Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Agenda Packet - CC - 2004.12.06
City OfBurlingame BISRUNGAME C['I'Y HALL-Sm PRIMROSE ROAD BURLINGAME,CALIFORNIA 94010 (650)5557200 BURLINGAME CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Regular Meeting - Monday, December 6, 2004 Page 1 of 2 CLOSED SESSION: a. Threatened Litigation (Government Code § 6:30p.m. Conference Room A 54956.9(b)(1),(3)©)): Claim of Jeanne Vitrano; Claim of James Shawndi; Claim of Neita Farmer; Claim of Margit Lowenstein b. Conference with Labor Negotiator pursuant to Government Code § 54957.6: City Negotiators: Bob Bell, Jim Nantell; Labor Organizations: Teamsters Local 856; Burlingame Association of Middle Managers (Microphone check) 1. CALL TO ORDER 7:00 p.m. Council Chambers 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG 3. ROLL CALL 4. MINUTES - Regular Meeting of November 15, 2004 Approve 5. PRESENTATION a. Presentation by Sgt. Pete Tokarski acknowledging citizen aid Presentation 6. PUBLIC HEARINGS The mayormay limit speakers to three minutes each. a. Adopt Ordinance amending Title 25 to require a conditional Hearing/Action use permit for operation of certain businesses during late night and early morning hours b. Adoption of assessments for year 2005 for the San Mateo Hearing/Action County Tourism Business Improvement District C. Adopt revisions to Municipal Code Section 17.04 (Fire Code) Hearing/Action d. Consider approval of amusement permit for Roti Indian Hearing/Action Bistro, 209 Park Road 7. PUBLIC COMMENTS -At this time,persons in the audience may speak on any item on the agenda or any other matter within the jurisdiction of the Council. The Ralph M.Brown Act(the State local agency open meeting law)prohibits council from acting on any matter which is not on the agenda. It is the policy of council to refer such matters to staff for investigation and/or action. Speakers are requested to fill out a"request to speak"card located on the table by the door and hand it to staff. The Mayor may limit speakers to three minutes each. City ofBwAlgame eua.InsaM CITY HALL-50i PRIMROSE ROAD -- BURLINGAME,CALIFORNIA 94010 (650)558-7200 BURLINGAME CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Regular Meeting - Monday, December 6, 2004 Page 1 of 2 8. STAFF REPORTS AND COMMUNICATIONS a. Adopt a Resolution approving art in public places policy Discuss/Direct/Adopt b. Consider appointments to Civil Service Commission Appoint 9. CONSENT CALENDAR Approve a. Reappointment of representative to San Mateo County Mosquito Abatement District Board of Trustees b. Resolution approving professional services agreement with Kennedy-Jenks Consultants for the design of water main replacements for the Burlingame Village, Burlingame Gate, and Burlingame Grove subdivisions and in various locations in the Burlingame Hills area C. Resolution approving agreement amendment No. 2 with Control Manufacturing Company to provide Phase 3 of the Citywide Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) System Integration d. Resolution approving a revision to a Mutual-aid Potable Water Transfer Agreement with the Town of Hillsborough e. Recommendation to adopt 2005 City Council calendar f. Approve rotation list for offices of Mayor and Vice Mayor g. Resolution approving changes to the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the City of Burlingame and the Burlingame Association of Middle Managers (BAMM) 10. COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS 11. OLD BUSINESS a. Council assignments 12. NEW BUSINESS 13. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS a. Commission Minutes: Library, October 19, 2004; Beautification,November 4, 2004; Planning, November 22, 2004 City ofBurlingame 86 RLI MGA ME'. 7 CITY HALL-5ol PRIMROSE ROAD BURLINGAME,CALIFORNIA 94010 (65o)558-7200 BURLINGAME CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Regular Meeting - Monday, December 6, 2004 Page 1 of 2 b. Department Reports: Police, October, 2004 C. Letter from Comcast concerning rate increase effective January 1, 2005 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.burlingame.orQ. Agendas and minutes are available at this site. NEXT MEETING—Monday, January 3, 2005 CITY G BURLINGAME c 40 9 Hni[o J NE 6 BURLINGAME CITY COUNCIL Unapproved Minutes Regular Meeting of November 15, 2004 1. CALL TO ORDER A duly noticed regular meeting of the Burlingame City Council was held on the above date in the City Hall Council Chambers. Mayor Rosalie O'Mahony called the meeting to order at 6:15 p.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG Led by Jo Ellen Galligan. 2. ROLL CALL COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT: Baylock, Coffey, Galligan, Nagel, O'Mahony COUNCILMEMBERS ABSENT: None 3. CEREMONIAL a. ROTATION OF MAYOR Mayor O'Mahony reviewed her term as mayor and thanked Burlingame voters for their support of Measures 1 A and A in the recent election commenting on their importance to both the city and the county. Mayor O'Mahony made a motion to nominate Vice Mayor Galligan as Mayor; seconded by Councilman Coffey, approved unanimously by voice vote, 5-0. Mayor Galligan made a motion to nominate Councilwoman Baylock as Vice Mayor; seconded by Councilman Coffey, approved unanimously by voice vote, 5-0. Mayor Galligan presented former Mayor O'Mahony with a plaque commemorating her term as mayor. 4. MINUTES Councilwoman O'Mahony made a motion to approve the minutes of the Joint City Council/Public Works Study Meeting of October 26, 2004; seconded by Councilwoman Nagel, approved unanimously by voice vote, 5-0. Councilwoman Nagel made a motion to approve the minutes of the November 1, 2004 regular Council meeting; seconded by Vice Mayor Baylock, approved unanimously by voice vote, 5-0. 5. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no comments frorn the floor. 1 Burlingame City Council November 15,2004 Unapproved Minutes 6. STAFF REPORTS a. INTRODUCE ORDINANCE AMENDING REVISIONS AND AMENDMENTS TO MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 17.04 (FIRE CODE) FC Reilly requested Council introduce an ordinance amending revisions and amendments to Municipal Code Section 17.04 (Fire Code). Fire Marshal Yballa provided the background for these revisions. Mayor Galligan requested CC Mortensen to read the title of the proposed ordinance amending Chapter 17.04, Uniform Fire Code to clarify alarm, fee and sprinkler provisions. Councilwoman O'Mahony made a motion to waiver further reading of the proposed ordinance; seconded by Councilwoman Nagel, approved unanimously by voice vote, 5-0. Councilwoman O'Mahony made a motion to introduce the proposed ordinance; seconded by Councilman Coffey, approved unanimously by voice vote, 5-0. Mayor Galligan requested CC Mortensen to publish a summary of the proposed ordinance at least five days before proposed adoption. b. MAKE TWO APPOINTMENTS TO BEAUTIFICATION COMMISSION Councilman Coffey made a motion to appoint Jeanne Carney and Geraldine O'Connor to fill two vacancies on the Beautification Commission; seconded by Councilwoman O'Mahony, approved unanimously by voice vote, 5-0. Council commended outgoing Commissioner Jo-Ellen Ellis for her contributions to the City of Burlingame. 7. CONSENT CALENDAR a. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 102-2004 APPROVING THE ANNUAL REPORT OF THE ADVISORY BOARD OF THE SAN MATEO COUNTY TOURISM BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT (BID) AND DECLARING INTENTION TO ESTABLISH ASSESSMENTS FOR THE 2005 YEAR FOR THE DISTRICT CA Anderson requested Council approve Resolution No. 102-2004 approving the Annual Report of the Advisory Board of the San Mateo County Tourism Business Improvement District and declaring intention to establish assessments for the 2005 year for the district. CA Anderson reported one change in the Annual Report: that South San Francisco will stay in the district and noted one change in Exhibit B: that the upper division of assessments in Half Moon Bay will not be assessed per the BID Advisory Board. b. AUTHORIZATION TO SOLICIT DONATIONS CM Nantell requested Council authorize the solicitation of donations from the public to fund items to assist the staff in better serving the community through a Community Wish List. C. TENTATIVE CONDOMINIUM MAP FOR A 3-UNIT CONDOMINIUM AT 508 PENINSULA AVENUE, LOT 1, BLOCK 31, MAP OF TOWN OF BURLINGAME DPW Bagdon requested Council approve the Tentative Condominium Map for a 3-unit condominium at 508 Peninsula Avenue, Lot 1, Block 31, Map of Town of Burlingame, with conditions. 2 Burlingame City Council November 15,2004 Unapproved Minutes d. RESOLUTION NO. 103-2004 APPROVING CHANGES TO THE DEPARTMENT HEAD AND UNREPRESENTED CLASSIFICATIONS COMPENSATION AND BENEFIT PLAN CM Nantell requested Council approve Resolution No. 103-2004 approving changes to the Compensation and Benefit Plan for the Burlingame Department Heads and Unrepresented Classifications and authorizing the City Manager to execute the Compensation and Benefit Plan on behalf of the City. e. RESOLUTION NO. 104-2004 APPROVING A SALARY INCREASE FOR THE CITY MANAGER AND CITY ATTORNEY HRD Bell requested Council approve Resolution No. 104-2004 approving the adjustment to salary for the City Manager and City Attorney. f. WARRANTS AND PAYRO L L FinDir Nava requested approval for payment of Warrants #98061-98559 duly audited, in the amount of $2,637,896.87 (excluding Library checks 98173-98209), Payroll checks #160111-160383 in the amount of $2,288,429.22 for the month of October 2004. Councilman Coffey made a motion to approve the Consent Calendar and the changes stated by CA Anderson; seconded by Vice Mayor Baylock, approved unanimously by voice vote, 5-0. 8. COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS Council reported on various events and committee meetings each of them attended on behalf of the City. 9. OLD BUSINESS There was no old business. 10. NEW BUSINESS There was no new business. 11. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS a. Commission Minutes: Library, September 21, 2004; Planning, November 8, 2004 b. Department Reports: Building, October 2004; Finance, October 2004 12. PUBLIC HEARINGS a. PUBLIC HEARING TO TAKE ACTION ON THE PENINSULA HOSPITAL REPLACEMENT PROJECT AT 1783 EL CAMINO REAL, ZONED C-3 AND UNCLASSIFIED (TO BE REZONED C-1 AND UNCLASSIFIED). THE FOLLOWING ACTIONS ARE REOUIRED• (1) CERTIFICATION OF THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT PREPARED FOR THE PROJECT WITH FINDINGS OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATION. 3 Burlingame City Council November 15,2004 Unapproved Minutes (3) ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE NO. 1747 TO REZONE FROM C-3 TO C-1 FOR 1515 TROUSDALE DRIVE (APN 025-123-040) AND TO REZONE FROM UNCLASSIFIED TO C-1 1791 EL CAMINO REAL (APN 025-123-100) (2) ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE NO. 1746 TO AMEND THE TEXT OF THE ZONING CODE TO ADD MEDICAL OFFICES AS A CONDITIONAL USE IN THE C-1 ZONING DISTRICT WITHIN THE MILLS PENINSULA BLOCK SUBAREA OF THE NORTH BURLINGAME/ ROLLINS ROAD SPECIFIC PLAN. (5) DESIGN REVIEW FOR COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS IN THE C-1 ZONING DISTRICT (4) CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS FOR ALL PROPOSED USES IN THE UNCLASSIFIED ZONING DISTRICT AND FOR MEDICAL OFFICE USE AND STRUCTURES OVER 35 FEET IN HEIGHT IN THE C-1 ZONING DISTRICT. CP Monroe reviewed the staff report and recommended that Council hold a public hearing and take action on: (1), the certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and Statement of Overriding Considerations if the project is to be approved; (2), adoption of Ordinance No. 1746 to amend the text of the zoning code to add medical offices as a conditional use in the C-1 Zoning district within the Mills Peninsula Block Subarea of the North Burlingame/Rollins Road Specific Plan; (3), adopt Ordinance No. 1747 to rezone from C-3 to C-1 for 1515 Trousdale Drive (APN 025-123-040) and to rezone from Unclassified to C-1 1791 El Camino Real (APN 025-123-100); (4), Conditional Use permits for proposed uses in the Unclassified Zoning District and for medical office use and structures over 35 feet in height in the C-1 Zoning District; and(5), Design Review for commercial buildings in the C-1 Zoning District. Mayor Galligan opened the public hearing. The applicant, Oren Reinbolt, Mills/Peninsula Hospital Project Manager, presented the site constraints for development, the project history and the now proposed hospital project; in addition, he reported on design refinements to the medical office building and hospital "skin," noise evaluation of the cooling towers, reported on discussions with PG&E regarding undergrounding the electrical lines along the southern property line and requested changes to several conditions required by the Planning Commission. Council asked the applicant questions to clarify its requested changes to the conditions, about working with neighbors regarding impacts and conditions over the term of construction, on-site parking and employee shifts, restrictions on the Davis Drive entrance during construction, continuation of the current shuttle between Mills and Peninsula during construction, scheduling of landscaping installation along southern property line, duration of maximum construction noise impact along southern property line, replacement of trees at the end of Albemarle, enforcement of conditions. There were no further questions. Mayor Galligan opened the hearing to the public. The following citizens spoke about the proposed hospital replacement project and on various conditions, some requesting changes: Tim Fanelli (address unknown- referenced Community Gate Path); Vince Muzzi, 1818 Gilbreth Road, #200; Pat Giomi, 1445 Balboa Avenue; Kevin Nelson, 1654 Albemarle Way; George Silvestri, 250 Bel Marin Keys Blvd., Ste F200, Novato; Dan Andersen, 728 Vernon Way; Simoun Almasi, 1604 Davis Drive; Chris Foley, 1504 Davis Drive; Steve Dambrosio, 1504 Davis Drive; Alan Cerro, 4758 Cross Road, Livermore;Nancy Fraser, 1645 Albemarle Way; and Leonie Wohl, 1608 Davis Drive. Mr. Reinbolt further discussed rationale for condition changes and Todd Tierney, Anchen and Allen, discussed architecture. Jaimee Hicks, Fehr & Peers Traffic Engineers, City's consultants on the Final EIR, discussed the Trousdale traffic study. There were no further comments from the floor; and the public hearing was closed. 4 Burlingame City Council November 15,2004 Unapproved Minutes Mayor Galligan noted that in this case the action on the Final EIR should come first along with the Findings of Overriding Considerations, which are attached to the resolution for reference. The conditions of approval, including the mitigations to implement the FEIR are a part of the action on the three conditional use permits, uses in the Unclassified zone, and height over 35 feet and medical office use in the C-1 zone. Following all the actions, Council will take a final action on the resolution of approval which includes all the facts and findings presented in the record of both the Planning Commission and Council review of the project. Councilwoman O'Mahony made a motion to certify the Final environmental Impact Report consisting of the Draft EIR, the Revised Draft EIR, the Response to Comments Document and the public record of the documents and testimony commenting on the EIR, finding that the FEIR was adequate and was presented to the decision makers and the information included in the documents was reviewed and considered before approving the project. The motion was seconded by Councilman Coffey. CA Anderson noted that because there were two areas identified of significant and unavoidable impact, the Council should include the findings of Overriding Consideration as recommended by the Planning Commission in an action of approval. Councilwoman O'Mahony moved to amend her motion to include the approval of the Findings of Overriding Consideration as recommended by the Planning Commission and included in the staff report. The second Councilman Coffey agreed to the amendment to the motion. Comment on the motion: asked when the mitigations were added to the action. CA noted that the mitigations are also included in the conditions of approval which will be acted on with the conditional use permits. Is that the point to discuss visual impacts from the exterior of the building? Yes, can comment on the current hospital throughout the actions. It was also noted that the siting of the structures is addressed and endorsed in the Statement of Overriding Considerations as well as in the mitigations. Mayor Galligan called for a voice vote on the motion to certify the Final EIR and to approve the Statement of Overriding Considerations as recommended by the Planning Commission. The motion passed on a 5-0 voice vote. Mayor Galligan then noted that the next action was approval of the ordinance to change the zoning on two parcels. Councilwoman O'Mahony moved to adopt the rezoning of 1515 Trousdale from C-3 to C-1 and 1791 El Camino Real from Unclassified to C-1. The motion was seconded by Councilwoman Baylock. Mayor Galligan called for a voice vote on the motion to adopt the rezoning of the two parcels. The motion passed 5-0 on a voice vote. Mayor Galligan noted that the next action was on the ordinance to allow medical office buildings in the C-1 zone along El Camino Real, noting that this action was an implementation of the recently adopted North Burlingame/Rollins Road Specific Plan. Councilman Coffey moved adoption of the ordinance to revise the zoning regulations to allow medical office buildings as a conditional use in the C-1 zone along the west side of El Camino Real adjacent to the hospital. The motion was seconded by Councilwoman O'Mahony. 5 Burlingame City Council November 15,2004 Unapproved Minutes Mayor Galligan called for a voice vote on the motion to adopt the amendment to the C-1 regulations to allow medical office buildings on the west side of El Camino Real as a conditional use. The motion passed 5-0 on a voice vote. Mayor Galligan then noted that the next action should be the Conditional Use Permits for the proposed uses on property zoned Unclassified, and for height over 35 feet and medical office use in the C-1 zone. CA Anderson asked that the Council review the conditions and direct staff on any changes the Council would agree on. The Council directed the CA regarding the changes to the conditions. CA noted that after the discussion on the design review he would ask for a recess to reformat the conditions to include the revisions made by Council. Mayor Galligan then noted that this was the time to discuss the design of the proposed buildings. In their discussion, Council referenced the revised elevation drawings for the medical office building and hospital included in the staff report. Council acknowledged the condition, which allowed for further review by staff and commission, as the detail of the design was refined with construction drawings. Issues noted to be aware of in this subsequent review were: include a real focal point at the front of the hospital which would direct people to the hospital entrance, windows as shown on the medical office building and hospital are a great improvement, like the darker aggregate in the concrete-keep dialogue open and be diligent about changes, should not look like an institution, do something about the cap of the hospital building—can energy efficiency/shading be accomplished in some other way at the top of the structure than using the steel trellis work, especially the trellis design next to the stair tower, the cap on the stair tower reads better, the hospital walls need to be capped at the top in a manner similar to the medical office building. There were no further comments. Mayor Galligan called for a 15-minute recess for the CA to work on the revisions to the conditions. Break began at 9:30 p.m. Council meeting reconvened at 10:00 p.m. Mayor Galligan noted that Council could take the action on the commercial design review first. CA noted that in acting on the design review, the Council may wish to refer to the findings on pages 21 —23 in the attached resolution; and if these are adequate and/or the Council wishes to amend or modify them, that can be done in the motion. Councilman Coffey moved to approve the commercial design of the hospital, medical office building and parking garage based on the findings in the resolution (pages 21-23). The motion was seconded by Councilwoman O'Mahony. Mayor Galligan called for a voice vote on the motion to approve the commercial design review based on the findings in the resolution and the comments in the record. The motion passed on a 5-0 voice vote. Mayor Galligan then noted that the Council should act on the conditional use permit for uses in the Unclassified zone, and height over 35 feet and medical office use in the C-1 zone. He noted that the conditions of approval are included with this action. CA handed out a revised draft and Council reviewed the changes for the record. Council discussion: it was noted that there was not a condition requiring that the hospital store 30,000 gallons of water for fire fighting and 150 gallons per licensed bed on site for its use in an emergency at all times. Applicant was asked if this was the appropriate quantity; he agreed. 6 Burlingame City Council November 15, 2004 Unapproved Minutes Councilwoman O'Mahony moved approval of the conditional use permit with all the conditions of approval as amended for the reasons stated in the record, including the findings on pages 13-21 of the draft resolution. The motion was seconded by Councilman Coffey. Discussion on the motion: commended the applicant for working with the community so well, excited about the community having a state of the art hospital; applicant was very cooperative and listened, the time and effort they and the Planning Commission spent, particularly the Planning Commission, made tonight very easy for the City Council; thanked staff for a complete report; thanked Oren Reinbolt and team for their willingness to make changes and to listen to the community, look forward to a continuing good relationship. Mayor Galligan called for a voice vote on the motion to approve the conditional use permits. The motion passed on a 5-0 voice vote. Mayor Galligan asked for the Council to take one final vote on the project, to approve the resolution including all the findings and amended conditions of approval for the project in one package. Councilwoman Baylock moved to approve Resolution No. 105-2004 noting that the resolution is complete, includes all the amendments to the conditions of approval made by City Council this evening, and meets the requirements of state law for action on this project. The motion was seconded by Councilman Coffey. Mayor Galligan called for a voice vote on Resolution No. 105-2004 approving the replacement hospital project including the amended conditions of approval and endorsing the findings for each action as required by state law. The motion passed on a 5-0 voice vote. 13. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Galligan adjourned the meeting at 10:10 p.m. in memory of Richard Stoppoloni. Respectfully submitted, Doris J. Mortensen City Clerk 7 Burlingame City Council November 15,2004 Unapproved Minutes CITY AGENDA 6a � ITEM# BURLINGAM � E MTG.STAFF REPORT DATE 12/6/2004 TO: Honorable Mayor and Council SUBMITTED - BY— DATE: UBMITTED _BYDATE: November 24. 2004 APPROVED � FROM: Larry E. Anderson, City Attorney BY SUBJECT: ADOPT ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 25 TO REQUIRE A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR OPERATION OF CERTAIN BUSINESSES DURING LATE NIGHT AND EARLY MORNING HOURS RECOMMENDATION: Adopt ordinance to require a conditional use permit for health services, beauty shops, barbershops, and tanning facilities if the use is to operated between the hours of 9 p.m. and 7 a.m. and instruct City Clerk to publish a summary of the ordinance within 15 days of adoption. DISCUSSION: During the past 2 years,there seems to have been an increase on the Peninsula in attempts to use a nail salon or health service as a cover for conduct of illegal massage or prostitution. Burlingame has been fortunate in having a strong ordinance regulating massage that was adopted in the early 1970's and strengthened in the early 1990's. Those provisions will be coming to the Council for amendment in the near future. The City has been lenient in allowing many uses to operate during any hours; however, grocery, drug, and department stores are limited to the hours of 7 a.m. to 11 p.m. without a conditional use permit. There have been occasions when persons who appear to be engaged in illegal activities such as prostitution have sought to use exemptions in the massage regulations by working for a barber, cosmetologist, or health practitioner. In order to discourage those attempts, a requirement for a conditional use permit for operating during the late night or early morning hours is proposed to govern those uses. Staff believes that the hours limitation would meet the operating needs of most legitimate uses, and a health use that routinely dealt with emergency visits would simply need to obtain a conditional use permit. In September,the Council adopted an urgency ordinance in the same form as presented for this hearing, and introduced this ordinance, waiving further reading at that time. Staff waited to bring the ordinance back for consideration to see if any problems or issues arose in the intervening time, and none have come to staff's attention. Attachment Proposed Ordinance Distribution: Chief of Police, City Planner I ORDINANCE NO. 2 ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME AMENDING TITLE 25 TO REQUIRE A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR 3 OPERATION OF CERTAIN BUSINESSES DURING LATE NIGHT AND EARLY MORNING HOURS 4 5 The CITY COUNCIL of the CITY OF BURLINGAME does hereby ordain as follows: 6 7 Section 1. Certain businesses can be sources of crime during late night and early morning 8 hours when there is little demand by the general public for the use and when it instead may only 9 be used in a manner that involves criminal activity. This conditional use permit requirement is 10 intended to and shall be applicable to all zoning districts in which these types of uses are permitted 11 by right or allowed as a conditional use, and the limitation on hours provided in this ordinance 12 should be made a condition of any permit allowing any such uses unless approval is expressly 13 granted to allow the use outside those hours. The uses limited by this ordinance are health services, 14 beauty shops, barbershops, tanning facilities, and massage, bathing, or similar establishments. 15 16 Section 2. A new Section 25.36.033 is added to read as follows: 17 25.36.030 Health services, beauty shops, barbershop, health studio, tanning facilities. 18 A health service,beauty shop,barbershop,health studio,or tanning facility in any location 19 in any C-1 district shall be limited to the hours of 7 a.m. to 9 p.m. unless a conditional use permit 20 is approved by the planning commission pursuant to chapter 25.52 to allow use outside those hours. 21 This limitation expressly applies to the Burlingame Avenue commercial subareas and Broadway 22 commercial area if the use is otherwise allowed. The hours limitation imposed by this section does 23 not apply to an occasional medical emergency at a health service use. 24 25 Section 3. A new Section 25.40.027 is added to read as follows: 26 25.40.027 Health services, tanning facilities, massage, bathing, or other similar establishments. 27 28 (a) A health service office shall be limited to the hours of 7 a.m. to 9 p.m. unless a 1 I conditional use permit is approved by the planning commission pursuant to chapter 25.52 to allow 2 use outside those hours. The hours limitation imposed by this subsection does not apply to an 3 occasional medical emergency at a health service use. 4 (b)A tanning facility,or massage,bathing,or similar establishment shall be limited to the 5 hours of 7 a.m.to 9 p.m.unless the terms of its conditional use permit as approved by the planning 6 commission pursuant to chapter 25.52 expressly allow the use outside those hours. 7 8 Section 4 A new Section 25.41.032 is added to read as follows: 9 25.41.032 Health service and massage, bathing, tanning, or similar establishments.. 10 (a) A health service office shall be limited to the hours of 7 a.m. to 9 p.m. unless a 11 conditional use permit is approved by the planning commission pursuant to chapter 25.52 to allow 12 use outside those hours. The hours limitation imposed by this subsection does not apply to an 13 occasional medical emergency at a health service use. 14 (b) A massage,bathing,tanning,or similar establishment shall be limited to the hours 15 of 7 a.m. to 9 p.m. unless the terms of its conditional use permit as approved by the planning 16 commission pursuant to chapter 25.52 expressly allow the use outside those hours. 17 18 Section 5. A new Section 25.42.025 is added to read as follows: 19 25.42.025 Conditional uses requiring a conditional use permit. 20 The following are conditional uses requiring a conditional use permit in the mixed 21 commercial-residential district: 22 (a) Operation of a health service, beauty shop, barbershop, or health studio between the 23 hours of 9 p.m. and 7 a.m. The hours limitation imposed by this subsection does not apply to an 24 occasional medical emergency at a health service use. 25 26 Section 6. A new Section 25.43.043 is added to read as follows: _27 25.43.043 Health service,medical clinic,beauty shop,barbershop,or tanning establishments. 28 A health service, beauty shop, barbershop, or tanning or similar establishment shall be 2 I limited to the hours of 7 a.m.to 9 p.m.unless a conditional use permit is approved by the planning commission pursuant to chapter 25.52 to expressly allow the use outside those hours. The hours 3 limitation imposed by this section does not apply to an occasional medical emergency at a health 4 service use. 5 6 Section 7 A new Section 25.44.042 is added to read as follows: 7 25.44.042 Health services or medical clinics. 8 A health service or medical clinic shall be limited to the hours of 7 a.m. to 9 p.m. unless 9 a conditional use permit is approved by the planning commission pursuant to chapter 25.52 to 10 expressly allow the use outside those hours. The hours limitation imposed by this section does not 11 apply to an occasional medical emergency at a health service or medical clinic use. 12 13 Section 8. This ordinance shall be published as required by law. 14 15 16 Mayor 17 I,DORIS MORTENSEN, City Clerk of the City of Burlingame,do hereby certify that the 18 foregoing ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 20TH day 19 of September, 2004, and adopted thereafter at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 20 day of , 2004, by the following vote: 21 AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: 22 NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: 23 ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: 24 City Clerk 25 C:\FILES\ORDINANC\hourscondlpermit.pin.wpd 26 27 28 CITY a AGENDA 6b ITEM# 6URLINGAME MTG. ; STAFF REPORT � DATE 12/6/2004 40 RRTEO r TO: Honorable Mayor and Council SUBMITTED BY DATE: November 30, 2004 APPROV BY FROM: Larry E. Anderson, City Attorney SUBJECT: ADOPTION OF ASSESSMENTS FOR YEAR 2005 FOR THE SAN MATEO COUNTY TOURISM BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT RECOMMENDATION: 1. Hold public hearing on the levy of assessments for the year 2005 in the San Mateo County Tourism Business Improvement District. 2. Close public hearing on the levy of assessments for the year 2005 in the San Mateo County Tourism Business Improvement District. 3. Adopt resolution overruling protests received as to assessments for the year 2005, approving programs and activities for the year 2005, and levying assessments for the year 2005. DISCUSSION In February 2001, the City Council formed the San Mateo County Tourism Business Improvement District with the consent of the County of San Mateo and the Cities of Belmont, Daly City, Foster City, Half Moon Bay, Millbrae, Redwood City, San Bruno, San Carlos, San Mateo, and South San Francisco. Burlingame is the lead agency for the District. Daly City withdrew in 2002 because its absence of a tourism industry. The City has entered into an agreement with the San Mateo County Convention and Visitors' Bureau to provide the activities and services for the District. To date, the assessments have been timely paid by almost every hotel in the District. The key elements of the District are a stable, focused source of revenue for promotion of tourism and conventions in the County, which has been so difficult in the past, and management and direction of the district and the convention and visitors bureau by hotel and tourist professionals, who establish the priorities for programs on a County-wide basis. Mayor and Council Re: Adoption of Assessments for Year 2004 for the San Mateo County Tourism BID November 30, 2004 Page 2 2005 Assessment Process On November 5, 2004,the City Council received and approved the annual report of the BID Advisory Board, which is composed of representatives of hotel properties and tourist-related businesses from throughout the County. The Board recommended that assessments be levied for the year 2005 at the same rate as in 2004. The small hotels in Half Moon Bay will continue to be exempt as that city is struggling to establish a viable chamber of commerce. The Ritz-Carlton in Half Moon Bay is also exempted for the coming year. The annual report detailed the immense efforts made by the Bureau in the past 12 months to boost the hospitality and tourism industry in the County. The Council adopted Resolution No. 102-2004, declaring its intention to levy assessments for the coming year and to approve the proposed programs and activities, and giving notice of the public hearing on the 2005 assessments on December 6, 2004. A copy of that resolution and the proposed assessments were then mailed to each and every hotel in the District. A copy of the resolution was also mailed to the County and each and every city that is within the boundaries of the District. A copy of the resolution was also published in the County-wide newspaper. Protests The City has not received any protests from any hotels as of the date of this report. Next Steps At the conclusion of the public hearing, the Council should formally close the public hearing and consider all protests received and changes requested. It does not appear that there is a majority protest as to the services and programs to be offered or provided, or to the assessments for 2005. It is recommended that the Council adopt the attached resolution, which: — Overrules protests submitted; — Approves the District programs and activities for the coming year; and — Adopts and levies the assessments on hotels in the District for the coming year. Mayor and Council Re: Adoption of Assessments for Year 2004 for the San Mateo County Tourism BID November 30, 2004 Page 3 Attachments: Proposed Assessments by Agency Location Proposed Resolution Distribution Anne LeClair, SMCCVB SUMMARY BY AGENCY FOR ASSESSEMENTS PROPOSED FOR SAN MATEO COUNTY TOURISM BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT--2005 TOTAL OF AGENCIES Rooms 2005 Assessment Per Room Belmont 671 24,127.20 $35.96 Burlingame 3771 723,337.20 $191.82 County of San Mateo 348 9,372.60 $26.93 Foster City 503 99,180.00 $197.18 Half Moon Bay 575 9,720.00 $16.90 Millbrae 1,218 170,215.20 $139.75 Redwood City 1,271 125,181.00 $98.49 San Bruno 664 39,808.80 $59.95 San Carlos 368 15,508.80 $42.14 San Mateo 1,978 254,052.00 $128.44 South San Francisco 2,876 305,478.00 $106.22 TOTAL 14,200 $1,882,765.80 $132.59 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME ESTABLISHING AND LEVYING YEAR 2005 ASSESSMENTS FOR THE SAN MATEO COUNTY TOURISM BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT AND APPROVING DISTRICT PROGRAMS AND ACTIVITIES FOR THE YEAR 2005 WHEREAS, pursuant to California Streets and Highways Code Section 36500 et sea., the San Mateo County Tourism Business Improvement District has been established for the purpose of promoting tourism in the District; and WHEREAS, the District Advisory Board has requested the Burlingame City Council to establish Year 2005 assessments for the District; and WHEREAS, on November 5, 2004, the City Council adopted a resolution of intention (Resolution No. 102-2004) declaring its intention to impose assessments for the Year 2005 within the Assessment District, and setting a public hearings on the proposed assessments; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the Streets & Highways Code, a public hearing on the proposed assessments was duly noticed for December 6, 2004, at 7:00 p.m. before the City Council of the City of Burlingame, at the Council's Chambers at 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame; and WHEREAS, at the public hearing held at that place and time, the City Council received and considered all oral and written testimony from all interested persons; and WHEREAS, the City did not receive a majority protest pursuant to the Streets & Highways Code as to the assessments or to any program or activity proposed for the District; and WHEREAS, the proposed assessments appear reasonable and consistent with the ordinance establishing the District and the underlying State law, and the assessment basis is within the basis established in Ordinance No. 1648; and WHEREAS, the proposed services, programs, and activities of the District are consistent with the ordinance establishing the District; and NOW, THEREFORE, the City of Burlingame does hereby resolve, determine, and find as follows: 1 1. Written protests to assessments, improvements or activities were not received at those public hearings that constituted a majority as defined in Government Code sections 36500 and following. 2. The City Council does hereby levy an assessment for the Year 2005 on hotels in the District as described in City of Burlingame Ordinance Nos. 1648 and 1678 and to pay for services,programs, and activities of the District. 3. The types of services, programs, and activities to be funded by the levy of assessments on businesses in the District are set forth in Exhibit"A", incorporated herein by reference. 4. The basis for assessments for the Year 2005 on all hotels within the District are set forth in Exhibit`B", incorporated herein by reference. 5. The assessments for the Year 2005 on hotels within the District are set forth in Exhibit "C", incorporated by reference. 6.New businesses shall not be exempt from assessment as provided in Exhibit "A." MAYOR I, DORIS MORTENSEN, City Clerk of the City of Burlingame do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council on the day of December, 2004, and was adopted thereafter by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: CITY CLERK C:\FILES\HotelBid\2005assessment.res.wpd 2 2004 Assessment Resolution EXHIBIT A ACTIVITIES, PROGRAMS AND SERVICES TO BE FUNDED BY THE SAN MATEO COUNTY TOURISM BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT 2005 In addition to the existing programs from 2004: 1. Increased Generation of Leisure travel leads for"togethering"trend among couples/families a. Advertising and editorials in leisure publications to emphasize this market 2. Group Leads a. Sales team to continue to make contacts/build business in Washington, D.C., Sacramento, and Midwestern markets; b. Sales team to continue focus on new feeder markets for discounted airlines into SFO, including Washington, DC, Indianapolis, Boston,New York and Calgary; C. In-house sales to continue to focus on corporate, SMERF markets; d. Stronger emphasis on tour and travel as rates are coming back; e. More emphasis on local and national sports groups; d. Continue to host familiarization trips for planners from all over the US; 3. Marketing Program for Meetings and Tourism a. Continue investment in extensive research to determine profiles of business and leisure visitors; b. Begin PR/marketing campaign targeted at potential customer outlined by research; C. Create overall destination"audit" and more localized area audits to assist the Bureau, the County, and cities in planning for visitor needs; d. Continue to host annual receptions in Sacramento, D.C., Chicago,New York and add receptions in Boston; e. Continue to participate in trade shows deemed promising by Bureau sales team and member hotels; f. Continue to place visitor guides in California Welcome centers throughout the State to generate drive traffic; g. Enhance advertising in publications/web programs aimed at meeting planners; h. Expand upon outreach to travel media and meeting planner publications, generating editorial on San Mateo County; i. Host annual group familiarization tour for travel writers from around the U.S.; j. Continue to participate in shows for travel writers around the U.S. and to host individual familiarizations; k. Work with new airlines into SFO, offering familiarization tours for airline sales teams and meeting planners from target markets; 1. Continue publishing specialty guides/promotional pieces aimed at target market segments; in. Continue outreach to film/ad/catalogue producers through film commission; n. Continue work with SFO, Caltrain, and BART on coordinated marketing of the area; o. Continue to build on relationships built by film commissioner to encourage more filming and room nights in the County; P. Continue to update/enhance website to increase number of"hits"by travelers. EXHIBIT B ASSESSMENT BASIS FOR SAN MATEO COUNTY TOURISM BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT FOR 2005 YEAR CATEGORY ZONE A—ASSESSMENT FOR YEAR ZONE B—ASSESSMENT FOR YEAR 2004 2004 Hotel with full $360 per sleeping room X 65% $360 per sleeping room X 55% service (no assessment in Half Moon Bay) and more than 20 sleeping rooms Hotel with limited $180 per sleeping room X 60% $180 per sleeping room X 40% service and more than 1000 square feet of meeting space and more than 20 sleeping rooms Hotel with limited $90 per sleeping room X 60% $90 per sleeping room X 40% service and some (no assessment in Half Moon Bay) meeting space but less than 1000 square feet and more than 20 sleeping rooms Hotel with standard $54 per sleeping room X 60% $54 per sleeping room X 40% service and more (no assessment in Half Moon Bay) than 20 sleeping rooms Hotel with full $54 per sleeping room X 30% $54 per sleeping room X 25% service, limited (no assessment in Half Moon Bay) service, or standard service, and 20 sleeping rooms or less ZONE A—Includes all cities participating in the District except Half Moon Bay ZONE B—Includes Half Moon Bay, and most of the unincorporated areas of San Mateo County Assessment of new hotels opening duringfiscal iscal year: A new hotel shall be assessed for an amount equal to the ratio of the number of full quarters remaining in the fiscal year multiplied by the full annual assessment that would have been due. A partial quarter is not counted for the ratio. For example, if a hotel opens in May, there are two full quarters and 2 months of one partial quarter remaining in the fiscal year. The full annual assessment would be multiplied by 2/4 for that year's assessment for the new hotel. SAN MATEO COUNTY TOURISM BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT ASSESSMENT CALCULATIONS ---YEAR 2005 EXHIBIT C Name of Property Zone Category/Assessment #Rooms ANNUAL Assessment Monthly assessment Burlingame_ Embassy Suites A $ 360.00 340 $ 79,560.00 $ 6,630.00 Doubletree Hotel A $ 360.00 390 $ 91,260.00 $ 7,605.00 SFO Marriott A $ 360.00 685 $ 160,290.00 $ 13,357.50 Hyatt Regency SFO A $ 360.00 789 $ 184,626.00 $ 15,385.50 Sheraton Gateway A $ 360.00 404 $ 94,536.00 $ 7,878.00 Hilton Garden Inn A $ 180.00 132 $ 14,256.00 $ 1,188.00 Crowne Plaza A $ 360.00 309 $ 72,306.00 $ 6,025.50 Holiday Inn Express A $ 90.00 144 $ 7,776.00 $ 648.00 Red Roof Inn A $ 54.00 212 $ 6,868.80 $ 572.40 Vagabond Inn A $ 54.00 91 $ 2,948.40 $ 245.70 Burlingame Hotel A $ 54.00 41 $ 1,328.40 $ 110.70 Country House A $ 54.00 27 $ 874.80 $ 72.90 Hampton Inn&Suites A $ 54.00 77 $ 2,494.80 $ 207.90 Bay Landing A $ 54.00 130 $ 4,212.00 $ 351.00 Room Total 3771 Total: $ 723,337.20 Name of Property Zone Category/Assessment #Rooms ANNUAL Assessment Monthly assessment San Mateo SM Marriott A $ 360.00 476 $ 111,384.00 $ 9,282.00 Radisson Villa Hotel A $ 360.00 286 $ 66,924.00 $ 5,577.00 Residence Inn A $ 54.00 160 $ 5,184.00 $ 432.00 Hilton Garden A $ 180.00 156 $ 16,848.00 $ 1,404.00 Homestead Village A $ 54.00 136 $ 4,406.40 $ 367.20 Holiday Inn A $ 360.00 110 $ 25,740.00 $ 2,145.00 Best Western Los Prados A $ 90.00 113 $ 6,102.00 $ 508.50 Comfort Inn A $ 54.00 111 $ 3,596.40 $ 299.70 Hillsdale Inn A $ 54.00 90 $ 2,916.00 $ 243.00 Howard Johnson A $ 54.00 57 $ 1,846.80 $ 153.90 Super 8 A $ 54.00 53 $ 1,717.20 $ 143.10 Avalon A $ 54.00 48 $ 1,555.20 $ 129.60 Firestone Lodge A $ 54.00 46 $ 1,490.40 $ 124.20 San Mateo Motel A $ 54.00 33 $ 1,069.20 $ 89.10 Coxhead House A $ 54.00 4 $ 64.80 $ 5.40 Wingate Inn A $ 54.00 99 $ 3,207.60 $ 267.30 Room Total 1978 Total: $ 254,052.00 11/30/2004 1 of 7 SAN MATEO COUNTY TOURISM BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT ASSESSMENT CALCULATIONS ---YEAR 2005 EXHIBIT C Name of Property IZone Category/Assessment #Rooms ANNUAL Assessment Monthly assessment South San Francisco Embassy Suites A $ 360.00 312 $ 73,008.00 $ 6,084.00 Comfort Suites A $ 54.00 166 $ 5,378.40 $ 448.20 Best Western Grosvenor Inn A $ 360.00 206 $ 48,204.00 $ 4,017.00 Hilton Garden Inn A $ 180.00 169 $ 18,252.00 $ 1,521.00 Holiday Inn North A $ 360.00 224 $ 52,416.00 $ 4,368.00 La Quinta Inn#659 A $ 180.00 174 $ 18,792.00 $ 1,566.00 Larkspur Landing A $ 90.00 111 $ 5,994.00 $ 499.50 Good Nite Inn A $ 180.00 175 $ 2.0,475.00 $ 1,706.25 Residence Inn A $ 90.00 152 $ 8,208.00 $ 684.00 Travelodge A $ 54.00 199 $ 6,447.60 $ 537.30 Airport Inn A $ 54.00 34 $ 1,101.60 $ 91.80 Americana Inn Motel A $ 54.00 17 $ 275.40 $ 22.95 Courtyard by Marriott A $ 180.00 197 $ 21,276.00 $ 1,773.00 Travelodge A $ 54.00 49 $ 1,587.60 $ 132.30 Days Inn(Airport Blvd.) A $ 54.00 25 $ 810.00 $ 67.50 Deluxe Inn A $ 54.00 20 $ 324.00 $ 27.00 Economy Inn A $ 54.00 21 $ 680.40 $ 56.70 Hallmark House Motel A $ 54.00 13 $ 210.60 $ 17.55 Hampton Inn A $ 54.00 100 $ 3,240.00 $ 270.00 Howard JohnsonNagabond A $ 54.00 51 $ 1,652.40 $ 137.70 Inn at Oyster Point A $ 90.00 30 $ 1,620.00 $ 135.00 Quality Inn&Suites A $ 54.00 45 $ 1,458.00 $ 121.50 Royal Inn A $ 54.00 17 $ 275.40 $ 22.95 Motel A $ 54.00 117 $ 3,790.80 $ 315.90 Travelers Inn A $ 54.00 20 $ 324.00 $ 27.00 Holiday Inn Express A $ 54.00 87 $ 2,818.80 $ 234.90 Sheraton Four Points A $ 90.00 100 $ 5,400.00 $ 450.00 Ramada Limited A $ 54.00 45 $ 1,458.00 $ 121.50 Room Total 2876 Total: $ 305,478.00 11/30/2004 2of7 SAN MATEO COUNTY TOURISM BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT ASSESSMENT CALCULATIONS ---YEAR 2005 EXHIBIT C Name of Property Zone Category/Assessment #Rooms ANNUAL Assessment Monthly assessment Millbrae Westin A $ 360.00 390 $ 91,260.00 $ 7,605.00 Clarion A $ 360.00 250 $ 58,500.00 $ 4,875.00 EI Rancho Inn &Suites A $ 54.00 306 $ 9,914.40 $ 826.20 Millwood Inn A $ 54.00 34 $ 1,101.60 $ 91.80 Travelodge A $ 54.00 58 $ 1,879.20 $ 156.60 Comfort Inn A $ 54.00 100 $ 3,240.00 $ 270.00 Quality Suites Millbrae A $ 90.00 80 $ 4,320.00 $ 360.00 Room Total 1218 Total $ 170,215.20 . SI a__.. Name of Property Zone Category/Assessment #Rooms ANNUAL Assessment Monthly assessment Foster City Crowne Plaza A $ 360.00 356 $ 83,304.00 $ 6,942.00 Marriott Courtyard A $ 180.00 147 $ 15,876.00 $ 1,323.00 Room Total 503 Total: $ 99,180.00 11/30/2004 3 of 7 SAN MATEO COUNTY TOURISM BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT ASSESSMENT CALCULATIONS ---YEAR 2005 EXHIBIT C Name of Property Zone 'Category/Assessment #Rooms ANNUAL Assessment Monthly assessment Half Moon Bay Beach House Inn B $ 180.00 54 $ 3,888.00 $ 324.00 Ritz Carlton B $ 360.00 261 $ - $ - Half Moon Bay Lodge B $ 180.00 81 $ 5,832.00 $ 486.00 Ramada Limited B $ 54.00 29 $ - $ - Holiday Inn Express B $ 54.00 52 $ - $ - Cameron's Inn B $ 54.00 3 $ - $ - Mill Rose Inn&Garden B $ 54.00 6 $ - $ - Miramar Lodge&Conf. Center B $ 90.00 40 $ - $ - Moon Dream Cottage B $ 54.00 0 $ - $ - Old Thyme Inn B $ 54.00 7 $ - $ - Plum Tree Court B $ 54.00 6 $ - $ - San Benito House B $ 54.00 12 $ - $ The Gilchrest House B $ 54.00 1 $ - $ - Zaballa House B $ 54.00 23 $ - $ - Room Total 575 Total: $ 9,720.00 I 11/30/2004 4of7 SAN MATEO COUNTY TOURISM BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT ASSESSMENT CALCULATIONS ---YEAR 2005 EXHIBIT C .Name of Property Zone Category/Assessment #Rooms ANNUAL Assessment Monthly assessment Unincorporated County Best Western Exec. Suites A $ 54.00 29 $ 939.60 $ 78.30 Costanoa Coastal Lodge B $ 90.00 172 $ 6,192.00 $ 516.00 Cypress Inn on Miramar Beach B $ 54.00 8 $ 108.00 $ 9.00 Farallone Inn B&B B $ 54.00 9 $ 121.50 $ 10.13 Goose&Turrets B&B B $ 54.00 5 $ 67.50 $ 5.63 Harbor View Inn B $ 54.00 18 $ 243.00 $ 20.25 Harbor House B $ 54.00 6 $ 81.00 $ 6.75 Landis Shores B $ 54.00 8 $ 108.00 $ 9.00 Motorville Motel B $ 54.00 30 $ 648.00 $ 54.00 Pacific Victorian B $ 54.00 3 $ 40.50 $ 3.38 Pillar Point Inn B $ 54.00 11 $ 148.50 $ 12.38 Princess Port B $ 54.00 4 $ 54.00 $ 4.50 Seal Cove Inn B $ 54.00 10 $ 135.00 $ 11.25 Estancia del Mar B $ 54.00 5 $ 67.50 $ 5.63 Pescadero Creek Inn B $ 54.00 4 $ 54.00 $ 4.50 Pescadero Creekside Barn B $ 54.00 1 $ 13.50 $ 1.13 Stillheart B $ 54.00 16 $ 216.00 $ 18.00 Atherton Inn A $ 54.00 5 $ 81.00 $ 6.75 The Miramar Victorian B $ 54.00 3 $ 40.50 $ 3.38 Rose Cottage by the Beach B $ 54.00 1 $ 13.50 $ 1.13 Room Total 348 Total: $ 9,372.60 11/30/2004 5of7 SAN MATEO COUNTY TOURISM BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT ASSESSMENT CALCULATIONS ---YEAR 2005 EXHIBIT C i Name of Property Zone Category/Assessment #Rooms ANNUAL Assessment Monthly assessment Redwood City Hotel Sofitel A $ 360.00 419, $ 98,046.00 $ 8,170.50 Best Western Inn A $ 54.00 26 $ 842.40 $ 70.20 Budget Inn A $ 54.00 27 $ 874.80 $ 72.90 Capri Hotel A $ 54.00 50 $ 1,620.00 $ 135.00 Pacific Euro A $ 54.00 55 $ 1,782.00 $ 148.50 Comfort Inn A $ 54.00 52 $ 1,684.80 $ 140.40 Days Inn A $ 54.00 68 $ 2,203.20 $ 183.60 Garden Motel A $ 54.00 17 $ 275.40 $ 22.95 Good Nite Inn A $ 54.00 123 $ 3,985.20 $ 332.10 Holiday Inn Express A $ 54.00 38 $ 1,231.20 $ 102.60 Pacific Inn Hotel A $ 54.00 75 $ 2,430.00 $ 202.50 Redwood Motor Court A $ 54.00 12 $ 194.40 $ 16.20 Best Inn A $ 54.00 38 $ 1,231.20 $ 102.60 Sequoia Inn A $ 54.00 22 $ 712.80 $ 59.40 Super 8 Motel A $ 54.00 40 $ 1,296.00 $ 108.00 Sequoia Hotel A $ 54.00 53 $ 1,717.20 $ 143.10 Marriott Towne Place Suites A $ 54.00 95 $ 3,078.00 $ 256.50 Hampton Inn A $ 54.00 61 $ 1,976.40 $ 164.70 Room Total 1271 Total: $ 125,181.00 Name of Property Zone Category/Assessment #Rooms ANNUAL Assessment Monthly assessment San Bruno Budget Inn A $ 54.00 29 $ 939.60 $ 78.30 Cable Car Inn A $ 54.00 24 $ 777.60 $ 64.80 Super 8 A $ 54.00 54 $ 1,749.60 $ 145.80 StayBridge Suites A $ 180.00 95 $ 10,260.00 $ 855.00 Marriott Courtyard A $ 180.00 147 $ 15,876.00 $ 1,323.00 Regency Inn A $ 54.00 32 $ 1,036.80 $ 86.40 Ramada Inn Limited A $ 54.00 61 $ 1,976.40 $ 164.70 Ritz Motel _ A $ 54.00 23 $ 745.20 $ 62.10 Best Inn A $ 54.00 29 $ 939.60 $ 78.30 The Gateway Inn A $ 54.00 31 $ 1,004.40 $ 83.70 Howard Johnson A $ 54.00 49 $ 1,587.60 $ 132.30 Guest House International" A $ 54.00 42 $ 1,360.80 $ 113.40 Days Inn A $ 54.00 48 $ 1,555.20 $ 129.60 Room Total 664 Total: $ 39,808.80 **Opening Spring 2005 11/30/2004 6 of 7 SAN MATEO COUNTY TOURISM BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT ASSESSMENT CALCULATIONS ---YEAR 2005 EXHIBIT C Name of Property Zone Category/Assessment #Rooms ANNUAL Assessment Monthly assessment Belmont Bel Mateo Motel A $ 54.00 23 $ 745.20 $ 62.10 Econolod a Belmont A $ 54.00 23 $ 745.20 $ 62.10 Holiday Inn Express&Suites A $ 90.00 82 $ 4,428.00 $ 369.00 Motel A $ 54.00 273 $ 8,845.20 $ 737.10 Summerfield Suites A $ 90.00 132 $ 7,128.00 $ 594.00 Belmont Palms A $ 54.00 14 $ 226.80 $ 18.90 ExtendedStay A $ 54.00 108 $ 1,749.60 $ 145.80 Kingsway Motel A $ 54.00 16 $ 259.20 $ 21.60 Room Total 671 Total: $ 24,127.20 .. . ,.,, 3x y„ ,,, .. ,. � ,; y ✓rte v r q ,1.,> 3 �m 0101 1 Name of Property Zone Category/Assessment #Rooms ANNUAL Assessmen Monthly assessment San Carlos Comfort Inn A $ 90.00 50 $ 2,700.00 $ 225.00 Days Inn A $ 54.00 29 $ 939.60 $ 78.30 Homestead Village Guest Stes A $ 90.00 116 $ 6,264.00 $ 522.00 Inns of America A $ 54.00 112 $ 3,628.80 $ 302.40 Best Value Inn A $ 54.00 32 $ 1,036.80 $ 86.40 Travellnn A $ 54.00 29 $ 939_.60 $ 78.30 Room Total 368 Total: $ 15,508.80 11/30/2004 7of7 STAFF REPORT BURLINGAME AGENDA ITEM# 6c Hyo o i, 900 MTG. �NATED JUNEO DATE December 6,2004 To: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL SUBMITTE BY Roc e b 1 a Fire Ma DATE: November 29, 2004 APPROVEDY, 44L w/ FROM: Central County Fire Department BY /�/ SUBJECT: Revisions to Burlingame Municipal Code Section .04 (Fire Code) Public Hearing: A. Adopt proposed ordinance. B. Direct city clerk to publish a summary of the ordinance within 15 days of adoption. BACKGROUND: On November 4`h, 2002, the City Council for the City of Burlingame adopted the 2001 Edition of the California Fire Code (CFC),Uniform Fire Code (UFC)with California Amendments. At that same time, the Council approved an amendment that changed the existing threshold for fire sprinkler requirements from 5,000 square feet to 2,000 square feet. With the increase level of fire sprinkler installations within the city, the fire department is proposing further amendments to the ordinance. These amendments are intended to clarify the threshold requirements and provide objective criteria for improved application of the ordinance. Adoption of this ordinance will, for the most part, retain existing local amendments. However, there have been some changes. 1. Adoption of the new fee schedule based upon hourly work does not properly account for"Phased" projects. As such, fire construction permits will have a set number of inspections; ensuring that the fire bureau will recover associated costs to extended construction projects. See §17.04.023 Section 105.9 #4 2. Increase construction activity in existing buildings has increased the need for inspection schedule flexibility. After hours inspections and rates are now identified in both the fee schedule and the city's fire code. See §17.04.023 Section 105.9 #5 3. Previously, the City of Burlingame referenced the Building Valuation Data published by the International Conference of Building Officials. This document is no longer published. The ordinance now references the Building Valuation Data as published by the International Code Council. This change is implemented throughout §17.04.030. 4. Due to the fluctuations in building values over recent years, the $75,000 threshold for fire sprinklers has now been dropped for both commercial and residential projects. In lieu of utilizing a dollar factor that fluctuates, we no utilize a square footage threshold of 750 square feet for residential projects and 1200 square feet for commercial projects. The valuation tables are still utilized for comparison purposes for small projects in relatively large buildings whereas sprinklers are not required if the work to be done is less than 20% of the value of a building. A designer is given the option to use either method. This change was made to §17.04.030. 5. Improved installation standards are now codified to improve contractor expectation. The standards are consistent with NFPA 13D and address target hazard areas within the city. See new §17.04.028. 6. A clarification for remodel and alteration is now addressed. See §17.04.030 Section 1003.2.1.4 where language is added. This language was previously reviewed by the National Fire Sprinkler Association for adoption in other Bay Area communities such as Monterey, California. This will allow designers to identify the requirement for fire sprinklers prior to submission to plan review or even as early as design review. 7. A retrofit requirement is now introduced to install radio repeater/receiver antenna for existing highrise structures. The threshold for compliance is based upon major infrastructure modifications to these existing structures (ie: complete HVAC renovation or Piping renovation). See §17.04.055. 1 ORDINANCE No. 2 ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME AMENDING CHAPTER 17.04— UNIFORM FIRE CODE TO CLARIFY ALARM,FEE,AND SPRINKLER 3 PROVISIONS 4 The CITY COUNCIL of the CITY OF BURLINGAME does hereby ordain as follows: 5 6 Section 1. The City of Burlingame is located between the Santa Cruz Mountains foothills 7 and San Francisco Bay, with a number of substantial creeks flowing through highly developed 8 residential and industrial areas. It is surrounded by large areas of open space maintained in natural 9 condition, as well as having a significant natural canyon in the center of the residential area. The 10 City normally receives no measurable precipitation between May and October , and it can often 11 extend into late October or early November. During this period, average temperatures average 12 between 70°F and 90'F, and strong winds comedown the foothills. These conditions eliminate 13 most of the moisture in the natural vegetation and heavily wooded hillsides. The area also suffers 14 periodic droughts that extend the dry periods to other months of the year. In addition,many wood 15 roofs over wood construction predominate the residential areas. The City is directly east of the 16 San Andreas Fault,and much of the highly developed part of the City is located along the front of 17 the Bay, some on fill. The foothill areas have a variety of soil formations with steep canyons and 18 heavy precipitation. Fires in the community could quickly spread because of the extensive, 19 natural vegetation throughout the City. The City has a number of highly developed commercial 20 areas with older buildings, and an industrial area that is filled with mixed uses utilizing various 21 materials that could be highly hazardous. In addition, heavily traveled approach and departure 22 routes for San Francisco International Airport are immediately adjacent or over the City. Much of 2; the residential areas that are immediately adjacent to woodland and canyon are served by narrow 24 one-or two-lane roads with confused access caused by the steepness of the terrain. Access by fire 25 suppression equipment is extremely limited by both topography and improved access. It is only 26 through strong building standards and effective fire prevention and containment programs that 27 28 citizens will receive the protection they deserve,and that citizens will be able to obtain reasonably 1111612004 1 I priced insurance for their homes and businesses. In seeking to attain these goals, the fire 2 prevention standards in Title 17 have been adopted. The amendments adopted in this ordinance 3 implement important safeguards in 4 5 Section 2. In addition, in order to provide appropriate, clear information to applicants for 6 construction approvals, Section 17.04.023 is amended to conform Title 17 to Title 18 and the 7 Zoning Code requirements established in the Municipal Code. 8 9 Section 3. Section 17.04.023 is amended to read as follows: 10 17.04.023 Section 105.9 added -- Fees. 11 Section 105.9 is added to read as follows: 12 105.9 Fees and Special Requirements. 13 1. The fees for the permits and other services shall be as established by 14 resolution of the Burlingame City Council as amended from time to time. The fees 15 shall be set to cover the cost of the Fire Department to review and inspect the 16 intended activities, operations or functions. The fees must be paid to the City of 17 Burlingame prior to engaging in the listed activities, operations, or functions. 18 EXCEPTION: 1. The applicant for a given permit shall be exempt 19 from the payment of such fees if they can show proof of non-profit 20 status. 21 2.The applicant for a given permit shall be exempt from the 22 payment when the work to be conducted is for properties or events 23 owned by the City of Burlingame. 24 2. In the case of multiple permits for an applicant,the permit applicant will 25 be charged the single highest listed rate of all the permits required. The other 26 permitable items will be charged at a rate of 50% of the listed fee as long as the 27 permits are for the same address. 28 3. Where processes or materials are inherent with a permitable item, 11/16/2004 2 1 subsequent fees may be waived at the discretion of fire chief. 2 4. All fire permits and fire construction permits shall have a set number of 3 inspections per permit as set forth in the fee schedule adopted by the City Council. 4 Additional inspections and additional re-inspections will be billed at an hourly rate 5 consistent with the fee schedule. 6 5. "After Hours"inspections will be invoiced at a rate of one and one-half 7 times the normal hourly rate. "After Hours" inspections will be billed at a rate of 8 three(3)hours minimum. "After Hours"inspections means inspections conducted 9 outside of normal business hours for the Fire Prevention Division. 10 6. Any person,group,organization,institution or business failing to pay the 11 applicable fees under this Article after thirty (30) days of the due date, for either 12 existing or new permit applicants,shall be issued a citation for non-payment of the 13 required permit fee. The penalty for all permit payments delinquent after thirty(3 0) 14 days shall be a doubling of the original fee. 15 16 Section 4. A new Section 17.04.028 is added as follows: 17 17.04.028 Sections 1003.1.3 and 1003.1.4 added - Installation requirements for fire sprinkler systems. 18 19 Sections 1003.1.3 and 1003.1.4 are added to read as follows: 20 1003.1.3 Local Fire Sprinkler Requirements. Inspector Test Valves shall be 21 provided for each system and located the furthest point away from the sprinkler 22 riser. 23 1003.1.4 Additional Fire Sprinkler Requirements in all Residential 24 Occupancies. The installation of a residential fire sprinkler system shall conform 25 to the following: 26 1. Sprinklers shall be required in all restrooms,bathrooms,powder rooms, 27 and toilet rooms regardless of their size. 28 2.. Sprinklers shall be required throughout carports and garages. 11/16/2004 I EXCEPTION: Detached carports and garages less than 2,000 2 square feet in area and separated from residential buildings in 3 accordance with Table 5A of the Building Code and assuming a 4 property line between all other structures. 5 3. Sprinkler coverage shall be provided in attics adjacent to storage, 6 mechanical equipment, electrical equipment, and attic access openings. 7 8 Section 5. Section 17.04.030 is amended to read as follows: 9 17.04.030 Sections 1003.2.1.1 through 1003.1.4 added—Required installations of 10 automatic fire extinguisher systems. 11 Sections 1003.2.1.1 through 1003.2.1.4 are added to read as follows: 12 1003.2.1.1 All new buildings with a total building floor area in excess of two 13 thousand (2,000) square feet or more than two (2) stories in height shall be 14 protected by an approved automatic sprinkler fire extinguishing system, with the 15 following provisions: 16 1. The shut-off valves and the water flow devices shall be supervised, and 17 their operations shall transmit a signal to an approved central station. 18 EXCEPTION: Residential one- and two-family dwellings. 19 2. In all buildings more than two (2) stories in height, shut-off valves and 20 water flow devices shall be supervised through an annunciator board at a location 21 approved by the Fire Department. 22 EXCEPTION: Residential one- and two-family dwellings. 23 3. If there is a local fire alarm in the building, the operation of the water 24 flow devices shall activate the local alarm system. 25 4.Any local fire alarm system shall be designed to be heard by all occupants 26 of the building and shall,when activated,transmit an alarm to an approved central 27 station. 28 5. Area separation walls may be used for area increases as per the Unifbint 11/16/2004 4 I Building Code,but shall not be used to separate buildings or structures in lieu of the 2 automatic sprinkler systems required by this section. 3 1003.2.1.2 All existing buildings with a total building floor area in excess of two 4 thousand (2,000) square feet or more than two (2) stories in height shall be 5 retroactively protected by an approved automatic extinguishing system when the 6 size of additions or alterations for which a building permit is required will exceed 7 twelve hundred(1200)square feet in area or the costs of additions or alterations for 8 which a building permit is required will exceed twenty percent (20%) of the 9 building's replacement cost as defined by the Building Valuation Data(BVD)table 10 as published by the International Code Council (ICC), whichever is greater. 1 I EXCEPTION: Residential one- and two-family dwellings. 12 The following provisions apply to all sprinklered buildings: 13 1. The shut-off valves and the water flow devices shall be supervised, and 14 their operations shall transmit a signal to an approved central station. 15 2. In all buildings more than two (2) stories in height, shut-off valves and 16 water flow devices shall be supervised through an annunciator board at a location 17 approved by the Fire Department. 18 3. If there is a local fire alarm in the building, the operation of the water 19 flow devices shall activate the local alarm system. 20 4.Any local fire alarm system shall be designed to be heard by all occupants 21 of the building and shall,when activated,transmit an alarm to an approved central 22 station. 23 5. Area separation walls may be used for area increases as per the Uniform 24 Building Code and may be used to divide a portion of the building that is not 25 involved with a remodel or renovation for purposes of this section. 26 6. In the event that a building is partially retrofitted with an approved 27 automatic sprinkler fire extinguishing system pursuant to this section,the building 28 shall complete the fire extinguishing system retrofit throughout the unprotected 1111612004 5 1 building interior areas within six (6) years from completing the initial partial retrofit. 7. The size or cost of additions and alterations used in calculating the size 4 or replacement cost value formula shall not be cumulative with regard to individual 5 additions or alterations in a building unless either of the following two 6 circumstances apply: 7 (a) Where more than one (1) addition or alteration for which g building permits are required are made within a two(2)year period and said 9 additions or alterations are made to the premises of the same occupant. In 10 such circumstances, the sum of the size or costs of these additions or 11 alterations during this two (2) year period shall be aggregated for the 12 purpose of calculating the size or replacement cost value formula; or 1; (b) Where more than one (1) addition or alteration for which 14 building permits have been issued have not yet received final Building 15 Department approval. In such circumstances, the sum of these issued but 16 not yet finalized building additions' or alterations' sizes or construction 17 costs shall be aggregated for the purpose of calculation of the size or 18 replacement cost value formula. 19 EXCEPTIONS: The cost of additions and alterations used 20 in calculating the replacement cost value formula shall be exclusive 21 of the cost to design and install an automatic fire sprinkler 22 extinguishing system pursuant to this section; building roof 2; repair/replacement; building heating and/or cooling unit 24 repair/replacement; and any other federal, state and local 25 construction code upgrade requirements including but not limited to 26 the American Disability Act architectural barrier removal 27 requirements, Title 24 handicap compliance requirements, seismic 28 retrofit requirements, asbestos and other hazardous material 11/16/2004 6 1 abatement. 1003.2.1.3 All existing residential one- and two-family dwellings buildings with a total building floor area in excess of two thousand (2,000) square feet or more 4 than two (2) stories in height shall be retroactively protected by an approved 5 automatic extinguishing system when the size of any combination of addition or 6 alteration for which a building permit is required will exceed seven hundred fifty 7 (750) square feet in area or the cost is greater than twenty percent (20%) of the 8 building's replacement cost as defined by the Building Valuation Data(BVD)table 9 as published by the International Code Council (ICC), whichever is greater, with 10 the following specific provisions: 11 1. In the event that a building is partially retrofitted with an approved 12 automatic sprinkler fire extinguishing system pursuant to this section,the building 1; fire extinguishing system retrofit shall be completed throughout the unprotected 14 building interior areas within two (2) years from completing the initial partial 15 retrofit. 16 2. The size or cost of additions and alterations used in calculating the 17 replacement cost value formula shall not be cumulative with regard to individual 18 additions or alterations in a building unless either of the following two 19 circumstances apply: 20 (a) Where more than one (1) addition or alteration for which 21 building permits are required are made within a two(2)year period and said 22 additions or alterations are made to the premises of the same occupant. In such circumstances, the sum of the sizes or costs of these additions or 24 alterations during this two (2) year period shall be aggregated for the 2� purpose of calculating the size or replacement cost value formula; or 26 (b) Where more than one (1) addition or alteration for which 27 building permits have been issued have not yet received final Building 28 Department approval. In such circumstances, the sum of these issued but 11/16/2004 I not yet finalized building additions' or alterations' sizes or construction 2 costs shall be aggregated for the purpose of calculation of the size or 3 replacement cost value formula. 4 EXCEPTIONS: The cost of additions and alterations used in 5 calculating the replacement cost value formula shall be exclusive of 6 the cost to design and install an automatic fire sprinkler 7 extinguishing system pursuant to this section; building roof 8 repair/replacement; building heating and/or cooling unit 9 repair/replacement; and any other federal, state and local 10 construction code upgrade requirements including but not limited to 11 the seismic retrofit requirements, asbestos and other hazardous 12 material abatement. 13 1003.2.1.4 Additions/Alterations. The standard for determining the size of 14 addition and/or alteration subject to the provisions of 1003.2.1.2 and 1003.2.1.3 15 shall be determined by the following: 16 1. The square footage of every room being added or altered shall be 17 included in the calculation of total square footage of addition or alteration. 18 2. The entire square footage of an individual room shall be considered 19 added or altered when at least fifty percent(50%) or greater of the linear length of 20 interior wall sheeting or ceiling of any one wall within the room is new, removed, 21 or replaced. 22 3. The entire square footage of an individual room shall be considered 23 added or altered when at least fifty percent(50%) or greater of the linear length of 24 concrete,brick or masonry walls of any one wall within the room is new,removed, 25 or replaced. 26 27 Section 6. Section 17.04.035 is added to read as follows: 28 17.04.035 Section 1006.1.2.1 added—False alarms. 11116/2004 8 I A new section 1006.1.2.1 is added to read as follows: 2 1006.1.2.1 False alarms. Any building owner or owner's agent who fails to 3 properly maintain and service any fire alarm system,smoke detector,or water-flow 4 detection alarm or fire sprinkler tamper alarm after being notified that service or 5 maintenance is required,will be subject to payment as provided in the fee schedule 6 adopted by the City Council. 7 8 Section 7. A new Section 17.04.055 is added to read as follows: 9 17.04.055 Section 6.1, Item 6.1 added—Building Security 10 Section 6.1 is amended by adding item 6.1 to read as follows: 11 Item 6.1 Building Security. All existing high-rise buildings shall provide a 12 location on the building for installation of a repeater/receiver antenna and supporting 13 equipment for City communications whenever a permit is secured to replace, modify, or 14 upgrade any of the building's basic infrastructure utilities. An electrical supply source shall 15 be provided by building owner or operator at the antenna/equipment location, and 16 reasonable access shall be provided by the building owner or operator to City staff and/or 17 city contractors for installation of necessary telephone lines and for purposes of installation, 18 maintenance, adjustment and repair of the antenna/equipment. This access and location 19 agreement shall be recorded in terms that convey the intent and meaning of this condition 20 in a form approved by the City Attorney. 21 22 Section 8. Wherever in the Municipal Code or the Uniform Fire Code, as adopted by 23 the Municipal Code,the term"fire department"or"Burlingame Fire Department"is used,it shall 24 mean the Central County Fire Department. 25 26 Section 9. This ordinance shall be published as required by law. 27 28 Mayor 1111612004 9 1 2 I, DORIS MORTENSEN, City Clerk of the City of Burlingame, do hereby certify that the 3 foregoing ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 15`"day 4 of November,2004,and adopted thereafter at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 5 day of , 2004, by the following vote: 6 AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: 7 NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: 8 ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: 9 City Clerk 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 11/16/2004 � CITY °�` AGENDA ITEM# bd MR7ME STAFF REPORT MAG. DATE 12/6/2004 `Msi uue 6,00 TO: Honorable Mayor and Council SUBMITTED BY DATE: November 23, 2004 APPROVED BY FROM: Larry E. Anderson, City Attorney SUBJECT: CONSIDER APPROVAL OF AMUSEMENT PERMIT FOR ROTI INDIAN BISTRO, 209 PARK ROAD RECOMMENDATION: Consider approval of an amusement permit for Roti Indian Bistro at 209 Park Road for live music during dinner hours for a period of six months. DISCUSSION: Roti Indian Bistro has recently opened for business at 209 Park Road. The owners would like to offer live music during the dinner hour. There have not been any previous amusement permits at this location. During the past year, there have been few calls at the establishment. Dicey Riley's also had few complaints. The Police Department is recommending approval with standard conditions with a six-month review. It is suggested by staff that the dinner hour be set at 3 p.m. to I I p.m. to provide flexibility to the new restaurant. Attachment Permit application from Roti Indian Bistro Proposed conditions for amusement permit Distribution Chief of Police City Planner Roti Restaurants LLC The City cl Durlinaame 4 AW Amusement Dermit Application City Clerk's Office • 501 Primrose Road • Burlingame, CA 94010 (650) 696-7200 NAMEoFBUSINESS: T`°7/ /ND/A"/ �s7�°�i�T/ r �7s�y.eA�✓rI/LCA STREET ADDRESS: MAILING ADDRESS: TELEPHONE NUMBER: (��a)/� O p APPLICANT'S FULL NAME: `/U/w/_ A�� //h4'/ ER O STREET ADDRESS: TELEPHONE NUMBER: PREVIOUS (IF LESS THAN ONE YEAR): DATE OF BIRTH SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER DRIVERS LICENSE NUMBER PROPERTY OWNER'S FU LL NAME(IF DIFFERENT): /;t ' ADDRESS: J� ,�U,�'L//✓(,pM/E /;t- � TELEPHONE NUMBER: s pro wner,I know a proposed amus em 4 and hereby authorize the above applicant to submit is pplica6 sY� GNATURE DATE PRIMARY TYPE OF BUSINESS: HOURS OF OPERATION //�1 PARKING)SPACES ON SITE AMUSEMENT DEVICES,NUMBER,AND TYPE: iPhle-9 L LleY /�r(z4�y/ ;,Wr /' RESTRICTIONS ON USE,AGE,HOURS: �l/ClN4 �l/NiN4 /7o Ai IAI EVIG/N 4 A"e CU04Mh�1. ENTERTAINMENT(BRIEF DESCRIPTION): I'Ni A/O/AN A¢�/ C W/>f/4 CO7Afy1�Y ,oU�/ Fb.e 1f1 .0 11�e PA/NM�I/Y Gy%0U/I D/NNE! �y EJ'71 DESCRIBE ANY OTHER RESTRICTIONS AND SECURITY MEASURES: Attach a letter fu her describing details of your business and the proposed amusement. Return this completed form with $100 check, le to City of Burlingame,for application fee to the City Clerk. You will be notified when the application is on the City ouncil agenda.- G Sign re of App-cant Date PROPOSED CONDITIONS FOR AMUSEMENT PERMIT FOR ROTI INDIAN BISTRO, 209 PARK ROAD Permit allows: Live music from 3:00 p.m. to 11 :00 p.m., seven days a week. 1 . All alcohol beverage control laws shall be strictly enforced. 2. Any violations of the law or threatened violations shall be immediately reported to the Police Department and full cooperation shall be given by employees and management of the business. 3. No variance from the permitted entertainment shall occur without obtaining an amendment to the permit. 4. No part of the business shall be subleased without notification to the Police Department. 5. The amusement permit shall be non-transferable. 6. Any fight, ejection of customer, thefts from customers, or any other criminal act occurring at or in the establishment or in adjacent Parking Lot M shall be reported to the Burlingame Police as soon as any establishment employee or security personnel is aware of such an incident. 7. Any request by anyone in the establishment for an employee or security personnel to contact the Police shall be honored immediately, without question. 8. Labor Code Section 6404.5 regulating smoking shall be enforced at all times. 9. Any advertising of the entertainment shall conform to the requirements of the City Sign Code. 10. Any loudspeakers for the business shall be directed toward the interior of the business; and The business shall not violate Section 10.40.020 of the Burlingame Municipal Code; and The entertainment shall not be audible outside the premises; and Upon request by the City, the establishment shall conduct noise measurements to determine whether the noise from the establishment is exceeding the 5 dBA standard for increases in noise from the baseline as provided in the Burlingame General Plan, and shall report the measurements to the City; and The establishment shall ensure that the 5 dBA standard is not exceeded. 11 . The business shall provide litter control along all frontages of the business and within fifty (50) feet of the business, and upon closing each evening that entertainment is offered, the business shall pick up all litter in front of the business. The decision of the Council is a final administrative decision pursuant to the Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.6. If anyone wishes to challenge the decision in a court of competent jurisdiction, they must do so within 90 days of the date of the decision unless a shorter time is required pursuant to state or federal law. STAFF REPORT AGENDA BURL.INGAME $S ITEM# MTG. 12/6/04 DATE TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL SUB ED Q BY DATE: December 6, 2004 APPRO T� FROM: Parks & Recreation Director (558-7307) BY SUBJECT: ART IN PUBLIC PLACES POLICY RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that Council review and approve the attached policy on Art in Public Places. BACKGROUND: In response to an offer from friends of former Mayor and City Council member Gloria Barton to donate a statue in memory of Gloria and her service to the community, Council appointed a committee to develop a policy regarding acceptance of such art works and related issues. The Committee was comprised of Beautification Commissioners Jo Ellen Ellis and Jill Lauder; Library Board Members Katie McCormack and Pat Toft; and Parks &Recreation Commissioners Mara Kahn and Mary Lawson. The Committee worked diligently on the task; using similar policies in many other jurisdictions as models. The attached policy addresses the process to be used when considering such gifts, site selection, establishment of a maintenance fund, removal procedures and a sample application form. Also noted are the potential need to develop policies for on-loan art and the potential for the City to purchase art work with donated funds. If the attached policy is adopted by Council, the friends of former Mayor Barton would be asked to complete the application form and the designed process would commence. BUDGET IMPACT: There is no cost associated with adoption of the attached policy. If art is accepted, some funds may be needed to maintain the work. ATTACHMENTS: Art in Public Places Policy RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME APPROVING ART IN PUBLIC PLACES POLICY RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Burlingame: WHEREAS,the City receives offers for donation of artwork to be placed in public facilities; and WHEREAS, a committee consisting of members of interested City boards and commissions has developed a policy that would be used to consider gifts of art and the placement and maintenance of any such gifts; and WHEREAS, this policy will assist the City in enhancing its public facilities, NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS RESOLVED AND ORDERED: 1. The Art in Public Place Policy attached hereto is approved and adopted. MAYOR I,DORIS MORTENSEN,City Clerk of the City of Burlingame,do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the day of 2004, and was adopted thereafter by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: CITY CLERK Amok City of Burlingame - Art in Public Places Policy BURLINGAME November 29, 2004 a I PURPOSE Since public art is a cultural reflection of a community and its people, it is important that procedures be in place for the acquisition and acceptance of art in the city of Burlingame. The purpose of this policy is to serve as a guide when considering aspects of public art, such as A Selection and acceptance of donated or loaned artwork, B Placement or site selection, C Funding projected maintenance, and D Deaccessioning or removal of artwork Changes to this Public Art Policy shall be directed, by Council, for review to a task force comprised of two (2)Beautification Commissioners, two(2)Library Board members and two (2)Parks& Recreation Commissioners. II DEFINITIONS Art as described in this policy is art intended to enrich the public environment for both residents and visitors. Art shall include, but not be limited to, sculptures, murals, paintings, graphic arts, mosaics, photography, crafts, mixed media, and environmental works. It shall include all artwork that is to be displayed for an extended period of time in a City- owned or leased facility or park, or a City- owned or leased open space. In this policy,Appropriate Comnussion refers to the City Commission whose sphere of influence is most closely associated with the facility or site in question. For example, the Parks & Recreation Commission will review applications for placement at park facilities or recreational buildings; the Library Board will review applications for placement at Library property; and the Beautification Commission will review applications for other City property. III SELECTION/ACCEPTANCE PROCESS When reviewing works of art for loan or gift to the collection, the Council, appropriate commission, and responsible department(s) shall consider whether: A The artwork 1. is thought-provoking, memorable or enduring and shall reflect the diverse social, cultural, or historic values of the City 2. is appropriate in terms of scale, form,content, and the environment 3. is durable relative to theft,vandalism and the environment 4. acknowledges and is sensitive to the importance of the contributions by local and regional artists to the City of Burlingame's art program 5. can be displayed on City property under the Federal and State Constitutions 6. meets the City of Burlingame's general library collection standards for appropriateness, and no depiction of specified sexual activities as defined in Chapter 10.58 of the Burlingame Municipal Code nor any advocacy of racism nor depiction of graphic violence shall be allowed. B The City already owns sufficient examples or better examples of this type of object or the objects by a particular artist in a particular style C The City has the facilities and resources necessary to properly care for and safe keep the object. The City has limited facilities and must consider the cost of processing, insuring, and maintaining the new artwork. D Whether the artist or donor is prepared to execute a contract or other document which, in the estimation of the City Attorney and City Manager, protects and serves the fiscal and other interests of the City in connection with the acquisition or donation of the artwork proposed for display in a public area. IV SITE SELECTION When selecting sites for works of art for loan or gift to the collection, the Council, the appropriate commission, and responsible department(s) shall consider: A Whether the artwork can be properly installed, placed to be seen, and displayed with patron safety in mind B Compatibility of design and location within unified design character or historical character of site, preservation and integration of natural features of the project C Site design including landscaping, drainage, grading, lighting and seating considerations D Environmental impacts such as noise, sound and light E Public accessibility to the artwork, particularly handicapped areas F Impact on adjacent property owner's views G Impact on operational functions of the City After consideration of the above, final selection of site location is the decision of the City. V FORM OF RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL Applications to donate artwork to the City will be made to the City Manager's office and will be routed to the Appropriate Commission. The Appropriate Commission will consider the staffs recommendation or comments, the criteria above, including written documentation, and, after a 30-day review period, will conduct a public hearing before making a recommendation to the City Council. The notice of the proposed public artwill be published in the local newspaper at least fifteen(15)days before the end of the review period and will be delivered to property owners who live within 300' and are in view of the artwork. The documentation of the proposed public art will be available for review at the City Clerk's office during this period. A majority of the City Council must vote affirmatively in order to approve the decision. The City Manager will notify donors of the City Council's decision. The notification, if the donation is approved, will include a description of the location where the art will be placed. The donation offer may be withdrawn at any time up until execution of an agreement between the City and the donor(s). VI MAINTENANCE OF ART IN PUBLIC PLACES: The City Clerk shall maintain detailed records of all artworks acquired. The records shall include all items outlined in the application attached to this policy. The work of art will be maintained with the same care as the City does in keeping and maintaining other similar City property. Upon receipt of the work of art pursuant to this policy, the City will be responsible for insuring the work of art as it determines appropriate in its sole discretion; however, nothing in this policy shall imply that the City has any obligation to purchase or obtain any insurance regarding the work of art of any kind. Staff will take into account the donor's or artist's recommendations for the appropriate method and frequency of maintenance for each work of art. It shall be the responsibility of the City to: A Provide for the regular inspection of public artworks B Ensure that all maintenance of public artworks is completed with the highest standards of professional conservation C Report on the location and condition of each artwork to the City Council each year in time for budget preparation, including recommendations for the restoration, repair, or maintenance of artworks, and estimated costs In the event repair, alteration, or refinishing of the artwork is required, the City shall first give the artist the opportunity to do the work for a reasonable fee if possible. However, it is recognized that the insurer of the artwork may require the repair, alteration, or refinishing to be done by the insurer's contractors. In the event the artist is unable or refuses to do the work for such a fee, the City may proceed to contract for the work with another qualified artist. VII REMOVING(DEACCESSIONING)ARTWORK Artwork may be removed from the City of Burlingame's art collection following review by the Appropriate Commission if: A The artwork's physical or structural condition poses a threat to public safety. B The artwork requires excessive maintenance, has faulty design or workmanship, and repair or remedy is impractical or unfeasible. C The artwork has been damaged and repair or remedy is impractical or unfeasible. D The condition or security of the artwork cannot be reasonably guaranteed. E Significant changes in the use, character or design of the site have occurred which affects the integrity of the artwork. F Significant, adverse public reaction has continued unabated over an extended period of time G Removal is requested by the artist or donor. Removal should be a seldom-employed action that operates with a strong presumption against removing works from the collection. Removal will be undertaken only in extreme circumstances, and primarily when the condition of the artwork makes conservation impossible for technical or financial reason. Removal Procedures Prior to removing artwork, the Appropriate Commission shall prepare a written report for each object it recommends to be removed. The report shall include: A Title, artist medium, dimensions, and present location of the artwork B The origin/source of the artwork C Slide(s) and/or photograph(s) of the artwork D Report on the condition of the artwork E Estimated value of the artwork F Justification for disposal of the artwork G Recommendation for method of disposal of the artwork A copy of this report shall be distributed to each member of the Appropriate Commission for review at least one month prior to the meeting at which the removal of the work will be considered. Each member of the Appropriate Commission shall physically inspect the work and the Commission shall conduct a public hearing before voting on whether or not to remove the artwork. Prior to the Commission meeting, staff shall make a reasonable effort to locate the donor or his/her heirs to advise them of the City's consideration to remove the artwork and reasons for the decision. A report of the decision to remove the artwork will be given to the City Council. The decision of the Appropriate Commission will be deemed final, unless called up by a member of the City Council for Council approval. Disposition of artwork shall be handled in accordance with the requirements of Civil Code sections 987 and following and City procedures for disposition of surplus property. VIII ON-LOAN POLICIES The City Council may wish to accept donated artwork to the City for display on a temporary basis. Policies in addition to those listed in this document should be developed prior to the acceptance of artwork on a temporary basis. IX FUNDING FOR ART IN PUBLIC PLACES The City of Burlingame shall establish a special reserve account designated as the Art in Public Places Fund. This reserve account shall be credited annually, with funds allocated by the City through the budgetary process and monies received through donations or grants or otherwise obtained. The fund is to be maintained and administered by the City's Finance Director. This account shall be used for the maintenance of public art. Expenditures of funds may include, but are not limited to, the following uses: costs associated with the transportation, installation, insurance, maintenance, repair, or restoration of artwork, and any costs to administer the art in Public Places program or purchase objects necessary for the proper presentation of the artwork. If individuals, entities, or groups donate undesignated funds to the Art in Public Places Program, the funds shall be deposited into the Art in Public Places Fund. The City Manager shall direct an Appropriate Commission to be designated the funds for either the maintenance or purchase of artwork. X PUBLIC ART PROPOSAL Any person wishing to donate artwork to the City of Burlingame must complete a Donation of Public Art Application, available in the City Manager's office. The application and accompanying materials shall include the following: A Photo, plans, model or other representation of proposed artwork B Proposed location of the artwork C Statement of reason for donation D Description of the artwork, including dimensions, weight, finish, and color, and system for mounting or displaying the artwork E Any special maintenance, mounting or display requirements F Artist biography G Statement of the approximate value of the proposed donation H Signage proposed for the artwork, including size, lettering and material (Note: signage shall be limited to the artist's name, title, and date of work, and where appropriate, a dedication. The name of the donor or lender may be part of the installation) euRLINGAME City of Burlingame's Donation of Public Art Application Project Name Proposed Location/Address Proposed by Phone Email Address City Zip Reason for donation Artist Name Phone Email Address City Zip Description of Artwork(Include finish and color) Approximate Weight Approximate Dimensions System for Mounting of Displaying Artwork Maintenance, Mounting or Display Requirements Approximate Value: $ Please attach • Photo, plans, model or other representation of proposed artwork • Artist biography • Signage proposed for the artwork, including size, lettering and material CITY o AGENDA �A o ITEM# _A3bNN — IBURUNGAMEI MTG. STAFF REPORT c I DATE DecembeLB,2(1Q4 4, TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL SUBMITT BY /I I A� DATE: December 6, 2004 APPROVE FROM: Netie Shinday (558-7204) BY SUBJECT: Consider Appointments to Civil Service Commission RECOMMENDATION: Consider appointment recommendation of interview committee and make appointments, or take other action. BACKGROUND: Three commission positions are due for appointment because of term expiration. The positions were advertised and three applications were received. The interview committee (Baylock/Galligan) will interview all applicants and make a recommendation at the Council meeting on December 6, 2004. The terms will be for three years ending in December 2007. STAFF REPORT BURLINGAME AGENDA ITEM# 9a " MTG. <4�oq 900 0RA.Eo JUNE DATE 12/6/04 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL SUBMITTED BY DATE: November 30, 2004 APPROVED FROM: Doris Mortensen, City Clerk By 650-558-7203 SUBJECT: REAPPOINTMENT OF REPRESENTATIVE TO SAN MATEO COUNTY MOSQUITO ABATEMENT DISTRICT BOARD OF TRUSTEES RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that Council reappoint Dennis Preger as Burlingame's representative to the San Mateo County Mosquito Abatement District Board of Trustees for the ensuing term of January 1, 2005, through December 31, 2008. BACKGROUND: Mr. Preger has been Burlingame's representative to the San Mateo County Mosquito Abatement District Board of Trustees since 1994. He continues to represent Burlingame with great enthusiasm and energy. His current term expires December 31, 2004; and since this is not a Council-formed commission position, the appointment process differs from commission appointments. C: Dennis Preger BURLINGAME STAFF REPORT ItAgenda 9b Date Date 12/6/04 SUBMITTED TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL BY: Meg awz APPROVED DATE: November 29, 2004 BY: /J FROM: PUBLIC WORKS j SUBJECT: RESOLUTION APPROVING PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH KENNEDY/JENKS CONSULTANTS FOR DESIGN OF WATER MAIN REPLACEMENTS FOR THE BURLINGAME VILLAGE, BURLINGAME GATE, AND BURLINGAME GROVE SUBDIVISIONS AND IN VARIOUS LOCATIONS IN THE BURLINGAME HILLS AREA, CITY PROJECT NO. 80320 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that Council approve the attached resolution authorizing a Professional Services Agreement with Kennedy/Jenks Consultants ("K/J") for the design of water main replacements in the Burlingame Village, Burlingame Gate, and Burlingame Grove Subdivisions and in various locations in the Burlingame Hills area in the amount of$350,150. BACKGROUND: On July 23, 2004, the City issued a Request for Proposal for the Planning, Design, and Construction Inspection to Replace Potable Water Distribution Mains in the Burlinghome/Easton Subdivision No. 5, Burlingame Village, Burlingame Gate, and Burlingame/Grove Subdivisions ("RFP"). On August 27, 2004 the City received a total of six proposals from pre-qualified consulting engineering firms and interviewed all six firms on September 16, 2004. Based upon the qualifications of the proposing firms and the nature of the work in the various subdivisions, staff recommends two separate project awards to different consulting firms. K/J has been selected to perform the main replacement design in the Burlingame Village, Gate, and Grove Subdivisions and in various locations in the Burlingame hills. A second consultant will be selected by staff to perform the main replacement design of the Burlinghome/Easton Subdivision No. 5 . The agreement will be brought to Council for approval after staff completes the negotiations. DISCUSSION: Water mains in the Burlingame Village, Gate, and Grove Subdivisions are old and in need of replacement. K/J was selected for this project because of their expertise and experience in evaluating, designing, and managing comparable water main replacement projects. The scope of work include the following: • Prepare a pre-design report and detailed construction cost estimates • Design approximately 5 miles of new water main • Design two new pressure reducing valve stations • Prepare 30%, 90%, and 100% design submittal packages • Distribute final design packages to prospective contractors • Assist with bidding and construction award of the new water mains The City has negotiated the scope of work and fee of$350,150 for the design engineering services and find it reasonable given the nature and complexity of the project. The $350,150 cost for design engineering services STAFF REPORT Page 2 of 2 represents approximately 10% of the estimated$3,600,000 total construction cost This fee is within the normal industry range of 10% to 20% of total construction cost. Additionally, the level of design effort was similar to that proposed by the other competing consulting firms. SUMMARY: The existing water mains within the Burlingame Village, Gate, and Grove Subdivisions are old and in need of replacement. Construction of new mains within the streets will provide improved water quality, water pressure, and flows for residents and is intended to increase the amount of water available for fire protection. Based upon proposal review and interviews with six qualified engineering consulting firms, City staff has selected K/J to perform the engineering design of the new water mains. Further, staff believes that the cost for the services is reasonable for the complexity of the project. EXHIBITS: Resolution, Professional Services Agreement with scope of services and maps BUDGET IMPACT: There are sufficient budgeted funds available through the 2004-05 water bond proceeds. cc: City Clerk, City Attorney, Kennedy/Jenks, Erler& Kalinowski, Inc. S:\A Public Works Directory\Staff Reports\80320 profession services award.doc RESOLUTION NO. - AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH KENNEDY/JENKS CONSULTANTS FOR DESIGN OF WATER MAIN REPLACEMENTS Burlingame Village, Gate, and Grove Subdivisions and Miscellaneous "Hills"Projects Kennedy/Jenks Consultants City Project Number 80320 RESOLVED, by the CITY COUNCIL of the City of Burlingame, California and this Council does hereby FIND, ORDER, and DETERMINE AS FOLLOWS: 1. The public interest and convenience require execution of the agreement cited in the title above. 2. The City Manager be, and he is hereby, authorized to sign said agreement for and on the behalf of the City of Burlingame. 3. The City Clerk is hereby ordered and instructed to attest such signature. Mayor I, ANN T. MUSSO, City Clerk of the City of Burlingame, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the day of 2004, and was adopted thereafter by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: City Clerk AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH KENNEDY/JENKS CONSULTANTS FOR DESIGN OF WATER MAIN REPLACEMENTS Burlingame Village, Gate, and Grove Subdivisions and Miscellaneous"Hills"Projects Kennedy/Jenks Consultants City Project Number 80320 THIS AGREEMENT is entered into this 6th day of December, 2004, by and between the City of Burlingame, State of California,herein called the "City", and KENNEDY/JENKS CONSULTANTS, engaged in providing PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING services herein called the "Consultant". RECITALS A. The City desires to engage an Engineering Consultant to prepare plans and specifications for the design of new water mains in the Burlingame Village, Gate, and Grove Subdivisions and Miscellaneous areas in the Hills of Burlingame. C. The Consultant represents and affirms that it is qualified and willing to perform the desired work pursuant to this Agreement. AGREEMENTS NOW, THEREFORE,THE PARTIES HERETO AGREE AS FOLLOWS: EXHIBIT A SHALL BE MADE AS PART OF THIS AGREEMENT. L Scope of Services. The Consultant shall provide all services as set forth in Exhibit A of this agreement. 2. Time of Performance. The services of the Consultant are to commence upon the execution of this Agreement. 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. Pagel of 7 Agreement for Professional Services Agreement with Kennedy/Jenks Consultants for Design Of Water Main Replacements Burlingame Village,Gate,and Grove Subdivisions and Miscellaneous"Hills"Projects City Project Number 80320 5. Information/Report Handling. All documents furnished to Consultant by the City and all reports and supportive data prepared by the Consultant under this Agreement are the City's property and shall be delivered to the City upon the completion of Consultant's services or at the City's written request. All reports, information,data, and exhibits prepared or assembled by Consultant in connection with the performance of its services pursuant to this Agreement are confidential until released by the City to the public, and the Consultant shall not make any of the these documents or information available to any individual or organization not employed by the Consultant or the City without the written consent of the City before such release. The City acknowledges that the reports to be prepared by the Consultant pursuant to this Agreement are for the purpose of evaluating a defined project, and City's use of the information contained in the reports prepared by the Consultant in connection with other projects shall be solely at City's risk, unless Consultant expressly consents to such use in writing. City further agrees that it will not appropriate any methodology or technique of Consultant which is and has been confirmed in writing by Consultant to be a trade secret of Consultant. Consultant may retain a copy of such confidential documents for its records. 6. Compensation. Compensation for Consultant's professional services shall not exceed $350,150.00; and payment shall be based upon City approval. Billing shall be accompanied by a detailed explanation of the work performed by whom at what rate and on what date. Also,plans, specifications, documents or other pertinent materials shall be submitted for City review, even if only in partial or draft form. 7. Availability of Records. Consultant shall maintain the records supporting this billing for not less than three (3) years following completion of the work under this Agreement. Consultant shall make these records available to authorized personnel of the City at the Consultant's offices during business hours upon written request of the City. 8. Project Manager. The Project Manager for the Consultant for the work under this Agreement shall be Tom Yeager. 9. Project Management and Billings. During the course of the project and to support each and every invoice the consultant shall furnish control reports that shall include the following: (A)A narrative progress report of specific accomplishments during the reporting period, problems encountered or anticipated,plans for resolution of problems, accomplishments scheduled for the next reported period, and results of any significant activities. (B)A cost report for each task showing: 1. Current period and cumulative expenditures to date. 2. Estimated cost to complete and at completion. 3. Estimated date to complete. 4. Approved budget and approved contract amount. Page 2 of 7 Agreement for Professional Services Agreement with Kennedy/Jenks Consultants for Design Of Water Main Replacements Burlingame Village, Gate,and Grove Subdivisions and Miscellaneous"Hills"Projects City Project Number 80320 5. A comparison of the estimated cost at completion with the approved budget to show any variance. Completed reports are to be submitted monthly,together with invoice submittal, unless directed otherwise by the City's project manager. The invoice shall be accompanied by a cost breakdown showing specific person and classification being billed for the period by task. Failure of consultant to submit and update plans or furnish required reports as directed shall constitute cause for suspension of payment of the invoices. Mark-up of subcontracted work shall be no more than 10 percent, and mark-up on any materials, supplies, and services shall be no more than 5 percent. There shall be no separate payments for local travel in the Bay Area, any phone service/calls,routine reproduction except for printing of final contract documents, or other support costs for consultant or subconsultant. 10. 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. 11. 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: Syed Murtuza, P.E./City Engineer City of Burlingame 501 Primrose Road Burlingame, CA 94010 To Consultant: Tom Yeager,P.E. Kennedy/Jenks Consultants 2191 East Bayshore Road, Ste 200 Palo Alto, CA 94303 Tel: (650) 852-2800 To Program Manager:Matthew P. Zucca,P.E. Erler&Kalinowski, Inc. 1870 Ogden Drive Burlingame, California 94010 Tel: (650)292-9100 or personally delivered to Consultant to such address or such other address as Consultant designates in writing to City. 12. 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 Page 3 of 7 Agreement for Professional Services Agreement with Kennedy/Jenks Consultants for Design Of Water Main Replacements Burlingame Village,Gate,and Grove Subdivisions and Miscellaneous"Hills"Projects City Project Number 80320 an agent or employee of the City. As an independent contractor he/she shall not obtain any rights to retirement benefits or other benefits which accrue to City employee(s). With prior written consent,the Consultant may perform some obligations under this Agreement by subcontracting,but may not delegate ultimate responsibility for performance or assign or transfer interests under this Agreement. Consultant agrees to testify in any litigation brought regarding the subject of the work to be performed under this Agreement. Consultant shall be compensated for its costs and expenses in preparing for,traveling to, and testifying in such matters at its then current hourly rates of compensation, unless such litigation is brought by Consultant or is based on allegations of Consultant's negligent performance or wrongdoing. 13. Conflict of Interest. Consultant understands that its professional responsibilities are 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,remove such person from the proj ect. 14. Equal Employment Opportunity. Consultant warrants that it is an equal opportunity employer and shall comply with applicable regulations governing equal employment opportunity. Neither Consultant nor its 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. 15. Insurance. A. Minimum Scope of Insurance: i. Consultant agrees to have and maintain, for the duration of the contract, General Liability insurance policies insuring him/her and his/her firm to an amount not less than: one million dollars($1,000,000)combined single limit per occurrence for bodily injury,personal injury and property damage. Page 4 of 7 Agreement for Professional Services Agreement with Kennedy/Jenks Consultants for Design Of Water Main Replacements Burlingame Village, Gate,and Grove Subdivisions and Miscellaneous"Hills"Projects City Project Number 80320 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 shall provide to the City all certificates of insurance, with original endorsements effecting coverage. Consultant agrees that all certificates and endorsements are to be received and approved by the City before work commences. iv. Consultant agrees to have and maintain, for the duration of the contract, professional liability insurance in amounts not less than $1,000,000 which is sufficient to insure Consultant for professional errors or omissions in the performance of the particular scope of work under this agreement. B. General Liability: 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. This requirement does not apply to the professional liability insurance required for professional errors and omissions. ii. The Consultant's insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers. Any insurance or self- insurances maintained by the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers shall be excess of the Consultant's insurance and shall not contribute with it. iii. Any failure to comply with reporting provisions of the policies shall not affect coverage provided to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. iv. The Consultant's insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom a claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the limits of the insurer's liability. C. All Coverages: Each insurance policy required in this item shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be suspended,voided,canceled, reduced in coverage or in limits except after thirty (30) days'prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested,has been given to the City. current certification of such insurance shall be kept on file at all times during the term of this agreement with the City Clerk. D. In addition to these policies, Consultant shall have and maintain Workers' Compensation insurance as required by California law and shall provide evidence of such policy to the City before beginning services under this Agreement. Further, Consultant shall ensure that Page 5 of 7 Agreement for Professional Services Agreement with Kennedy/Jenks Consultants for Design Of Water Main Replacements Burlingame Village,Gate,and Grove Subdivisions and Miscellaneous"Hills"Projects City Project Number 80320 all subcontractors employed by Consultant provide the required Workers' Compensation insurance for their respective employees. 16. Indemnification. The Consultant shall save, keep and hold harmless indemnify and defend the City its officers, agent, employees and volunteers from all damages, liabilities, penalties, costs, or expenses in law or equity that may at any time arise or be set up because of damages to property or personal injury received by reason of, or in the course of performing work to the extent caused by a willful or negligent act, errors or omissions of the Consultant, or any of the Consultant's officers, employees, or agents or any subconsultant. 17. Waiver. No failure on the part of either party to exercise any right or remedy hereunder shall operate as a waiver of any other right or remedy that party may have hereunder, nor does waiver of a breach or default under this Agreement constitute a continuing waiver of a subsequent breach of the same or any other provision of this Agreement. 18. Governing Law. This Agreement,regardless of where executed, shall be governed by and construed to the laws of the State of California. Venue for any action regarding this Agreement shall be in the Superior or Municipal Court of the County of San Mateo or Santa Clara. 19. 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. 20. 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. 21. 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. 22. 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. Page 6 of 7 IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the City and Consultant have executed this Agreement as of the date indicated on page one(1). City of Burlingame By City Manager Consultant: Kennedy/Jenks Consultants City of Burlingame Print Name Signature Title ATTEST: Approved as to form: City Clerk City Attorney EXHIBIT A SCOPE OF SERVICES FOR WATER MAIN REPLACEMENT Burlingame Village,Gate,and Grove Subdivisions and Miscellaneous "Hills "Projects Kennedy/Jenks Consultants City Project Number 80320 SUMMARY OF WORK The scope of work for this project includes pre-design, design,preparation of contract documents, bidding services,and project management associated with the City of Burlingame ("City")Water Main Replacement for the Burlingame Village,Burlingame Gate, and Burlingame Grove Subdivisions("Project"), as shown on Figures I and 2. This Project is anticipated by the City to be bid and constructed in two phases, one phase will be bid in the Spring of 2005 and the second phase will be bid in the Spring of 2006. However,the design of the two construction projects will be conducted simultaneously. During the design effort,the actual scope of the main replacement construction project will be determined based upon the available funding and estimated construction costs. In addition,miscellaneous water distribution projects will be designed in the Hills area as shown on Figures 3 and 4. These projects consist of: • The design of approximately 1700 feet of new water line from the intersection of Alvarado and Adeline Drive uphill as shown on Figure 3. • The design of approximately 3600 feet of water line in Los Robles Drive, Fey Drive, and the connecting easement as shown on Figure 4. • The design of two replacement pressure reducing stations(Canyon PRV and Adeline PRV). The scope of services is divided into the following 5 phases: • Phase 1 — Predesign Report • Phase 2—Plans and Specifications ■ Task 1: 50% Design ■ Task 2: 90%Design • Task 3: 100%Design • Phase 3 —Bid Assistance • Phase 4—Project Management • Phase 5—Miscellaneous Water Distribution Projects A combined detailed staffing estimate and budget for Phases 1-4 is attached. The staffing and budget estimate for Phase 5 is attached separately. Page 1 of 8 SCOPE OF SERVICES FOR DESIGN OF WATER MAIN REPLACEMENT Burlingame Village,Gate,and Grove Subdivisions and Miscellaneous"Hills"Water Distribution Projects Kennedy/Jenks Consultants,City Project Number 80320 Plans and specifications,representative of the level of design at the end of each task,will be submitted to the City at the end of each task for review and comment. Once comments on the 100%Design (Task 3)submittal are received from the City,we will prepare and provide to the City contract documents suitable for soliciting construction bids. PHASE 1 —PREDESIGN REPORT Work conducted, as part of this phase will include: • Attend a kickoff meeting with the City. The purpose of the kickoff meeting will be to confirm the project objectives,and agree to the project schedule,protocols for communication,and deliverables. • Conduct a site reconnaissance to identify the existing utilities and make recommendations regarding resolving utility conflicts • Compare elevations determined through field surveys with elevations obtained from GIS base maps and make recommendations regarding the need for further field surveys • Prepare preliminary plan and profile sheets showing the horizontal and vertical location of known utilities. Profile sheets will be separate from the plan sheets. • Prepare preliminary cost estimates • Prepare a construction sequencing plan • Coordinate subconsultants and review materials: ? Sandis-Humber-Jones will conduct a survey to identify storm and sanitary manholes invert elevations and ground contours ? Fugro West will conduct geotechnical borings where deep excavation will be required to determine subsurface conditions that could impact excavations ? Miller Pipeline will perform pot-holing at identified critical locations(utility crossing)and selected street locations to identify the pavement thickness and information regarding potential utility conflicts ? HJW Geospatial will add house and driveway information from aerial photos to a planimetric base map ? Heritage Tree Care(S.J Mclenahan)will develop a plan for the protection of the eucalyptus roots along El Camino Real. • Prepare a draft predesign report,Review with the City, and Prepare a Final predesign report. Deliverables Deliverables for Phase I shall consist of a predesign report("PDR")that includes: • Preliminary plan and profile sheets. Page 2 of 8 SCOPE OF SERVICES FOR DESIGN OF WATER MAIN REPLACEMENT Burlingame Village,Gate,and Grove Subdivisions and Miscellaneous"Hills"Water Distribution Projects Kennedy/Jenks Consultants,City Project Number 80320 • A preliminary construction cost estimate. • Based upon information provided by the City regarding the available funding for construction,prepare a preliminary construction phasing plan. • A survey report that identifies the nature and extent of discrepancies, if any,between measured plane coordinates and elevations of existing utilities and those shown in the City's geographical information system. Correction of discrepancies between measured coordinates and those in the City's GIS system is not included in this scope of work but can be performed separately. • A summary of identified geotechnical issues that might affect constructability. • A utility survey report that identifies critical utility locations and a discussion of potential methods to avoid utility conflicts. • A summary of identified issues associated with construction in the vicinity of eucalyptus trees along El Camino Real and construction methods or main alignments potentially necessary to protect the existing trees. PHASE 2—PLAN AND SPECIFICATIONS Task 1: 50% Design Submittals Work conducted,as part of this phase will include: • Review the specifications from previous projects with City staff and the program manager. The purpose of this review will be to determine how the specifications from recent City projects could be improved, based on our team's experience on similar projects and on the issues encountered by the City during construction of recent similar projects. • Provide more details of identified utility conflicts where relocation of existing utilities maybe required. Details will also be provided for points of connection between the new water mains and the old existing water mains. • Compare locations of water meters as shown on the GIS map with actual field locations and adjust mapping as required • Develop plan sheets that will be cross-referenced to separate profile sheets. The preliminary sheet count is as follows: Page 3 of 8 SCOPE OF SERVICES FOR DESIGN OF WATER MAIN REPLACEMENT Burlingame Village,Gate,and Grove Subdivisions and Miscellaneous"Hills"Water Distribution Projects Kennedy/Jenks Consultants,City Project Number 80320 Title Number Cover Sheet 1 Abbreviation Sheet 1 Plan Sheets 9 Profile Sheets 14 Utility Conflict/Connection Detail Sheets 4 Street/Easement Cross-sections 1 Creek Crossing Structural and Detail 1 EI Camino Real Crossing Detail I Trak Control Plan 1 Misc.Detail Sheets 2 Total 35 • Prepare an estimate of probable cost of construction for the Project. • Update the construction phasing plan based upon information provided by the City regarding the available funding for construction. • Prepare and submit a draft CalTrans Permit to the City for review. • Perform internal QA/QC of plans and specifications. • Attend a meeting with city staff to review City's comments on the 50%Design submittal Task 1 Deliverables Deliverables for Task 1 include: • 5 full-size sets of the 50%plans identified above and specifications for the City's review. • Updated opinion of construction costs and construction phasing plan. • Draft CalTrans Permit submittal for review by the City. Task 2: 90% Design Submittals The purpose of this task is to address the City's comments on the 50% Contract Documents and to prepare 90%plans and specifications. Work conducted as part of this phase includes: • Incorporate City comments on the 50%Design submittal • Field check proposed locations of fire hydrants with City staff and make adjustments as required • Update estimate of the probable cost of construction • Prepare 90%Design drawings and specifications • Update the traffic control plan Page 4 of 8 SCOPE OF SERVICES FOR DESIGN OF WATER MAIN REPLACEMENT Burlingame Village, Gate,and Grove Subdivisions and Miscellaneous"Hills"Water Distribution Projects Kennedy/Jenks Consultants,City Project Number 80320 • Perform internal QA/QC • Attendance at a meeting with City staff to review City's comments on 90%design submittal Task 2 Deliverables • 5 full-size sets of the 90%plans and specifications for the City's review. • Updated construction cost estimate and construction phasing plan. Task 3: 100% Design Submittals The purpose of this task is to address the comments submitted by the City on the 90% Contract Documents,to develop the Contract Documents to the 100% level, and to provide the necessary supporting documentation for the Contract Documents. Work conducted as part of this phase includes: • Incorporate City comments on the 90%Design submittal into the drawings and technical specifications • Update estimate of the probable cost of construction • Update the traffic control plan • Prepare of 100%design drawings and specifications • Prepare and submit a final CalTrans Permit to the City for review. • Perform internal QA/QC. Task 3 Deliverables • 5 sets of the 100 %plans and specifications for the City's review. • Final opinion of construction costs and construction phasing plan. • Final CalTrans Permit submittal for review by the City. PHASE 3—BID ASSISTANCE The purpose of this task is to provide assistance to the City during the period the project is being advertised for Bid. The project will be bid as two separate projects,approximately 12 months apart.The following is the preliminary estimated breakdown of sheets for the two construction projects currently anticipated by the City. Page 5 of 8 SCOPE OF SERVICES FOR DESIGN OF WATER MAIN REPLACEMENT Burlingame Village,Gate,and Grove Subdivisions and Miscellaneous"Hills"Water Distribution Projects Kennedy/Jenks Consultants,City Project Number 80320 Title Project No. 1 Project No.2 Cover Sheet 1 I Abbreviation Sheet 1 1 Plan Sheet 5 5 Profile Sheets 7 7 Utility Conflict/Connection Detail Sheets 2 2 Street/Easement Cross-sections 1 1 Creek Crossing Structural and Detail 1 I El Camino Real Crossing Detail 0 1 Traffic Control Plan 1 1 Misc.Detail Sheets 2 2 Total 21 22 For each project bid period,the scope of services shall include: • Attend a pre-bid meeting and associated site walk for each bid period • Provide a maximum of 40 hours of consultation to the City regarding questions that may be raised during each bidding period • Prepare a maximum of two addenda with a maximum of 20 items each(per project) for each bid period • Review bid results and provide a summary table of bid responses for each bid period • A "For Construction" set of the plans and specifications such that addenda and questions identified during bidding have been conformed or included in the plans and specifications For each bid period. In addition,the Consultant will prepare maximum of 40 sets of contract documents for each bid period. The Consultant will distribute contract documents to the various plan holder services. The City will distribute contract documents to prospective bidders. Phase 3 Deliverables • One set of stamped reproducible plans and specifications for each period • 40 sets of contract documents for each of the 2 anticipated construction projects • Electronic files of plans(AutoCad version 2000i)and of specifications(Microsoft Word-Windows 2000) • Final opinion of probable construction costs for each bid period • Requested addenda to the Contract Documents for each bid period PHASE 4—PROJECT MANAGEMENT Work conducted as part of this phase includes various project administrative tasks such as: Page 6 of 8 SCOPE OF SERVICES FOR DESIGN OF WATER MAIN REPLACEMENT Burlingame Village,Gate,and Grove Subdivisions and Miscellaneous"Hills"Water Distribution Projects Kennedy/Jenks Consultants,City Project Number 80320 • Setting up internal project accounting system • Conducting an internal project kickoff meeting • Reviewing project progress along with budget status • Preparing monthly billings Deliverables • Monthly Status and Billing Reports in both paper and Adobe Acrobat format for the City that will include a summary of the work performed during the billing period, a schedule update, and a summary of current and anticipated problems. PHASE 5-MISCELLANEOUS WATER DISTRIBUTION PROJECTS Mains located in this area are predominantly located within San Mateo County's right-of-way and, as a result, designs will need to incorporate San Mateo County engineering standards. Draft and final plans will be submitted to San Mateo County for review and comments will be incorporated into the final plans and specifications. It is anticipated that this work will not be bid as a separate project but rather it would be added to an existing construction contract. Work conducted as part of this phase includes: • Develop plan sheets that will be cross-referenced to separate profile sheets preparation of 90%plans for water lines and 90%plan and specifications for PRVs. Our preliminary sheet count is as follows: Title Number Plan Sheets 3 Profile Sheets 3 PRV Detail Sheet 1 Connection Detail Sheets 1 Total 8 • Prepare probable cost of construction • Perform internal QA/QC • Attend a meeting with City staff to review City's comments • Prepare 100%Design drawings for water lines • Prepare 100%Design drawings and specifications for pressure reducing valves ("PRVs") • Perform internal QA/QC Page 7 of 8 SCOPE OF SERVICES FOR DESIGN OF WATER MAIN REPLACEMENT Burlingame Village,Gate,and Grove Subdivisions and Miscellaneous"Hills"Water Distribution Projects Kennedy/Jenks Consultants,City Project Number 80320 Phase 5 Deliverables Consultant shall provide the following deliverables associated with Phase 5: • 5 full-size sets of the 90%plans and specifications for the City's review. • 5 full-size sets of the 100%plans and specifications. • One conformed"For Construction"set of the plans and specifications delivered to the current contractor operating in the project area. SCHEDULE Phases 1-3 We propose submitting the Draft Predesign Report(PDR)for review 2 '/z months after receiving the notice to proceed from the City. We propose submitting the final PDR to the City 2 weeks after the meeting to discuss the City's comments on the Draft PDR. We propose submitting the 50%Design submittal to the City for review and comment 9 weeks after the meeting to discuss the City's comments. We propose submitting the 90%Design submittal to the City for review and comment 7 weeks after the meeting to discuss the City's comments on the 50%Design submittal. We propose submitting the 100%Design submittal to the City for review and comment 4 weeks after the meeting on the 90%Design submittal. We propose submitting the Bid Documents to the City: • Phase I: one week after receiving, and discussing with the City,the City's comments on the 100% Design submittal. • Phase Il: 2 weeks after requested by the City to make the necessary submittal. Phase 5 We propose submitting the 90%plans 6 weeks after receiving the notice to proceed. We propose submitting the 100%plans, 3 weeks after the meeting to discuss the City's comments. Page 8 of 8 Proposal Fee Estimate Kennedy/Jenks Consultants Job Name:Cny of Bur ingeme Job Descdptlon:Phase III Water Rapaam.nt CIP-Project B:Burlbgem.Wells,Bur6ngwa Gate, and BurNngsms Grow Subd'rvi l Prop-&!/Job Number:B04074 Data 14 Nowmb.r 2004 January 1,2004 Rates Eng-8.1-EngS i-EngSd-EngSd-ENScl-EngS.I-Eng2al-Er g4.1.En9S.1-Daalg- CAD Project AdminTotal K/J K!J Bab. Cla.0moadon: Spec 9 Spee 8 Spec 7 Spec 7 Spec 6 Spec 4 Sp a 4 Spec 2 Spec 1 Sr Tach Tach Admin Assmt Abe Total Labor Internal Direct tblWaator Total JNR TEY WL OLE JKC KMA FNE Nonny Rata: $195 $176 $163 $193 $130 $114 $114 $96 $90 $90 $76 $68 $59 543 Noun Costs Costa Cost. Costa Cost Phase 1-Predealgn Report Canouct.sive ncavabsanca bkWnmy ihe..e Wu01itles 40 12 $1,812 $100 $1,712 Obtain and Rwbw utMy-ImfAdd b pan sheen 12 8 20 $2,250 $0 $2,280 Coordirob cub uonaultants end red..malarial 4 18 32 52 $6.172 $0 $8172 Compare GIB W Field.1-bons 18 16 $1,824 $0 $1,824 Preliminary Pion Sheet 8 48 48 104570,472 $2,080 $12,5112 Preblmlary Profs Stroh 8 80 60 168 518,510 53,380 518,880 Pr.aninary oonst-ton wet ast-tes 6 18 24 $3,224 $0 $3,224 Cenab-bon ssouenckg Pion 4 6 8 20 I $2.304 SD 804 Prepare Draft PDR 4 1 18 8 28 $2,988 $0 52906 Inbnai GA/OC 8 6 78 $2,784 30 $2,784 PDR-kahop wnh city 4 8 12 $1,612 $66 $1,688 Finalize PDR 4 8 12 $1,612 $92 $1,709 Phase 1-Subrofa1 8 48 16 0 0 160 SB 0 0 0 136 0 8 0 484 $53,712 $5,686 $0 $0 $59,400 Phase 2-Prepare Water Main Plans and Spacffla0ons Task 2-1:3071 Coobaet DrawkW Plan sheaf(9-.) 4 24 36 64 $6,136 $1 $7,416 Verwabr nabs to Plan an aet. 4 12 24 40 $4,108 m $4,108 Pmfw sfwb 20 (14s.) 4 18 40 w $5.524 51 0 56724 Cafiid/Connec3on Deb$Shsst(4se..) 8 ZD 18 46 92 $9,104 $1,840 $10,944 Cray-awtion(ta.) 4 8 B 20 $2,524 5400 $2,924 Co-.Standard Details,Legend,en.(Me) 0 24 32 $2,712 $810 $3,82 Crack crossing(I ea.) 6 18 24 $3,128 $480 $3,808 EI Cam.RW cro."(1 se) 4 12 16 $2,068 $320 $2,388 SpedBalions(engin only) 4 8 8 20 $2,524 $0 $2,524 ReNsad E.Ilmsb of ProWbb Cost d Cwawdlon 4 16 12 32 $3 544 $3,544 CALTRAN Penna Subnnbl 12 8 20 1 $1.740 $1,740 Traffic Canbd Plan 18 18 $1,824 $1,821 Im-1 OWCC --- e 8 18 $2,784 $2,784 Deaign Rat Meeting w th the Cly Staff 4 9 72 $1,812 $100 $7 712 Task 2-2:90%Canbaet Dnwkga Plan shseh(9se.) 8 32 32 72 $7,448 $1.440 Sfi,eB6 Profs sheens(14w.) 8 40 40 110 $8,980 $1.780 $10,720 Cw9k.UCon a Detail Shset(4.) 8 B 40 56 $5,312 $1,120 $6,432 Croaa-6edbns(1 w.) 6 4 12 $1,368 $240 $1808 Co-,Standard Details.Legend,arc.(4.a) 12 1 12 $900 $240 $1,140 Proposal F.CIP pW<BwWV ms August 2004 hoed 0 Venbn 3A. 1,2 f � k i ; |■ � ! � ! ` | i � | | � ` | / ` � � E | - � | $ | t | I + ! ! ! � 2 � ! ! | � 22 | s 2 � f2 2 ■ \ ; / - \ ; § � � � � � ■ � � � � � , s { � t ! � # ! ' � ! � � r , � ■ . , . ! z | § I | | � . : , § ; , ■ . � ; � � . . , . � & a � � ; ; , � ; ; � E ' _ ■# x ; „ � - - - x „ - - - , # � | | | ) % � k ) ■ ■ ! a ! 2 § � ■ * | � | § # m ■ k � k � « ■ ! k ,`■,9■ ■ § „ � � I, x9 , ; ; � r - - . , , - - - „ � E E ik*■q■ ■ � ■ k2 ■ ■ § ■ § ■ § # # ■ � | � 2 § � � � § § k ) » ■ » . Proposal Fee Estimate Kennedy/Jenks Consultants Job Name:City of Burlingame Job Description:Prone III Water Rela pcement CIP-Projeot B:Miscellaneous"Hills"Water Distribution 1 ProposallJob Number:804074 Data 14 Noverr b.2004 January 1,2004 Room EngSei-EngSd-EngScl-EngSol.EMSel-EngSd-Eng3el-'�IEngSoL EngSd-aaignari CAD PtoJaot Admin Total KN K/J Sub• ClassRbdbn: Slaw 8 Spw 8 Spee 7 Spee 7 Spw 6 Spw t SPw 4 bpw 3 bpae 1 8r Twh Twh !Admh1 Aasbm AideTotal Labor brlar0ai Olreet contractor Total JHR TEY WL JKC K. FNIE -i Hourty Rab: $100 $176 $163 1 $163 $120 $114 1 $114 000 $00 000 $79 300 000 $46 Hours Coals Loeb Coab Costs Cost Phap f—Prepare Water Main and PRV Plano and OpeoMeatlona Taal tot:60%.gPwMOa _._........__. _ ..____.._.___..._ _..._ _._._h_.___.... 34 $3.082 $000 03,742 Vedfy/Add anter motors b plan _Z... . .. ........... 4 _. _. .�....__. ...._..___ 0', _.__ ._....._.... _..__._...22 .._........ ....__.__.. ............_ .. ...... .... _. .._. _. ._. .. ..._. ........ .. 224.24 _...__32 �2 834 $040 5474 ConMcUComadbn Ddd Shod(1 aa]___. _..__.___...__..__._.._._....__......_.___ 2 0 L...._...4 12 i 24 SZ300 $2.970 PRV DdaY Sheat(1 aa) 2 16 B _ 2/ —_ _ 48 .540,68. Sped.ftai ria for PRV 4 1 8 10 31 83t1...1......�_._i0 __.._..._s ice. Eeblote of Probable Cod of ConM¢tion 2 4 1 11 $1.490 j 1 01100 Idemai DAfDC 4 _4 $740 $740 4 _. _..—.4 _. .� ._ ._..__....__._ _. S __...51.106 . $100 .._._ 31 200 Tnlr 62:100% Plan ehosb(3 ea.) 2 4 ib 22 006 5440 $2.448 Vadty/Add vnbr rtietars to'P4n Mada2y 2 ._ 4 0 11910 $100 ProNa sheds(3 awl _ 2 4 2 10 24 32.23ill f400 711 Corllio Onnecben OdaY Sheat(1 sa..) 2 ! 4 2 51 _.,- 18 51634 0320 $1.954 PRV DatoN Shoot(1 4 _ i.. / 0 ....._._.. 10 ..4111750 0320 52,070, SpeUMations Bx PRV 2 4... .... 0 11508 30 610 ...__... $808 Revised,Esy"to of Probable Cod of ConstructW 1 4 0 11 1866 _.__.—j..__.._............ ._ .� .—... ..._ .... Internal OA/OC 2 2 1 $030 $686 Dee gn Rewew Meeting who the City SbR 1 4 8 $1,156. $158 $1,314 Phase 5 Subtotal 8 40 2 0 0 68'. 28. 38 0 0 140 0 0 0 320 332,882 33778 540 EO $36,700 All Phases Total 6 40 2 0' 0 68 2636 0 0 140 0 0! 0 320 $32,882 33,778 $01 $0 $36,700 SUBTOTAL LABOR S 38,700 SUBCONSULTANT ALLOWANCE $2,200 HJW Geos anal $1,000 S1,100 Sendis-HumberJones $2-0-001—$2 200 GRAND TOTAL $ 38,900 Propoaal Fea CIP Phaaa 5.xh 111 e e c e n ---. - - - LLI a- _ of . -D LLJ C-j 5i CN PooLIJ'a VANAW CIL •. LL f LL- 0 LLJ LLJ cn.... s ]77 4--4 r• - _. Ie v - i — a r --- a LLL���LLL � 1\ � .game }� t/ — _ ._ __ ..,.-. _. 1 __ _ _ _ I• - _ _ Publicf WorkaFl t` �' _..�.._ -- T T rye I \ 501 Primrose Rd. h — I p a`• Burlingame, G 9W10 41y r r. ,... �) �zc-.,%'' 650.685.9310 (fox) 1 iraFnoa.eo. WATER MAIN TO BE REPLACE Kennedy/Jenks Consultants sonoeeoie ---- WATER LATERAL TO BE REPLACE 2181 E Bey*hM R0e4 awe 100 �.i 4 AS Rolm Feb NW G 8/303 ow..+. ■G49 (650)W2-2800 NCVFL■ER 4 2nW . 1 OF 1 (MO)866-0627(fex) � FlWPE 1 *** PRELIMINARY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION *** ■ o r r x O� aA \ NI - 1 I m - LL_ Li t Z 11 if I ...� ., f { ;1� ~ 1 t y « LLJ �_.... _t. � fi'�•••. � � �'�' __.L-- Lill+ 3e� ,' Q � I a T X i City of Burlingame _. m`■+'wx r�i-'.d1. _-_-... :._' .. __. i! ((( 11 I °I Public Works e 'I 501 Primrose R �^•• — .. _ _ d. ' r .p 7a•- — _ ---- " Burlingame, CA 94010 ._ __ _.. ._ _ ,a.,� 650.558.7230 " iIN1` 'Ir 1 1 „ L 650.685.9310 (fox) .i 117 Jill PEAU u■s or ooaAeln .�. WATER MAIN TO BE REPLACE �•�'�r Kennedy/Jenks Consultants m-0°°01 WATER LATERAL TO BE REPLACE Tref E B■ytW. Bo■a ane 200 m.m. As WTO PW Aha CA 61903 ^ Irllfs xoVEb■F8 4 20M 1 OF 2 (650)962-2800 (660)8682621(1■xl "" *** PRELIMINARY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCT ION *** SEE SHEET'..25 SEE --SHEET 48 Y LO 1 ------------------------ ALVA7KCt4l \. 1 + / \ ..: � \\ _ � 1 '� ,ice i s aW ��• � for 1 I /-96/ /•I 7 xkiB hny, \,��pc `i\.i��� 1zsAc. o q•,ac9GAc_ _ y;� c j� \ I O.HJ3O6 h "l1i ay77Qrc�.A a1/7 Ac. � ;> '..� JJ*! 0.5,12 c. � � . CSA0914 12 I as Y k `I � cc .3N �. I '' � r :.- s ,.an ! .de 2dir w x ��� cf ;1 . ulse• f.. ���1 .. y 03• �\ 2B �� A( ! (,• •'s fir Rtser✓oir�Pressrun o\ ,. �S. ` fco 1Fo 2/ '•o / / �� .-� e.ef�e. ). s t! f k4 SalE 7• 7,M '� �•Y o- - .q� 2 54 ............. �� +3�^ s-µs• "° W ' s'. '] RESERVOIR SITE �1 , c .v° .,,�•., a,r rp. 8 ° o.30Ac14 . o'J 11. ,.Ld Z$40 t 138 AC. 1 1 \ 1.� +a°. ;• '\Q 6.4110 _ TQ3C (WT.aa SK� 5N ll Qe w \ ( .B;CLAe a•r7 Ae. 56 r.l. a ZQ 2 �S q� �� ' � +y- 4 Q��AC ,•.' I.E03c „+ m � !W w'n ti ,,,�.p oo.y s ar 'AIOpr .. 4776 At '' '� �' ' ; �5,. + 1[l'` '. -., zr s `5 1 bTk r,state. - .•�. '+'. 2 _� 1 1 ' 28. V +6 �\: . 2 'y0•J9 y�`�!'! P 47•x,'.. •�•3S 20 • (. �I F�9SA; �• $ ,� « 20 � � I '- ` °?dri o� 0•yil .��1$df- 2Btg ��. jr rnI if N-1 u NG f I m 4. sada ass ;, 2ts 6 tib I, A .�'os`�,�a. �•o is ; VISSTA� 'LI'Q � ,'z� - C � ZOO fes' _ _ � .:A� � /f. a Y)t. ��6� :^l � '„ �ro„ .• � :: .. �•P•J �p�., .:4`. r �..� `\+o `a o iy �. aw v eF 06 78 LO 1` �, �" .� 1� �tr w a {r• Cb O `',� t�G' `�N y` , .1: X17. ? � �: e ' �B,t.4c. �P" s .,.� y acsl./c. �, / p• ,�v�w ` _ tee. s'oE , •+3+..r.3 .14o.e7 2f(.7/ ., ,� � (�a,`� �� �t 7epQ:_ 1f:p. Q y, e°\y / o- '{' ,y' �°pSt�„1 °J' '� J��q. i"-��, ?_•F;�q. ! \ aL \\\\\ 8'P vC r t � ro• a Q y� /991•0• - Bar 112,� rg, f;i P xb kt �G• to �` m \� .� I I c �j I JJ` �DT L56T �\\ � �•�. '3� ,p,�,/5��+"� p�eh� � 1 ,tyt ,B 00, Al A7�..gCP X814 s� 63 ta7 I I ttt 4�� PYA o/� � !! ! "°� �091 . \��� 'J�•_� .R` 'JR4 , g.. � Ilyl�, s1aT T' � °° � 3 J'4 - 't BBQ Zil rL �1 N �� "�\\\r ��—mob / � a i�/ `,�\ \\ � �0 4°<�. I ;� �+'r \\ _s -- -- / �� — � ,q�•- v CITY OF BURLINGAME 7m N """ B" C'C"'t CITY OF BUR WATER SYSTEM FACILITIES � 15 o B ,BB zW ]W WATER SYSTEly WWW r uCry Fu ✓ l �fi `— �a 1 t O;A��.. �. .t�� � arhrrrr ''*..S.,�j"i } =4( :+!Iwamus�lssar, �c'aararit�„��d a r�,.` 1j.VS:•.. . q <;^ka. i E.,y `t Y. ar°+31rar " ;,, •,rH,p c .� f'�f"�_1M, __ t � __ y �.. `z is ✓t •" s '"*�� —fie , Qi — , ec!x ® .LID AW PL � ; *T t"sA"✓e .."Ate '�y,.� �^asai f -°'1� '�\,.`!! '�� J�'.q/'�' �q�y Hri�flir�r+l,lj3 `HrN� :'R j>. :dC "k .v4-�� � p rS.`�� ��r<d��,,k'� <iti� .nF�-- ~��,r ?r��ys�tEruu l-�� �k h�eau�p'ant��} r.+ry - /a h� �/���S !`'�`•��wi�j�. r.,t�� t"" '^:a �' ., ��^y,;,�a .a�/"","`rri• 4r�_ �s�Kzrx. ���3v�"+euru��`� tstgp �L'°�t,��y� y. .� :. '�<+. �°\���� ryk�s .,�'� ,_ �5 Y,. a r.," � -. �.•esa,.z_ i �Im 7 �.�u '[¢jq _ r'� AIR ,ts ' g* �"� - � 'G ` "4i`.` ,{` �"- y�.-SJ,�jS` r�+,�,�iy��` �•a "t"�„'�..e I � ✓� -�..e \ ti gig I ! �'g \ r �i 74 i \ ` y h /�yQL j �� � f • � Y�����'adrt �`.t-���'��k dv°�,��Y',y�1��j.�; ti� :� �' I Ili '; • �• 1 •. eta,; �y���`� �'�'�,�'�^ � �>� �• - .•• . •• • � � .� ���•��y Y'� ,;�' my� � ..�f 0 ''� � • IIS 11� , AGENDA BURLINGAME STAFF REPORT ITEM# 9C DATE 12/06/04 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL SUBMITTED DATE: NOVEMBER 23, 2004 BY Ldo APPROVED / FROM: PUBLIC WORKS BY /v �2 " SUBJECT: RESOLUTION APPROVING AGREEMENT AMENDMENT N . 2 WITH CONTROL MANUFACTURING COMPANY TO PROVIDE PHASE 3 OF THE CITYWIDE SUPERVISORY CONTROL AND DATA ACQUISITION (SCADA) SYSTEM INTEGRATION - CITY PROJECT NO. 9940 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that Council approve the attached resolution for Agreement Amendment No. 2 for the subject work to Control Manufacturing Company of Napa, California, in the amount of$260,145.00 BACKGROUND: On December 2, 2002, Council awarded a contract to Control Manufacturing Company for the design, construction, start up and training of Phase 1 of the SCADA System, including the central control center,telemetry(radio)system,and major operational stations within the City's water,wastewater and storm drain systems. On April 5, 2004, Contract Amendment No. 1 for Phase 2 was approved by Council which included SCADA facilities for stormwater pump stations, the Washington Park well and San Francisco Public Utilities Commission(SFPUC) water connections. Control Manufacturing Company,a design/build SCADA integration company, has met all the requirements for the design, furnishing of equipment, and installation and is presently testing and starting up Phase 1 facilities of the project. Both Phase 1 and 2 work is substantially completed. Staff had indicated to Council at the April 5,2004 meeting,that a third phase of the project would be brought back for approval as an Agreement Amendment at the conclusion of the Phase 1 and 2 work. DISCUSSION Staff is returning to Council for approval of Agreement Amendment No.2 for Phase 3,which includes furnishing and installing SCADA equipment for two additional water connections with the SFPUC,two pressure-reducing valve locations,as well as upgrading equipment at the Skyline,Hyatt,California Grove,Trousdale, 1000 Rollins, and Easton pump stations, and additional equipment at the Waste Water Treatment Plant. All work will be performed in accordance with the Phase 1 design and installation contract specifications.It is estimated that Phase 3 will be completed by Spring, 2005. EXHIBITS: Resolution; Agreement Amendment No. 2 BUDGET IMPACT: The 2004-05 Capital Improvement Budget, including the General (320), Water(326) and Sewer (327) includes funding for these services. The estimated costs are: Design and construction $265,107 Contingencies 26,511 $291,618 Doug Bell,-genior Civil Engineer 650-558-7245 c: City Clerk U:\79400CMC.AGR AMEND 2 SCADA.Nov23.04wpd.wpd RESOLUTION NO. AUTHORIZING AGREEMENT AMENDMENT NO. 2 WITH CONTROL MANUFACTURING COMPANY TO PROVIDE PHASE 3 OF THE CITYWIDE SUPERVISORY CONTROL AND DATA ACQUISITION (SCADA) SYSTEM INTEGRATION CITY PROJECT NO. 9940 RESOLVED, by the CITY COUNCIL ofthe City of Burlingame, California and this Council does hereby FIND, ORDER and DETERMINE AS FOLLOWS: 1 . The public interest and convenience require execution of the agreement cited in the title above. 2. The City Manager be, and he is hereby, authorized to sign said agreement for and on behalf of the City of Burlingame. 3. The City Clerk is hereby ordered and instructed to attest such signature. Mayor I, DORIS MORTENSEN, City Clerk of the City of Burlingame, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the day of 2004, and was adopted thereafter by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: City Clerk AGREEMENT AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO PROVIDE PHASE 3 OF THE CITYWIDE SCADA SYSTEM INTEGRATION CITY PROJECT NO. 9940 THIS AGREEMENT, made in duplicate and entered into this day of ,2004, by and between the CITY OF BURLINGAME, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "CITY" and CONTROL MANUFACTURING COMPANY hereinafter referred to as "CONSULTANT," WITNESSETH : WHEREAS, CITY and CONSULTANT have previously entered into an agreement for certain services, said agreement being dated DECEMBER 2, 2002; and WHEREAS, it is the desire of the parties to amend said agreement as hereinafter set forth; NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY AGREED AS FOLLOWS: 1. Amendment of Agreement Said agreement dated DECEMBER 2,2002,is hereby amended to include those revisions in services and compensation set forth in EXHIBIT "A", attached hereto. 2. In all other respects said agreement dated DECEMBER 2,2002,shall remain in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the parties hereto have executed this AGREEMENT on the day and year first above written. CITY OF BURLINGAME A municipal corporation Approved as to form: By City Manager City Attorney ATTEST: City Clerk Consultant U:\ACREEMENTAMENDMENT.No2Nov04.wpd Control Manufacturing Company 19-Nov-04 Citywide SCADA System,Phase 3 City Project#79400 Exhibit A,Page 1 of 3 CMC Project#2926 Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 Grand Total ITEM DESCRIPTION Total 1 Easton PS $ 35,006 $ 3,856 $ 38,862 2 Trousdale PS $ 54,443 $ 7,769 $ 62,212 3 Hillside PS and Resewrvoir $ 55,504 $ 55,504 4 Donnelly PS&Reservoir $ 81,282 $ 61,262 5 Mills Reservoir $ 26,807 $ 26,807 6 Alcazar Reservoir $ 35,096 $ 35,096 7 Skyline PS&Reservoir $ 58,121 $ 11,996 $ 70,117 8 Adrian Storm Drain PS(program only) $ 7,869 $ 38,815 $ 46,684 9 Marsten Storm Drain PS(program only) $ 10,728 $ 42,373 $ 53,101 10 1740 Storm Drain PS(program only) $ 10,217 $ 42,000 $ 52,217 11 Cowan Storm PS(program only) $ 11,781 $ 43,000 $ 54,781 12 Mitten Road Sewer PS 13 Gilbreth Sewer PS $ 40,243 $ 40,243 14 1740 Rollins Sewer PS $ 44,528 $ 44,528 15 Hyatt Sewer PS $ 7,140 $ 14,419 $ 21,559 16 Airport Sewer PS $ 41,591 $ 41,591 17 399 Rollins Sewer PS $ 40,757 $ 40,757 18 1000 Rollins Sewer PS $ 10,640 $ 11,012 $ 21,652 19 Wastewater Treatment Plant $ 12,961 $ 5,095 $ 18,056 20 Library $ 15,578 $ 15,578 21 Driving Range Sewer LS#1 22 Driving Range Sewer LS#2 23 Mamten#2 Storm Drain PS 24 California 8 Grove Storm Drain PS $ 21,977 $ 5,346 $ 27,323 25 Mary Polo Turnout(PG&E by City) $ 27,059 $ 27,059 26 Magnolia&Trousdale Turnout $ 25,733 $ 25,733 27 Easton&ECR Turnout $ 1,200 $ 31,757 $ 32,957 28 Balboa&Broadway Turnout(PG&E by City) $ 31,343 $ 31,343 29 Pepper&Chapin Turnout(PG&E by City) $ 24,781 $ 24,781 30 Fairfield&ECR Turnout $ 1,200 $ 35,072 $ 36,272 31 Fey&Canyon PRV $ 1,200 $ 36,909 $ 38,109 32 Adeline&Hillside PRV $ 1,200 $ 34,511 $ 35,711 33 Washington Park Well $ 32,505 $ 32,505 34 Central She $ 280,400 $ 3,732 $ 284,132 35 Mobilimbon,Bonds&Insurance $ 13,114 $ 13,114 CCO CCO#1-5 $ 84,961 $ 84,961 System Paralleling(old&new simultaneously) $ 32,079 $ 32,079 CCO CCO#6 $ 31,554 $ 31,554 SUbtOUI CMC $ 1,058,297 $ 234,836 $ 265,107 $ 1,558,240 Page 1 of 6 NOV. 24 ' 2004 16 : 22 707 258 8465 CONTROL XF.- Co #2149 P . 002/ 004 Control Manufacturing Company 2650 Napa valley Corporate 4rlve Exhibit A, Page 2 of 3 Napa, CAMM12 94558 f 707.258.8400 Fix: 707.258.8465 www-control manufacturing,corn Napa, CA Portland, OR November 24, 2004 City of Burlingame 501 Primrose Road Burlingame, California 94010 Attention: Mr. Douglas Bell, Senior Engineer and Project Manager Subject: Proposed Phase 3 Project Work for SCADA Integration Project Reference: City of Burlingame Project 9940; CMC Project 2926 Dear Doug: As we approach the successful completion of Phases 1 and 2 of the Burlingame Citywide Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) System implementation, I thank you for the opportunity to furnish this System. i also thank you for the opportunity to provide a Quotation for continuation of this contract in Phase 3 (attached). Work will be in accordance with the provisions of the Phase 1 contract. A Schedule is also attached. Phase 3 will include design, fabrication, installation, and startup for four Turnout and Pressure Reducing Valve (PRV) sites (Easton & El Camino Turnout, Fairfield & El Camino runout, Fey & Canyon Pressure Reducing Valve, and Adeline & Hillside PRV), for which CMC provided Site Drawings during Phase 2. CMC will also provide a High Pressure Discharge Lockout at Easton Pump Station (PS); a Repeater for Trousdale PS, Hydropneumatic Tank controls for Skyline PS; Startup, testing, and a repeater for Hyatt Sewage Lift Station (SLS); bstallation and startup for 1000 Rollins SLS (deleted from. Phase 1 to accommodate operation of existing radios); Antenna Extension and alarm modifications for the Wastewater Treatment Plant; An antenna for California & Grove Storm Pump Station (SPS); Relocation of the data concentrator at the Central site; Please 2 installation cost escalation; and Paralleling of signals. Per consensus of the City of Burlingame, CyberNet, and CMC, the quoted costs are based on a single mobilization for installation and startup of all remaining sites, including turnouts, Phase 2 sites (all hardware has been delivered and tested), and all Phase 3 work. As in Phases 1 and 2, I will be CMC's Project Manager, and Atlas-Pellizzari Electric will be our installation subcontractor. We Iook fonvard to working with you, your staff, and CyberNet Consulting on Phase 3 of this project. Sincerely,, Drendan L. Doss, PE, PMP, CBM Senior Project Manager Control Manufacturing Company, Inc. CMC, Inc Is certliled by the Control and information Systems Integrator Association www cPrvs.orq P. 1 of 1 ' z O C N ,P N 0 0 Burlingame, Citywide SCADA System Integration Project No. 9940 Summary of Phase 3 _ Control Manufacturing Company, B Doss 11/2412004 i N N CO IGo # RTU Name/Location Change Quote Number I Description j Price 1 Easton PS BLD-04-2926-043-COR007P Easton High Pressure Discharge Lockout $ 3,8_56 2 Trousdale PS IBLE)-04-2926-043-COR007D1 Repeater at Trousdale& Loyola $ _7,769_ 7 Skyline PS&Res. :BLD-042926-043-COR007Q Implement Skyline Hydro Tank Controls $ 11,996 15 Hatt SLS BLD-04-2926-043-COR007K&N Hatt SLS Startup,Testing,&Repeater ! $ 14,419 18 1000 Rollins SLS i BLD-04-2926-043-COR0070 1000 Rollins SLS Installation&Startup $ 11,012 19 Sewage Treatment Plant BLD-04-2926-043-COR007B1 & E1 WWTP Antenna Extension, Alarm Mods $ 5,095 z 24 California&Grove SPS :BLD-04-2926-043-COR007C1 Antenna for Catifomla &Grove $ 5,346 27 Easton&EI Camino Real Turnout ;CMC Proposal dated Oct 21,2002 Design.Fabricate, Install,&Startup $ 31,75.7 0 30 Fairfield &EI Camino Real Turnout CMC Proposal dated Oct 21,2002 Design, Fabricate, Install,&Startup $ 35,072 31 Fey&Canyon PRV CMC Proposal dated Oct 21,2002 Design, Fabricate, Install, &Startup $ 36,909 32 Adellne&Hillsdale PRV CMC Proposal dated Oct 21,2002 Design, Fabricate, Install, &Startu $ 34,511 0 34 Central Site BLD-04-2926.043-COR007F1 Relocate Data Concentrator 39 System Paralleling BLD-04-2926-043-COR007H1 Additlonal work Paralleling VO $ 32,079 40 Cost Escalation BLD-04-2926-043-COR007J Alias-Pellizzari Phase 2 Cost Escalation $ 31,554 Total $ 263,107 N r ko ro b o � o OQ w � o W o O � W AGENDA BURLINGAME STAFF REPORT ITEM# 9d MTG. 12/06/04 DATE TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL SUBMITTEDAC-2 DATE: November 23, 2004 BY APPROV ;� FROM: PUBLIC WORKS BY SUBJECT: RESOLUTION APPROVING A REVISION TO A M TUAL-AID POTABLE WATER TRANSFER AGREEMENT WITH THE TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that Council approve the attached resolution approving a revision to a mutual aid potable water transfer agreement with the Town of Hillsborough. Back rg ound: The water system periodically is shut down to perform necessary repairs and maintenance. In order to provide an un-interrupted water supply to Burlingame customers,water needs to be transferred from the Hillsborough system (and vice-versa if Hillsborough has a similar need). Currently water transfers are negotiated by the staff of both agencies on a case by case basis in the absence of a formal agreement. Discussion: On September 7th 2004,Council approved a mutual aid potable water transfer agreement with the Town of Hillsborough. The agreement was then sent to Hillsborough for approval. The Hillsborough City Council requested a revision involving the reimbursement of all direct costs from the mutual aid receiving agency to the mutual aid providing agency during an emergency. Staff concurs with the revision and recommends that Council approve the revised agreement. EXHIBITS: Resolution, copy of previous agreement with staff report, and revised agreement with map Fiscal Impact: None Sed Murtuz .E. sst. Director of Public Works 650-558-7230 c: City Clerk, City Attorney, Finance Director, Town of Hillsborough SAA Public Works Directory\Staff ReportsMillsborough-mutual aid water-agr.wpd RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME APPROVING A REVISED MUTUAL AID AGREEMENT FOR POTABLE WATER TRANSFER BETWEEN THE TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH AND THE CITY OF BURLINGAME REGARDING THE SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM RESOLVED,by the City Council of the City of Burlingame: WHEREAS,the City of Burlingame and the Town of Hillsborough have a number of inter- connections that allowed transfer of potable water between the two agencies; and WHEREAS, in case of an emergency, disaster, or construction, it is important to establish the procedures that would be used to share water or other assets to ensure potable water service to our communities; and WHEREAS, on September 7, 2004, in Resolution No. 79-2004, the City Council approved a mutual aid agreement with the Town to support each other's water services during such occurrences; and WHEREAS, subsequent to that action, the Town requested a revision to the agreement to require a receiving party under the agreement to pay full reimbursement for all direct and indirect costs of providing the emergency water services and supply regardless of any reimbursement by state or federal funds, NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS RESOLVED AND ORDERED: 1. The City Manager is authorized and directed to execute the Agreement attached hereto as Exhibit A by and on behalf of the City. 2. The Clerk is directed to attest to the signature of the Manager. 3. This resolution supersedes and replaces Resolution No. 79-2004. MAYOR I,DORIS MORTENSEN,City Clerk of the City of Burlingame,do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the_day of 2004, and was adopted thereafter by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: CITY CLERK MUTUAL AID AGREEMENT FOR TRANSFERS OF POTABLE WATER BETWEEN THE TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH AND THE CITY OF BURLINGAME THIS MUTUAL AID AGREEMENT ("Agreement") is made and entered into as of , 2004, by and between the Town of Hillsborough ("Hillsborough") and the City of Burlingame ("Burlingame"). WHEREAS, the water systems of Hillsborough and Burlingame are currently interconnected at four(4) locations as shown in Exhibit A attached hereto; WHEREAS, the parties have determined that it would be in their best interests to enter into an agreement setting forth the procedures and responsibilities that will pertain whenever, either as part of a Planned Water Transfer or as part of an emergency water transfer, potable water is to be transferred from one party to the other or emergency personnel, equipment and facility assistance are to be provided by one party to the other, or both; WHEREAS, neither party should have to deplete unreasonably its own water supply or other resources when providing potable water or other resources, facilities, or services pursuant to this Agreement; and WHEREAS, this Agreement is consistent with the California Emergency Services Act (California Government Code §§ 8550 et seq.); NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the conditions and covenants contained herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. Definitions. For purposes of this Agreement, the following terms have the following meanings: A. "Coordinator" means the person designated by a party to act on behalf of that party on all matters relative to emergency or planned water transfers hereunder, including, but not limited to, requests, responses, and reimbursement. B. "Local Water Emergency" means the unexpected, actual or threatened, severe reduction or loss of potable water service to some or all water customers in Burlingame or Hillsborough. C. "Planned Water Transfer" means a non-emergency water transfer agreed upon by the parties' Coordinators and subject to reimbursement as described in paragraph 7 of this Agreement. 2. Designation of Coordinator. Each party's Director of Public Works (or his/her 1 designee) shall be that party's Coordinator. Whenever the identity of the Coordinator changes, the new Coordinator shall promptly so notify the other party in writing. 3. Requesting Assistance. A Coordinator may request assistance when the Requesting Coordinator ("RC") determines that (i) there is a Local Water Emergency; (ii)the city council or authorized official of the Coordinator's municipality has proclaimed a Local Water Emergency; or(iii) a Planned Water Transfer is needed to permit the maintenance of water facilities or for similar reasons. 4. Coordinating Assistance. Upon receiving a request for assistance under this Agreement, the Assisting Coordinator("AC") shall promptly advise the RC of the extent and nature of the assistance that can be provided without jeopardizing the safety of persons or property within the AC's jurisdiction. The Coordinators shall then work together to develop the means and manner of delivering the assistance that can be provided. No party receiving a request for assistance shall be under any obligation to provide assistance or incur any liability for not complying with the request. 5. Concluding Assistance. When the water transfers, personnel, equipment, and facilities are no longer required by the RC's jurisdiction or when the AC advises that the resources involved are required within the AC's own jurisdiction, the RC shall immediately arrange for the end of the water transfers and for the return of any personnel, equipment, and other resources. 6. Safekeeping of Resources. The municipality receiving assistance shall be responsible for the reasonable safekeeping of the resources received from the municipality providing assistance. 7. Planned Water Transfer Reimbursement. For a Planned Water Transfer, the receiving party shall reimburse the assisting party for all indirect(including, but not necessarily limited to, overhead) and direct costs of salary, equipment, and any other costs for the personnel, equipment, and facilities provided. In addition, the receiving party shall reimburse the assisting party for the latter party's direct costs of the water provided. The receiving party shall pay the assisting party within ninety (90) days after receipt of a detailed invoice from the assisting party. If requested by either Coordinator, the two Coordinators shall meet to discuss resource allocations and associated costs. 8. Local Water Emergency Reimbursement. For a Local Water Emergency,the receiving party shall reimburse the assisting party for all indirect(including, but not necessarily limited to, overhead) and direct costs of salary, equipment, and any other costs for the personnel, equipment, and facilities provided. In addition,the receiving party shall reimburse the assisting party for the latter party's direct costs of the water provided. The receiving party shall pay the assisting party within ninety (90) days after receipt of a detailed invoice from the assisting party. If the receiving party intends to obtain federal and/or state reimbursement of the costs incurred, the assisting party shall cooperate with the receiving party in providing and necessary 2 documentation and technical assistance in seeking this reimbursement. The receiving party shall be entitled to keep any reimbursement received, to the extent that the assisting party has already been paid for its costs as set forth above. 9. Hold Harmless. The receiving party shall hold harmless, indemnify, and defend the assisting party, its elected officials, officers, agents, and employees against all liability, claims, losses, demands or actions for injury to or death of a person or persons or damages to property arising out of or alleged to arise out of or in consequence of this Agreement, provided that such liability, claims, losses, demands, or actions are claimed to be due to the acts or omissions of the receiving party, its elected officials, officers, agents or employees, or employees of the assisting party working under the direction and control of the receiving party when the act or omission of such assisting party occurs or is alleged to occur under the direction and control of the receiving party. 10. Record-keeping. When mutual aid is provided under Paragraph 8 of this Agreement, the receiving and assisting parties shall keep financial accounting records of the personnel, equipment, and materials provided as required by Federal and State regulations and guidelines to maximize the possibility of Federal and State disaster reimbursement. Each party shall have access to the other party's relevant financial records for this purpose. 11. Term of Agreement. This Agreement shall take effect immediately upon its execution and shall remain in effect until terminated. 12. Termination of Agreement. Either party may terminate this Agreement with or without cause effective sixty (60) days after delivery of written notice thereof to the other party's Coordinator. 13. Regional Emergency or Disaster. If there is a disaster or emergency affecting more cities than the two parties to this Agreement, the parties shall channel their mutual aid assistance requests through the appropriate county or regional State Office of Emergency Services to ensure maximum effectiveness in allocating resources to the highest priority needs. 14. Mediation and Arbitration. A. The parties shall attempt in good faith to resolve through negotiation any dispute, claim or controversy arising out of or relating to this Agreement. If the dispute is not resolved by these negotiations,the matter shall be submitted to a mutually agreed-upon mediator. If the parties are unable to agree on a mediator, the matter shall be referred to Judicial Arbitration and Mediation Service (JAMS), or its successor, for mediation. The parties shall cooperate with JAMS and with one another in selecting a mediator from JAMS'panel of neutrals, and in scheduling mediation proceedings. The parties shall participate in the mediation in good faith and shall share equally in the costs of mediation. All offers, promises, conduct and statements, whether oral or written, made in the course of the mediation by 3 any of the parties, their agents, employees, experts and attorneys, and by the mediator and any mediator employees, are confidential, privileged and inadmissible for any purpose, including impeachment, in any litigation or other proceeding involving the parties, provided that evidence that is otherwise admissible or discoverable shall not be rendered inadmissible or non-discoverable as a result of its use in the mediation. B. All disputes that are not resolved by mediation shall be decided by binding arbitration conducted by JAMS in accordance with the Comprehensive Arbitration Rules then in effect. A single arbitrator shall be appointed. Unless otherwise agreed by both parties,the mediator shall be disqualified from serving as arbitrator in the case. The provisions of this paragraph may be enforced by the Superior Court of the State of California in and for the County of San Mateo. All discovery shall be conducted in accordance with the JAMS rules. The costs of the arbitration shall be paid equally by the parties. 15. Non-Waiver of Immunities. This Agreement shall not be deemed to abrogate or waive any immunity available under the Tort Claims Act. 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. Amendment. No modification, waiver, mutual termination, or amendment of this Agreement is effective unless made in writing and signed by both parties. 18. Not a Joint Powers Agreement. Nothing contained in this Agreement is intended to be nor shall it be construed to create a joint powers agreement pursuant to Government Code sections 6500 and following. 19. Entire Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the complete and exclusive statement of the Agreement between the parties. 4 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Hillsborough and Burlingame have executed this Agreement as of the date indicated on page one (1). CITY OF BURLINGAME TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH City Manager City Manager Attest Attest City Clerk City Clerk Approved as to form Approved as to form City Attorney City Attorney 5 ..) '^'"...\... `, ; �^�.... [� y�.' \ /"_ �;.�-y, 1_ ..;,t\j' ,> ? '% f�'�/ T,'�`�,, / ', '' ' `.',• `X..'i�`` '�`�>'J>\ '/� '�C /'„> �`,�`/ i/'f,`•f.�T*v �t,r' / � t r<'�\, 't :'\ h ` /'�' /••,� / ` .. � '''t` ` • C```am <•'• `/ ,/s'��./ ' ' `� , .`r `<��' // . ,�t�;�; fJ '/(' / .:.tL.; ,'\ ,.r1��`\.,'•y\�\ `••y'T ,,�..\ � \.%YYY�,Jt `y�'/,`;\t , /• .Y S,y ''^,' >t`<`'7!`1�j�, �,'�� �./'` '\xX�;>\`/!Y i,`/> T �, fY J J'„/,!!!! y, -'\ `\�•\„ \�X�,1, V�\ >„ !' / `;� �\Y TlT>, /// ,\.1 �,�,.�' , �<`, /�1t' >' '•,y�,j;•T,<` i/�� ,-/S,v\�f y ���.y�, ..f'' _t'\�(`, 7 .�� _ 1>\(\`/..� •(//JT, �r�'�t �% `�`.✓� •j V `\\ ,\\ T•,` `'-/''//�, '> T /' '/`'`./� ? ,��\> > t �'v, @1t' - y t \ Y \ ,\-J Summit Dr. low 1-./ fK -,1/ Y/\�`\y A// ,. y1 (`,�. j�• •'1 �-- - .'' �,�\,*....\\`� .>'•��< \\, ..fir.. j._.-_� .� \\}.\ ,�,.• \\ �` S. Y; ,�,� `/.'\ ' /” � �� y�•%'�"��-_. �- .,. `-tel k,,� � f'� , �•-� \ � ,�/ ` \�'' /`\ b@+ IQ,CtB r 7 ,��Y%<. �;/// vv/\� f IYAlc J 1Y I 51,10 � f I ♦ �( �.f , ''�..,, :♦\ ''(/\\ /1, y J. -mac-\``` ;��,\// /f �. ��` `\�.�\. ,''�',,.•-y \,,/ :I_ � �.,�`` \ /may/ ./.-.:'-'"..".\. YX 4-4 ExH air W 1 urlingameillsboroU Emergency Water Connections N•T-S . BURLINGAME AGENDA STAFF REPORT ITEM# 9b MTG. 9/07/04 HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL SUBMITTED DATE DATE: August 27, 2004 BY APPROVED FROM: PUBLIC WORKS BY SUBJECT. RESOLUTIONS APPROVINGANUPDATE OFANEXISTISANITARYSEWER AGREEMENTAND A NEW MUTUAL-AID POTABLE WATER TRANSFER AGREEMENT WITH THE TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that Council approve the attached resolutions for a sanitary sewer collection,treatment and discharge updated agreement and a mutual aid potable water transfer agreement,both with the Town of Hillsborough. SANITARY SEWER AGREEMENT Background: For decades Burlingame has been responsible for the collection,treatment and discharge of a portion of Hillsborough's sewage. In December 1975, Hillsborough and Burlingame entered into an agreement which identified the cost sharing,monitoring and testing for the sewerage.The agreement was revised in July 1985 to update the methodology for determining Hillsborough's share of the costs. Discussion:The attached agreement reflects changes in Hillsborough flow characteristics,provides clarification on the methodology for determining Hillsborough's sewage collection, treatment, discharge and capital improvement costs as well as identifies invoicing procedures. The agreement also requires Hillsborough to install flow monitors -,t the point of entry in the Burlingame sewer system and to calibrate them on an annual basis to verify sewage flow curacy. MUTUAL-AID POTABLE WATER TRANSFER AGREEMENT Background:The water system periodically is shut down to perform necessary repairs and maintenance.In order to provide an un-interrupted water supply to Burlingame customers,water needs to be transferred from the Hillsborough system (and vice-versa if Hillsborough has a similar need). Currently water transfers are negotiated by the staff of both agencies on a case by case basis in the absence of a formal agreement. Discussion:There are four existing inter-connections between the Burlingame and Hillsborough water systems that allow transfers (see attached map). The agreement defines the method for requesting assistance and coordinating water transfers as well as for reimbursement of indirect and direct costs in planned and emergency situations. These agreements are scheduled for Hillsborough Town Council approval on September 13, 2004. IBITS: Resolutions and agreements with maps Sy uu , P.E. Asst. Director of Public Works 650-558-7230 c: City Clerk, City Attorney,Finance Director,Town of Hillsborough SAA Public Works Directory\Staff Reports\I-lillsborough-water-sewer-agr.wpd RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME APPROVING AN UPDATED AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH AND THE CITY OF BURLINGAME REGARDING THE SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM RESOLVED,by the City Council of the City of Burlingame: WHEREAS,the City of Burlingame has been providing collection, treatment, and discharge of sanitary sewerage services to the Town of Hillsborough for a number of years; and WHEREAS,the agreement between the Town and the City is in need of revision to better address flow characteristics, methodology of calculations, and billing procedures; and WHEREAS,the updated agreement will continue the mutually beneficial partnership with the Town, NOW,THEREFORE,IT IS RESOLVED AND ORDERED: 1. The City Manager is authorized and directed execute the Agreement attached hereto as Exhibit A by and on behalf of the City. 2. The Clerk is directed to attest to the signature of the Manager. MAYOR I, ANN T. MUSSO, City Clerk of the City of Burlingame, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the_day of 2004,and was adopted thereafter by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: CITY CLERK MUTUAL AID AGREEMENT FOR TRANSFERS OF POTABLE WATER BETWEEN THE TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH AND THE CITY OF BURLINGAME THIS MUTUAL AID AGREEMENT("Agreement")is made and entered into as of 2004,by and between the Town of Hillsborough("Hillsborough")and the City of Burlingame("Burlingame"). WHEREAS,the water systems of Hillsborough and Burlingame are currently interconnected at four(4)locations as shown in Exhibit A attached hereto; WHEREAS,the parties have determined that it would be in their best interests to enter into an agreement setting forth the procedures and responsibilities that will pertain whenever, either as part of a Planned Water Transfer or as part of an emergency water transfer,potable water is to be transferred from one party to the other or emergency personnel,equipment and facility assistance are to be provided by one party to the other,or both;,_ WHEREAS,neither party should have to deplete unreasonably its own water supply or other resources when providing potable water or other resources,facilities,or services pursuant to this Agreement;and WHEREAS,this Agreement is consistent with the California Emergency Services Act (California Government Code§§8550 et seq.); NOW,THEREFORE,in consideration of the conditions and covenants contained herein,the parties agree as follows: 1. Definitions. For purposes of this Agreement,the following terms have the following meanings: A. "Coordinator"means the person designated by a party to act on behalf of that party on all matters relative to emergency or planned water transfers hereunder, including,but not limited to,requests,responses,and reimbursement. B. "Local Water Emergency"means the unexpected,actual or threatened,severe reduction or loss of potable water service to some or all water customers in Burlingame or Hillsborough. C. "Planned Water Transfer"means a non-emergency water transfer agreed upon by the parties'Coordinators and subject to reimbursement as described in paragraph 7 of this Agreement. 2. Designation of Coordinator. Each party's Director of Public Works(or his/her I designee) shall be that party's Coordinator. Whenever the identity of the Coordinator changes, the new Coordinator shall promptly so notify the other party in writing_ 3. Requesting Assistance. A Coordinator may request assistance when the Requesting Coordinator("RC")determines that(i) there is a Local Water Emergency; (ii)the city council or authorized official of the Coordinator's municipality has proclaimed a Local Water Emergency; or(iii) a Planned Water Transfer is needed to permit the maintenance of water facilities or for similar reasons. 4. Coordinating Assistance. Upon receiving a request for assistance under this Agreement, the Assisting Coordinator("AC")shall promptly advise the RC of the extent and nature of the assistance that can be provided without jeopardizing the safety of persons or property within the AC's jurisdiction. The Coordinators shall then work together to develop the means and manner of delivering the assistance that can be provided. No party receiving a request for assistance shall be under any obligation to provide assistance or incur any liability for not complying with the request. 5. Concluding Assistance. When the water transfers,personnel, equipment, and facilities are no longer required by the RC's jurisdiction or when the AC advises that the resources involved are required within the AC'S own jurisdiction, the RC shall immediately arrange for the end of the water transfers and for the return of any personnel, equipment, and other resources. 6. Safekeeping of Resources. The municipality receiving assistance shall be responsible for the reasonable safekeeping of the resources received from the municipality providing assistance. 7. Planned Water Transfer Reimbursement. For a Planned Water Transfer, the receiving party shall reimburse the assisting party for all indirect(including, but not necessarily limited to, overhead) and direct costs of salary, equipment, and any other costs for the personnel, equipment, and facilities provided. In addition, the receiving party shall reimburse the assisting party for the latter party's direct costs of the water provided. The receiving party shall pay the assisting party within ninety(90) days after receipt of a detailed invoice from the assisting party. If requested by either Coordinator,the two Coordinators shall meet to discuss resource allocations and associated costs. & Local Water Emergency Reimbursement. For a Local Water Emergency, the receiving party shall only be required to reimburse the assisting party for the assisting party's costs to the extent that the receiving party actually receives federal and state disaster or emergency reimbursement covering those costs. The receiving party shall make every reasonable effort to obtain such federal and state reimbursement and if successfulr shall remit any reimbursement of the costs incurred by the assisting party to the same within ninety (90) days of receipt of reimbursement. The assisting party shall cooperate with the receiving party in providing any necessary documentation and technical assistance in seeking this reimbursement.' i, 2 9. Hold Harmless. The receiving party shall hold harmless, indemnify, and defend the assisting party, its elected officials, officers, agents, and employees against all liability, claims, losses, demands or actions for injury to or death of a person or persons or damages to property arising out of or alleged to arise out of or in consequence of this Agreement,provided that such liability, claims, losses,demands, or actions are claimed to be due to the acts or omissions of the receiving party,its elected officials, officers, agents or employees, or employees of the assisting party working under the direction and control of the receiving party when the act or omission of such assisting party occurs or is alleged to occur under the direction and control of the receiving party. 10. Record-keeping. When mutual aid is provided under Paragraph 8 of this Agreement,the receiving and assisting parties shall keep financial accounting records of the personnel, equipment, and materials provided as required by Federal and State regulations and guidelines to maximize the possibility of Federal and State disaster reimbursement. Each party shall have access to the other party's relevant financial records for this purpose. 11. Term ofAgreement. This Agreement shall take effect immediately upon its execution and shall remain in effect until terminated. 12. Termination of Agreement. Either party may terminate this Agreement with or without cause effective sixty (60)days after delivery of written notice thereof to the other party's Coordinator. 13. Regional Emergency or Disaster. If there is a disaster or emergency affecting more cities than the two parties to this Agreement, the parties shall channel their mutual aid assistance requests through the appropriate county or regional State Office of Emergency Services to ensure maximum effectiveness in allocating resources to the highest priority needs. 14. Mediation and Arbitration. A. The parties shall attempt in good faith to resolve through negotiation any dispute, claim or controversy arising out of or relating to this Agreement. If the dispute is not resolved by these negotiations,the matter shall be submitted to a mutually agreed-upon mediator. If the parties are unable to agree on a mediator,the matter shall be referred to Judicial Arbitration and Mediation Service (JAMS), or its successor, for mediation. The parties shall cooperate with JAMS and with one another in selecting a mediator from JAMS'panel of neutrals, and in scheduling mediation proceedings. The parties shall participate in the mediation in good faith and shall share equally in the costs of mediation. All offers,promises, conduct and statements,whether oral or written,made in the course ofihe rpediation by any of the parties,their agents, employees, experts and attorneys,and by the mediator and any mediator employees,are confidential,privileged and inadmissible for any purpose,including impeachment, in any litigation or other 3 proceeding involving the parties, provided that evidence that is otherwise admissible or discoverable shall not be rendered inadmissible or non-discoverable as a result of its use in the mediation. B. All disputes that are not resolved by mediation shall be decided by binding arbitration conducted by JAMS in accordance with the Comprehensive Arbitration Rules then in effect. A single arbitrator shall be appointed. Unless otherwise agreed by both parties, the mediator shall be disqualified from serving as arbitrator in the case. The provisions of this paragraph may be enforced by the Superior Court of the State of California in and for the County of San Mateo. All discovery shall be conducted in accordance with the JAMS rules. The costs of the arbitration shall be paid equally by the parties. 15. Non-Waiver of Immunities. This Agreement shall not be deemed to abrogate or waive any immunity available under the Tort Claims Act. 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. Amendment. No modification, waiver, mutual termination, or amendment of this Agreement is effective unless made in writing and signed by both parties. 18. Not a Joint Powers Agreement. Nothing contained in this Agreement is intended to be nor shall it be construed to create a joint powers agreement pursuant to Government Code sections 6500 and following. 19. Entire Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the complete and exclusive statement of the Agreement between the parties. k 4 IN WITNESS WHEREOF,Hillsborough and Burlingame have executed this Agreement as of the date indicated on page one(1). CITY OF BURLINGAME TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH City Manager City Manager Attest Attest - City Clerk City Clerk Approved as to form Approved as to form City Attorney City Attorney SAA Public Works Directory\Waterlhillsborough-water mutualaid 8-16-04.agr.doc 5 I/v AN, If' Y '/'�\ \� Y r ,,\♦ �`\\ \ ,�. �" 1 \.•r /�l y` ;;.,\ r f�^\ \ ./ �\r `` �/� (� •.>'Y•. Lam'/1♦�' IN, Y 4y'Z tboroUg udingame Emergency Water Connections CITY 0� STAFF REPORT BURLINGAME AGENDA 9e - ITEM# MTG. O A�FATEO JUNE 6 9 DATE 12/6/04 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL SUBMITTED BY 1 DATE: November 4, 2004 APPROVED1 FROM: Doris Mortensen, City Clerk By k1 650-558-7203 SUBJECT: Recommendation to Adopt 2005 City Council Calendar RECOMMENDATION: To review, make changes if necessary and approve the Burlingame City Council Calendar for 2005. EXHIBITS: 2005 Burlingame City Council Calendar BUDGET IMPACT: None HURLINGAME 2005 BURLINGAME CITY COUNCIL CALENDAR City Council meetings are held on the first and third Monday of each month. When Monday is a holiday,the meeting is usually held on Tuesday or Wednesday. Study meetings are held as scheduled. Meetings begin at 7:00 at City Hall, 501 Primrose Road,and are open to the public. Regular Council meetings are televised live via Burlingame's Cable Channel 27. For more information,please view the City's website at«�w��._hurliilame.or� or call the City Clerk at 650-558-7203. REGULAR MEETINGS STUDY MEETINGS AND OTHER DATES January 3 Tuesday, January 18 Saturday, January 29— Consult with Council on Budget policy issues and input on goals for 2005/06, 9 a.m., Lane Room, Burlingame Library Friday, February 4—Commissioner's Dinner February 7 Thursday, February 17—Joint Meeting with Parks &Recreation Commission, 6 p.m. Tuesday, February 22 Saturday, February 26—Present Budget Balancing Recommendations and Department goals to City Council March 7 March 21 April 4 April 18 May 2 Thursday, May 5 —Joint Meeting with Beautification Commission, 5 p.m. May 16 Tuesday, May 31 —Budget Study Session June 6 Wednesday, June 15 —City Manager's mid-year review, 4 p.m. June 20 Tuesday, June 21 —Joint Meeting with Library Board, 5:30 p.m. Tuesday, July 5 July 18 (tentative) August 1 August 15 (tentative) Tuesday, September 6 September 19 Monday, September 19 —Joint Meeting with Civil Service Commission, 5 p.m. October 3 Thursday, October 13 —Joint Meeting with Traffic, Safety and Parking Commission, 6 p.m. October 17 November 7 November 21 December 5 Wednesday, December 7 — City Manager's year end review, 4 p.m. December 19 (tentative) 11/4/2004 2:36 PM CITY c AGENDA 9f t 'I' ITEM# BIJRIJNGAME STAFF REPORT MTG. "o DATE 12/6/2004 �wT[o uw[6,ep4 A TO: Honorable Mayor and Council SUBMIT BY DATE: October 28, 2004 APPROVE BY FROM: Larry E. Anderson, City Attorney SUBJECT: APPROVE ROTATION LIST FOR OFFICES OF MAYOR AND VICE MAYOR RECOMMENDATION: Approve rotation list for Mayor and Vice Mayor for coming year. DISCUSSION: Resolution No. 117 (1999) sets forth the process for rotating the offices of Mayor and Vice Mayor. Pursuant to that resolution,the rotation list is to be updated each year so that the rotation list is kept current. Attached are the rotation lists for November 17, 2003 (before the current rotation) and November 15, 2004 (the current rotation list). Attachment Rotation List (November 17, 2003, and November 15, 2004) Resolution No. 117 (1999) ROTATION LIST FOR OFFICES OF MAYOR AND VICE MAYOR (November 17,2003) 1. Mayor Rosalie O'Mahony 2. Vice Mayor Joe Galligan 3. Councilmember Cathy Baylock 4. Councilmember Mike Coffey 5. Councilmember Terry Nagel ROTATION LIST FOR OFFICES OF MAYOR AND VICE MAYOR (November 15,2004) 1. Mayor Joe Galligan 2. Vice Mayor Cathy Baylock 3. Councilmember Mike Coffey 4. Councilmember Terry Nagel 5. Councilmember Rosalie O'Mahony RESOLUTION NO. 117-1999 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME ADOPTING CITY COUNCIL POLICY ON ROTATION OF COUNCIL OFFICERS WHEREAS, Section 36802 of the Government Code requires the City of Burlingame have a Mayor and Vice Mayor; and WHEREAS, by Council tradition the Council has rotated the office of Mayor and Vice Mayor annually at the second meeting in November of each year; and WHEREAS, the Council desires to insure an equitable rotation of officers amongst all persons elected to the City Council, NOW, THEREFORE, be it RESOLVED and DETERMINED by the CITY COUNCIL of THE CITY OF BURLINGAME that the following procedure shall govern the appointment of Council officers: 1. Rotation of the office of Mayor and Vice Mayor shall occur annually at the second City Council meeting in November of each year. 2. The Vice Mayor shall become Mayor if eligible and a new Vice Mayor shall be appointed from the remainder of the councilmembers next in order of position on the rotation list described below. If the Vice Mayor is ineligible, unable, or declines to serve as Mayor, then councilmembers next in order of position on the rotation list described below shall fill both the offices of Mayor and Vice Mayor. 3. A rotation list based on seniority of consecutive years in the office of councilmember and this resolution is established pursuant to Exhibit A. 4. As changes in Council membership occur, the rotation list shall be updated as follows: A. The outgoing mayor shall be placed ahead of any councilmembers newly elected in the November general election, if any, but below all continuing and re-elected council-members B. A newly elected or appointed councilmember shall be placed at the bottom of the rotation list upon taking office. If more than one councilmember is elected or appointed at the same time, the newly elected or appointed councilmembers shall draw straws to determine their position relative to each other at the bottom of the rotation list. 1 C. If a councilmember declines to serve as either mayor or vice mayor when it is that councilmember's turn to serve, the declining councilmember shall be placed on the rotation list ahead of any councilmembers newly elected in the November general election, if any, and below all continuing and re-elected councilmembers. If however, more than one councilmember at the same time declines to serve as either mayor or vice mayor when it is their turn to serve, the declining councilmembers shall be placed in the same relative order to each other as before but below all other councilmembers on the rotation list. 5. The same process for rotation of officers contained in this resolution shall be used if the office of mayor or vice mayor becomes vacant at a time other than the second Council meeting in November of each year. However, if the vacancy occurs because the mayor or vice mayor is no longer able or willing to serve in that office, the outgoing officer shall be placed below all other councilmembers on the rotation list. 6. For purposes of this resolution, "the November general election" refers to the City general election that has occurred on the first Tuesday of November immediately preceding the second Council meeting for that November. Mayor I, Judith A. Malfatti, 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 1" day of November, 1999, and was adopted thereafter by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: GALLIGAN, KNIGHT, JANNEY, O'MAHONY, SPINELLI NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE City Clerk [C:\FILES\COUNREPS\mayorlist2004.ccr.wpd] 2 EXHIBIT A ROTATION LIST FOR OFFICES OF MAYOR AND VICE MAYOR (November 1, 1999) 1. Mayor Mary Janney 2. Vice Mayor Marti Knight 3. Councilmember Rosalie O'Mahony 4. Councilmember Joe Galligan 5. Councilmember Mike Spinelli (Immediate Past Mayor) 3 ���CITY o� STAFF REPORT BIJRUNOAME AGENDA ITEM# 9g 0,0 MTG. DATE 12/6/04 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL SUBMITTED - BY DATE: November_ 24, 2004 APPROVED FROM: Robert Bell, Human Resources Director BY SUBJECT: Resolution Approving Changes to the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)between the City of Burlingame and the Burlingame Association of Middle Managers (BAMM). RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Council approve the resolution authorizing the City Manager to incorporate the tentative agreement between BAMM and the City of Burlingame into the Memoranda of Understanding (MOU) for each of these units. The tentative agreement is attached to this report as Exhibit A. BACKGROUND: BAMM represents the City's miscellaneous management classifications in the City. The current labor agreement expires on December 12, 2004. The City and BAMM have been meeting since October to negotiate the terms of the new agreement. The City and Union negotiators were able to craft a new agreement that was ratified by BAMM on November 22, 2004. The major components of the tentative agreement are as follows: ■ Term—Three Year Agreement 12/13/04— 12/24/07 ■ Salary Increases — Effective the last pay period of December, 2004, the Unit will receive a general wage increase of 3%. This will keep most classifications at or above market median. Other classifications that are further behind market median will receive two equity adjustments over the next twelve months. Though the salary increases are lower market placement than the City's 'Td in Market" philosophy, based on the current financial situation in the City, the unit and City came to an agreement to place the unit at market median. The unit agreed to a salary freeze last year so they have not had a salary increase in more than 2 years. In subsequent years of the contract, the Unit will be placed to P in the market as long as the City has the ability to pay. If the City does not, an increase tied to CPI will be granted to the Unit. ■ Health Care - The group agreed to a modified cafeteria plan that will provide the City cost containment around escalating health care costs. The new structure has the City's contribution towards a Ca1PERS medical plan tied to enrollment level of employee only, employee plus one dependent or employee plus family. The contribution amounts for each level of coverage are tied to various premiums associated with the Ca1PERS health plans. In order for this to be equitable for employees, those with fewer dependents will have an allowance that gives them the ability to select from several plans without a monthly deduction for health care premiums. However, unlike the City's current contribution structure, no employee will be able to enroll in the costliest health care plan and have the City pay the entire premium. The new structure also allows for a"No Plan" allowance so if employees have coverage through another entity, they can get a monthly cash allowance. Currently, the City provide no "cash in-lieu" option so employees may be in the City's health care plans despite the fact they can qualify for or have other medical coverage. ■ Voluntary Time Off Program - The Association approved to participate in the Voluntary Time Off (VTO) program. The VTO program would be offered only in fiscal years where the City is anticipating a budget deficit. ■ Retirement - The City agreed to a reopener to look at retirement enhancements in the future. The City memorialized some of the criteria that would be used in determining if such enhancements would be granted to miscellaneous employees. ■ Sick Leave Incentive Program and Payout - The City proposed changes to the current sick leave incentive program. The program had become costly and difficult to administer. This was due in part to the expansion of State and Federal protected leave laws. The parties agreed to terminate this program and change the formula of sick leave payout used at retirement. This new program will award employees retiring from the City that have managed their sick leave well over the course of their employment. ■ Other Proposals - The majority of the other proposals are language clean-up proposals. BUDGET IMPACT ■ The salary increases and health care costs associated with the new agreement were included in the 2004/05 Budget. The costs are as follows: o Project Salary Increase Costs: $86,750 o Tiered Health Care Costs: $22,450 ATTACHMENTS: Resolution Exhibit A- Tentative Agreement RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME APPROVING CHANGES TO THE MEMORANDA OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE CITY OF BURLINGAME AND THE BURLINGAME ASSOCIATION OF MIDDLE MANAGERS AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE MEMORANDA OF UNDERSTANDING ON BEHALF OF THE CITY RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Burlingame: WHEREAS, the City of Burlingame and the Burlingame Association of Middle Managers (BAMM) have met and conferred in good faith on the terms and conditions of employment as provided by State law; and WHEREAS,the City and BAMM have reached agreement on certain changes to be made to the existing terms and conditions of employment and memorandum of understanding between the City and the Association; and WHEREAS,the proposed changes are fair and in the best interests of the public and the employees represented by BAMM; NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS RESOLVED AND ORDERED: 1. The changes in existing salary of the employees represented by BAMM as contained in Exhibit A hereto are approved. 2. The City Manager is authorized and directed to execute the terms contained in Exhibit A and incorporate them into the Memoranda of Understanding between BAMM and the City of Burlingame. MAYOR 1, DORIS MORTENSEN, City Clerk of the City of Burlingame, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council held on 6ffi day of December, 2004, and was adopted thereafter by the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: CITY CLERK APPENDIX A Burlingame Association of Middle Managers and City of Burlingame Summary of Terms - Tentative Agreement December 2004 - December 2007 Term of Agreement- Three(3)year,effective 12/13/04 - 12/24/07 Retirement- Beginning December of 2005 and each December of this contract thereafter,the parties agree to meet and confer regarding the following miscellaneous retirement enhancements: 2.5% @ 55 2.7%@ 55 3%@ 60 The parties acknowledge that the City will be considering several factors in determining the feasibility of contracting for one of the above enhancements.These factors include but are not limited to: Prevailing Practice-does at least 6 of the 11 Cities used in the San Mateo County Survey Market contract for one of the above enhancements Budget Deficit-does the ongoing budget projections reflect ongoing revenues meeting or exceeding ongoing revenues even after the costs of enhancements are included in these projections Retiree Medical Costs-can the parties develop a program to reduce ongoing costs associated with providing retiree medical coverage Wages- Effective 12/13/04,a general wage increase of three percent(3%) will be granted to all classifications in the unit. In addition to the 3%general wage increase,the following classifications will receive equity adjustments as follows: Effective 12/13/04,a one-time equity adjustment will be granted to bring the following classification to market median: Senior Planner .81% Effective 12/13/04,the first of two equity adjustments will be granted to bring the following classifications to their market median: Administrative Services Manager: 2.15% Assistant Director of Public Works: 2.35% Financial Services Manager: 2.15% APPENDIX A Senior Civil Engineer: 2.35% Effective 12/04/2005, the second of two equity adjustments will be granted to bring the following classifications to their market median: Administrative Services Manager: 2.15% Assistant Director of Public Works: 2.35% Financial Services Manager: 2.15% Senior Civil Engineer: 2.35% The equity adjustments as enumerated above are not subject to the ability to pay clause. Effective 12/12/05, the City will grant a salary increase to place the unit 3`d in the San Mateo County survey market. When performing the survey, the 12/04/2005 equity adjustments will be added to base salaries of the respective classifications before calculating any additional adjustment to get those classifications to 3'd in the San Mateo County survey market. The City may exercise its option to reopen the contract per the ability to pay clause included in this tentative agreement. If the City exercises its option to reopen the contract per the ability to pay clause and no alternative salary agreement can be reached by the parties, effective 12/12/05 the Unit will receive an increase equal to the April 04 to April 05 CPI for Urban Wage Earners Index (CPI-U) for the San Francisco-Oakland- San Jose area with a minimum increase of 1% and a maximum increase of 3%. Effective 12/11/06, , the City will grant a salary increase to place the unit 3rd in the San Mateo County survey market. The City may exercise its option to reopen the contract per the ability to pay clause included in this tentative agreement. If the City exercises its option to reopen the contract per the ability to pay clause and no alternative salary agreement can be reached by the parties, effective 12/11/06 the Unit will receive an increase equal to the April 05 to April 06 CPI for Urban Wage Earners Index (CPI-U) for the San Francisco-Oakland- San Jose area with a minimum increase of 2% and a maximum increase of 4%. Ability to Pay: If the City projects a general fund deficit in the current or following fiscal year and/or is developing budget reduction alternatives, the City can reopen the contract relative to salary increases. The parties will meet on alternative options regarding salary increases. If no alternatives can be agreed to, the unit will receive the CPI adjustment as indicated above. APPENDIX A Medical Plans - Employee to retain full choice of plans at each subscriber level. City contribution, effective 1/1/05 to be set at following levels: No Plan $200.00 month (must prove coverage elsewhere; amount can be put into deferred compensation, IRS 125 plan, or given as pay, subject to taxation) Employee only - $389.96 month (fully covers premium for Kaiser, PERS Choice or Blue Shield; workers choosing a plan with higher premiums would pay the difference) Employee + 1 - $779.92 month (fully covers premium for Kaiser, PERS Choice or Blue Shield; workers choosing a plan with higher premiums would pay the difference) Employee + 2 or more - $922.19 month (fully covers premium for Kaiser; workers choosing a plan with higher premiums would pay the difference) (City payment toward retiree medical to continue at up to maximum for unit of$922.19) In subsequent years of the contract, the City and Association will meet and confer on City's tiered medical plan contribution. The parties agree to meet and confer no later than September 15 of each calendar year. Dental Plan - Increase annual benefit for employee from $1600 to $1700 Increase annual benefit for family from $1600 to $1800 In subsequent years of the contract, the Unit will receive the same dental benefits as AFSCME employees. Vision Plan - The unit will receive the same vision benefits as AFSCME employees. Sick Leave - Discontinue sick leave incentive program in exchange for: Payoff Upon Retirement — If an employee elects to be paid off for accrued sick leave he/she will be paid according to the following schedule: All Hours Between: Pay out: 0000 — 0600 25% will be paid out or 150 hours maximum payout. 0600 — 1200 35% or 210 hours maximum payout. 1200 — 1560 50% or 180 hours maximum payout. Under this program the maximum amount of hours that will be paid out is 540 hours. Sick Leave Conversion - Employees can elect to have all sick leave hours converted to CalPERS credible service per GC Section 20965. If an employees elects to have sick leave hours paid out per Section 1.1.1, the remaining sick leave balance not paid out is eligible for conversion to credible service per GC Section 20965. The maximum available for conversion after payout is 1020 hours. Any sick leave hours paid out at retirement are not eligible for conversion. APPENDIX A Maximum Accrual - The maximum accrual of sick leave will be 1560 hours. Voluntary Time Off- In years of financial shortfall, City may institute program allowing worker voluntary time off without pay (at 41.6, 104, or 208 hours per year) if worker's application approved by department head. Does not affect seniority, benefit status, time accruals, or retirement service credit. Holiday Closure - Where voluntary time off instituted in years of financial shortfall, City Facilities may close between Christmas and New Year holidays, employees to use vacation or other accrued time (time advanced if probationary or insufficient time on books). Accrued leave time to be coordinated with Holiday's during the week are as follows: 28 hours of accrued leave for Non-Corporation Yard and/or Non-parks Maintenance Supervisor/Superintendent employees. 32 hours of accrued leave for Corporation Yard and/or Parks Maintenance employees. Vacation Accrual - Upon ratification and approval of this agreement, the vacation accrual language will be changed as follows to reflect the current practice regarding vacation accrual: Anniversary Date Days Per Year Hours Per Pay period Hire to 4th 10 3.08 5th 15 4.62 loth 16 4.93 11th 17 5.24 12th 18 5.54 13th 19 5.85 14th 20 6.16 15th 21 6.47 16th 22 6.78 17th&over 23 7.09 Accrual Maximum - Earned vacation time may be accumulated, but the employee shall not be allowed to have an accumulation of more than two (2) years' credit at any time. Probationary Period - The probationary period for employees promoted into higher-level classifications within the BAMM unit will be reduced from twelve (12) months to six (6) months. The probationary period can be extended by the department head if documented performance shows employee is not meeting standards. APPENDIX A Safety Shoes - Employees required to purchase safety boots will receive $200 per year reimbursement. In subsequent years of the contract safety shoe reimbursement will be granted at the same amount provided to AFSCME employees. Records Clerk Supervisor- The Records Clerk Supervisor will receive the same uniform allowance as AFSCME 829 Police Clerk employees. Procedural Issues - During the first year of the contract, the parties can request to meet and confer regarding the Grievance Procedure and No Discrimination Clause provisions applicable to the Unit. CITY OF BURLINGAME COUNCIL ASSIGNMENTS 2005 1. ABAG — City Delegate (1 to 4 meetings per year) Nagel (alternate O'Mahony) 2. Airport Land Use Commission Coffey (alternate Nagel) 3. Airport Round Table (I" Wednesday) Nagel (alternate Coffey) 4. Audit Committee Galligan and O'Mahony 5. Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee (BPAC) Baylock 6. BAWSCA (Bay Area Water Supply and Conservation Agency) O'Mahony (4 year term from 2003-2007) 7. Budget Chair Galligan and O'Mahony CA, CM, CC, FIN, HR O'Mahony Park & Recreation Baylock Library Nagel Fire and Police Coffey Planning/Public Works Galligan 8. Chamber of Commerce Liaison (monthly) Coffey & Galligan (alternate Baylock) 9. City/County Association of Governments (CCAG) O'Mahony (alternate Nagel) 10. City/Schools Liaison Committee Coffey & Baylock 11 . Commission interview teams Determined during recruitment time 12 Congestion Management Committee (CMAC) To be determined 13. Council of Cities (4th Friday of month) All 14. Economic Development Committee Galligan and O'Mahony 15. Emergency Services Council (quarterly) Nagel (alternate Coffey) 16. Fire ALS Joint Powers Authority Nagel 17. Housing Trust & Endowment Ask Cathy or Terry must be voted on at Council of Cities CITY OF BURLINGAME COUNCIL ASSIGNMENTS 2005—Page 2 18. Juvenile Justice Baylock 19. Peninsula Congestion Relief Alliance Nagel (alternate Jane Gomery) 20. Peninsula Division of League of California Cities All (4 meetings year) 21. Regional Financing Authority(RFA) (4 year term from 2003- O'Mahony 2007) 22. Transportation Authority Galligan 23. Warrants review O'Mahony 12/6/2004 3:44 PM CITY 0 RI 101 wGAME Q E6`9 MEMORANDUM City of Burlingame City Clerk's Office To: Honorable Mayor and City Council From: Doris Mortensen, City Clerk Date: November 29, 2004 Re: Council Assignments Attached is the list of Council Assignments for your review. Attachment CITY OF BURLINGAME COUNCIL ASSIGNMENTS 2005 1. ABAG—City Delegate (1 to 4 meetings per year) Nagel (alternate O'Mahony) 2. Airport Land Use Commission Coffey(alternate Nagel) 3. Airport Round Table (1St Wednesday) Nagel (alternate Coffey) 4. Audit Committee Galligan and O'Mahony 5. Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee (BPAC) Baylock 6. BAWSCA (Bay Area Water Supply and Conservation Agency) O'Mahony (4 year term from 2003-2007) 7. Budget Chair(CA, CM, CC, FIN, HR) Galligan and O'Mahony Budget (Park&Rec) Baylock Library Nagel Fire and Police Coffey Planning/Public Works Galligan 8. Chamber of Commerce Liaison (monthly) Coffey & Galligan (alternate Baylock) 9. City/County Association of Governments (CCAG) O'Mahony(alternate Nagel) 10. City/Schools Liaison Committee Coffey& Baylock 11. Commission interview teams Determined during recruitment time 12 Congestion Management Committee (CMAC) To be determined 13. Council of Cities (4 Ih Friday of month) All 14. Economic Development Committee Galligan and O'Mahony 15. Emergency Services Council (quarterly) Nagel (alternate Coffey) 16. Fire ALS Joint Powers Authority Nagel 17. Housing Trust & Endowment Ask Cathy or Terry must be voted on at Council of Cities 18. Juvenile Justice Baylock CITY OF BURLINGAME COUNCIL ASSIGNMENTS 2005—Page 2 20. Peninsula Congestion Relief Alliance Nagel (alternate Jane Gomery) 21. Peninsula Division of League of California Cities All (4 meetings year) 22. Regional Financing Authority(RFA) (4 year term from 2003- O'Mahony 2007) 23. Transportation Authority Galligan 24. Warrants review O'Mahony 11/16/2004 1 1:22 AM BURLINGAME PUBLIC LIBRARY Burlingame Public Library Board of Trustees Minutes, October 19, 2004 I. Call to Order President Herman called the meeting to order at 4:30pm. II. Roll Call Trustees Present: David Carr, Mary Herman, Catherine McCormack, Carol Rossi and Pat Toft Staff Present: Al Escoffier, City Librarian Sidney Poland, Recorder III. Warrants and Special Funds The Trustees unanimously agreed to approve the warrants. M/S/C (Carr/Herman) IV. Minutes The Trustees unanimously approved the minutes of the September 21, 2004 meeting with the correction that Katie McCormack is assisting Carol Rossi with the Employee Appreciation Event. MJS/C (Rossi/McCormack) V. Correspondence and Attachments The Trustees agreed to move discussion on Item 5a. and Item 5c. to Item 9. New Business. A. San Mateo County Literacy Statistics - The Trustees discussed a memo on San Mateo County Library literacy program statistics in city library service areas. The City Librarian noted that Burlingame Public Library contributes to San Mateo Public's program Project Read. VI. From the Floor None VII. Reports A. City Librarian's Report - Highlights of Report 1. Easton Happenings - The two story hours at Easton are in full swing with the first evening event having an attendance of 50. Additional staffing has been sent to Easton for the first month to help staff and patrons become acquainted with procedures and technical equipment. Installation of the express check out machine is complete. 48o Primrose Road•Burlingame•CA 94010-4083 Phone (650) 558-7474'Fax(650) 342-6295 2. Projects at Main - Staff will now begin work on various projects that have been on hold due to the commitment to open Easton on time. Complete technology upgrades at main, installation of new express checks, collection development, conclusion of the periodical evaluation project, and finalization of the Easton punch list are a few of areas that will keep staff busy. 3. CLA Conference - Mary Herman, Pat Toft and Al Escoffier will attend the conference on Saturday, November 13th. B. Foundation Report 1 . Financial Developments - The Foundation Board has pledged to raise $50,000 a year for the Library. The Development Committee under the guidance of Scott Nedwick, is working on a business plan that will give the Foundation a broader base for its fund raising projects. Forming a membership group is one of the ideas under discussion. 2. Book Sale - Jim Cannon and Steven Hamilton, co-chairs of the November 13th sale have had an excellent response from active board members, as well as Advisory members to work as volunteers. The sale hours will be 10:00am - 5:00pm. 3. Newsletter - The Newsletter is in the final draft stages and will be mailed November 8th. C. Public Art Committee Task Force - McCormack/Toft The committee has had 2 meetings and is in the process of drafting a policy that will provide concise guidelines for the City to use in its acceptance of donated artwork and in commissioning an artwork for a particular site in the City. The next meeting is October 28th. VIII. Unfinished Business A. Gift of Bronze Statue to the Library - The Trustees agreed to table agenda item (8a) regarding the acceptance of the bronze statue in memory the late Mayor and Councilwoman Gloria Barton to the Library until the Public Art Committee has completed the policy and it has been approved by the City Council. B. Employee Appreciation Event, December 5th Trustee Rossi reported that the cost of the event will be $25.00 per person. Invitations will be sent the second week of November. IX. New Business A. Utilization of PLS Resources - City Librarian, Al Escoffier, discussed his memo to PLS Council in which he noted some of his concerns about how budget cuts resulting in loss of service hours and significant staff reductions may be affecting the cooperative spirit of the PLS system in areas such as collection development, equal offerings of service, open service hours and library use and traffic. Library Board of Trustee Minutes 2 October 19, 2004 1. Collection Development Policy - Burlingame Library is now purchasing more copies of books and media, and fewer titles due to patron requests. The City Librarian has determined that our collection has the depth to proceed with this new policy. 2. Cluster Holds - Holds for popular items are now filled for our patrons first. Users from other libraries will not be able to place these popular items on hold but may come to the library to pick the item up. The purpose of the change is to insure that our patrons will be able to get the materials sooner. The Trustees agreed with this policy and felt it would promote good will and community support. B. Budget for Employee Appreciation Dinner - The Trustees agreed to table this item until the cost of the event is available. C. Library Closure Schedule 2005 - The Trustees unanimously approved the Library Closure Schedule for 2005. M/S/C (Rossi/Carr) X. Announcements A. December Meeting- Trustee Herman requested that the cancellation of the December 21 st meeting due to lack of official business be included on the agenda for the November 16th meeting. B. City Holiday Program - The City is considering having the annual tree lighting and program at the train station. The Library Holiday program will be held December 7th. XI. Adjournment - The meeting was adjourned at 6:OOPM. M/S/C (McCormack/Carr) The next meeting of the Library Board of Trustees will be held November 16, 2004 in the Library Conference Room. Respectfully Submitted, Alfred H. Escoffier City Librarian Library Board of Trustee Minutes 3 October 19, 2004 BURLINGAME BEAUTIFICATION COMMISSION November 4,2004 The regularly scheduled meeting of the Beautification Commission was called to order at 5:30 p.m. by Chairperson Hesselgren. ROLL CALL Present: Chairperson Hesselgren, Carney, Ellis, Grandcolas, Lauder, McQuaide and Webb Staff: Parks & Recreation Director Schwartz, Parks Superintendent Richmond, Arborist Porter, Secretary Harvey Guests: Bobbi Benson, Mike Stallings (1512 Alturas) MINUTES The minutes of the October 7, 2004 Beautification Commission meeting were approved as submitted. CORRESPONDENCE Criteria for Tree Removal Due to Sidewalk Repair (example/model for Commission consideration) Suggested additions of the Elm species to the Official Street Tree List as submitted by Jennifer Pfaff. FROM THE FLOOR- Bobbi Benson, Master Gardener, stated that 45 volunteers participated in the Community plant on Burlingame Avenue on Sunday, October 24h. She especially thanked the Burlingame Garden Center for delivering the plants to each planter. Groups such as the Citizens for a Better Burlingame, the Burlingame Beautification Commission, the Chamber of Commerce, and the Burlingame Improvement District were well represented. Bobbi Benson stated that the letters that go out informing property owners not to trim City trees, prevent property owners from trimming the suckers at the base of the trees but she stated that the suckers need to be trimmed throughout the City. She asked that this item be placed on the agenda so the Commission could discuss this problem more in depth. OLD BUSINESS Tree View Ordinance - Public Input -Mike Stallings of 1512 Alturas introduced himself to the Commission. He stated that he has been told, after placing annual calls to the Parks Division for the past 14 years, that trimming trees for views is not allowed. He is now asking the Commission to consider establishing an ordinance that would allow the trimming, shaping, and lowering of both City and Private trees to accommodate properties that have long views that are being blocked. An ordinance that would allow for "case by case topping", would provide for a body to mitigate restoration of views between property owners, and would also mitigate disputes if a property owner does not wish to cooperate with "uphill' property owners. 1 OLD BUSINESS — Tree View Ordinance — Public Input — (Contd.) - Mr. Stallings then presented a photo presentation of trees in his area related to blocked views. Pictures included trees that are "topped, about in half' under utilities by P.G.&E. that Mr. Stallings commented "thrive". He also showed a picture of a Pine tree that bad the middle cut out "Eke a saddle" to accommodate the utility lines, "and it is still thriving". Other pictures included were those of City-owned Oak trees on La Mesa Drive that block his "panoramic" view from the West, to Oakland, as well as pictures of a large private tree that the property owner had once allowed to be trimmed for views, but will no longer allow. Mr. Stallings concluded that the neighbors on his block have asked him to speak to the Commission initially with regard to their views. Chairperson Hesselgren opened the meeting for discussion and asked Mr. Stallings if the property owners on La Mesa Drive liked the City owned trees. Mr. Stallings stated that they do not and added that the City trees could be replaced with size appropriate trees and the Private trees could be reduced. Superintendent Richmond clarified that one of the property owners on La Mesa Drive did come before the Commission some years ago to request removal of the City-owned Oak tree due to aphids, but his request was denied. Arborist Porter noted that in the winter the view is better because the Oak trees lose their leaves. Mr. Stallings agreed, but added that the view is still obscured. Commissioner Webb asked Arborist Porter if the Oak trees on La Mesa Drive have been trimmed to open up the view. Arborist Porter responded that the lower portions of the tree have been cleaned out to open up the view while still maintaining the uppermost canopy of the trees. Following the discussion, Chairperson Hesselgren thanked Mr. Stallings for his presentation and noted that all the information presented would be referred to the Commission's Tree View Ordinance Committee for further consideration. Street Tree Removal Policy - Arborist Porter presented to the Commission an example of approved removals of City-owned Liquidambar trees at 2422 Hale Drive using existing criteria. Both Liquidambars (under primary utilities) have been routinely topped causing structural problems. The Liquidambar tree that was presenting substantial hardscape damage and drainage issues would be removed and replaced by the City. A permit will be issued for the property owner to remove and replace the other Liquidambar at their expense. Arborist Porter added that the defining difference between the City conducting the removal and replacement and the property owner being responsible for removal and replacement, was the drainage issues being caused by the one tree that could not be resolved unless removal occurred. Chairperson Hesselgren then explained the model she developed, Criteria for Tree Removal Due to Sidewalk Repair which uses a point system to help determine when removal of a City tree might be warranted. 2 OLD BUSINESS — Street Tree Removal Policy — (Contd.) - Commissioners McQuaide and Ellis researched other cities policies and models (locally and throughout the country), and found that varying policies exist as to sidewalk repair and related costs and tree removal policies and their related costs. Commissioner Ellis submitted a copy of a model from the City of Austin, Texas that uses a value system and 10 different factors to be considered in warranting tree removals. The Commission further discussed the different policies and models and conducted an exercise using the point system with the model presented by Chairperson Hesselgren. Following the exercise, the Commission agreed to review both models submitted, determine which and what factors should be considered, determine the type of point system to be used, and discuss further at the next Commission meeting. NEW BUSINESS Arbor Day Ceremonies - Monday, March 7, 2005 - Superintendent Richmond stated that Arbor Day will be held at Bayside Park. Redwood trees, along with a Redwood Tree donated by Commissioner Lauder, will be planted to replace Monterey Pines that will need to be removed in the near future. REPORTS - Superintendent Richmond - l. Tree Pruning and Stump Grinding contract has begun. 2. Approximately 130 trees were planted this planting season. 3. City Hall lawn was renovated by Parks crew. 4. Pruning by City Crew of this year's Sycamore section will begin shortly. 5. Adopt-a-Planter group did initial Burlingame Avenue planting on October 24. Event went very well. 6. PG&E asked to remove private palm at 11 Kenmar. The property owner is supportive. Neighbors noticed as per ordinance. 7. Jennifer Pfaff requested that the Commission consider adding some elms to the official planting list for the larger planting strips. The planting list is given to property owner for selecting new trees after a removal. Her suggestions are included in tonight's packet. Please study the list; item will be placed on the December agenda. 8. Council will meet with the Beautification Commission on May 5 at 5 p.m. The regular meeting of the Commission will start at 6 p.m. rather than the normal 5:30 p.m. 9. The landscape screen at the north end of California Drive has been installed. The maintenance period begins 11/8. Lauder - Commissioner Lauder reported that a draft of the Art In Public Policy is near completion and will be available to appropriate commissions for review. She also stated it was wonderful that several Burlingame High School students volunteered their time at the Community planting on Burlingame Avenue. 3 REPORTS—(Contd.)— Webb - Commissioner Webb reported that he and Commissioner Grandcolas met and reviewed other City's View Ordinances and will be making a report at the December 2nd Commission meeting. He also reported that the pipeline work along Oak Grove is looking good; the pathway created by chips along the area looks very nice. McQuaide - Commissioner McQuaide submitted an article from the City of Santa Cruz Parks & Recreation Department: "Growing an Urban Forest" Benefits of Trees and stated that incorporating reasons for people to keep trees within the information that goes out to the public would help to educate the public of the importance of trees in a community. Carney - Commissioner Carney asked when Rollins Road trash would be cleaned up. Superintendent Richmond stated that Rollins Road has routinely been cleaned several times a year but with fewer staff available it will be more difficult to schedule. There being no further business the meeting was adjourned at 7:50 pm. Respectfully submitted, 4- �aAAA-T Karlene Harvey Recording Secretary 4 CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION UNAPPROVED MINUTES 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, CA November 22, 2004 Council Chambers I. CALL TO ORDER Chair Osterling called the November 22, 2004, regular meeting of the Planning Commission to order at 7:00 p.m. II. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Auran,Bojues,Brownrigg,Keighran,Osterling and Vistica Absent: Commissioners: Keele Staff Present: City Planner,Margaret Monroe; Planner,Ruben Hurin; City Attorney, Larry Anderson; Senior Engineer; Doug Bell. III. MINUTES The minutes of the November 8, 2004 regular meeting of the Planning Commission were approved as mailed.- IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Because they were related,agenda item 6 was shifted to follow agenda item 4. V. FROM THE FLOOR Pat Giorni, 1445 Balboa, spoke. She noted that the only jurisdiction in San Mateo County to receive Safe to Schools Act money for bicycles was San Carlos, if the city needs help riding its bicycle routes to qualify for this funding she is recently retired and would volunteer. She also noted that she has been observing the Planning Commission for some time now and is concerned that the community is being swept up by carpetbaggers who are building mini-mansions on small lots not intended for such large houses; as commission works on implementation of North Burlingame/Rollins Road plan take time to talk to contractors about the impact of their buildings. It's time for the residents to think about what Burlingame should be. VI. STUDY ITEMS There were no study items for review VII. ACTION ITEMS Consent Calendar-Items on the consent calendar are considered to be routine. They are acted on simultaneously unless separate discussion and/or action is requested by the applicant,a member of the public or a commissioner prior to the time the commission votes on the motion to adopt. 1. 1546 NEWLANDS AVENUE, ZONED R-1 - APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW, SPECIAL PERMIT FOR DECLINING HEIGHT ENVELOPE,AND PARKING VARIANCE FOR A FIRST AND SECOND STORY ADDITION AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR WINDOWS AND SKYLIGHTS IN AN EXISTING ACCESSORY STRUCTURE(EDWARD SUPPLEE,APPLICANT AND PROPERTY OWNER; RANDY GRANGE, TRG ARCHITECTS, ARCHITECT) (57 NOTICED) PROJECT PLANNER: RUBEN HURIN Chair Osterling asked if anyone in the audience or on the Commission wished to call any item off the consent calendar. There were no requests. City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes November 22, 2004 C. Keighran moved approval of the consent calendar based on the facts in the staff report, commissioners comments and the findings in the staff report with recommended conditions in the staff report and by resolution. The motion was seconded by C. Brownrigg. Chair called for a voice vote on the motion to approve the consent calendar. The motion passed 6-0-1 (C. Keele absent). Appeal procedures were advised. VIII. REGULAR ACTION ITEM 2. 164 PEPPER AVENUE, ZONED R-1 - APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW FOR A FIRST AND SECOND STORY ADDITION (TRG ARCHITECTS, APPLICANT AND ARCHITECT; GREGG AND KRIS HURLEY, PROPERTY OWNERS) (48 NOTICED) PROJECT PLANNER: RUBEN HURIN Reference staff report November 22, 2004, with attachments. Phu-. Hurin presented the report, reviewed criteria and staff comments. Nine conditions were suggested for consideration. There were no questions of staff. Chair Osterling opened the public hearing. Joe Conti, 25 Edwards Court, represented the property owners, noted that the previously approved project was not built for financial reasons, now the property owners have the resources to build the project. Commission noted that the floor plans and building elevations for the detached garage appear to be inconsistent, floor plans show no roof eave overhang along the right side property line, but front building elevation shows roof eave overhang. Applicant noted that there should be no roof eave overhang along the right side property line, not allowed by building code. There were no further comments and the public hearing was closed. Commission discussion: Commissioner clarified that the plans indicate a barge rafter at the front of the `.- garage with no roof eave overhang along the property line, barge rafter provides a symmetrical look at the front of the garage without creating problems with the building code, plans as drawn are ok. C. Keighran noted that the proposed project, with a smaller detached garage, is identical to the previously approved project, this is a well-designed addition, provides a larger front porch, and moved to approve the application, by resolution, with the following conditions: 1) that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department date stamped October 27, 2004, sheets A-I through A-6, and that any changes to building materials, exterior finishes, footprint or floor area of the building shall require an amendment to this permit; 2) that any changes to the size or envelope of the first or second floors, or garage, which would include adding or enlarging a dormer(s), moving or changing windows and architectural features or changing the roof height or pitch, shall be subject to Planning Commission review; 3) that prior to scheduling the roof deck inspection, a licensed surveyor shall shoot the height of the roof ridge and provide certification of that height to the Building Department; 4) that prior to scheduling the framing inspection, the project architect, engineer or other licensed professional shall provide architectural certification that the architectural details such as window locations and bays are built as shown on the approved plans; if there is no licensed professional involved in the project, the property owner or contractor shall provide the certification under penalty of perjury. Certifications shall be submitted to the Building Department; 5) that prior to final inspection, Planning Department staff will inspect and note compliance of the architectural details (trim materials, window type, etc.) to verify that the project has been built according to the approved Planning and Building plans; 6) that all air ducts, plumbing vents, and flues shall be combined, where possible, to a single termination and installed on the portions of the roof not visible from the street; and that these venting details shall be included and approved in the construction plans before a Building permit is issued; 7) that the conditions of the City Engineer's, Fire Marshal's, Chief Building Inspector's, Recycling Specialist's, and NPDES Coordinator's November 1 , 2004, memos shall be met; 8) 2 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes November 22, 2004 that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Uniform Fire Codes, 2001 Edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame; and 9) that the applicant shall comply with Ordinance 1503, the City of Burlingame Storm Water Management and Discharge Control Ordinance. The motion was seconded by C. Auran. Chair Osterling called for a voice vote on the motion to approve. The motion passed on a 6-0-1 (C. Keele absent). Appeal procedures were advised. This item concluded at 7:16 p.m. 3. 2849 RIVERA DRIVE, ZONED R-1 — APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW, HILLSIDE AREA CONSTRUCTION PERMIT AND SPECIAL PERMIT FOR A NEW, TWO-STORY SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING WITH AN ATTACHED GARAGE (STAN MUI, APPLICANT AND PROPERTY OWNER; VAN LY, ARCHITECT) (37 NOTICED) PLANNER: ERICA STROHMEIER Reference staff report November 22, 2004, with attachments. CP Monroe presented the report, reviewed criteria and staff comments. Fifteen conditions were suggested for consideration. Commission noted that sections of the staff report indicate a special permit for height, is this an error? Staff noted the error, no exception is needed for building height, the reference is an editing problem. Commission noted that the condition regarding replacement trees should be amended requiring careful placement of the tree so they do not create view obstruction. Also, would like to see replacement trees be evergreen with a mature height of 20 to 25 feet. There were no further questions of staff. Chair Osterling opened the public hearing. Van Ly, architect, 8 Brussels Street, San Francisco, was available to answer questions. There were no further comments and the public hearing was closed. `— Commission discussion: Commission noted that the story poles were partially blown down by recent winds, however enough remained to evaluate view obstruction, spoke with the adjacent neighbors and they indicated no concern with view blockage, only with some loss of sunlight from the proposed house. C. Auran noted this house is well-designed for the neighborhood, design is considerate of the views from neighboring properties, and moved to approve the application for design review, hillside area construction permit and a special permit for an attached garage, by resolution, with the following amended conditions: 1) that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department date stamped September 15, 2004, sheets A-1, A-3, and Architectural Site Survey, and November 12, 2004, sheet A-2; and that any changes to the footprint or floor area of the building shall require an amendment to this permit; 2) that in addition to the trees required by the City's reforestation ordinance, the property owner shall install two new 24-inch box size evergreen trees chosen from the City's tree list with a mature growth of 20 to 25 feet and be placed so they do not block views from neighboring properties; they shall be planted at the front and/or exterior sides of the lot as replacements for the un-permitted removal of two protected size pine trees; appropriate irrigation measures and on-going maintenance shall be provided to these trees as approved by the City Arborist; 3) that any changes to the size or envelope of the first or second floors, or garage, which would include adding or enlarging a dormer(s), moving or changing windows and architectural features or changing the roof height or pitch, shall be subject to Planning Commission review; 4) that prior to scheduling the framing inspection, the prof ect architect, engineer or other licensed professional shall provide architectural certification that the architectural details such as window locations and bays are built as shown on the approved plans; if there is no licensed professional involved in the project, the property owner or contractor shall provide the certification under penalty of perjury. Certifications shall be submitted to the Building Department; 5) that prior to final inspection, Planning Department staff will inspect and note compliance of the architectural details (trim materials, window type, etc.) to verify that the project has been 3 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes November 22, 2004 built according to the approved Planning and Building plans. 6)that all air ducts,plumbing vents,and flues shall be combined, where possible, to a single termination and installed on the portions of the roof not visible from the street;and that these venting details shall be included and approved in the construction plans before a Building permit is issued; 7)that prior to scheduling the foundation inspection a licensed surveyor shall locate the property corners and set the building footprint; 8)that prior to underfloor frame inspection the surveyor shall certify the first floor elevation of the new structure(s) and the various surveys shall be accepted by the City Engineer; 9) that during demolition of the existing residence, site preparation and construction of the new residence, the applicant shall use all applicable "best management practices" as identified in Burlingame's Storm Water Ordinance, to prevent erosion and off-site sedimentation of storm water runoff; 10) that the project is subject to the state-mandated water conservation program, and a complete Irrigation Water Management Plan must be submitted with landscape and irrigation plans at time of permit application; 11) that demolition for removal of the existing structures and any grading or earth moving on the site shall not occur until a building permit has been issued and such site work shall be required to comply with all the regulations of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District. 12)that prior to scheduling the roof deck inspection, a licensed surveyor shall shoot the height of the roof ridge and provide certification of that height to the Building Department; 13)that the conditions of the City Engineer's March 10, 2004, Chief Building Official's and Fire Marshal's March 8, 2004, and Recycling Specialist's March 3, 2004, memos shall be met; 14) that the applicant shall comply with Ordinance 1503, the City of Burlingame Storm Water Management and Discharge Control Ordinance; 15)that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Uniform Fire Codes,2001 Edition,as amended by the City of Burlingame. The motion was seconded by C. Keighran. Comment on the motion: Commission noted that this is a two-story house in the hillside area,but because the house is located on a down sloping corner lot with Temple Shalom and school located across the street and behind this property, there is no view obstruction created. Chair Osterling called for a voice vote on the motion to approve. The motion passed on a 6-0-1 (C.Keele absent). Appeal procedures were advised. This item concluded at 7:25 p.m. 4. 1464&1470 VANCOUVER AVENUE,ZONED R-1 -APPLICATION FOR LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT AND VARIANCE FOR LOT FRONTAGE (MICHAEL GONG/AMY LUI AND HERBERT WEI, APPLICANTS AND PROPERTY OWNERS (75 NOTICED)PROJECT PLANNER: RUBEN HURIN Reference staff report November 22, 2004,with attachments. CP Monroe presented the report noting the history and the requirements of the Subdivision Map Act. Two conditions to be amended to the mapping action were suggested for consideration. CA Anderson noted that six years ago the city granted a variance to the lot on the left (1470 Vancouver Avenue) because they assumed the deed agreement was OK. Commissioners asked staff. with this proposed change does the variance granted in the 1990's go away;no, but the distance to side property line becomes better by 3'-6"; seems this is a pubic policy issue,in the past two property owners made an agreement without notifying the city, now they do not meet the 50 foot frontage requirement, those who granted the variance in 1998 were not aware that this agreement was not recorded, so Planning Commission did not make a conscious decision about this lot line adjustment at that time. CA noted that it is correct that the lot line adjustment was not considered in 1998 and city did not research original subdivision at that time. Chair Osterling opened the public hearing. John Ward, represented the property owners. Staff report �-' presents the history and facts clearly. Commissioner asked why not return to both lots having 50 foot frontage at this time,since the transfer was not legal when it was done? Applicant noted in this case history 4 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes November 22, 2004 guides, the city action in 1998 allowed a new house on 1470 Vancouver, so in fairness and equity the city should acknowledge this situation and make it legal now. In addition a 50 foot frontage would not work for the current applicant on 1464 Vancouver. There were no further comments from the floor. The public hearing was closed. Commission discussion: Do I understand that in order to reuse 1464 Vancouver the lot line adjustment had to be done?CA noted that property owners of 1464 Vancouver were bound by a private contract signed in 1951 which required them to return 3'-6"to the property at 1470 Vancouver if the house on 1464 Vancouver were ever demolished. The house at 1464 Vancouver had to be demolished in order to adjust the property line because we do not allow a property line to cross under a structure. So this lot line adjustment was not imposed by the city?CA No,although at design review the commission could make adjustments to the siting of the proposed structures,however,the proposed project is just coming forward. Would like to consider a condition to the lot line adjustment that the left side setback on 1464 be increased so that the space between the two houses is equal to the combined side setback on two 50 foot wide lots e.g.at least 8 feet,so that from the street these two lots are visually the same as all the other lots. As it looks now,the two houses appear as if they could overlap. CA noted that such a side separation requirement could be considered in design review. Could condition the map so this and all future houses would have to comply. If remove the house at 1470 Vancouver could a new house be built to property line? CP noted no,it would be required to meet the 3 foot side setback for a 40 foot wide lot. C. Bojues noted that he can accept a modification in the lot line to increase the street frontage on 1470 Vancouver, if the side separation were adjusted to guarantee at least 8 feet between the two houses then it would be the same as two 50 foot lots;moved approval with an added condition that the minimum setback between 1470 and 1464 Vancouver shall be 8 feet, the equivalent of two 50 foot wide lots, by resolution with the following conditions: 1)that letters of no objection from the mortgage institutions as indicated in the preliminary title reports shall be submitted to the City prior to the recording of the lot-line adjustment; 2)that the lot line adjustment shall be recorded with the property at the San Mateo County Recorders Office and a copy of the recorded document shall be sent to the City Engineer;and 3)that there shall be maintained a side separation of at least 8 feet between the two houses at 1470 and 1464 Vancouver Avenue,which will ensure a consistent appearance with the residential character of the neighborhood.The motion was seconded by C. Brownrigg. Chair Osterling called for a voice vote on the motion to approve the lot line adjustment with the added condition that the side setback between the two properties at 1470 and 1464 Vancouver shall be at least 8 feet,the minimum side setback for two 50 foot wide lots. The motion passed on a 6-0-1 (C.Keele absent). Appeal procedures were advised. This item concluded at 7:45 p.m. IX. DESIGN REVIEW STUDY ITEMS 6. 1464 VANCOUVER AVENUE,ZONED R-1 -APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW FOR A NEW, TWO-STORY SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING AND DETACHED GARAGE(STEWART ASSOCIATES, APPLICANT AND DESIGNER; MICHAEL GONG AND AMY LUI, PROPERTY OWNERS) (75 NOTICED) PROJECT PLANNER: RUBEN HURIN CP Monroe briefly presented the project description,noting that this project is proposed for the now vacant lot created by the lot line adjustment. There were no questions of staff. 5 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes November 22, 2004 Chair Osterling opened the public comment. John Stewart,architect, 1351 Laurel Street,San Carlos,noted that he designed the new house next door at 1470 Vancouver Avenue,that house was built with a 4-foot side setback, with the lot line adjustment the setback at 1470 Vancouver will be increased to 7.5 feet; the new house at 1464 Vancouver has a 9.5-foot side setback,therefore the total distance between the houses will be 17 feet,double the distance found on typical 50-foot wide lots with 4-foot side setbacks for each house;the extra portion at the front of the lot gives variety to the streetscape and house design because it allowed for a one-story design to be incorporated on this part of the house, provides something different in the neighborhood. Commission asked if the architect thought about applying for a special permit for height to exceed 30 feet to eliminate the clipped roof. The architect noted that based on the proposed roof pitch,the height would increase by approximately 8 feet. Commission noted that simulated slate is proposed on the roof and asked if using real slate is a possibility? Architect noted that real slate would probably not be used since it is costly and adds a lot more weight to the roof. Concern is that the Commission has seen several project come back to request using composition shingle rather than slate as approved,just want to make sure applicant is confident that they will use a simulated slate roof. Architect noted that he has used this product on several houses in Hillsborough and it works very well. The architect made a strong point about changing the neighborhood fabric by adding variety with the lot frontage and house design on this very long block. Commission noted a concern with the flow from the living room to the rear yard,cannot enter back into the house until you get to the rear.Architect noted that the door from the living roof and terrace was designed to provide a space for a small table and chairs, not really as an access to the rear yard. Commission asked if any thought was given to providing a smaller garage since only a one-car garage is required for a 4-bedroom house. Architect commented that the property owners want a two-car garage to park their vehicles. Architect ask if the proposed setback between the houses is acceptable. Commission noted that the proposed setback works well. There were no other comments from the floor and the public hearing was closed. �. The Commission had the following comments and concerns: • Right side elevation is a two-story wall extending the entire length of the house,concerned that it is not as articulated as is the left side elevation,mass needs to be broken up along the right side,would like to see a softer look along the right side; • Concerned that the houses will appear to close to each other because the lot and neighboring house jog towards the rear of the lot, the 2-foot wide fireplace will make the houses look like they are overlapping each other from the street, concerned that there is not much open space between the houses towards the rear; • Landscape plan indicates a lemon tree to be planted in the rear left corner of the lot and a laurel adjacent to the garage,suggest changing these trees to a larger evergreen species to add screening for neighbor; and • Proposed coast live oak tree at the front of the property is squeezed in between the house and side property line,this tree should be moved further out in to the front yard,will also help to break of the mass at the front of the house. C. Bojues noted that the house is designed well and is confident that the architect can make the suggested changes to the project, and made a motion to place this item on the consent calendar at a time when the suggested revisions have been made and plan checked. This motion was seconded by C. Auran. Comment on motion: the overall design is good,however want to make it clear that the right side elevation needs more articulation,prefer to see the project come back as a regular action item;Commission noted that the project can be pulled off the consent calendar if there still concern after the changes have been made, recommend that project be placed on the consent calendar; architect needs to give serious thought to the 6 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes November 22, 2004 concern about the two houses visually overlapping each other, open space could be added by moving the fireplace in by an additional two feet, will pull off the consent calendar if project comes back as proposed tonight, concerned with the configuration of the lot, existing house at 1470 Vancouver is squeezed in; architect clearly understands concerns expressed by the Commission, feel consent calendar is appropriate given that the architect can resolve the concerns. Chair Osterling called for a vote on the motion to place this item on the consent calendar when plans had been revised as directed. The motion passed on a voice vote 6-0-1 (C. Keele absent). The Planning Commission's action is advisory and not appealable. This item concluded at 8:05 p.m. 5. 29 STANLEY ROAD, ZONED R-1 - APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW AND FRONT SETBACK VARIANCE FOR A NEW, TWO-STORY SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING AND DETACHED GARAGE (TRG ARCHITECTS, APPLICANT AND ARCHITECT; KAUSHIK AND SONALI BHAUMIK, PROPERTY OWNERS) (67 NOTICED) PROJECT PLANNER: RUBEN HURIN Plnr. Hurin briefly presented the project description. Commission asked what is the minimum required driveway width. Staff noted that a 9'-6" clear driveway width is required. There were no further questions of staff. Chair Osterling opened the public comment. Poko Klein, project manager, noted that the attached garage now at the front of the lot will be replaced with a new detached garage at the rear of the lot, renovation will add curb appeal, keeping the majority of the existing exterior walls along the right side and rear of the house, house complies with the minimum front setback of 15'-0" (15'-7" proposed). Commission noted that this is a well-designed project and an improvement compared to the existing house. Commission asked how will the second floor deck off the master bedroom be used? The project manager noted that the open deck is designed to provide a view of the open rear yard and as a sitting area with a small table and chairs. Commission noted that there is concern about large decks, but in this case the deck is small and only accessible through the master bedroom, so people will not be congregating on the deck. There were no other comments from the floor and the public hearing was closed. The Commission had the following comments and concerns: • The side access door in the detached garage should swing out so that it does not affect parking; • The Landscape Plan on sheet A-5 notes three new Quint, please clarify what these plantings are or revise plans as necessary; • Identify type of existing and proposed shrubs along the right side property line; and • Proposed trees should be evergreen to help screen the new house. C. Auran made a motion to place this item on the consent calendar at a time when the suggested revisions have been made and plan checked. This motion was seconded by C. Brownrigg. Chair Osterling called for a vote on the motion to place this item on the consent calendar when plans had been revised as directed, checked and there is space. The motion passed on a voice vote 6-0-1 (C. Keele absent). The Planning Commission's action is advisory and not appealable. This item concluded at 8:11 p.m. 7 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes November 22, 2004 X. PLANNER REPORTS - Review of City Council regular meeting of November 15, 2004. CP Monroe reviewed the actions of the Council meeting of November 15, 2004. - FYI—Revision to add a light well to an approved design review project at 1029 Balboa Avenue. In addition to the light well location issue, commission also discussed a change in roofing material for this project from composition shingle to wooden shake. Commission discussed why light wells were not structures in the side yard, types of protection to keep them from being hazards, and the need to bring forward standards for light wells which have been discussed earlier but not acted on. The Commission also acknowledged the change in roofing material for this house;noting a concern about flammability and that the Fire Marshal would have to approve the roofing material. XI. ADJOURN REGULAR MEETING Chair Osterling adjourned the regular meeting to a study meeting at 8:30 p.m. The Commission moved to Conference Room A for the study meeting. XII. PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY MEETING A. Discussion about the Planning Commission's 2005 work program and how to organize to get it done. Chair Osterling called the study meeting to order at 8:35 p.m. Staff present were CP Monroe,Plr Hurin,CA Anderson. �-- The commissioners discussed the 2005 work program as outlined in the staff material in general and the various ways, in the past, that the Commission has organized to get similar tasks accomplished. The consensus of the group was to discuss the best approach to each item in the work program individually because the activity would dictate the organization. - Implementing Zoning for the Bayfront Plan Since the plan was recently adopted and guides the zoning alternatives and since the plan preparation included a broad base of public input, the consensus was to continue the current subcommittee made up of Cers. Bojues, Keighran, and Keele. The group will meet regularly once a month and continue to review the draft zoning regulations until they are ready for presentation to the Planning Commission for study and action. The regular meetings to review the new zoning district regulations will commence in January. - Revise the Sign Code. The consensus was that there were some issues in the sign code which were more critical than others. It was decided that a subcommittee of the Commission would meet with staff and identify key areas,such as auto row signage, where the code has become outmoded. Once the problem areas are identified representatives of property owners or merchants in those specific areas would be invited to work with the Subcommittee to address signage issues applicable to the particular zoning districts. The members of the Planning Commission who would lead this effort were: Cers. Bojues, Brownrigg, and Osterling. In �. January staff will organize the first brainstorming session. 8 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes November 22, 2004 - Implementing Zoning for the North Burlingame/Rollins Road Plan Staff noted that there were fewer new zoning districts to be created for this planning area,so felt that the zoning that remained of the Housing Element Work Program could be incorporated into the work of this committee. Consensus was that since the stakeholders participated in the creation of the specific plan and the Housing Element and since this zoning was focused on the implementation of the plan and element,this work could be done by a subcommittee of the commission. Leading this effort are: Cers. Auran, Brownrigg, and Vistica. The group will meet regularly once a month, in the early morning commencing in January or February. - Neighborhood Consistency Subcommittee(Standing Committee to Coordinate Design Review) The purpose of this subcommittee is to coordinate with and calibrate the consulting design reviewers. This year there are two zoning tasks also on the committee's docket: off street parking for second units eligible for amnesty and a review of the demolition permit process. It was decided that the current subcommittee would continue: Cers. Bojues, Keighran, Osterling. In general the consensus was that the design reviewers are presently well calibrated. Staff noted that currently only the most difficult projects are being referred to the reviewers, some reviewers have indicated that they might want to discuss with the subcommittee the best way to make negative recommendations. The general conclusion was that since the commission and reviewers seem to be on the same "wave length" two meetings in the course of the year might be sufficient for this coordination effort. Two commissioners agreed to work together to collect some survey data on the relationship between the size of the on-site covered parking area and its use for parking in single family residential areas. They felt,and the commission agreed,that some factual information about how the community felt about this issue would assist the commission in the continuing debate. As a group the commissioners discussed how to best coordinate and understand the Council's planning interests for the coming year. They noted that it would be advantageous for the Commissioners to meet with the Council some time this year,not to identify work program priorities since they seem set and finances are clearly limited,but for the Commission to better understand the Council's planning objectives and concerns. The consensus was that the Chair should send a memo to the Mayor offering to meet with the City Council at their convenience on a date of Council's choice,before or after one of the Council meetings if that was more convenient for them. The purpose would be for the Commission to hear and have a dialogue with the Council on planning issues;including how the Council feels that past actions are working now that they are being implemented,like the change in multiple family height limits, detached vs.attached garages,and implementation of the various plans adopted. The consensus was that a Saturday morning meeting was not necessary;but a briefer discussion meeting would be useful to the Commission when the Council could work it into their schedule. Chair Osterling adjourned the study meeting at 9:55 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Michael Brownrigg, Secretary SAMINUTES\unapproved 11.22.doc 9 11-16-04 SUMMARY OF PART ONE OFFENSES PAGE: 1 FOR: OCTOBER, 2004 Current Prev Last Actual Actual YTD YTD Crime Classification.................... Current Year.. YTD.. YTD.. Change $ Change Murder and Nonnegligent Manslaughter 0 0 0 0 0 Manslaughter by Negligence 0 0 0 0 0 Rape By Force 0 2 4 6 -2 -33.33 Attempt to Commit Forcible Rape 0 0 1 1 0 0.00 Robbery Firearm 1 2 7 5 2 40.00 Robbery Knife 0 0 0 2 -2 -100.00 Robbery Other Dangerous Weapon 2 0 7 4 3 75.00 Robbery Strong-Arm 0 0 2 5 -3 -60.00 Assault - Firearm 0 0 0 0 0 Assault - Knife 0 0 6 3 3 100.00 n Assault - Other Dangerous Weapon 2 4 18 15 3 20.00 Assault - Hands,Fists,Feet 0 1 11 7 4 57.14 Assault - Other (Simple) 24 22 177 165 12 7.27 Burglary - Forcible Entry 3 7 70 69 1 1.45 Burglary - Unlawful Entry 2 6 78 53 25 47.17 Burglary - Attempted Forcible Entry 0 0 0 1 -1 -100.00 Larceny Pocket-Picking 0 0 0 0 0 Larceny Purse-Snatching 0 0 0 2 -2 -100.00 Larceny Shoplifting 1 2 26 21 5 23.81 Larceny From Motor Vehicle 16 35 237 230 7 3.04 Larceny Motor Veh Parts Accessories 1 5 46 42 4 9.52 Larceny Bicycles 4 5 26 29 -3 -10.34 Larceny From Building 2 4 14 20 -6 -30.00 Larceny From Any Coin-Op Machine 0 4 11 25 -14 -56.00 Larceny All Other 24 21 240 193 47 24.35 Motor Vehicle Theft Auto 10 5 98 65 33 50.77 Motor Vehicle Theft Bus 0 1 1 3 -2 -66.67 Motor Vehicle Theft Other 1 1 6 5 1 20.00 93 127 1,086 971 93 127 1,086 971 • % 11-16-04 MONTHLY SUMMARY OF PART TWO OFFENSES PAGE: 1 CITY REPORT FOR: OCTOBER, 2004 Current Prev last Actual Actual YTD YTD i Crime Classification.................... Current Year.. YTD.. YTD.. Change Change All Other Offenses 26 48 366 364 2 0.55 Animal Abuse 0 0 1 2 -1 -50.00 Animal Nuisance 0 0 0 1 -1 -100.00 Arson 0 0 4 10 -6 -60.00 Assists to Outside Agencies 0 0 0 0 0 Bicycle Violations 0 0 0 0 0 Bigamy 0 0 0 0 0 Bomb Offense 0 0 0 3 -3 -100.00 Bomb Threat 0 0 0 1 -1 -100.00 Bribery 0 0 0 0 0 Check Offenses 0 1 3 15 -12 -80.00 Child Neglect/prot custody 0 4 16 22 -6 -27.27 Computer Crime 0 0 0 0 0 Conspiracy 0 0 0 0 0 Credit Card Offenses 0 0 0 0 0 Cruelty to Dependent Adult 0 0 3 2 1 50.00 Curfew and Loitering Laws 2 1 2 1 1 100.00 Death Investigation 2 3 25 23 2 8.70 Disorderly Conduct 1 4 20 33 -13 -39.39 Driver's License Violations 0 0 4 3 1 33.33 Driving Under the Influence 6 9 65 57 8 14.04 Drug Abuse Violations 4 3 38 20 18 90.00 Drug/Sex Registrants 0 0 1 2 -1 -50.00 Drunkeness 6 4 49 52 -3 -5.77 Embezzlement 0 0 15 7 8 114.29 Escape 0 0 0 0 0 Extortion 0 0 0 0 0 False Police Reports 0 0 0 0 0 False Reports of Emergency 0 0 0 0 0 Fish and Game Violations 0 0 0 0 0 Forgery and Counterfeiting 3 0 36 35 1 2.86 Found Property 2 6 88 74 14 18.92 Fraud 4 2 29 33 -4 -12.12 Gambling 0 0 0 0 0 Harrassing Phone Calls 0 2 39 43 -4 -9.30 b i r 11-16-04 MONTHLY SUMMARY OF PART TWO OFFENSES PAGE: 2 CITY REPORT FOR: OCTOBER, 2004 Current Prev Last Actual Actual YTD YTD Crime Classification.................... Current Year.. YTD.. YTD.. Change Change Hit and Run Accidents 4 4 46 28 18 64.29 Impersonation 0 0 3 1 2 200.00 Incest 0 0 0 0 0 Indecent Exposure 0 1 3 8 -5 -62.50 Intimidating a witness 0 0 1 0 1 Kidnapping 0 0 0 0 0 Lewd Conduct 0 0 2 0 2 Liquor Laws 2 2 7 6 -1 -12.50 Littering/Dumping 0 0 0 0 0 Marijuana Violations 2 2 23 17 6 35.29 Mental Health Cases 6 9 92 97 -5 -5.15 Missing Person 7 13 48 33 15 45.45 „ Missing Property 8 7 85 86 -1 -1.16 Municipal Code Violations 11 2 67 37 30 81.08 Narcotics Sales/Manufacture 0 0 1 0 1 Offenses Against Children 0 0 2 6 -4 -66.67 Other Assaults 24 22 177 165 12 7.27 Other Juvenile Offenses 0 2 2 5 -3 -60.00 Other Police Service 2 7 63 54 9 16.67 Pandering for immoral purposes 0 0 0 0 0 Parole Violations 0 1 2 1 1 100.00 Perjury 0 0 0 0 0 Possession of Burglary Tools 0 0 0 1 -1 -100.00 Possession of drug paraphernalia 0 0 0 0 0 Possession of obscene literature;picture 0 0 0 0 0 Probation Violations 0 1 3 7 -4 -57.14 Prostitution and Commercial Vice 0 3 2 3 -1 -33.33 Prowling 0 0 0 0 0 Resisting Arrest 1 0 4 0 4 Runaways (Under 18) 0 0 0 0 0 Sex Offenses 0 0 1 3 -2 -66.67 Sex Offenses against Children 0 0 1 3 -2 -66.67 Sodomy 0 0 0 0 0 Stalking 0 0 1 3 -2 -66.67 Statutory Rape 0 0 0 2 -2 -100.00 '% y . 11-16-04 MONTHLY SUMMARY OF PART TWO OFFENSES PAGE: 3 CITY REPORT FOR: OCTOBER, 2004 Current Prev Last Actual Actual YTD YTD Crime Classification.................... Current Year.. YTD.. YTD.. Change Change Stolen Property;Buying;Receiving;Possess 0 2 4 4 0 0.00 Suspended License 4 3 37 25 12 48.00 Tax Evasion 0 0 0 0 0 Temp Restraining Orders 9 2 51 28 23 82.14 Terrorist Threats 2 4 24 20 4 20.00 Towed Vehicle 54 32 389 337 52 15.43 Trespassing 1 1 12 14 -2 -14.29 Truants/Incorrigible Juvs 1 0 4 2 2 100.00 US Mail Crimes 0 0 0 0 0 Vagrancy 0 0 0 0 0 Vandalism 14 15 163 227 -64 -28.19 Vehicle Code Violations 4 3 27 38 -11 -28.95 Violation of Court Order 3 5 20 25 -5 -20.00 Warrants - Felony 1 1 13 11 2 18.18 Warrants - Misd 6 3 52 28 24 85.71 Weapons;Carrying,Possessing 0 2 15 8 7 87.50 Welfare Fraud 0 0 0 0 0 ------- ------ ------- ------- 222 236 2,251 2,138 222 236 2,251 2,138 11-16-04 MONTHLY SUMMARY OF CITATIONS PAGE : 1 CITY REPORT FOR: OCTOBER, 2004 Current Prev Last Actual Actual Crime Classification. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Current Year. . YTD. . YTD. . Parking Citations 4263 3 , 677 42 , 550 32 , 547 Moving Citations 225 217 2 , 717 2 , 580 ------- ------ ------- ------- 4488 3 , 894 45, 267 35, 127 ------- ------ ------- ------- ------- ------ ------- ------- 4488 3 , 894 45, 267 35, 127 BURLINGAME Officer Productivity. . . . generated on 11/16/2004 at 04 : 00 : 46 PM Reported On: All Officers Report Range: 10/01/2004 to 10/31/2004 Data Type Reported on: PARKING Valid % All Voids $ All % Officer: ID: Cnt Valid Cnt Voids Valid ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ DAVIS 190 1003 24.53 7 10.94 99.31 DAZA-QUIROZ 634 430 10.52 2 3.13 99.54 GARRETT 501 953 23.31 19 29.69 98.05 HARRISON 506 849 20.76 9 14.06 98.95 KIRKPATRICK 502 854 20.89 27 42.19 96.94 Total 4089 64 Page 1 of 1 co m ca st Comcast Cable Communications,Inc. 1205 Chrysler Drive Menlo Park,CA 94025 Tel:650.289.6799 November 22, 2004 Fax:650.326.1707 www.comcast.com Mr. Jesus Nava Finance Director/Treasurer City of Burlingame 501 Primrose Road Burlingame, CA. 94010 Dear Mr. ava: k-j_� Comcast has been the Bay Area's cable company for two years. When we became the Bay Area's cable company, we promised that we would work hard to upgrade the cable service, offer useful new products and deliver improved customer service. We believe that we have kept with our promises by offering more new channels, as well as introducing new products like High Definition Television. In addition, we are working hard to offer more new products like video-on-demand and digital video recorders so that our customers have more choices and more control over their television viewing. Comcast is committed to providing our customers with the finest variety of programming choices, excellent picture quality and improved customer service. We realize that our customers have other alternatives for entertainment and we're working hard to offer the best choice and value in the industry. We have invested in significant technical improvements that advance the reliability and quality of our multi-channel video services, added new channels, and substantially invested in the improvement of the customer service we provide. To reflect the current value of the products and services we deliver, we will be adjusting the prices for our analog and digital service levels. Prices for equipment and installation are not being adjusted at this time. These price adjustments will be effective for billing periods on or after January 1, 2005. Customers will be notified of these adjustments by legal notice and a bill insert. The specific adjustments and their respective service levels are set forth in the attached legal notice. If you have any questions or comments, please me at (650) 289-6794. Sincerely, d�� Kathi Noe Director of Government Affairs and Franchising West Bay Peninsula Area Enclosure: Price Adjustment Legal Notice Notice of Price Change Comcast Burlingame Effective for billing periods beginning on or after January 1 2005, Comcast will make the following changes in the area(s) listed above with respect to its cable television pricing. TYPE OF SERVICE CURRENT PRICE NEW PRICE Limited Basic Service $11.76 $11.83 Expanded Basic Service $26.94 $30.16 Standard Cable $38.70 $41.99 DIGITAL VALUE PACKAGES CURRENT PRICE NEW PRICE The Comcast packages below do not include Standard Cable: Digital Classic $ 9.95 NO CHANGE Digital Plus $14.95 NO CHANGE Digital Silver Package $27.95 $28.95 Digital Gold Package $39.95 $41.95 Digital Platinum Package $50.95 $53.95 The following digital packages include Standard Cable: Digital Starter Package $51.99 $55.99 Digital Bronze Package $54.99 $58.99 Digital Standard Package $61.99 $66.99 Digital Silver Package $71.99 $76.99 Digital Gold Package $81.99 $86.99 Digital Platinum Package $91.99 $96.99 Spanish Language Packages: Cable Latino $19.95 $24.99 Cable Latino Con HBO $29.95 $34.99 Completo $44.95 $46.99 Completo Con HBO $54.95 $56.99 OPTIONAL PER-CHANNEL SERVICES CURRENT PRICE NEW PRICE HBO $18.99 $16.99 Selecto Total $14.95 $16.99 Important Information:For customers receiving service through commercial accounts or bulk arrangements,some of the product,pricing,and other information contained herein may not apply.Please refer to the terms and conditions of the separate agreement covering these arrangements.Where such terms are inconsistent with the information in this notice,the terms and conditions of the separate agreement will apply.Prices for products or services not listed above are not changing on January 1,2005. All prices are exclusive of franchise fees,regulatory fees and taxes.Pricing,programming,channel location and packaging may change.After notice of a retiering of our services or rate increase,you may change your level of service at no additional charge for a period of 30 days.Otherwise,changes in the services you receive,which are requested or caused by you,will be subject to upgrade and downgrade charges.If you have questions,please contact us at 1-888-824-8066. FCC#CA0925, Headend#H2534,Sys/Prin#8770-2100,Agent#0390 12/04 Newspaper Legal Notice Version 10.1 5.04