwelling Unit
General Facilities and Equipment
$2,756
$1,636
Libraries
$2,283
$1,415
Police
$437
$259
Parks and Recreation
$590
$350
Streets and Traffic
$1,573
$1,105
Fi re
$ 642
$381
Storm Drainage
$781
$391
Source: Burlingame Planning Department, ZU14
Due to the physical constraints of a largely, built -out environment, the City does not have a
Quimby Act fee for adding parkland. There are limited opportunities to acquire land for
parks and any acquisitions would be costly. To pursue improvements to parks and other
public recreational facilities, the City's Parks and Recreation Public Facility Impact Fee has
been a source of funding for these types of projects.
If a project proposes to include open space/recreational amenities on site, the project
applicant can request a waiver of the Public Facilities Impact fee related to Parks and
Recreation. The Municipal Code Chapter related to Public Facilities Impact fees allows a
developer of a project to apply to the Community Development Director for a reduction or
waiver of any one of the fees. The fee waiver request will be considered by the Planning
Commission at the time that the development application is considered. The findings for
such a waiver would be based on the provision of open space/recreational amenities to be
available for the use of the residents, therefore, the project would not create an impact to
the existing parks in the community.
Recycling Fees: Ordinance No. 1645 was adopted in 2000 by the Burlingame City Council in
order to meet the goals of the California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989, which
requires all California cities and counties to divert 50% of waste they generate away from
landfills. The City's recycling ordinance requires that 60% (by weight) of all waste generated
from demolition and new construction be reused and/or recycled, and that a minimum of
25% of structural material (excluding concrete, asphalt and dirt) must be recycled.
Prior to permitting,-niplicants must complete a recycling and waste reduction form, then a
City employee makes a site visit to verify the estimated waste anticipated to be generated
by the project. The applicant is then required to pay a deposit at the rate of $50 per ton of
waste generated. For example, if a project is estimated to generate 10 tons of debris, the
deposit would be ($50 X 10 tons) $500, and 5 tons is required to be recycled. All recycling,
reuse and disposal must be documented by receipts, weight tags or other records. If the
recycling goal is met, the full deposit is refunded, however if the recycling goal is not met
only a proportionate amount of the deposit will be returned. Some waste materials can be
sold by the developer to offset his/her additional cost of removal caused by recycling.
Public Works: Public Works fees associated with housing development typically include
sewer connection fees which are $237 for a single family dwelling or duplex and $180 per
Housing Constraints Page 59
unit for multi -family structures. Water meter and service connection fees can range from
$4,100 to $5,420 depending on the size of the service and meter required. Sidewalk and
( special encroachment fees are range from $315 to $570 for properties in residential zoning
districts. Fees for street frontage improvements commonly associated with housing
development, including sidewalk, curb, gutter and curb drain modifications, are $402 for
changes to 150 square feet or less.
School Fees: Two school districts serve Burlingame: the Burlingame Elementary School
District and the San Mateo Union High School District. School fees are collected to offset
costs of rehabilitation and maintenance of school buildings, with 60% of the fees collected
going to the elementary school district and 40% to the high school district. Fees are
collected on all new construction projects and residential remodels in Burlingame that add
500 square feet or more. Residential school development fees for 500 square feet or more
of development are $3.06 per square foot, and commercial and industrial projects are
charged $0.49 per square foot. Mini -storage buildings are also charged a fee of $0.01 per
square foot.
Housing Constraints Page 60
7. Process and Permitting Procedures
Planning Process: Single Family Construction
Burlingame adopted interim single family residential design review guidelines in 1998 for
new single family construction and second story additions in the R-1 zoning district. The
process was revised slightly to include first floor additions involving substantial construction
and to expedite processing times, and was made permanent in April 2000. The intent of the
guidelines is to preserve the original and unique patterns of distinct neighborhoods through
consistency of character in individual homes to allow protection of each homeowner's
investment when future projects are initiated. The process requires that all qualifying
projects go before the Planning Commission in a design review study meeting, with notice
to all neighbors within 300 feet. The project is either referred to a design review consultant
or the project is moved forward on the Planning Commission calendar for action. The
Planning Commission action is appealable to City Council. The average processing time for a
project that is not referred to a design review consultant is 60 days. Approximately 26% of
the projects requiring design review are sent to a design review consultant. The average
processing time for these projects is approximately 90 days. These average processing
times include "out of court" time in which the applicant is revising drawings. The design
review process has been extended to include all types of residential and commercial
development.
In addition to design review, applicants may request exceptions to the zoning code in the
form of variances, conditional use and special permits. A variance is generally a measurable
standard, such as parking space dimension or front setback dimension. Special permits and
conditional use permits are more discretionary.
The average processing times for these types of applications is about 8 to 10 weeks (56 to
70 calendar days). This time line is generally driven by legal noticing requirements and
Planning Commission hearing availability. The Burlingame Planning Commission meets the
second and fourth Monday of each month. All applications require two meetings before the
Commission; one for design review study and one for action. Three weeks is added to the
review time if a decision is appealed to the City Council because of the requirements to
comply with the Ralph M. Brown Act provisions.
There are two administrative processes in Burlingame: minor modifications and hillside area
construction permits. Minor modifications are similar to variances, but are for minor
encroachments beyond the established development regulations. For example, a property
owner may seek a minor modification rather than a variance for a 1 foot extension into the
required side yard. In the hillside areas of the city, any construction requires a hillside area
construction permit. The intent of this process is to allow opportunity to review construction
for its effect on existing distant views from inside structures on r-2arby properties.
Administrative permits are noticed to immediate neighbors (within 100 feet). If there are no
appeals within 7 days, the permit is issued administratively. If a neighbor wishes to appeal
the project it moves on to full review with a public hearing before the Planning Commission.
An administrative permit review which is not appealed takes about 16 days.
Multiple Family Construction
Residential Condominium permits: All proposals for condominiums, residential or
commercial, require a condominium permit. The Planning Commission and City Council must
approve the project based on the following criteria: conformity with zoning regulations and
General Plan densities, its effect on surrounding community, impact on schools, parks,
public utilities, streets, traffic, and submittal of legal tentative parcel map approved by the
City Engineer. Condominium projects must also meet certain development criteria such as
Housing Constraints Page 61
common and private open space, as well as greater setbacks than is required for
apartments.
Apartment Development: Apartments are allowed by right in the R-3 and R-4 zoning
districts, assuming all development standards of the district are met. However, these
projects are subject to the design review process. There are no requirements for common
and private open space in apartment projects.
The California Environmental Quality Act allows categorical exemptions for projects involving
four or less units, and for larger infill projects which meet certain criteria. For those larger
developments which do not meet the infill criteria, the environmental review process may
add time to development projects, as discussed above.
Plan Check: The City of Burlingame offers a parallel plan check process which allows
applicants by their choice to submit construction plans to the Building Department while
they are simultaneously going through the zoning review process. The intent of providing
this option to the public is to expedite the review process. However, there is a risk involved
with this process in that plan drawings and engineering and structural calculations may be
required to be redone should the action of the Planning Commission cause a substantial
change to the project. Additional plan check fees are charged for revised plans. There is a 7
day performance standard for Planning Department review of building permit applications.
Public Works: Since Burlingame operates its own wastewater treatment plant, and it must
meet the operating requirements of the San Francisco Region Water Quality Control Board,
it is a part of the City's permit that a sewer lateral test be completed prior to the sale of a
house that is 25 years old or older and before renovations occur where two or more
plumbing fixtures are added. Typically these tests cost $315, in addition to any repairs or
line replacement required.
Coastal Zone Requirements: A portion of Burlingame is adjacent to the San Francisco Bay,
which is considered part of the State of California's Coastal Zone. The San Francisco Bay
Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC) has authority over the portion of the
Coastal Zone which is adjacent to San Francisco Bay.
The area along Burlingame's San Francisco Bay frontage is zoned SL, Shoreline and AA,
Anza Area, both of which allow development of hotels, offices, restaurants and commercial
recreational uses but do not allow residential uses. Therefore there is no housing allowed
within the area that falls within BCDC's jurisdiction.
Housing Constraints Page 62
S. Constraints to Housing for Persons with Disabilities
Existing Regulations 1
a. Building Code: The City of Burlingame has adopted the California Building Code and
Uniform Fire Code, 2013 Editions for reviewing construction plans. Burlingame has adopted
amendments to the California Building Code which relate to the appeals procedure and
requirements for lighted street addresses, roof covering, drainage, reroofing, retaining
walls, slab thickness, bracing framed walls and suspended ceiling upgrades. None of these
amendments would impact additions of accessibility features to a home or upgrades
required for a group home.
Building code regulations are established to provide minimum health and safety standards
for structures. These minimum standards for occupancy and exiting must be met for any
group home occupancy in a single family residence. The Building Code and Federal ADA
standards require that certain accessibility amenities for persons with disabilities be included
in new construction and improvements to property.
b. Zoning Code: Per State law, the Burlingame zoning ordinance allows licensed care
facilities, including group homes with up to six residents, by right in all residential zoning
districts. Since these facilities are considered a "single housekeeping unit', no additional
parking is required for this use, the group home only needs to meet the parking
requirement for a single family home (one or two covered and one uncovered parking
space, depending on the number of bedrooms). There are no City restrictions on the
distance between two (or more) group homes. The City does not have occupancy standards
that apply to unrelated adults and are not required of families. The maximum occupancy for
a residential use is based on the safety requirements of the fire and building codes.
Group residential facilities for the elderly are allowed in the multiple -family R-3 and R-4
zoning districts with a conditional use permit. Parking for group residential facilities is
required at the rate of one parking space for each three dwelling units, or one for each four
lodgers, if separate units are not provided. This is about one-third of the parking required
for an apartment building. Rooming and Boarding Houses are also allowed with a conditional
use permit; they have a parking requirement of one space for each rented room for the first
four rooms, plus one space for each two additional rooms.
All residential zoning districts require building setbacks from property lines and are limited
in the area of the lot that can be covered by structures. Generally, all structures over 30
inches high, including the portions of such ramps which are over 30 inches above grade, are
subject to the setback and lot coverage requirements. At least a portion of ramps and
landings installed to provide access for the disabled are over 30 inches high and would be
required to meet the lot coverage and setback requirements.
As a part of the Housing Element Implementation program adopted by the City Council in
September, 2011, provisions were added to the zoning code which would allow supportive
and transitional housing to be considered as a residential use, and only subject to the
restrictions that apply to other residential uses of the same type in the same zone.
Supportive housing is defined as housing with no limit on the length of stay, that is occupied
by target populations, as defined in the California Health and Safety Code, and that is linked
to on- or off-site services that assist the supportive housing residents. Transitional housing
is housing development that provides residence and support services for a specified length
of time.
Housing Constraints Page 63
opportunities to Remove Constraints to Housing for Persons with Disabilities
To improve the options for housing for persons with disabilities, Burlingame has adopted a
Reasonable Accommodation for Accessibility procedure as a part of the zoning code. This
allows a person with a disability to request modifications to zoning standards in order to
install physical improvements to a residence to accommodate the person's disability. These
improvements would include such improvements as ramps, walls, handrails, as well as
elevators or lifts. This is an administrative procedure, subject to meeting the criteria
outlined in the zoning code chapter.
Housing Constraints Page 64
NON-GOVERNMENTAL CONSTRAINTS
1. Environmental
Geotechnical/Noise: The topography in Burlingame goes from the waters of San Francisco
Bay to the coastal range foothills. Four creeks drain from the coastal range, through the.
city, to the bay. In Burlingame the face of the coastal range is divided into large -lot single-
family dwellings. Due to the steep slopes and shallow underground streams, some areas are
vulnerable to landslides during the wet weather. The hillside area is divided into larger lots
(10,000 SF minimum). Developments on these lots require additional seismic and structural
engineering features. The flat land areas in Burlingame are subject to a high water table
and, in some areas to short term flooding. These constraints increase the cost of building
housing in some areas.
Certain areas of the city are also subject to high noise levels. These areas include sites close
to US 101, the Caltrain rail line, and areas subject to over flight from planes departing San
Francisco International Airport. A larger area of the flat land and upward sloping area at the
north end of the city are also subject to back blasts (low frequency) noise from departing
airplanes. Housing development in these areas will require noise mitigation, which also adds
to increased housing costs. It should be noted that due to advance technology in airplane
design, noise impacts from the airport have decreased.
2. Land and Construction Costs
Housing and land costs within San Mateo County have dramatically increased in recent
decades. This is due in large part to the rapid growth of high-technology businesses in the
Bay Area region, particularly on the San Francisco Peninsula. The increase in the F
employment and housing demand has been more dramatic than any time in the past twenty l
years, with housing costs rising much faster than household income levels.
In general lots are small in Burlingame with the typical lot between 5000 and 6000 SF.
There are fewer than 30 acres of vacant undeveloped land in the city, and most new
development will occur by re -use of already developed land. It has become common
practice to see proposals that include the demolition of a single family dwelling and
reconstruction of a larger single family dwelling on the lot. Many of these proposals are
made by developers who intend to market these homes on the high-end real estate market.
The largest increase in residential units has been in the multi -family zoned areas. Between
1999 and 2007, 111 multi -family units were added to the city's housing stock. From 2008 to
2013, 70 units were added, resulting in 181 units added between 1999 and 2013.
Th_ cost of construction for residential development has dramatically increased in recent
decades as well. The economic boom in the technology industry sparked a large demand for
office space in the Bay Area in the late 1990s, but then fell dramatically early in the next
decade. Demand for office space has only recently begun to increase in Silicon Valley and
San Francisco, but has yet to increase on the rest of the Peninsula. Building construction
costs are estimated by the Building Department to be $200 per square foot for single family
residential development.
Housing Constraints Page 65
3. Financing and Affordability
In San Mateo County "affordable" housing is defined as that with a contract rent or price
affordable to low and moderate income households, based upon rent not exceeding 30% of
monthly income and monthly mortgage payment not exceeding 33% of gross monthly
income.
The median sales price in 2012 for a single family detached home in San Mateo County was
$661,000 (compared to $600,000 in 2000). The median price in 2012 for a condominium in
San Mateo County was $360,000, which is the same price as in 2000. In Burlingame, the
average price for a single family detached home in Burlingame in 2012 was $1,382,000 -
compared to $811,418 in 2000. The median sales price in 2012 for a condominium in
Burlingame was $654,000 - compared to $747,000 in 2006. And where 47 percent of the
housing stock is multiple family units, the average monthly rent for a 2 -bedroom unit in
Burlingame was $2,346 in 2013, up from $1,784 in 2005.
Assuming a 20% down payment, a $1,384,000home financed for 30 years at 4.5 percent
would require a monthly payment of approximately $5,610. An annual household income of
about $192,300 would be required for the mortgage to be considered affordable - with
affordability defined as 35 percent of household income for owner -occupied units. The
median annual -household income for Burlingame was $88,915 in 2011 (based on 2013
inflation adjusted dollars), which shows the large disparity between affordability and the
median income.
Housing Constraints Page 66
V. Community Resources and Opportunities
LAND INVENTORY AND SITE IDENTIFICATION
State law requires that local governments identify sufficient vacant or underdeveloped land
to accommodate the community's housing needs. One of the primary ways to do this is the
identification of lands suitable for future residential development. This identification should
include review of vacant sites and sites that have potential for reuse or whose use could be
intensified for residential use. An important factor in suitability of sites for housing is the
relationship of the identified sites to appropriate zoning, public facilities and services.
PROPERTIES WITH POTENTIAL FOR DEVELOPMENT
The selection of areas of the city and sites within those areas with the greatest potential for
development was based on a number of considerations, including the experience with
effective programs in the 2009-2014 Housing Element and changes in our developed
environment which have served to attract residential development.
The sites potentially available for housing in the city of Burlingame range from as small as
50 feet by 100 feet to as large as 2 acres. While these may be considered "small sites," the
majority of the sites are fairly typical for the city. Because Burlingame is built out and there
are no large, vacant parcels available, projects are proposed and built on these smaller
sites, at fairly high densities. Some of these parcels are adjacent to one another, such -as in
the Downtown area. The City can encourage lot consolidation through development
incentives such as reduced parking, increased heights, and density bonuses for lots that are
developed over 1/2 acre. (See Implementation Policy H(F-1) and Table V-1 for opportunity
sites). In addition, in the past 20 years, there have been 15 multi -family projects built with
three to six units each on lots as small as 5000 square feet, with densities averaging 24
units per acre. With lot consolidation, increased density could easily be achieved. Although
the City of Burlingame does not currently have a housing authority with the ability to
purchase land for redevelopment, the City is in constant contact with property owners and
potential developers to facilitate development.
Since Burlingame is virtually built out the focus of the 2009-2014 Housing Element was on
in -fill development and changing the use of existing properties. During the planning period
of the previous Housing Element between 1999 and 2006, a net of 104 dwelling units were
added on in -fill sites (including one at the north end of the city) near the city's commercial
areas and along EI Camino Real. These were sites which had been developed in lower
density residential uses and on which multiple family (R-3 and R-4) zoning had been in
place fora number of years. Between 2007 and 2012, 77 units were been added.
An important reuse development incentive in the 2002 Housing Element was to create a
new zoning district which allowed for the highest density multiple family zoning in areas
with previous commercial zoning on two of the blocks at the north end of the city within
one-quarter mile of the Millbrae BART/Caltrain station. The intention of this new zoning was
to encourage more transit oriented residential development on these properties now
developed with older, more marginal office buildings. Since the implementation of the
zoning in this area, one 45 -unit multiple family residential development has been built on a
former office site, and another 25 -unit multi -family project is under construction. In
addition, a 77 -unit senior housing facility is under construction in this area, and a 124 -unit
senior housing facility is under review.
Community Resources and Opportunities Page 67
The Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) District extended BART to San Francisco International
Airport with an end of the line station and cross platform with Caltrain's San Francisco
Peninsula rail service at the Millbrae Intermodal station, one quarter mile from Burlingame's
northern border. This regional transportation service provides unique incentives for multiple
family residential development at the north end of the city. Furthermore, SamTrans recently
upgraded its EI Camino Real bus route to provide service every 15 minutes, with a stop at
the Millbrae Intermodal station, thereby improving transit access to multifamily properties
along EI Camino Real. Building on the experience of implementing the earlier Housing
Element action programs (particularly the multiple family mixed use zoning) and the
proposed residential incentive programs built into the 2015-2023 Housing Element the City
has every expectation of meeting its fair share housing numbers particularly in the north
end of the city and along EI Camino Real.
There were several new residential development incentive programs included in the 2009-
2014 Housing Element to encourage reuse of the identified sites and other sites in the area
not specifically cited but with residential potential, whose development will be stimulated by
market demand, overlay zoning or other owner initiative. The action programs proposed
were:
• Provide additional incentives in the new multi-family/mixed use zoning districts at
the north end of the city adjacent to BART/Caltrain and Peninsula Hospital;
• Offer developers incentives in all residential areas to include affordable housing;
• Provides opportunities for increasing densities with reduced parking requirements
and increased height for housing within one-third mile of a major transportation
hub;
• Amend the zoning code regulations to expand types of housing, live/work units
and mixed commercial/residential; and
• Provides incentives for lot consolidation.
Several of these programs were implemented with the Council's 2011 adoption of the
Zoning Implementation for the Housing Element. The zoning for the North Burlingame area
includes incentives for multi -family and mixed use development as well as for lot
consolidation. The Council adopted reduced parking requirements within the Downtown
Burlingame area for residential projects based on its proximity to Caltrain and along two
major transit corridors and added provisions to provide smaller, more affordable units. The
zoning for both the North Burlingame and Downtown Specific Plan areas include provisions
for mixed use as well as standalone residential projects.
The properties included in the analysis of properties for development include
underdeveloped or vacant properties zoned for high density residential use or mixed use. An
inventory of these properties, along with an estimated buildout capacity of 80 percent
density (to control for site variations that would likely reduce total unit count in practice), is
included in Table V-1. The identified sites yield a total potential of 1,486 units (at 800/0
density). Based on the 1981 Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM) for the city of Burlingame,
all sites identified for potential residential development are outside of the 100 and 500 year
flood boundaries. In addition to proposing rezoning programs for these sites, it is proposed
that zoning code changes be implemented which would offer incentives for building
affordable housing, incentives for building more housing within one-third mile of the three
transportation hubs, and incentives for consolidating smaller lots into a larger development.
A description of the actions to be taken to achieve these goals is at the end of this chapter.
Vacant Or Underused Sites Now Zoned For Residential Use
North Burlingame Area
Community Resources and Opportunities Page 68
Although Burlingame is a built -out community with few vacant sites, there are a number of
sites already zoned for residential use where the full potential has not been used. Many of
these sites are located in the Downtown Specific Plan area and the North Burlingame/Rollins
Road Specific Plan area. There is a concentration of underutilized parcels within the area
bounded by Murchison and Dufferin between EI Camino Real and California Drive. This office
commercial area was rezoned to a new multi -family residential/mixed use zone district (ECN
— EI Camino North) in 2006 to implement the North Burlingame/Rollins Road Specific Plan.
Prior to that, as a part of the 1994 Housing Element work program, an R-4 overlay zone
was created. One office building was removed and the 1.24 acre site has been developed
with a 20 -unit residential condominium and a 48 -bed residential care facility for the elderly.
In addition, an area west of EI Camino Real and North of Trousdale Drive was rezoned to a
new residential mixed use district (TW — Trousdale West). Within this area, a condominium
project at 1800 Trousdale Drive is under construction; it will replace an office building with
22 market rate units and 3 moderate income units. All of these sites are within one-half
mile of the Millbrae Intermodal Station. Because of proximity to a transit terminal, these
sites would warrant special provisions for higher residential density such as reduced parking
requirements and increased height. All development of sites in this area is subject to
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) approval for height.
Carolan Avenue Residential Overlay
In 2009 the City Council approved the rezoning of the C-2 zoned sites along Carolan and
Rollins Road to include a high-density overlay (R-4). This rezoning allows stand-alone high
density residential uses on these parcels, which total 5.4 acres combined.
Downtown Specific Plan
In 2010 the City adopted a Specific Plan for the area framed by Oak Grove Avenue on the
north side, the Caltrain tracks south to Burlingame Avenue and Anita Road on the east side,
Peninsula Avenue and the City limits on the south side, and EI Camino Real on the west
side. Within this area the plan has areas of medium-high (R-3) and high (R-4) density
residential, as well as mixed-use development opportunities. The Specific Plan identifies new
mixed use areas (previously zoned C-1) along Howard and Lorton Avenues, Primrose and.
Park Roads, and along California Drive. Within the mixed use zones, it is proposed that a
project could either be mixed use or standalone high density residential. Table V-1: Vacant
or Underused Sites identifies those sites within the proposed Downtown Specific Plan. The
development standards vary for the different areas within the planning area, but include
zero setback requirements in many instances, average maximum unit sizes of 1,250 square
feet, increased height limits, and reduced parking standards. These development standards
will facilitate mixed-use and multi -family residential housing, particularly because housing
was not previously permitted in some of these areas, and because the new standards allow
more intensive development compared to other residential areas in the city.
The Downtown Specific Plan area contains numerous sites with the potential for reuse. In
2011, these areas were rezoned to reflect the mixed use area identified in the Downtown
Specific Plan. The areas determined to be appropriate for mixed use zoning, which includes
the opportunity for standalone multiple family residential uses are: HMU (Howard Mixed
Use), BMU (Bayswater Mixed Use), CAR (California Auto Row), and MMU (Myrtle Mixed Use).
In addition, there are areas within the boundaries of the Downtown Specific Plan which are
zoned R-3 and R-4, including an R-4 incentive district, which allows building heights up to
55 feet. As a part of the zoning implementation, reduced parking standards for multiple
family residential development was adopted for properties within the Downtown Specific
Plan area. Since the Downtown Specific Plan and zoning amendments were adopted, 12
new units have been approved and another 70 units have been proposed.
Community Resources and Opportunities Page 69
O
z
W
z
W
H
T
Y @
.a-
Y
C O
0
+' C
E I
N C
N I O
N m'
w t O -
m
L v
Y
L C u L m Vl
C O
al +' L W N
a)
_ Ol y., O C
IO
C
w .Si
0
V- L VI
O N YC i
a m
�L J L O
W"' Y C
O
L L
Y
E OC
1n 0 m
m m C=
y
C O N W
0 ❑ In i Q C
C Ln a) N N
'E ❑ N� a C
L 0 1 am+
0 m w m '- N
U
N
��
-0 cu
0
cto c
C
o o a
o a @ ,o o a 0
3 O Ln m
v
c a
m -CU m rn�-0
rnrnU rnr-o
U
-6-0 a)
CL C)
Y"
i+
C 3 s fn C W
ON O
C C L In C v'
ON O
'o
61 X_ ri W C
C
Y VIOL ai
C
y
H
O Y V
U
y� Y U
Ul
O a+
E
C C D]
C
•X
a) m 7 !a C
m 0 7 �a C
C N y^ N
N N y m
E a m o
O
W U
m Y N L 0.0 O
> 67- a 2 m u
X 7 UJ L O 'D O
w 9 2 a 2 to u
O L O W X
N O a .-I a)
0 tm-a I 4
U
V N
U_ N
I V N
CO
U
(U 0 Ul N
Y N
O Y m
O Y m
O Y m
N>
E C a)
r3
m Iaw
m m
= 'La m
u=
C
- G m
C C m
-
C C m
Y E
m
w
.-.
u
m � E m
o
m E :3
O
Y o
01
N
P C O
C 'D v U Irl
m O G
m
~
'i
H
a)
O O U
4) F
a aY m
4�
ra N N N i,
li
N
> LO
a@1
0
VA
W Ua N
L2tna>c c cc
•X�
0
0
0
W
W
m W U L ' j
O 1L O L O E
Mo a Z
p
m
�
n
M cr) LIJ
U N 0
.i
[+1
Z-0 mw 6 N Ot
Q
7
0
O
m2EO Nvcmt
a =
x
t n u
> _ C O
ra m m u •N
A w
O
V
O
7
O
Nr
O=
d m CL 7 N[h
�o
c N m O
Y Y v = i
_ N
_>
u
m O 0
in E
w o m s m v N
O
Q 0
3 4
NT
Na
m
0 E LA apE
NN
c
m Y
-N m
Z EN
yO
_ O
•c
TO
U
a-a_O m E
d
O
U
:3 37.
w UCm
U N
mv
Z
7
a
FL-
uj
m m>
a)ocF 3v
3m
O
C O- O L L a) (n N N
(6
L
O"
o m � Qi =❑ aJ la
m
O L
m W Y
Vl w L
O
o-Ew aE c N N m
d
r
c
°'—
U .-
a
-71
m 7 0 m C N J N
Ca
al
�_''
-6wU
w
aw �m+a
ra
Y L H, lO
0E� Lo �+�a`o
Y
x0m
OCJ N
x �v
w
d
i --i
E a) N W
mLL
Y C_ O ❑
w
O
a) L O .N E m £ Z i aV,
H
N O
0
N
' -C -C
d
y
m C
d
O
N Ot Ot
Lu
L
'O O
N
O
LU
C
>.
E�EE�
0
��
ISE
c
o+�oo
U F S
9
Ln L Y
N m
OO m
U) m 3 0 C
Y-0OEY v zcc
•N
Q
a
,F n
O
E
a) .N U .- Q t7 to
x 3 U
E
C N m N 'a
la O> O O
2
Vl f''1 +-i
Lt) V' O
v1 0 0
O
C O L N
E a F S>
d
N Ncn
N V'I\
NLn Lo
U
u Y
Q
0
0 1
o
N�_
3
"0 ol
U Z3 —2 vl
C
U 7
a)
�.- a)
OC
7
Q O
2 C Y
7 Y
2 0-
-0 OC J
_
C N
O m u U
N Y ra a) L
O C
Y L
3 E C '�
N C
— O d C 2
N C
a) EC
0
'O
+-� � U 3 O
�.+ �. Y .O U
a) Y j U
y
= �y m
fa N T to
°WE u I u M_0
a)
o a)- N a)
a a; E-
0.0
v 3 o m
Y
m O r0
U +_' Cl -'o
Y i a) 'O _
VI C L L a1 ..
O Y S O a1 0 7
0 -0 2 C
N U d u 7
❑\ O ro a
O Y S O
_ o� 2
OI M
U
u= .L O C
01 N
— m a) U -N 0 'O
_
10 a) L C a)
�
N
C
N
O U x
N 7 uO-
0) d1
C C C O U X
0. 1 a) L a+
UC N ++ N N
C)
C C n G
y+ N
H i=
C
Y !�
S O :9 I
N= O]
U N
E
.0
y y_
% O
O O "C
aT+ a) Oi
O N m 2 C
Y L L
O ro O c6 a) '6 vI
N ,--I O O L
O r0 O r0
LU U
2 I O. a3w
ciU 22 C 3 V) E
2 2U 2L ru fa
O
ZU1 Y—=2
0- O.0 2
u
I u a)
V W
I U a)
I U a)
I U m
u al
O �'L
Y a
O i"9
Y a
OYLO
a
— Y R
O Y r0
—
Y)
UI _
to
y _
= a
Y
=10
m
M
H
G C 16
C C 16
C C fo
C C C
C C r0
u
m o
O
O
N
b
O
o
M o 00
N
N
N
01-
1-X
x
O
n
O
M
N
0
N
Ill
N
M
N
Y
X C
O
O
O
O
O
W �
In
N
ri
�O
rb
In
C
ri
r -i
o0�0
X Y
+
T
+
M G
H
r
L d
N
Ln
Ln
Q
T
= a
f d
D
d
IM
fa
C
3:
�3:xa)
06
o
=_ �
M
N
am
2
m
ro
()
ro
ro
R C
y
U
-,0,
C
C C a
0 Q
a1 a
x_
_
x
a) S a)
= a)
p
X_ p
p
Y
Y
Y
J
i
J
J
y
N
0)
01
O
L
d
O
C
C
C
V
p
.-i E
i
i
'D
Q
N
N
O
ul 2
2 W
2 lL
2 Z
Z
O) IT O
M N (D
T V O
O) �t O
0) . O
6
NOLl
N. -I O
NOM
NNN
NM V
6
ONN
O, --I
ONN
0NN
0N N
00
N ry
y N
N YO
N
3
y
0
T 0
y, 'n L
7
m Y
C m
N
Y
C
J]
Y
C v
'0
O
a)
E
a) m
U
E m m 0
O. 7 m
L y O
M
E
Q m -O M LY
N
C
01
-
m
U 1] 3
Oi
3 M
p
'Ca
3_0
G)
m
Y0 0 C (1. 41
=�
0 CL
O v
C L
m
.\-I O
i
v M d
7 ate.
�
O aYi
aa)) m
o 0 -fo
O
a)
t6 � M�
0 m 1 6 o
�
C
Ia
a1
41 -0 +' a) —
m
L
L D, Y (_J 'n
w
-o
>':E "
UJ
1n
-0 (Z C O1 Y
7
•�
i
a1 L C U_
y al O C
.O
a1
01
v m \
M�
1
C>
Y
E C
>_
a) M
3 m N
C '
C
Y.
V
"6
D M
m C
ro a) _U
v 01 G
m ;'
i
m
'�-'
� OC O
m vl
y
H G
w 7
a
0
C
-O
0,
mc
um.
y
N N
U
X O
O
tL0 3 7
0`
aU+
7
O C Y=
m U
a)
t=
7 0, m
m
m 41 m
'L �—'
m
W U
L
f1
7 S m f1 0
to Y L m Y 3
m
m
In U-0
m Y 0 C
U w U a �i
U. c
L
O
z L U.
C
T 'p O
O fn _O U U
m
m CL
U
3
I V N
I V al
I U a)
L
YL
Y L ..O
Y L .Li
y y1
O Y m
O Y m
O Y m
m
— m
M
L m
L m
— m
L
C C m
C_ m
C C m
[y
u
e
m 0
T
N
M
e1
v F-ro
M
0
Ln
OD
N
N
OD
1+f
yf
N y
•K C
O
O
O
O
O
O
W �
M
M
fb
In
n
i
O
n
fA
O
D1
.--I
u
a
N
O
O
N
O
O
X
m N
.+-I
H
L Q
In
'n
T
N
(. d
cCIm
m O
C
cl, a
NL 7
c
\ a)
:t LR
v
N
() >
K
N
U O
�
C
_0L
N A
0 d
O D U w
> m
a
N a)
0 C
2
(g
N In
In
X
m
O
rY
U
N
C
m
N
Ya
W
d
C
m
C
m
C
m
i
'fl
00
N
O
O m
O m
0
O m
In
M
O m
O m
a
.-I U
. U
' U
m
.-I U
. m
Z
LO 001000
ID 001000
MN O
0) N O
G.
N [t ID
N V V
"I;rm
N V n
N Mn
Nd'N
4
0NM
ONM
0NN
0NM
0N.-1
0NO
O
v-.
L
.D m
C �O
E
(U >
Y
"
°
\
0 1---0
ami
O'_
3
o,
aj =y-0
cu
v
I._
cu (D-° u
Ot
Y
—_
C O
._ _0E O
0_ I C
C10
E
0
N
-o
E
N
al
O O. Cl m
m
L
� y
C
°
O. m C
C
Q
O
C Y
C— L
°
° �u�0,uu
°Na°i�ao°
o°nf0s
X O
O ol m
w m U
m
O
O
O O
O\
1 Lo m cu C
O O O .—
W U
E L V
Y_0 a m
U
U
m
i'0
ri
m Y -O -0 VI
n u S S
U
I U_ aJ
I U a)
Y L
O
+ y
N—
O y m
Y m
L Y
—jr-10 m
m
U
i
Y O
hyo
{O
N
co
mom
ry x
p
0 i
M
m'
'X C
O
O
W �
�}
M
L
W
N
o
0
X
+
L Q
In
T
N
lC
L d
m
L O
L
3 x v
N
m
m
_
10
y Y
N
a
_ C
x
c�
o u
Hm
0
7
d
m
L
L
O C
m
1O
O EOo
O
Q
Baa
=
Z
O N O
CA. O
Q
O N
O N O
rn
m
C
L
a
o.
O
C
a)
u
u
L
0
0
T
C
3
E
E
0
u
Y_
L
o v
0 f0
-C3 �� �
3aj
0m0
mC,OL>'
30'°0'
marn0
O,
Ll W C y 0 0 0 .3 N
— N
0 +�
C
�) v C .0 O C O-0
— O
H W
C
m W
O L@ N Ut
0'E N o>> m C o
—
m m
L Ol Ot r
u N o> L C O m
>`
'6 O
T um
:6
C
•i
16
C M N N-0 a
L
30 'O C
C M N y 'D U - (•�j
C
E¢
ti C> Ol O
N OVI
E Q
o .-i C>-0 O n N
O -
V% Ci
• A
+' L
2� L .0 OJ Q7 UJ Ol 'O
�C
L r-+ Nwcu C
�+
O
m
O. (6 u 'C Y 7 p to
3 ol
O ;-' t0 u !' t O
W u
�'C0
3u C O V7 O -o u 10 rlF
C�
3u C O(n �'-I=
O
7
U v
U N
IYII i
o
m
LL
L
N
_u
Y � O
A o CO
d
a
ce
mx
o °
of
ui
F�
Y Y
C
O
O
W �
�
N
N
H
u
u
Q
O
O
x
M N
C
C_ H
f a
O
cn
3x N
3 x y
C
= v
_ _
N
m
aj N
V
C
X_
x
v
L
3
L
ti 0
z
rn o
Cl) 0
d
N14,
N M C 1
a
0No
C)N0
rn
m
C
L
a
o.
O
C
a)
u
u
L
0
0
T
C
3
E
E
0
u
s
n
'"
L
O L Y
t
-0Y
O C
N
.O
O O d1 m>
++ 0- m Y -Q
m O od m>
'—' 0— m Y
m—
3
N
3 y
- �
m—
3
dC
to H
t0
m Ul U
ate.+ a)
C a) 3
L m C O
C m
m a) U
C N aL.+
U
U) .
L N C
U C C 3 2
>- N
C C 3
C m a)
—
d0c
E
Em
O O
p
OY'O
d
1'_YO
2mOQ
ipY1
YC yR
FA
C
O
O OmCE
oQ
o
o
C=
t 3
0)C}C!>>
0)-
) -
•
X
k O
01 O
rcl m n
t:n o
E o m
c o o
W c
L
YC UUj U m
-O�
O� V�
U
I U N
I U m
N i
O y m
o Y m
— N
C "
C >
C >
m
.- c m
u
N Y C
a
O
a
H co
0 m
tn
Ln
H �
Y
x�
O
0
W �
N
N
u
u
a
O
O
X
m�
f`
0
y
!C_
G d
c
3 x a)
3 x N
S =
= v D
N
W,
a)
0
N
a) m
O
cn
W
O
x
x
H
M
0
a
U
L
L
V
N3
O
0,3
.-I O
1
N M N
N M�
Q
O N O
O N O
w
0
0
C
a) N
3
0E
v
N C al C
mmti
Y Q
._
o f
c
u0
cELEcDa3°c
p
v'
EE
U \ 1
ILO d O E
• C i
1�Ea)m
3�
L
a o L
0.
07 L
\
d
L O •--I C
Ol O
Y O L
OV +'
v 0
p .-i C
O
Y
L
a) v m o Y
N N
Q C
'L Y
L N-0
O> W 3
y �O
i- R
O C
_ Y
O>>
O- C
¢-
o .L R
'�- a) N C
-p R
O L R
'1-
a) v al Y a)
v m
O U
M U
>� 3 L
c l0n
c c>
0 3 o aj
d ti
a u°�Lo��cmv00
w
McccL�10
y+y
L C_
U
U
N N"
aJ
aJ
-O
•X O
7= p al
a) N 4!
U 'L a-' O 3
.p
R i' C
-O 0 O
U
W a) N y
.L Y -6 p-
m
C C
LUu
R¢uU
oLn'mou
m
< u U
oo0-3:3R
u
I V a1
I V m
L
Y i p
Y L
lYll
o Y R
U Y IO
-a7
— O R
Er
C
M
C C R
C R
u
N o
Y O
a
co
F co
Cd
oX
O
F
ei
Y_
W �
N
d
ti
N
G
o
0
X
R �
c
D
= N
d
p
.0
Q (Y
Q O (Y
O
U 0
U m o
N
U
U
a
y
�
C
a R
C —
w°
N
x
N
R
R
N
C
C
L
L
O
w
O
N 0
N
N R
2
M N O
O N O
d
N M I,
N f+'1 t0
Q
O N O
O N O
0 Y
L O C
C
L O
0
Ln
0 U
a'
U
00
9 "
w0 C N f0
1]
C
v of my
v
'm
m
m O 6 m
m � fu m
U) 0 V
v o oy @
3 Y L>
.01
%% O Y IAV
v
m�
p
Y
o6
m Y t !�
U) p fl Y L
0 yL
p Y fll-
Y'O -C
p Y C)
t-+� L �
O Y
v -+'-O
L 3 p
H H
fa fD O U
0) .0 Y O uNl C
O fll 0 U
0
N +' ++ T C E
"O
f9 N
0 U
V
N a-+ Y y T C w
C C 3 ++
,N
V U
V C C 3 O O
C_ N N 0 d +�
U
>' O G p
U C C +� p C
C fll N-0 .0 Y LO
N
U
�_` f0
C O
U p
C K fll -0 .0 r-+ U
LE�a,Y mll
_
_030
�'
a3o
m
C i
o3o
E Q p �_
o a a a rn a
y
E Q p —_
0Ev�m�
a a w 6
.O
L
E Q
O—
pEv�m
a a L o
C Y
E
C _:L- p p C Q
O
+.
C E
C Y p O L
O Fn �- U
'O
'O
w
C E
0 0 L 0
O �-
Y Yl
C
L a
O y —
u C j j fT C
E=
.ti
L
N N to •--i
i+ C>> d
(6
y .5
- t
y v O to
C>> a C-0
X O
m
01 O
(L6 >> C=
'i
m
=7 01 O,
C
fa w N O M
C
O cn
O m
Y N W N V p C
W V
cc=
G L C) �"�
p
VI .{l -0-0 N -0 V
d
G L ti
v
VI Y- L U �" I=
cc
-0-0 L U fO
3
L
I U N
YY
U N
I U N
' L
++ N
O y O
O ++ O
o
0 Y O
ra
y
> W"
V- >
w w >
=
C C ff]
C C R
C C f6
F•1
-
U
Y � O
O
a
L
IA
f0„
ce
M A
N
n
Q
F
Y
O
O
O
W �
r
N
fn
a
xY
c
D
C_
� d
D
6 *
f6
i
'O
0
- ll
L= 0
C N
i L= 0
c
�3xa)
Q°vY
¢° v�
N
2=
U U Q
U U a o
Y
3
o
cu
N
d m
r
ya
fy
x
x
_
U)
Ln
N
L
L
O
H O
i
n E
n _
m
N f0
U
.-I U
d
NNLn
Nm Id,
Nm m
a
O N O
O N O
O N O
DD
r,
a)
CD
d
w
m
c
L
CL
CL
O
C:
O
w
O
U
L
3
O
N
K
T
G
E
E
O
U
pfn
�
i-
'�
Y
O C m
T
-0
Y
3
O
'a
fu
N p t
-o — ,-i
v
c
N O
a .o —
ri fu
o
� O -•f ru
> uJ
v Y — Y I
o
>) 0,-6
-3( (u�
L>
Ate+ '- v
o
y=
Y L>
0 cu
(Q L(1
> Y
N N
L
f0 N O U
N '—
N a0+ ++ ++ L N C~
O N
L
O U
N '—
N Y +: y �- N
C M
y,
U U w
>'
U C C 3 T o 0-0
C K OJ
U
U w
U C C 3 T 0
C K N
O ri
' C
(6 C O
p d a-+ N
to
C O
-O p 2
Y
m
E o v_
' o o- n o a
_T
E Q
o v'
U o_ CL m ol'@O
c i
Q
m ,.�-cNoovc'aL
u+ -a
,�-
cNoo�C'-m
'+. N
H =
cEo
Yr 3m
(a
i+ C j J Ol= C 3�a-L
�m
cEo
�m++
00 �N
C
i
m
> >
U N
LU U
'E D
D
N v v w-0 U t a
'�
.moi
Yn 9
ov (o Q
O
V O
U O
L
i
Y i
L
-0
ra
-0
N m
>
M
C C N
C C (6
u
Y � D
C
d
0 O co
F-
ed
mx
C N
N
Ill
F-
Y_
O
o
W
H
IV
N
ri
G
O
O
K Y
M N
C
c
L
O
C 'N
� a
m *
-
C
_3
7 a)
v
fu aj
3 x
N
_x
= 0
am V
D
L
to m
a
v
0)
W
X_
X_
ri
N
N
m
Ln
U
-O
L
"a
Ck N
3
m N
m 3 m
a
m o
m o>
Z
M N O
01 N O
d
NN CT
NNm
a
O N O
O N O
DD
r,
a)
CD
d
w
m
c
L
CL
CL
O
C:
O
w
O
U
L
3
O
N
K
T
G
E
E
O
U
010
OL
>, L
L p C ++
C a)
y
ul a+ fO
(
n a) Y
2 M
a)
-0 y
3y
V- C L Q 16
ai._-0
3 .�
p E
y C .�
N a
v p 3
+ 3 C
N 0.
_0 C
n
p
O O d5 10
> Y 0= N Y
O O c6 i>
." O L N
N
C (*1
m a d >`
'" vpi
m Y
Z- -0 L L L �
O .ate a) Y
a.+ �� L O C,
0 .-i C
++ O O `-
� C
d
0"
O
N
L Y N N
— L O
++ O
E
0 O
L 0 0
o 0 M
N H
O
16 W p U
Y a+
U 3 w C
O
O W U U
N Y ++ w
U C C 3 u-_ V
C z
O>>
ID'+.
ri
C C
C N N i
>- 0 C p
C a) a) O p
_ .L
a
YO i m
a)
y U
C O
E p�
_
O a)yJl
-a
E Q O
i —
i O 0. L p N
m
n
C 3 C>
m
V
Ci
y
Q
d d lE 01-0_
C i p p C
C
Cp . n O O N L
.-i
U di @
N O E
C a� C
0 M
N
H �
y C
_ L 3 E
O 0
o
y0- C>
3=
E
3
�>> o o
o a)+
aj a� v 0�
'D
00 y
X O
rn
0 01 O
> C:
tL0 a>j C 0
0
0 Ot O
a7 m N 3 0'>-
-O O O
C 'i Y
._ p .-
W �%
L 0 ey
U1 Y .0O In U=
L 'i
IA N V0 i+ 11
>
Q U U
.— O� 0
v
L
Y
Y7
Y L 'Li
++ N
O y O
O Y R
O +� R
N
>
�-' >
w >
C
N
C C R
C N
u
Y � p
0
00
as
OF
aR
N
O
O
H
0
H
O
O
O
W �
u
a
p
p
0
X
m N
C
0
T
N
c=
L N
12
mw
ma) rov*
L
C
3 x a
3 x
3 x
o
=vim
zvgD
=v��
N
a)
m
R
N
7
L C
c —
x
ma
x
x x
x x
LA
0
y
LLn0
L
rn E
! L
0
G
_
�
.Maa
Z
N O
al - 0
01N
Q
0 N�
O N O
O N O
E
Y
0 O
IOL
Y
Y N
'O C
U1 C 1n
� �O
'O 3 C
U1 -O O N
O Oaj di 1�0
> �"' CDL
N N
O o�
j Y O U N y
oY(V
-0U)rmCU
oYm—+'
-ocnL 3
w
ym
- C t0
m°'uvucc33"ri
C N . Y m
O
- i" IQ
C
ma uUucc30oo�
C UJ . Y N
7I
m
T
C N v
C
>' C O
C 41 N .O
p .-i
C O
—EQov
.- n iD
�M
*EQoa
oo.a�oN
oaavrnay
16 0
C '_' O O C
a Y-
C Y O O C
y+
E
Sl .-I
O d
-@> 'O
O
MA C
i+ L S
, C N N
w L
N-
L
C c Ln
ro
Wu
2:170
of'aa nno
3Q�"�O\i
�b_0a m.n uN
L
O Y t0
o Y f0
Y1
C C N
C C S
F=i
u
!O o
G G
O
d
w
0 hco
�
F
Y_
X C
O
O
W
-
M
u
o
0
Xi
ma
c
GN
� m
O
ra �
a
-6 iF
C
< 0 C O
O
U -iEU Q o
= v
,O
v
o
d
x
x
(D
m
rn
H
N
C
N
L
V
w
r
H L
h 16
O 16
4
Q
,1 U
N a
Z
N O
S M O
d
NM D
N 0l
Q
O N
O N O
E
J
C
C
C
L O i
Y
W O L
ON
Y 4O- O L
i'
Y C ra O
Y
O N
-0
a)
3 C
3 C
vl W) m -o N
W Ods `L°
>
W)u
m
>_ �'ro
�Yo °'� `L°
i p 'D N�
01
C
3$�Y
-O jj
Y
W) a'
-a
0 0 ` C
O Y a) L+
Y -O (n .L
O Y
v— Y L
O r-+
Y -6>. m
yOj
C O t0
U
O Y Y -+
N C
W—
C
O
O N Y �.+ Y
V
v
— C O U
(6
L
O> > O OU In
7
t0 U U
U C C 3
G W) W) i
p 0
M
O
V
T �0
U U C C
p C WJ N .O
>,
V U
T O C O
'O 'O N V O N
C
_T fu C O
0. i+
C
O
u)
c
30: =0
0afl.na�
EQ
o° oas
CO
Ea00
'�
>a�030° y
y
w " E
�+ O O W)
C O
0_
u0-
, O O
C
C
w C
C Y C L N d
D-
A C
-iF,5 = 3
O
y C>> M=
cY
-�
M >>
C1
�=
t M
U V O Y
X O
M
7 O O
N W (1 C
7 0
]
6
0 Y W N
7
O) O
C C ._ — W O, H
W U
� L 0 �"")
to i-0 'O W-0
U
N
c7
G L
L
!n Y "O U
._
VI
Q
C
G L .--I
.- O U) O L d > N
U
1 U W)
1 U 4!
I U W)
i/
O y
O Y W]
U) L
— a)
C
C
C N
C N
C 16
Fy
_
u
N m o
N
o o
14
Fro
ce
m x
0
a
to
i
Y y
O
O
W �
'
Ln
M
u
Q
O
C
X
S
c"
C_Cc
Sd
0
L
3 x_ a)
2 3 x_
3 x_
= OBD
=.ZO_.�j
=v��
N
a)
w
m
�
w
() Ip
O
_0
O
_ —
W
W)
W)
0 a
x
x
x
H
W)
M _0
I!)
H
to
M C
M
d
O
N m
N
v
E
n
ti Y
O
m
N (u
Q
N m
N 2
N D
Z
0) (n O
CA, O
0) MO
d
N O CO
N. DO
N O U)
Q
O N O
O N O
O N O
J
N
co
N
m
a
G
m
to
u
u
L
0
O
a)
Nm
LL
Y_
C
E
E
0
U
C
CC
0
L
�0
O L A, N r'a.
"
3
0 O T-
m m
3 C
N
N 0 N
0)-o N
3 oaS m
j
m
(b
m
Is
m
0 -
cm C
7
u
L
O
Q
a
O
C
m
cu
rn
u
U
L
0
O
N
m
u
C
7
E
E
O
U
C
C
L
NO
L
O L
+'
3
3
c
m
a c
N }'
z 'D U)
O + m _
++ -p U) L
�.+ .—
O .a..
C p m
O N
C m m
C m
C d: �—'
N
H y
m v u U
Ol i..
V C m'�
p
m U U U
m s+
c c 3
U) c
O
�I c
T m p
C C
C N N -N -p .B
>- mpC
u
m .p
T d O
C
E p
m
dO
ON
O r
0a
y
O
Q
w
Op
O O
0
CO
dy
r=
E
O �—
n
X O
m o
a m a>i a Ln
rn o
a M a) v
o vii
W U
'i C)�--I
ayi o
N ++ 'O U L— N d
'i .-i
p a-+ 'O -0
m _0 U N
U
U W
I U a
L
V L
L
N L
O y m
— U =
O Y m
— N
= m'
= m'm
� c m
C C m
iCi
u_
N � O
m o
v
`�
Y M
02
f
M
X C
O
O
W �
00
u
Q
O
O
Xi
m�
v
f d
0
g 3 x m
m
2 3 x_ v
N
= M �
= v D
m
m
V
D
L
M
C
X_
X_
a)
2
W
N
L
m
d
In
N
to
N
L
i
•3
vm
Lr)m
Q
N c-
N d
z
rn m o
rn m o
1
N O m
N O N
Q
O N O
O N O
m
(b
m
Is
m
0 -
cm C
7
u
L
O
Q
a
O
C
m
cu
rn
u
U
L
0
O
N
m
u
C
7
E
E
O
U
m
N
m
c
i
0
a
CL
O
C
m
m
u
u
L
7
Q
0)
m
T
C
3
E
E
O
U
L O
L
O
V aj
i
0 U
-0 }'
w C -0
N
-0
O
N>�
a-+
w O
w m O
3 c
Y�'mr
3 c
��'�t
0
3 c
Ta)
O o7i
m
O $i m>
ai
O
05 R>
a� -0
> O O .�
a
3
�'' O
In
O Y C
❑"
3
N
N Y
p N
3�
O C it
C N u
3 0
0
C N N-0
O 3 m
0J
C m
m O U
C N _+�+
c:
u
ruO
t0
m u U
u
CO
C
m
00
OU V
u
L a
Y
u
c C +T'
C
u
C c
M
u
C C 3
0 Q
C
>' m C O
C O) m- a+
7
�` m C p
C m m-
a:+ U
>` m
C p
C 0) m
u p� T. i -
C •ILO
E Q
O a O T 'D
E Q O N
O a a°
M
E Q
0
O m
C N II N
c
o' o O o
C
u
Uj
C
o 0 o
L o N
C 'E
a
o 0
u° 3
E
m U1
a�
�°
E
Y Y
OJ N
U)
IF
4-;
o
QJ UI
0
VI 1n
•x
J-/ C m
M
U
Y G
(p
'D
Y
Y C
@ N
O
O m O
M m m O 0-0
m
m O
�+ 0 m m
O
m
O
Y m 07 m
'0 m O m
W U
'L 0 .�
m ,.� -o -o L u
m
'c 0 .�
w ,� a
L u m
';_
.-i
m Y a a
m u u m
U
7
U m
I U m
I U Ol
Y
Q1
O .Y m
O y m
Q Y m
m m
L
L
L
w
c m
c m_
m
v
N
0 G
n
H co
ce
m X
o m
H �
b
O1
IA
Y N
K C
O
O
O
WD
N
Ln
N
L
N
N
G
o
o
xr
+
A w
m
Ln
O
_C N
a
m *
m
�
C
C
L O
Q wC�Q
O
2
d -
C
N
U— o
U= o
U :3U
m
m
ma
N
n
>-
A
N
G 0
O
x
O
x
=o
�a
y
m
Qi
LY
V
N
Y
L
O
�
(n 'LO
m
Ln -LO
'O
lf) m
0-0
0-0
a
mU
z¢
z¢
Z
Cr "
O1N0
OWN O
r,
N
Q
O O
O N O
O N O
m
N
m
c
i
0
a
CL
O
C
m
m
u
u
L
7
Q
0)
m
T
C
3
E
E
O
U
L O
C
L E
i"
3
t
L 3 U m tD
T
L
N
O U
O
.'-'
0 +� U)
3 i0 C y>
o]
O
C -N
_0'"'
3
E
O
Y
O
.1
-Q 3 C
V1
U
C
to O
3 T
N E
N
m $°
> a o o y
a) op�'�
> m
��
�E E m�
Lm
L°
O
3
O
c
H
m
E U to
y
C@
m O U
C yti
m a+ �-. '— T C
N
a
C
m
m
U
C m u
U
am.
i-
U)
C
'Ln
a
T m a +'
01
N
Vl
m
u c c 3
W '
u
u
C C 3
C U1
In 7
-O
OU
tm+ a c
CO
C
T m C 0
C .0
E 0
�' ^
C p
a
u
C Q E
30
Z
E o v
N
O a a w o
E
o m
a c
amu.
N
v m c
L
3
w° m a
c
C
m a
s+ O O
m a
Y
C Y O L
a) U)
O
O
N i C 0
N
E
O O L 0
X3/1
y a'
C E
O In m m
v1 N V
v1
C
m 7� N
m
N L
L 3
N Cu
>>
t
3 M
> C
O>^
L
U)
E 0) O >
U
N
5 M
m m a C
7
EO'
m m
y
W U
E0,�
ulYUv uCo
-I
(n++'O O
am
u
U1
am mnv
m
U
I U m
I V m
I U m
Y 3
O Y m
O ar m
O t+ m
—_
0 L
m Y
— m
__ m m
—_ m m
W
m
w w >
w >
µ" w>
N
�c la
m
m
u
m Q O
co
TI
F
0
ui
Y
x C
O
O
D
W �
L
M
r1
M
N
In
M
u
Q
O
O
O
X =
+
+
m
i d
u,
U)
0
c
Sm
0
m
rn
'c 3
C
Q 0
d
d
C
U O
o
N
U :3
Q)
w
T
T y
N m
C
o m
C
X
_ N
=� N
(?d
N
N
M
M
LN
'D
-O
'D
W Ot
W O1
N 7
N
Q
Z Q
z Q
Z
01NO
ONO
01N0
MNCCD)
d
N 7 7
N 7 M
N M co
N M CA
Q
ONO
0 NN
0 ri fi
(D - r
0
C
C
T
o
C +O�
U_ °� N
U
'o rn cl
'-i
O'
C-
u R=
al
U
w. +i
E
O
O C O 'p
�=
N
a)
ID ate-+
Z
Y O t6 O '�"1
s�
y _ -p
C
N
CL
=
tl
L T N U .0
DlO NY^
C-0 al
E' m O O
u.n U
N
E
p
C Y'O
f0 Q�
a)Q
`"'I F- _ _
3.--1
U O++
'� to
R Q 7
U
i
N
t0
r m OL
O
>-C
Ttil C
'C
U�
Y
C1d�-
H y
N
C O
y N
N'
3O
U to m !n C
0- m 1
U �,
w C C m `�
O
Y
C
O
O++
1++
>,— � O ID
.� cl 2ro
+�
'� O
O O a)'O
O N;
N
R
a
d X
N O.
ai N .m-1
R
Tra
a)
Ot
Ol C
Q
o m N
C y.
C C /b
R 0 C D C_ O
,.+ R C
Y ._ _
N C
d
d r -I
7 N
N a) 'a toil pl
7
a) al i
0^ O
Y
N
O
D
U>
OU
O a U
a= Q C L
R
W U
iE
U) O
0 U O
E O .O O !n
d'
N
3
I U a)
I U al
I U N
Y d
O y @
O y 0
o
O y m
N L
—M
N
>
w 4L- >
VL- >
C
C C 10
C C 16
C C R
U
I
m o
.m
N
N
OD
ri
P'1
�F-R
mx
L
p
N
0
a
0
LU
rrr
vti
L
m
0 o
`n
N
a
0
0
+
x
m
O
N
O
Ln
D
C
� d
0
a)
FL -
I
L C
7to
U N
O N
C
da
' p E C=
cu--
-O
aliF'v,
m
(r
pv
x0a/
mal
N
U)
W e
W e
R
C
m
'n
O
O
0.-1
V
lfl R
In N
lD OL
�D .21
U
U
Z
In 00 O
LO .--a O
to ti ti
0l .-+ O
d
NNm
NNm
NmO
Q
O N+-1
0 C) 0
000
0+--10
O N O
0
n
00
a)
fo
IL
Q)0 O
N fa
,m., � v o
rn CU
a)
7 a) O
7 C Y
C
to C O C-
C-
N U ul C N
� �
3
v E—' `0
N YO Ti
16 c
N C C m
E m m
0
3 m
� m
C) O= p0 0 G
Cl
Q N U ^
Xy
cn 41 Q.
0 0
N F t0
NU
U'iF al }'.N -i
E O f1 C'O
�_ Cw w
m ;
X�'OO a) y, 10�!�
Ll .
d
�mo���3�
�m�CE�n3 �v�m
H y
O .i L co C C
LwE�'�E�u�-0W
O 7 U C�
N 'm a C
W 'D
6 ';_ - N fY w CO j U)
3 0
Y
O � a) O
C
_
fo O
U - UI
O W
T
a)\-) an d ++ Q O d)
O C
•L
p, v
E
_�
9 .0
C
N 1] C '� -�O
-
=)
IE6 L C O
G
O L C O
fa (a
O S fa C O 'O 'O
O
E
._ 0 0 to
n
Vz;
y U
L Y F O N
fa
>
Y> i N '� �_ O 7 7
O CO �i
N
k 0
7 0 V-- M C O
7
C �, v1 Y
'O Q y �O
a1 L
aU..
] O y 0 0 O
p CO
W U
fo U) � O U) O F
U)
O N m U) U�
N
m N U U) U �- F
U
U
LY
I U N
1 U a)
Y
I U N
Y L-0
O Y (O
O Y fO
Y (O
V) L
w
C
C
v
i
m
Ln
foo
N
W
ce
x
Gp
rn
Y
C
O
O
O
W �
Go
rl
Q
p
N
k
.N
O
o
0
� m
O
= N
a
O
O
a)
O)
m
C
ro
C
-aY
N
z E
- N
0
F o
U a
w U 0
F L
N
F
w
F
w Y
C
W
U a)
U a)
C F
U
"O U
U `� -0
'O cu '- -O
ma
x0 m xUOf
i
W x0
aa)
F
H
N
-
C
O
H
d
Ow
O
C_
N
L
v
Lo E
rL
Q
� F
Z
In rl O
In N o
!n . O
CL
N N IT
N VO .-I
N N LO
Q
0 .-i 0
0
n
00
a)
fo
IL
N 0) O
a) O1 d'
m
+� O
m C O
O
E
-0-0mW
U co
I,
a)0 Z3 oL
m0 D,�., oL
a)F �'.o
OY oL
un
X Q m Y
m
X o m Y
m
X
'Q
0) m m
C
Y U --
L u a 3
.-
Y O U
z L U v L 3
Y
L "-
H .- U-
E� n 3
L
N
0
Ln
CD . ._ F-.
aS wE�Nc
cm .- F .-
�'c oEdN0
Ol 7
ad —0
C F .-
a'm op3
Y
I=
�
�� u
a co0—
no
rn.a
>.
L -0
.0 ��Co0—
E W 0o
E
ccw amLa
a)
C Y
ai C-
c-
N
m O
O
y
m ate) m
w C L O O
G
m m G
w y C L O O
T a1
L m
Y Y L O O
w L
y
N
�
p L_ 'm C
m
-O
m
- O O �_ - C U
O5
C '3 =� N C
al
p C j
wu
O aL-+
u0z
aL.+
uO
2
m
oU ^Eur ouF
o�
mY 3�cn
m 3�u)
m
U
1 U m
I U a)
I U m
L
Y 3
Y L
f
N al
O y, m
O Y )a
o
O Y m
m m
—_
7
'�- t� i
�' w
C
M
C m
G C m
C m
u
=mo
N
N
d
a o o
'i
rl
tt
cd
mx
F�
H
H
Y
O
O
W �
d
L
~
Ln
a
o
0
m�
o
O
o
0
T
N
CC
G d
a)
ar
O)
m
m
m
.O
OL
CU
OL
F OL
N
F
a) CV ra
a) W Y
a) w Y
IO
c
mc
v
m c
'o � a
7 m c
-o v
da
a ;,�
a)E -
a)EU
mE -
r,
x0v
x0 d
x0 m
Ln
m
ta
d
C
C
-
O
�-
a)
(D a)
Ln C
V
,y U
N -O
N E
Q
0
0
Z
Ln .-1 O
Ln .-i O
Ln .-I O
6
N N .--i
N N N
N N I,
a
o .-1
0
0
A
c
Y
L
()
0 -
CL [L
O
C
m
a)
u
u
L
0
v
Y_
C
El(
E
0
U
Nm
0
RE
1�
0) a)
-0m Y
O C O
y
uo
C
C
o .0 C�
E
—
Jmcy
v~
L
m m
m
0
_
-0
C,
CL
r-
o
fa CD0 a)ao
vN0
-
� n
C o-_ C m
g"
y�
v
3 w cn
> o
m
E
V�
> 0
m'55 E u a-oa)—
C a
v
m
a C
-0
U
C
.E
H y
di 7
(!%
O N
C '— a) = al
a)
C
di 0
C L (`') -� m C 4! U al
CL
C Y
E
C
to "Ill
O +y+ (n O
W
O w
�_ E ja
OU U r = U)
OL O W 9
O N U
O) 1C
y++
C
u1
al 16 y'D
0)N��
E Y+'
�� C y� vl
-OU G
c
o L c
o
C C—\
C o m
m
m
m C
o c o w m m a_
w v
=
d
16 -0
E
Co
ON .-i
a)
�
c++
U)
_
.01.D
E
C—
to N
f`l m=
N
L O
C
—
N
Y
n
N a) Y VI a3
Y U fa —
al
-0
V
x O
W U
C T N
m �-
O
u
O C\
u -0
Q Y 0 aJ
+� m U) u
O +'
w In
O C
u n7
a)
a'
i�
.n L
— N Q Y (a al 0 :�'
U) O ._ 07 U) u w. In
O W
u
uo
u a
u a)
Y a3
Ora
N is
H L
Lti
w (aC
ro
C
C C a7
._ C fa
U
cl
m o c
N
ri
00
ce
mx
n
d
F �
IY1
N
Y y�
K C
O
O
W �
m
N
�
Q
x
❑
N
!C
G d
W O
O
C u
z E o
z E L
N
w U z
w U Z
1
a) T
1
m— c
U
_
0)
c a
vo
m 0 v
x U d
x U m
(A
0
LLJ 0
o
co E
E
9
00 m
r+ U
00 V
Q
z
Ln OO
Ln OO
1
N Ln N
N u1 0
Q
0. N
0 ti N
A
c
Y
L
()
0 -
CL [L
O
C
m
a)
u
u
L
0
v
Y_
C
El(
E
0
U
m
W m O
3 "O
"O Y
W m
al m O
3 "O
p
W
N W y
a+ Y 01 W
X11 C O -0 C
co C O
V m—
N
.a-:
CEY
i+ Y 01 W
'N C O .D C
LD 0 >.
v�vmooEm10
C
�mc-0Za)mtn'
m
C
°o3a
��U
W--
W cc
oWaLo
uc
Wa0o
x',c--, OL
C: °'.c,w m0 a) o+'
0 1a
aca
°11-c,v�-- CD > oyU
aci
d
�NEro
Ecum�W-3c
NES':3
U W -3—i
Y
m
N
7r
E
oa) r-
aEouoWimo-
oc��oma
f0
U UriYLn O W
.2
m
U U. -I x U1� O W_0
i+M m 0
cm 'ruE
1
-a al.NYUU
1
cn.N
C
ra 00 -0 -
C L
t C
O O C V C O m m O
L3 W C
L C
O O V C p m tLo O
m C
L+ y
1` 01 W
C L Y Fes-- ��-0
m
O� U.!
M00
01 W
E:
C L yF O`I-�-d
m
DO
W
y r=
0
c:�
3
W a)— � w m a
} Q
lu
D7
—
3
Q) m o m a
Q W
-Se
CO W m
X
W U
T
�a LUl
Y m W p
N
O._CD U) V�V- N
O �
V.� m
T W
�.n LU)
.- - N Y m O
O.-[0 U) Ubu-. N
O
Uti�cl
U
I U W
I U W
L
Y L
y L-0
Y ai
L
0 y m
Y m
-m'ro
L
m
_
C C m
C C m
u_
Y � O
N
00
a
F
Ixw
Y
❑
H
Y
'N C
O
O
W �
I
Q
O
O
Y
R 'U;
O
v
O
v
MN
❑
T
� N
a
O
O
01
C ^C
zEy
z'E-r
Cw
w
O
U 0
U z
N
w
w
W m
1
W 0
W Y
y r
Y
C
N
ai _ C
W of
aria
u—
U _— W
ami" m-0
U .— W
v" d-0
x U o
Ucr-'
d
g K
w
O O
LD
�E
1n
LG
�Ln
°
v
C)
m
m U
O
co
Q
U
w
Z
n0
1n OO
CL
NLn of
N Inn
a
0�ti
0ti'
m m
m m
3 II
0
Y CP a)
y
0
a) m
0
0) 3 m 0
1 II ++ 0) a)
O )n
to
Y
C O
C .p C L
n O U
C
.- +.
m
'U] C O C II C .O
to n
E
a
00 C
coGo
a) C
m CP O
0 Q Q
a) C C
m U) O a) ❑. OL O 0-
X O
C Y
— O
L E U
X O p
N C Y — 0
L i-
O
dCII
�tCi
�U^
Y O_CII
Cw �m >
\
E
u= CI)� > OY
O
E
U)
7 0
C
L
,i6
N }' a) II Q
C a) W m
7 O
C a) C N II m
C .D
C m i
7 C
T E p
r
O
0,
CO
0 �' C
T E U
Q m\ tL6 O. 0 C L
p d' ❑
0
(� 0J
O0 Ln m 0
1 m
0 V •--� Y (n L O N
Y 0 C
ra
.�
C i
Y C
`� G U
L O) p
II 'O
Y C
O O C U C Lp m R
II C N
y
w L
C O L
v0- m T IL
m C
"� m a)
C Y� p 'L 0-
O E ._
i, N
O
m II
L Y �-'
p
UI m
p��
t� m W_ Y
Y L
L �
0) Y N m m
VI 'm` i
3
Y m a)
C U� m L
0
N > m L a)
Y II Q
u
X O
W u
0 >.
E L L
Y II Q
U) O T co
v Y
w u .n l o
p_ co m m
u Ei Elf
>`
Z L L
Y m 0)p
N
In O .- co U) u -0 In
u W 2-1
V
U a
YY
U m
7
d
Q Y m
0 m
W
to
ru
N
W Y
m
V
w">
C:
c
cm
C m
u
1 d
mom
�
N
Foo
6 x
1Y1
H
N
fM1
F-
N c
O
O
W �
00
(31
C;
0
K
.N
G C
O
o
T
N
c�
(. d
❑
0
Q
C
'E
C
z
z E
C
V m
W U
W U z
O
z
N
w
W
1
°
m�
aS y
1
. m
D
0) C
U
d
C.
U� a)
IIw YII
m a)
II'�YII
xU� v
CU
X�K v
Cm7a
NW
N
al
LJJ O
C
0
C
V
LODE
_
E
O
a
m mm
U
tiu
noo
Ln 00
y
N)n
NLnm
Vl
w
c
7
Lo
CL
a
O
C
m
w
L
J
O
ai
w
Y
C
E
E
0
U
w`) _0
G
NL vm
o ate)
m
wu 3.w ow
'D E
C C
0 LU n 00
7 C m W
C T
E
U C Y 0-0
a) 0 N U fo
.+_+
m O E
O w Y (`'1
� Eyl tD w-0 O co
XC Q° m 3 C O
x y U T1 �-
C Y m J>
L
iC Y m w OD o a) !n a% Y
�Y Ea'up�w>�LwC�
mC nv���
L°���3�
o E
0
o'S L
Y w—
p U
L O
7 Y
E w C 0
T y [j]
° Q w
JJ Y O O p o w
Ic
TI m�m� ° mTao3m
C'o
a)o[nvNa��0
C H
01 a) C m CO m w
T a) w m �_ O
C a O tll
1�0 w� d: C 9 � u�� G
IY11 O
++ .L -p y y C 3 .°
Y p m �_ m
w E C -°
O> E L E E x p G v E
'X O
7 T 1n _ m N
aj
E N °V u
7_ C J I� Y
._ — O O C
_ m p m m p ._ L O CO m
L L1 U U E Q U U
W U
E .0
a V) 9 0 U)
N O D U m
m u
°I
L
U w
Y E
I U w
I U w
1-0Y
I V w
w
O L
Y m
O L
Y m
O m
—_
° Y m
—
N L
— N —
— Uf =
U1 -
V)
>
w >
w >
C
M
C C m
C C m
C C m
G m
u_
w O
m O
N
co
moo
y
.1
Fro
Mcc
x
It
N
0
N
N
N
N
Y
W �
u'I
N
D
co
CP
M
h
r1
N
4
O
O
O
O
V
7
Ln
7
D
C_y
a
w
of
vo
m�
w°
z
=1w
N
W (13 0
Z
o
U m°
w U z
U
_
mm
Y
a°�
w m
m
m
d R
V—
= w
U
EY
UI w
a
° Fa w
C_
a)
w
-0 u-- Y -0
ww
'B ._ V
w
Ot
_O
a)
p w '�
0
x a w
x O w
o w
x )
Y
ul
O
w m 0) w m W O
y
L
°
H
N
W C
E m
Y w C E N O C
�'0 C� E
.—
00m
o
coL
tD
lnmw
m
o�m ^3Go
Q
.-iU
.ti F-
lnUd
ZQd o
Z
lnoo
Ingo
m o
v)oo
R
N In.
N d'r,
N, --I t0
Nun V
0. 0
0 0
0 +N
orio
Vl
w
c
7
Lo
CL
a
O
C
m
w
L
J
O
ai
w
Y
C
E
E
0
U
N
m
C
L
O
CL
0-
0 O
-o
C
(U
w
a)
U
L
0
O
co
m
T
C
D
E
E
0
V
J
C
O
V i
m
— T
— T
a) �.
p
m o Y Y
m 0, C Y
p)Nm 0'
a)
cw m-EEo
C-pEm�E�
pEcT
m
C
3 p
y C 0 M C T t
o o
L O) ::3.-
o- mL
'O o m O U O
p >w w
-O m O U O
o >w w
O m-
m Y U Ea
L N _\
7 C di E L
L C N E
a >` -C
- ---
m C y m W m
w— -
m C y m W 16
a 3 m m
m m :D 4- U
w N
CL
m OU Ln Ql '�
p
m-0 mc) U m
T N N- U C C
3
0
Tal N- U O C
3
r -j
-O O_ a) O Y=
w .- C Ti m 0_
C
j -- C 0 0
m
t!) w
I
m\ C m°
m T a Y U
E Y a p 0� o m
E y p o
o m
m E 3
cm
NMmNNE��o�Umcwa
nw�o3o�wau�oaov°
a -�
of
3 n .� O , al
�.�
w m - " °1
y, x al m a) ' O
Y X - v m a) I p
Yc
01 p) a)
y r
3 Y E o o
] E L C 0> m c
C E c o.>_ m e
3 o m o
N a)
OU
OU
W u
Z 0 d 3 IZ m i)
C� 3 O S a m
O F O a alp
O -r O 00 �
F- C m -O m
u
:3 Z
-0
y� �=mm
DUNm
YC
OO (ma
YC
a.+m
la
=m
_am)
m
m
>
>
>
m
>
C
VUraLC- m
C
CO
C
C C m
C C m
u
I
m o
-m
aD
h
1�
o o
m
M
N
.i
N
~
mx
N
N
o
d
0
7
M
N
NAn
M
Y
C
O
O
O
O
O
N
m
(Y]
ti
W
00
^
un
un
N
t0
co
Q
O
O
O
O
O
O
C
c
v
OI
I i Ln
N
O
C
O
C
N
c
m
v N
E
C
am -O
n m
z
U m U
U m 0
U
v
>' X N
0
2 2 X
~ p
WUZ
W Z
O
m
L C7
� U
� v v
� U m
y m
a)
m
w -O
m
w w
N o N -O2
o
a)
4)
X
�
XOa'
x
X0 0
K
XOCC
K
K
O
W
N
O
Lol
o
CL
W O
_
W O
O
t
C
C
vL
unE
oM°uL
�E
03E
rn3
�U
0)
Q
0
.^-I�
�U
- 0
Invo
u)oo
unoo
rnd-o
TZ0)
NN 7
N[Y m
Nun O)
Nano
NmN
O N O
C) rl H
O r 0
0 .-+ .-i
O N O
N
m
C
L
O
CL
0-
0 O
-o
C
(U
w
a)
U
L
0
O
co
m
T
C
D
E
E
0
V
J
L
O
N
a)
L !n
o
m T o C6 I
Y (UO U
Y ruo u
'+
ir,Eo ra
a�
m OLI
E a)
O 00�
a
Y .O 'O
0)
Y -0-0
Y O L
U a) U
i
ul3 O Y
(6 1n
Oai
O 16 N
m
N
L
E
Y
y
T R N 3 0 0
— R
R C
R C
D O
N ._ U
a a)
d a) a L Y
U—
V
-O U
C
01�
E N Y._R
R-
R
T
Tal
7a+ R
cL4a3inmw°�
v
�
u �U
y
M
0�0
M
aCi�L
:3 -0
O 1
O N
DE
R
�'yC
,
K
01
cl
x O
T 3: co 0 0
C L
OO
inc0
0 0
N a)
to fll
L C O a)
D_RUL
wu
EE,o a
U)r-0-
u
7
i u R
i u d
l u d
i ci w
i v v
i uy
L
Y
Y
Y Z
Y:3
L
Y O
L .fl
Y L -O
L=
O Y R
L
O Y R
L -O
O Y R
O Y R
O Y R
O Y R
y L
'Ip
(6 'R
—_ M ._
fL0
_
1La
fLp
Y
= IL6
i
— fL0 R
�"' V-- i
—
4' w i
—_ R
Y-- i
— R
4-. i
— R
V-
M
C C R
C C R
C C R
C R
C C R
C C R
u
cm
H i
ti
ri
ri
ri
rl
KY_
C
O
O
O
O
O
O
W �
n
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
m
>
.+
1x6
0
W
o]
W
W
y
a
m
T
C=
R
N
i`
Q
D
W
0
o
L
a
`
r+
tm
D3�a v
m
N
U z
�.
K
d
K
y x
m >-Z
LU
_
R
U
W
m
Y
C
Y
Y
a1 Y
111 Y
C
i p
y
c)
._ C
u U R m
C c-
N a)
C C
m R
C C
a1 a)
C
N a1
'Dw va
u
(D
X O a)
m
a)
W
g
o
o
o
a
�x
CL
1+ RJ
Y R
Y
C _
O
C
C
OW
OU
OND
L
ai
W
N
U O
R N
ai O
Y
h O x
'O
'O
'D
'C N
OO
U n
U C
a)
017
Q
O m O b R
ZQU
O17 N OR
ZQuYU
O OR
ZQ
Q
1n
Z Q..H�
H
N
2
Lnao
tDN0
Ln V o
00Cj'(D
N N 0
0)M0
S
NLnh
N W )D
NO)0
rJ ter,
NLn6
Nr1im
Q
O. O
O Ti N
0. .
O (`l N
0 .-i .-i
0 N.
�
\ #
{ \
Zi \
/ \
\ \
)
\
ai
Ln
z
CD
0 /
\ &
\
\
\ @
-
{ &
Qj
a
cr
\\\
\\\
3
:S EL
_
) ul
\
em,
&
\\\
u
\}/
-C3
ƒ
/}}
#
\%\a
)
=\32
/&\\
0(
c
O
C U
o
u L
U (n
7 C
N O
C �
oa
U c
L �
d �
ru
C
O
O�
� O
d L
O
CL °
Q c
Q
Y
U
d
.Oru
a`
L
YER
VI
N
a
m
H
L
O O
7 C Y C 7 C C
� -- O L O - C �p p - O
73 C O .D .y Z i C a) ++
Y) "E>.+�m E,.. "q) -r- >0E� -OrnN ¢N _E+-�0)
M 7 -o 0 � .2 v N tYn Ol = y N N N D_ N O W N C U tYl) W
f0 i C O. U1 C 'O^ C y C 0 C p O. C �-' m 1' •--1 N 01 7 C O E C N
a+ O O a () O L O 01 m> O O L O.._ O C X t IDN i O L O O\
{il V m N K V a V I, m_ C V d m V 7 E a) Y O M V d V U M
a >�
m
v
L
w 3
Q' J
(V
G
O
U 6 H M N
C O
H
a
aN+ > N Q1 GO
C �O N
� Q f
al
CN n N M
CL
CL
W N N D M
N O) I!] y
a
o O o 0 0
T
Ix0 '� O O O O
N Ln LIl 7 Lr)
Lfl
O
T
lC� N
L d
C M a N
Q N F v F v
v
n _m m m v v m m m
Q)
n
U
TC
v
o
T--
w Y
W Y
J-/
Y
L >- Y
v
v
m
E cv
aj
o
'o `)-0
0'o
0�
E CU
C
v❑
X O
EF
XO
my
��
v
v
a)
ma)
v
Ln
Ln
N
v
't
d'U)
-Y
c
v
tea)
m
y
a
v
O
>>
v
9
m L
p o
.ti O
C- =
7=
ir) o
d'Go
co
a)
a)
¢
'i LL
ri
rl I-
ri ro
Z
M N O
u1 ti O
U1 .-i O
0) - CD
CTIol
O O
d
N,-1 Ln
N NiD
NNIS
NN c7'
NN Vl
NOi,
Q
O r 0
O .-a O
O ti N
0 .-i 0
0 .-I 0
0, O
E
E
0
V
m
a)
Y
C
7
Y
O
O.
a
O
U
c
u
u
L
7
O
a)
v
7
E
E�
O
U
E
3 p
7� CO 0
Ln
=3 3: p
.0 p Y
.0 O U
z 'C
O U
N
Q m
0
P UL L
Y I.J L L
N
Y U L L
.1=+
C -0 N aJ N
C -o N a) N
(D
4!
C 'O tYll
C C
N
O�
? Cp L C Cp
OU C
? p L C p
U) NO
3
i p C
(A
L) u O_ D u
lD U Cl 7 u
-% O
lD V fl_ n U
Y
� 3
=
ai o
a
»
m
'o
L
W
a
d
E
U
'O
N
ri
rl
01
c
O
N
V1
W
Ln
c
Oo
�M0
t
i
C
In
a
IL
Q
v
m
rn
u
a
O
cs
U)
Ln
o"
c
r
O
C
u
c
m
O
L
N
O�
O
C
M
M
m
U
=
O
K
aC
L
O
N
Da
C
_
L
O
a7
m fa
m is
0) m
.N
W
E'Na
�� v
E
>
L
C -p
C�
a) ._
C �
7 N .—
O
=off v
�C) �
'off a`)
L
a
C7
a
a
7
H
t!
L cl�
L
a
Y Y
—
rA
— O
al
3 Q
a3
3 aLn
a
aL1
n
N
NE
V >-
TC)
O
O a7 o O
0 O N O
N
aM
L
Z
LO. 0
m Lno
MInO
0)NO
6
N N W
N m Ln
N m V
-
N m NIM
C4
a
O O 0
0 N .-i
O N .--i
O H O
m
a)
Y
C
7
Y
O
O.
a
O
U
c
u
u
L
7
O
a)
v
7
E
E�
O
U
1
Q1
CD
0)
m
0-
3 3
0
0
m
a
i C1
025121170
c\
i
025121091
025121260 d° ,(
! 025121D40 o
1 �l
025121120 ^
/oF 0251`21060
`
025121 IN
ioieo \
025150200
-
025156220
0251500
025144
025150090
ECN
➢25161110
Hospital
site v
i
North Burlingame N
EttJRLINGAME Housing Opportunity Sites W+E
2009-2014 Opportunity Sites 19 Burlingame City Limits S
® New 2015-2023 Opportunity Sites Feet
Approved or Under Construction 0 250 500 1,000
Community Resources and Opportunities Page 101
SL
W.
HWY 101
026240370
C2(R-4 OVerlay
026240290 026240360
026240340
I
Carolan Avenue N
e�URIINGAME Housing Opportunity Sites W+E
2009-2014 Opportunity Sites IN Burlingame City Limits S
New 2015-2023 Opportunity Sites Feet
Approved or Under Construction 0 250 500 1;000
Community Resources and Opportunities Page 102
M
Downtown Burlingame y„ N
BURIINGgME Housing Opportunity Sites E
-2009-2014 Opportunity Sites Is Burlingame City Limits S
® New 2015-2023 Opportunity Sites Feet
Approved or Under Construction 0 250 500 1,000
Community Resources and Opportunities Page 103
/
\ i
\Rit
\
'Air ZIN�
M Pei
DA'C"I" V \\ / / / / G\ / 029235140 \ r
029234020,
629235"I50
N/ iq ,\ 028232160 029232030
\ r
\ i 0292042 0 \ / 4 029232049 T /
029231050
03923'1040 029232050
0292
29 5032 060 /
029204250 029231030 029232070 r'
\ / i \_ 03231020' 029231060 /
\ 0292310A0 / _ CAR
•,� \ \\ 029232170 024242040
/ "\l 029203020 029293 40 / / / /
0029203030 029203050 r 12121'i,240
• /
\ } \ 0292x2050 !'
029203100 0292U3b60\ \ i /'` /�,.' t` �i`�f '
\_\.// ^029242030 / r
H `0 U v ' / / 029242020 r mh o
029224270 029242230\
029222650
029203060
T. \\ 0202Z2030�v_ R4vy/� / AVA iAr %
i�
/
/ v\ 029242159 a
\. Y 029222180 \,
\ / 029221030'
\/" \ 029221040
029221050 \ /� ?. / %
ry ✓ 1 rj)'
5029223430 /
C
( 3
i�
Downtown Burlingame N
alingame City LimHousing Opportunity Sites W�
E
2009-2014 Opportunity Sites Is Burlingame S
® New 2015-2023 Opportunity Sites Feet
Approved or Under Construction 0 250 500 1,000
Community Resources and Opportunities Page 104
Sites from the 2009-2014 Housing Element Sites Inventory that are not included `
in the 2015-2023 opportunity sites inventory
The following sites were opportunity sites in the 2009-2014 Housing Element that are no
longer available for development.
Table V-3: 2009-2014 Housing Element Sites No Longer Available.
APN
Address
Reason
Site is zoned C-2 and is surrounded by an existing
026-011-020
1501 EI
neighborhood shopping center. The C-2 zoning no longer
Camino Real
allows mixed use
027-093-110
12 Vista
property has been developed with two single family homes
Lane
1840 Ogden
Property has been developed with a 45 -unit condominium
025-121-130
Drive
project.
This was included in the 2009-2014 Housing Element
736 Laurel
because there was an application to build a duplex
029-062 080
Avenue
condominium on this site. The application has since been
withdrawn.
220-234
029-203-090
Primrose
A new retail building has been constructed on this site.
Road
218-222
029-211-180
Lorton Ave
The adopted Burlingame Downtown Specific Plan and BAC
zoning included this portion of Lorton Avenue as part of
226 Lorton
029-211-190
Ave
the downtown core which was determined not to be
appropriate for residential uses - residential and mixed
236-240
029-211-200
Lorton Ave
use zoning was added on the periphery of the downtown
core.
246-250
029 211 210
Lorton Ave
Community Resources and Opportunities Page 105
ZONING TO ACCOMMODATE HOUSING FOR LOWER INCOME HOUSEHOLDS
State law requires cities to demonstrate the capacity of the site inventory to accommodate
a city's share of lower income households. Cities can show the ability to accommodate lower
income households by identifying sites zoned for higher densities. California Government
Code Section 65583.2(c) establishes the minimum density, or "default" density, deemed
appropriate to accommodate lower income households. This is based on the recognition that
sites zoned for higher densities allow for more units which can potentially lower per unit
costs through economies of scale. For Burlingame, the "default" density is 30 dwelling units
per acre, consistent with the rest of San Mateo County.
About half of the sites identified in the inventory have been zoned for more than 30 units
per acre and are available for development. The default density is applicable to a total of 40
parcels with the potential to accommodate 1,076 units, which exceeds the RHNA allocation
of 575 for very low, low and moderate income households.
Table V-4: Zoning for Lower Income Households
Community Resources and Opportunities Page 106
Max
Realistic
APN
Address
Zoning
Acres
Total:
Density
80% Density'
Unclassified -
1501 Trousdale
025123130
(portion of site)
any use
40
4.15
133
reg uires CUP
TW - Trousdale
025144170
1740 Marco Polo
40
0.6
19
West
ECN (EI
025150160
1876 EI Camino
40
0.35
11
Camino North
029112400
501 Primrose
R-4
51
1.14
46
029224270
Parking Lot F
HMU & R-4
51+
0.84
26
029231240
Parking Lot N
R-4
51+
0.51
20
026240360
1008 Carolan
C -2/R-4 Overlay
51+
2.03
290
026240340
1016 Carolan
C -2/R-4 Overlay
51+
0.73
026240290
1028 Carolan
C -2/R-4 Overlay
51+
0.58
026240370
935 Rollins
C -2/R-4 Overlay
51+
2.05
029242020
1063 Bayswater
R-4
51+
0.11
4
029242150
1100 Peninsula
R-4
51+
0.84
26
029242030
No Site Address
R-4
51+
0.11
4
029242230
No SLre Address
R-4
51+
0.23
7
029132180,
1128-1132 Douglas
R-4
51+
0.35
13
029132190
026011010,
1509 EI Camino
R-3
50
0.31
12
025228130
TW (Trousdale
025121031
1600 Trousdale
40
1.01
32
West
029231060
161 Highland
R-4
51+
0.26
9
TW (Trousdale
025121040
1710 Trousdale
40
0.48
15
West)
ECN (EI Camino
025161110
1766 EI Camino
40
1.7
54
North
Community Resources and Opportunities Page 106
Community Resources and Opportunities Page 107
Realistic
APN
Address
Zoning
Max
Density
Acres
Total:
80% Density
025121260
1777 Murchison
TW (Trousdale
West
40
2.74
87
025121110
1814 Ogden
TW (Trousdale
West)
40
0.41
12
025121120
1820 Ogden
TW (Trousdale
40
0.35
11
West
025121170
1825 Magnolia
TW (Trousdale
West
40
1.4
44
025150220
1828 EI Camino
ECN (EI Camino
North
40
0.92
29
025150200
1838 EI Camino
ECN (EI Camino
North
40
0.6
19
025150180
1840-46 EI Camino
ECN (EI Camino
North
40
0.16
4
1848-1850 EI
ECN (EI Camino
40
0.16
4
025150170
Camino
North
025150210
1860 El Camino
ECN (EI Camino
North
40
0.58
18
025150190
1870 EI Camino
ECN (EI Camino
North
40
0.79
24
025150010
1875 California
ECN (EI Camino
North
40
0.35
11
025144070
1875 Trousdale
TW (Trousdale
West
40
0.32
9
029111260
556 EI Camino Real
R-3
50
0.36
14
No Site Address -
025150040
Parking lot - same
ECN (EI Camino
40
0.28
8
owner as 1860 EI
North)
Camino
025144190
1730 Marco Polo
TW (Trousdale West)
40
0.88
28
025150090
1810 EI Camino
ECN (EI Camino
North
40
0.57
17
025150100
1818 EI Camino
ECN (EI Camino
North
40
0.25
8
No Site Address
ECN (El Camino
40
0.17
8
025150070
(adjacent to 1810 &
North)
1818 EI Camino
Total Potential Capacity for Lower Income
1,076
Community Resources and Opportunities Page 107
SUMMARY OF SITES TO MEET RHNA
The site inventory has the potential to meet projected housing needs for all income levels as
provided by the RHNA. A summary of the inventory in comparison with the RHNA is shown
in Table V-5. The City has the capacity to accommodate housing needs through the
following:
• Currently approved projects to be completed within the 2014-2022 RHNA cycle;
• A site inventory with total unit development potential above the RHNA target;
• Sufficient sites zoned to accommodate lower income housing through "default
densities" (Government Code Section 65583.2(c)).
Table V-5: Site Capacity to Meet the RHNA
*Very low, low and moderate income each received one-third of the units from the "total potential
capacity for lower income' (Table V-4)
ACTIONS REQUIRED/ZONING CHANGES
All of these areas already have zoning in place to achieve new residential development. In
order to improve the opportunities on existing residential sites, the following actions are
required.
Community Resources and Opportunities Page 108
Very
Low
Moderate
Above
Total
Low
Moderate
RHNA
276
144
155
288
863
Approved/
9
145
154
Under Construction
Available Site
358
358
358
281
1355
Capacity*
Units Over RHNA
82
214
212
138
646
Capacity
*Very low, low and moderate income each received one-third of the units from the "total potential
capacity for lower income' (Table V-4)
ACTIONS REQUIRED/ZONING CHANGES
All of these areas already have zoning in place to achieve new residential development. In
order to improve the opportunities on existing residential sites, the following actions are
required.
Community Resources and Opportunities Page 108
Amend the Zoning Code To Offer Additional Incentives For Affordable Housing And
Transit Oriented Development
In areas near a transit hub, zoning code changes would be considered to:
• Provide incentives for affordable housing;
• Outside of Downtown, provide for reduced parking and increased height for
development within one-third mile of a transportation hub or corridor;
• Provide incentives such as reduced parking requirement for efficiency units if all units
are affordable;
• Amend the zoning code regulations to provide opportunities for live/work units and
mixed use projects in areas outside of Downtown;
• Provide incentives for lot consolidation in areas where there are small
underdeveloped lots and/or residential development design would benefit from
larger lots;
• Provide multiple incentives, such as reduced parking requirements and increased
height, for projects that propose units affordable to Extremely Low Income (ELI)
households.
Community Resources and Opportunities Page 109
PUBLIC FACILITY CAPACITY
The city of Burlingame is almost built out and public facilities in place are adequate to serve
existing and proposed development. There are two public sewer projects which have been
completed in the last 20 years which have removed any constraints to new residential
development, particularly at the north end of the city. Many of the sites identified are
located in the northern portion of the city.
Sewer Treatment Plant Improvements
In 1994, major improvements were made to the city's wastewater treatment plant facilities.
As a result of these upgrades, the capacity of the plant was increased to accommodate the
ultimate population anticipated in the City's General Plan. According to estimates made by
the Association of Bay Area Governments, Burlingame's General Plan buildout would
accommodate an additional 1240 housing units above what is shown to exist in Burlingame
by Census 2010. Therefore, there is adequate capacity at the wastewater treatment to
handle the projected 863 units proposed.
Sewer Interceptor Project
In 1998, the Public Works Department completed a major sewer interceptor project which
included installation of new sewer collection main along California Drive from the city's north
boundary to the Wastewater Treatment Plant. This project improved the capacity of the
sewer collection system and provided sufficient capacity for development in the north end of
Burlingame, including all the sites selected north of Peninsula Hospital.
Water Supply
The City of Burlingame provides water service to properties within its boundaries as well as
to the unincorporated Burlingame Hills area adjacent to the west. The Burlingame Hills area
is a residential subdivision of 420 dwelling units which is entirely built out. The City's sole
source of potable water is the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC) system,
which also supplies water to the City and County of San Francisco and other cities along the
Peninsula.
In May of 2011, the City of Burlingame adopted an Urban Water Management Plan in
accordance with State law requirements. The plan looks at the City's water needs and
anticipated supplies to accommodate current needs and future growth.
The Urban Water Management Plan uses the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG)
population projections as well as updated General Plan projections based on the adoption of
the North Burlingame/Rollins Road Specif..- Plan and the Downtown Specific Plan to
anticipate the future water supply needs for the city of Burlingame and the unincorporated
Burlingame Hills. ABAG had projected that the population for Burlingame by 2030 will be
34,000 people. The Department of Finance indicates that as of January 1, 2013, the current
population of Burlingame is 29,426 people. ABAG projections anticipate an increase in
population of about 4500 people by 2030.
The Housing Element update plans for the potential addition of 863 housing units in
Burlingame by the year 2023. The 2010 Census indicates that the average household size in
Burlingame is 2.29people. Therefore, the 863 new housing units would accommodate a
population increase of about 2000 people by the year 2023. This is well within the scope of
Community Resources and Opportunities Page 110
the 4500 person increase in population projected by ABAG and used as a basis for the
Urban Water Management plan.
The city of Burlingame now uses about 4.8 million gallons of water per day (mgd). By 2019-
2020, the Urban Water Management Plan projects that Burlingame will use about 4.97 mgd
(a 4% increase). Burlingame has a guaranteed allotment of 5.24 mgd from the total supply
of the SFPUC system (300 mgd), which may be modified in the future. At the writing of this
document, there is an adequate supply of water available to accommodate the addition of
863 housing units within the next eight years. If there are any substantial changes to the
future water supply, the appropriate analysis will be completed.
The City of Burlingame provides waste water treatment for its residents and those in the
Burlingame Hills area as well as parts of neighboring Hillsborough. Burlingame has started
using recycled water for non -potable uses at its Waste Water Treatment Plant, and will be
building a water distribution system to use recycled water for irrigation at some of the City's
parks and other municipally owned landscaped areas. Larger commercial developments on
the east side of US 101 are required to extend water lines for non -potable irrigation water
to support their required landscaping. The Burlingame Municipal code requires that any new
landscape installation shall include water conservation measures, and this is implemented
by the Department of Public Works. Implementation of these measures will help reduce
future demand for water from the SFPUC system.
Housing Funding Opportunities
Because the city's population is less than 50,000, Burlingame does not receive Federal
housing assistance money (Block Grant/CDBG) directly. However, the City does have an
administrative agreement with San Mateo County, which is the recipient of the CDBG funds
for the unincorporated county and all the jurisdictions too small to receive Block Grant funds
directly.
Although the City of Burlingame does not offer assistance directly to first time homebuyers;
the City does participate with the County consortium in a Community Development Block
Grant program funded by the Federal Government, which provides some first time
homebuyer programs.
The San Mateo County Office of Housing and Community Development is the lead agency
for the Consortium. San Mateo County HOME Consortium receives federal block grants from
which they fund housing projects. The Home Investment Partnership Program (HOME) is
one of the more active loan programs operating in the county. The participating cities, along
with the unincorporated area of the County compete for funding from this grant. The local
jurisdiction in which a project is funded, must match 25% of the Federal funds. Projects
seeking funding from the block grant must complete a request for proposal (RFP) that is
reviewed by the HOME Program Review Committee that formulates recommendations to the
Board of Supervisors. The Board of Supervisors makes the final decision on which projects
are to be funded.
The other main program operating in the County is the Mortgage Credit Certificate Program
(MCC). The MCC is a tax credit certificate that is issued by San Mateo County Department of
Housing and Community Development to eligible homebuyers. The certificate allows a tax
credit equal to 20 percent of the annual mortgage interest paid on a home loan, with the
remaining 80 percent of the mortgage interest still eligible to be taken as an itemized
deduction. With this benefit, new homeowners may wish to adjust their Federal tax
Community Resources and Opportunities Page 111
withholdings, resulting in more spendable income each month. In order to qualify for this
program, applicant's total gross household income cannot exceed $84,400 for a 1 or 2
person household, and $105,500 for a 3 or more person household, according to 2014
limits. The purchase price cannot exceed $673,616 for a newly constructed or existing
dwelling. Due to the high cost of housing in Burlingame, it may be difficult to find a property
that would meet the criteria for the above stated programs.
The Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) is promoting investments in priority
development areas through its four-year, $320 million OneBayArea Grant (OBAG) Program.
The OBAG funding distribution formula to county Congestion Management Agencies (CMA) is
based on factors such as population, past housing production, and future housing
commitments — the allocation for San Mateo County is about $26 million. The City/County
Association of Governments (C/CAG), the CMA for San Mateo County, programs OBAG funds
to projects that meet requirements in one of six transportation improvement categories:
Local streets and roads preservation; bicycle and pedestrian improvements; transportation
for livable communities; safe routes to school; priority conservation areas; and CMA
planning activities. Only jurisdictions with an adopted complete streets resolution or a
general plan that complies with the California Complete Streets Act of 2008 will be eligible
for OBAGs. Additionally, a jurisdiction must have a housing element certified by the
Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD).
Human Investment Project for Housing (HIP) is a non-profit organization located in San
Mateo County that has programs to assist people with special needs, either from income or
circumstance, to live independent, self-sufficient lives in decent, safe, low cost housing. HIP
Housing's Home Sharing program matches those who have space in their home with those
who need an affordable place to live, maximizing housing inventory and turning existing
housing stock into a new affordable housing option. It is the only program of its kind in San
Mateo County and provides a housing option for over 700 people each year. Over 90% of
those using the Home Sharing program are low to extremely low income.
There are several other grants and low interest loan opportunities that are available for
housing rehabilitation, construction, acquisition, retention, and preservation in the city of
Burlingame. Many of these funds are accessed through the County Office of Housing and
Community Development, like the HOME program described above. An example of some of
the other housing assistance programs include; CalHome Program, Emergency Solutions
Grant (ESG) Program, and Multifamily Housing Program (MHP).
ENERGY CONSERVATION OPPORTUNITIES
It is a requirement of every housing element to include a section on residential energy
conservation opportunities. Since the deregulation of energy companies in 1998, the price
of energy has increased substantially. With such an increase in prices, energy costs can be a
-substantial portion of housing costs. Effective energy conservation measures built into or
added to existing housing can help residents manage their housing costs over time and
keep lower income households affordably housed. There are a number of programs offered
by the City of Burlingame, the local energy provider (PG&E) and the State of California,
which provide cost-effective energy saving programs.
Energy Programs Offered by the City of Burlingame
Primary Programs:
• All new residential and nonresidential construction in the city must abide by the
State of California's residential building standards for energy efficiency (Title 24 of
the California Administrative Code). Title 24 Standards were established in 1978 to
insure that all-new construction meets a minimum level of energy efficiency
Community Resources and Opportunities Page 112
standards. Burlingame requires that new development must exceed Title 24 energy
conservation requirements by fifteen percent.
• The City's zoning ordinances do not discourage the installation of solar energy
systems and other natural heating and cooling opportunities.
Secondary Programs:
• The City of Burlingame enforces a tree preservation and reforestation ordinance. Part
of the ordinance requires that when additions are made or new residences are built,
property owners shall plant one (1) landscape tree for every 1,000 square feet of lot
coverage or habitable space for single family homes or duplexes; and one (1)
landscape tree for every 2,000 square feet of lot coverage for apartment houses and
condominiums. New trees planted shall be 15 gallon to 24" box size, and shall not be
fruit trees. In addition, the ordinance provides for the protection of the larger,
existing trees in the city. With the proper siting of trees to allow sun exposure in the
winter and shade in the summer, a homeowner can save up to 25% of a household's
energy consumption for heating and cooling. Computer models devised by the U.S.
Department of Energy predict that the proper placement of only three trees will save
an average household between $100 to $250 in energy costs annually.
• The Bay Area Air Quality Management District is encouraging cities to adopt an
ordinance which would allow only pellet -fueled wood heaters, an EPA certified wood
heater,__ or a fireplace certified by the EPA should the EPA develop a fireplace
certification program for installation of any woodburning appliance. The use of
properly regulated woodburning appliances would decrease the amount of natural
gas and electricity required to heat homes in the city while preserving the region's
air quality.
• The City of Burlingame adopted an ordinance requiring the recycling and salvaging of
construction and demolition materials. Enforcement of this ordinance reduces the
amount of materials going to landfills and also conserve energy through the reuse
and recycling of these materials. The Steel Recycling Institute reports that steel
recycling, the number one recycled material in the U.S., saves enough energy to
electrically power the equivalent of 18 million homes for a year.
Community Resources and Opportunities Page 113
Local Energy Supplier (PG&E)
The Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) supplies all of the electric and gas needs to
the residents of Burlingame. PG&E offers an assortment of programs that provide residents
with the opportunity for energy conservation. These programs are available to all residents,
but there are additional programs for households that qualify as low-income. PG&E has been
the sponsor of energy savings assistance programs which provide energy education,
weatherization measures, and energy-efficient appliances to low-income households.
The State Of California
California Energy Commission Rebate Programs:
Open to all residents of California, independent of their income. Rebates are provided based
on current funding. Rebate opportunities are updated by the California Energy Commission.
The California Solar Initiative has provided rebates and incentives to home owners for
installation of photovoltaic systems.
Public Outreach:
The City of Burlingame has prepared an informational packet available to residents
highlighting the available energy conservation programs. This packet is made available to all
persons coming to the Building and Planning counters for building permit information. In
addition, the City of Burlingame publishes a recreation brochure that is mailed to all
residents twice a year. An advertisement will be included in this brochure to direct residents
to the energy conservation programs. This information will also be included in the
community newsletter sent out with the City's utility bills.
Community Resources and Opportunities Page 114
VI. Housing Goals, Policies and Action Programs: 2015-2023
The Burlingame community and City Council have worked hard and achieved many of the
implementing action programs set out in the 2009-2014 Housing Element. In some cases
time and opportunity hindered the accomplishment of some programs. Over the past five
years circumstances facing the city and its residents have also changed. In this section the
focus is on the particular successes of the 2009-2014 Housing Element which should be
carried forward, the lessons to be learned from the action programs not achieved, and the
changing circumstances which will affect the city's housing opportunities and programs in
the coming planning period, as well as the goals and policies that the City of Burlingame
intends to implement to address the housing needs identified in the needs assessment
evaluation.
Key Programmatic Accomplishments of the 2009-2014 Housing Element
Burlingame's 2009-2014 Housing Element action program was divided by planning goals.
The premise was that the residents, Council and staff would work together identifying and
implementing action programs to create opportunity for more housing to assist in meeting
the City's share of California's housing need but also to assist those households with unique
housing needs. In Burlingame these households include persons with disabilities, the elderly
who live on lower or fixed incomes, single heads of households, and our service and public
employees. Because more than half the city's single family housing stock and
neighborhoods were built before 1940, maintenance and conservation of neighborhood
character was a leading issue during the planning period.
Burlingame's 2009-2014 Housing Element action program contained a number of items that
have been accomplished. Among the programs implemented during the planning period /
were: Il
• Reasonable Accommodation for Accessibility: The zoning code was amended to
include a Reasonable Accommodation for Accessibility procedure which establishes a
process by which an individual with a disability may request modifications to
development standards to install physical improvements (such as ramps, handrails,
elevators or lifts) necessary to accommodate the disability.
• Emergency Shelters: The zoning code was amended to permit emergency shelters
by right within the northern part of the Rollins Road (RR) zoning district subject to
performance standards. This area was identified as appropriate for emergency
shelters because it is near services and transportation (close to the Millbrae
BART/Caltrain Station)
• Transitional and Supportive Housing: The zoning code was amended to include
definitions for transitional and supportive housing as outlined in State law, and to
specify that these uses are considered a residential use subject rn the same
restrictions as other residential uses of the same type in the same zone district.
• Secondary Dwelling Units: The zoning code was amended to allow secondary
dwelling units on certain lots within the R-1 zone district, subject to performance
standards.
• Downtown Specific Plan Zoning Implementation: In addition, the Downtown
Specific Plan was adopted as well as all implementing ordinances. The zoning
implementation actions for the Downtown Specific Plan which also implemented the
Housing Element programs include the following:
o Established a series of Mixed Use Zoning District in areas which were
previously zoned exclusively for commercial uses. These districts would allow
both mixed use buildings which include residential uses as well as stand-alone
multiple family residential uses.
Housing Goals, Policies and Action Program Page 115
o Established an R-4 Incentive District adjacent to the Downtown Commercial
core which allows taller buildings to encourage multiple family residential
development.
o Established reduced parking requirements for any multiple family residential
use within the Downtown area west of California Drive.
o Established a maximum average dwelling unit size throughout the downtown
area to encourage smaller, more affordable units.
In addition, the City continued to implement the following programs which were established
in previous housing elements:
• Single family residential design review which places an emphasis on structural and
neighborhood conservation and maintenance;
• Second Unit Amnesty which encourages the retention and maintenance as lower cost
housing of second units built before 1954 on single family lots;
• An active code enforcement program to manage property maintenance issues and
broker tenant/owner disputes;
• Participated in and funded the City's proportional share of a new north San Mateo
County homeless shelter for single adults;
• A day center and emergency shelters at local churches to participate in an ongoing
program of emergency housing and support assistance for homeless families have
continued to successfully operate in the community;
• Continued to promote and enforce urban reforestation and exterior illumination
regulations which support local goals for energy conservation.
Building on these programs, over the planning period the City added 77 dwelling units and
rehabilitated 216 dwelling units. The City laid more ground work for adding more
opportunities for new housing and maintaining the city's residential quality and supporting
affordable housing than with any other Housing Element implementation program. The
2015-2023 Housing Element will build on and expand on this legislative base and
implementation experience.
Lessons from the 2009-2014 Housing Element Implementation
The City has learned from the variety of experience implementing the 2009-2014 Housing
Element. The proposed 2015-2023 Housing Element work program is based on the current
Housing Element's successes and reality checks. We have been successful with legislation
which provides incentives for private developers to change land use from commercial to
residential using multiple family overlay zones and residential mixed use zones on
commercial properties, both of which allow standalone multiple family development, as well
as with incentives to single family homeowners to maintain their properties, retain older
second units and in some cases add second units. Without a redevelopment agency or direct
government entitlement funds, we have learned that City staff must work at being informed
and build a bridge of information and program linkage between developers and available
assistance. Moreover, as the regulatory programs outside the City's control multiply and
discourage new residential development by increasing its cost, City staff must be trained to
facilitate and communicate. The 2015-2023 Housing Element work program is built on these
lessons. The City's mandate is to facilitate development which implements the City's
planning goals and policies and to maintain the City's services and facilities to meet the
standards of regulatory agencies and residents needs so that new residential development
can be accommodated. The private sector's mandate is to build new residential units within
the established goals and policies. The Housing Element will provide the link to form a
partnership.
Housing Goals, Policies and Action Program Page 116
The types of programs proposed in the 2015-2023 Housing Element which should succeed
because they build on the success and experience of the 2009-2014 Housing Element are: `
• Continue rehabilitation through code enforcement; t
• Allow fee waivers for affordable rehabilitation;
• Continuation of Second Unit Amnesty program coupled with participation in county
housing rental rehabilitation programs;
• Facilitate creation of new second units that meet the criteria outlined in the zoning
code;
• Residential and neighborhood maintenance through residential design review;
• Expand zoning incentives for transit oriented development with inclusion of
affordable units to include the Priority Development Area along the EI Camino Real
and California Drive corridors as well as areas within 1/3 mile of the city's three
transit hubs;
• Continue to maintain partnerships with a local non-profit organizations to insure
existing and new residential units stay affordable;
• Build on successful partnerships with non-profit providers and provide more
regulatory incentives to encourage housing assistance for senior citizens including
assistance in modifying existing housing for the elderly and disabled;
• Continue to promote housing in areas which have been zoned for mixed use;
• Reduce greenhouse gas emissions through sustainable building practices;
Establish a policy to maintain zero net -loss of housing units when new development
is proposed; and,
• Continue staff training and encouragement in their role as program facilitator and
broker between funding agencies and private developers;
• Implement an outreach program for persons with disabilities;
• Continue to provide incentives for developers to include affordable units in new
residential projects; `
• Consider adoption of a commercial impact in -lieu fee that would require developers
of employment -generating commercial and industrial developments to contribute to
the supply of low- and moderate -income housing through the provision of
commercial in -lieu fees as prescribed in a nexus impact fee study;
• Consider adoption of a residential in -lieu fee as an alternative to providing affordable
units on site.
These policies are outlined in more detail in the following Goals, Policies and
Implementation Programs, which outlines the specific programs, five year objectives,
funding sources, responsible agencies and time frames for implementation.
Housing Goals, Policies and Action Program Page 117
[This page intentionally left blank]
Housing Goals, Policies and Action Program Page 118
O
d
C
�
w m
G
N O C
C
LL
O =O C
N N O
a)
LLL•
'o
aC)
u--
a L F 1 a S E
O N
y
m
G
Y o y m o v m
m v
Q
O
F
w 0- TmNwO+L,
-
F
L
uo
u
D
E
u
CC
y
o.
d
c a
Z
°
�
rn
m:L'
Cf
m m
a
°a
oU
a
E o
F
4
O
fl
iW �E N
�
,
o
EL
O
UO
7
E
O
�
O
a)
a
p
W o
O
N
CL
Ea
a)
(13
NC
N
a
Q
FA
o>
a)O
O a)
CL
w
O
U
C.
U U 0
O
4
U
i
U
i
ui
f6V
am+
N
V
a]
U
p
0]
z
d=
()
0
a
L
a)
m
�^
i
u
.fl
O
u
U
a)
v
O
C
'�
3
O
N
3
v
m
ry
`1
m
UO
°
E
�
c
E
O
vi
�
O
U)
z
m
v-
aRi
m
rn
�` _0
R
v
.m
rn
LL
Q
0.....
C
-
'p
ma c
N U
M
'd
4J
t�'
M
w
L
3
t
;C
c
c
C x
t
N
C
C
Li
Z'
10
O
C
m
L
rn
O
3
a) m
cm
Q)
3
C
a1 O
Z.
N:
�O
C
'D
W
U
LL
(.7 f
W
R'
LL
U w.
N
E
O
O
O
m
'Q
0
.N
p
o
7
C
o,
-0
o>
c
m a)
3
b v
p
Z
'v
O
U
L
y
—
°,
%� O
C
v O
a)
a1 L
Z
Q
C
C
m
0
m
C
>
O a>
.fl m A
L O L L6
' W
U1 `
10
L
aP
—
L
O
m
O L N
C tN/I
r
0.
Q
d
U
C_ u
1
m
O -.
C
_
C
Q
T
Y
a)
w
m
d
i..l
R Y Y
a) O U)
Y d a)
L �..N
„I
U
U
CT
C
C m VI C
3
a
CO L L C
w
y
a)
_^
0L
C°
u
a) m a)
u m
m
F
L
L
`°
L°
L
R
G vl CPE
m a1 C
CO
m Q
c
.J�
LL
m
x
C
U
9
U
Q.
y
U
_Emc_
o
N
ii
�Y
C
�'m
a
a ��>
:.
ana.�.�E
n211
X
m
Y
ow
c
c
3L
—a)
oco_c
v
W''
a)
V-
O
d
O
°.
CL
y In R -
m
6- Y aJ E
1 J
Z
O
y
m
U
'D
,F.
Cl) a) w
}' 7 u- m aJ C
Q-.�
L
o
i
t"
U)
a°
O
C U N y
R
N O C 0
N
y
o
y
O
i
u°
d
c m
t
E a° E 3Y
u
°
a�
c
of
c
ormO
a'
Y'
o
u0CL)
aa))_
u w
V
L—
m
d
a
R
U.2 Y
L c o E�
6 Q:.W
:
m
y
O,
E
C
O m C
d O m
2
L
U
L
m
troll
CP
O_
U
LU
�!
F
a
a
L
aC
°
m
v°
O
c
O U°
O
H
O
a)
J I:
LL
m
L
d
a)
fl_
LR
i V vl a)
O
-O O
aj
m O r= O
O..
Y
7
C
aj
Y
m
O
a
O— C m
=
OJ—
ju s
y,�
-0-0.� O L
1
U
J ,
JZ
m
Y
C_
E
V,
p
1
CL ro
U 07
c
U W
0
OL
O
la
OL
j
O
F
'v °
N
-ate+ gym+ N
amF
a
U�
a
a
a
U
Q
a
C a
a
U o�
N c
W.
a
'-:
F
...mac m
�_
m u -0 -0
Ja,Jy
Lovr-m�
¢Q¢Q¢Q<LU
cE-O�
a)ES-
.
S
S
S
S
2
2
.0
to
V
S
W
m
'N c m 3
A
of m
o Y 3
U
VU
U
V_U
U
Umyo�
r
°O,wy,O
OO
—°a°
H
Lha
UC�
o9
'w
M
v.
a
mo—a
n.
sLc
O
, av m
G.
—O
r
O
O
y
L C
L 7
w
TY E
_
y
E
w Ili
E
C
w
a
c° w
a
R
C°
m
LL
° O
�j
IL
LL
° C
O
O
LL
C i..
C i.+ W
ez
F
a+ O
mz
z3
E
i=
cm
O
Er.+
O W
mw�F-
of
O
m
U
>
>
A
U
T Y
'0
C
U
U
C
U
CY
d
C
p
V
C
a
aw
C
O
C
w
01
d
p
CM
W
Im
'_'
a)
tm
a .0
W
Q
U C
1a
Q
Q
v
Q
U
L
GI
Y O
V
Ci
Y
C
Y L
ja
aci C C
o�
m
Tv
m�
,T,(DCP
a
c
n o. E E v
N
c
n
a
c
E
c
E a c
0
°'
0
E L° o c
c
c
E
�ao
y
E w
o
E v c
H
w
E> O w
N
E>
�
E>
:�
c
E> T7
d
o
o w W L rn
w
o
W
-O
o
V
w
o W
d
o W o
a
a
U
m
C'
u 0
O:
U O U u
..
0)
Oi
N
U
�
h
d
Imp
d
d
v,
d
,°C
N
ID
d
to
i
0
o
O
N
O(
c
3
O
V
w
0L
U)
i
O
{%%
1-
R
:i.
cn
O
V)
i
�n
D
O
ul
Vl
a
w
Ip
w
"-
C_
L
t
U'O
W
R
LL
U
W
Z
{L
Z
W
R
LL
n3.
W
IL
OU
L
O m CO
N
E
N
y
°
3 V� C Y
.--i
N
C
o
L
d
to
0 7 .0
p C W
a
ios °-wo W
a—°E'�
w
o)WaZrnO+
L
o
W o�
rnm
N
E o
c
a 0 m
„ L
.O
H
Y a
CD
L
L L' m 0
Y
L W
C
QY
.R
7 a
W
7 y
O W
u
O
d
W w
a t0
L a
a
L In U L
w° E w
L�
'L
°
L
N VI
�o
U) m W
Y
L
u ILo c 0
C
_
o_LYY
L Y
N
n
w
O
O
0
L�°�E
O O N
O
O
'..
Imo
U) u- m .-
E
u 3
C'E
c
m pa
C L
C o
Cl m
0 0 a
O
L
u
G
O O.
,�
L
w vi L
W C d C O
9
N
3 U C
7
H
a)
CW G
7 Y Ol O° L
y
>
L O T m �L
C
rn W O
N
N
'6 a
a
O
•3
W a
U
OL O
°_
C Q
Y O L
w +.+ p
7 E>
U
N
C
w
a L O w Y
01
L
L
O
a C
a)
W
Y C
N m a
L
p—
"c
3
ui
�
16
ym
f E
;?
� o u
N
..
�
0
d
-,0
L
$
L Y C
o
mm
W
d=
vC
O
3
^w
O
Y
L a m
U
C—
a
'~
>
a
W a)
+'
7
o
°. w
W
O O Z m-0 W
m
O a
O
0)
Z
L .°
C
N
m
°)
Q
Y N C OL > i
Q
IJ C
I/1
C
LL
C
0 N
�_
W
N Cl Ol ° L O
1
C w ) L O w
W W U) Y O_
OL
1
�' W
'D
O
.-
O
N
1'a
a)
'n
W
1
O N L=
3 fl_
= L
Q
m
E
o
YL o o
a
my
W
in
y
o�
two
a°olamo
a
��.E
D m a
a_
v`oC:
L
mro
a
�1
Ur
o
J+
E u
G
L°
o
O O
0 O
S
a L C a L
S
°U
S
C
Y
T
L
S
L
C
i+
w .° a) to C
0 of
H
++ O
C
C1
O
N a)
N w L
u1 ° C
Y
w
E_
fO
L
Vl
Y
ILO
y.l
.° O
R
E O
'~
W
L
.D L> a s
L
a)
a L
9
V
C t..
a E E
01
O
R
M> a) w C
C
01
>
C
C> y
L
Y
W°
a
01
:u a U
c a
Ot 0
L
L o o a
O
C ._
p
0
T p,
O
C
p L a
IL
i
U 3 N o_ d E
a
U
°U
3
d
a
3
Q 0
N
a
U Q
d cu) am
r
E
to
IT
O
IL
C
O
V
C
c
m
w
V
Q
d
N
10
O
0
cn
C
E
E
U.
LL
N
o
3
N
o
E
m
E
m
O
L
L
U
0
U
�
N
Z3
IM
E
a
ra
ra
d
a)
0-01
._
•N
N
;O
'N
O C
Y
�
0
P C
C Ifi
N
V1
LCL
C d
E
In
E>Q
L
O
y
CSE
Q
d
U O
m
d'
a m
u
lu
C
O
>
49
%
U
U
U
U
L
O
_
.fl
O
Q
ICI
N
O
o
o
O
LL
IG,
N
V)
7
Ah
(A
C
N
Q)
Of
U-
d
N
tm
o
i
J
c_
m
>.
In
c
a
LL
W
U
LL
U`
W
a
¢
d
R
W
-O T
C
c
f Q,
C
to E
a E
3 o m
O21)
v
`I—
u3
N
-0L
j
c
d"m—
3
vmIn
mm
a)
•C.
>
rn ro o
o
O a
G)
L
L
O
C ,0
L
O I
O1
m
mVIm
0
N
c N
C
U
N
C
'O ru E 'O
W_
m
y a m
c
yy�
t,
m�0_Q
E
w
T.-
c
E
o
L
O
N O
S
C d
ra
yLn
N
•y
C O U
U
y
G
d
� N
O O
_O C_ (U
U
U
fa
O
*2
O
U�
P%
1
CT
1
W y
_°
00
S
E a a3,
d Q
- m>
m
m
�`
Un
L Y C u
U
L
C 01.E C
Ot
Im
O O
ImC .-
0
C T
O u
O
C C U N
O O N N
IL
In U L .Si
LL
U
E
to
IT
O
IL
C
O
V
C
c
m
w
V
Q
d
N
10
O
0
cn
C
E
o
�'
o
m
(A:
m -.
LL.
d'w
2
m
C�
c
v
E_
O
°
Q
1-
O
J
m
N
u
Lu
o
LL
C
}--
W
01
0,
Vl
O
N
Q
v c
o
o
c
w a
0
121
GJ
O
d
o m
U a
IL
c
Q.)K
Oto'
z
2
d
Z
F
m
za�
u
m
._
m
Y
O
0
O
O
}
w
v'
L.
-
to
4)
vCAt
F
m.
O
:C
'6
�' p
_
O
4
E
>
LULL.
Uw
E
u
m
•a: y-
m m
m:.
~
C
Y
c
y
m c
m
tOi1
i >
CO
m
m
°10
E
L
�_ ow
m
m
2-;.
Vl
m
O
O@
U C
o L
— d
m L
W
4
m�
E
U,
m +' C v O
a a
E c 0
m N
cu
y
0 E c3
ro
my
m
o
oo. m -o0 3
m
v m
O
'c
+.
L fl m
my
(u'a
uo�aca��a�
M
O
o
.
w" c c m
m u
m
O0
O
a�
o
0 W 0w0-�y���
3
0
H
„E Y E
o cs-_
c
3
3r
Z
lu
c
Al
c
i
E 0 L-
> 0 m ,ti
aU
m N Y
O
a.
Q
c
O
E
a
i
m
u m a�
LO N L
m L
c K o
.- -
m
�yF''•
0
m
C >� 3 N
m m
E
lu
m
m
W Y>
O c
E J U
T
W
O
�%
u
C 0 9 O_
>� O .-
O
0 y
ar�
a --o0
a o_my
oY.c
cU
Qui
°
°Y'
m
cC
a
O E .,o-°
v
ao
m
>_C7
oa
a
E
0.
vyoE._�mc
Y
W
1iJ.--a
C0
E
E
O
-
y
y U
t' m w.
c c
N
~
0
L
0
m
..y
1"�
�>mo
-0
i6 a)
E U
m
>�
a°
Q
m
u
y Y 0)
D3mmm,��3cm
LL
0
m
OCU
lo
IL
LU
•�
N
Z
i
0 0 0 c c
>
N O
' G
W
m
m
W
E�
Nom, E c a)
v rn +'
� u
m
0
0
U
W
i
O+m
to
C
aLummLEoum
C U
U
i
a
C9
J
y
u
C
C 3
c L o=--
2 9
as E
o=
�
Q-
Lu
O
D
O
F
t'
0 m
0 0 c 7>
0
0
C
U7
U
M
IL
a
n.
H
d
m
U u N a 0
U1
L u-
,Cp au
Zce
Y
E
W
E
x
O
r.
O)
O
U.
0
f6
O
C
O
LL
o
a
Z
d
U
v
c
O
L
"
E
a
ES
Q
�
�=
Y
Y
O
c
Y
N
O
O
N
E
�_
fr
C
O
E
�Y�/
�
T
O
S
W
O
r
O
Y
Q
J
fa
C
w
F
a)
U
u
U
N
E
LL
a
C
_
l
N
0
O>
E
_
N
a
Y
0-
o
M
O
o
—
O
Y
Q;r
a
N
o
g
f6
7
W
a
E
_
.o
U
E
U
Y
my
o
N
a
W
Y
F
>
v
u
Y
T
o
0
m
v
'7
0
W
i
o)
o
O
m
a)
E
.N
J
al
n.
uOj
N
-
°
'L
c
y
E>
L
U
a
Y
o
E
c
r
w
a)
>
U
a�'i
aa))
L00
:Ll
al
o
U
a)
a`
am
o
y
U D
L
p
m
Y0.
>
H.
7.
M
m
U y
N
L
L
CU
Z
Z.
'o
L
u
U C
a
2
a
0
U
a)
T
C1
O
O
o
u
U
p E
E
3
z3
7°
0
fz
0
QL
_
°-
L
O
R
°
o+
s
U
LVI
gyp
a
>
R
V)
E
>
0)
m
Z
O
w
C
6
U
y
>W
d
d
U
v
C
c.
FUi
+O+
C
V
�/
`/
L
V
W
S
2
S
rn
J,
-
M
V_ V
a
W
&U
J
U_
ol
a)
O
x
O
O
O
_
O
N
N
W
W 4
IL
U
R
LL
Z
fa
(1)
L
L
i
o
fa
m
Y
C
m
Y
w
U
2)0
v
d T
y0.
C
Y
C
a)
Y
O
a)
_
N
Y
C C E - to
E
w
w
0
Y
o��
�
`—° o0 o
-O
y>j
'ti
IO
3 C IO t
L
_
cEoEU�
C
a)
a)
N
=
Y
O N a) a)
m
O
o
-o
E
fa
N
L
a)
O
>_
c O o o
'0 -u
p >_
o
m
m
a
°
o
�'
u
C"
N
O
'L
W
a) U a)
=
fi
=
�
E
Y
C
°�
.�
fa
u
�
N
�'3
°�
m
'
Lq--
N
=�C__E
C T 3
i
m
U_
e
aL
�
C
C
w
O
aa))
U
p
u
E w L
C
(ra °lLI
C
y
0
al
t6
U
N
CD
- C L a)
N 0
"0O
N
U)
N
__
a)
E
y
C
fa 0 3
E 'y
_
—
0
C
Y
E
O.
0-
C
.�
10
C M p
C 00 .- a).
N
O
C
O
L
p
O
L
E O Y O
C
L Y
E
L N
N
N
a)
>
Oo
O
'OL
y d C
E
Y
-0
m
c
z
E
m°
_
E -0a) 0
N
fa
'w0p
OO
>
C E E
w c o
u—Oa)moOE�E Y
9
.0
C
@
N'X>N
U
A
N L
O
C
C
+-'
U
C
01
'N ui
f
C O 0
H
a) d
u1
p
"'."
E
'>
C
C
w E'
fV
Cp
U
M
o
fa
L
.-
'd
O O
- L
M
1
C`O-'
'_ a) �- j
C6 L
al C
fa
�
N
m
N
O
Y
m
O to v 0 0
O
-0
�
L
Ol
C L
v
Y G L
C
C
ac
o
as
o=
�
U
E
v
-0
m
3
E
Uv3vo
o)EN E E
E m
C
j--
a>
R 0
3 w�-
O
O
D-
U
i
p O y > O
01 IA
'y al
N
Y
C
d
U
N
C
dt
O
Q
O
U
>O m
d
O
u,
C
0
0
C1-0
L
O Y
LL
C a) m a)
W -O u- N-6
N_0
Zce
Y
E
W
E
x
r.
O
O
0
o
Z
c
O
E
C
N
L
�Y�/
o
L
Y
Oai
Y
U
u
J
fa
C
w
F
a)
N
E
LL
a
0
O>
E
_
N
>
Y
M
O
o
—
O
Y
Q;r
f6
7
W
a
E
_
.o
U
E
U
my
o
N
a
_
Nu
F
>
v
u
Y
T
o
0
m
v
'7
W
i
o)
o
O
m
a)
E
.N
J
al
n.
uOj
N
-
°
'L
O
7
L
U
Y
E
c
r
w
a)
>
U
i
L00
:Ll
o
a
a,
a`
am
Z
a
o)
m
Y0.
>
H.
7.
M
m
a
L
CU
Z
Z.
'o
L
u
a)
2
a
0
0
0=E
T
C1
O
O
o
M
u
u
z3
7°
fz
fa
_
°-
L
O
o
—
o+
s
U
LVI
gyp
a
>
U
E
>
0)
Z
O
w
C
6
U
y
>W
d
w
-
0
c.
FUi
V
�/
`/
L
V
W
S
2
S
rn
J,
-
M
V_ V
a
W
&U
J
U_
a)
O
x
O
O
O
_
O
N
N
E
E
c
C)
C)
a) 3 Yo
(U
FO
C NONCw
O Q
O
m
uL
O E
a)
O
N
U.
-IL OTC C
_N N
U
C
m
LG
OyO
=Nn C
O
4
m m
m
IrNIC
H
C
al
CUy�P
>
m 0 II T
'
ia
HR
U
�
L O.
CN
O mw mi
CiC
U
a
C
_
y
u
;
T
u
Ol
a)
yJ,
O1
a)
N
In
CI
c
a
C
Tv
E
3
y
E
C
O
O
i
c
OO
a
°
Eft
E>
3 a
y
E>
a
D:
0 D
i
0 o0'
41
o a)
u0
a
> Ot
>a�
0O
L m
O
(.7
L G
O
T
IM
U
N h
U
Ctrra
)
N
01Q O
O O
C
>
WU �LL
yTi
U
Wawa
LL
0 -
ECLL
L
Y
a1
t7l
O
Um.OUp
_ Z �
O
>>
w
.H
_
E
O V _0 a
CU C
L oO
m
m m
0
E
E N E
u m m
0 0
aL
o
-a u
nc
i 6 U
O O O O
,
a)
UO a
O
O
L m N Ca)
i-iYC
C
j O
C
NmL
�>Qmm-1
La
a)I,
-a m
O)
U O
a)
O C .N a)
E C
"" d 0 O Y m O E +� o -
m
a, C -a
u 'a C
O
a a
m O m C C
m
O
a)
u--.
d C O
Y
E
O
CI a)
y, L L O
In Uf 0 U1 m I -w
7 0 7 E 7 L 3-0
d O
Y 7
f!1
_ a (r 0) al
C L 0
y 3 o E o E o 0 0 o C
N
p) L
O o
c E ur
0 .-
a _
u
u N= a 2 0- 2 0 u -02 y
C Y
v
u N� C a) > X
to a) m L
N t 1
C_ m a' m m -O 16 a) L N a)
7 -0 .O �'
O) U
� o � o � ° � �
� u
'o-=
oozy
rn 0 3 o
,� }'
O m
Ol
-0
E
w C C
p
C 3> j u m j u u
ate)
c m�
U N
a�
E
rn
v o
E u
a 7 u@ u m v u m� � m
o� �a�
Wim °
L ILa
C i ti C m C
C 9
I m m a)
I Citi N tCi —Ci
_
N
V O >
N .
O
�L u E
od)T
oiaa.+_0 Qj
OLOo
°�
a1
uT
FF
'� O =
,a., a.+Y_0woIA
�
Y0�+
"X-
.ViO.O c �+
.V.c c �a D 0 c D v c�
0 c m a
c u �Y
-o
Z
= d m Yj O N ry
m rte., a) N a) O Y a) 0 0 a)
(n a) U
C C-
LU
W
c�m mE
mE�Em Em�EmcE.�
Oaa)a)
N O_
C) a C a ¢
a
a)
W
Id m +' C '-
Y 0 9 O
m C¢ T T T
L m Y O Y O Y
Z+ 0
V d
m N N
L L
L
mN
c "'-°-
C
v
O'O '� o. 'cam �+
a)
rn:
._ m
a a
CL
C
am'm_
mE>
m
Ou u E a v
L a) a)
o
L
N
o t'
L
L lA L C
O m F m
>_0
m m 0
C 0 p ++
O.._ _ rn D u r 0 m 0
a) m
L ui 3 L
N a)
2 0 L L
H
E
3
E
cu
a)o
3
E
(U
a)O
';
E
�m
p
m
— c
o
fa
c -
C
C
u
N
m
'6 m -
Ol v
LL
y u-
C O
O
LL
Y �+- O
Y-
O. a) T,
Ol
LL
C U C
u
O.
a) :N
N
Y
11p
y
O
O
E
O aJ m=
O
O
E
a) m OE
a) 0
V
E
�1 pvi
al
F
Q w T
S W m
la
�-'
a w >m. 2 W m
.p
U O. U
�
N
3
o
O
o
++'�
d
d
m
Q
m
01
Q
a)
OI
Q
a)
V
Q
a)
a
m
Y
ru
Y
C
p
C
a)
O
i.i
•n
Y
LNCE
C
O_
°�'
N
C
cE
it
LAN
+_,,
C
cE
0-
0
o
E
o
E oc
v
a
E
i C
VlE>
i G
N
E>
y U
N
v
C
O'er
N
O N
u
`I
C V
0,0.E
N
O N
UD
C N
O
O N
u
V O
V O
] v0:
l
>_ •� E
v
�
�pE
ua)E
y OU
u(1)E
OU
OU
y
Q
m
N
t
a D
m
O L
m=
O
3
I Lm
o
U
d a) a'
m a)
o
N � U
01
01
o
c
Y
c
a m
c
Q
'a
u
= c -o
c
Q
o,Qa
c
a
mo `o
=
w(�mLL
z
iuC�m�
z
Wa`3LL
0-
0 O c
m
Y O
0
Mn
a) c
C N
>
L 01 O
yI L
i
'V
m N O -
m
m
E_O
E 7
m C m
`6
N
9 �
L 6
0
m vm- O 3
C
._ ui
E 3 m
N m
as C.
aE m
u �
� 3 E
m
u m d '-
vi of
m L
al 0
m
C +O' -O O
Lo_
�Ewo
o
0
w m
O a
�ti� E.,
m0>,
p
C w
mEa m�v
O+'o.�YfOv
��no�
N OI CL
N
Z3
d a)
O.0
y
C.
N O
W
C. _
dam+
= C yN„ Y C w
y N
E@r>Ln °
c�
m
aEcuO��u
v°
Y°
9°
m -
d E u 3 o o
m c u
'L O d m0.
L m
C1 O m L m
U
0
V Y L E
N ++ C
N p
i V y O X
_J m
'N E
Y
y
O uY NYi.+
C Eai.o��
O O E 'C m
yN.,
c �._
O a) c
m
u�._N�__
CII — m --
u U T C O X
u L
O m
W L N u U m>
I y m O Q C
i m 0)
I C. `� C
u- m
I(]1 C
3 Y Ql Y
I Y 'p
1 N m
(A C1
m O
C-
d p Y "6
L
u O�
U
V 3 C m
O
2 1 'O C 7 U
= C m
O C .O
m 3 C
C m L m 0:
E •_ L a) E L V
m
of
E
L C _ _ o
E m m o N
i U O O m w
Y N
d "O -Q
m
'6 Y Y u 7
-
E
C m O
O C, c>> O o.
O Ol C O
O O r0+ N
G L w
L 0 a) a) U In
E
L O L
w
L L O
C. C" E u
O
O C
CL u -O U C m
0.
U Q
.
Ln
N
ti
N
U)
m
d
I
LD
N
a)
m
a
E
3
LL
Ul
a)
_G
O
E
m
F
C
O
y
u
7
L N
=
= E
-
a0i 'N
o)
c
a
m -
O m a
m
t'Ci C L
w a!
C i U
ra
L'
O
N
rnm
+ C
++
C
i0 W
H
C E m O- O
y C a)
C
a)
-m>6
c�oa
E�ai��m
V-
H
E> T 7 U
>_ � U v
ce
u 0 u u Q0
d N
T
L
U
i
'rn
O ea
3
vi
i ] >
moC
O
II
vc�
C
CL
IM
II w
p
a) 0) O
C
C a) a)
N
rS�
U C=>
r
7
UO
N
'W
O) O
�'-CiU
U
LLL
dpj
T
m
W
N
O.
O)
a)
C
N
II
>
o
E
m
a 3
c m
c
c
N al
O i
to O U,
a!
w m
>
a)
C rn
>
T
V
o
�-
'.sm
oo-aa))0 9;Y=
30)
m���mc
i
-a
N
G
w
Er-
i
d
O1
_
a) TU
N N N °-01
m
N
N
m
7C
N> O
7
L L m
"I ��
U
O rt)
a N
0-0— O 7 N
a)
C
r� a)
L m
X >_ C
7
c
o
o
°c
d N°-
= o� Lao
o
a
E o o
E m
O
ww
r -a mm
¢a� —mLLm
mE
ma)ac-
N 70)
7
O C L m
0) E B O O L L
C
w
L N
m>„
}+ m S O
W
S
m
m
O°
"' E II
C m> i m
m
O
`� L
C-0 a)
0,:L, —_ a) O..
C
C
w .O
7 E
7 OL
C r�0
_
7
,a
y -
II l
U
i
p L
r+
Co
C
a
L
m
O)
- .0 C JN+ m-0=
i' o m v m
V
m
C
OC
'C N
M a
m— 'i
O
O
O
O
m 7 C O
m C y
p^
W >i
C Q a)
C CC VI
C
O
O'
U
Lo
OL
O
i
N O m
m Um)
000W
0o
�QN
ooErnEaa)
J
mN'�n'
Nm
�NLM.0
jLn
E_
U
01N
T p E
Q
m
O)
C
m.
C
NII L
VarU m0
C >
.6LN
p
-
m
O)C mL
O
N p C
7
a! m o (T.- p)p
c o -^-
CL
o -NII
m2 :
W
7
O
7
7
aT+
N L U E a)
Y 7 N O E C
II
7
E`
a 7 O
C O O p
a
ami
—
d
0
L
0
L
7
a)+' V) C
�II� )L U 0-
TN
O
I--
mwL CL
fA
a)m
OU
Tm
`) 5P;
3
W
m
Ol
N
rn
O)
U a) o-
C O ra N
m0 m
aa)i u
61
L [C M
C
7 m
U
Q
4!
E
9
E
E
i
O
�-.
„Cy E :n 7 fE0
v 3wu)
m U p, Z L II O
m e nI v
m
-o C
m
m C
C
V- E Ol
o ac
> O p 2 u
v f0L
pC
II
.j
7
o
um
:D
7
o
7
o
a
Z
0
N
r-. a o v
)
N ;., o m
o
c.
m ;,_
c .O
7 o v
7
E
C
C
G
7
N
�,7 U to 01
-- O II j C a y
rn
TOO-
U (Ca
ro m cn L
V
a
W
W
W
U)
Q
Q O O
7 N O O)
C
'- r-+
-
C _�
C LO O. N
,�
u O
N a) i. C
N -C
M 9
a)
O V
w
i
m
N
rT m
a) O)'- O
C C v
m
Ln
Z
N a) C
= c —
N KU N
E
E
a)
m 7
w 0)
m
E ++
m
W
6
W
N
E
U
7 7
C_ O C_ m
C_ 7 7'—
II 7 C O O Cam'
LJ—+
C
O)
7
O O L U C
0
M
2
S
O-
2
2
2
')"' m Z; U
-� ++ C_
'�
_ ++
,C
E
-.V� m
U
O
W
i C m C ra
O m C C C C m
Q
-U C
p
U a)
'6
>
J
CE
py
T T—
U U
a)
T
U
T
U
T
U
J
a
O a) 0 0.
U U V v
O L O m N O
U U n n U E
m
,a 0
w U
II
m E
E C
E
._ w m
C L a) m
m d o
O
(7
IL
d
d
II
d
d
O.
M
C. m 1]
V II m
w
m
L
LD
N
a)
m
a
3 8
i
0)
E
LL
al
F
m
c
O
0
L>
'
!n
V
a
C
C
m
Y
CL
`n
U
Q
CC
i o)
.D
>,v
h
e
7
m k
Q)
ei moa
a
v
E m
o a
3
v ri
L i��
a o°
O
U
L
E Y
U)
s-
0
v
w
Y
m' Loa
in
c w
N.N
i E
C
V O'00Qj O
C
cur
ro +�
a OC
U
ra
> N-O�
Ln
Y
m v U
3
'L ±' c
tNn
C
W ll - m-
U.
a m a w
m
7
T C O_ 'O
E O m p m
V Y Nm C >
m m w U N C
C o V ut L L m m N
.�+ O >>�>mEmu �o O�nam
C m a) m a) L O- a1 O) O
= ccm O UO 0- Y U Y N C T w m .ro
C m 00 -0 a� ra
o m ni a a1 O O. o �' Q m
m L L
cE v m n m a vi o_m0 vm m m TE o m
r E n v o E v m L° v o E o m
0 u uL o 0 u L �� m+ n �0 �'E
u o N m- �n C I >.—
a+ mmE N+}m�oocvO- +`.oc�)mmm
w am— Ln
U O) N >-- N� y N VILA O)
10-0 M U
> Q L m m L L o m o a)
Y U N U C VI QL — U 0 N E c u0- a)
HQ N -0 > CLY .VO
TO . a
o>E m o mE COµa)
e o— c E=Um o-mYN m a
o mc o
-- E m um cc_
3
' O0 UY(a N m O ,- OUY' +mU UO m aVy—+
E
a) Y'
v_m C OdO
O N O — CO N O O O
a) U
E mC: m 0)
)LE a) w NO Ua)
m m
uoum U5 -�
Ucvm°>vco
Es a) ao o v oc m-0 a -0 i�U-6 m
U a
G, 'Q m .O U "O
cn
C
m
N
ti
@
m
@
a
y
Y
0
b
E
$w 3 TE
c
0 0
n.
m
'L
E
�0 C:
0 aa)) c°
al
o Y "
+-' O)
)a
N N a) Y 3
"p E
N >' O 'N
O)
R>
LL
3 N 0 3
c N 0
04
LL
C C L
N '� 0. 3 C
C
'y
H
C C 3 0
.0 C
L
i
C— a0+ :F m U N
'O C O O al
'N
O
:p 0) U
'0
@ @ m
4
C
y
O m n.._ _ m c o al
-o .c @
._ -O x
v
i
-o v
o
-0 0)
4
a)
3
E
u 0
a) 3 -O v E E
c N@@
.o
yiP
w e
U@@y@oo-0
C L C@
�F
._
0 p
u)o@QN@YNyu30
p— w L-
L
a)
c
O
Qj
C
Vv) L
G
j
@
y=
U
ro
o
w
.ti;
a
aim
a@
C
o
O)
O
U
o
°"
O)
0>
°
=@a
o
c
a
o�
u
U
C
d
C-
Ln
C
a
L
T
N a) .V
o
C
i a) u N
@a)
c
s
o
aa�c
c�
0
4�c
O
j0,
O
t) U
3cL n
O
°i
C
-O
d
O
C
N
d
E> T
O a) }'
N V
L
N
a)
E> T@
O a) ' N
c
w
UOU
m
3'oa
000-0
�?
;�
O N
Q
d N 3 N
W
amz
Vi N
"
d
aim-0M"
O)nwr03
U
o�Na
=
� L
°Y
L�
@o0
y
L°->o�0
c
V)
0c
w00mr-
.N V a)
R ,O
C l
Vi
_0
N
L p
N a
yw°�
m
draco.uo)
p'�xcE
Ln
N
C C to
0
i>
0 0 N
>
G_) u
o=
C
O)
Q
C
T@ F- >
Y
W ti
ro
dh L
LL.
W 2
u
O K Q
7
LL
O L d
U u O.�'p
00
o v
E v
@
0
E
ro
m X
E0
..O @
G
V w O)w
'a
m C C@ y
E
0-j
O
L
C L
"6 @ C
s
3 aa'c
,a
II
0 Via)
Oc3E -
%.
c x@>
N
N
y G R y
U -O Ol a) C C
�r
V
EM
CO CS i
u
C
N 0) -0
@� Oy c3
'-
w
VI V)
i-+ V) 'V) E �' a@+
E
O
N- m
a) u! U @
E 3 O - - 0
C C -0 — N —
N
+_
U@ 3 0 C UI
@v oLVL°'N
L
> 3 7 y
Oma
N
L D 'Q N
aroZE33�
O
�'
C 'T
3
O
a) a)
O E U O
_�
0 ECU
0,-0U
N E
N
o >T @ u ,� E c c
Y CD
a
F Q
0 3
N C H O
0) 3 u
1 c@
u
-
L>" u
rw
0 c L E c o
n_
o@ o
a@ o° @-
aj
d
7 3 C, C@ 3 O U
Y O@ c
— O V) U p m
m
O<�a �mTa)
O
wEa�
cuLn
0)
N s
o c
u
o
a
O@ v c 32
w
U > C
@
,9 Y
N
'B Y U to 3 0.
L ti O
L"
@ N L
a) In y .- -a a) y
•m
3 >
9
V- L V) m E @ y
" Q.
U r- @ a) a) y µ-.VI
0 'O E^ V) i 0
p>
E @ c
3
a Urn
0 3 V) Q
L c a c 0
N
V) 30 @ L-
O. c
C a)
U
C y@ i@
3 "� C a) O O
n
3 �
C U ;C x 0 �
)
/` O
C aC) U O N O E O fyo W t
Y
MOO1a
vo)Uma)
adOEomy@--^v-0°o
I
1
ta
VI L a) t C= 0)-
VI Y u Y .m a) a)
) 0 C C O O C_ U C a) �'
0 � O a) a) y Y
r..
Q@>
Sp$
CO '�'o3�m
E
S Ny>v@iwa>>�YN3o
E S
3 c 3 c a rn
a) N
C L
E
@ L L o c c a a) v
-u '3
A
Y Q Y
y Y C
m@ .L
O
A y.
O
N
'C
v Y Y Q Y 3 y
C C _O ._ O
c
o u o O Q"
N
N 6> C
E r 0 v 0 o o@ 3 c= Q)
cn a)
Y a) L L Y 3
0-
Q Y {l) LO
U U �l 1n 3@ L
O L
chi U)
aaz_m
L m O
R CLU m -0
a i
m
ri
m
N
ti
@
m
@
a
a
E
>
ul Q
L
U.
�
RO
6Cl
O
L
G
0)
G
o m
F
O
4 y
U
U
N
Q
�
N
U`
a
Tjyv
O
y
C
E
7 n
°o
O
uEcu
V a.,
NQL
> 4 `�° v
w
O'
�' O v
U U
C O C
i
O my
a
m
10
o
V LL
01 N lol
? c Q y
C
m
Y
V
N
01 C m U
C
LL
C
W Urn vGi
0
Y
Op
1
3
cm
�
L
L
v
CU 7=
'O
O
O O
N
N O
O
,-+
L p U>,
U CL V N
Oi U
O T
L L L
v
y L O.
N
3 L m
i 3 0c
O O o w
Q
m m y
al
v U
m
o
C Um
7 V m C 0 0
C„ n Y m d'
m
0 O
W m ., Q. L �
m
VI •- +�
N
Z3Y N
G
C U
E
m0 V
O C N
L
O m C
VI Q y
m
N
JO+ m C m w
m v Ln N O
> N
N
v
CU)
H 0. C C >p
O
n t0 N
at
a, L m
p i n-0
Q
C
C
fp n N=
O
r
i
OU
N
O m o -0'p
-C O>
Q L O
��
N O N
.fl E" n = nco
U
C9 a)
E
O L� N L m w C C
N
L V VI w C O O m
CL 01 N
v C VI
N
C O L N
1 OL m m fl1 y n
�awEyvcrc
ocw
O
O
LO C O
y L 'U O C
C
v
3-c
C
v N
v
S y y L
m C
nL°y
m> 7
7
C >
O
0to 0vi
m"
a�m
O U
�ati
t ofmp 1 4-+
U N V
'
UCl
N
Q
i
-Q-Q
C i OV ym3
-0
ViF
dmLd
v-0+
Eaj
co
E
o
E
E
E
� C m
m
cc
m
m O 7
N
LL
C1)
LL
O1
LL
a) _ 3 0
U
()
O
�j
0)
O
Ol
U a) m Z, in
O
m
0-0C m
aH
.y
O
O
F-
dumaou-0
u
u
F
�
o
o
u
c
W
0
Ln
co
d
0-
+
c
d
a
c
(D-
u-
u
o
o+
m
(ts
rn
v
/m
a�
M
j
ate+ a)
CY
(U
d
'in
Y a)
N
'y
E E�
a
C E
'E E
O
O
= O
Em
0
0
3 0
Em
y
O
O O
Ea)
2
ca
o
m
E>
m
>
ciLd
a
m
E>
y
a
E>
LU
d', -,a)
0a)
Om
a
Om
u
>_mn
u
>_mw
uo.>_cct
u
u i
u Z
am
LU
0 a'
a)
al U
N
u
w ina)
U
COu
°'S m
N
Ou3
o
O
N
=
O
a)Y0w
O
C
J
W
-
L
m
C
V1 a)
L
m C
(A
N
Y L
L
OS
c
2
4201
vE
ar W
rn
E
} Q,
c
C O_
} a)
c
W
} U
c
G O.
Z
m
o u
C a)
"
L a
L `
a)
r
N m
C
dS (U
C
>- m
Q
u
ma
=
N_0)a)mo=
(7v
cn
+ o
>-
a
WQLL
U-0
W CLL
a_ L
WALL
V -ac,
,=L+
C C
L
LU
Z
oO
u
0)
c
O
W
-Q
-O Co
c
v
W
C
y a) u
-O.
@ X
a) N
'O
w
c L
o3c
c m O
o EO
a) O
> U
W
u1
a)
ami L
d
9 10 -, ns
i+ ILo „
l c
Z
L c
ul E y—
O3 rn m
>
o m
C
v
al C C
OL
OC
O
07
O ca m �a
c m
O m
N
W
>
E a, O- U C
u U c=
w N
O
uE =-
1
o
o
O
o
ua)
E-C
U
C O
a
OmYo
>
0 m
i
Y
W
Z
CM
v
+' —> 6
m la a) o rn
T=
ns rn as
al 7
>„
LU
m
c c
1>. ` c
+
>> a) O
o_
N L m
D C
N O
V
V)
4)
H U O N
C
T a)
C U O
C
o
O
Z.;..
a)
m `mo+
u �Jt' Ea)D-
c mO
r�o�
IU
C
C7
>' 3c-
_U
cmc'°
00
m
E
Y a)
CL
a) c� > C
E m
H (U u
m 7
UA
C31L
mLL
U oc
,(1)
O
5
)i 0��o
ri
U) (Dce >
3
E o
ON
1 O) Y m m
c
1 N N a)
L u
1 m C
LU
u
0 �
m
N 0
m E
0. W
F
� Y~.c
1 O �' C m
o ac
1 L
U
a
1 O m m
:L
-
F
W_ a) O_ a3 Y
W a'C-+ .O
W L
��-'
N
Z
= u ro O- E
S IYo v
S �j Q c
W.W.i
W
W
u C m ._ O
E (a
E H ,O, m 3
++ N
E C -O E
M
==
O C O Y
Y O a)
L
ILO m N
u
W
L r a O C
0 :i:; 0)
Y- O C
O)NYNa
(U
O) D
EUU6O
O C ra -O
O =
d.3L
O
O 0 6O
'O
au to 0--oaao
E -o
Y a)
IL Lo fa
E
M
.-I
N
m
ra
(1
i=
1N
v
v
—
N
ra
a)
_
—
C
L
E
E
O
Y
N
m
O
U
O
-O
Y
O
L
O
C
YU
N
V
m
o
0
o
E
—
'O
L
f0
"0
T
V
m
C
y
�
@
C
ro
E
V
j
j
ti
d
ate)
C
m
i
cn
X
N
Y
cU
Y
N
Y
C
V
Y
L
O
O
d
N
O
O
N
ED
C
Y
N
v
U
3
Y
c
3a
ro
w
w
°
N
O
O
-L
°)
T
E
L
a
N
n
L
0-
C
O
O)
O
U
>
O
roL
L
O
L
E
>
E
0-
'D
0
>
0
C
O
C
N
°
o
E
0
Y
01
ro
'E
0
C
y
G
C
C
O1
7
O
L
J
w
°
d
V
O
O
N
y
N
N
N
C
N
O)
@
.0
N
C
O
O
N
U
N
fp
_
-0
N
a
O
°
EN
ENE
ate-+
i
W
N
m
'-
f0
V)
r0
N
a
.O
J
N
+'
!:!
a
E
N
C
T
fp
V1
C
C
0
O
H
O
X
+�.'
m>
@
E
C
w'>
V
J
O
N J
O
O
-O
N_
O
m
0
C
O L
_
C
U
C
U
O
N w
f0
16
L
V
L
i
V)
C
O
T—
O
LL
_
m
m
ry
N
O
E
m
n
'°
O
a
E
w
ro
m
CN
'O
E
Y
O.
°U
m
d
O.
J
V) >
N
O)
m
N
mO
CL
N
N
IXl
.N
w
a
T
Y
0,>
X
a:+
C
�
JAY
O
fli
E
g
.N
o
0
c
a)=
w
c
L
v aci
O'
m X
a)
°
o
o
C
o
E
U.
J
V N-0
C
IL
O
'D .ti
C
O
C
Y
O
O
loll
m 0
O=
:u
O
w
O
O
N
- O
'
N
C
N
L
O
L
c
O
a
'U
-
>
fll
LL
O
y f6
O
Y
N
0-
++
VI O
a)
L
y-
c
'O
c
C
c
m
m
E c
+�
w
_ m
O
O
OC
d
d@
OL
C
LL-.
_ ro
CD
UE
'D
@
fll
N
N
N
S
N-0
N
z
O
O C>
R
R
R
0
p
N
t1 C
O
IN
>
u
fU
L
L
L
J
N O
L
W
C
O
W
O
O
O,
C_
V) O
CL
N '-
V
U
U>>
C U
W_
E
�'
W
W
W>
Lu
V)
W
a
LL
N
w LL
U
Y
LL
LL
LL
LL
LL
d Il
N LL
V)
-O
lu
LL_
I"I
2
S
s
S
2
2
2
S
2
u S
UCL)
U
U
a
j
YOYBUUUU
y
N
O
O
O
N O
C
O
O
O
O
O
O
C O
O
('
LL
O.
-0 O.
J
d
a
d
a
O.
0 d
J Cl-
.0
M
.-I
N
m
ra
(1
i=
1N
c
m
CCUm
m
m
Q
E
T
O
R
C u,
O'
U
-Q
N
jLL
c
od
OOO (a
m
E
= o
mE
.F
oE -aO
o—
Wm
Q
j
F
W m
j
U Q
m
j pT
O=
U
+'
U
U
U
N
Y
m L
w
O
a
y
0
al
Q- loQ
p
�Q
p
ca
tm
Q
u
N U
C-
m
m �
y c
a
y m
� G
a
y m G
m 0
o
w
E G
y
c E
r
G E m
C
c c
Y
c
aE_
co
Ezu
c°o.
Ev
u30
E0`mc
m
CL
E>
m
E>
E n
m
E> n c
o
ad
m
>.
oa)
m
aiamd
omd'
-0
ommo
>c;a
UpU
>_�ya
ups
-��
uppu
*, m o
U
r
U m
u my
> o
p
m
++ J
7
++
7
VI
um-
C
O
O
V1
m
O
R`
vj
o_
R Imil
o
m
a
R
a) E
as
m
v
C_
Y
m
m O
C
C
Y m
C
C
i•1 O O
E
u3- V
Y m'13
t >N
L
w
Y
L >
t E
C
>- a
a,
C
A
>
0 CU
C
>
O
W a
LL
u m
W a O
LZ
U
W d'O
LL
u
m U L
m
m 0
C m C
iii N W
01
= Y L m
i
m CTL
Ch
C G-
O C 0 i
61 m C 01
m
- m m L O
U)
CO C 'D
00
o
ua 01
O y
0 0
m O
Q
`
O0
C
y0m m
CU
. .o�UL W
-•m Y C
_
m 7
Y N_Y>
L E O'O_ O E 0' L m L
Q w-
O > 6n
y m 3
fs m u m a) m m p
m 3>
L.
d
O w a m
N � ou .L
w m 01 c m
o > m
v
0 m> >- c c
Y-
G
._
m
O
E v � '° mg
m
c c m 0@
'i
um
O
a p c m v=
0- Q m
4! m C 0
= O
N G CO IVa U
-o
E— U
N -0 G
d Y Y
o.> 03 _0
E (a
a>i a� mac au u l° aGi c
O d c m GJ L
O. v
0 'C m L U 9 O L E m
O y c v, o
o ami m
- m L m o m =' a m
1 O .- 0) m
y L N
V O-0 Y L 3 0
O G o
(D
R
(/�
m C
d m m fY6
>, m
9 - y_
O +m+ m-0 _>
•i m G C ILp m> '— m a
z
_O_
CL
RCTu'IImw
sal+ mm
UNomc���Ea
OO
R
O m m
•' 0 L Y_ U C1 L U R
O 0, 0
O d +� - m O
E N
R R Y V1 Y m C E O_ O
Q
C m m 3 E
m
S i=+
Y
y C .O o C _o O a W l
u
yL„ - .1
Wy��>m
Y
�+ m��
O m m .- L u
UW ou�E E�m'o
z
0
m
m f1
Lri
m E a o_a C Y a
~
^y �' m
N
M A C o o O N Ico m U
~
1 m G O c m
1 _>
L G m>
y N G m VI
�_ '0 'O 'D
U.
> NN G Y-0 w C 01 0 m.
z
= ° a
m IY°
O c m
W
m m Y c
m
W N o m r s E i
u 0 010 fu
�C�Y
W-
RM'�=>m
U a) o
L mUm
UC'O O r- C1
°1 m 'c C
a
Im m-
m m C- m -o
Of v m m
o� mLxc>._0�
f
odm�aa
LaEomE
Om. >-
Ls+ mG�
LOE>o'-Emomo�
O. mQumm
a m�._L
CLSQO CL -0_0cm,
o-•�
m
m
m
0)
fo
IL
0,
C
�
a,
-
01
C
iii
M
v
S C
N
C
?
j°-
U.
m
c
L
LL
N@
E
a) L
N C
O
W
f6
C
O O
L
m
L y0. .� O
y O
d
J
QI
Q
E
01
J£
C
E
O O O '�
0 01
'O C
Q '�
E
C
J m
C
O
U O
F
Q
L -o O C
a l6 N J
ro O
O O
h`
Q
N C
O
F
y
c pl
O
N
C N
O C
Q.)
"�
uJ:E
ro i
U
L L
'c
o
fo
v
° 3
w
j o
0
0-
°' o
of
o �_
a
U
C C
�cu
cn
1n o
•CU
m
y
'�
E
Q
'°
N
Eo
oC
c
lz m
o
C
C
a ca
E
-aj5i
n
a
v
mCL
E
ami
a>
o
E+.
°
EV
o
m
y
o o
dd
c
dvau^Q�
md
Q
L
a
° Q)�0
> l�
�
Q lu
o
o
O
Q
c
0)
oa
0O
o�
o
0 °
L
a
o
0
o
u
M a)
U)
N Q
N
U1
C
0
N j°c�aa°
o+
aw
as
rncn
t
w
OL7a
o
C
i(n
O
C
C
a) '�
>-
I ti
G
U
Ol
CtM
O OC>>
O)mWWU.
Qt
=`
❑U
W
Q
W
Qa
s
U
a
W
�n
1=L
Z
N
O
u
G
a) O m
Y
C
°
N X
J
U
-
> 0.O
C'
O1
CU
toil
J f1 0)
7 J N
O
vi
W m
N -O
L L
•o
E
mOl
-6
N
E
-_
y a) m
C
-0 U m
E -0
0- C O
N c
to
= O
t m
N a) Y
0 0-
0 �,
f�0 C N
o
N }'
a) p L
0
-0'0
Y y
'O X O�
V N
+
U :L-
c-0
L
Q)
Uw O t
°
��
3
it a)
m E Y N
to m O
++ O L
01
O L 14
m d�
a)
K H
m -o
L m ami
m G m
�
G o-
0) !—°
m
•E L
-C N
3 m
c u0- > L
V
-O C Y
m_
O _ J -0 c ri
O M
07
.0
a) _
L E
._ > L.L
L C
m
O
"6
N y
3 C C
>
O fn
a)
J .-I
�-+ O
L
-O G
Y
N Cl m
o
0) E
c o
N O a)
u
a N m
a) y
to
c Y 0 N
w
e '�-
N p a)
w
a 0
10
J m c y
v>
v o a) C
F
la y
m J
a
M O
N >�
_ C
-0 Y L
L 01
a) V O-
0S
N to
N
v 9
o m
v u_ m
c N
o c 9 c a
o v
-� !�
Y
O
N N
X t-0 E
A
'D
0;
y (1 Y
o
y a)
m a) _
O
0)
w a
fY >
E 3—
Y
C
E°
0 m
m an d
.
M C
cn 3
N +�
f0d
Um
3��J
dom��uLro.-a
o0
Ery°a
0
O C
c y,
a) a) -0 a)
CCC
O a f1
— >.
01 G m
U)
a `_'
f0 O U
01 M
w 0
._ C
C C L
E
U
O-
9
al 0 J N
m
O U
0) U
c
tl7 O
a) m m
Q
++ V
N
L Q
N
U w
C C m
.-Y
m
Y
F'
m
y
='
fa to
fy/I f1L
3
la m~
.N C L
a)
J
m
N
Ln H
w
C d 1011
7
G C
N 0
lY/TI v m L
C
7 raa
m a)
-0 -
y a
E
3
C c
N W
Y.T. C
YO
�- IO
C
m C
O f1
Y
C E
d
fa
J
a) Q
C (11
0'
a) Y m
O
m m1
d
E fa aj y
x
Y
E
aJ
O c
C 1
w Y
E 3
Y O_ C U
c d J
U)
C
=� Y O
c m L
a) L
� Y
m Y c
y
o v
.O
m �,
N
L
a) N
Y
01
J f1
E
Y C> J
J
O
�••,
L S
._ m
J
Y O
H O
O
-C
E C '� a)
L
�
1
C
G O
r O
m
c m 'O
3-0 L
)
C y
o
U=
l
N
O. a) fa
O
C
c
l>a VI o
r� dl
N O
N o? m 9
O C
m O
O
0
C fa
to CO '`.'
O 0
lf1
fy6
G i
E
u Q)
LL.
-0
LL
V) Ot U C -00 0 c :3 -O
v a) Y-0
m 0
a) to N 3
C U C
a) T
=C
_CC
a
Y d 7 p N=
+=+ �1 a)
U 0-�
O c
Y C
t' d,
a1
G C O
E N
L -0
G
S C fY
L o
L :N 01
Y O
p- m J°+
O
Lo cEomoCivEl-
cum�L:3
��c
(n '�
L W 0 J L .- L
-O
tM Y_ Y
UI fn
— >
O m
Olyyo��Y>c
C
a)
,-0
O
O f1 (1
C
0
J
L
O In
N lLa
Y_
OL. L
m
m m m
01.
U m a
p
3 U
6 i H m
M
U C
0)
3
m
m
m
m
0)
fo
IL
0,
C
v
E
R
L
O LL
Q .E
i E
a,
Q O
N
O ~ U
Q r
Ln 0
Ln
Cc
C H
C 71 O
d U N y
u�0
O
O m
L O
R S
C
d Ol
L y =
c
W U G LL
00
c y
m O N
C U O.
O O
o� o
0
= o m
N C
m m m
C 0
U) V1 O
U a) O'
Y
L m o
m O E
E TL E
Y O 01
m c ao
" n0cm E CL
Y
o E m
C o v 0
W U E m
T m C y
O C O) 0 c
O 3 c a
u
017 E
Y]aj L
Y m c o
U
M.
I� 0 N 4
LL C a 3 C
V m m
= U) O -E
Y Y �
E Y aT� C
m
L .O L
01 0 L O C
O z C
LL Q w O
O1
C_
O
m
C
O
RM,
y
C
0
E
LC
U.
N
E
F
O
C
O
cm O
G
Y
Y m
0
E
LL
O
E
F
O
C
Y
Y C
�- C O
O .C- N Y
L E o.
m 0 m 0
T 2 W m
v
Ln Y L O Y
L u U c v
CU
O
U
E
R O O- O O_
-_
OL O
C
T
LL
L
6 Y (oma
(D O1 a) 3
aL-+
Co p E u
UI
C
y
> m>V
O
U
�
S
N
m v m t
U
v
O_O O� 6U
C
o EL(9 m m
H
U m O CO O C
a+
01
a
O
0. in L 3
�,
'U a) w d N ++
��L� O
Z
,
a
O
r_ ID
0-
^ O m
Ea
Ea
16
O T a U- O
oU
i:+ C U m O
_
0%
O Om m > O.
a
U U o. U m o
N
o
O O W O C
v
S
N L .c O L
v T Y O
m
0
A
m�
6 m> m o
Im
m Y OL Y (1I
oE�Qo�.c
O
a
C
.,
C
N
C
m
E
v
a
E
v
`^
y
E>
T
y
ra
E>
>
U
ce
U
0
U
9
W
U
A)
�
v
x
u
u
aJ
u
L
a
C
L
9
a
m
0
t
m
0
°c
m
n
H
o
(A
R
O
N
N
d
5.
Hm
m
C
C
w
d
i'
O
C
v
C
to
t
am
C
m
'D
L
Im
C
T
W
O
LL
U
V
W
Z
LL.
U
0
a)
Y C
cm O
G
Y
Y m
m 0 E w
v
Ln Y L O Y
L u U c v
CU
m v
Co t j 0
E
R O O- O O_
a00�E�n
OL O
C
rn� E o�
Lo
LL
L
6 Y (oma
(D O1 a) 3
aL-+
Co p E u
E
> m>V
O
mn Y O
S
N
m v m t
E
O_O O� 6U
C
o EL(9 m m
H
U m O CO O C
a+
c CDEo
0. in L 3
�,
'U a) w d N ++
��L� O
Z
,
a
LL ,p > Y C - I
0.o
U)Y
O
r_ ID
0-
^ O m
Ea
o m c
16
O T a U- O
O1
i:+ C U m O
_
0%
O Om m > O.
G.
U U o. U m o
Y
i 0)
- C
w N
a 0
L 0
Y �
o E Y m
n 3 m 3
E o a
a
m
00
C
C�
N N� m
0
a) 0
0 m
c
0 > u c
o m m
O
N O d N
O
u
L U O'C
"� c
C
a) -0 0)
H
Y N o n
oc
aa) 0. 00
6 m O 0,
41
a7 -a _0 c
Z
,
-0—Cm
oornmE
O
m
ca)
M y U
N
o 0 U c
o
U Lcu m
_
0%
L
O
Y O
LL
O O W O C
v
S
N L .c O L
v T Y O
EL
. mm
V
Y E
A
m�
6 m> m o
Im
m Y OL Y (1I
oE�Qo�.c
Y
a
Q E m m L
Ln
M
W
CD
W
O_
3
Ol
0
o_
0
0
u
Q
C
co
N
W
V
O
0-
0 O
0
CD
C
I
d
3yi
W
E
O
3
rp
f0
>
W
i
L
W U W
3
LL
L
LL
aj '-
l
d
N
O W
+'
C>
7
Y:3 L
ra o W
4�
m
F
Q
m N
Um
IVQ Ln
u
1 ,93
) 0
u
m
m
4
a
`
ra
n
W
W
O1
W
h
E
W
N
C
W m
C
.fl
y
U
y
a a
o
H
E
v, W
m
C E
C p
-C
C
j
O.
O V
=
7 d
a,
W
C
p
3
O
E �
W
D
CL
E>
a)�6
4
N
E>
C
U
H
W
O
W
41
ai
U D
>;
C
Q�
U
o
�
i+
v
L i,
C
U
3
c
o
Cl
j
d
0
=
L
Q o
O
W
m
i
W
UI
R
C W
V/
vI
w
IEIIu
U
a+
pN v
0
'p
9
-
C
a+
o
MX
LLJ y
m
LL
U
W
U W D_
LL
U
WCD
E
C
E
Wfa
L>
m E
i
C
W w T Y
ra
fp C)
d
O 0
U -O
Y
v-- w
L 01 is
3
'0
C
0)
C T d
3
T
m
o 0
n.
M 3
m
W O o La
O
m Y
C
E
W
!n
E W
m
7
C
> p_ a Y
C
W
Y N
'B
i 61
7—
W
W N
G C
W O
CO
L
O>
CL 7
w
C
Y 'C C
.O
IO
O
0
W
'B
W m
C C -6
W
L
d
•�
Y
N O
w
+T+
'WO
ate_, -0
aT+
m
°m
Cu
L°
33
m���
c
;�s,0,—
C 1
Y
U
m Y (a
i
E i
0 L
++ Y
f0
W
O
m
{A
W 'p L
0
a +.'
L O
C ra
C7
-O L O
=
L O.
-p
V O 7.
pur
3c
Q
'0
O
\mo
c
ro Wmm
�Wo
W
.0
oEamNu7
00
�vEwdN-„-,Wm
>�N
o�
a�
oouo°�m
�p
u
v��Np
o
L
W 7
to U
O '+'
Y U
C O to W—
1n C
L
C C
O
Ol p
M 7
W
m
_
Wa)
W U W -O
C
�p
fa N _C a7
^
IM
C: 0
E W
O W W W
>
N W
O
N
Y
C
7 W
O
0_
W
Y
�j
Y V1
•to
E
C
C ++
O Y
i O1 O U
C
01
O '�-
p Ot i W
W
C O
u
CD
O
7—
Ol> �
G
W
OC
N
L
C
O C
-O
p Q
'O [a
> u>
N .G
E
VI C
01
'�W'
C
N E
i 0
C=
.. W W
of 7 co >,
a
INO
W
aj
NC
EWo
_
WOu
N+0'
N O
W
d
L �
O
coUO
O
M W
ra 'o
O0
O
IL
1)NTO
W
,
Op
U U
-
�"L1
p
0
UY
U
C C
N
3 OC
m
u
W
v O
N
C N
C
W
W
W 01
a3
C
U
SC
C Ol C -
.p
=
O- X
ate.,
C W
E,
�` i
W cL
'D
C m N O
0 W
O1 C
p N
W
-O W 'O
C
O W
-p
O
0
a
U .UI
G .L
”
E
G
N Y OIL R
1p
W��moLmv�0C:>�ma7oc0_'u.°E�3N�0a
L C
O
`�
W
O -6
I 01 O W>
Y
X L O_
-0
�
O W
U 'O
m d O L
U d' to m O.,
Z3
O
C L
E
O
U
O1
W Y O
C 7 �.
o
n3
W fl_
0
.-�
m
.—
ouo0Cnn
U L
w o
m
d
Q 0- is
OL.
.
. .
.
.
.
Ln
M
W
CD
W
O_
3
Ol
0
o_
0
0
u
Q
C
co
N
W
V
O
0-
0 O
0
CD
C
I
As required by Section 65583 of the California Government Code, the goals, policies, and
actions in this chapter seek to meet quantified housing objectives. Table VI -2 summarizes
these findings, which result in a total estimated capacity of 1,066 housing units. All of these
units will be produced through new construction. Although the City expects to rehabilitate
homes, these upgrades may not meet the definition of "substantial rehabilitation" as
required under Section 65583. Planning staff consulted with the Building Official and Code
Enforcement Officer and determined that no units within the city have been found to be
unfit for human habitation.
r �. n..__a.:c:...a a....... �.-. ..F 7n7 c_7n j a Hnnainn Flamant Wnrk Prnnram
Income
Category
ABAG
Fair
Share
New
Construction
Rehabilitation**
Conservation***
Total
Very low*
276
276
50
58
384
Low
144
144
45
50
239
Moderate
155
155
0
0
155
Above
Moderate
288
288
0
0
288
Total
863
863
95
108
1,066
*Note-. The "extremely -low income- category is nor incwaeo In the Kn NH. rluweVel, UIICJ
are charged with addressing the housing needs of this population in the housing element.
Although ELI need was not calculated by ABAG, HCD allows the City to assume that
approximately half of the very -low income households qualify as ELI.
**rehabilitation objectives through code enforcement/ rehabilitation loans (20) and
potential fee waivers (75)
***although no affordable units are currently at risk of conversion to market rate housing,
the City has set objectives to maintain all current Section 8 units (100). Additionally, it is
estimated that eight second unit amnesty applications would be approved based on past
performance.
Housing Goals, Policies and Action Programs Page 137
[This page intentionally left blank]
Housing Goals, Policies and Action Programs Page 138
VII. Data Sources
City of Burlingame
• Community Development Department
• Finance Department
• Code Enforcement
Public Works Department
CA Housing and Community Development
Census 1990, 2000, 2010
2011 US Census OnTheMap
2007-2011 American Community Survey
2009-2011 American Community Survey
CA Department of Finance, 2013
HOPE Homeless Census and Survey Final Report (2007)
Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) Projections 2013
21 Elements
Housing and Urban Development CHAS 2006-2010
• Real Facts 2013
• San Mateo County Department of Housing
• Zillow Real Estate
• San Mateo County Association of Realtors
• Golden Gate Regional Center
• 2009 San Mateo County Homeless Census and Survey
1981 Flood Insurance Rate Maps, City of Burlingame
Data Sources Page 139
Appendices
City of Burlingame
2015-2023 BURL�NRA11
L d 4 a C5 & N f n
UN Housing Element _
APPENDIX A — WORKSHOP SUMMARIES
Outreach Summary: Workshop #1
The City of Burlingame hosted Workshop #1 of the Housing Element Update on March 18,
2014. The meeting convened at the Burlingame Recreation Center at 7:00 pm. The fifteen
people in attendance were introduced to the Housing Element Update project. The workshop
was structured as an informational session that highlighted the findings of the Housing
Needs Assessment and covered demographics, housing needs, Burlingame's existing
housing stock, housing affordability and the Regional Housing Need Allocation (RHNA) target
for the City. Attendees were informed about the importance of the Housing Element being
certified by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) and
the necessary steps to adopt a certified Housing Element by the January 31, 2015 deadline.
City staff answered questions that arose during the presentation and during the comments
session after the presentation.
City staff fielded questions about several housing element requirements. Several questions
related to the consequences of failing to certify a Housing Element and how smaller
communities would be able to meet their RHNA. Although the presentation touched on the
consequences of an uncertified Housing Element, City staff and the consultant expanded
upon the legal challenges that would arise from noncompliance. Further, the RHNA
numbers and the role of HCD and ABAG were discussed to clarify why the City needs to plan
for its share of the regional housing needs allocation.
There were a number of inquiries regarding the process for identifying potential housing
sites. Attendees asked whether existing single-family homes would be replaced with
multifamily units, but staff replied that it was not recommending any changes to zoning
designations. The opportunity sites analysis typically focuses on determining sites with
development potential — these sites may be vacant, underused or have a potential for
reuse, but in Burlingame do not require rezoning. An audience member expressed support
for mixed use developments and felt a need for more development featuring residential
units over ground -floor shops. City staff explained that mixed use development is indeed
promoted in Burlingame, particularly in the Downtown and North Burlingame areas.
The rising cost of housing in Burlingame is a concern for residents. As stated by one of the
attendees, there is increasing pressure that is driving up rents in the rental market. Those
who can afford rents in Burlingame are concerned with rents rising beyond what they can
afford. Others who want to be part of the community, who are working in the city but have
lower incomes, will continue to be excluded as a result of chronically high housing costs.
High rents can also force larger households into smaller apartments.
Attendees asked whether developers would be interested in building smaller units. City staff
responded that there is a market for smaller units, as evidenced by a few projects in the
Downtown that feature smaller units to comply with unit size regulations in the Downtown
Specific Plan. Several projects featuring smaller units are under review as well. A member
of the audience who works in affordable housing development confirmed that there is
indeed interest among developers. Developers may look to develop affordable housing
projects but the project must be financially sound. Developing more units at smaller sizes is
Appendix A Page Al
one method to create a more financially viable project. There is interest in smaller units
among buyers, which makes is viable for developers to build units that cater to this market.
In responding to questions about tools that the City may use to promote the development of
more affordable units, City staff raised the idea of fee generation through a variety of
mechanisms. A nexus study is being prepared to determine the link between new
development and the cost of housing. Other programs that are also being considered
include linkage fees and impacts.
The meeting concluded with an invitation to attend the next community meeting to discuss
opportunity sites.
outreach Summary Workshop #2
The City of Burlingame hosted Workshop #2 of
the Housing Element Update on May 20, 2014.
The meeting convened at the Burlingame
Recreation Center at 7:00 pm. Twelve people
who were in attendance listened to the
presentation of potential housing opportunity
sites, program accomplishments and strategic
approaches in developing housing programs.
The workshop was structured as an
informational session that encouraged audience
members to ask questions and make
comments about sites and programs.
City staff explained that many sites were
carried over from the existing site inventory in the adopted Housing Element. Maps of these
sites, as well as newly proposed sites, were shown to residents on maps in a PowerPoint
presentation. The new sites were highlighted in colors that distinguished them from the
previously identified sites to show the relative locations of all housing opportunity sites that
are proposed for the 2015-2023 Housing Element. The majority of sites were concentrated
in North Burlingame and Downtown Burlingame.
Sites
After City staff went through these sites, attendees asked a few questions about specific
sites that were included and wondered whether other sites could be included:
• Peninsula Hospital area:
Located in North Burlingame, this area could accommodate new housing in the City.
An audience member stated that the area around Peninsula Hospital used to be
affordable to seniors but is now too expensive. She wondered whether there was a
way to make housing affordable to keep people in -their homes. Staff replied that new
development at the site would be required to meet the City's affordability
requirements, but that plans are only conceptual at this point.
• North Burlingame area office buildings:
One attendee believes that some of the sites in the North Burlingame area seem to
be neglected in terms of new development. Staff noted that there are a number of
Appendix A Page A2
individual property owners in the area, which makes it difficult to consolidate parcels
and gain efficiencies of scale with larger parcels. Older office buildings are still being
rented out, and many long-term property owners do not want to put their properties
on the market.
• East Burlingame/ Burlingame Bayfront:
The movie theater site was not included in the housing opportunity sites inventory,
but was a location that an audience thought might warrant some consideration. Staff
stated that the zoning would need to be changed in order to accommodate housing,
and that the current update was not focusing on zoning changes. However the City's
upcoming General Plan update will provide an opportunity to reconsider land uses
and would provide a better venue for considering changes to sites that the
community thinks would be better utilized, including the Bayfront area. In terms of
physical constraints, the lack of services near the site to support housing
development is an existing challenge and will require more planning and investment
if it were to become a residential location.
• Burlingame Plaza:
A question arose about changes to Burlingame Plaza. Zoning allows changes to
Burlingame Plaza but owners are pursuing a remodel instead. The shopping center is
split into multiple parcels, so it is difficult to coordinate a project.
• Other:
One attendee was interested in assisted living projects that may be developed. A
Sunrise Senior Living assisted living project has resumed construction in North
Burlingame after being dormant for several years. There is also an application under
review for an additional assisted living project on a nearby site.
Affordable Housing
City staff and attendees discussed
opportunities for affordable housing
development in Burlingame. Affordable housing
is often located near amenities such as transit,
senior centers, and parks. Burlingame's BART
and Caltrain stations can provide housing units
with great access to public transportation.
Sites with the potential to support affordable
housing development are ones that meet
eligibility for State and Federal funding, with
transit proximity as a common requirement.
Second Units
Questions and interest about second units were discussed, including the definition of second
units, restrictions and applicability towards the RHNA. In brief, City staff stated that second
units count towards the RHNA and are defined as independent dwelling units occupying the
same lot as a primary unit. There are provisions in the zoning code which allow new second
units on certain lots in Burlingame, subject to performance standards to make sure the units
are compatible with the neighborhood.
O rci a n izatio ns
Attendees and City staff had conversations about organizations that can help the City and
residents in the provision of affordable housing options for all residents.
Appendix A Page A3
• Neighborhood Housing Services of Silicon Valley is an affordable housing resource
It manages Burlingame's affordable housing programs, however the number of
affordable housing units in Burlingame is still relatively small.
• Human Investment Program opportunities
Human Investment Program (HIP) connects people to affordable housing options,
including a homesharing program linking people in need of housing with people who
have space in their homes. The homesharing program is mentioned in the Housing
Element and the City will continue to monitor the affordable housing alternatives
managed by HIP. While home sharing is not counted towards RHNA targets, it
provides a valuable option for meeting housing needs of the community.
• Center for Independence of Individuals with Disabilities as an additional local
resource
City staff has conducted outreach with the Golden Gate Regional Center, which
provides services to persons with disabilities in the region encompassing San Mateo,
San Francisco, and Marin counties. In expanding outreach to persons with
disabilities, staff will also reach out to other local resources including the services
provided by the Center for Independence.
The meeting concluded with an invitation to attend the Planning Commission meeting to
discuss the public review draft of the Housing Element.
Appendix A Page A4
.-, I L , I ZM, Role], W91 ll Z4 &I RwA Lei wvo,. .. , LO.AlLel 4 . N] L& 1 . -:.1 ,.
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DIVISION OF HOUSING POLICY DEVELOPMENT
2020 W. EI Camino Avenue, Suite 500
Sacramento, CA 95833
(916) 263-29111 FAX (916) 263-7453
w .hcd.ca.gov
November 25, 2014
Mr. Kevin Gardiner, Planning Manager
Community Development Department
City of Burlingame
501 Primrose Road
Burlingame, CA 94010-3997
Dear Mr. Gardiner:
RE: City of Burlingame's 5th Cycle (2015-2023) Draft Housing Element
`UpMUNfTy
a �'f
L
ro
U'.tlf'UAlnP
Thank you for submitting the City of Burlingame's draft housing element update which was
received for review on September 30, 2014, along with additional revisions received on
November 19, 24 and 25, 2014. Pursuant to Government Code (GC) Section 65585(b),
the Department is reporting the results of its review. Our review was facilitated by various
communications including a telephone conversation with you on October 27, 2014.
The Department conducted a streamlined review of the draft housing element based on
the City meeting all eligibility criteria detailed in the Department's Housing Element Update
Guidance. The City also utilized 21 Elements pre -approved housing needs assessment.
In addition, the Department received comments from Karyl Eldridge, on behalf of San
Francisco Organizing Project and Peninsula Interfaith Action (SFOP/PIA) and Housing
Leadership Council of San Mateo County (HLC), pursuant to GC Section 65585(c).
The draft element with revisions meets the statutory requirements of State housing
element law. The element will comply with State housing element law (GC, Article 10.6)
when the draft and revisions are adopted and submitted to the Department, in accordance
with GC Section 65585(g).
Public participation in the development, adoption and implementation of the housing
element is essential to effective housing planning. Throughout the housing element
process, the City must continue to engage the community, including organizations that
represent lower -'income and special needs households, by making information regularly
available, considering and incorporating comments where appropriate.
The Department appreciates the hard work and dedication of the City in preparation of the
housing element and looks forward to receiving Burlingame's adopted element. If you
have any questions or need additional technical assistance, please contact Greg Nickless
of our staff, at (916) 274-6244.
SincereI ,
4
Paul McDougall
Housing Policy Manager
City of Burlingame
Staff Report
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
Date: September 2, 2014
From: William Meeker, Community Development Director - (650) 558-7255
Kathleen Kane, City Attorney - (650) 558-7204
BURLINGAME CITY HALL
501 PRIMROSE ROAD
BURLINGAME, CA 94010
Subject:
Review and Comment on Revisions to the Draft 2015-2023 Housing Element Update and Authorize the
Community Development Department to Submit the Document to the State Department of Housing and
Community Development for Review and Certification
RECOMMENDATION
The City Council should review revisions to the Draft Housing Element Update, as directed subsequent to the
public hearing conducted at the August 18, 2014 City Council meeting. Provided that the revisions as
attached are acceptable, the Council should, by motion, authorize the Community Development Department to
submit the revised document to the State Department of Housing and Community Development for review and
certification.
BACKGROUND
By State mandate, each city and county in the Bay Area Region of California is required to plan for the
housing needs for its share of the expected new households over the next eight years as well as for the
housing needs of all economic segments of each jurisdiction's population. This planning is being done in
Burlingame by updating the City's adopted 2009-2014 Housing Element of the General Plan. The Housing
Element serves as a guiding document for new housing development, how the City allocates resources for
new housing, and housing -related services during the period from 2015-2023. The draft Housing Element was
reviewed in public hearings before both the Planning Commission and the City Council. Following its
discussion, the Council directed staff to make identified changes to the draft and bring it back for action.
At its August 18, 2014 meeting the City Council conducted a public hearing, considered public input, and
provided comments on the Draft Housing Element. Revisions have been made to the draft document to reflect
Council comments. The revised document with revisions shown as tracked changes is attached to this report.
Summary of Revisions to the Draft Housing Element: Revisions to the Draft Housing Element include:
Population Growth and Trends Goes 10-12) - The Population Growth and Trends section has been
expanded to include a discussion of historic population increases, the Association of Bay Area
City of Burlingame Page i of 4 Printed on 8128/2014`
powered by Legistar^
Government (ABAG) projections, and State Department of Finance (DOF) Estimates.
• Concurrent Processing (page 48) - A note has been added to the Governmental Constraints Land Use
Regulations section clarifying that when a project requires more than one type of application, the
applications are processed concurrently.
• Burlingame Fair Property Rights Ordinance (Measure T)(iaae 49) - A description of the Burlingame
Fair Property Rights Ordinance has been added to the Governmental Constraints section.
• Stormwater Runoff (page 50) - A notation is been added to the NPDES (National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System) Requirements section acknowledging that current regulations encourage on-site
stormwater retention and recharge.
• Provisions for Smaller Units (page 6161) - Mention of provisions to provide smaller, more affordable units
has been added to the discussion of Community Resources and Opportunities.
• Energy Conservation (page 92) - Acknowledgement that Burlingame requires new development to
exceed Title 24 energy conservation requirements by 15 percent.
• Program H(A-3): Allow Fee Waivers for Affordable Rehabilitation (pace 99) - The program has been
expanded to identify not only San Mateo County programs and non-profit agencies, but also other
means including Federal Programs. The program further suggests providing incentives for property
owners to maintain their properties.
• Program H(B-2): Implement an Outreach Program for Persons with Disabilities and Others with Special
Needs (page 101) - Agencies identified in the program have been expanded to include InnVision
Shelter Network, Call Primrose, and Center for Independence of Individuals with Disabilities.
City Council Comments Follow -Up : The City Council provided a number of comments relating to the
function of the Housing Element and its relationship to other regulatory documents. Some of the comments
address related City initiatives that do not necessarily need to be specifically addressed in the Housing
Element text but merit further discussion for future implementation.
• Inclusionary Housing Incentives - As described in the August 18, 2014 staff report, the City's existing
Inclusionary Housing requirements as outlined in Chapter 25.63 of the Zoning Ordinance will need to
be reviewed to ensure consistency with local and state legi�fative requirements, including the
Burlingame Fair Property Rights Ordinance (Measure T). This will be conducted in conjunction with
consideration of an amendment to the zoning code to include a density bonus ordinance in accordance
with State standards for the provision of housing units for very low- and lower-income renters, seniors
and moderate income residents in compliance with Government Code Section 65915, et seq. This will
provide the opportunity to study alternate incentives to providing below-market rate units in new
developments, including consideration of formulas based on floor area in addition to numbers of units.
• Impact Fee Nexus Study - Burlingame has joined with other San Mateo County jurisdictions in a nexus
and financial feasibility study to consider Housing Impact Fees to assess new market rate development
for the increased demand that it creates for affordable housing. The nexus study is required for
City of Burlingame Page 2 of 4 Printed on 8/28/2014
powered by LegistaT-
implementation of in -lieu fees, as well as to provide a legal basis to support the City's existing
inclusionary housing requirements. The nexus study will include a range of recommendations for fees
that take a variety of considerations into account, including construction costs and project feasibility.
While all San Mateo County jurisdictions are participating in the study, the fee options will be specific to
each jurisdiction, and each jurisdiction will make its own determination with the types and amounts of
fees it may adopt.
• Renters' Task Force - There have been suggestions of a task force to consider options for enabling
residents to remain in the community in the face of scarce housing and rising rents. Given the
constraints of the Fair Property Rights Ordinance, options may be limited for many common anti -
displacement tools. However creative solutions could be considered, such as homesharing which
benefits both renters and homeowners. Program H(D-1) of the Draft Housing Element specifies
referring seniors who are homeowners to the Human Investment Project (HIP) for Housing Home
Sharing Program, to find eligible tenants to share their housing. This effort could also establish a
"dashboard of indicators" to track rent and sales trends as well as consumer price data that impact
overall affordability.
Relationship to the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance : Current zoning and land use designations
provide sufficient capacity to accommodate the City's Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) targets,
so it will not be necessary to rezone or change land use designations to implement the updated Housing
Element. Given this situation, the adoption of the updated Housing Element will not convey any potential
entitlements that do not already exist under the current General Plan, specific plans, and Zoning Ordinance.
A comprehensive update of the City's General Plan is anticipated in the next two years. However there has(
been some confusion regarding the relationship of the 2015-2023 Housing Element to the General Plan,
particularly whether the 2015-2023 Housing Element Update will set the direction for the rest of the General
Plan. To clarify:
• The General Plan is the City's top-level policy planning policy document - in effect, its "master plan."
• The Housing Element is one part of the General Plan. Other parts include the Land Use,
Circulation/Transportation, Open Space, Conservation, Safety, Scenic Roads and Highways, and
Noise Elements.
• While the Housing Element is the key policy document relating to housing, it must be consistent with all
other General Plan elements including the Land Use Element.
• In the hierarchy of plans and regulations, the General Plan sets the framework for all the zoning and
codes that follow, with the exception of State building codes. If the community desired to make a policy
change to zoning or any other ordinances, it would start with the General Plan.
Given that the 2015-2023 Housing Element is required to be adopted prior to the timeframe of the General
Plan Update, the approach to the update of the Housing Element has been to work within existing land use
and zoning designations. If there is interest in making any changes to land use that may impact housing, the
General Plan update will provide a venue for considering such changes as part of a broader city-wide context
that addresses housing needs as well as employment and economic development. Any such changes would
be considered as part of a city-wide General Plan discussion, rather than the current Housing Element
Update.
City of Burlingame Page 3 of 4 Printed on 8/28/2014
powered by Legistar-
Next Stens : After Council action on the revisions to the Draft 2015-2023 Housing Element, Community
Development Department staff will submit the document to the California Department of Housing and
Community Development for review and certification. Once the State review is complete and the Housing
Element is certified as compliant with State law, the document will be resubmitted to the public, Planning
Commission and City Council for final adoption.
FISCAL IMPACT
None.
Prepared by: Kevin Gardiner, Planning Manager
Exhibits:
1. Council Resolution (Proposed)
2. Revised Draft 2015-2023 Housing Element dated September 2, 2014
City of Burlingame Page 4 of 4 Printed on 8/28/2014
petered by Legistar""
a
STAFF REPORT
AGENDA ITEM NO:
IMIAaII0Lei V:\Iso
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Submitted by
Date: August 18, 2014 Approved by
From: William Meeker — (650) 558-7250
August 18, 2014
Subject Review and Comment on Draft 2015-2023 Housing Element Update and
Authorize the Community Development Department to Submit the
Document to the State Department of Housing and Community
Development for Review and Certification
RECOMMENDATION
The City Council should review the Draft Housing Element Update, conduct a public hearing,
and consider public input on the contents of the Draft Housing Element. At the conclusion of the
hearing, the City Council should:
1. Provide direction about any changes to be made to the proposed draft document; and
2. Authorize the Community Development Department to submit the document, with any
suggested changes, to the State Department of Housing and Community Development
for review and certification.
BACKGROUND
By State mandate, each city and county in in the Bay Area Region of California is required to
plan for the housing needs for its share of the expected new households over the next eight
years as well as for the housing needs of all economic segments of each jurisdiction's
population. This planning is being done in Burlingame by updating the City's adopted 2009-2014
Housing Element of the General Plan. The Housing Element serves as a guiding document for
new housing development, how the City allocates resources for new housing, and housing -
related services during the period from 2015-2023.
DISCUSSION
The Draft Housing Element includes a Housing Inventory Sites list that demonstrates how the
City could accommodate its Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) of 863 units, and
contains policies and programs to encourage developers in the production of housing. The sites
selected are concentrated in the Downtown Burlingame area near the Caltrain station and in the
North Burlingame area, near the Millbrae Intermodal Station. Since the adoption of the most
recent Housing Element and the Downtown Specific Plan, implementing zoning is now in place
1
I
Draft 2015-2023 Housing Element Update August 18, 2014
so that all of the identified potential housing sites can be accommodated within the existing
zoning for these sites.
Public Process: Broad-based community participation is essential to preparing an
implementable and locally meaningful housing policy and action program. After compiling data
on Burlingame's housing needs and demographics, the City held two community workshops to
receive input from the community about Burlingame's housing needs and potential housing
sites. Summaries of the two workshops are included in the Draft Housing Element document.
Review of Draft 2015-2023 Housing Element: California State Housing Element law requires
each city and county to update its housing element every five to eight years to ensure that all
localities provide adequate development sites for sufficient new housing to meet their fair share
of the regional housing need. As part of the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA)
process overseen by the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG), the City of Burlingame
was assigned a quantified goal of 863 housing units. This represents the City's "fair share" of
projected housing need for the 2015-2023 planning period, distributed among the following
income groups: extremely low (138 units), very low (138 units), low (144 units), moderate (155
units) and above moderate (288 units) income categories. San Mateo County as a whole was
designated 16,418 housing units, which is 8.7 percent of the Bay Area allocation.
Housing Element law is the State's primary strategy to increase housing supply, choice and
affordability. The Housing Element identifies the existing and projected housing needs of all
economic segments of the community, including the homeless and persons with disabilities, and
promotes a variety of housing types, including multifamily rental units, transitional and other
types of supportive housing. The Housing Element also defines the policies and programs that
the community will implement to achieve its housing goals and objectives.
It is important to note that Housing Element law only requires the City to provide residential
zoning opportunities to accommodate its RHNA allocation, it does not require the City to
approve or itself construct such housing. However, the programs and policies in the Housing
Element must present a reasonable framework for entities wanting to build housing, and should
represent a good faith effort to address market and regulatory constraints. Cities and counties
without compliant housing elements may be faced with legal challenges pursuant to Housing
Element law and/or fair housing law. In addition, many State housing, transportation and
infrastructure funding programs available to local governments require a certified Housing
Element as one of the eligibility crit: ia. The State's sustainable communities law (known as SB
375) to reduce greenhouse gases contains further incentives for cities to submit compliant
Housing Elements by conditioning key transportation grants to compliant elements and by
extending the time frame of the housing cycle for cities with certified elements.
The Housing Element is a subset of the General Plan. Relevant policies in the Housing
Element, along with policies from the other elements of the General Plan, provide the overall
guidance to address neighborhood compatibility, location, density, design, environmental
constraints, and public services for new housing opportunities. The document contains five
mandatory components including a Housing Needs Assessment, which identifies the City's
existing and projected housing needs; a sites inventory analysis including a detailed land
Draft 2015-2023 Housing Element Update August 18, 2014
inventory and analysis of potential housing sites; an analysis of constraints on housing, both
governmental and non-governmental; housing programs and quantified objectives.
Within the Housing Element, the Profile of the Community identifies current and past trends in l
Burlingame regarding the demographic profile of the City, housing characteristics and
employment patterns, and it contains the Housing Needs Assessment identifying the
components of the City's housing stock and the residents' needs. The Housing Constraints
section identifies governmental, market and environmental -related constraints to the
development of housing, and offers solutions to alleviate the restrictions. The Community
Resources and Opportunities section identifies the potential development sites for housing
within the city, any required changes to the zoning of those sites, public infrastructure capacity,
financial resources and opportunities for energy conservation. The Housing Goals, Policies and
Action Programs section outlines key program accomplishments from the 2009-2014 Housing
Element and creates a road map for implementation of the policies and programs for the current
Housing Element update.
KeV Changes to the Housing Sites Inventory: The housing sites inventory includes many of
the same sites that were identified as appropriate for housing in the 2009-2014 Housing
Element. There are a few new sites identified in the Downtown area, based on the adopted
Downtown Specific Plan. These sites include the Post Office site, City Parking Lots E, F & N,
and the City Hall site. IntheNorth Burlingame area, the vacant portion of the Peninsula Hospital
site and an adjacent site on Marco Polo Way, and the gas station site at the corner of EI Camino
Real and Murchison have been identified. Other sites in the Downtown area have been included
where there are active proposals submitted now under review. `
Goals, Policies and Action Programs: The updated 2015-2023 Housing Element carries over
many of the Goals, Policies and Action Programs from the previous Housing Element. These
include goals to preserve the character of existing neighborhoods; remove barriers to housing
choice based on discrimination; provide housing opportunities for City employees, teachers,
hospital workers and others in the service industry; provide incentives to developers to include
affordable units in new residential projects; encourage special purpose housing for the elderly,
the disabled population and single parent households; reduce residential energy use to
conserve energy and reduce housing costs; and to provide programs to increase affordability of
housing.
New programs proposed to be added to achieve these goals elude the following:
• Program H(A-3) — Allow fee waivers for affordable rehabilitation: Consider amendment to
the Master Fee Schedule to allow for waiver of permit fees for rehabilitation of affordable
housing achieved through San Mateo County programs or through non-profit agencies.
• Prooram H(8-2) — Implement an outreach program for persons with disabilities: Work
with the Golden Gate Regional Center, a state -funded nonprofit organization serving
individuals with developmental disabilities in Marin, San Francisco and San Mateo
counties, to implement an outreach program that informs families in Burlingame about
housing and services available for persons with disabilities. The program could include
3
Draft 2015-2023 Housing Element Update
August 18, 2014
the development of an informational brochure, providing information on services on the
City's website, and providing housing -related training for individuals/families through
workshops.
• Program H(C-3) — Consider adoption of a commercial in -lieu fee: Consider adopting a
commercial in -lieu fee that would require developers of employment -generating
commercial and industrial developments to contribute to the supply of low- and
moderate -income housing through the provision of commercial in -lieu fees as prescribed
in a nexus impact fee study.
• Program H(C-4) — Consider adoption of a residential in -lieu fee option: Consider
adopting a residential in -lieu fee as an alternative to providing affordable units on-site.
• Program H(F-3) — Create Priority Development Area (PDA) Housing Overlay Zone:
Amend the zoning code to create a "Priority Development Area Housing Overlay Zone"
to establish standards and incentives for housing in the portions of the community zoned
for high density residential and/or mixed use development that are adjacent to transit
corridors and transit centers. Specific standards to be considered are densities,
development standard incentives, parking requirements, building heights, transitions with
adjacent lower -density residential neighborhoods and specified level of affordability. The
Priority Development Area covers the North Burlingame area, the EI Camino Real and
California Drive corridors and the Downtown Specific Plan area.
Accomplishments Achieved Based on the 2009-2014 Action Program: Burlingame's 2009-
2014 Housing Element action program contained a number of items that have been
accomplished. Among the programs implemented during the planning period were:
• Reasonable Accommodation for Accessibility The zoning code was amended to include
a Reasonable Accommodation for Accessibility procedure which establishes a process
by which an individual with a disability may request modifications to development
standards to install physical improvements (such as ramps, handrails, elevators or lifts)
necessary to accommodate the disability.
• Emergency Shelters: The zoning code was amended to permit emergency shelters by
right within the northern part of the Rollins Road (RR) zoning district subject to
performance standards- This area was identified as appropriate for emergency S-haIters
because it is near services and transportation (close to the Millbrae BART/Caltrain
Station).
• Transitional and Supportive Housing: The zoning code was amended to include
definitions for transitional and supportive housing as outlined in State law, and to specify
that these uses are considered a residential use subject to the same restrictions as other
residential uses of the same type in the same zone district.
• Secondary Dwelling Units: The zoning code was amended to allow secondary dwelling
units on certain lots within the R-1 zone district, subject to performance standards.
Draft 2015-2023 Housing Element Update
August 18, 2014
• Downtown Specific Plan Zoning Implementation: In addition, the Downtown Specific
Plan was adopted as well as all implementing ordinances. The zoning implementation
actions for the Downtown Specific Plan, which also implemented the Housing Element
programs, include the following:
✓ Established a series of Mixed Use Zoning District in areas that were previously
zoned exclusively for commercial uses. These districts would allow both mixed
use buildings that include residential uses as well as stand-alone multiple family
residential uses.
✓ Established an R-4 Incentive District adjacent to the Downtown Commercial core
that allows taller buildings to encourage multiple family residential development.
✓ Established reduced parking requirements for any multiple family residential use
within the Downtown area west of California Drive.
✓ Established a maximum average dwelling unit size throughout the Downtown
area to encourage smaller, more affordable units.
Related Initiatives: Concurrent with developing the Draft 2015-2023 Housing Element Update,
staff has been working on related initiatives that will need to be implemented prior to final
certification of the Housing Element in January 2015:
• Density Bonus Ordinance: Planning staff is in the process of proposing an amendment t
to the zoning code to include a density bonus ordinance in accordance with State
standards for the provision of housing units for very low- and lower-income renters,
seniors and moderate income residents in compliance with Government Code Section
65915, et seq. The Density Bonus Ordinance must be adopted prior to final certification
of the Housing Element in order for the City to qualify for streamlined review and to
qualify for the 8 -year review cycle (as opposed to a 4 -year cycle). It is expected that the
Density Bonus Ordinance will be considered by the Planning Commission at either the
July 14th or July 28, 2014 meeting, and by the City Council in late summer or early fall.
• Impact Fee Nexus Study.' Burlingame has joined with other San Mateo County
jurisdictions in a nexus and financial feasibility study to consider Housing Impact Fees to
assess new market rate development for the increased demand that it creates for
affordable housing. The nexus study is required for implementation of in -lieu fees, as
well as to provide a legal basis to support the City's existing inclusionary housing
requirements. The nexus study will be completed prior to final certification of the Housing
Element.
General Plan Update: A comprehensive update of the City's General Plan is anticipated in the
next two years. Staff is currently developing a Request for Proposals for qualified consultants to
assist with the effort, and plans to engage the City Council in the work plan is anticipated after
the summer break. Given that the 2015-2023 Housing Element is required to be adopted prior to
the timeframe of the General Plan Update, the approach to the update of the Housing Element
Draft 2015-2023 Housing Element Update August 18, 2014
has been to work within existing land use and zoning designations. Current zoning and land use
designations provide sufficient capacity to accommodate the City's RHNA targets, so it is not
necessary to rezone or change land use designations.
However, as part of the community engagement for the Housing Element, there has been
interest in exploring housing opportunities in other areas of the community that do not currently
allow residential use. The approach in the current Housing Element Update has been to suggest
that any consideration of expanding residential uses be taken up as part of the General Plan
Update, since any changes could impact other land uses and economic interests. The General
Plan Update will provide a venue for considering such changes as part of a broader city-wide
context that addresses housing needs as well as employment and economic development.
Planning Commission Action: On June 23, 2014, the Planning Commission, by a 6-0-0-1
vote (Commissioner DeMartini absent), recommended to the City Council that the Draft 2015-
2023 Housing Element be submitted to the State Department of Housing and Community
Development for review and certification. The Planning Commission and members of the public
made the following comments regarding the Draft Housing Element.
Commission Comments:
• Based on the statistics in the Housing Element, it appears that there are about 30,000
jobs in Burlingame where the people who hold these jobs do not live here. Would like to
know the number of service employees who work here but don't live here.
• Would like to see a few clarifications in the chapter on Government Constraints:
✓ Clarify that there are other methods to handle storm drainage so that some of the
runoff can be retained on site and all drainage does not have to be
accommodated by the storm drain system. Alternative solutions could help
affordability.
✓ Clarify that for energy conservation, Burlingame requires that new development
must exceed Title 24 energy conservation requirements by 15 percent.
✓ Clarify that when several types of applications are required for a project, they are
processed concurrently; therefore, the timelines for a project would not be as
long as if they were processed sequentially.
• In addition to the sites identified in the Draft Housing Element that are already zoned for
multi -family residential use, consider adding a band of R-2 zoning behind the R-3 zoned
properties along EI Camino Real to provide a transition and to add another type of
housing opportunity.
• Want to make sure that if in -lieu fees are established, there is a clear mechanism to
show that the fees collected are used to achieve Housing Element goals.
6
Draft 2015-2023 Housing Element Update August 18, 2014
• Growth in Burlingame is limited by availability of sites, demand is now exceeding supply,
and housing prices indicate that there is demand, so if the housing stock is increased
perhaps there will be less price pressure.
• The affordable requirements the City now has seem perfunctory and it seems the City
could do more. It does not go far enough to add more affordable units.
• There was a downturn in the economy during the last Housing Element cycle, there were
projects approved that didn't go forward, which could partly explain why housing
production was not greater. We are seeing more projects proposed now that the
economy is improving.
• Projects need to be well planned and crafted to fit into the neighborhood.
• The Housing Element framework has been crafted to accommodate housing; it has to
make sense to build the units. If it doesn't make sense, the units won't be built.
With direction from the City Council, the Commission's clarifications to the text of the
Governmental Constraints chapter can be incorporated into the Draft Housing Element when it
is sent to the State Department of Housing and Community Development for review and
certification.
Public Comments: Prior to action on this item, the Commission received public testimony
regarding the Draft Housing Element. Following is a summary of public comments:
• Want to make sure we maintain the quality of Burlingame's neighborhoods. There are no
shabby neighborhoods now; what contributes to a shabby neighborhood is the
appearance of the buildings and congested parking. Concerned with reducing parking
standards, and how will that affect the quality of Burlingame's neighborhoods.
• Burlingame appears to be focusing on a walkable urbanism which relies on higher
density and access to transportation. However this density would be greater than what
Burlingame can sustain. Transit oriented development relies on High Speed Rail and
electrification of Caltrain in the future, and these are not given. It is understandable that
there is a desire to increase the tax base, but this can be done either through hyper -
development c, through enhancing what already makes the community unique. Should
look at the Bayshore area as another alternative for locating housing.
• Represent a coalition of community groups that promote best practices to address
affordable housing need, and many of these best practices have been incorporated into
the Draft Housing Element. Would like to see more robust anti -displacement policies,
since rents have gone up at an alarming rate and the impacts are profound. Would like
the City to recognize this threat and include a policy to study anti -displacement.
• Lived in an apartment building in North Burlingame, the rent went up by $800, and all but `
one tenant had to move out. This is an issue that needs to be addressed. The Housing 1!
Element states that 42% of people who work in Burlingame make less than $33,000 a
7
Draft 2015-2023 Housing Element Update August 18, 2014
year, but there are no affordable housing options for seniors or the disabled. The
Housing Element has no muscle to affect change. In the last Housing Element cycle,
only 77 units were built out of more than 600 planned for.
• Without an adopted Housing Element, the community won't get transportation funds; do
we want transit development that looks like San Mateo or Millbrae? Not sure people will
use public transit, but Priority Development Areas need transit to work. Population in
Burlingame has only changed by 1000 people, so why do we need more housing?
Senior assisted living projects should be required to include affordable units.
In addition, staff received two emails with comments on the Draft Housing Element (refer to
attached emails from Mark Haberecht, 1505 Balboa, and from David DeNola, Center for
Independence).
Next Steps: After Council action on the Draft 2015-2023 Housing Element, Community
Development Department staff will submit the document to the California Department of
Housing and Community Development for review and certification. Once the State review is
complete and the Housing Element is certified as compliant with State law, the document will be
resubmitted to the public, Planning Commission and City Council for final adoption.
FISCAL IMPACT
None.
Kevin Gardiner
Planning Manager
Exhibits:
• Council Resolution (Proposed)
• Draft 2015-2023 Housing Element (separate document)
• Email from Mark Haberecht, 1505 Balboa, dated June 23, 2014
• Email from David DeNola, Center for Independence, dated June 23, 2014
• Planning Commission Resolution
• Planning Commission Minutes, June 23, 2014
• Notice of Public Hearing — Mailed and Published in the San Mateo County Times June 27,
2014
', COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
CITY OF BURLINGAME B R�,N�AE
Planning Division
City Hall — 501 Primrose Road l.f. PH: (650) 558-7250
Burlingame, California 94010-3997 FAX: (650) 696-3790
NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT A NEGATIVE DECLARATION
To: Interested Individuals From: City of Burlingame
County Clerk of San Mateo Community Development Department
Planning Division
501 Primrose Road
Burlingame CA 94010
Subject: Notice of Intent to Adopt a Negative Declaration (ND -578-P)
Forthe 2015-2023 Burlingame Housing Element Update
Project Location: City-wide — City of Burlingame, San Mateo County, California
Project Description: The project consists of the update of the City of Burlingame's Housing Element, a mandated element of
the General Plan. The document includes programs and policies which address the housing needs of the community. New
policies and programs in the updated Housing Element include recommendations for the creation of incentives to encourage
development of a variety of housing types, allowing fee waivers for affordable rehabilitation, and consideration of residential
and commercial in -lieu fees to contribute towards the supply of low- and moderate -income housing. Any future changes in
regulations, zoning changes and development of housing will be subject to environmental review per the requirements of the
California Environmental Quality Act, and subject to public review and hearings prior to implementation.
The specific recommendations for implementation of the goals and policies are outlined in the Draft Housing Element. There
are no major changes proposed to the goals and policies of the current 2009-2014 Housing Element, and no changes to any
land use or zoning designations. The City of Burlingame is a mature community with very little vacant land available for
development. Most of the sites selected for housing are infill sites which are now underdeveloped and could be redeveloped
at higher densities under existing zoning regulations. Three areas of the City are specifically identified for developme
opportunities: Downtown Burlingame, North Burlingame, and sites along Carolan Avenue. Since the Housing Element upda
is an amendment to the General Plan, the analysis of environmental impacts is being done on a broad scale. All of the
programs and policies can be implemented through the zoning code now in place. Analysis of the housing element update will
assume development will occur under the existing code as well as the recommended code revisions, which will likely occur
within the first year of implementation.
In accordance with Section 15072(a) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, notice is hereby given of
the City's intent to adopt a Negative Declaration for the project listed above. A negative declaration is prepared for a project
when the initial study has identified no potentially significant effect on the environment, and there is no substantial evidence
in the light of the whole record before the public agency that the project may have a significant effect on the environment.
The City of Burlingame has completed a review of the proposed project, and on the basis of an Initial Study, finds that the
project will not have a significant effect upon the environment. The City has prepared a Negative Declaration and Initial Study
that are available for public review at City Hall, 501 Primr.-se Road, Burlingame, Californi=, 94010.
As mandated by State Law, the minimum comment period for this document is 30 (thirty) days and begins on December 3,
2014. Comments may be submitted during the review period and up to the end of the 30 -day review on January 5, 2015.
Persons having comments concerning this project, including objections to the basis of determination set forth in the Initial
Study/Negative Declaration, are invited to furnish their comments summarizing the specific and factual basis for their
comments, in writing to: William Meeker, Community Development Director, City of Burlingame Community Development
Department, Planning Division, Sol Primrose Road, Burlingame, CA 94010-3997, Fax: (650) 696-3790; Email:
wmeeker@burlingame.org. Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21177, any legal challenge to the adoption of the
proposed Initial Study/Negative Declaration will be limited to those issues presented to the City during the public comment
period described above.
Public Hearing: The City of Burlingame City Council will hold a public hearing to consider adoption of the proposed 2015-2k
Housing Element Update and the Negative Declaration for this project on Monday, January 5, 2015 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council
Chambers, Burlingame City Hall, 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame CA 94010. Published and Posted: December 3, 2014
40URL[NGAME S TA F F REPORT AGENDA NO: 1 Oa
65 MEETING DATE: January5, 2015
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
Date: January 5, 2015
From: William Meeker, Community Development Director — (650) 558-7255
Kathleen Kane, City Attorney — (650) 558-7204
Subject: Adoption of an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Burlingame,
Amending Chapter 25.63 of the Burlingame Municipal Code to Comply with
State Law Requiring Incentives or Concessions for Qualifying
Developments (Density Bonus Ordinance)
RECOMMENDATION
The City Council should:
1. Consider public comment and discuss the proposed ordinance.
2. Adopt the ordinance by motion: "An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of
Burlingame, Amending Chapter 25.63 of the Burlingame Municipal Code to
Comply with State Law Requiring Incentives or Concessions for Qualifying
Developments (Density Bonus Ordinance)".
BACKGROUND
State Density Bonus Law, Government Code Section 65915, was first enacted in 1979. The law
requires local governments to provide density bonuses and other incentives to developers of
affordable housing who commit to providing a certain percentage of dwelling units to persons
whose income does not exceed specific thresholds. Cities also must provide bonuses to certain
developers of senior housing developments, and in response to certain donations of land and the
inclusion of childcare centers in some developments.
Essentially, state density bonus law establishes that a residential project of five or more units that
provides affordable or senior housing at specific affordability levels may be eligible for:
• a "density bonus" to allow more dwelling units than otherwise allowed on the site
by the applicable General Plan Land Use Map and Zoning;
• use of density bonus parking standards;
• incentives reducing site development standards or a modification of zoning code
or architectural requirements that result in financially sufficient and actual cost
reductions;
1
Introduction - Density Bonus Ordinance January 5, 2015
• waiver of development standards that would otherwise make the increased
density physically impossible to construct;
• an additional density bonus if a childcare facility is provided.
A density bonus may be approved only in conjunction with a development permit (i.e. tentative
map, parcel map, use permit or design review). Under State law, a jurisdiction must provide a
density bonus, and incentives will be granted at the applicant's request based on specific criteria.
The amount of the density bonus is set on a sliding scale. Jurisdictions are required to adopt a
density bonus ordinance prior to or in conjunction with the final certification of the 2015-2023
Housing Element in January 2015.
The updated Burlingame 2015-2023 Housing Element includes 35 different programs, each
designed to respond to various aspects of the community's housing needs. No one program is
able to address every housing issue in itself, but each has an important place in contributing to a
comprehensive housing strategy. The Density Bonus Ordinance (and the previous Inclusionary
Ordinance) is intended to allow new housing development to contribute towards the community's
need to provide housing opportunities for a range of households and incomes. In this respect,
the Density Bonus Ordinance is an implementation of Housing Element Program H(C-2) which
calls for incentives for developers to include affordable units in new residential projects.
Additional background and discussion of the Density Bonus Ordinance can be found in
the staff report provided for the November 17, 2014 City Council meeting. That report is
included as an attachment,- the remainder of this report provides follow-up analysis to
Council comments.
DISCUSSION
The City Council last considered the Density Bonus Ordinance at its November 17, 2014 meeting
(meeting minutes attached). Councilmembers requested follow-up on potential impacts of the
proposed density bonus on typical development sites, expressed concern with reduced parking
standards in locations outside of Downtown, and requested staff to engage housing developers
for further input.
Potential Impact on Typical Sites: At the November 17th meeting, staff presented two sample
scenarios showing how the sliding scale for the density bonus would translate to numbers of units
on a prototypical one -acre site. Councilmembers asked for further analysis such as illustrating the
physical implications of a density bonus on a project, and the differences in the amounts of
parking provided.
Attached to this report is an exhibit that provides a series of scenarios for a prototypical 20,000
square foot site. This parcel size was determined to be more representative of a typical infill
project in Burlingame. A number of potential scenarios are illustrated since different applicants
may choose different incentives. Furthermore, the implications of additional units on a project
may result in greater building mass, but alternatively could result in a greater number of smaller
units within the same building mass. The prototypes are meant to illustrate a range of potential
FA
Introduction - Density Bonus Ordinance January 5, 2015
scenarios that could result from the provisions in the proposed ordinance. The prototypes do not
indicate that the City would approve any particular project, and are for illustration purposes only.
Developer Input: The proposed ordinance is a merger of the State's density bonus provisions and
the City's previous Inclusionary Housing Ordinance. As such, it is intended to provide a
mechanism for continuing (and expanding) the City's previous inclusionary housing program, as
well as comply with the State mandate to provide specific incentives to help make the
development of affordable and senior housing economically feasible. The State legislation has
been in place in its current form since 2008, and the incentives it provides have been vetted by
both affordable housing and market -rate developers. The City's Inclusionary Housing Ordinance
has been in place since 2003 and has been applied to a total of eight multifamily residential
projects representing 115 units, including 14 affordable units. Incentives in the draft ordinance
represent direction from the state legislation, together with the City's experience with projects
approved and constructed since the Inclusionary Ordinance was adopted in 2003.
For perspective from a representative affordable housing developer, staff reviewed the proposed
ordinance with MidPen Housing. MidPen is familiar with Burlingame and has made a number of
presentations to the City Council on affordable housing. Because MidPen projects are typically
100% affordable, the provisions of the ordinance regarding the percentages of affordable units
would not apply, but the incentives offered by the ordinance would be a consideration in
evaluating the feasibility of a potential project. MidPen has utilized the State density bonus
provisions in other jurisdictions, and while the benefits vary for each project, MidPen has found
that the incentives related to parking standards, height, density, and setbacks have been the
most important in improving project feasibility. In evaluating a potential project, MidPen considers
the density bonus incentives alongside all other development standards to determine whether a
project will be financially feasible. With some projects, the incentives will make the difference
between feasibility and infeasibility, whereas with others, the incentives will simply improve the
financials for an otherwise feasible project.
Regarding parking, MidPen reported that the reduced parking standards allowed by the State law
are important for improving project feasibility (particularly for projects with structured parking), but
they also emphasized that they would not build a project with less parking than would be needed
to accommodate the residents. As an affordable developer, they may be especially sensitive to
avoiding spill-over parking into adjacent streets. Through their post -occupancy evaluations, they
have found that residents of affordable housing tend to own fewer vehicles than residents of
market -rate developments.
Because the Density Bonus Ordinance is designed to encourage affordable units in market -rate
projects, staff also interviewed several market -rate developers familiar with Burlingame. Like
MidPen, those interviewed said that they consider the density bonus incentives alongside all
other development standards to determine whether a project will be feasible. Given that infill
projects typically have structured parking, the lowered parking ratios provided by the State law
are particularly important. Like MidPen, the market -rate developers have an interest in providing
sufficient parking for demand, but from their perspective adequate parking is more directly related
to the project's marketability and its competitiveness with other projects. In identifying other
incentives, increased height and reduced setbacks were most commonly mentioned.
rej
Introduction - Density Bonus Ordinance
January 5, 2015
Further Reduction in Parking for Projects Near Transit: In its review of the Density Bonus
Ordinance, the Planning Commission recommended adding the incentive further reduction in
parking for projects near transit to those outlined in 25.62.040 (c) of the draft ordinance. However
in its November 17th meeting, members of the City Council expressed concern with reducing
parking standards outside of the Downtown Specific Plan area, given that those areas are not
necessarily served by high -frequency regional rail transit. Therefore the recommendation has not
been added to the proposed ordinance. An applicant can request the parking standards specified
in the state legislation as outlined in 25.62.040 (c) of the draft ordinance, but the proposed
ordinance does not offer further reductions outside of the Downtown Specific Plan area.
FISCAL IMPACT
None.
Exhibits:
• Density Bonus Ordinance
• November 17, 2014 City Council Staff Report
• November 17, 2014 City Council Minutes
• Prototypical Development Scenarios
0
T
a -J
U1
+'
Ln
p
V
Ln
`
�
O
QJ
4-J
l!1
V
V
O
�^
Ln
0o
ra
O
-
.N
o
N
U
D
r6
U
ateJ
O
Q
O
0).-
l.—
+'
/Ln
4—j
i
o
Qj
V 1
0
O
4J
U
L-
O
Q
rB
ro
ot
M
0�
N
U
V
0
0
N
Q)
-0
_0
—
(3)Ln
O
ra
(
_0
Ln
c
ro
Ln:.
-0
�
O
N
CL
O
4_oa,
�Ln
4-j
4--
V
D
c
V
Lf)
ro
} ,
r6
ra
O
0-
V)
Ln
n
r6
v�1
X0
a,
0—
-0
Z
O
ro
l7
M
N
ro
N
Ln
N
O
N
c
v
Ln
>, CJ)
co
U ro
'-EQ
ro -0
Q 4J
i
U U
r i
4-
0
Ln
ro
ro o
_ v
E-0
Vl ro
Ln
X
c
v
O_
UJ
Ln
>14-J
W
+-
ro
—_
>
v)
_>
ro
Ol
:-:Ln
>
4J
O
ro
4J
4-J
+j
L
cl�
E
_0
uv
u
Ero
o
-
O
�
Qv
OV
-I--�°
O
-0
a)
.—
i
Ln
QJ
4J
Ln
ci
0
ro
++
o
C
CY1
O
-0O
L
�'
OU
-�
D
O
N
c
.01
2
—
O
a)
v
GJ
v
ro
s
M
>
. �^
ai
_0 rC
C 1
Ln
C
v
ro
0O
U
ro
U)
Q
2
ro
N
Ln
N
O
N
c
v
Ln
>, CJ)
co
U ro
'-EQ
ro -0
Q 4J
i
U U
r i
4-
0
Ln
ro
ro o
_ v
E-0
Vl ro
X
L
ai
3
ap
l
T
{
1
VI
3 i
ill
/O
RS
i i{
Sari i
ii +ail #
O
V
m
{
l
T
iii{
V€
C
r
^1
—
Fn
QW
o
m
L
ai
l
T
1
VI
/O
RS
c
O
V
m
l
T
'V
V€
C
r
^1
—
Fn
QW
o
m
=
.4;
ro
ra
4-
4 -JO
to
O
_
(n
N
L
C
�
�
v
O
U
E
i
C
�
v
L
�M
D
4J
�
N
i
Ln
Ln
v1
E
T
L � 1
T
0
fir\ E
V € 111
^ W
O C
s •L
m o
4—
O m
N N
O
O N
Ln F
a-+
C
O O
Ln N
Q) v
0-
4-j
Ln
v
v
Ln
D
E
E
O
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME,
AMENDING CHAPTER 25.63 OF THE BURLINGAME MUNICIPAL CODE TO
COMPLY WITH STATE LAW REQUIRING INCENTIVES OR CONCESSIONS
FOR QUALIFYING DEVELOPMENTS (DENSITY BONUS ORDINANCE)
WHEREAS State Law requires the adoption of a Density Bonus Ordinance, under
Government Code §65915-65919; and
WHEREAS the City's existing Inclusionary Housing provisions require modification to
reflect governing state law and account for local conditions; and
WHEREAS current regulations should be updated to reflect governing state law and
account for local conditions; and
WHEREAS efficiency and transparency are served by combining the objectives served
by the existing Inclusionary Housing provisions into the required Density Bonus Ordinance;
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council does hereby ordain as follows:
DIVISION 1:
Section 1: Burlingame Municipal Code Chapter 25.63 is repealed in its entirety and replaced
with the following:
25.63.010 Purpose.
(a) It is the City Council's intent that this chapter be implemented in a manner consistent
with the provisions set forth in Government Code §§65915-65919, hereinafter the
"density bonus law." This chapter creates procedures for identifying qualifying
developments, and the submission, review, and granting of incentives and concessions
consistent with state law.
(b) All applicable provisions of the density bonus law are hereby incorporated by reference
and shall be the default law unless otherwise provided by this chapter.
(c) This chapter shall not abrogate the any other requirements set forth by federal, state, or
local law, including but not limited to California Environmental Quality Act requirements
and Burlingame Municipal Code.
25.63.015 Definitions.
The following terms shall have the following meanings when used in this chapter. All
other terms shall be interpreted consistent with the meaning set forth in the density bonus law.
1
ORDINANCE NO.
(a) Affordable units" shall collectively mean units qualifying as "very low," 'lower," and
"moderate" income units as used in this chapter and in the density bonus law.
(b) `Applicant" shall mean any person, firm, partnership, association, joint venture,
corporation, entity, or any combination thereof, who seeks a density bonus and/or
concessions as defined in this section.
(c) "Child care facility" shall mean a child day care facility other than a family day care
home, including, but not limited to, infant centers, preschools, extended day care
facilities, and schoolage child care centers.
(d) "Concessions" shall be interchangeable with "incentives," unless otherwise indicated.
The meaning shall be consistent with Government Code §65915(k).
(e) "Density bonus" shall mean a density increase over the otherwise maximum allowable
residential density as of the date of the application.
(f) `Development" shall have the meaning set forth in Government Code §65915(i).
(g) "Incentives" shall be interchangeable with "concessions," unless otherwise indicated.
The meaning shall be consistent with Government Code §65915(k).
(h) "Lower income" shall have the same definition set forth in Health and Safety Code
§50079.5.
(i) "Moderate income" shall have the same definition set forth in Health and Safety Code
§50093.
Q) "Specific adverse impact" shall have the same definition as set forth in Government
Code §65589.5(d)(2).
(k) "Very low income" shall have the same definition as set forth in Health and Safety Code
§50105.
25.63.020 Density Bonus.
This section describes the density bonuses that will be provided, at the request of an
applicant, when that applicant provides restricted affordable units as described below.
(a) The city shall grant a 20 percent (20%) density bonus when an applicant for a
development of five (5) or more dwelling units seeks and agrees to construct at least any
one of the following in accordance with the requirements of this Section and Government
2
ORDINANCE NO.
Code Section 65915:
(1) At least 10 percent (10%) of the total dwelling units of the development as
restricted affordable units affordable to lower income households. For each one
percent (1%) increase in the percentage of restricted lower income units, a
development will receive an additional one and one-half percent (1.5%) density
bonus up to thirty-five percent (35%) of the maximum residential density; or
(2) At least five percent (5%) of the total dwelling units of the development as
restricted affordable units affordable to very low income households. For each
one percent (1%) increase in the percentage of restricted very low income units,
a development will receive an additional two and one-half percent (2.5%) density
bonus up to thirty-five percent (35%) of the maximum residential density; or
(3) A senior citizen housing development; or
(4) A qualifying mobile home park.
(b) The city shall grant a five percent (5%) density bonus when an applicant for a
development of five (5) or more additional dwelling units seeks and agrees to construct,
in accordance with the requirements of this Section and Government Code Section
65915, at least 10 percent (10%) of the total dwelling units in a common interest
development as defined in California Civil Code Section 4100 for moderate income
households, provided that all dwelling units in the development are offered to the public
for purchase. For each one percent (1%) increase in the percentage of restricted
moderate income units, a development will receive an additional one percent (1%)
density bonus up to thirty-five percent (35%) of the maximum residential density.
(c) No additional density bonus shall be authorized for a senior citizen development or
qualifying mobile home park beyond the density bonus authorized by subsection (a) of
this section.
(d) When calculating the number of permitted density bonus units, any fractions of units
shall be rounded to the next highest number. An applicant may elect to receive a density
bonus that is less than the amount permitted by this section; however, the city shall not
be required to similarly reduce the number of restricted affordable units required to be
dedicated pursuant to this section and Government Code Section 65915(b).
(e) Each development is entitled to only one density bonus, which shall be selected by the
applicant based on the percentage of very low restricted affordable units, lower income
restricted affordable units, or moderate income restricted affordable units, or the
development's status as a senior citizen housing development or qualifying mobile home
park. Density bonuses from more than one category may not be combined. In no case
3
ORDINANCE NO.
shall a development be entitled to a density bonus of more than thirty-five percent (35%).
(f) The density bonus units shall not be included when determining the number of restricted
affordable units required to qualify for a density bonus. When calculating the required
number of restricted affordable units, any resulting decimal fraction shall be rounded to
the next larger integer.
(g) Any restricted affordable unit provided pursuant to a below market rate housing program
adopted by the City shall be included when determining the number of restricted
affordable units required to qualify for a density bonus or other entitlement under this
chapter. However, the payment of a housing impact or in lieu fee shall not qualify for a
density bonus or other entitlement under this chapter.
(h) Certain other types of development activities are specifically eligible for a density bonus
pursuant to state law:
(1) A development may be eligible for a density bonus in return for land donation
pursuant to the requirements set forth in Government Code Section 65915(g).
(2) A condominium conversion may be eligible for a density bonus or concession
pursuant to the requirements set forth in Government Code Section 65915.5.
(i) Notwithstanding any provision of this chapter, all developments must
satisfy all applicable requirements of any below market rate housing
program adopted by the City, which may impose requirements for
restricted affordable units in addition to those required to receive a
density bonus or concessions.
Table 1 summarizes the density bonus provisions described in this Section.
Table 1: Density Bonus Summary Table
Additional
Percentage
Bonus for
of Restricted
Minimum
Each 1%
Units
Percentage
Percentage
Increase in
Required for
of Restricted
of Density
Restricted
Maximum
Restricted Affordable
Affordable
Bonus
Affordable
35% Density
Units or Category
Units
Granted
Units
Bonus
Very Low Income
5%
200/6
2.50%
110/,
Lower Income
100/o
20%
1.50%
20%
Moderate Income
10%
5%
1%
40%
Senior Citizen
100%
20%
____
------
ORDINANCE NO.
Housing
Qualifying Mobile Park 100% 20% ------
Note: A density bonus may be selected from only one category up to a maximum of
35% of the Maximum Residential Density.
25.63.030 Development Standards for Affordable Units.
The affordable housing standards are as follows:
(a) Concurrent Construction. The required affordable dwelling units shall be constructed
concurrently with market -rate units unless both the final decision-making authority of the
city and developer agree within the affordable housing agreement to an alternative
schedule for development.
(b) Moderate income restricted affordable units shall remain restricted and affordable to the
designated income group for a minimum period of 30 years (or a longer period of time if
required by the construction or mortgage financing assistance program, mortgage
insurance program, or rental subsidy program). Very low and lower restricted affordable
units shall remain restricted and affordable to the designated income group for a period
of 30 years for both rental and for -sale units (or a longer period of time if required by a
construction or mortgage financing assistance program, mortgage insurance program, or
rental subsidy program).
(c) Design. Restricted affordable units shall be built on-site and be dispersed within the
development. The number of bedrooms of the restricted affordable units shall be
equivalent to the bedroom mix of the non -restricted units in the development; except that
the applicant may include a higher proportion of restricted affordable units with more
bedrooms. The design and construction of the affordable dwelling units shall be
consistent with general plan standards; compatible with the design, unit layout, and
construction of the total project development in terms of appearance, construction
materials, unit layout, and finished quality and conform to general plan standards; and
consistent with any affordable residential development standards that may be prepared
by the City.
(d) Minimum Dwelling Unit Size. To qualify as affordable dwelling units under this chapter,
the affordable dwelling units shall meet the following minimum size requirements,
excluding common areas, storage units, and assigned parking areas or spaces:
Type of Unit
Minimum Size
Studio
500 square
feet
One -bedroom
650 square
5
ORDINANCE NO.
feet
Two-bedroom 800 square
feet
(e) A regulatory agreement, as described in Section 25.63.080, shall be made a condition of
the discretionary permits for all developments pursuant to this chapter. The regulatory
agreement shall be recorded as a restriction on the development.
25.63.040 Development Concessions and Incentives.
(a) By Right Parking Incentives. Upon request by the applicant a development that is eligible
for a Density Bonus may provide parking as provided in this subsection (a), consistent
with Government Code Section 65915(p), inclusive of accessible and guest parking:
(1) Zero to one bedroom unit: one on-site parking space;
(2) Two to three bedroom unit: two on-site parking spaces;
(3) Four or more bedroom unit: two and one-half parking spaces.
(b) Other Incentives and Concessions. A development is eligible for other Concessions or
Incentives as follows:
(c) In submitting a request for Concessions or Incentives, an applicant may request the
specific Concessions set forth below. The following Concessions and Incentives are
deemed not to have a specific adverse impact:
(1) A height for structures of forty-six (46) feet in height or less without a conditional
use permit;
(2) Reduction of common open space in the rear yard of a residential development
by up to fifty (50) percent or two hundred (200) square feet, whichever is more,
without necessity of a variance, so long as no dimension of the common open
space provided is less than ten (10) feet in any direction; or
(3) Use of unistall parking spaces each with a clear interior measurement of eight
2
% very low
income units
%lower
income units
% moderate
income units
1 incentive
5
10
10
2 incentives
10
20
20
3 incentives
15
30
30
(c) In submitting a request for Concessions or Incentives, an applicant may request the
specific Concessions set forth below. The following Concessions and Incentives are
deemed not to have a specific adverse impact:
(1) A height for structures of forty-six (46) feet in height or less without a conditional
use permit;
(2) Reduction of common open space in the rear yard of a residential development
by up to fifty (50) percent or two hundred (200) square feet, whichever is more,
without necessity of a variance, so long as no dimension of the common open
space provided is less than ten (10) feet in any direction; or
(3) Use of unistall parking spaces each with a clear interior measurement of eight
2
ORDINANCE NO.
and one-half (8 1/2) feet in width and eighteen (18) feet in length without
necessity of a variance; or
(4) Allowance of up to fifty (50) percent of the required parking as compact parking
stalls as defined in Chapter 25.70, without necessity of a variance.
(d) Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to require the provision of direct financial
concessions for the development, including the provision of publicly owned land by the
city or the waiver of fees or dedication requirements.
25.63.050 Waiver/Modification of Development Standards
An applicant may apply for a waiver or modification of development standards that will
have the effect of physically precluding the construction of a development at the densities or
with the concessions or incentives permitted by this chapter. The developer must demonstrate
that development standards that are requested to be waived or modified will have the effect of
physically precluding the construction of a development meeting the criteria of subsection (a) of
Section 25.63.020 at the densities or with the concessions or incentives permitted by this
chapter.
25.63.060 Child Care Facilities.
(a) An applicant otherwise qualifying for density bonuses and/or incentives under this
chapter may be eligible for the following density bonuses or incentives if they propose to
construct a qualifying child care facility, consistent with §65915(h).
(b) The density bonus shall be in an amount of square feet of residential space that is equal
to or greater than the amount of square feet in the child care facility.
(c) The incentive shall be granted if it contributes significantly to the economic feasibility of
the construction of the child care facility.
(d) The City may deny the density bonus or incentives described in this section if it finds,
based on substantial evidence, that the community has adequate child care facilities.
25.63.070 Application and Review Process.
(a) An application for a density bonus or incentive shall be made to the Community
Development Department on forms provided by the City. The application shall include
the following information:
(1) A brief description of the proposed housing development, including the total
7
ORDINANCE NO.
number of dwelling units, affordable housing units, and density bonus units
proposed.
(2) The requested density bonus amount and requested incentives, if any.
(3) Site plans showing the location of market -rate, density bonus, and affordable
housing units.
(4) Any other such information as is necessary to verify that the applicant and/or the
housing development meets all requirements set forth by state and local law.
(b) The application, or an incentive therein, may be wholly or partially denied for any of the
following reasons:
(1) The application is incomplete.
(2) The application contains a material misrepresentation.
(3) The incentive has an insufficient relationship to providing affordable housing.
(4) The incentive has a specific, adverse impact as defined in this chapter.
(5) The incentive is contrary to federal or state law.
(c) The applicant may file an appeal to the City Council within 14 days of being
notified of his application's final denial.
25.63.080 Regulatory Agreement.
(a) After approval of the application as detailed in §25.63.050, applicant shall enter into a
regulatory agreement with the City. The terms of this agreement shall be approved as to
form by the City Attorney's Office, and reviewed and revised as appropriate by the
reviewing city official. This agreement shall be on a form provided by the City, and shall
include the following terms:
(1) The affordability of very low, lower, and moderate income housing shall be
assured in a manner consistent with Government Code §65915(c)(1).
(2) An equity sharing agreement pursuant to Government Code §65915(c)(2).
(3) The location, dwelling unit sizes, rental cost, and number of bedrooms of the
affordable units.
E
ORDINANCE NO.
(4) A description of any bonuses and incentives, if any, provided by the City.
(5) Any other terms as required to ensure implementation and compliance with this
section, and the applicable sections of the density bonus law.
(b) This agreement shall be binding on all future owners and successors in interest. The
agreement required by this section shall be a condition of all development approvals and
shall be fully executed and recorded prior to the issuance of any building or construction
permit for the project in question.
DIVISION 2:
If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason
held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this
Ordinance. The Council hereby declares that it would have adopted the Ordinance and each
section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or
more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid.
DIVISION 3:
This Ordinance shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation in accordance
with California Government Code Section 36933, published, and circulated in the City of
Burlingame, and shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its final passage.
Terry Nagel, Mayor
I, Mary Ellen Kearney, 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 17th day of
November, 2014 and adopted thereafter at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 5`h
day of January, 2015 by the following vote:
AYES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
ATTEST:
IF,
Mary Ellen Kearney, City Clerk
9 BURLINGAME STAFF REPORT AGENDA NO:
MEETING DATE: November 17, 2014
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
Date: November 17, 2014
From: William Meeker, Community Development Director— (650) 558-7255
Subject: Introduction of an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Burlingame,
Amending Chapter 25.63 of the Burlingame Municipal Code to Comply with
State Law Requiring Incentives or Concessions for Qualifying
_Developments (Density Bonus Ordinance)
The City Council should:
Introduce the following ordinance by title only, waiving further reading: "An Ordinance of
the City Council of the City of Burlingame, Amending Chapter 25.63 of the Burlingame
Municipal Code to Comply with State Law Requiring Incentives or Concessions for
Qualifying Developments (Density Bonus Ordinance)".
2. Conduct a public hearing and consider all public testimony related to the ordinance.
3. Following conclusion of the public hearing, provide direction to staff regarding any
desired changes to the proposed ordinance.
4. Direct staff to place adoption of the proposed ordinance on the December 1, 2014
regular meeting agenda of the City Council.
BACKGROUND
State Density Bonus Law, Government Code Section 65915, was first enacted in 1979. The law
requires local governments to provide density bonuses and other incentives to developers of
affordable housing who commit to providing a certain percentage of dwelling units to persons
whose income does not exceed specific thresholds. Cities also must provide bonuses to certain
developers of senior housing developments, and in response to certain donations of land and the
inclusion of childcare centers in some developments.
Essentially, state density bonus law establishes that a residential project of five or more units that
provides affordable or senior housing at specific affordability levels may be eligible for:
• a "density bonus" to allow more dwelling units than otherwise allowed on the site by the
applicable General Plan Land Use Map and Zoning;
1
Introduction - Density Bonus Ordinance
• use of density bonus parking standards;
November 17, 2014
• incentives reducing site development standards or a modification of zoning code or
architectural requirements that result in financially sufficient and actual cost reductions;
• waiver of development standards that would otherwise make the increased density
physically impossible to construct;
• an additional density bonus if a childcare facility is provided.
The density bonus may be approved only in conjunction with a development permit (i.e., tentative
map, parcel map, use permit or design review). Under State law, a jurisdiction must provide a
density bonus, and incentives will be granted at the applicant's request based on specific criteria.
The amount of the density bonus is set on a sliding scale, based on the percentage of affordable
units at each income level, as shown on Table 1 on the following page:
2
Introduction - Density Bonus Ordinance November 17, 2014
Table 1: Density Bonus Chart
Unit
Percentage*Income
5%
Income
Density
Bonus
2070
Density
:.
-
Moderate
'
Bonus
-
Donation
Bonus
-
Housing
Density
Bonus
20%
6%
22.5%
20%
7%
25%
20%
8%
27.5%
20%
9%
30%
20%
10%
32.5%
20%
50/6
15%
20%
11%
359%
21.5%
6%
16%
20%
12%
35%
23%
7%
17%
20%
13%
35%
24.5%
8%
18%
209/6
14%
350%
26%
9%
19%
20%
15%
350/6
27.59%
10%
20%
20%
16%
35%
29%
110%
21%
20%
17%
35%
30.5%
12%
22%
20%
18%
35%
32%
13%
23%
20%
19%
35%
33.5%
14%
24%
20%
20%
35%
35%
15%
25%
200/6
21%
35%
35%
16%
26%
20%
22%
35%
35%
170%
27%
20%
23%
35%
35%
18%
28%
20%
24%
35%
35%
19%
29%
20%
25%
35%
35%
20%
30%
20%
26%
35%
35%
21%
31%
20%
27%
35%
35%
22%
32%
20%
280%
35%
35%
23%
33%
20%
29%
35%
35%
24%
34%
20%
309/6
35%
35%
25%
35%
20%
31%
350%
359/.
269%
35%
209/6
329/6
35%
35%
27%
35%
20%
339/6
35%
35%
28%
359/6
209/6
34%
35%
35%
29%
35%
20%
350/6
35%
35%
309/6
350%
200/6
360/6
35%
35%
31%
35%
209/6
37%
35%
359/6
329/6
35%
20%
38%
35%
35%
330/6
359/6
20%
399%
359/6
359/6
349/o
35%
20%
409/6
359/6
359/6
35%
35%
20%
uansuy uunus uaiuwauuns resuming in Tracnons are rounded up to the next whole number.
** Affordable unit percentage is calculated excluding units added by a density bonus.
*** No affordable units are required for senior housing units to receive a density bonus.
Introduction - Density Bonus Ordinance November 17. 2014
Furthermore the State Density Bonus law provides maximum parking requirements upon the
applicant's request. Requesting these parking standards does not count as an incentive or
concession. Table 2 outlines the maximum parking requirements set forth by the State Density
Bonus law compared to multifamily parking standards in the Burlingame Municipal Code:
Table 2: Density Bonus Parking Standards Compared to Burlingame Municipal Code
If a child care center is also included in the affordable or senior housing development, the local
agency shall grant either an additional density bonus equal to or greater than the amount of
square feet of the child care center or grant an additional incentive that contributes significantly to
the economic feasibility of the construction of the child care facility, with the following additional
requirements:
1. The child care facility shall remain in operation for a period of time as long as the term of
the affordable units;
2. The percentage of children from very low-, low- and moderate income -families reflects the
percentage of affordable units in the development;
3. The local agency shall not be required to provide a density bonus or concession for a child
care facility if it finds that the community has adequate child care facilities.
Burlingame's current Housing Element was adopted in 2010. A draft of the updated 2015-2023
Housing Element is currently under review by the State Department of Housing and Community
Development (HCD). It includes the following implementation programs related to density
bonuses:
Program H(C-2) - Provide incentives for developers to include affordable units in new
residential projects.
1. Amend the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance to comply with local and state legislative
requirements
0
D- e.
Burlingame
.... -
Specific.-
cific Plan
Type of Use
Standards
Standards except for
Area West of Rail
Area East of Rail
Downtown Specific
Plan Area
Corridor
Corridor
Studio
1 space/unit
1.5 space/unit
1 space/unit
1 space/unit
1 Bedroom
1 space/unit
1.5 space/unit
1 space/unit
1.5 space/unit
2 Bedroom
2 spaces/unit
2 spaces/unit
1.5 spaces/unit
2 spaces/unit
3 Bedroom
2 spaces/unit
2.5 spaces/unit
2 spaces/unit
2 spaces/unit
Apartments:
none required
Guest parking
None required
Condominiums:
1 for 2-4 units
None required
None required
2 for 5-15 units
3 for 15 or more units
If a child care center is also included in the affordable or senior housing development, the local
agency shall grant either an additional density bonus equal to or greater than the amount of
square feet of the child care center or grant an additional incentive that contributes significantly to
the economic feasibility of the construction of the child care facility, with the following additional
requirements:
1. The child care facility shall remain in operation for a period of time as long as the term of
the affordable units;
2. The percentage of children from very low-, low- and moderate income -families reflects the
percentage of affordable units in the development;
3. The local agency shall not be required to provide a density bonus or concession for a child
care facility if it finds that the community has adequate child care facilities.
Burlingame's current Housing Element was adopted in 2010. A draft of the updated 2015-2023
Housing Element is currently under review by the State Department of Housing and Community
Development (HCD). It includes the following implementation programs related to density
bonuses:
Program H(C-2) - Provide incentives for developers to include affordable units in new
residential projects.
1. Amend the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance to comply with local and state legislative
requirements
0
Introduction - Density Bonus Ordinance November 17, 2014
2. Amend the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance or adopt a Density Bonus Ordinance to
accommodate a Low -Income component of required affordable housing.
3. Amend the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance or adopt a Density Bonus Ordinance to
encourage smaller unit sizes (i.e. studio, SROs, one- and two-bedroom units).
4. Amend the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance or adopt a Density Bonus Ordinance to
extend the affordability time restrictions.
5. Amend the zoning code to provide incentives to developers who provide additional
affordable units and/or serve a broader range of income levels than that required by the
Inclusionary Housing Ordinance or state density bonus requirements, such as reduced
parking requirements, increased height limits, reduced landscaping requirements, flexible
setback requirements and reduced fees.
The Density Bonus Ordinance must be adopted prior to final certification of the 2015-2023
Housing Element in January 2015.
Relation to Chapter 25.63 Inclusionary Housing: Chapter 25.63 of the Municipal Code,
adopted by the City Council in 2003, currently provides for density bonuses and affordable
housing units. The provisions in the existing chapter were developed to comply with earlier
versions of the State Density Bonus Law, and to respond to community objectives to provide
affordable units in new developments.
The proposed Density Bonus Ordinance is intended to fully replace the existing Chapter 25.63
Inclusionary Housing chapter. The proposed ordinance combines most of the elements of the
existing Chapter 25.63 Inclusionary Housing together with the most recent requirements of the
State Density Bonus Law. The most significant modifications to the existing Inclusionary Housing
provisions as set forth in Chapter 25.63 would be:
• Affordable units would no longer be a requirement of projects; the inclusion of affordable
units would be at the discretion of the applicant, in an agreement with the City for the
concessions and incentives offered in the Density Bonus Ordinance.
• Units affordable to Moderate Income households would be required to remain restricted
and affordable for a minimum period of 30 years, rather than the current 10 years.
• The list of incentives currently provided in 26.63.030(b) would be expanded to provide
additional options.
• Applicants would be able to apply for a waiver or modification of development standards
that would have the effect of physically precluding the construction of a development at
the densities or with the concessions or incentives permitted by the Density Bonus
Ordinance.
5
Introduction - Density Bonus Ordinance November 17, 2014
Application of Density Bonuses: Density bonuses would be applicable to the maximum
residential density of the respective General Plan, Zoning, or Specific Plan designation for a given
property. Most residential areas within Burlingame have either a designated range of residential
densities and/or a maximum residential density.
The exception is the High Density Land Use/R-4 Zoning District, which is designated on the
General Plan Land Use map as "51 plus dwelling units per acre." Developments in the R-4 district
would not need to request a density bonus since there is no upper density limit, but would be
eligible to request concession(s) or incentive(s) provided in the Density Bonus Ordinance in
exchange for building affordable units. The incentive to allow additional building height without a
Conditional Use Permit currently provided in 26.63.030(b) was originally intended to provide
additional floor area that would be the approximate equivalent to a unit density bonus. The height
incentive is proposed to remain in the new ordinance both to provide a mechanism for a bonus in
the R-4 district, as well as to provide an incentive for providing affordable units in any residential
district.
Incentives: Because affordable units would be an option rather than a requirement, it is
important that the incentives offered be sufficient to offset the cost of providing the affordable
units, and provide sufficient encouragement for developers to participate in the program.
Exhibit 1 (attached) lists the multifamily residential developments approved since Chapter 25.63
was adopted in 2003, including the incentives each development utilized. Of the eight
developments, five utilized increased building height and five utilized the provision of compact
parking spaces (some projects utilized two incentives). No developments requested the reduction
of rear yard common open space.
In meeting with prospective housing development applicants, staff has found the most commonly
requested incentives to be increased building height, reduced parking stall dimensions, and
reduced parking ratios. The developments approved since Chapter 25.63 went into effect (as
shown in Exhibit 1) would appear to support this observation. There has also been interest from
some prospective developers to incorporate a uniform reduced parking stall dimension rather
than a mix of standard and compact stalls. Currently an 81/2' x 18' "unistall" option is available in
the EI Camino Real North (ECN) and Trousdale West (TW) zoning districts; the Density Bonus
Ordinance proposes to allow the unistall option for developments with affordable units in all
multifamily districts.
Reduction in parking standards for developments with affordable units is mandated by State
Density Bonus law and does not count as an incentive or concession. As shown in Table 2, the
maximum parking standards outlined in the state law are slightly lower than the City's base
multifamily parking standards, and are relatively comparable to those in the City's Downtown
Specific Plan area.
While the State Density Bonus law also allows a developer to apply for a waiver or modification of
development standards that it deems to preclude the construction of a development at the
densities provided in the ordinance, there are benefits to both the community and developers to
0
Introduction - Density Bonus Ordinance November 17, 2014
having a defined "menu' of choices as currently provided in Chapter 25.63 and proposed to be
further expanded in the new ordinance. A menu of options offers predictability for both the
community and applicants, and allows options to be vetted in advance. In reviewing the draft
ordinance, the Council, community members, and prospective developers of affordable housing
may want to suggest additional incentives in addition to or in place of those outlined in the draft
ordinance.
In -lieu Fees, Impact Fees and Alternate Density Bonus Approaches: Burlingame has joined
with other San Mateo County jurisdictions in a nexus and financial feasibility study to consider
Housing Impact Fees to assess new market rate development for the increased demand that it
creates for affordable housing. The nexus study is required to determine and implement impact
and in -lieu fees. The study will include a range of recommendations for fees that take a variety of
considerations into account, including construction costs and project feasibility. It may also
provide data to assist in developing alternative options for density bonuses such as formulas
based on floor area. While all San Mateo County jurisdictions are participating in the study, the
fee options will be specific to each jurisdiction, and each jurisdiction will make its own
determination as to the types and amounts of fees it may adopt. The study is expected to be
completed at the end of this year, and further legislative action may be taken at that time.
However the City is required to enact a density bonus ordinance in the meantime.
Planning Commission Review and Recommendation: The Planning Commission reviewed the
Density Bonus Ordinance in its September 22nd and October 14`h meetings (October 14th meeting
minutes attached). With the objective of encouraging affordable units through incentives,
commissioners were asked to consider additional incentives in addition to or in place of those
outlined in 25.62.040 (c) of the draft ordinance. Potential additional incentives evaluated by the
Planning Commission included:
• Relief to upper -floor step -back requirements;
• Less costly interior finishes on affordable units;
• Further reduction in parking for projects near transit;
• Further reduction in parking for projects that have car sharing available.
Some commissioners also expressed interest in requiring that the units be affordable for longer
than thirty years, establishing a maximum density for the R-4 District, and eliminating the
increased building height incentive.
Of the potential additional incentives evaluated, the Planning Commission recommended adding
the incentive further reduction in parking for projects near transit to those outlined in 25.62.040 (c)
of the draft ordinance. There was not a consensus to add any of the other suggested additional
incentives that had been evaluated. For the purposes of identifying areas that are convenient to
transit, the staff report suggested referencing the 'Priority Development Area" (PDA) that
approximately corresponds to one-quarter mile from a major rail station (Downtown Burlingame
and Millbrae Intermodal) or major transit corridor (EI Camino Real with 15 -minute headway
7
Introduction - Density Bonus Ordinance
November 17, 2014
express bus service), and proposing the existing Downtown Specific Plan parking regulations as
a reference for reduced parking ratios.
FISCAL IMPACT
None.
Exhibits:
Density Bonus Ordinance
Exhibit 1: Burlingame Multifamily Project References
Exhibit 2: Multifamily Residential Projects with Planning Approvals since adoption of Code
Chapter 25.63
Burlingame Priority Development Area (PDA) map
EXHIBIT 1:
BURLINGAME MULTIFAMILY PROJECT REFERENCES
1512-1516 Floribunda Avenue
1838 Ogden Drive
c
_
pleted
2008
Units
9
Units
T
1
per Acre
28.6
ing Height
53'-1"
tives
Completed
50% Compact Parking
2012
Total Units
45
BMR Units
5
Units per Acre
49.5
Building Height
46'-0"
Incentives
Completed
Total Units
Height, 50% Compact Parking
2010
1226 El Camino Real
l� 1
1111
_
1321 El Camino Real
goCompleted
9
1
BMR Units
Units per Acre
30.5
Building Height
Incentives
45'-5"
Height, 50% Compact Parking
2014 (estimated)
Total Units
5
BMR Units
1
Units per Acre
29.9
Building Height
42'-4"
Incentives
Height
.0, Bayswater Avenue
J6
i
�kIMM
Completed
2014 (estimated)
Total Units
6
BMR Units
1
Units per Acre
26.1
Building Height
26'-1"
:11 Trousdale
-
.rte r
'-
-
Floribunda1225 Avenue
T62
�, fill
�ai4.bru.ee '
1433 Floribunda
a
��
Incentives
Completed
50% Compact Parking
under construction -approved 2013
Total Units
25
BMR Units
3
Units per Acre
50
Building Height
60'-4"
Incentives
Completed
50% Compact Parking
under construction - approved 2013
Total Units
6
BMR Units
1
Units per Acre
31.7
Building Height
43'-07/8"
Incentives
Completed
Height
approved 2014
Total Units
10
BMR Units
1
Units per Acre
45.9
Building Height
46'-0"
Incentives
Height
EXHIBIT 2:
CITY OF BURLINGAME
MULTI -FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS WITH PLANNING APPROVALS
SINCE ADOPTION OF MUNCIPAL CODE CHAPTER 25.63
1512-1516 Floribunda Ave 1
Lot Area
(sq ft)
13,709
Acres
0.32
Units
9
BIVIR
Units
11
Units/
Acre
28.6
Type
Condo
PC
Approval
10/11/OS
Completed/
Finaled
4/17/08
508 Peninsula Ave.
5,021
0.12
3
0
26.1
Condo
7/26/04
5/6/09
1840 Ogden Drive
38,905
0.91
45
5
49.5
Condo
7/24J06
3/1/12
1459 Oak Grove Ave
5,790
0.13
3
0
22.6
Condo
6/23/08
4/3/14
1226 El Camino Real
12,874
0.30
9
1
30.5
Condo
SJ27/08
6/14/10
1321 El Camino Real
7,311
0.17
5
1
29.9
Apt
1/10/11
under constr
904 Bayswater Ave
10,000
0.23
6
1
26.1Cando
7/23/12
underconstr
1800 Trousdale Drive
21,741
0.50
25
3
50.0
Condo
3/11/13
under constr
3.225 Floribunda Ave
8,223
0.19
6
1
31.7
Condo
9/9/13
under constr
1433 Floribunda Ave
9,515
0.22
10
1
45.78
Condo
2/24/14
.6.x__1_,.•
no
J. PUBLIC HEARING
a. INTRODUCTION OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CHAPTER 25.63 OF THE
BURLINGAME MUNICIPAL CODE TO COMPLY WITH STATE LAW REQUIRING
INCENTIVES OR CONCESSIONS FOR QUALIFYING DEVELOPMENTS (DENSITY
Planning Manager Kevin Gardiner reviewed the staff report and gave a presentation on the State Density
Bonus Law that requires local governments to provide density bonuses and other incentives to developers of
affordable housing who commit to providing a certain percentage of dwelling units to persons whose income
does not exceed specific thresholds. Mr. Gardiner advised that the state law also requires cities to provide
bonuses to certain developers of senior housing developments, and to certain donations of land and the
inclusion of child care centers in some developments.
Council questions and comments followed and Council expressed concern over sufficient parking for any
new housing units that might be built. Council also discussed in lieu fees, incentive programs for existing
buildings and not just focusing on new construction.
Mayor Brownrigg requested CC Kearney read the title of the proposed Ordinance to amend Chapter 25.63 of
the Burlingame Municipal Code to comply with State law requiring incentives or concessions for qualifying
developments. Councilmember Ortiz made a motion to waive further reading and introduce the Ordinance;
seconded by Vice Mayor Nagel_ The motion was approved unanimously by voice vote, 5-0.
Mayor Brownrigg directed the City Clerk to publish a summary of the proposed Ordinance within five days
of the public hearing_
Mayor Brownrigg opened the public hearing and Burlingame residents Cynthia Cornell, Cynthia Wukotich,
and Melinda spoke. There were no further comments from the floor, and the hearing was closed.
Council requested that this item be agendized again for the January 5, 2015 meeting with more practical
suggestions for Burlingame. Council asked staff to provide additional analysis on case studies, explore
conversion to affordable housing of some existing units, and consult with some non-profit housing
organizations for their input. CA Kane commented that this was our first pass on this matter, so it can
always come back with adjustments.
• 1 11 1A 11101 FARIA U ralk,
__ 1- _ _ -1. ! 6 1 _ �_ • � �. _ _ � .1. � � • � ill ill __ �� _
Burlingame City Council November 17, 2014
Approved Minutes
DENSITY BONUS
PROTOTYPICAL DEVELOPMENT SCENARIOS
The Prototypical Development Scenarios illustrates a variety of potential applications of the
proposed Density Bonus Ordinance on a prototypical 20,000 square foot (0.46 acre) infill site.
The proposed ordinance offers a range of options and incentives, and applicants may choose
different solutions depending on the development program, type of construction,
neighborhood context, and their own priorities for project feasibility. The prototypes are meant
to illustrate a range of potential scenarios.
4`
��
f I
op
Base Scenario
The Base Scenario illustrates a multifamily residential infill project with the following
assumptions:
Site Area
20,000 square feet (0.46 acre)
Density
40 units/acre maximum
Building Height
35 feet maximum
Lot Coverage
50% maximum
Parking
1 Bedroom = 1.5 spaces/unit
2 Bedroom = 2 spaces/unit
(City of Burlingame standards for multifamily residential, except in Downtown
Specific Plan area)
At 40 units per acre the site could accommodate up to 18 units. The number of parking spaces
would depend on the unit mix. Two scenarios are shown:
1 Bedroom Units
6
9
2 Bedroom Units
12
9
Total Parking Required
33
32
The diagram illustrates a three-story building situated over a partially -underground parking
garage, with a 35 -foot height and 50% lot coverage.
Moderate Income Category Density Bonus
The minimum threshold to qualify for a density bonus would be 10% Moderate Income units.
This would provide a density bonus of 5% over the base standard. On the prototypical 20,000
square foot development site, two units would need to be affordable to Moderate Income
households (10% of the total), and the project would be eligible for one additional unit (5%
bonus):
Base Density
40 units/acre maximum
Units @ Base Density
18 units
Affordable Units
2 units affordable to Moderate Income households
Percent Bonus
5%
Bonus Units
1 unit
Total Units
19 units
The project would be eligible for the reduced parking specified in the State legislation:
Once again, the number of parking spaces would depend on the unit mix. Two scenarios are
shown:
1 Bedroom Units
City of Burlingame
Multifamily Residential Standard
(except for Downtown Specific Plan)
Density Bonus Standards
Studio
1.5 spaces/unit
1 space/unit
1 Bedroom
1.5 spaces/unit
1 space/unit
2 Bedroom
2 spaces/unit
2 spaces/unit
3 Bedroom
2.5 spaces/unit
2 spaces/unit
Guest Parking
Apartments: None required
None required
Condominiums:
3 spaces for 15 or more units
Once again, the number of parking spaces would depend on the unit mix. Two scenarios are
shown:
1 Bedroom Units
6
9
2 Bedroom Units
13
10
Total Parking Required
32
29
Low Income Category Density Bonus
If 10% of the units were affordable to Low Income households, the density bonus would
increase to 20% over the base standard. On the prototypical 20,000 square foot development
site, two units would need to be affordable to Low Income households (10% of the total), and
the project would be eligible for four additional unit (20% bonus):
Base Density
40 units/acre maximum
Units @ Base Density
18 units
Affordable Units
2 units affordable to Low Income households
Percent Bonus
20%
Bonus Units
4 unit
Total Units
22 units
Again, the number of parking spaces would depend on the unit mix. Two scenarios are shown:
1 Bedroom Units 8 10
2 Bedroom Units 28 24
Total Parking Required 36 34
0
Concept #1: 50% Compact Parking Spaces
Since Burlingame's Inclusionary Housing Ordinance was adopted in 2003, two-thirds of the
multifamily residential projects have utilized the incentive to provide 50% compact parking
spaces. Given the high costs of constructing structured parking, reducing the overall size of the
garage can result in significant savings. On constrained sites, compact spaces may be the most
feasible method for accommodating the required number of parking spaces.
The diagram shown below illustrates a project with 19 units (1 more than the base scenario)
but no change to the building envelope. As shown, an additional 1 -bedroom unit is
accommodated, and one of the 2 -bedroom units is switched to a 1 -bedroom unit.
Parking would depend on the unit mix:
Base Scenario:
18 Units
Density Bonus Scenario:
19 Units
1 Bedroom Units 6 9
6 9
2 Bedroom Units 12 9
13 10
Total Parking Required 33 32
32 29
The diagram illustrates a three-story building situated over a partially -underground parking
garage, with a 35 -foot height and 50% lot coverage.
Concept #2: Increased Building Height for Architectural Variation
The proposed Density Bonus Ordinance would retain the current incentive for a 46 -foot
building height or less without a conditional use permit. The additional height could
accommodate an additional story, varied architectural forms, or a combination of both.
In this concept, pitched roof forms are added to the 35 -foot building module, to bring the
building height to approximately 45 to 46 -feet. Depending on the roof form, additional loft
spaces could be provided for the upper -floor units.
Concept #3: Increased Building Height for Neighborhood Context
In this concept, an additional floor is added to one side of the building, while the height is
reduced on the other side. This approach could be desirable where the site borders a sensitive
use such as lower -density residential. As shown, units on the lower side of the building would
have a townhome configuration, which would provide additional variety to the unit mix.
9 a1URLINGAME STAFF REPORT AGENDA NO: 10b
MEETING DATE: January5, 2015
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
Date: January 5, 2015
From: William Meeker, Community Development Director — (650) 558-7255
Subject: Adoption of a Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a
Professional Services Agreement with MIG for Preparation of an Update of
the City's General Plan and Zoning Ordinance with Accompanying
Environmental Impact Report (Project Name: "Burlingame 2040")
RECOMMENDATION
The City Council is asked to adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute a
Professional Services Agreement with MIG in an amount not to exceed $1,320,281 for
preparation of an update of the City's General Plan and Zoning Ordinance, and to prepare an
environmental impact report for the project pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA).
BACKGROUND
California State Law requires each city and county to adopt a General Plan that provides for the
physical development of lands within its jurisdictional boundaries or sphere of influence. The
General Plan serves much like a constitution that embodies a community's development goals
and public policy relative to the distribution of public and private land uses. The policies of the
General Plan are intended to inform and provide support for all land use decisions made in the
community. Preparation of a General Plan is predicated upon having an open public process that
considers the vision and desires of the community at the time the plan is prepared, and projects
this vision of the community into the future.
The typical shelf -life of a general plan is 10 to 20 years; however, the last comprehensive update
of the City of Burlingame's General Plan was in 1969. The 1969 Plan was completed in advance
of adoption of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); therefore, the current Plan does
not benefit from a detailed environmental analysis that ensures the soundness of the policy
direction contained therein. Since 1969, the City has adopted a rather piecemeal approach to
comprehensive planning by adopting specific plans for three primary non-residential areas in the
City. Additionally, the Housing Element of the Plan has been updated periodically, as required by
State law.
On February 18, 2014, the City Council authorized the Community Development Department to
apply for grant funds from the State of California's Strategic Growth Council through its
Sustainable Communities and Incentive Program to update the City's General Plan. The grant
1
MIG Professional Services Agreement- General Plan Update January 5, 2015
program is meant to foster the development of sustainable communities throughout California,
with objectives to promote equity, strengthen the economy, protect the environment, and promote
healthy, safe communities. These objectives are consistent with the City's most recently adopted
specific plans, and the expectation is that they will be furthered through the General Plan Update.
On February 28, 2014, the Community Development Department submitted the application to the
Strategic Growth Council. On June 3, 2014, the Strategic Growth Council awarded a grant of
$491,770 to the City of Burlingame for the preparation of the update of the General Plan and the
Zoning Ordinance. The City Council previously allocated $500,000.00 from FY 13-14 and
$500,000.00 from FY 14-15 from the General Fund, for a total budget of $1,491,770.
DISCUSSION
The Community Development Department sought proposals from qualified consulting firms to
assist with the update of the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance and to prepare a
comprehensive environmental impact report (EIR) to support the efficacy of the policy document
and implementing regulations. Proposals were received from Dyett & Bhatia, Metropolitan
Planning Group, MIG, and Placeworks. Estimated costs for the update from each of the firms
were fairly comparable, all between $1.3 and $1.4 million (not including contingencies). The
update of the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance is expected to take approximately 30 months
to complete.
All four firms were interviewed by a panel consisting of the Community Development Director,
Planning Manager, Senior Planners and Economic Development Specialist. At the conclusion of
the interviews and after reviewing references, the panel felt that MIG would be best qualified to
prepare the updates of the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance based upon: 1) the firm's
involvement in numerous General Plan updates in comparable jurisdictions in the Bay Area; 2) its
experience with and approach to the Zoning Ordinance Update, including a consultant on the
team who specializes in zoning and development regulations; 3) recognized leadership in
community engagement, with the proposal including a comprehensive community participation
and outreach plan; and 4) the overall expertise of the team assembled for the project.
Attached is a draft Agreement for Professional Services with MIG to perform the services required
for the update of the General Plan and the Zoning Ordinance. The MIG budget is an amount not
to exceed $1,320,281 (Agreement, Exhibit 2). As the total budget allocated for the General Plan
and Zoning Ordinance Update is $1,491,770, a balance of $171,489 will be remaining. Any
unused budget would be returned to the General Fund at the completion of the project and/or be
available for follow-up implementation activities. Because the cost of the agreement exceeds
$100,000, Council approval is required. The Work Program for services to be provided by MIG,
including the project budget, is attached to this report as Exhibit 3.
FISCAL IMPACT
The General Plan update is being funded through a $491,770 Strategic Growth Council
Sustainable Communities Grant approved on June 3, 2014, and through two $500,000 General
Fund allocations authorized by the City Council in FY 13-14 and FY 14-15.
2
MIG Professional Services Agreement- General Plan Update January 5, 2015
Exhibits:
• Proposed Resolution
• Draft Agreement for Professional Services with MIG
• City of Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Update Work Program
—- 3
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME AUTHORIZING
THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH
MIG PREPARE THE UPDATE OF THE CITY'S GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING ORDINANCE
WHEREAS, the City of Burlingame has embarked on an update to the City's General
Plan and zoning ordinance to provide a comprehensive plan for the community; and
WHEREAS, the Community Development Department sought proposals from qualified
consulting firms to prepare the update of the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance; and
WHEREAS, the City has selected MIG to prepare the update of the General Plan update
based on its experience preparing similar documents in the Bay Area region, its experience with
zoning ordinance updates, its comprehensive community participation and outreach plan, and
the expertise of the team assembled for preparation of the update; and
WHEREAS, an agreement has been prepared incorporating the Work Program, Cost
Estimate and Project Schedule prepared by MIG in the amount of $1,320,281.00, which was
found to be adequate to complete the update of the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance; and
WHEREAS, because the agreement will authorize work in excess of $100,000, City
Council approval is required.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AND ORDERED:
The City Manager is authorized and directed to enter into a Professional Services
Agreement with MIG for the update of the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance,
consistent with the Work Program attached to this resolution, for a maximum cost of
$1,320,281.00, as stated in the Work Program.
The City Clerk is directed to attest to the signature of the City Manager upon execution of
the Professional Services Agreement.
Mayor
Resolution No.
I, Mary Ellen Kearney, 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 5th day
of January, 2015, and as adopted thereafter by the following vote:
AYES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
NAYES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
City Clerk
AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
BETWEEN THE CITY OF BURLINGAME AND MIG
TO PREPARE THE UPDATE OF THE CITY'S GENERAL PLAN
AND ZONING ORDINANCE
THIS AGREEMENT is by and between MIG ("Consultant") and the City of
Burlingame, a public body of the State of California ("City"). Consultant and City agree:
1. Services. Consultant shall provide the Services set forth in Exhibit A, attached
hereto and incorporated herein.
2. Compensation. Notwithstanding the expenditure by Consultant of time and
materials in excess of said Maximum compensation amount, Consultant agrees to perform all of
the Scope of Services herein required of Consultant for $1,320,281, including all materials and
other reimbursable amounts ("Maximum Compensation"). Consultant shall submit invoices on a
monthly basis. All bills submitted by Consultant shall contain sufficient information to
determine whether the amount deemed due and payable is accurate. Bills shall include a brief
description of services performed, the date services were performed, the number of hours spent
and by whom, a brief description of any costs incurred and the Consultant's signature.
3. Term. This Agreement commences on full execution hereof and terminates on
June 30, 2016 unless otherwise extended or terminated pursuant to the provisions hereof.
Consultant agrees to diligently prosecute the services to be provided under this Agreement to
completion and in accordance with any schedules specified herein. In the performance of this
Agreement, time is of the essence. Time extensions for delays beyond the Consultant's control,
other than delays caused by the City, shall be requested in writing to the City's Contract
Administrator prior to the expiration of the specified completion date.
4. Assignment and Subcontracting. A substantial inducement to City for entering
into this Agreement is the professional reputation and competence of Consultant. Neither this
Agreement nor any interest herein may be assigned or subcontracted by Consultant without the
prior written approval of City. It is expressly understood and agreed by both parties that
Consultant is an independent contractor and not an employee of the City.
5. Insurance. Consultant, at its own cost and expense, shall carry, maintain for the
duration of the Agreement, and provide proof thereof, acceptable to the City, the insurance
coverages specified in Exhibit B, "City Insurance Requirements," attached hereto and
incorporated herein by reference. Consultant shall demonstrate proof of required insurance
coverage prior to the commencement of services required under this Agreement, by delivery of
endorsements and certificates of insurance to City.
6. Indemnification. Consultant shall indemnify, defend, and hold City, its directors,
officers, employees, agents, and volunteers harmless from and against any and all liability,
claims, suits, actions, damages, and causes of action arising out of, pertaining or relating to the
negligence, recklessness or willful misconduct of Consultant, its employees, subcontractors, or
agents, or on account of the performance or character of the Services, except for any such claim
arising out of the sole negligence or willful misconduct of the City, its officers, employees,
agents, or volunteers. It is understood that the duty of Consultant to indemnify and hold
harmless includes the duty to defend as set forth in section 2778 of the California Civil Code.
Agreement for Professional Services Between the City of Burlingame and MIG
for preparation of an Update to the General Plan and Zoning Code Update
Notwithstanding the foregoing, for any design professional services, the duty to defend and
indemnify City shall be limited to that allowed pursuant to California Civil Code section 2782.8.
Acceptance of insurance certificates and endorsements required under this Agreement does not
relieve Consultant from liability under this indemnification and hold harmless clause. This
indemnification and hold harmless clause shall apply whether or not such insurance policies shall
have been determined to be applicable to any of such damages or claims for damages.
7. Termination and Abandonment. This Agreement may be cancelled at any time
by City for its convenience upon written notice to Consultant. In the event of such termination,
Consultant shall be entitled to pro -rated compensation for authorized Services performed prior to
the effective date of termination provided however that City may condition payment of such
compensation upon Consultant's delivery to City of any or all materials described herein. In the
event the Consultant ceases performing services under this Agreement or otherwise abandons the
project prior to completing all of the Services described in this Agreement, Consultant shall,
without delay, deliver to City all materials and records prepared or obtained in the performance
of this Agreement. Consultant shall be paid for the reasonable value of the authorized Services
performed up to the time of Consultant's cessation or abandonment, less a deduction for any
damages or additional expenses which City incurs as a result of such cessation or abandonment.
8. Ownership of Materials. All documents, materials, and records of a finished
nature, including but not limited to final plans, specifications, video or audio tapes, photographs,
computer data, software, reports, maps, electronic files and films, and any final revisions,
prepared or obtained in the performance of this Agreement, shall be delivered to and become the
property of City. All documents and materials of a preliminary nature, including but not limited
to notes, sketches, preliminary plans, computations and other data, and any other material
referenced in this Section, prepared or obtained in the performance of this Agreement, shall be
made available, upon request, to City at no additional charge and without restriction or limitation
on their use. Upon City's request, Consultant shall execute appropriate documents to assign to
the City the copyright or trademark to work created pursuant to this Agreement. Consultant shall
return all City property in Consultant's control or possession immediately upon termination.
9. Compliance with Laws. In the performance of this Agreement, Consultant shall
abide by and conform to any and all applicable laws of the United States and the State of
California, and all ordinances, regulations, and policies of the City. Consultant warrants that all
work done under this Agreement will be in compliance with all applicable safety rules, laws,
statutes, and practices, including but not limited to Cal/OSHA regulations. If a license or
registration of any kind is required of Consultant, its employees, agents, or subcontractors by
law, Consultant warrants that such license has been obtained, is valid and in good standing, and
Consultant shall keep it in effect at all times during the term of this Agreement, and that any
applicable bond shall be posted in accordance with all applicable laws and regulations.
10. Conflict of Interest. Consultant warrants and covenants that Consultant presently
has no interest in, nor shall any interest be hereinafter acquired in, any matter which will render
the services required under the provisions of this Agreement a violation of any applicable state,
local, or federal law. In the event that any conflict of interest should nevertheless hereinafter
Agreement for Professional services Between the City of Burlingame and MIG
for preparation of an Update to the General Plan and Zoning Code Update
arise, Consultant shall promptly notify City of the existence of such conflict of interest so that
the City may determine whether to terminate this Agreement. Consultant further warrants its
compliance with the Political Reform Act (Government Code § 81000 et seq.) respecting this
Agreement.
11. Whole Agreement and Amendments. This Agreement constitutes the entire
understanding and Agreement of the parties and integrates all of the terms and conditions
mentioned herein or incidental hereto and supersedes all negotiations or any previous written or
oral Agreements between the parties with respect to all or any part of the subject matter hereof.
The parties intend not to create rights in, or to grant remedies to, any third parry as a beneficiary
of this Agreement or of any duty, covenant, obligation, or undertaking established herein. This
Agreement may be amended only by a written document, executed by both Consultant and the
City Manager, and approved as to form by the City Attorney. Such document shall expressly
state that it is intended by the parties to amend certain terms and conditions of this Agreement.
The waiver by either parry of a breach by the other of any provision of this Agreement shall not
constitute a continuing waiver or a waiver of any subsequent breach of either the same or a
different provision of this Agreement. Multiple copies of this Agreement may be executed but
the parties agree that the Agreement on file in the office of the City Clerk is the version of the
Agreement that shall take precedence should any differences exist among counterparts of the
document. This Agreement and all matters relating to it shall be governed by the laws of the
State of California.
12. Capacity of Parties. Each signatory and party hereto warrants and represents to
the other party that it has all legal authority and capacity and direction from its principal to enter
into this Agreement and that all necessary actions have been taken so as to enable it to enter into
this Agreement.
13. Severability. Should any part of this Agreement be declared by a final decision
by a court or tribunal of competent jurisdiction to be unconstitutional, invalid, or beyond the
authority of either party to enter into or carry out, such decision shall not affect the validity of the
remainder of this Agreement, which shall continue in full force and effect, provided that the
remainder of this Agreement, absent the unexcised portion, can be reasonably interpreted to give
effect to the intentions of the parties.
14. Notice. Any notice required or desired to be given under this Agreement shall be
in writing and shall be personally served or, in lieu of personal service, may be given by (i)
depositing such notice in the United States mail, registered or certified, return receipt requested,
postage prepaid, addressed to a parry at its address set forth in Exhibit A; (ii) transmitting such
notice by means of Federal Express or similar overnight commercial courier ("Courier"), postage
paid and addressed to the other at its street address set forth below; (iii) transmitting the same by
facsimile, in which case notice shall be deemed delivered upon confirmation of receipt by the
sending facsimile machine's acknowledgment of such with date and time printout; or (iv) by
personal delivery. Any notice given by Courier shall be deemed given on the date shown on the
receipt for acceptance or rejection of the notice. Either party may, by written notice, change the
address to which notices addressed to it shall thereafter be sent.
3
Agreement for Professional Services Between the City of Burlingame and MIG
for preparation of an Update to the General Plan and Zoning Code Update
15. Miscellaneous. Except to the extent that it provides a part of the definition of the
term used herein, the captions used in this Agreement are for convenience only and shall not be
considered in the construction of interpretation of any provision hereof, nor taken as a correct or
complete segregation of the several units of materials and labor.
Capitalized terms refer to the definition provide with its first usage in the Agreement.
When the context of this Agreement requires, the neuter gender includes the masculine,
the feminine, a partnership or corporation, trust or joint venture, and the singular includes the
plural.
The terms "shall', "will", "must' and "agree" are mandatory. The term "may" is
permissive.
The waiver by either parry of a breach by the other of any provision of this Agreement
shall not constitute a continuing waiver or a waiver of any subsequent breach of either the same
or a different provision of this Agreement.
When a party is required to do something by this Agreement, it shall do so at its sole cost
and expense without right to reimbursement from the other party unless specific provision is
made otherwise.
Where any party is obligated not to perform any act, such party is also obligated to
restrain any others within its control from performing such act, including its agents, invitees,
contractors, subcontractors and employees.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Consultant and City execute this Agreement.
CITY OF BURLINGAME
501 Primrose Road
Burlingame, CA 94010
Lisa Goldman
City Manager
CONSULTANT
MIG
800 Hearst Avenue
Berkeley, CA 94710
By:_
Name
Title
Federal Employer ID Number:
Mary Ellen Kearney
City Clerk
Agreement for Professional Services Between the City of Burlingame and MIG
for preparation of an Update to the General Plan and Zoning Code Update
Approved as to form:
Kathleen Kane
City Attorney
Attachments:
Exhibit A Scope of Services
Exhibit B City Insurance Provisions
City of Burlingame
General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Update
Work Program
Updated December 18, 2014
Introduction
The MIG Team's proposed work program presents a detailed, logical series of
phases and tasks, with information from each step creating the foundation for
the next. Our approach uses resources efficiently while allowing City staff, the
Planning Commission, City Council, Community Advisory Committee, property
and business owners as well as residents ample opportunity to review and
comment on the information compiled during each major task.
We have included an extensive, inclusive public outreach and engagement
program with innovative and proven high-tech and high -touch tools that will
result in genuine community participation throughout the project. This approach
ensures that the community will be kept well informed and actively engaged in
the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance update processes. This engagement
which will result in new planning and regulatory documents that have a higher
level of community acceptance, user-f(endliness and legal compliance.
We also intend to utilize the planned Technical Advisory Committee, Community
Advisory Committee and Planning Commission Sub -committee throughout the
project in a genuine, focused and well -organized process; these meetings are all
described under Phase 9. The MIG Team will meet with these committees on a
regular basis to: 1) present draft ideas and work products, 2) discuss emerging
concepts and strategies, and 3) confirm and expand upon community input.
Our approach will ensure that the City has a complete, internally consistent and
legally defensible General Plan that reflects the community's vision for
Burlingame. Also, the updated Zoning Ordinance and amended specific plans
will fully reflect and implement the General Plan. For this project to be a success,
City staff must be a key partner throughout the entire process. To show how we
proposed to integrate City staff, we have included specific assignments for City
staff in blue/italicized text at the end of each task.
City of Burlingame Updated December 18, 2014
General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Update Work Program
Phase 1: Project Start -Up and Background Materials
Task 1.1: Kick-off Meeting and City Tour
E
At the beginning of the project, the MIG Team will visit Burlingame for an all day
kick-off meeting and City tour to formally launch the project. This event will have
four primary components:
Meeting with City Project Manager. The MIG Team and the City's Project
Manager will meet to discuss the overall project and develop project
management, communication, invoicing and billing protocols. The kick-
off meeting will provide an opportunity for the MIG Team to collaborate
with the City to finalize the project framework and refine the customized
outreach strategy.
2. Meetings with Individual Departments. Key members of the MIG Team will
meet individually with City department heads for their respective topic
areas. During these meetings, the MIG Team will discuss major project
goals and will collect hard copy or digital files of existing data, reports and
plans from City staff.
3. Identification of Key Issues and Opportunities. The MIG Team, working with
City staff, will develop a preliminary list of issues and opportunities to be
addressed.
4. City Tour. City staff will lead the MIG Team on a tour of Burlingame to
highlight individual neighborhoods and community areas, the overall
geography of the City, key issue and opportunity sites, economic
development areas, areas where land use change may be desired and
other factors. The focus of the tour will be to view and understand the
neighborhoods, districts and opportunity areas. MIG will photo -document
the tour for use in subsequent presentations and work products.
City staff will be responsible for meeting and tour logistics (e.g., scheduling
meetings, securing meeting rooms and van for City tour, etc.), and for attending
the meeting and tour.
Task 1.2: City Council Retreat and Refined Work Program
At the onset of the project, MIG will meet with the City Council during a Study
Session (just prior to a regular Council meeting) to discuss the community
engagement process for the General Plan Update. MIG will then meet with the
City Council, Planning Commission, and senior staff during their annual meeting
City of Burlingame Updated December 18, 2014
General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Update Work Program
(March 7, 2014) to discuss the General Plan Update purpose, process and work
plan. This will include a discussion on the historical, legal and regulatory role of a
general plan, and how the comprehensive update process will benefit the City
and community. The annual meeting will be an opportunity for the City Council
and Planning Commission to ask questions about the process, and for City staff
and the consultants to get a better understanding of what the key objectives
are for the update. Based on the outcome of the discussion, MIG will prepare a
refined scope of work and detailed project schedule that will be critical
components to ensure deadlines are met and the project is completed on time
and on budget.
City staff will be responsible for scheduling the study session, the logistics for the
annual meeting, inviting Council and Commission members and staff and
providing input and feedback necessary to refine the overall Work Program.
Task 1.3: Community Participation and Outreach Plan
MIG will develop a comprehensive Community Participation and Outreach Plan
in coordination with City staff. This plan will include outreach strategies, tools and
tactics, and will guide the work of City staff and consultants to effectively
engage community members throughout the program. The initial plan will
include a schedule, target audiences, priorities, public involvement activities,
communication tools and key community relationships. It will also include a
detailed process diagram to illustrate the sequence and timing of project
activities in a succinct format easily understood by a public audience. It is likely
that the plan will be updated or revised throughout the course of the project as
issues and policies unfold.
MIG will also develop a project logo, look and feel (color palette and brief style
guide) and templated materials (e.g., flyer, postcard) to brand the program and
ensure outreach materials are consistent and easily identifiable by the
community.
A Community Advisory Committee will also be convened to advise the project
team and help the City promote participation in the General Plan Update
process. The specific task for committee meetings and involvement is described
under Phase 9 below.
The following are major components and products of the Outreach Plan that will
be developed under this task:
• Speakers Series. During the first two Phases of the project, MIG will
manage a Speaker Series that will be open to the public and include
City of Burlingame Updated December 18, 2014
General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Update Work Program 3
keynote presentations from leaders in areas including community
involvement, downtown planning and sustainability. These sessions will be
intended to share best practices relevant to Burlingame and the General
Plan/Zoning Ordinance Update as well as to inspire and encourage
community members to be active participants in the plan development.
We will work with City staff to develop the final list of keynote speakers.
MIG will be responsible for scheduling the speakers and arraigning all
logistics (flights, hotels, etc.).
• Community Surveys. MIG will develop a survey to gather input on
community opinions and ideas for the General Plan update. The survey
will be designed in a format that collects the richest and most informative
data while enabling efficient data collection and tabulation methods.
The survey will be available electronically, and paper versions of the
survey will be distributed at community events and visioning workshops.
Using Metroquest—an eye-catching, user-friendly survey interface—MIG
will conduct a web -based survey designed to collect input on goals,
priorities and trade-offs. Metroquest is an easy to use and visually
appealing interface that helps simplify complex policy and planning
questions into more accessible question formats. Participants can take the
survey using the web, smart phones, tablets or desktop computers. MIG
will also rent attractive touch screen kiosks (3-4 total) that are located in
high -traffic areas (e.g., shopping and recreational centers) in the City to
allow people to participate where they are. The kiosks can be very
effective in reaching participants that might not normally get involved,
and in the right location, kiosks can attract 100 to 300 participants daily.
Additionally, Metroquest can be translated into multiple languages. The
results of the survey will be collected and analyzed by MIG and will assist
in the development of the Vision and Transformative Strategies.
City staff will review two drafts of the survey instrument and will provide
MIG with two consolidated sets of revisions. City staff will also assist with
dissemination of the electronic and paper versions of the questionnaire.
• Email Updates. MIG will work with City staff to develop a comprehensive
list of email addresses for people interested in the project. MIG will
prepare and send regular email updates to maintain interest in the
project and generate participation.
• Project Newsletters. MIG will prepare a series of five newsletters throughout
the project that update the community on the project. Each newsletter
will include a short overview of the project, schedule, notice of upcoming
meetings/hearings and summary of recently produced materials. The
City of Burlingame Updated December 18, 2014
General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Update Work Program 4
newsletters will include a combination of graphics and narrative text. MIG
will post each newsletter on the project website, distribute them via email
blast, and provide hard copies to the City for distribution. As an optional
item, MIG can also produce versions of this newsletter in Spanish. The
general topics for each newsletter include:
o Newsletter # 1 -General Plan Update Introduction and Overview
o Newsletter #2 - Existing Conditions Summary
o Newsletter #3 - Vision and Transformative Strategies
o Newsletter #4 - Concept Alternatives and Major Policy Concepts
o Newsletter #5 - Public Review and Adoption Process
• Postcards. MIG will prepare a total of five highly graphic postcards that
will be used to promote the project, community workshops and public
hearings. The postcards will be 4 inches x 5 inches, double -sided pieces
designed to drive participation in the project. The postcards will also be
mass -mailed to residents and businesses throughout Burlingame. The
budget assumes that the City would be responsible for printing and
mailing the postcards.
• Outreach Toolkit and Volunteer Training. MIG will design and develop an
Outreach Toolkit to be used by trained community volunteers and City
staff to meet with a variety of community groups, associations and
individual citizens to collect community input in a variety of settings, such
as regular meetings of community organizations or at a gathering of
interested neighbors. Each Toolkit will include a discussion guide,
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs), comment cards and PowerPoint
presentation as necessary. MIG will develop two kits: one for use at the
beginning of the process and one updated midway through the project
in order to get feedback as the draft General Plan develops. MIG will
conduct two training sessions for community volunteers and City staff on
how to use the Outreach Toolkits. City staff will be responsible for
summarizing the results of these efforts for the MIG Team.
• Mobile Outreach -The Plan Van. If desired by the City, MIG can design
graphic materials that highlight the project and can be printed on vinyl
and used to cover an existing City fleet vehicle (preferably either a van or
truck). The Plan Van would be used to bring attention to the project and
as a mobile workshop tool. City staff can park the van at major gathering
places during event times and solicit people to learn more about the
project and fill out surveys. While MIG would prepare the graphics and
organize the application of vinyl materials with a third -party vendor, MIG
City of Burlingame Updated December 18, 2014
General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Update Work Program 5
would not provide or drive the vehicle. It is assumed the City would cover
the costs for the vinyl materials (production and application).
City staff will be responsible for providing input and feedback necessary to refine
the overall Community Participation and Outreach Plan. City staff will also be
responsible for printing and mailing the postcards, attending Outreach Toolkit
training sessions, and securing a vehicle for the Plan Van (if used).
Task 1.4: Decision Maker and Stakeholder Interviews
The MIG Team will conduct three days of stakeholder interviews (approximately
20 one-on-one and small group interviews). This will include interviews with each
City Council member, Planning Commissioner, chairs of other City commissions
as well as local stakeholders (e.g., community group leaders, major
business/property owners, school districts, etc.). The interviews will be informal
and will provide a valuable opportunity to better understand desired project
outcomes and perspectives of key decision makers and stakeholders. We have
budgeted three full days for interviews. The final list of interviewees will be
developed by MIG in close coordination with City staff.
City staff will be responsible for contacting and coordinating interview times as
well as securing room(s) at City Hall to hold the interviews.
Task 1.5: Project Website Development and Maintenance
MIG will work with City staff to create a unique project website that links to the
City's website. This will include incorporating the project logo, fonts and colors to
make the page easily identifiable with the General Plan Update project. While it
is assumed the website will be hosted by the City, we also assume that it will be
linked to various features through MIG's suite of proprietary web -based tools
know as TownSquareTM. This software will allow the webpage to host a
moderated blog, online survey, and interactive mapping and visualization tools.
MIG will work with City staff to determine final website features and content.
However, we anticipate using some combination of the following tools:
• Comment Publisher: this tool can be used for registered users to provide
web -based comments on planning topics and draft documents
• Virtual Meeting: an interactive tool to engage community members
online, utilizing the same materials developed for main workshops
• Interactive Survey; this can include mapping exercises, virtual tours and
visual preference surveys
• Google Translate Toolbar: to enable users to easily translate the website
into over 60 different languages
City of Burlingame Updated December 18, 2014
General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Update Work Program 6
• Calendar and Event Manager
• Document Library
The website and associated features will be used throughout the process for 20-
30 months or longer as needed and mutually agreed to. Once the project is
completed, MIG will send the City electronic copies of all webpage materials
and content to be reloaded on the city's website. MIG retains ownership of all
underlying software and publishing tools. Reporting of site statistics, usage and
network performance will be provided at the request of City staff, but no more
frequently than quarterly.
City staff will be responsible for hosting the website, maintaining City webpage
html, CSS or other code language, coordinating with MIG on all external
TownsquareTM features, reviewing and approving all content, and assisting the
MIG Team in preparing responses to digitally submitted community comments.
Task 1.6: Social Media Program
MIG will identify key social media platforms and constituent segments to share
project messaging and promote outreach activities. MIG will recommend a
social media strategy that establishes and leverages pre -segmented social
media audiences by demographics and/or interests. The strategy could include
publishing posts to established City, and other agency, social media accounts,
starting a new social media account, supplying posts to social media accounts
targeted at key audiences and/or promoting a hash tag.
The social media program will enhance communications with educational
content, community -building incentives and calls -to -action. Social media touch -
points could include City and community organization social media feeds
(Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, free or paid advertising) and blog articles.
City staff will be responsible for developing a posting protocol and reviewing all
social media content prior to posting.
Task 1.7: Base Mapping and GIS Database
MIG will collect and review GIS data from the City, including existing land use,
General Plan land use designations, zoning, existing dwelling units per parcel,
existing jobs or non-residential square footage per parcel, street centerlines, and
county assessor data. Building footprint and height attributes are also desirable, if
available. All information will be assumed to be accurate and up to date. MIG,
in coordination with the City, will also define and format a series of base maps for
use throughout the update process. These base maps will include existing
City of Burlingame Updated December 18, 2014
General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Update Work Program 7
conditions information, such as existing land use, zoning, circulation and
environmental information. We will ensure all maps have a uniform style, legend
and title block.
At the culmination of the project, MIG will provide the City with the GIS maps
and associated files developed during the process. All GIS data and mapping
prepared for the General Plan will be developed consistent with City protocols
and data formats to ensure easy integration into the City's information system
upon project completion.
City staff will be responsible for providing GIS data, coordinating on formatting
and metodata protocols, and reviewing and providing feedback on the base
maps.
Task 1.8: Existing Conditions Reports
The MIG Team will conduct an analysis of existing conditions and the regulatory
context in Burlingame. This will include a thorough review and analysis of the
current General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, Specific Plans, existing Climate Action
Plan, infrastructure master plans, Housing Element, and other City plans and
programs. We will also conduct a thorough analysis of existing physical
conditions in Burlingame, including urban design, mobility, open space and
environmental features. This review and analysis will be compiled into a series of
in-depth Existing Conditions Reports. Each report will include opportunities and
challenges associated with the current conditions in Burlingame, as well as
synthesize key findings from each of the main sections. The reports will include:
• Land Use and Urban Form. MIG will analyze the existing land use patterns
and adopted and pending plans that affect development in the city. We
will describe, analyze and map existing land uses and identify constraints
and opportunities for future growth and development. Special attention
will be paid to defining built -out residential areas and identifying infill
opportunity areas and areas with potential to generate new economic
and employment activities. MIG will also summarize key adopted City
plans, as well as plans in progress and plans for areas surrounding
Burlingame (e.g., Millbrae, City of San Mateo, County of San Mateo and
Hillsborough General Plans, and San Francisco International Airport plans
and proposals). This will include a discussion on regional plans affecting
the City.
MIG will prepare an urban design summary that describes the look, feel
and character of existing development and public spaces. This will
include identifying architectural patterns and themes to be preserved,
City of Burlingame Updated December 18, 2014
General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Update Work Program 8
character elements to emphasize and barriers to be addressed. MIG will
produce associated maps and graphics that illustrate existing conditions
in Burlingame, including gateways, scenic resources, major geographic
features, major community features, open space, character areas,
landmarks and gateways, and up to three other maps identified during
the process.
Economic and Market Demand Analysis Strategic Economics (SE) will
conduct a market analysis for residential, office/R&D, industrial and
commercial uses. For each of these land uses, SE will estimate the total
potential demand (in number of units or square feet of development)
over the short term (5-10 years) and the long term (10-20 years) in the mid -
Peninsula region, the City of Burlingame and the areas of change. The
Market Demand Analysis summary includes the following:
o Demographic and Employment Trends - SE will conduct an analysis
of historical and projected population and household growth as
well as a review of employment trends and estimates of projected
job growth by industry sector. The analysis will consider trends for
the mid -Peninsula region and the City of Burlingame.
o Residential Market Analysis - SE will estimate market demand for
residential units (for -sale and rental) for the mid -Peninsula region
and Burlingame; assess the competitive advantages of the areas of
change and potential challenges for attracting development;
identify product types that the areas of change are most likely to
attract; and determine the likely sales prices/rents of new housing
by type.
o Office/R&D/Light Industrial Market Analysis - Based on an analysis
of industry trends, projected job growth by industry, and a review of
newly built and proposed development in the mid -Peninsula
region, SE will estimate the demand for new office/R&D/light
industrial development in Burlingame by product type. The analysis
will consider the performance and quality of existing
office/R&D/light industrial parks in the areas of change, and assess
whether these buildings can accommodate future demand, or if
they require reinvestment or reconfiguration to attract and retain
businesses. The analysis will determine the likely tenants and rental
rates that could be achieved with existing building stock and new
product types in the areas of change.
City of Burlingame Updated December 18, 2014
General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Update Work Program 9
o Retail Market Analysis - SE will assess the demand for both regional -
serving and neighborhood -serving retail in the areas of change.
The analysis will first assess the City's competitiveness in specific
retail sectors relative to existing large shopping centers in the
market area, collecting information on rents, vacancy rates, major
tenants, and retail taxable sales. Based on this analysis, SE will
estimate the potential for additional regional -serving retail in the
areas of change. SE will also estimate the demand for
neighborhood -serving retail in the areas of change based on
household and employee spending from the new residential units
and office/R&D/light industrial development potential calculated
in the previous sub -tasks. The retail market analysis will result in
recommendations on the type of retail most likely to succeed in the
areas of change without detracting from downtown Burlingame,
Broadway and other existing retail centers.
o Hotel - SE will assess the market for hotels in the areas of change
based on the performance of existing hotel properties in the mid -
Peninsula region, planned and proposed projects as well as the
competitive advantages of the areas of change.
• Sustainability and Public Health. MIG will analyze and summarize the
existing conditions in the community related to sustainability and public
health. We will summarize sustainability topics including water and energy
use and efficiency, green buildings, and climate change adaptation. MIG
will summarize public health topics including physical activity levels, land
use patterns and transportation networks as they relate to active
transportation as well as access to nutritious foods, health care and health
facilities.
• Transportation and Mobility. Nelson\Nygaard (N\N) will summarize and
analyze existing transportation and mobility facilities in the City, including
streets and roadways, public transit, bicycle facilities, pedestrian mobility,
freight movement, and rail. N\N will prepare an assessment of existing
mobility conditions by travel mode that describes the following existing
conditions:
o Travel patterns: mode splits for journey -to -work resident and
nonresident employees, and origin/destination patterns
o Street network: overview of existing street classifications, map of
existing street classifications including planned facilities relevant to
Future Baseline conditions
City of Burlingame Updated December 18, 2014
General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Update Work Program 10
o Bicycle travel: overview of existing circulation conditions for cyclists,
existing and proposed bike network map, and barriers and
constraints to cycling in Burlingame
o Motor vehicles: overview of existing circulation conditions for motor
vehicle travel including parking, existing vehicle network
classification map, daily and peak -hour volumes, and intersection
operations (existing and future baseline conditions)
o Pedestrian: Overview of existing pedestrian circulation conditions, a
pedestrian circulation map identifying pedestrian priority zones, key
constraints and barriers, and/or sidewalk gaps where applicable
o Transit: Overview of existing transit service and access, map of
exiting public transit service and private shuttles providing service
to Burlingame, and a description of key factors affecting transit
access in the City, including physical constraints and barriers as
well as service constraints affecting transit access
• Public Services and Infrastructure: Fuscoe Engineering will summarize
information on existing conditions in the city related to water, sewer,
hydrology and dry utilities (i.e., electrical, telephone, natural gas, cable
television, etc.). This analysis will focus on existing conditions and trends as
well as the regulatory framework affecting the issues addressed. Fuscoe
will review pertinent documents (i.e., existing General Plan elements,
special studies, EIRs, existing specific plans) and contact appropriate
agencies and organizations. MIG will summarize existing police and fire
services, as well as schools, childcare and senior care facilities.
• Natural Resources. MIG will summarize existing natural resources in
Burlingame. MIG will check the California Natural Diversity Database for
known occurrences of special -status species in the area, and will prepare
a map of the habitat types found in the City. The summary will describe
the natural and urban environments, including vegetation types, common
wildlife, whether important wildlife movement corridors are present, and
what special -status species are known or expected to occur within the
General Plan boundaries. The report will describe the urban forest and its
value to the community history and to wildlife. This summary will also
describe the regulatory setting, including state and federal laws that
apply to biological resources in the City.
• Open Space and Recreation. MIG will summarize the City's parks,
recreation facilities, recreation services and open space areas. This will
include an inventory of existing parks and facilities, existing programs
(including level of participation), and gaps in services and facilities,
including but not limited to, use and location.
City of Burlingame Updated December 18, 2014
General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Update Work Program 11
Community Indicators. MIG will summarize key indicators of current
conditions in the community, especially those that measure quality of life,
public safety, economic growth, health and sustainability. The indicators
will be drawn from all sections of the report and will serve as a starting
point for identifying issues and opportunities.
City staff will be responsible for reviewing and providing one consolidated set of
City comments to the MIG Team for each Existing Conditions Report.
Task 1.9: Settings and Opportunities Summary
Building upon the information contained in the Existing Conditions Reports, MIG
will prepare a highly visual, easy -to -read and user-friendly summary of key
findings and opportunities. This summary report will include narrative, maps,
photo documentation, illustrative examples from comparable communities and
other graphics as appropriate, and will be approximately 40-45 pages. It will be
created in a PowerPoint format to provide maximum digital accessibility and
allow easy online viewing on multiple platforms.
City staff will be responsible for reviewing the summary and providing one
consolidated set of City comments to the MIG Team.
Task 1.10: Planning Commission Study Session
MIG will prepare for and facilitate a study session of the Planning Commission to
review the status of the program, present the Settings and Opportunities
Summary, and solicit input on major issues and opportunities for Burlingame that
need to be addressed during the General Plan Update process.
City staff will be responsible for preparing the staff report and a short summary of
this study session.
Task 1.1 1: City Council Study Session
MIG will prepare for and facilitate a study session of the City Council to review
the status of the program, present the Settings and Opportunities Summary, and
solicit input on major issues and opportunities for Burlingame that need to be
addressed during the General Plan Update process.
City staff will be responsible for preparing the staff report and a short summary of
this study session.
City of Burlingame Updated December 18, 2014
General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Update Work Program 12
Task 1 Deliverables
• Kick -Off Meeting and City Tour Materials: agenda, sign -in sheet, photo
database and brief summary (Word/PDF/PPT/JPEG)
• Retreat Agenda and Facilitation (Word/PDF)
• Refined Work Program (Word/Excel/PDF)
• Community Participation and Outreach Plan (Word/InDesign/PDF)
• Project Logo, Style Guide and Templates (InDesign/PDF)
• Project Newsletters (InDesign/PDF/printed by City)
• Post Cards (InDesign/PDF)
• Outreach Toolkits (InDesign/PPT/PDF/hard copies for 20 sets)
• Stakeholder Interview Summaries (Word/PDF)
• Project Webpage and TownSquareTM Products (HTML/CSS/Flash/PDF)
• Social Media Strategy and Content (Word/PDF)
• Base Maps (GIS/Illustrator/PDF)
• Existing Conditions Reports (Word/Illustrator/GIS/PDF/10 printed copies
each)
• Settings and Opportunities Report (PPT/PDF/10 printed copies)
• Planning Commission and City Council Study Session Materials (Word/PPT)
Phase 2: Vision and Transformative Strategies
Task 2.1: Community Workshop — Vision for the Future
At the beginning of this phase of work, MIG will facilitate a community workshop
to provide an update on the project and solicit input from the community. The
agenda for this workshop will include: 1) project status, 2) summary of work to
date, and 3) an interactive exercise to refine an overall vision for the City and
identify major urban design, land use, mobility, community health and
sustainability objectives. We will utilize the specific plan work the City has
conducted as a starting point for developing the General Plan vision by asking
participants to confirm, refine or revisit concepts included in those plans. MIG, in
coordination with City staff, will be responsible for developing the content,
printing materials, and facilitating the workshop. MIG will provide one facilitator
and one graphic recorder for this workshop.
City staff will be responsible for securing workshop locations, printing and mailing
announcements, and providing food.
Task 2.2: Draft Vision and Transformative Strategies Framework
City of Burlingame Updated December 18, 2014
General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Update Work Program 13
Based on the input received from the Community Workshops and in close
coordination with City staff, the Community Advisory Committee and the
Planning Commission Sub -committee, MIG will develop a Vision and
Transformative Strategies Framework for the updated general plan. This
framework will include a vision for future growth, stability and sustainability in
Burlingame. This will be followed by a series of transformative strategies designed
to create positive change in the city. MIG will submit a draft for City staff review,
and will produce a revised version that reflects staff edits.
City staff will be responsible for reviewing the draft and providing MIG with one
set of consolidated and confirmed edits.
Task 2.3: Planning Commission Study Session
MIG will prepare for and facilitate a study session of the Planning Commission to
review the status of the program and present the draft Vision and Transformative
Strategies Framework. The Planning Commission will provide direction to City staff
and MIG on any rewording to the Vision and Transformative Strategies
Framework.
City staff will be responsible for preparing the staff report and a short summary for
this study session.
Task 2.4: City Council Study Session
MIG will prepare for and facilitate a study session of the City Council to review
the status of the program and discuss the draft Vision and Transformative
Strategies Framework. The City Council will review Planning Commission
recommendations and provide direction to City staff and MIG on final wording
for the Vision and Transformative Strategies Framework. As an alternative, this
study session can be conducted as a joint session with the Planning Commission.
City staff will be responsible for preparing the staff report and a short summary for
this study session.
Task 2.4: Final Vision and Transformative Strategies Framework
MIG will revise and prepare a final version of the Vision and Transformative
Strategies Framework based upon direction received from the City Council and
Planning Commission.
City of Burlingame Updated December 18, 2014
General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Update Work Program 14
Phase 2 Deliverables
• Community Workshop Materials and Summary
(Word/InDesign/PPT/PD F/hard copies)
■ Draft Vision and Transformative Strategies Framework (InDesign/PDF)
• Planning Commission and City Council Study Session Materials (Word/PPT)
• Final Vision and Transformative Strategies Framework (InDesign/PDF)
Phase 3: Concept Alternatives
Task 3.1: Areas of Stability and Change Mapping
MIG will analyze existing land use patterns, development patterns, potential
projects, circulation opportunities, and environmental resources and constraints.
Based on this analysis, and the information prepared during earlier tasks, MIG will
prepare a series of Stability and Change Area Maps that will be used as a
starting point for developing scenarios during Phase 3. As part of this task, MIG
will also prepare a series of public health maps that will be used throughout the
project as a way of educating the public and identifying areas of concern and
opportunities.
City staff will be responsible for reviewing the draft mapping and providing MIG
with one set of consolidated and confirmed edits.
Task 3.2: Concept Alternatives Summary
Building upon the Areas of Stability and Change Maps, the MIG Team will
develop, in close coordination with City staff, three Concept Alternatives that will
be used to show land use, mobility and policy options for the future. This will
include identifying specific "focus areas" that are expected to be the primary
locations of land use change resulting from the General Plan Update. The
Concept Alternatives will be highly graphical and include descriptive text, a
diagram and images (including photo simulations and sketches). The Concept
Alternatives will be formatted to be large display boards (42" x 60") that can be
used during the public outreach and engagement process.
The MIG Team will work with City staff to evaluate the Concept Alternatives in
terms of implications of land use, mobility, economic development, public
facilities and services, and the natural environment. Based on the evaluation, we
will prepare a Concept Alternatives Summary Report that includes text, graphics,
images and maps. An underlying objective of the report will be to communicate
technical and policy issues in a straight -forward manner that is easily understood
City of Burlingame Updated December 18, 2014
General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Update Work Program 15
by community members and decision makers. It is anticipated that the report will
be prepared in PowerPoint and be approximately 40 pages in length. Specific
areas that will be addressed and compared include:
• Land use and development, such as planning areas, City limits and
opportunity area buildout projections (i.e., dwelling units, building square
footage, population and employment), timing, infill and redevelopment
potential as well as industrial land conversion.
• Urban design criteria to promote future development that builds on the
City's existing desirable features and facilitates improvements to areas
that will likely undergo change during the timeframe of the new General
Plan.
• Economic trends, such as number and types of jobs created and tax
revenue generated.
• Housing, such as dwelling unit types, choices, location and affordability
(based on the adopted Housing Element).
• Transportation and mobility, including general automotive circulation and
multimodal access improvements. The analysis will include performing a
set of trip generation calculations and brief qualitative evaluation.
• Public infrastructure and service demands, including water, sanitary, storm
drainage, flooding, recycled water, police and fire.
• Open space and parks and recreation, including the demand for parks,
open spaces, recreation programs and impacts on cultural resources.
• Conservation and environmental resources, such as water and air quality,
water and energy consumption, climate change and greenhouse gas
emissions.
• Public safety, such as vulnerability to natural and manmade hazards (e.g.,
sea level rise, floods, heat waves).
City staff will be responsible for reviewing the draft report and providing MIG with
one set of consolidated and confirmed edits.
City of Buringame Updated December 18, 2014
General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Update Work Program 16
Task 3.3: Fiscal and Economic Analysis
SE will build a pro forma model to explore the financial feasibility of various land
uses in the three alternatives. SE will work closely with the City and MIG Team to
develop up to five prototypical building types to be tested in the analysis. Cost
and revenue assumptions in the model will be vetted with local developers
active in Burlingame and/or the mid -Peninsula. In addition to helping to identify
the most feasible product types for the plan area, the analysis will provide insight
on how different development standards could factor into a project's financial
performance. The pro forma will test sensitivity to variables such as building
heights, FARs, parking ratios, and other planning/zoning factors to provide
recommendations on market - appropriate standards for the areas of change.
SE will estimate the fiscal impact of up to four land use alternatives (including the
existing baseline) on the City's General Fund, on a net annual and cumulative
basis over a 25 -year period. SE will update its existing fiscal impact model used
for the Downtown and EI Camino Real Specific Plan for the analysis. The fiscal
impact analysis will estimate the current operating revenues and expenditures in
the areas of change based on existing conditions, and estimate the potential
change from projected growth in residential, office/industrial, and retail land
uses for each alternative. SE will analyze the property tax, tax increment, sales
tax, and other major sources of General Fund revenues generated by each
scenario. Based on interviews with key City departments including Police, Fire,
Public Works, Parks and Recreation, and Finance, SE will calculate the increase in
General Fund expenditures for providing services to new residents and
employees under each alternative. Based on the results of the fiscal analysis, SE
will determine the extent to which each alternative provides sufficient revenues
to offset the increased costs to the City General Fund.
Task 3.4: Community Workshop - Concept Alternatives
MIG will facilitate a community workshop to solicit input on the Concept
Alternatives Summary. The agenda for this workshop will include project update,
summary of work to date, and an interactive exercise to review and discuss the
various alternatives. The objective of this workshop will be to gain direct
feedback from the community regarding which concepts they support. This
feedback will help inform the selection of a preferred concept that will be used
as the basis for the updated General Plan. MIG, in coordination with City staff,
will be responsible for developing content, printing materials and facilitating
each workshop. MIG will provide one facilitator and one graphic recorder for this
workshop.
City of Burlingame Updated December 18, 2014
General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Update Work Program 17
City staff will be responsible for securing workshop locations, printing and mailing
announcements, and providing food.
Task 3.5: Planning Commission Study Session
MIG will meet with the Planning Commission to provide it with an update on the
project, discuss the Concepts Alternatives Summary, and present feedback
received during the Community Workshop. MIG will facilitate a discussion with
the Planning Commission to identify a preferred concept. As an option, this can
be scheduled as joint session with the City Council.
City staff will be responsible for preparing the staff report and a short summary for
this study session.
Task 3.6: City Council Study Session
MIG will meet with the City Council to provide it with an update on the project,
discuss the Concepts Alternatives Summary, present feedback received during
the Community Workshop, and discuss the Planning Commission preferred
concept. MIG will facilitate a discussion with the City Council to identify the final
preferred concept. This preferred concept will be used as the basis for preparing
the General Plan Update.
City staff will be responsible for preparing the staff report and a short summary for
this study session.
Task 3.7: Preferred Concept
Based on direction received from the City Council and Planning Commission, the
MIG Team will prepare a Preferred Concept that will be used as the basis for
developing the Draft General Plan Update.
Phase 3 Deliverables
• Stability and Change Area Maps (GIS/Illustrator/PDF)
• Concept Alternatives Summary (InDesign/PDF/20 hard copies)
• Community Workshop Materials and Summary
(Word/InDesign/ PPT/PDF/printed copies)
• Planning Commission and City Council Study Session Materials (Word/PPT)
• Preferred Concept (InDesign/PDF)
City of Burlingame Updated December 18, 2014
General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Update Work Program 18
Phase 4: Draft General Plan
Task 4.1: Policy Framework
Prior to drafting the updated General Plan, MIG will create a policy framework
document that identifies new or modified goals, policies and implementation
programs. Our objective is to create a streamlined, action -oriented General
Plan. Below we outline a structure that largely follows the structure established in
State statutes. However, we are amenable to structuring the General Plan in any
manner that works best for Burlingame. In all cases, we look to integrate
sustainability and healthy communities principles into all of the Plan elements.
The policy framework may identify responsible parties and timeframes for
implementation of each plan policy. Color maps and graphics may be used as
needed to illustrate various concepts such as sustainability, design and
character areas, transit -oriented development, roadway networks, transit
improvements, street standards, natural resources, open space, environmental
and physical hazards, locations of public facilities, and economic development
strategies. The policy framework will be reviewed by City staff as well as by
commissions and committees, per staff direction.
City staff will be responsible for reviewing the draft and providing MIG with one
set of consolidated and confirmed edits.
Task 4.2: Administrative Draft General Plan
The MIG Team will prepare a new, comprehensive General Plan based on the
technical analysis, input received during earlier phases and State legal
requirements. The draft General Plan will reflect expressed community values,
such as economic vitality, sustainability, safe and healthy communities,
connectivity and education throughout each element. As noted above, we will
incorporate sustainability and healthy community concepts into each of the
individual elements. The updated Plan will also include a comprehensive
implementation program that will focus on having the Plan be a living document
that results in the desired change in the community.
The updated General Plan will include the following elements/sections; the exact
order and arrangement of elements and topics will be discussed and confirmed
with City staff:
Introduction. MIG will prepare an Introduction that summarizes the new
General Plan. This will include a summary of the update process, extensive
City of Burlingame Updated December 18, 2014
General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Update Work Program 19
public outreach and engagement process, and a specific discussion on
how the updated Plan addresses recent and emerging state sustainability
and greenhouse gas reduction mandates.
• Land Use Element. MIG will prepare a Land Use Element that includes a
new Land Use Diagram and updated land use designations that include
allowable use, density ranges, floor -area ratios and other appropriate
standards. We will describe the general land use patterns envisioned for
Burlingame, and map the distribution of open space and density. This will
include developing a set of standard street design guidelines based on
the variety of street typologies specified in the plan. Building from the
vision and community values, MIG will identify new goals, policies and
implementation measures that will form the basis of urban design
components to the General Plan. We will utilize the extensive public
outreach and engagement process results as a resource that provides
initial direction for defining urban design standards and guidelines. MIG
will use photo examples to illustrate development standards, prototypes
and character in focus areas. We will create a map and describe the
distribution of character areas, building heights, development intensity
and key public/private interface areas. MIG will also develop policies to
promote community goals such as public health and equality, promote
infill and compact development, revitalize urban and community centers,
and protect natural resources.
The Land Use Element will also include a specific section on climate
change and adaptation. Building upon the work the City has already
done to prepare an initial draft Climate Action Plan, MIG will develop a
complete set of policy directives necessary to fully address climate
change. Our recommendation is to include all relevant CAP policy within
the General Plan (as opposed to a separate stand-alone document) to
fully integrate policy. This is a common approach that we have had
success with on previous projects. In addition, and as part of the EIR
process (see Phase 5), MIG will conduct necessary greenhouse gas and
air quality modeling to support the climate change analysis.
• Mobility Element. MIG, with support from Nelson\Nygaard and Hexagon,
will prepare a Mobility Element that describes the planned transportation
network, including a new Circulation Diagram. We will produce full-color
maps showing planned pedestrian facilities; bicycle facilities; bus, shuttle
and paratransit facilities and services; rail transit facilities and services;
electric vehicle infrastructure; and streets and roadways for automobiles,
including freight and high -occupancy -vehicles. We will update general
plan policies related to Complete Streets and multimodal transportation,
City of Burlingame Updated December 18, 2014
General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Update Work Program 20
Transportation Demand Management, access for the mobility impaired,
site design guidelines, guidelines for the coordination of land use and
development with the provision of adequate transportation facilities and
services, and neighborhood traffic management. We will also develop an
Access Action Plan, including a work plan and timeline for near-term and
long-range actions necessary to implement the plans and policies in the
Mobility Element.
• Conservation and Open Space Element MIG will prepare an updated
Conservation and Open Space Element that shows the distribution and
potential locations of recreation facilities, schools, public buildings and
waste facilities. We will produce maps and define requirements for trails,
parks and recreation access as well as cultural and historical resources.
We will also identify methods for conservation of features such as water,
soils, archeological resources and wildlife.
• Noise Element. MIG will prepare a Noise Element that includes
appropriate noise standards and policies to address development under
the new General Plan. We will produce Future Noise Exposure Contours
calculated based upon future traffic data, railroad usage assumptions
and other information provided by the City. MIG will prepare a Noise
Contour Map in terms of Len in increments of 5 decibels down to 60 dab
Len.
• Safety Element. MIG, with support from Fuscoe Engineering, will prepare
an updated Safety Element that addresses areas constrained by hazards
such as high noise levels, flooding, seismic and geologic hazards, fire
danger, hazardous materials and other topics as appropriate. This will
include policies and programs specifically related to greenhouse gas
reduction, climate change adaptation and sustainability.
• Economic Development Element. MIG, with support from Strategic
Economics, will prepare an Economic Development Element that supports
the General Plan's vision from an economic perspective. The element will
include a realistic plan to implement its economic goals and objectives in
the absence of redevelopment. In preparing this element, SE will evaluate
current and future development opportunities, and help the City identify
related goals in terms of job quality, reduced unemployment, tax benefits,
retail shopping opportunities and visitor -serving uses. Based on the
assessment of goals and opportunities, SE will craft a policy framework,
internally consistent with other general plan elements, to clearly express
the City's economic development vision. The element will include an
implementation action plan that recognizes the City's anticipated staffing
City of Burlingame Updated December 18, 2014
General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Update Work Program 21
capabilities and which leverages local and regional resources to
maximize Burlingame's profile in the marketplace.
• Public Services and Infrastructure Element. MIG, with support from Fuscoe
Engineering, will develop a Public Services and Infrastructure Element. This
element will include goals, policies and programs related to fire, police,
emergency medical services, disaster preparedness, water, wastewater,
telecommunications, and drainage. There will be a special focus on the
creation of Low Impact Development (LID) techniques and sustainability
concepts in new infrastructure investment.
The Administrative Draft General Plan will be submitted to the City as a series of
separate Word files with embedded or attached images and figures.
City staff will be responsible for reviewing each element, adding track -change
comments and edits to the Word files, and providing one set of consolidated
and confirmed edits.
Task 4.3: Public Draft General Plan
MIG will incorporate City staff comments and prepare a public draft General
Plan. The public draft General Plan will include final formatting in InDesign and
will be highly graphic and easy to read. (If the City desires an ePlan document,
the Public Draft General Plan would not be formatted in InDesign.) This will
include all images, figures and diagrams necessary to fully articulate the policy
concepts included under each element.
City staff will be responsible for reviewing the full plan, and providing one set of
consolidated and confirmed edits.
City of Burlingame Updated December 18, 2014
General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Update Work Program 22
Task 4.4: Community Open House
MIG will plan and facilitate a citywide open house on the draft General Plan. The
MIG Team will be available to answer questions about the project and the draft
General Plan elements. This will provide an opportunity for members of the public
to provide feedback on the draft elements, including the vision, goals, policies
and programs. MIG will prepare large boards or posters that describe each of
the draft elements, highlighting new policy concepts and major changes from
the existing General Plan. MIG, in coordination with City staff and the project
team, will be responsible for developing the content, printing materials and
facilitating each workshop.
City staff will be responsible forsecuring workshop locations, printing and mailing
announcements, and providing food.
Phase 4 Deliverables
• Policy Framework (Word/Illustrator/GIS/PDF/20 hard copies)
• Administrative Draft General Plan (Word/Illustrator/GIS/PDF/5 printed
copies)
• Public Draft General Plan (Word/Illustrator/GIS/PDF/printed copies to be
defined)
• Community Workshop Materials and Summary
(Word/InDesign/PPT/PDF/printed copies)
Phase 5: Environmental Review
Task 5.1: Initial Study, Notice of Preparation and Scoping Meeting
MIG will complete an Initial Study (IS) checklist and narrative to appropriately
focus the topical contents of the General Plan Environmental Impact Report
(EIR). Although the Zoning Ordinance update will not have been completed by
this time, we will write the EIR to anticipate changes to the Zoning Ordinance to
achieve General Plan consistency, as well as revisions to Specific Plans required
to achieve the same. This will allow us to prepare a Consistency Finding or
Addendum for future actions associated with this work program (following
General Plan adoption).
Those focus topics determined to have a potentially significant impact on the
environment will be further analyzed during development of the Draft EIR, and
associated mitigation strategies closely linked to General Plan policies and
zoning ordinance updates will be identified. MIG will also prepare the EIR Notice
City of Burlingame Updated December 18, 2014
General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Update Work Program 28
of Preparation (NOP) to attach to the IS, and will attend one CEQA-required EIR
scoping session with responsible/interested agencies and members of the public.
City staff will be responsible for reviewing and approving the NOP/IS, compiling
the mailing list (with MIG assistance), and distributing the NOP/IS to responsible
and interested agencies.
Task 5.2: Draft Environmental Impact Report
The MIG Team will develop a program -level Draft EIR that considers all aspects of
General Plan implementation (i.e., citywide policy initiatives, as well as potential
individual project approvals, construction and operation) in order to streamline
both future entitlements and CEQA work. This task will be concurrent and
collaborative with the General Plan update process. Environmental topic areas
and potential CEQA-defined impacts will be aligned with potential new policies
and amendments. General Plan policies will address environmental topics such
as sustainability, efficient land use, and connectivity, which in turn will avoid or
reduce potential impacts. The EIR will not react to a completed General Plan
Update; the EIR will help form the update process.
Mitigation will be developed through close coordination with General Plan
policies and implementation strategies, integration of uniformly applicable
development standards (CEQA section 15183 - Projects Consistent With a
Community Plan or Zoning), and application of mitigation measures from recent
projects. In turn, the evaluation of focus topics in the Draft EIR will identify how
proactive measures will avoid or reduce potential impacts to less -than -significant
levels, without the need for additional mitigation.
CEQA encourages the efficient use of applicable, certified CEQA documents
and discourages redundancy. The EIR will enable streamlined CEQA review for
future individual development proposals, based on the following CEQA
Guidelines sections:
• 15183 - Projects Consistent With a Community Plan or Zoning
15183.3 -Streamlining for Infill Projects
• 15152 -Tiering
• 15162 -Subsequent EIRs and Negative Declarations
• 15163 -Supplement to an EIR
• 15168 - Program EIR
• SB 743 - Draft revisions to CEQA (July 2014)
Each of the CEQA Guidelines sections listed above affords opportunities for
significant streamlining. MIG will prepare guidelines explaining how the City can
City of Burlingame Updated December 18, 2014
General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Update Work Program 24
apply these CEQA streamlining opportunities to future projects. The guidelines will
be included in the Draft EIR introduction -so that decision makers and other
readers can easily understand how the City will use the EIR proactively over time
as the Update is implemented. The guidelines can also be printed separately as
a handout for individual project applicants to help the applicant better
understand the CEQA process and how the City's process can save time and
money.
We anticipate that the following 14 focus topics will be of importance to City
decision makers, interested agencies and the public during their consideration of
the General Plan. These topics will receive emphasis in the Draft EIR. For the
remaining topics (agriculture and forestry resources, mineral resources), the Initial
Study will include brief written statements explaining why no significant impacts
are anticipated. Likewise, the Initial Study will be the foundation for focusing
potential impacts so that the EIR does not include irrelevant information that
obscures environmental issues that need to be addressed.
• Aesthetics: Consistent with CEQA, the EIR will independently evaluate the
potential impacts of the land use and urban design policies on the visual
character and image of the planning area, including on vistas of San
Francisco Bay. This will include potential citywide impacts under the
General Plan buildout. Beneficial aesthetic effects of the project also will
be discussed. The EIR will recommend any project refinements warranted
to minimize identified visual impacts, including measures that ultimately
may be incorporated into the Zoning Ordinance and/or Specific Plans.
• Air Quality. The EIR will assess the local and regional air emission impacts of
General Plan buildout based on the most recently adopted modeling
criteria of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD), with
criteria and toxic air contaminant modeling. For any significant impacts,
the EIR will identify mitigations consistent with BAAQMD CEQA
requirements that can be formulated into General Plan policies or zoning
amendments. Current guidance from BAAQMD recommends the use of a
recently released modeling tool: the California Emissions Estimator Model
(CalEEMOd). MIG will consult with BAAQMD regarding use of CaIEEMod
and preferred modeling approach at the time of analysis.
• Biological Resources. Based on available biological surveys of special -
status plants and animals in the City and Bay Shore, MIG will ensure that
General Plan Update policies and amendments regarding these
resources are consistent with Best Management Practices and
jurisdictional protocols for mitigating potential impacts.
City of Burlingame Updated December 18, 2014
General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Update Work Program 25
Cultural and Historic Resources. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section
15064.5, the EIR will evaluate the potential effects of the General Plan
Update on any identified or potential cultural or historic resources in the
planning area. CEQA-based mitigation protocols that can be
incorporated directly into General Plan policy will be identified. The results
of these assessments will be incorporated into the impact findings, with
mitigation protocols that can be included in updated policy and
amendments.
Geology and Soils. The EIR will identify potential geotechnical impacts of
General Plan development and describe mitigation protocols (including
City Building Department requirements) to reduce potential impacts of
earthquakes to less -than -significant levels.
Greenhouse Gas Emissions (GHG). The EIR will address the GHG
implications, both beneficial and adverse, of General Plan buildout. The
EIR will quantify project climate change impacts based on the most
recently adopted modeling criteria of the BAAQMD. The EIR will also
analyze consistency with BAAQMD's adopted Clean Air Plan (CAP). For
any significant impacts, the EIR will identify mitigations consistent with
BAAQMD CEQA requirements that can be included in General Plan
Update policies and amendments.
Hazards and Hazardous Materials. Based on review of available data
(including the Department of Toxic Substances Control EnviroStor
website), the EIR will discuss the potential for future hazardous material
exposure impacts associated with potential development under General
Plan buildout and describe associated jurisdictional mitigation protocols.
MIG will prepare a technical report on the Federal, State, County and
local regulations that apply to the use, storage, transport and disposal of
hazardous materials in the planning area (this information will also provide
the "Regulatory Setting" section of this EIR chapter). Based on this
technical report, the EIR will describe the project's proposed changes to
the City's review process regarding hazardous materials and evaluate
how those changes would avoid or reduce potential environmental
impacts.
Hydrology and Water Quality. The EIR will describe drainage, flooding and
water quality issues. Fuscoe Engineering will assist in analyzing potential
impacts and identifying mitigations.
Land Use and Plannina. The EIR will independently evaluate the land use
implications, both beneficial and adverse, of the General Plan Update
City of Burlingame Updated December 18, 2014
General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Update Work Program 26
and will identify any significant impacts under CEQA (e.g.," division of an
established neighborhood"). The EIR will then identify any associated
mitigations, including recommended General Plan refinements that can
be incorporated directly into Update policies and amendments. In
addition, to comply with CEQA, the consistency of the General Plan
proposed policies with relevant regional planning policies (e.g., BAAQMD)
will be evaluated.
Noise and Vibration. The EIR will describe the impacts of General Plan
development policies and associated future buildout on the local
noise/vibration environment. Short- and long-term noise measurements
and existing noise contours will be provided. Projected noise modeling
and contours under the proposed Update will be developed. The EIR will
analyze construction noise/vibration, traffic and rail noise/vibration, and
land use compatibility within the projected noise environment. The EIR will
then identify effective and feasible mitigations that can be incorporated
directly into General Plan Update policies and amendments.
Population and Housina. The EIR will describe the project's potential
effects on housing and population in order to provide the statistical basis
for related quantitative environmental impact evaluations (e.g., public
services and utilities). General Plan Update implementation is not, in itself,
expected to cause CEQA-defined population or housing impacts (e.g.,
substantial displacement).
Public Services (including recreation). The EIR will evaluate the project's
effects on the following public services: fire protection, police protection,
schools and parks/recreation. Appropriate service providers (identified in
coordination with City staff) will be contacted to help identify potential
impacts and formulate any mitigations that can be incorporated into
General Plan Update policy and uniform standards.
Transportation and Traffic. Hexagon will prepare the travel demand
forecasts using the VTA/CCAG model, which includes a sophisticated
routine for forecasting transit trips. The model also includes a module to
forecast bicycling trips. However, the bicycling module could use better
validation. Hexagon could work on validating the bicycle module as an
optional task. Walking trips generally occur within a zone and are
accounted for with the trip generation equations. The Year 2040 modeling
process consists of the following subtasks:
A. Refine and Validate the Model: Hexagon will refine the VTA/CCAG
model for application in Burlingame. This will involve comparing 2014
City of Burlingame Updated December 18, 2014
General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Update Work Program 27
model forecasts to 2014 traffic counts. The City of Burlingame will
supply the 2014 land use data. Hexagon will adjust model parameters
to get a reasonable validation.
B. Develop Future Land use Data Files: City staff will develop land use
forecasts for the 2040 baseline and proposed General Plan scenarios.
The land use and demographic data used by the model is expressed
in terms of the number of households, household population,
household income, six types of employment (retail, service, other,
agricultural, manufacturing, and wholesale) and school enrollment
(elementary, high school and college).
C. Transportation Improvements: Hexagon will consult with VTA and City
staff to determine which regional and local transportation
improvement projects will be assumed for the General Plan horizon
year. The model's transportation networks (highway and transit) will be
updated to reflect these improvement projects. The baseline transit
network will include the Caltrain electrification project.
D. Develop Forecasts: Forecasts of future demand on the City's
transportation system will be prepared using the adjusted VTA/CCAG
travel demand model. This model uses widely accepted transportation
planning formulas to convert forecasts of future land use into the
number and distribution of future vehicle trips on the roadway network
and transit ridership on the transit system. Peak -hour traffic volumes
(peak -hour intersection turning movement volumes and roadway
segment volumes) and transit ridership on the public transportation
system (bus routes and Caltrain) will be forecasted by the model.
Other model outputs will include vehicle miles traveled, hours of delay,
travel speeds, the number of trips generated, and trips by mode (drive
alone, carpool, transit, bike and walk).
E. Model Adjustment Interface: Although the model will be calibrated
against existing traffic counts and should reflect existing travel patterns
reasonably well, it is not recommended to use model forecasted
turning movements at intersections, verbatim. Therefore, the model
forecasts will be adjusted based on existing traffic counts, base year
and future year model volumes.
F. Review and Report Forecasts: The output data from the model
forecasts will be reviewed to ensure that the results are reasonable
and reflect expected changes in traffic as a result of the assumed
land use growth and transportation improvements. Hexagon will supply
City of Burlingame Updated December 18, 2014
General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Update Work Program 28
link -level adjusted forecasts to Nelson\Nygaard for use in the
operational assessment.
G. Transportation Impact Assessment: Nelson\Nygaard will prepare an
operational assessment that will utilize the travel demand forecasts to
be prepared by Hexagon. The operational assessment will identify
potentially significant transportation impacts for incorporation into the
Draft EIR.
H. Additional Travel Demand Scenario Testing (optional): Hexagon can
prepare additional scenario testing utilizing the VTA/CCAG model to
test TDM measures, such as parking cost, increased transit services or
discount transit passes.
Utilities and Service Systems. The EIR will evaluate the project's effects on
water supply and distribution, sanitary sewer treatment capacity and
distribution, and storm drainage. The EIR will also evaluate solid
waste/recycling services.
A sequence of two Administrative Draft EIRs will be delivered for City staff review,
and then a Screencheck Draft EIR will be prepared for final review by a limited
number of City staff before a public release Draft EIR is completed.
City staff will be responsible for reviewing and providing one consolidated set of
City comments to the MIG Team on the two Administrative Draft EIRs and the
Screencheck Draft EIR.
Task 5.3: Final Environmental Impact Report
MIG will prepare a Final EIR that includes responses to public and agency
comments received on the Draft EIR during the 45 -day public review period. The
budget assumes there will be approximately 120 individual comments requiring a
response (note: each comment letter may include multiple comments). MIG will
also prepare a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for adoption with
the Update. An Administrative Final EIR will be delivered for City staff review
before a public release Final EIR is completed.
City staff will be responsible for reviewing and providing one consolidated set of
City comments to the MIG Team on the Administrative Draft Final EIR, Final EIR
and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
Phase 5 Deliverables
City of Burlingame Updated December 18, 2014
General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Update Work Program 29
• Notice of Preparation and Initial Study Checklist (Word/PDF)
• Scoping Public Meeting Materials and Summary
(Word/Illustrator/InDesign/PDF/hard copies)
• Two Administrative Draft EIRs; Screencheck Draft EIR and Public Release
EIR (Word/PDF/20 printed copies, with technical appendices on a CD)
• Final Environmental Impact Report and Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program (Word/PDF/20 printed copies)
Phase 6: General Plan Hearings and Adoption
Task 6.1: Planning Commission Public Hearings (2)
MIG will meet with the Planning Commission two times to present, discuss and
receive input/direction on the Draft General Plan and Draft EIR. These hearings
will provide an opportunity for the Planning Commission to formally receive
public comments on the draft documents. The conclusion of these hearings will
be a formal recommendation on the project to the City Council.
City staff will be responsible for preparing the formal staff reports for these
hearings.
Task 6.2: City Council Public Hearings (2)
MIG will meet with the City Council once to present, discuss and receive
input/direction on the Draft General Plan and EIR. This public hearing will provide
an opportunity for the City Council to review Planning Commission
recommendations and formally receive public comments on the draft
documents. Following this hearing, MIG will attend a second Adoption Hearing
with the City Council to review and discuss the final documents. The conclusion
of this hearing will be the City Council's formal adoption of the updated General
Plan and certification of the EIR.
City staff will be responsible for preparing the formal staff reports for these
hearings.
Task 6.3: Final General Plan
MIG will prepare a Final General Plan based on the outcome of the City Council
adoption hearing. Following Plan adoption, MIG will submit all project files to the
City, including all GIS shapefiles developed during the process. If desired by the
City, this would be the time the digital ePlan would be developed by MIG. (The
budget assumes a standard, searchable and updateable ePlan would be
City of Burlingame Updated December 18, 2014
General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Update Work Program 30
developed. Additional features and functionality is available as an optional
budget item.)
City staff will be responsible for preparing the formal staff reports for these
hearings.
Task 6 Deliverables
• Planning Commission and City Council Hearing Materials (Word/PPT)
• Final General Plan (InDesign/Illustrator/GIS/PDF/printed copies to be
determined)
Phase 7: Zoning Ordinance Update
The City of Burlingame Zoning Ordinance (Title 25 of the Municipal Code) has not
been comprehensively updated since the 1950s. Over the years, revisions have
been made to address evolving land use and development practices,
incorporate Specific Plans and special purpose zones and address changes in
State law. However, this piecemeal update approach has resulted in internal
inconsistencies and a somewhat disorganized structure, with new provisions
tacked onto the end of the Ordinance rather integrated into the most logical
chapter or section. Also, outdated regulations and confusing administrative
provisions have remained embedded in the Ordinance, making it difficult to use.
Undertaking a comprehensive approach to updating the Ordinance together
with the General Plan Update will give the City the opportunity to evaluate the
entire document and rewrite toward these ends:
• Reflect modern land use regulations and development approaches,
including those incorporating sustainability principles
• Implement new General Plan policies developed through the
comprehensive update, including anticipated goals that promote
complete neighborhoods and districts, as well as transit access
• Incorporate all current laws and laws that may become effective during
preparation of the General Plan Update
• Address all of City staff's "fix it" provisions
• Incorporate graphics and tables to make the Ordinance easier to use
• Reflect the City's objectives for good design and quality development by
including urban design standards and illustrations
• Respond to community goals regarding neighborhood preservation
• Establish provisions that incentivize high-quality infill projects that are
compatible with established development
• Create performance standards that reflect conditions and objectives
specific to Burlingame
City of Burlingame Updated December 18, 2014
General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Update Work Program 31
Ensure that administrative procedures are clear, consistent, compatible
with State law, and capable of providing for streamlined review
Establish a logical overall Ordinance structure that allows for future
amendments in locations where it makes sense.
Based on our review of current Title 25, our knowledge of Burlingame, discussions
with Planning staff, and information presented in the Request for Proposals, the
work plan for the Zoning Ordinance update responds to the City's objectives
and incorporates approaches we have found to be successful in other Zoning
Code update programs. We will incorporate good design principles and
standards into the provisions for each zone category (single-family residential,
multifamily residential, commercial, and industrial), with graphics to illustrate
what the City seeks to achieve.
We anticipate beginning work on the Zoning Ordinance during preparation of
the General Plan to inform development/revision of land use categories.
However, most of the work will be completed quickly following General Plan
adoption.
Below we present our initial thoughts on how Title 25 can be reorganized.
New Zoning
Ordinance, Section L Existing Zoning Ordinance Section Recommended Improvements
Section 25.04.010 Zoning plan
established—Purpose.
Section 25.04.040 Incorporation of State
planning act by reference.
Section 25.04.050 Interpretation of Title as
Article 1 minimum requirements.
General Provisions Section 25.04.060 Application to
municipal buildings and uses.
Section 25.04.070 Uses limited to those
permitted.
Section 25.04.080 Consistency with
General or Specific Plans and CEQA.
We will revise/update material to appropriately
summarize the General Plan vision. At a
minimum we will add:
■ Relationship to other Plans and CEQA
■ Interpretation of Regulations
■ Zoning Map Adopted and Zones
Established
■ How to deal with projects already in the
pipeline
City of Burlingame Updated December 18, 2014
General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Update Work Program 32
New Zoning
Ordinance Section brisling Zoning Ordinance Section
Recommended Improvements
All existing districts will be evaluated to ensure
consistency with General Plan land use
designations. Some districts will be deleted,
merged with others, and/or added.
The provisions for each district will be rewritten
and will include a clear purpose statement,
land uses tables and permit requirements,
zone -driven development standards displayed
in a table format, and references to other
applicable standards.
For the residential districts, we will ensure that
the use regulations and development
standards reflect specific programs in the
current Housing Element necessary to maintain
its certified status.
City of Burlingame Updated December 18, 2014
General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Update Work Program 33
Chapter 25.26 R-1 District Regulations
Chapter 25.27 R-2 District Regulations
Chapter 25.28 R-3 District Regulations
Chapter 25.29 R-4 District Regulations
Chapter 25.30 C-1 District Regulations
Chapter 25.31 C-2 District Regulations
Chapter 25.32 BAC (Burlingame Avenue
Commercial) District Regulations
Chapter 25.33 HMU (Howard Mixed Use)
District Regulations
Chapter 25.34 MMU (Myrtle Road Mixed
Use) District Regulations
Chapter 25.35 BMU (Bayswater Mixed
Use) District Regulations
Article 2
Chapter 25.36 DAC (Donnelly Avenue
Zones, Allowable
Commercial) District Regulations
Uses, and
Chapter 25.37 CAC (Chapin Avenue
Development
Commercial) District Regulations
Standards
Chapter 25.38 CAR (California Drive Auto
Row) District Regulations
Chapter 25.40 Trousdale West of EI
Camino Real (TW) District Regulations
Chapter 25.41 EI Camino North District
Regulations (ECN)
Chapter 25.42 C-R District Regulations
Chapter 25.43 Inner Bayshore District (IB)
Chapter 25.44 Rollins Road (RR) District
Regulations
Chapter 25.45 Shoreline District (SL)
Chapter 25.46 T -P District Regulations
Chapter 25.47 Anza Area
Chapter 25.48 Anza Point North (APN)
Chapter25.49 Anza Point South (APS)
Recommended Improvements
All existing districts will be evaluated to ensure
consistency with General Plan land use
designations. Some districts will be deleted,
merged with others, and/or added.
The provisions for each district will be rewritten
and will include a clear purpose statement,
land uses tables and permit requirements,
zone -driven development standards displayed
in a table format, and references to other
applicable standards.
For the residential districts, we will ensure that
the use regulations and development
standards reflect specific programs in the
current Housing Element necessary to maintain
its certified status.
City of Burlingame Updated December 18, 2014
General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Update Work Program 33
New Zoning
Ordinance Section
Article 3
Site Planning and
General
Development
Regulations
Existing Zoning Ordinance Section
Chapter 25.56 Rental or Lease of Vacant
School Properties
Chapter 25.58 General Use Provisions
Chapter 25.63 Inclusionary Housing
Chapter 25.70 Off -Street Parking
Chapter 25.77 Wireless Communications
Facilities
Chapter 25.78 Fences and Hedges
Chapter 25.59 Secondary Dwelling Units
Chapter 25.60 Accessory Structures In R-1
and R-2 Districts
Article 4 Chapter 25.61 Additions To or
Standards for Modifications of Residences In Hillside
Areas
Specific Land Uses
Chapter 25.68 Home Occupations
Chapter 25.74 Automobile Parking Lots,
Sales Lots, and Service Stations
Chapter 25.76 Adult Entertainment
Businesses
Recommended Improvements
We will revise/update existing sections and add
the following sections, among others, as
determined to be appropriate by City staff:
■ Site Planning and General Development
Standards
• Outdoor Lighting Standards
■ Accessory Structures
■ Fences, Walls, and Hedges
■ Landscaping Standards
■ Property Maintenance
■ Performance Standards
■ Infill Development Standards
■ Revised Off -Street Parking and Loading
Standards
■ Density Bonus and Incentives
■ Sustainable Development Practices
Regulations and standards for specific uses will
be organized into one new Article. Other
specific uses that require more detailed
regulations specific to the City will be identified
and added to this Article. We will draw from
provisions currently included throughout the
Code and add additional specific uses,
including for example:
■ Child Care Facilities per State Law
■ Drive-In/Drive-Through
■ Live Entertainment (with reference to
other portions to the Municipal Code(
■ Outdoor Dining
■ Places of Religious Assembly per Federal
Law
■ Residential Care Facilities
■ Identity other uses to be
considered/added
We recommend establishing a new, separate
Article to address nonconformities. The new
Article will be organized to clearly distinguish
Article 5 between nonconforming uses, nonconforming
Nonconformities Chapter 25.50 Nonconforming Uses and structures, nonconforming development
Structures standards, and nonconforming lots. Also, we
Will consult with the staff and City Attorney
regarding the extent to which these provisions
Will be revised, particularly with regard to
amortization requirements, if any.
City of Burlingame Updated December 18, 2014
General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Update Work Program 34
New Zoning
Ordinance Section
Article 6
Permit Processing
Procedures
Existing Zoning Ordinance Section
Chapter 25.16 Procedure for
Classification, Reclassification, Variance
or Special Permit
Chapter 25.20 Permits and Licenses
Chapter 25.24 Fees
Chapter 25.51 Special Permits
Chapter 25.52 Conditional Use Permits
Chapter 25.54 Variances
Chapter 25.55 Minor Modifications
Chapter 25.57 Design Review
Chapter 25.66 Requests for Reasonable
Accommodation for Accessibility
Chapter 25.16 Procedure for
Article 7 Classification, Reclassification, Variance
Zoning Ordinance or Special Permit
Administration Section 25.04.020 Powers and Duties of
Planning Commission
Recommended Improvements
We will organize all of the City's required
planning -related permits and approvals into
this new Article. Each article will begin with a
purpose statement and will be followed by
application filing requirements, processing
procedures, required findings, and post
decision making procedures. We will work with
City staff to determine new administrative
provisions to be considered to streamline
project review.
• General Provisions
■ Application Processing Procedures
(including a comprehensive Review
Authority table)
■ Conditional Use Permits
■ Administrative/Minor Use Permits
• Home Occupation Permits
■ Development/Design Reviews
■ Temporary Use Permits
• Variances
■ Minor Modifications
■ Zoning Clearances
• Planned Development Permits
■ Reasonable Accommodations
■ Permit Implementation, Time Limits, and
Extensions
We will organize all of the City's planning -
related administrative provisions into this new
Article.
■ Administrative Responsibilities
■ Amendments
■ Appeals
■ Public Notices and Hearings
■ Development Agreements
■ Specific Plans
■ Permit Modifications and Revocations
We will modernize the definitions by adding an
Article 8 abbreviations section, rewriting text, defining all
Chapter 25.08 Definitions allowed land uses, adding new terms, deleting
Definitions outdated language, and incorporating
graphics.
Involving Stakeholders, Decision Makers, and the General Public
In Phase 1, we describe the robust public engagement planned for the General
Plan Update work program. During the stakeholder interviews (Task 1.4), we will
talk to Planning Commissioners, developers, property owners, and others who
work closely with the Zoning Ordinance to understand their concerns and ideas
for improvement. We will also conduct study sessions with the Commission and
City Council to get policy direction on key zoning -related issues while Ordinance
City of Burlingame Updated December 18, 2014
General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Update Work Program 35
preparation is underway. We will plan and facilitate at least one community-
wide workshop to present new provisions included in the Zoning Ordinance for
public review and will invite property owners likely to be affected by the General
Plan Update and subsequent re -zoning.
Review of Draft Zoning Ordinance Materials
MIG will prepare the following documents to allow for comprehensive review
and coordination with City staff throughout the process:
• A Diagnosis of current Zoning Ordinance and other sections of the
Burlingame Municipal Code that have a relationship to the Zoning
Ordinance
• Draft Style Sheet and Annotated Outline of Zoning Ordinance
• Policy White Papers for discussion with the Planning Commission during
preparation of the update Zoning Ordinance
• Administrative Draft: First draft (in sections) for internal staff review
• Preliminary Draft: Second draft (in sections) to ensure that comments
have been appropriately addressed, and for discussion with the Planning
Commission in study sessions
• Public Hearing Draft: Third draft for public review, environmental review,
and public hearings with the Planning Commission and City Council
Screencheck
• Final Zoning Ordinance: Following final Council action on the Zoning
Ordinance, internal Screencheck draft to confirm accurate incorporation
of changes approved by the City Council
• Final Zoning Ordinance: Final Zoning Ordinance codification and
publication
• On-line Zoning Ordinance: Searchable on-line version of the adopted
Ordinance (optional task)
Use of a City Staff Technical Advisory Committee
The MIG Team will work closely with City staff throughout the process of draft
Zoning Ordinance preparation, review, and adoption. To help the program
proceed most efficiently and effectively, we recommend that staff establish an
in-house Technical Advisory Committee, or TAC. The TAC can consist of select
planning staff, representatives from Code Enforcement, and, as needed, the
City Attorney and Public Works staff. It may include members from the General
Plan TAC, but may also include members with specific zoning or development
review expertise who were not part of the General Plan TAC. We will conduct
meetings with the TAC to review project progress and significant new portions of
the Ordinance. We will be highly responsive to any evolving City objectives that
City of Burlingame Updated December 18, 2014
General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Update Work Program 36
may emerge from the TAC or as the document is reviewed. TAC meetings are
included in the schedule and budget as staff meetings.
Updated Zoning Map
MIG will prepare a new Zoning Map to reflect the updated General Plan. This will
begin with a General Plan/zoning consistency analysis and result in a new GIS -
based Zoning Map. Because properties will be re -zoned citywide either to
achieve consistency or reflect new zones, property owners should be engaged
and notified. We recommend conducting a workshop focused solely on the
proposed zone changes, as our experience has shown that such a meeting
addresses specific issues and concerns of affected property owners. State law
requires that property owners be directly notified if fewer than 1,000 properties
are directly affected. We recommend direct notification of all property owners
subject to a zone change. MIG can prepare communication materials for this
notification, such as a postcard or newsletter.
Task 7.1: Initial Strategy Meeting
At the outset of this effort, staff from MIG and Jacobson & Wack (J&W) will meet
with City staff to confirm objectives for the Zoning Ordinance update, finalize
and schedule the public engagement tasks specific to this phase of the work
program, and define how recently adopted land use policies will be reflected in
the updated zoning regulations. We will also discuss problems and issues
associated with present land use and development regulations (including
regulatory topics that need attention but are not fully addressed in the current
Zoning Ordinance), and we will review and discuss format and organizational
alternatives. (Please refer to our initial thoughts on this topic above.)
We understand that several City staff members may keep a list of inconsistencies
and confusing provisions (a "fix -it" list) in the current Ordinance that they wish to
address. We will ask that staff prepare a consolidated, comprehensive list prior to
the meeting to help our team understand staff's objectives and desires for
amending the regulations.
As part of this meeting, we will review with staff the Municipal Code as a whole
to identify other provisions that should be included or cross-referenced in the
Zoning Ordinance, or that will, at a minimum, need to be understood so that no
conflicts occurwith the updated provisions.
City staff will meet with MIG and J& W to discuss issues and strategies for updating
the Municipal Code.
City of Burlingame Updated December 18, 2014
General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Update Work Program 37
Task 7.2: Diagnosis of the Zoning Ordinance
Based upon the results of meetings with staff, stakeholder interviews, our review
of City staff's list of identified problems with the current Title 25, and our in-depth
review of the Ordinance and other relevant documents, MIG and J&W will
prepare a diagnosis of the Ordinance and an annotated outline showing how
we propose to address issues in the updated Zoning Ordinance. The outline will
identify existing deficiencies, the revisions deemed necessary to correct those
deficiencies, and where the revisions will be addressed in the comprehensive
updated Title 25.
We will prepare the diagnosis in a matrix format. The matrix can be used to track
revisions to the existing Ordinance during the drafting process and is intended to
assist in the preparation of staff report(s) when the updated Ordinance goes
through the public review and adoption process.
As part of this task, MIG and J&W will also prepare a recommended style sheet,
a standard chapter format that will be used, and a working outline for the
updated Zoning Ordinance. In consultation with City staff, we will identify which
existing zones will remain to implement General Plan land use designations,
which will be eliminated as no longer necessary or purposeful, and new zones
that will need to be created.
MIG and J&W will meet with staff to review the diagnosis, style sheet and format,
and outline. Because we anticipate that the Ordinance ultimately will be
incorporated into the City's on-line Municipal Code, we will structure the
document to allow for easy conversion. Based on the input received from staff,
MIG and J&W will revise the annotated outline, format and style sheet, and
sample chapter format to illustrate the intended format and style of the updated
Zoning Ordinance. The revised outline will form the basis for the comprehensive
update.
City staff will meet with MIG and J&W,• review the diagnosis, style sheet, format
and outline; and provide feedback.
City of Burlingame Updated December 18, 2014
General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Update Work Program 38
Task 7.3: Administrative Draft Zoning Ordinance
MIG and J&W will prepare an Administrative Draft Zoning Ordinance for Planning
staff and TAC review. The Ordinance will be prepared as individual articles,
chapters and sections in order to allow staff to provide timely, focused
feedback. The efforts will focus on:
• Restructuring the Ordinance for ease of use (see the draft outline above
for recommended restructuring);
• Eliminating redundancies and inconsistencies;
• Extensive use of tables and illustrative graphics;
• Implementing General Plan land use and urban design policies;
• Incorporating State law provisions that are not currently reflected in the
Code;
• Addressing smart growth and environmentally sustainable development
practices (such as site design and use of materials); and
• Streamlining development review processes.
MIG and J&W will prepare the Administrative Draft of all articles of the updated
Ordinance. The Ordinance will generally address the following, with the details to
be defined as part of the diagnosis process.
Chapter 1: General Provisions
This Chapter corresponds to Chapters 25.04, 25.20, and 25.24 of current Title 25.
We will reformat per the new structure and expand the regulations to address
zoning relationships to the CEQA process as well as other provisions required by
law.
Chapter 2: Zone Provisions
Chapters 25.26 through 25.49 establish the various zones in Burlingame and the
land use and development regulations that apply. We note that the provisions
largely do not contain Purpose and Intent statements for each zone. We will
draft purpose statements for each existing and new proposed zoning district.
The current Ordinance structure provides long lists of permitted and conditionally
permitted uses for each zone. To create an easy-to-use code, we will construct
use tables for each zone or groups of zones. (An example section of a table is
provided on the next page). We will analyze the use regulations applicable to
each zone and the development standards to ensure they reflect the General
Plan, other City objectives, and current State law. For the residential districts and
other zones that allow residential uses, we will ensure that the use regulations and
City of Burlingame Updated December 18, 2014
General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Update Work Program 39
development standards reflect specific programs in the current Housing Element
necessary to maintain its certified status.
We will expand the development standards to incorporate the following, to the
extent desired by City staff:
• Good site design and building design principles (those that can and
should be codified)
• Universal access standards
• Sustainable design practices, to the extent desired by the City
Residential Zones
We understand that the City does not envision substantive changes to the
residential zones. Our work here will focus on reorganizing Chapters 25.26
through 25.29 into a single chapter with use and development standard
matrices. We will make land use regulatory changes only as directed by staff
and as required to meet current State law. Language will be clarified and
simplified as needed. Regulations provided for specific uses (e.g., corner stores)
may be relocated to new Article 4.
A separate table will be prepared for development standards, and these will
only be adjusted to include clarifying language, so as not to create widespread
nonconformities. To the extent practical and desired by the City, we will move
provisions from the current residential design guidelines to the Ordinance. For
example, we envision guidelines addressing privacy, porches, and fences could
easily be codified by changing Ordinance language (e.g., "shall" instead of
"should").
If it makes sense to do so, we will also incorporate updated hillside regulations
from existing Chapter 25.61 into this Chapter. If the City prefers that the hillside
regulations be kept separate, we will update and incorporate them instead into
Article 3. We also recommend including in the Residential Zone Chapter existing
Chapter 25.59 (Secondary Dwelling Units).
Example of Land Use Table
Where the last column in the Table 2-5 includes a Chapter or Section number,
the regulations in the referenced Chapter or Section shall apply to the use.
Provisions in other Sections of this Development Code may also apply.
City of Burlingame Updated December 18, 2014
General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Update Work Program 40
Table 2-5
Allowed Uses and Permit
Requirements
Commercial Zone Permit
P Permitted By Right
A Permitted as Accessory Use
MUP Minor Use Permit
CUP Conditional Use Permit
Not Allowed
Land Use C -P C -G C -F Specific Use
Regulations
Retail Trade Uses
Alcohol Beverage Sales
A
Alcohol Sales (off -sale)
A
CUP
CUP
See 19.60.030
Alcohol Sales (on -sale), Accessory Only
A
A
A
(Alcohol
Beverage Sales
Business)
Convenience Store
CUP
CUP
A
Pawn Shop
Retail Store (Less than 20,000 sf)
P
P
Retail Store (20,001 to 80,000 sf)
MUP
MUP
Retail Store (80,001 or greater sf)
CUP
CUP
Shopping Center
Neighborhood
CUP
See 19.12.040
Community
CUP
CUP
(Limitations on
Regional
CUP
CUP
Shopping
Centers)
Vehicle Rental
MUP
MUP
Vehicle Sales - New
CUP
P
Vehicle Sales - Used
CUP
Vehicle Parts Sales
(including stereos/alarms, but no installation)
P
A
Vending Machines - Outside
MUP
MUP
MUP
See 19.60.170
(Vending
Machines -
Outdoor)
Business, Financial, and Professional
ATMs
A
A
A
Financial Institutions and Related Services
P
P
MUP
Offices — Business or Corporate
P
P
ana
Accessory Food Service (open to public) A A A
Bars, Lounges, Nightclubs, and Taverns CUP CUP
City of Burlingame Updated December 18, 2014
General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Update Work Program 41
Commercial and Mixed -Use Zones
Burlingame has approximately 12 zones for commercial and mixed-use
development. Several have been crafted to respond to unique conditions and
goals for a focused area (for example, Burlingame Avenue Commercial), and
others implement Specific Plans (for example, EI Camino North). During the
General Plan process of revisiting land use categories, we will do the same for
the commercial and mixed-use zones to ensure they continue to achieve the
City's objectives by encouraging the types of land uses and scale of
development desired. In consultation with City staff/TAC, we will determine
whether any zones should be combined, eliminated, or substantially revised.
MIG will prepare a matrix of development standards, with particular attention
paid to crafting standards that encourage high-quality, compatible infill
development. As with the Residential zones, we will draw from the adopted
Commercial Design Guidelines to include design standards into the Zoning
Ordinance (e.g., building entries, pedestrian access, massing, fencing/gates)
and develop new standards as needed to illustrate the quality the City seeks to
achieve.
Chapter 3: Regulations Applicable to All Zones
MIG and J&W will update provisions that address development regulations
applicable to all zones, including parking and loading, landscaping, property
maintenance, and operational performance standards. In particular, we will:
• Consolidate landscaping requirements into a single article, revise them to
meet City aesthetic objectives, and address the requirements of AB 1881 if
the City has not already done so;
• Update parking and loading requirements as appropriate, including
parking structure standards;
• Develop comprehensive and clear standards for property maintenance;
and
• Include performance standards for lighting, noise, and any other
conditions desired.
Parking
MIG and J&W will update the parking standards to address any difficulties staff
has had in their interpretation and/or application. In particular, we will create a
parking space requirement matrix (with standards changed as needed based
on best practices and in discussion with City staff), provide graphics, address
sustainable parking lot design, and update the loading facilities requirements.
We will also develop standards for bicycle parking and accommodations for
parking of electric and other alternative fuel vehicles.
City of Burlingame Updated December 18, 2014
General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Update Work Program 42
Sianage
The City's sign regulations are currently contained in Chapter 22 (Signs) and
appear to have been updated in 2007. The Sign Ordinance will be updated to
ensure consistency with any changes to the Zoning Ordinance. We have
budgeted an allowance for focused revisions to the Sign Ordinance. We will
discuss with the City whether the it wishes to allow LED signs, either on-site or off-
site (billboards) and if so, will develop regulations accordingly. LED signs are an
issue we recommend staff explore early with the Planning Commission, as this
can be a controversial issue that can take up a lot of time and discussion.
Sustainable Development
The City may wish to incorporate sustainability principles and green building
concepts into the Zoning Ordinance. This approach to planning and
development has a spectrum of options depending on how "green" the City
wishes to be. For this work program, we recommend a modest approach,
incorporating, for example, building orientation, LEED or equivalent standards
that can be addressed through zoning controls, and use of sustainable building
materials. The City may consider providing incentives for green development
strategies, such as increased densities or intensities or expedited application
processing. Based on direction we receive during the initial outreach, we will
incorporate additional sustainability principles and standards. As part of the
scope refinement task, we will discuss with staff how far along the green
spectrum the City wishes to go.
The Cal Green Code includes provisions related to sustainability that if not
currently addressed in the City's Building Code, either explicitly or by reference,
can be folded into the Zoning Ordinance. As part of our discussions with the
City, we will identify the best approach to addressing Cal Green Code
standards.
Other Standards
MIG and J&W will incorporate other standards and updates to reflect current
practices into Chapter 3 including fence and hedges, measurement of building
height, accessory structures, outdoor storage, trash enclosures, performance
standards (e.g., lighting, noise), property maintenance, trip reduction and
transportation demand management and treatment alleys.
Chapter 4: Special Land Use Regulations
MIG and J&W will update provisions of the Ordinance that address specific uses
allowed in multiple zones. We will also identify uses that staff routinely write
conditions of approval for and create new regulations to codify these. At a
City of Burlingame Updated December 18, 2014
General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Update Work Program 43
minimum, the MIG Team will prepare updated regulations for the following uses
currently addressed in the Zoning Ordinance:
• Adult Entertainment Businesses (working closely with the City Attorney)
• Alcoholic Beverage Sales
• D(ve-Through Businesses
• Large Family Day Care
• Residential Care Facilities
• Service Stations
• Wireless Telecommunications Facilities
Chapter 5: Nonconformities
We recommend establishing a new, separate chapter to address
nonconformities. The new chapter will be organized to clearly distinguish
between nonconforming uses, nonconforming structures, nonconforming
development standards, and nonconforming lots. Also, we will discuss with staff
and the City Attorney whether amortization provisions are desired for any
particular uses.
Chapters 6 and 7: Administrative Provisions
We anticipate making fairly substantive revisions to current Chapters 25.51
through 25.55, as well as bringing into Chapter 6 the administrative provisions that
may currently be scattered throughout the Zoning Ordinance, with the goals of:
1) streamlining certain development processes, 2) consolidating provisions to
improve usability of the Code and ensure consistency among processes (such as
a standard time period to file Appeals), and 3) updating/revising any other
administrative provisions that staff has found problematic. We will include a
Review Authority table (see example provided) that clearly identifies primary
approval and appeal authority for each type of review and discretionary permit.
At a minimum, new articles will address:
Purpose and adoption of the Zoning Ordinance, applicability,
responsibility and authority for its administration, interpretation procedures,
and provisions addressing pipeline applications (applications deemed
complete but not yet approved/disapproved that might be affected by
an Ordinance amendment)
Definition of the roles of each project review entity, including the Planning
Department, Planning Commission, City Council, and any other pertinent
bodies
Administrative procedures for discretionary use permits, establishment of
an administrative adjustment process, site plan review, development
City at Burlingame Updated December 18, 2014
General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Update Work Program 44
agreements, specific plans, appeals, zoning map changes, Zoning
Ordinance and general plan amendments.
We also envision making the provisions for the Special Permit more robust, clearly
indicating the circumstances under which the Special Permit may be requested
and indicating more clearly the public benefits and trade-offs that must be
attained.
City of Burlingame Updated December 18, 2014
General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Update Work Program 45
Example of Review Authority table
Table 6-1
Applicable Role of Review Authority (1)
Review Authority
Code
Chapter/ City Zoning Commission Council
Type of Action Section Planner I Administrator
Administrative and Legislative Actions
Development Agreements and 10.118
Amendments
Recommend
Decision
General Plan Amendments 10.112
Recommend
Decision
Interpretations 10.06 Decision (2)
Appeal
Appeal
Specific Plans and Amendments 10.120
Recommend
Decision
Zoning Code Amendments 10.112
Zoning Map Amendments 10.112
Recommend
Decision
Recommend
I Decision
Planning Permits and Approvals
Conditional Use Permits
10.84
Decision
Appeal
Home Occupation Permits
10.86
Decision (2)
Appeal
Appeal
Minor Use Permits
10.84
Decision (2)
Appeal
Appeal
Minor Variances
10.98
Decision (2)
Appeal
Appeal
Planned Development Permits
10.88
Decision
Appeal
Reasonable Accommodations
10.90
Decision (2)
Appeal
Appeal
Sign Permits
10.34
Decision (2)
Appeal
Appeal
Site Plan and Design Review
(See Table 6-2 for specified
thresholds.)
10.94
Decision (2)
Decision/
Appeal
Appeal
Temporary Use Permits
10.96
Decision (2)
(3)
Appeal
Variances
10.98
Decision
Appeal
Zoning Clearances
10.100
Decision
Appeal
Appeal
Notes:
(1) 'Recommend" means that the review authority makes a recommendation to a higher decision
making body; "Decision" means that the review authority makes the final decision on the matter;
"Appeal" means that the review authority may consider and decide upon appeals to the
decision of an earlier decision making body, in compliance with Chapter 10.114 (Appeals).
(2) The City Planner or Zoning Administrator may choose to refer the application to the Commission
for review and final decision, as authorized by this Zoning Code.
(3) The City Manager shall serve as the first line of appeal for Temporary Use Permits in compliance
with Subsection 10.96.080 D. (City Manager to Act as Appeal Review Authority). The decision of
the City Manager is appealable to the Council.
Chapter 8: Definitions
MIG and AW will move the Definitions to be the last Chapter of the Ordinance,
and will comprehensively update these provisions to reflect changes made to
other parts of the Ordinance, ensure consistency with state and federal laws,
include illustrations of key terms, and consolidate and standardize all definitions
that may now be found throughout the Ordinance. We will provide a definition
City of Burlingame Updated December 18, 2014
General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Update Work Program 46
for each allowed land use specified in Chapter 2 (Zoning District Provisions) and
for the codified Specific Plans.
City staff will provide the consultant team one version of the Administrative Draft
that contains all staff mark-ups and comments, preferably using Word's track
changes tool.
Task 7.4: Prepare Preliminary Draft Zoning Ordinance
This task will include revisions to the Administrative Draft Zoning Code Ordinance
based on Planning staff/TAC input, the creation of a detailed table of contents,
and the addition of graphics and illustrations. Graphics will be used throughout
the updated Ordinance wherever they may assist users in visualizing the
meaning and applicability of standards, or otherwise improve understanding or
ease of use.
Following staff review of the Preliminary Draft, the MIG Team will meet with staff
to review comments. City staff will provide the consultant team one version of
the preliminary draft Zoning Ordinance that contains all of staff's mark-ups and
comments using Word's track -changes function.
City staff will provide the consultant team one version of the Preliminary Draft
that contains all staff mark-ups and comments, preferably using Word's track
changes tool.
Task 7.5: Prepare Public Review Draft Zoning Ordinance
MIG and J&W will prepare the Public Review Draft Zoning Ordinance to
incorporate final staff comments on the Preliminary Draft. This is the version that
will be available for the Planning Commission workshops.
City staff will review the Public Draft and provide a consolidated set of staff mark-
ups comments.
Task 7.6: Public Workshops with the Planning Commission
Prior to formal public hearings on the Draft Zoning Ordinance, we propose to
conduct a series of workshops with the Planning Commission, to which the public
will be specifically invited to attend and participate. These will be informal
sessions that will allow the consultant team and City staff to present the draft
Ordinance and Zoning Map to policy makers and the public, to highlight key
revisions and new provisions, to discuss mixed-use provisions in a focused
manner, to describe development review processes, and otherwise review
City of Burlingame Updated December 18, 2014
General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Update Work Program 47
important sections of the updated Ordinance. We find this approach to be very
helpful for the subsequent public hearing process. During the workshops, the
Commission and public can identify any issues they may have with draft
Ordinance provisions, and the staff/consultant team can prepare
responses/options to bring back to the Planning Commission as part of the formal
public hearing process.
Up to 20 workshops will be held throughout the course of the program. Several of
these will be allocated to the Zoning Ordinance component. The topics and
structure will be determined in consultation with City staff.
MIG and J&W will be responsible for preparing all workshop materials, including
"white papers" to guide the review process. We will meet with staff prior to each
workshop or series of workshops to coordinate presentation of the materials.
City staff will be responsible for securing workshop locations, printing and mailing
announcements, and providing food.
Task 7.7: Zoning Map and Related Public Outreach
The City will need to prepare an updated Zoning Map that reflects any new
zoning districts and achieves consistency with the General Plan land use policy
map. This map will need to be part of the public hearing process for the Zoning
Ordinance. In additional to creating the updated map, the City may need to
individually notify any property owners of proposed zone changes (unless more
than 1,000 properties are affected, then a general notice will suffice).
Consistency Analysis
Our work scope assumes that the City will provide our team with the current GIS
file of the Zoning Map. We will use this and the General Plan land use policy
map GIS file created during the MIG the General Plan Update to conduct a
consistency analysis and identify where rezoning will need to be accomplished.
The consistency review process we will use involves:
• Creating a General Plan land use/zoning consistency matrix for staff
review.
Preparing a map based on the consistency matrix, showing where
properties need to be rezoned because (1) the underlying land use
designation has changed, (2) a new land use/zone has been created, or
(3) the old zone no longer exists as a result of the comprehensive update;
and
Working with City staff to identify the appropriate new zones for affected
properties.
City of Burlingame Updated December 18, 2014
General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Update Work Program 48
Focused Outreach for Rezoning
We recommend focused outreach to property owners likely to be affected by
re -zoning. Our experience has shown that the public hearing process can be
eased when we directly address the concerns of property owners whose
properties will be rezoned to achieve General Plan consistency and/or reflect
changes in the updated Zoning Ordinance (for example, renaming or
elimination of zones).
Many properties may be rezoned as a result of the update to the Zoning Map,
and affected property owners may need to be individually noticed in this
regard. State law requires individual notice if fewer than 1,000 properties are
affected; if 1,000 or more will be changed, then public notice can be limited to
an eighth -page newspaper notice. However, many cities elect to provide
individual notices in any case. In any event, to help affected property owners
understand the reasons for the rezoning and its effects, MIG will prepare an
informational newsletter that can be produced in a relatively inexpensive black -
and -white format and mailed to affected owners, as well as posted on the City's
website.
We also recommend conducting one or more of the Planning Commission
workshops as a focused rezoning public workshop to answer questions that
property owners may have regarding proposed rezoning. The newsletter can
also serve as a workshop notice. We have found that many property owners,
after they have read the newsletter and/or contacted City staff with questions,
are satisfied with the proposals. However, the workshop provides a good forum
to allow property owners to review maps and ask questions in a public forum.
The City will be responsible for newsletter reproduction costs and
mailing/distribution, and responsible for securing workshop locations, printing and
mailing announcements, and providing food.
Task 7.8: CEQA Documentation
The EIR prepared for the General Plan update will address the Zoning Ordinance
update; thus, separate CEQA documentation will not be required other than
requiring the decision-making bodies to adopt a consistency finding.
City staff will be responsible for reviewing draft documents.
Task 7.9: Public Review and Adoption
City of Burlingame Updated December 18, 2014
General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Update Work Program 49
MIG and J&W will attend two Planning Commission hearings and two City
Council hearings to support Zoning Ordinance adoption. We are available to
attend additional hearings on a reimbursable basis.
City staff will be responsible for preparing the formal staff reports for these
hearings.
Task 7.10: Final Zoning Ordinance and Zoning Map
After the final City Council hearing on the updated Zoning Ordinance and
before its effective date, we will prepare a final version to incorporate all
changes made by the City Council. We will provide a screencheck version so
that City staff can verify that the document accurately incorporates all changes
approved by the City Council (including changes recommended by the
Planning Commission and accepted by the Council) during the adoption
process.
Because we cannot anticipate the scope of changes to be directed by the City
Council, our budget includes a specific allowance for this task. Any work
required beyond this allowance will be billed on a time -and -materials basis with
prior authorization from the City. We will prepare the final Zoning Ordinance for
delivery to the City for codification and publication. Based on final City Council
direction during the hearings, we will make revisions to the Zoning Map.
City staff will be responsible for reviewing the final Zoning Ordinance.
City of Burlingame Updated December 18, 2014
General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Update Work Program 50
Optional Tasks
Below are a series of optional tasks that the City may consider incorporating into
the Zoning Ordinance work program.
Task 0.1: Searchable Online Zoning Ordinance
If desired by the City—and if the City intends to adopt the Zoning Ordinance
separate from the Municipal Code—we can prepare and deliver a complete
hypertext version of the updated Zoning Ordinance for the City website home
page. This version would contain all text, charts, graphics, and illustrations
included in the printed document. The functional details of the Online Zoning
Ordinance and the appearance of its user interface would be worked out
through discussions with City staff; however, the following describes our
recommended approach.
(Our caution: If the City publishes Title 25 through its Municipal Code publisher as
the official Zoning Ordinance, the online hypertext version will always need to be
revised in tandem with the official published version. This creates a situation that
could arise regarding possible inconsistencies between the two documents. The
way to avoid this is to not publish Title 25 with the balance of the Municipal
Code, and to have the City maintain the official version. Planning staff will need
to discuss with the City Clerk whether this approach is acceptable. We will work
out details with the City as part of the scope refinement process.)
If the Zoning Ordinance is published online separate from the Municipal Code, a
user accessing the City's website would find a scrollable hypertext table of
contents showing titles of all chapters. Any selection would jump to the
applicable page. Each page would be scrollable (pages larger than the
computer screen frame can be shifted up or down to allow viewing of all parts
of the page). "Forward" and "Back" buttons on the web browser software
toolbar at the top of the screen would allow moving from page to page.
Additional functions would allow printing individual or groups of pages, saving
one or more pages to a text file, marking a page or section for future reference,
and accessing a key word search of the entire Code.
The website Zoning Ordinance would be produced in two tasks. A "proof of
concept" version consisting of the user interface, search, and other facilities with
a demonstration portion of the data would be produced for City staff review. A
final, complete version of the website would be produced after City Council
adoption of the final document.
City of Burlingame Updated December 18, 2014
General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Update Work Program 51
We would assist with the installation of a test version of the software in the
Department (or on the consultant's website) and instruct City staff on its use.
Based on City staff feedback from use of the test version, we would prepare final
versions of the software and conduct workshops for staff on the installation and
use of the system. We would remain available to answer City staff questions and
correct any problems with the software for a period of one year at no additional
cost to the City.
0.2: Updated Design Guidelines
As part of the scoped and budgeted work program, MIG intends to incorporate
good design principles and standards into the provisions for each zone category
(single-family residential, multifamily residential, commercial, and industrial), with
graphics and illustrations showing what the City looks to achieve. More detailed,
highly illustrative design guidelines that build on the existing City documents can
be prepared as an optional task. MIG has an in-house team of talented urban
designers who are well qualified to complete design guidelines for the many
areas described above. We envision creating a complete Design Guidelines
manual to address all areas, with separate chapters focusing on discrete districts
or development types. Because the work program can vary widely depending
upon the City's expectations and the level of community engagement
undertaken, we have provided a budget range in our cost proposal. If the City
elects to pursue this optional task, the scope and cost will be determined during
the initial scope refinement process.
0.3: Interactive Zoning Map
MIG can prepare an interactive Zoning Map that allows members of the public
to find out a range of information—and foremost the zoning of a property—using
a property address or Assessor's Parcel Number (APN). We would develop an
application using an Arc Explorer map project that will enable staff and the
public to navigate and conduct basic queries of the GIS data created during
the update program. We would deliver a stand-alone Arc Explorer Map
application package preconfigured with Burlingame's parcel -level GIS data. This
application package would be preconfigured to run directly from a CD-ROM or
could be installed on a computer.
Task 7 Deliverables:
• Diagnosis of Zoning Ordinance
• Annotated Outline of updated Zoning Ordinance
• Sample format and style sheet and chapter format
• Administrative Draft Zoning Ordinance (Word/PDF/5 printed copies)
City of Burlingame Updated December 18, 2014
General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Update Work Program 52
We would assist with the installation of a test version of the software in the
Department (or on the consultant's website) and instruct City staff on its use.
Based on City staff feedback from use of the test version, we would prepare final
versions of the software and conduct workshops for staff on the installation and
use of the system. We would remain available to answer City staff questions and
correct any problems with the software for a period of one year at no additional
cost to the City.
0.2: Updated Design Guidelines
As part of the scoped and budgeted work program, MIG intends to incorporate
good design principles and standards into the provisions for each zone category
(single-family residential, multifamily residential, commercial, and industrial), with
graphics and illustrations showing what the City looks to achieve. More detailed,
highly illustrative design guidelines that build on the existing City documents can
be prepared as an optional task. MIG has an in-house team of talented urban
designers who are well qualified to complete design guidelines for the many
areas described above. We envision creating a complete Design Guidelines
manual to address all areas, with separate chapters focusing on discrete districts
or development types. Because the work program can vary widely depending
upon the City's expectations and the level of community engagement
undertaken, we have provided a budget range in our cost proposal. If the City
elects to pursue this optional task, the scope and cost will be determined during
the initial scope refinement process.
0.3: Interactive Zoning Map
MIG can prepare an interactive Zoning Map that allows members of the public
to find out a range of information—and foremost the zoning of a property—using
a property address or Assessor's Parcel Number (APN). We would develop an
application using an Arc Explorer map project that will enable staff and the
public to navigate and conduct basic queries of the GIS data created during
the update program. We would deliver a stand-alone Arc Explorer Map
application package preconfigured with Burlingame's parcel -level GIS data. This
application package would be preconfigured to run directly from a CD-ROM or
could be installed on a computer.
Task 7 Deliverables:
• Diagnosis of Zoning Ordinance
• Annotated Outline of updated Zoning Ordinance
• Sample format and style sheet and chapter format
• Administrative Draft Zoning Ordinance (Word/PDF/5 printed copies)
City of Burlingame Updated December 18, 2014
General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Update Work Program 52
• Preliminary Draft Zoning Ordinance (Word/PDF/5 printed copies)
• Public Review Draft Zoning Ordinance (Word/PDF/15 printed copies)
• Workshop Materials (Word/PPT/PDF/printed copies)
• Consistency Matrix (Excel)
• Consistency Map (GIS/Illustrator/PDF)
• Administrative Draft and Final Rezoning Newsletter (InDesign/PDF/printed
copies to be determined)
• Hearing presentation materials (PowerPoint/PDF)
• Screencheck Final Zoning Code (PDF)
• Final Zoning Code (master reproducible; Word/PDF)
• GIS files of Final Zoning Map (GIS/PDF)
• Searchable Online Zoning Ordinance (Optional Task)
• Updated Design Guidelines (Optional Task)
• Interactive Zoning Map (Optional Task)
Phase 8: Specific Plan Technical Updates
8.1: Administrative Draft Specific Plan Updates
Based upon the updates to the General Plan and the Zoning Ordinance, MIG will
prepare focused, technical updates to the North Burlingame/Rollins Road,
Downtown, and Bayfront specific plans to ensure consistency. These updates will
be included within the current Word or InDesign files of the Specific Plans. It is
assumed that MIG will be making text edits to these documents, and that any
new graphic edits would be an out of scope item. MIG will submit Administrative
Drafts of each updated specific plan to City staff for review.
City staff will provide the consultant team one version of the administrative draft
that contains all staff mark-ups and comments, preferably using Word's track
changes tool.
8.2: Public Draft Specific Plans
Based upon City staff comments, MIG will prepare Public Drafts of each Specific
Plan within their original Word or InDesign files. It is assumed that the specific plan
updates will not require additional CEQA analysis, but instead they will rely on the
EIR prepared for the General Plan.
City staff will coordinate with MIG on final edits and refinements to the specific
plans.
City of Burlingame Updated December 18, 2014
General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Update Work Program 53
Phase 8 Deliverables:
Administrative Draft Specific Plans (Word/InDesign/PDF)
Public Draft Specific Plans (Word/InDesign/PDF/printed copies to be
determined)
Phase 9: Ongoing Coordination and Management
The Project Management Team, in close coordination with City staff, will be
responsible for managing the General Plan Amendment process in order to keep
the project on schedule and budget. This phase includes internal and external
project coordination and management activities, including weekly calls,
quarterly meetings, and coordination with other public agencies and community
organizations. This phase also includes internal coordination and management
between the City and the MIG Team.
The MIG Team will also work with three groups - the Technical Advisory
Committee, Community Advisory Committee and Planning Commission Sub -
Committee to review draft work products, discuss emerging concepts and
strategies, and confirm and expand upon community input.
Task 9.1: Coordination Calls and Meetings
The Project Management Team and Topic Area Leaders will attend weekly
conference calls with City staff to coordinate on the project, discuss draft ideas
or work products, and schedule near term items or data needs. Laura Stetson
and/or Dan Amsden will attend each of these calls. Other team members will be
included in calls related to their tasks or work products as needed. As such, the
budget assumes a reasonable level of involvement for all team members during
the duration of the project.
City staff will be responsible for reviewing draft agendas and participating in
calls.
Task 9.2: City Technical Advisory Committee Meetings (10)
As noted above in Phase 7, MIG recommends the City convene a Technical
Advisory Committee, or TAC, to consult and advise the project team during the
development of the General Plan Update and Zoning Ordinance. The TAC
would consist of City staff from Community Development, Engineering, Parks and
Recreation, Public Works and other departments with a vested interest in this
City of Burlingame Updated December 18, 2014
General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Update Work Program 54
project. Staff from other partner agencies may be invited to participate on the
TAC as well. MIG will consult with City staff to develop the TAC roster. The TAC will
be convened up to 10 times during the course of the project schedule, to review
draft work products, advise on policy and plan development and help staff
prepare for public meetings, workshops and hearings.
City staff will be responsible for finalizing the list of TAC members and inviting
them to participate. For regular meetings, the City will secure meeting locations
and provide materials.
Task 9.3: Community Advisory Committee Meetings (20)
The MIG Team will plan and facilitate up to 20 meetings of a Community
Advisory Committee, or CAC, that will represent a range of community interests
to advise the project team during the development of the General Plan Update
and Zoning Ordinance. Members may include representatives from
neighborhood associations, business groups, transportation and housing
advocacy groups, environmental organizations as well as residents representing
a range of perspectives, including youth and seniors. MIG will consult with City
staff to develop the CAC roster. MIG will plan, facilitate and briefly summarize
each CAC meeting to inform the work of the project team. The CAC will be
active participants in the planning process at each stage, from visioning through
adoption, and will serve as liaisons to their constituent groups, inviting input into
the process and encouraging community participation in public events,
community workshops and online surveys. All CAC meetings will be open to the
public and may include public comment periods.
City staff will be responsible for finalizing the list of CAC members and inviting
them to participate. For regular meetings, the City will secure meeting locations
and provide materials and refreshments.
Task 9.4: Planning Commission Sub -committee Meetings (10)
A sub -committee of the Planning Commission will be convened to work closely
with the project team during the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance updates.
This group will advise the project team and provide informational updates to the
Planning Commission. MIG will plan, facilitate and briefly summarize each
meeting to inform the work of the project team.
City staff will be responsible for meeting locations and provide materials and
refreshments.
City of Burlingame Updated December 18, 2014
General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Update Work Program 55
Task 9.5: Other Agency and Community Group Coordination
The MIG Team will coordinate with other public agencies throughout the
General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Update processes. This task includes up to
five meetings with other agencies during the course of the project, and ongoing
phone and email coordination. This task will allow MIG to have flexible and timely
engagement with key groups that may have specific issues or require in-depth
conversations with the project team. These meetings will help keep other
community workshops focused and ensure the project remains on topic and
schedule.
City staff will be responsible for assisting MIG with any meeting logistics.
Task 9.6: Project Management
MIG will have a lead role managing the process to ensure the project remains on
budget and schedule. This task accounts for MIG's project management and
coordination (emails, calls, data transfers, etc.) with both City staff and the
subconsultant team.
City staff will be responsible for regular communication with the MIG project
management team.
Phase 9 Deliverables:
• Weekly Project Management Calls
• As -needed phone and email communication and in-person staff
meetings
• TAC Meeting Materials and Summaries (Word/PDF/hard copies)
• CAC Meeting Materials and Summaries (Word/PDF/hard copies)
• Planning Commission Sub -Committee Materials and Summaries
(Word/PDF/hard copies)
• Meetings with Community Groups and Agencies
• Monthly invoices, budget and progress reports (PDF)
Process Schedule
The MIG Team believes that the phases and tasks outlined in our work program
can be completed within the 24 month timeframe envisioned by the City for
General Plan adoption (and 30 month to complete all tasks, including the Zoning
Ordinance Update and technical updates to the Specific Plans). To illustrate how
we would schedule the project, we have prepared the following detailed
Process Schedule graphic that outlines our proposed approach in detail.
City of Burlingame Updated December 18, 2014
General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Update Work Program 56
Budget
The attached budget presents the MIG Team's estimate of costs for the General
Plan and Zoning Ordinance update project. As for all of our projects, we
anticipate working closely with the City of Burlingame to revise and tailor the
work program and budget to ensure that they reflect Burlingame's needs,
resources and goals.
City of Burlingame Updated December 18, 2014
General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Update Work Program 57
a;epoll aOueucpdo JuiuoZ pue ueld ledauao aun:aulldng
V LOZ'e L H3ONAD30
ov
LLOZ Ain£ HOOOLHI SLOZ AHvnNvr:SHINOW
iinaIHDS IDIM id
sfiupaaW
3uauwfieueW l.atmd 9'6
aau
e avi'w ]VI']tl
p w
d
uonew pw., uo4ez!uefi+O Ayunwwa,/.( ua6tl+a4}O 5"6
�_
ys�
Tr
L) s6 4ry
(0 6n aaW aaiilwwo, Aos!nPtl A!fiaww.lJ £'6
(oz),
_
..
....
...
.. ..
....
...
.... ..
IpU s6upaaW aau!ww., As!nptl iw'!u4n lA!] Z"6
}uawafieueW
yafa�d Weuapeu!p�w]6u!o6up
e6upaayy pue ape, uoyewryooJ L'6
vela
uolieulp+.oJ pue;uawa6eueW :6 aseyd
zue!d J!�dSi)wO o!14nd ZS
sued 3SnadS ywO auuns!u!wPy l'a
—
se3ePdH lea!°9a 1 "eid al}PatlS :a aseyd
dnW 6u,.o pue e3ueulp o 6uw.Z leu, OL'L
dvw pue
..,doptl pue.!caa?Wl 6'1
s6upaaN
ueoiryo5
43ea+ino 3!Ignd Paielaa pue del fiu!u.Z CL
]](Jd
'O ZHe,a wl
d
. w., 6=.., ay¢ 4i1u sd.ggd Ma!Ign, 9"L
eu!po SuluoZ lived ua!naa 3!!gnd weds+d 5"L
mmm1
—
93eu!p+O 6uluoZ 4wO Aeulw!la+d weda+d by
au ewpl, 6u!uoz4." auee+islwwPtl E'L
ai eu!p+O 6wuoZ ayi }. soufie!O Zy
6uP-W ASaIe Sle.wl L
;1-7HueldlwaueOleu!d
a;epdn aauempip 6usuoZ :L aseyd
E9
KI s6uueaH 3!Ild IPunoJ A!] Z'9
(2) s6uueaH iggnd uws,wwo, 6umueld L'9
uo4doptl pue s6uueaH ueld Iwaua9:9 ase4d
al31en9
MI3 Ha+0
itlm5/d0
Po .N iedw ryawumu
I le ud euO E
_._ Yoday iiedwi lewawuw!m33)e3O Z'S
_
6up98W 6u!doas pue dON'Apn1S le4lul L'S
.,shay le}uawuaynua :S aseyd
Dano
va u!!gnd
al
aaannsi
Aaged
(0 asnoH ua oAlunww. b'b
_
ueld I .... Oy.O.!14M E"b
—
ueld le�auaOl}wO an¢egsry!wptl Z�4
---
4:.mawwd A!Ind L'b
-
Yeld leiauaq gvd :q ase4d
}daiuo, pviadwd CE
gza5
uApms
tlryryoM
Neww
6ultltl }y
( L)uo!ssag APn15 pnuno, Ap 9'£
]dn]
as peva}
A!unwwo
=a.pawvl
+daaa]
a6uey]
/A!INnS
(LI ..ps .S Apws u.!mwuro, 6u!uueld S'E
(L) d.4W.M A!unww., VE
,sldeuy 3!w.u., P"e le3sH E'E
_
AewwnS un!iewaytlidaiuo, Zy
6u!ddeN a6ue4, pue A!I!ge}S }. eea+tl L'E
san4euia;Itl;demoJ :£ aseyd
4 s
.aawd
do .M
g+ornawey uoisf leu S'Z
=d I
u -MA
Wumwo.
(L) uv—S ApwS Ipun.D 410 V
(L) uorssas FANS oars,..., 6u!uu%, EZ
_
__
ry+oxawey uo!s!A)-U Z
W dogTY MA!unww., Ve
sal6vv36 aylewio}suety pue uas!A:Z aseyd
m gaMaal
d (N uo!s SApnyS 1puno A!, LCL
ft) u.!saaS Apn}5 umsslwwo, 6u,ueld OL'L
A+ewwns saplunYoddO Pue sfiu!ue5 6'L
sunpu5
ueww
,wtl a
sYodaa vo4!puo, 6upe!rd 9
SpmS
amumo+
O suop� a]
i/6m,}aaW
-q,., S, pue 6u!ddeW.,, CL
J]Od
Pu Bury
fiups
ytrY M
6wd e!paW lePnS 9'L
j,
.Dasa.}u!eW pue 3uawdaynaO anm Mnaln+d S
�
(s6ep E)sMalwaiu!3aPp4age15PageW uo!snaO V'L
ue!d 4oe po pue uogedP!Yed A!unwwo, E
w.6.,eY°M Pa....6,.w Immo, ACJ Z'L
+noy A!3Pue 6u'..w Hog?:N I
eleua;eW punw6yoea pue drove S 33aj.ad:L ase4d
smWanga}) 6aN pue Slsel PafO,d
V LOZ'e L H3ONAD30
ov
LLOZ Ain£ HOOOLHI SLOZ AHvnNvr:SHINOW
iinaIHDS IDIM id
-1 CS,
.,E,d 7 aaueuipap 6uluo2 pue ue!d!e{aua, awe6uyng
a 1 0 1
a3 auleAsiuiwWtuey^suoagaD
O{9'6CY
990'3605
S150J1Jatl108333'Itl1018pS
OOZY
SESRS
pop pa:lp
O{b'6LP
as
O61'Lf
Ze
ObYOR
2EL
MS'z{f
So
jwrea,
I Zft
[35'698$
{1[9
Rf
pK
•SL9'Uti
It
sem
m
It
M1.
LLS
jocaromit
I OOS
Tlf
I W
!OW"Lf{f
I M
ac,$I
BK
3331tl%ptg
OBL'LP -
bL OS
0
!OM'It
: ZL
Of
4KCl
ZL
066'a x,
' MB
OOOOLS
as
OpiM
: 9f
OLWool
M 1086'[8
BL
KL'pLf
- Z6
1009'lZS
:092
OS
0
'OSO"df
OY OCa Is
SO
^4
08
0
OS
0
OS
0
p3
p
p4
0
O06'02f
bbl
000'0{4
OB
105
0
08
0
OS
0
04
D
OS
0
Of
0
000'53
Op
00964
pZ
luaw t. V.,md 46
OS
0
as
0
p4
- 0
OS
- 0
Off
- 0
01.14
96
03
0
pL
0
OOg S$
OB
03
0
O%
o
Ips
0
OS
- 0
OSC64
Of
098'[8
B
0g1eWploo�uo!lenue p IunWwOy Y aaylp gg
O%
0
a
0
OS
0
OS
0
Off
! C
O9g'9ZP
PCt
OS
0
000'Z4
9L
pK'L8
9l
pS
0
009'fi8
! 09
006'5$
Db
1.
0
1..'SO,
' Ob
1..ot
ZL
O4
s upaaW aaRuwopgn9 uolsa!uau09 IWryd Og
M
0
M
0
OS
0
W
- 0
OS
0
a. a.
OZZ
OS
0
000 as
B
OLIT$
" 04
OBB'LS
BL
M
0
0090[5
OB
04
0
C09'LLS
OB
lot'f3
BL
too s upaaW C'fi
OP
0
OS
- 0
0$
0
05
0
Jos
1 0
ON Ill
! 69
O$
D
Jos
0
p9
p
1.
:, 0
OS
p
pOti G4
Ob
oa
D
009'54
! Ob
O9!$
6
OL s paeW aap!uwo9 osµptl R+lwpel Ip Z'fi
OBL'EY :
pZ
OS
0
OW'L4
24
DS
0
own
Zt
OL{'In
I "I
at
� 0
OOS LS
f Zt
K
0
103
: 0
OS54
: S
DS
I 0
IDS
0
Op1'04
! 09 OSY SL !
OE
seupaaWpue WD -N. lfi
04
0
0$
0
OS
0
04
- 0
'OS
0
OEOYZ}
P6{
pf
0
Of
0
M
O
Ipp9'LLS
092
Of
0
'Of
0
04
0
oP C$
62
S6tf
OL
5
OP
O
OS
D
OS
0
OS
0
DS
0
.0
: OS
OS
0
IDS
: 0
OS
0
006'63
Ob
z
D
p4
I 0
OS
0
1094'[$
j 3
OfiE4
Z
suryd lna SYUO aIIq^d ZB
OP
0
OS
- 0
04
- 0
OS
-� 0
OS
0
WO'LI}
! bbl
04
0
OS
0
OS
0
DOZ'ClS
Oa
3
D
OS
0
of
0
OZC 25
94
0951$
: B
sueld aSI SYeq eNle•Islulwpy L'B
OP
0
OS
0
OS
0
OS
0
O$
0
9${YZI}
ZSB
04
0
101
; 0
IN
D
M ON
! 9LG 0$
: 0
O$
D
Of
0
lot
0
O[L'S9f
- let
eloW^S
O8
C
04
0
OE
: 0
Off
- 0
OS
0
Op1'B8
! Ob
p$
08
: 0
OS
- 0Oe!'LS
: 9L
Oz0
p4
j p
D$
Olo3
I D
099§4
It
eW uaaZ Pue aaueulWO III ewj ol'(
08 :
0
I S
o
04
: 0
0$
:.' 0
DS
D
Opp'98
! Op
OS
as
: 0
M
: 0
OBC'IS
: 8L
04
: 0
M
0
p3
p
04
0
099'M
K
ua0 aptlpua A`alAatl aWM 6'(
04 :
0
IS
0
04
0
OS
: 0
DS
! 0
OBC2l$
IS
OQ
OS
0
OS
u7f—T
OL
If
0
OS
{ 0
04
p
OS
! 0
'64
62
y^ee0e0�'I1^dI-M8pue eW a4uoZ EL
OS I
0
04
D
04
t D
03
0
0$
! 0
M048
Sp 0S
OS
- 0
04
- 0
09CL$
94
04
! 0
OS
0
OS
0
05
0
bZ'94
ZE
u ss(uwop fiumueld s4141Pos cyzyoMgpnd B'L
O8
0
04
- 0
04
0
04
0
8
0
OR1.
69
OS
OL
0
M
: 0
009'ez
: 09
OS
! 0
It
1 0
OS
0
OS
0
B9'p4
PC
ueurypfiowoL perp wapay allg^d ae ad 5'1
as :
0
M
0
0Y
0
OS
0
04
: 0
MB'§ZP
all
GE
a%0
OS
D
KTLY
: OZL
04
: 0
OS
0
OS
0
0Y
0
Ctt4
: 09
—99ta6uwoGpe:p aulLWlad ae and b'1
OS
0
M
: 0
04
1 0
Of
: 0
Oz
0
M9'LM
! 0PC
Of
-
04
0
ISOS
p
OS
p
p4
0
05
0
0§'EL4
OZt
uemp:0 uwoZYWp aApepslulwPo E'1
OS
0
DO
0
OS
: 0
OS
D
04
0
Dow'p
OL
OS
04
0
OS
0
OS
I 0
OS
p
OS
0
04
:_ 0
IDS
0
05 f8
: OZ
uewpp u!uoZ aylla spau yl
OS -
0
M
: 0
M
: D
OS
0
Oz
D
921'!8
: 9
D$
OS
0
Off
0
930
OS
D
03
o
0
Ift
0
IDL149
9
upaaW AealepS leplul L'1
p56'K !
OE
2S0
OM'tf
Zt
0$
0
IOLS'Cf
! BL
096'.a
! 921
05L'L$
OL
04
0
OS
0
OS
! 0
Oi fi'L4
LL
O'AS
: fL
Df
• 0
OBCM
I, O[9'at
pC
lelolq^S
08
0
Off
- 0
M
0
08
0
OS
0
onow
Ob
DSZS
Z
OS
0
Of
: 0
OS
• 0
DID L4_
Lt
029'IS
1 ZL
08
0
ODI IS
! ZL
D6ES
Z
ueldl"M leu" C'9
00[E8
OZ
OS
- 0
0964
j B
0$
0
0§f'23
1 ZL
OZO'L4
66
D053
6
GE
0
OS
0
OS
: 0
OS
0
Oep'{4
0
05
0
02C 28
BL
DZt'ES
et
2 s upeaH ."lot luunop p9 Zg
059{8
OL
OS
0
08M
I p"
p$
� 0
OGL'LS
B
OZO'L4
66
ONS
6
OS
. 0
04
0
OS
'• D
OS
I 0
000'44
I B
105
0
O2C S
9L
OZL'F$
: BL
2supaaH allgnd ualzslwwop 6uryueld L'9
0P
0
Of
- 0
OS
0
p4
0
pS
j 0
516'9024
6[51
o00'ES
Is
S!3'DZ4S
198
04
- 0
009'98
! 09
02$'19$
Rb
IDS,
: 0
Of
0
IW9'SS
Op OZ L'CS
9L
WW9^9
OP
O
OS
- 0
04
0
0$
p
DS
! o
SW'ZC8
S2Z
OS
0
GZ4'bL3
Ett
as
- 0
OS
: 0
09E"G14
96
1.
( 0
04
0
Ob!'LY
2L
BLL
b
y ay Ve Wleluawualnu3leLg E'S
O8
0
04
0
04
0
0$
: 0
M
0
Of9'99{$
:9kLl
ODO'C4
K
051604E:
0E8
p4
0
009'83
09
009'fib4
ptE
0$
j p
p5
D
ZCR
84
8544
9
tl ayla WI IeWawWllAlf3 yuO to
OS
j 0
04
0
OS
p
090BY
: 9S
OS
0
Op]'CS
61
p4
: 0 -
04
0
O6S'Z8
e4
OS
0
Oz
0
p!'l8
ZL
OCLS
b
upaaW I aaBpuedOpi Oa pp -u1 La
OS
0
Of
0
0f
! 0
Og5'9B!
OE9 WS'Zf
0
000'[f
r IS
Safts
Op
OpYKf
j UR 02Ca
i Z4
losses
: It "Its
K
O[CRf
i ML
OBS'Bf
M
9^S
OS
0
OS
: 0
as
0
OS.
0
Off
0
CB['[IP
06f
W54
6
p$
: 0
OC9'L3
DO
006'Is
C6
OS
! 0
OpYE3
bZ
0
O06'FS
§Z
0954z
a
LasnaH uaO w woo p'p
08
0
OS
0
OS
: 0
08
- 0
04
0
O6pbR
j O9
000'44
9
OS
0
pII
: 0
Wp'M
at
05
0
04
: 0
M
0
OBp'ff
§Z
OSS'LS
B
ue!dleraua vwaglq^d El
OB j
0
OS
C
OS
0
05
: 0
OS
0
OGEfi33
1 KZ
000'48
9
000¢4
: PL
p3
0
WO'Lt8
I DO,
DOb'Is
I Ob
jeatZs
: 9l
025'24
ZL
054'044
1 OL
OZt'ES
9L
uey laleuad yer0 auleR9ulwpLs Z'6
O!
0
OS
C
OS
0
04
0
105
p
OZpg{q
L §21
Cq
0
Of
! 0
OS
0
OOp'K
1 Op
K6'LS
1 ZL
mu
1 ZL
OZG'Z4
Zt
oR54
9E oIE23
ZL
-
Woxaue:3 A?Ilod L'b
Oi{'Kp
902 o6g'E$
Zp
OOCOIS
: afi
KYl4
p6
105985
! Of
OLC.LE
! 919
OSG'4$
"
00'f5
- IS
'K
Op
pOl'62S
! oLZ
OM'$f
• pC
aws!
M 09CfS
9L
05fi'S4I
OLL
OK'M
M
I=Wq^4
08
0
08
0
04
0
0Y
: 0
OS
0
CBd94
OL
0523
2
M
0
0$
: 0
00464
06
M
0
Z9'LS
L1
OS
0
06143
24
D9Lf
§
1 zuop paualad fE
O4
0
a
0
OS
1 0
M
o
04
0
09G'33
I pZ
0055
6
I'It
: 0
04
o
pL
0
Of
0
0654
16
04
0
t'LS
8.
0954$
0
L uagse9 ry8lwunap g6
O%
0
K
- 0
OS
0
OS
0
as
0
98CCY
I PC
0054
b
GY
: 0
M
0
p5
0
M
0
0652
i 6
0Y
0
(5CL5
: C
095'4$
8
II ni—S PNBugsq--o luuey SE
M
0
0$
0
OS
C
03
0
OS
0
09[[44
I OIt
OS%
I
O$
0
009'§4
al
000'64
! Ob
p$
0
OK'C$
bZ
Off
0
OE4E5
! K
D954%
8
(4 oysN:oM uwp by
021424 :902
6962
Z§
000643
- OB
096(3
bb
GS'GY
I, OE
De5Y8
I 9L
0Y
0
0$
C
04
: 0
04
0
M
p
OS
1 0
05
0
OOL'LB
Z4
OBL4
p
sp eatyauwuoa3 pueleasd C
OP 1
0
DO
0
04
0
I
04
0
Og5'9ZP
1 OZZ
04
0
Is
: bZ
M
0
002'ELS
• OZL
008K
! at
as
0
O08'{S
- B
Of E'63
Of
09944
B
euaun8 sauleugly aauop Zy
OP
0
DO
- 0
pf
0
O$
: p
04
1 0
W1'[f!
ZO{
04
0
OS
p
04
p
001'[8
j OL
0694
p
04
0
00915
B
Kf'ZS
el
09[4
6
eWa ueyp pue /ylpelSla sea IT
DP
0
OS
0
K
0
OS
- 0
04
p
06Z'9EP'
1 252
OOffK
24
Of
0
009'SO
p0
OBYSS
I BI OS
0
0M'9a
Sp
OL'2f
! Ol
!WL'Bf
: O9
0[991
- M
et^W^8
OY 1
O
OS
- 0
OS
0
OS
0
08
0
01525
at
0.S
p
OS
0
Of
0
03
! 0
04
! 0
OK!
6
OZM
2
OBC43
! 0
D6E4
Z
Woasawel3 WIZIAIe 5'Z
04
O
OS
0
K
- 0
OS
: 0
04
0
09[44
6Z
DOGS
6
04
0
OS
0
OS
0
OS
0
10653
6
K
0
OBCIB
8
095'[8
8
L umssa3 ApnlSyalmap p 62
04 :
0
as
0
M
0
0$
0
08
0
O82'f8
pZ
COSS
6
O$
1 0
K
- 0
O$
0
O$
0
0654
! 6
3
p
0944$
B
OB$'t4
B
4 ua!—. 57S u01zz!un 0 YW4eld EZ
OP
0
0Y
0
OS
0
OS
0
K0
MI'LP
86
M
0
OS
0
OS
j 0
0904
8
OS
0
..'aZL
6948
8
Obl'L$
1 ZL
'l8
B
'a—w" uoglAUa10 ZZ
04 :
O
at
D
OS
0
O$
0
K
0
ML'L L4
Opt
pM4
I
OS
0
OM'Is
: Op
046%
: Ob
O$
: 0
062E3
62
OS
It
M✓K
pZ
'4$
0
(410 at,oM Apuauau^8 I'Z
099'LM 1,
962
MPES
OI
MWBIS
Set
ML'94
- 46 OW"t
2L
ses"At8
! 9ZEL
060."
M
052'94S
OEL at.$
OK oM'B[S
1 ME
'!as
: p6
OM'6f
9.L
OOLYS
0I
.WOOS
Z6t
4['641
46
3
059"IS
at
OS
- D
M63
0
OS
0
[CLS
a
O9L'Ef
! pZ
OD53
6
0E
0
04
0
OS
j p
M
0
aIGz
6
Oz
IS
0
L'tf
8
.9 IS
9
4 ua!zse8 n5lpunep Op µ{
M9"11
at
OS
0
Dole
6
OS
0
LLL$
a
MG4$
I PZ
Op54
6
p8
0
04
0
p4
0
OS
D
mt
1 6
0
S:
095'44
9
4 uolesaS P^19 u -!--p -,Weld OCL
O}
C
p4
6
OS
1 O
M
0
04
0
014'648
:9tt
Op53
6
04
0
OS
0
OM'B3
OB
OS
0
p$
0
Oz
0
Mp'K
: BZ
082%
b
unu^8=apw^ Bput s6 -H-9 EL
OSIB2Y
OlZ
OOB44
Op
ppp'u3
apI
MB'85
Ob
MB'GS
Of
OL6'MP
1 ME
OMS
6
OR'44$
Ofi
K
: 0
MS'944
M4
002'[15
pl
04
: 0
OOLiS
OL
22, 2,
00
OZL'CS
9L
ayo ay woo!puop ps!r3 0"I
OY
0
04
0
1a$
O
0$
0
O$
0
022518
BZl
04
0
ON'S8
Ob
OS
- 0
MLLS
@
M
D
0Y
0-
IS
0
DPL'as
j ZL
M14
I
crenaMI
pue u1 eµ asap !}
OP
0
OS
0
at
0
OS
0
M
j 0
W9"65
i 92
04
D
104
0
009M
: 06
04
0
M
0
OZE'IS
ZE
K
0
at'a
! Z
O6f5
ZaI
Wd%WW1-1 9'4
OIt
0
CS
- 0
OS
: p
K
: C
M
0
M05Z8
: z
t000'[8
B
o3
0
0592[8
G,Dvn
0§
OS
0
Does Is
i R
K
0
COLC
: ZL
COLS
6
eualu;eW puelaaw ganap gaMVa d G'L
05694
Ob
09
0
D94'Z4
64
at
p
M265
ZL
MeZ@
OB
03
0
M
P
S
0
G02'LS
! B
OK'ES
K
M
0
PP Is
62
OB9I
It
sap El srnzlvarylraWeyaNerypaNaW UPIWaO b'L
0}
0
OS
0
DS
D
04
: 0
1.
' 0
C215Z4
961
p3
p
p4
: 0
mUs
"I
04
0
OS
i 0
Cat as
M
IS
C
Mb Y5
bL
OK ES
Z4
ueld V^eagnO pue uoge laryed !u^wWop E'L
OS
0
04
0
OS
j 0
p4
0
104
1 0
O6l'LP
: B6
00024
9L
Jos
: 0
IS
P
104
C
p9Z IS
9
IN
I0
04
0
pZE 24
9L
0954$
9
we:6 o:d WMA Pauyatlpealay l!auno9 App yI
.0 It
BZ
OS
0
Obb L4
: ZI
091'14
:, 9
10951$
I 8
M994
96
DOGS
b
0q
p
O$
D
pp L'l4
0,
MZ 4$
B
090'[5
8
04
0
D9L C
0
095'43
- 9r^ol
pl ule upaaW 4o-4aN 4'L
.,E,d 7 aaueuipap 6uluo2 pue ue!d!e{aua, awe6uyng
a 1 0 1
n.'S4 uwna0pK"d0
-epdn awewpap 6uryo1 pue uald I .... I 6are6Ylppg
m
:aSsro Lon zn a6¢a
SB['ZLf
aa3 an4a44NWPtl lurynsuoJgng z
sse'LO['4f
9'ZLOS
O0p'9($
00{9(5
OOY06!
pB{'O6f
-
S1g00103tl1p 83311tl101B p5
S90'si3
OSC 43
OP
W
OSOYY
Op88
SP-3 Lawp
4[0'8[2'45
�AL
'bIf
lla OIYyS
Bl1
915 � BU OH91}
l
$51
�M9'9tf
644
H
D¢ 0!('915
f
asCLH
86
Wall;
BW
L'!LS
OL
OK'btl
9(! ppEYEf
®
Qt
pZ lavaZL
'025
ML
39l lylpLgp
049'0545
a06'a2Zi
O40YL4
OB6'9Zf
D.Lal'
086'144
nest
US
PoL
e6
beL
"I
68
2@
21".4
04
04
03
03
03
OZ9'019
H
0
0
0
D
0
: at
H
Ot
0S
OP
M
as
M
a
0
0
0
0
0
� 0
a5
OS
OS
OS
M
OS
O$
0
: 0
! a
j 0
0
D
I
O6E}
oS
OT t
at !
0A L
OY ;
OBE. l
Z
0
p
0
0
0
Z
i0S
0$
p4
GS
OS
OS
OS
". p
i a
0
0
D
0
0
08
04
04
04
OS _
04
p4
! 0
: D
D
0
D
D
p
OBTi
04
04
OS
0$
0$
OfiE$
2
0
0
p
0
a
Z
OS :
W
N -
Of
at
OA
04
0
: 0
0
0
0
: 0
0
Of
DS
p5
Of
a3
04
H
0
0
0
0
0
- 0
0
10f
0$
p4
OS
O$
OS
O$
' 0
0
0
I 0
• 0
D
0
OS W :
04
04
04 I
OS ;
OS !
MISS I
Zi H
0 0$
0 M
O as
IS 02
S, OS
Zp a$
0
1 0
I a
0
', 0
0
'�, 0
'IS
05
a8
DS
OS
OS
6'H
2E
0
0
0
D
D
ZE
OS
04
Of
Of
Of
a$
OS
0
; 0
0
0
� a
0
� D
OLfi'LS
04
Of
04
O8
a4
1845
Ol
0
0
0
a
p
at
wll$
luewa eueW pa ad 98
w0eypwog uopeave q uwumy a aaylp gg
0L ... pwW aalPuwwygn9 uals.,luu g yweld p'fi
DZI9 ylaayy as@wua� pelnptl uwwu� ffi
(p4 s6uya¢W Bap.,, JSlnptl lwWyaal LpO 2'fi
sfiu!IaeW pug sY¢J ugleygma0 1'6
0f0'af
098'SS
686'([5
IEL
a5
Fbl
09
OS
OS
a
0
0
.T
OY
OY
0
0
0
IH
a
Of
!.
! o
0
of 1
0$
0!
o
0
0
lot
O[
M
a
; 0
j 0
Of
0$
f8
O
0
0
aS
OS
lus
0
D
a
M
a}
In
a
0
i 0
of
Df
4
D
p
0
of
H
04
1 a
! 0
! 0
aS t
at !
O! !
O
D
a
at
04
Of
1
! 0
0
0
04
OS
a
0
0
0
as
OT
a
; 0
0
H
p$
M
0-
0
0
laluwas
su eld Jy!x gyw0 ululd
sueid aqua g—u .1—mim
2'0
p0
BfiEVfiI$
069'6!
OBZOLf
..a '$
068'444
OH'02S
WL'Hf
OW614
Op1'LS
9fL'ZS
DL[L
09
69
bfi
ZL
- 6pL
on
: Dp5
- 60
2t
ppYB[!
002'5{
up. t4
OS
OpB'E4
6096$
DOZE'S
GOOYfS
OpB'fS __pZ
0968
: Bl1
al
bZ
+ 0
pZ
08
! OZt
MZ
9
OBI'9(S
Ope f
OpB'E!
OS
nest
.9 as
00614
opO Z[8
ObB"C$
o9BP
- BLA OW BLS
a DOL'H
6Z Goon
- 0 OS
: pZ OOB'f3
09 00988
all OOZ'BL$
- Oat 0002Ef
62 06e'Ef
: 9 OBM
9LF pS l
OZ 04 !
M
: 0 Off !
bZ M j
O9 M
OZ' M
OW M
bZ M
9 OS
0
0
0
6
0H
0
0
0
0
0
OS
s
Of
OS
OS
0$
O8
M
OS
: 0
i 0
0
j 0
0
0
: 0
0
0
0
0S
GS
Po'
OT
0Y
D%
GS
M
M
M
a
0
! 0
D
p
D
D
- 0
D
: D
Of
a4
04
04
TI—0
O$
OS'
&S—D
0$
04
0
0
0M
0
0
0
. 0
0
H
a
as
OP
OS
H
p¢
m—.
M
0
0
j 0
0
0
0
; 0
: 0
j I,
Of
O$
04
OS
IS
0$
IS
O$
04
OS
0
0
a
- 0
0
: 0
0
: 0
p
: 0
Of
OS
04
H
0$
as
04
04
Of
OS
' a
l a
; .
j .
D
l 0
• 0
i a
• 0
0
OS
at ;
at !
(IS ;
at !
Of
W :
OS
M
M
0
0
a
0
0
0
0
0
a
O
,Of
H
O$
OS
OS
O$
05
OS
04
04
0
i 0
+ 0
1 0
D
0
I 0
j 0
0
j 0
pf
04
OS
OS
Of
O$
D4
at
OS
Of
- 0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Ips
In
G4
In
In
p4
O$
M
DS
0$
0
', 0
D
I 0
0
0
; p
.
I 0
j 0
OS
OS
Off
OS
OS
M
03
0$
OS
as
0
0
0
p
0
0
: 0
0
: 0
0
S
tlBW WWL pue aweulp'O wuo2leuy all
.Pue maNaymlgod 6'd
4-4-0 owOd PTM H Pue ew 6urynZ L'L
umzsBuwo064vueld SlO yllm zdayryloM a!Wod 9"L
weulpXl I.:;'d lD maws aBgnd ale ald $'L
uerypi0 uiuoZyoO wW9md a1 aid b'L
Yeyp10 luol yyOaµwlgYpYpy ['L
---au- uIUOZ ayllo z!sau6010 Z'L
upaaW al.nwgjy L'L
04fi'bEf
0265!
OZE'OH
mus It
Bft
: ab
69
: 69
Osfi'pf
OS
Wf'f
O591t
DE
0
OZ
: aL .
D40
Of
Ot
OT
.. O
: 0
i 0
01
as
aff
M
1 0
0
0
1 p
OJ
M j
M
M
0
0
0
0
0fpf
a$
a8
p8
; 0
• 0
0
M
M
M
0
: 0
0
04
0$
Oi
o
0
0
0
M
0$
O$
M
0
0
0
! 0
0f
OS
O$
OS
0
0
D
: D
M
OS
04
OS
1 0
0
:..
p
H
O$
at
0! l
0
0
O
a
0S
0$
M
D$
0
0
0
0
Of
M
0$
M
- 0
0
0
0
0S
OS
8
0
! 0
0
! 0
0f
OS
OS
M
a
0
0
0
wwgos
ueyl lmwaq leutl
ZsyaeaH a!19od BaunoO
Z s uVeaq glgntl lmis41uwo0 uluugd
[ 9
Z.
L'B
9L5'SfiZf
661'!6!
gas wt
090'H
5442 W9'B8}
filE 66L51P
199 PoBYLY.
9S M
989
pe Of
: Lfi6 OS
0 OT
1 0
: O
: 0
: 0
OS
at
04
OS
Ia
: D
0
p
8991E19
806§ff
OSb§ff
M 1
ZB
ZL
M
0
Of
p5
a8
DS
a
0
0
0
YB'E44
006'55
56'B$
M
: 2B
ZE
DS
0
0$
08
OS
OS
0
0
0
p
a6!'B9f
a".
Mf'{38
OY
251 00$'855
BE 0065!
pfiL 005'55$
0 OS
an Wells
02 046'H
: DLf 080'5$
D 0$
1 N
B4
bZ
j p
99"
916$8
9L6'ZY
0! 1
f
B1
gt
0
as
05
OS
Of
0
D
: 0
D
DOBYS
006H
OOti IS
M
; nOf
04
at
0
OS
$
4
0
0
0
0
L'ES
015'IS
IS
OP
� 94
S
.
p
Y¢IgoS
y ay Ve 114uawulu'3 Nui
Y HVe Ilelu_w -30¢10
B`aa ws PJe d N' PNS Paul
E'S
ZS
L'S
Z.9-ut
pLZ'L 4f
.Wssas
020'8{$
Cao
: BSL
p8
- DID
62t
BBYCGY
ZOa et
0618
lull,
OS
1 EL2
9L
I
: LSZ
p
pS
DL
OY
OA
OS
0
: O
: 0
0
: 0
Of
04
04
O$
OS
j a
0
0
0
0
O(0'Sf
ML$
M(S
a15'LY I
M
BZ
6
p
8l
0
Of
p$i
a4
aff
Of
0
! 0
0
0
0
a5
M
at
M
: D
1 0
: 0
p
: 0
a10'9f
aBLS
0014
045'55
OS
9Z
6
6
BL
- 0
Ojos!
OT
M
OLfi'ES
OB
{Z
: 0
0
LZ
0
05645
O$
O%
Me'LS
p$
EL
D
: D
fl
: 0
H6lf
Of
OS
M.LS
D3
I 0
1 D
0
B
p
OOCYLS
ZZO YS 1
OS
peZYZS
O8
9ZE
Z1
0
ILZ
0
BBN 414
OS
OS
BW'L44
04
ppL
0
0
661
D
D0 a'LS
0688
as
60013
0Y -
B9
9
0
a9
0
1000'15
Of
Of
P. L4
04
: b
0
0
b
D
EE bf
ZO4'LS
M
Z54'E4
OS
ZL
- 9
0
el
a
go
IWS
4)aznoH Ya O •u uwo0
Ye dle:aye0 ye�0 a1191'd
veld l¢IanaO Yeq aylegzwwpy
vjauewelj !pd
p'b
f 0
Z6
L"b
6H'Sl tf
OBL'Bf
H[E$
09G'[$
ML'!LY
OH'O[f
b[N0a3
Col—[LP
-0044
- OL
62
02
014
ZZZ
- 845
Z04
095'[94
O$
OS
OS
M
OZl'BZS
bIV6EY
04
IM M
O OT
0 of
a Of
O OS
HZ M
: om OS
0 Of
0
: O
0
0
0
: a
0
j 0
Of
O$
04
at
OS
Off
D4
OS
1 0
0
0
0
! 0
0
0
1 0
Ot j'L {t
Od
0Y
OP
Ot ;
OY i
OW13
Ot
60{
0
0
0
0
0
M
0
601'65
a4
08
OS
a
OS
09['68
Of
6[
- 0
: 0
! 0
0
0
bf
0
040'8!
O$
M
OS
O$
a$
b'0$
M
M 6065$
p 0$
p M
D M
a OS
0 M
09 note
0 M
02
D
0
0
0
0
OZ
D
ooz,,
0Y
OY
OS
0Y
OS
Olt-
M
02 OM'4f
0 OS
0 OS
0 OS
.' 0 p$
a aS
DOW -11Z4
: O O$
Z4
0
p
0
0
0
p
09645
O$
M
pS
D$
$
09B'IS
M
0
0
D
0
! 0
0
! B
0
IL9'B{$
OS
M
M
M
OS
NoM j
M
b[{
0
o
0
0
0
PU
0
BLS'Bf
0$�.
OS
0Y
OS
OS
all as
of
644
D
D
0
D
i 0
"I
—D
ap 9'SS
p$
Off
D4
Off
04
009'98
0g
ab Wq'tt
0 OS
0 p4
0 p4
0 M
0 .M
Ob 60'lt
0 M
I
0
0
: 0
! 0
i 0
; 6
0
ZS L'Cf
M
OS
M
M
M
ZSL'CS MI
as
94
0
a
O
0
0
.L
D
FWgaB
wYog paYye)d !E
L ugssas MlS llwno0 ,g 8'e
4 uoyu4 NS Y%sslwla0 uueld 5 E
4 oyrymM y Ynuop 6"E
ssyeutl Swwm3 PYelleasj CE
vuunS sarylewalry aauog SE
eW a Yeyg pue 4WIS J., -N I.s
1.1.63
04524
68!'55
M'it
OBp'LS
.Wlat
: OBZ
94
Il
-' 0Z
60
894
B6{'p$
OS
OS
04
O4
86,'6!
BZ
0
: 0
: a
a
i OZ
at
O8
O8
at
at
Off
0
0
o
0
0
0
OS
OS
a4
OS
03
OS
0
! 0
j 0
D
o
1 0
oust
as
OS
M j
M
095'tY
I
0
o
0
0
B
O$
as
O$
04
p4
04
a
0
0
0
0
0
0S
DS
at
as
OS
M
IS
0
0
0
:, p
0
095[5
as
M
M
M
699'4$
B
0
o
0
0,
B
OS
M
Ot
M
Op
OY
0
a
a
1 O
o
0
O$
D$
bb
OS
M
M
0
0
o
0
: 0
j 0
t
$
0
i 0
D
D
0
as'et
M
OS
OS
oY
..0
a2 9195
0 M
D M
0 M
O M
OZ BW4
0
1 o
p
1 0
B
Ob Of
DS
ms—.
09
M
685
9
0
0
D
B
H
as
M
M
as
M
: 0
a
0
0
O
! 0
20 L'li
a4
M
M
M
ul-Dt
9
0
p
0
p
: 8
WgeS
We'aaWvj ual4lA leuW
(Ll JolszaS PSls l!aunop
4 YYlssag PulS uol¢sNw1o08uluu0y
mo awwd uos 0yyp
(l oyzpoM rynwwog
5'Z
b'Z
E2
Zy
LY
Za6162E
OLY9f
O4YS3
Po''64S
HYLE44
80 L'ELf
OM'fi3
S2f
OM'bZS
OZYSLf
091'[5
608'645
rna Z.111214
bE O98'H
bE M9''3
944 O}
'LSD[ BS!'9B4
tfi4 998'[5
". 92 OS
OR OS
! 2s1 628'!!4
964 M
". Bp 04
2[l NI'E lP
: 106 0$
Ol Off
: Ol M
0 M
lL0 M
90 M
0 M
0 M
1 zG M
: 0 M
0 M
9L 105
0
- 0
- O
: 0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
OS
a4
M
H
O$
p$
OS
04
a3
p4
OS
OS
! 0
D
0
1 0
0
0
0
0
a
O
0
0
Z69sEt ! 652 006111
as ! p p$
M 0 M
M 0 OS
251'024 WI 008'53
OOE'94 51 OOf
M 1 0 M
03 a 04
MEY4 ! OZ p4
M p p4
Off ! 0 M
095'45 1 B a8
$B
0
0
:" 0
Dp
Sp
0
j 0
0
• p
p
0
9Walt
a
M
M
94'9!3
p$
M
M
08E'E4
M
M
M
! B'4 OS9'Sf
0 as
O as
! 0 as
Bfi OfiY1S
0 M
0 M
t 0 M
aZ ot
: 0 M
D OS
0 095'[5
DE
a
0
0
ZZ
0
D
p
a
a
a
0
MB SIM
M
M
M
M[A
M
04
M
M
a4
OS
09{-U9
: 58
O
: 0
: 0
Bp
0
: a
a
0
0
0
l
OS6L4
OS
M
M
OSL'a
M
M
0$
M
M
S
OaZ'44
E9
0
O
D
56
- D
0
0
0
D
D
B
117,
P
M
as
DBB$
04
3
as
D4
M6'l4
! ZL
- 0
; 0
0
6
. 0
0
0
o
! _D
j 0
0
Sala '{E} I p[L 0564[5
OT ! 0 a4
OS O M
OY 0
9fl'RP ZZZ ZLb'O LS
Duels i OZ Mf'It
Od I O M
03 p a$
Polls Zl M
OS 0 M
OS O p5
0p0'K 62 O$
; KL
: 0
'0
1951
g4
! O
i a
! 0
0
D
D
O'Z4S
Do
M
O$
B9'B.
OB24
as
aso
006'{4
as
0$
108915
� H 0'LS
- D M
0 M
a M
ZB 000'1$
"4 Z ot
-0 M
M
DL a4
0 04
0 OS
ZL 0$
� I
0
p
0
1
1 p
.
0
0
0
0
0
869'H
O$
t
O$
Oma
M
O$
M
6654
04
DS
IS5E 25
pE
D
0
0
OZ
p
0
D
2
0
0
z
W9oB
L Wlssag pole JaunYO IJ LL'L
{ uw,4seS 0115 YJlsswyo0 lousy p4l
awwnS 4ery,Unyo tl0 pJes ugLa$ fi t
No ay wzrypuop ugsv3 g1
asegge0519 pue YI DuOw ase. L
Jld 6061 Illws 94
UeWWIeW Wery olaw0ae qaM Ua and 5'L
s Pf sml TUI IaPIJyaaelSYaryew uolnaa0 1'1
"Id 48.64;0 We uoge laNed lu mwo, E L
wuBvdNOM WwlayOealey l?unoO ll!, yl
Ina! ID pue fiYyaaw yo-ryaiy L'L
-epdn awewpap 6uryo1 pue uald I .... I 6are6Ylppg
m
TRAFFIC SAFETY AND PARKING COMMISSION
Approved Minutes
Special Meeting of Thursday, October 23, 2014
1. CALL TO ORDER. 7:00 p.m.
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG.
3. ROLL CALL.
MEMBER PRESENT: Wettan, Noworolski, Akers, Londer, Martos
MEMBERS ABSENT: None
4. PUBLIC COMMENTS — NON -AGENDA
None.
5. DISCUSSION/STUDY ITEMS
a. Floribunda Avenue/EI Camino Real Intersection Safety Project — DEIR
The following is a summary of the comments and question brought up at the Special
Traffic Safety and Parking Commission meeting on Thursday, October 23, 2014.
Public Comments:
Jennifer Pfaff:
1) All trees contribute to the overall feel of the canopy along EI Camino Real, not
just the trees on the National Register.
Pat Giorni:
1) Project is significantly reduced from previous versions.
2) Concerns regarding no tree replacement within 200' of intersection.
3) City has previously requested 25 MPH along ECR north of Floribunda.
4) Trees along ECR act has unofficial pedestrian safety barriers.
Michael Wiebraght:
1) Significant visual impacts due to tree removal.
2) Tree removal will have impact on nearby residences.
3) Quantitative data used in all the operational analysis? Why not in the
Appendix?
4) Modeling data and assumptions used? Appendix?
5) Why does State's (TASAS) accident data differ from Burlingame Police's
data?
6) Provide detailed explanation of "every attempt to replace trees". Provide
process and locations of tree replacement.
7) What is the highest accident rate in the State? How does ECR/Floribunda
compare?
8) Re-issue/extend, and re -notice 45 -day noticing period.
9) Concerns that Caltrans will go directly to "Build" scenario.
10) Project possibly addressing a problem that no longer exists.
11) What is ultimate plan for entire ECR Corridor, especially if ECR/Floribunda is
not the primary collision location?
12) Has Caltrans considered a NB left -turn at Bellevue?
13) Has Caltrans considered a signal at Bellevue to provide gaps?
14) DEIR fundamentally flawed because report states tree analysis was done, but
without a link/citation to the Visual Impact Report.
15)Try low impact/cost alternatives first, before going forward with "Build"
alternative.
16) How does this project fit into the overall plan of the Grand Boulevard
Initiative?
17) Will all crosswalks be restored? Or, will the pork -chop island remain?
18) What is the delay when using protected -left turns?
19) Does this proposed project's funding allow for improvements to adjacent
intersection which may be impacted by the proposed changes to
ECR/Floribunda?
20) If the DEIR is certified, who certifies it?
6. ADJOURNMENT 8:50 p.m.
11
c�Ty
�9poa�
TRAFFIC, SAFETY AND PARKING COMMISSION
Approved Minutes
Regular Meeting of Thursday, October 9, 2014
1. CALL TO ORDER. 7:06 p.m.
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG.
3. ROLL CALL.
MEMBER PRESENT:
MEMBERS ABSENT:
Wettan, Akers, Martos
Noworolski, Londer
4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
a) Motion: To accept the minutes of September 11, 2014 as submitted.
M/S/C: Akers/Martos; 3/0/0
5. PUBLIC COMMENTS — NON -AGENDA
Joe Kavalaris commented that the radar signs on Floribunda Avenue were only functioning
during daylight hours. He also asked about an update on if Council was supportive of
making Floribunda Avenue a one-way street. Mr. Kavakaris said that he also wanted to see
crosswalks on Floribunda Avenue.
Manito Velasco distributed copies of a staff report accepting a resurfacing project done one
year ago which should have included a northbound bike lane on California Drive. He stated
that this bike lane was never installed and h& -found it to be very disappointing. Mr. Velasco
said that he felt the sharrows and speed radar on California Drive were no longer effective.
6. DISCUSSION/STUDY ITEMS
a. Floribunda Avenue/EI Camino Real Area Traffic Safety, Pedestrians & Crosswalks)
Mr. Chou presented a staff report which recommended that the Commission hold a public
discussion regarding possible traffic circulation and safety mitigations to address concerns
in the vicinity of Floribunda/EI Camino Real intersection. He said that it was anticipated that
1
Caltrans would release the Draft EIR tomorrow afternoon (October 10, 2014) and hold an
open -house public event on November 13, 2014. He added that Caltrans would continue to
accept public comments for the DEIR until November 30, 2014. Mr. Chou reported that staff
was preparing a staff report and presentation to seek Council direction at the November 3,
2014 Council meeting.
A discussion occurred about the need for accident data to be complete as Floribunda
Avenue & EI Camino Real did not seem to be at the top of the accident history list. The
Commission mentioned possible options such as split -phasing the signal for EI Camino Real
north and south, making Floribunda Avenue a one-way street, or implementing No Left -Turn
restrictions on EI Camino Real.
Chair Wettan opened the floor for public comment.
Jennifer Pfaff noted that the Caltrans public meeting was the same date as the next TSPC
meeting. Ms. Pfaff recalled that over the initial study period of ten years, Caltrans looked at
had over 100 accidents at this intersection, which translated into roughly 2/3 turning into
Hillsborough and 1/3 turning in Burlingame.
Manito Velasco stated that he had previously forwarded a project study report which
referenced a three year period from 2006-2008, showing 35 collisions at an average of 12
per year. Mr. Velasco said there had been some improvements made by Caltrans at this
intersection and suggested that the City look at trends.
The Commission agreed that they needed a more complete accident data set to be able to
better weigh in on the issues with this intersection.
The Commission went on to discuss the timeliness of this discussion, possible Council
direction at their November 3rd meeting, and the Caltrans public comment period.
Motion: To hold a Special Meeting on October 23, 2014 to focus on the EI Camino Real &
Floribunda Avenue intersection and review the Caltrans Draft EIR.
M/S/C: Wettan/Akers; 3/0/0
7. ACTION ITEMS
a) Traffic & Safety Brochures (Bicycle -Vehicles, Neighborhood Traffic Safety, Pedestrians
& Crosswalks).
Mr. Chou presented the Bicycle -Vehicles, Neighborhood Traffic Safety and the
Pedestrian & Crosswalks brochures.
Chair Wettan called a ten minute recess to allow the Commissioners an opportunity to
2
review the brochures and then resumed at 8:50 p.m.
(Commission recessed at 8:40 p.m. and resumed at 8:50 p.m.)
Motion: To adopt the drafts of the Bicycle -Vehicles, Neighborhood Traffic Safety and
the Pedestrian & Crosswalks brochures with concurrence on the comments
regarding driving below the posted speed limit as opposed to recommending
people to schedule their time and that this adoption is not a barrier to update
or revise these brochures going forward.
M/S/C: Akers/Martos; 3/0/0
8. INFORMATION ITEMS
a) Engineering Division Reports
Mr. Wong presented a staff report which gave status updates on various Public Works —
Engineering project and activities.
o Floribunda Traffic Calming review - Driver feedback signs active along
Floribunda as well as on Cypress.
o Burlingame Avenue Streetscape Project - Mostly complete. Completing punch
list items. The Ribbon Cutting Ceremony will be held November e. "Free Friday"
parking will terminate after November 6`" and this information will be distributed
via eNews and through DBID.
o Linden/Larkspur Intersection Temporary Traffic Circle - Finalizing contractor
contract. Work to be completed by end of October.
o ECR/Ray/Rosedale - Staff has met with Caltrans. Reviewing countdown
pedestrian signals, as well as driver feedback signs on Ray and Rosedale. The
Commission would like to see this on a future agenda to see if the City budget
can support another crossing guard.
o 2014 Street Resurfacing Program - Project underway, subdrain and concrete
work completed. Repaving operations have started (Rivera, Hunt, Granada,
Toledo, Rio). Project completion was anticipated for end of October.
o HowardNictoria Traffic Concerns - Data collection work -for stop sign warrant
analysis still pending. Crosswalks installed on Howard at Bloomfield, Howard
and Channing, and Channing at Bayswater.
o Floribunda/EI Camino Real Intersection Update - Staff to respond after Caltrans'
Draft Environmental Impact Report document (DEIR) has been released.
3
o Carolan Complete Street Proiect — Consultant team Kimley-Horn under contract,
with next steps to setup public outreach meetings.
o US 101/Broadway - Demolition and clearing & grubbing operations have begun.
Major construction scheduled for spring 2015.
o Broadway Grade Separation PSR - Design consultant URS Corporation selected
and preparing for a project "kick-off' meeting.
b) Police Department Reports
Sergeant Kiely reported that a new grant cycle started this month. A checkpoint will
occur on October 24th followed by DUI enforcement on October 25th
Selective enforcement has been occurring at Arguello and Martinez Drives due to
parents speeding down the hill to get to school; and, selective enforcement continues
on EI Camino Real by the Mills -Peninsula Hospital.
9. COMMISSION & COMMITTEE REPORTS
a) Burlingame Bicycle/Pedestrian Advisory Committee (B/PAC)
B/PAC did not meet this month and there was no report.
b) Traffic & Safety Brochures Sub -committee
Mr. Chou said that he would be providing the next three brochures for the
Commissioners to review and mark up. Mr. Chou asked that they are returned to him by
October 30th so that he can then redistribute with revisions.
c) Downtown Parking Strategy Sub -committee
Mr. Chou presented a slightly revised parking lot way -finding sign to be used. He also
reported that staff was going to Council on October 20th with a staff report to reduce the
parking rate for Parking Lot H from $3 per day to $1 per day. He added that the City's
parking lot maps have been updated and a larger version would also be placed at pay
station lots. Mr. Chou stated that the sub -committee also discussed way -finding signs
and having them placed with specific "entry points" to Burlingame Avenue. Finally, the
sub -committee discussed how to move forward regarding employee parking and
modifying the business permit system.
Il
10. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
Commissioner Martos requested any Hoover School updates for future meetings.
Chair Wettan requested discussion of commuter paths to the Millbrae transit hub for future
meetings.
11. ADJOURNMENT 9:33 p.m.