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 - 2004.02.17
City OfBurllrlgame ®VRt.INGAME CITY HALL-SOl PRIMROSE ROAD BURLINGAME,CALIFORNIA 94010 (650)558-7200 BURLINGAME CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Regular Meeting - Tuesday, February 17, 2004 Page 1 of 2 CLOSED SESSION: 6:15 p.m., Conf. Room A a. Threat of Litigation (Government Code § 54956.9(b)(1),(3)©)): Claim of Ewa Patuszynski; Claim of Michelle Galvin; Claim of Diane Johnson, et. al. b. Conference with Real Property Negotiators pursuant to Government Code §54956.8: Property: Assessor Parcel No. 028-285-030 (1512 Ralston Avenue); Agency Negotiators: Jim Nantell, George Bagdon, Larry Anderson; Negotiating parties: Walter C. Sjostrom and Ana T. Sjostrom Trust; Under negotiation: Possible purchase of property C. Personnel Matter (Government Code §54957) one matter (continued from February 3, 2004) 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG 3. ROLL CALL 4. MINUTES - Regular Meeting of February 2, 2004; Special continued Approval regular meeting of February 3, 2004 5. PRESENTATION a. Recognition of a group of citizens who assisted in Presentation apprehending a suspect b. Presentation on Measure A from Transportation Authority Presentation 6. PUBLIC HEARINGS The mayormaylimitstaeakemtotkwminutes each a. Appeal of Beautification Commission decision on protected Hearing/Action tree at 1537 Westmoor 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. 8. STAFF REPORTS AND COMMUNICATIONS a. Introduce Ordinance to add uses to the Broadway Commercial Introduce area, zoned C-1 Broadway Commercial Area B!F I \ City OfBurhngame ' CITY HALL-501 PRIMROSE ROAD BURLINGAME,CALIFORNIA%010 (65o)5-5&7200 BURLINGAME CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Regular Meeting -Tuesday, February 17, 2004 Page 1 of 2 b. Resolutions: 1) Accepting BFI solid waste rates for 2004; 2) Approve Commercial Organics Collection Program for Burlingame businesses and authorizing a 25%rate reduction incentive C. Introduce Ordinance to amend the second unit amnesty Introduce program and implement changes to the second unit zoning regulations 9. CONSENT CALENDAR Approval a. Resolution approving lease agreement with Rino Betti for the property located at 1080 Howard Avenue b. Resolution opposing SB 744 legislation that would empower the State's Executive Branch to unilaterally overturn land use decisions C. Warrants & Payroll, January, 2004 10. COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS 11. OLD BUSINESS 12. NEW BUSINESS 13. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS a. Commission Minutes: Planning, February 9, 2004; b. Department Reports: Building, January, 2004; Finance, January, 2004; 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.burlinizame.org. Agendas and minutes are available at this site. NEXT MEETING— Saturday February 28, 2004 CITY 6tJM1JNOAME a NAT®JU.26• BURLINGAME CITY COUNCIL Unapproved Minutes Regular Meeting of February 2,2004 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 7:00 p.m. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG Led by City Planner Meg Monroe. 3. ROLL CALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Baylock, Coffey, Galligan,Nagel, O'Mahony MEMBERS ABSENT: None 4. MINUTES Vice Mayor Galligan made a motion to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of January 20, 2004; seconded by Councilwoman Nagel, approved unanimously by voice vote, 5-0. Councilwoman Nagel made a motion to approve the minutes of the study session of January 24, 2004; seconded by Councilman Coffey, approved unanimously by voice vote, 5-0. 5. PRESENTATION Mayor O'Mahony presented a proclamation to the American Heart Association honoring their new initiative to "Go Red for Women" campaign in an effort to help educate the public on the relationship of women and heart disease. 6. PUBLIC COMMENTS Tom Marriscolo, 440 Lomita Avenue, Millbrae, commented on the stop sign study that was referred to at the meeting of January 20, 2004. 7. STAFF REPORTS AND COMMUNICATIONS a. ADOPT RESOLUTION #9-2004 URGING SUPPORT OF PROPOSITIONS 57 AND 58 ON THE MARCH 2,2004 BALLOT 1 Burlingame City Council February 2,2004 Unapproved Minutes CM Nantell referred to his staff report regarding State Proposition 57, "The Economic Recovery Bond Act" and State Proposition 58, "The California Balanced Budget Act" and urged Council to adopt a resolution of support for the two propositions. Vice Mayor Galligan made a motion to approve the adoption of Resolution#9-2004 urging support of Propositions 57 and 58 on the March 2, 2004 ballot; seconded by Councilman Coffey, approved unanimously by voice vote, 5-0. 8. CONSENT CALENDAR a. ADJUST ASSESSMENT BASIS FOR TRAVELODGE SAN FRANCISCO AIRPORT NORTH TO CORRECTLY REFLECT ROOM COUNT FOR THE SAN MATEO COUNTY TOURISM BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT CA Anderson requested Council approve adjustment in unit count for assessment basis for the San Francisco Airport North Travelodge, located in South San Francisco to correctly reflect 199 units. b. REQUEST PERMISSION FOR OUT-OF-STATE TRAVEL TO ATLANTA, GEORGIA FOR POLICE OFFICER FARBER COP Palmer requested permission from the Council to allow Officer Heather Farber to attend, as a coordinator, the National Law Enforcement Explorer Training Conference in Atlanta, Georgia from July 19 to July 24, 2004. C. APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION TO APPROVE LEASE AGREEMENT WITH RING BETTI FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1080 HOWARD AVENUE P&RD Schwartz requested Council approve the lease agreement between the City of Burlingame and Rino Betti, dba Sam's Sandwiches, for the property located at 1080 Howard Avenue. Councilman Coffey made a motion to approve items 8a and 8b on the consent calendar; seconded by Councilwoman Nagel, approved unanimously by voice vote. Item 8c was pulled for further consideration and will be agendized at a later date. 9. PUBLIC HEARINGS a. APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S ACTION ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT, REZONING, CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS, PARKING DIMENSION VARIANCE, PARCEL MAP FOR LOT MERGER AND RECONFIGURATION OF LOTS; CONSOLIDATION AND RECONFIGURATION OF TWO CITY-OWNED PUBLIC PARKING LOTS FOR THE SAFEWAY PROJECT LOCATED AT 1450 HOWARD AVENUE CP Monroe requested Council hold a public hearing on the Safeway project and on the Final Environmental Impact Report, consisting of the draft EIR, the Response to Comments document, and Supplement numbers 1 and 2 to the response to comments document. Mayor O'Mahony opened the public hearing. Mark Hudak, attorney representing Safeway, made a presentation regarding the proposed project. Matthew Ridgeway, representing Fehr and Peers, a 2 Burlingame City Council February 2,2004 Unapproved Minutes transportation consultant firm, made a presentation regarding the transportation issues concerning the proposed Safeway project. The following citizens spoke against the proposed Safeway project: Anna Marie Holland Daniels, 515 Howard Avenue, Kerbey Altmann, 1537 Cypress Avenue, Dan Andersen, 728 Vernon Way, Marilyn Canon, 1545 Howard Avenue, Stephen Hamilton, 105 Crescent Avenue, Francesca Tashjian, 1408 Burlingame Avenue, Tom Paine, 728 Concord Way, Teresa Lindhartsen, 1408 Burlingame Avenue, Ralph Nielsen, 1216 Burlingame Avenue, Rich Grogan, 1450 Columbus Avenue, Sue Fuller, 2710 Poppy Drive, Charles Voltz, 725 Vernon Way, Mary Hunt, 725 Vernon Way, Tom Gilman, 1540 Columbus Avenue, Joseph Seliber, 724 Farringdon Lane, Elrae Bilsey, 112 Howard Avenue, Sheila Myers, 1400 Floribunda Avenue#109, Alice Cathcart, 789 El Camino Real #32, John Root, 1407 Montero Avenue, Carolyn Root, 1407 Montero Avenue, Kent Lauder, 449 Bloomfield, Jill Lauder, 449 Bloomfield, Jennifer Pfaff, 615 Bayswater Avenue, David Kincead, 124 Lorton Avenue, Michael Nilmeyer, 128 Pepper Avenue, Cliff Woods, 234 Primrose Road, George Parker, 733 Lexington Way, Jason Tolu, 124 Railroad Place, San Mateo, Ramona Martinez, 709 Walnut Avenue, Rebecca Haseleu, 232 Stanley Road, Jonathan Sharp, 1457 Bellevue, Bernie Borok, 1475 Lincoln Avenue, Mike Spinelli, 1301 Mills Avenue, Diane Condon Wirgler, 1536 Cypress Avenue, Peggy Ryan, 772 Willborough, Angela Johnson, 1528 Ralston Avenue, Russ Cohen, 605 Lexington Way, Jeannie Gilmore, 1431 Carlos Avenue, Katie O'Brien, 2204 Poppy Drive, Bob Gilligan, 1518 Burlingame Avenue, Rena Gilligan, 1518 Burlingame Avenue, Jim Scileny, 212 Anita Road, Justin Karimzad, 1672 Eisenhower St., San Mateo, Lynette Watterson, 819 Fairfield Road. The following citizens spoke in favor of the proposed Safeway project: Travis Dawson, 777 Morrell Avenue, Arnold Ruff, 112 Anita Road, Pamela Appleby, 500 Almer Road, Ron Karp, 1209 Burlingame Avenue, John Reed, 9 Winchester Place. Mark Hudak, attorney representing Safeway, responded to some issues that were raised during the public hearing. There were no further comments from the floor and the hearing was closed. At this time, Mayor O'Mahony continued the item until the following evening at 7:30 p.m. in the City Hall Council Chambers. 9. COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS Item continued to next meeting. 10. OLD BUSINESS DPW Bagdon made a brief presentation on the chloramine outreach program. 11. NEW BUSINESS There was no new business. 12. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS a. Commission Minutes: Library, December 16, 2003; Traffic, Safety & Parking, January 8, 2004; Planning, January 26, 2004 3 Burlingame City Council February 2,2004 Unapproved Minutes b. Letter from Comcast concerning programming adjustment 13. ADJOURNMENT Mayor O'Mahony adjourned the meeting at 11:18 p.m. in memory of Marjorie Bolton, Charlotte E. Kalbhenn and Tim Regan. Respectfully submitted, Ann T. Musso City Clerk 4 Burlingame City Council February 2,2004 Unapproved Minutes CITY BUOiM e WEogq v° 114Tm JlM[`. BURLINGAME CITY COUNCIL Unapproved Minutes Regular Meeting of February 3,2004 1. CALL TO ORDER A duly noticed regular meeting of the Burlingame City Council which was continued from February 2, 2004, was held on the above date in the City Hall Council Chambers. Mayor Rosalie O'Mahony called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG Led by Reverend Peter Garrison. 3. ROLL CALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Baylock, Coffey, Galligan,Nagel, O'Mahony MEMBERS ABSENT: None 4. PUBLIC HEARINGS a. APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S ACTION ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT, REZONING, CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS, PARKING DIMENSION VARIANCE, PARCEL MAP FOR LOT MERGER AND RECONFIGURATION OF LOTS; CONSOLIDATION AND RECONFIGURATION OF TWO CITY-OWNED PUBLIC PARKING LOTS FOR THE SAFEWAY PROJECT LOCATED AT 1450 HOWARD AVENUE Mayor O'Mahony continued the proceedings from the February 2, 2004 regular meeting of the Burlingame City Council. Vice Mayor Galligan made a motion to accept the Environmental Impact Report prepared for the project, finding that it has been properly noticed as required by CEQA, is a proper analysis by the City, and provides enough information for the Council to make a decision on the project. The motion was seconded by Councilman Coffey. After discussion, Mayor O'Mahony called for a roll call vote on the motion to approve the Environmental Impact Report. The motion passed on a 3-2 vote (Baylock and Nagel dissenting). Councilwoman Nagel made a motion to uphold the Planning Commission's decision to deny the project, based on the determination that the project is too big, degrades the sense of community; does not fit in with the Burlingame Avenue ambiance, village feel and pedestrian environment of our downtown; does not provide for its parking demand; the relocation of the City public parking lots does not benefit the City; it will 1 Burlingame City Council February 3,2004 Unapproved Minutes r remove a heritage oak tree; opens up the unsightly back sides of stores on Burlingame Avenue; does not adequately address the safety concerns for pedestrians in front of the store where the trucks will be traveling; it will create congestion on Primrose and Fox Plaza Lane; the proposed sidewalk on Fox Plaza Lane is not wide enough to provide for pedestrians and a proper connection to the Burlingame Avenue shopping area; the location of the main driveway will shorten the distance between the main driveway to the site on Howard Avenue and the intersection at El Camino Real which could cause backup and safety issues; and will create a large wall along Primrose Road which will divide the downtown. The motion was seconded by Councilwoman Baylock. After discussion, Mayor O'Mahony called for a roll call vote on the motion to uphold the Planning Commission's decision and deny the project. The motion passed on a 3-2 vote (Coffey and Galligan dissenting). 5. COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS This item is continued to the next meeting. 6. ADJOURNMENT Mayor O'Mahony adjourned the meeting at 10:40 p.m. in memory of Helen Raiskin. Respectfully submitted, Doris J. Mortensen Deputy City Clerk 2 Burlingame City Council February 3,2004 Unapproved Minutes Measure A Investing in our Transportation Future or., Transportation Authority 2 x Id •.' .MW Economic and population growth means more congestion Trans ports do n Authority Investing in our •• • 1 HOW DO WE MAINTAIN CONTROL OF OUR COUNTY'S TRANSPORTATION FUTURE? „o Transportation Authority 77"ii"�ve I sti • i I n our •• • San Mateo County Transportation Authority Investments Caltrain/Rail-23.3% Caltrain Improvements i Dumbarton Rail �. El Grade Separations-22.8% T State Highways-29.2% El Local Streets&Roads-20% Paratransit-3.1% ® Shuttles, Bicycles&Congestion Relief-1.6% Transportation Authority 2 Leveraging Measure A funds (through the fife of the Measure) NOW Measure A Share $1 billion Share from other sources available only after initial Measure A contribution is secured $1.2 billion Total = $2.2 billion Transportation Authority •in our Transportation Putting Measure A money to work - countywide 0 lift N Transportation Authority • in our Transportation 3 The Measure AOutreachaReauthorizationProcess A. Building a Countywide Consensus Tra �R gg# L� Measure A—Investing in our Transportation Future The Measure A Outreach & Reauthorization Process May 2003 Nov. 2003-Jan. 2004 Jan-Feb 2004 Feb.2004 TransPortation Focus Groups Community Workshops City Council Presentations Open Houses Feb.2004 7A releases draft expenditure plan and holds Board Workshop Project Requests ($millions) Step 1 —Project Step 2—C/CAG TAC Submissions Evaluation of Need 33 33 674 608 1,263 �" ' +_.1,101 1,01 - ■Highways ■Highways Transit G3 Transit ■Grade Separations ■Grade Separations ❑Bike/Ped �i.Bike/Ped $3.4 B $2.6 B Transportation Authority Allocation of New Measure Funds $1.2 Billion Total Alternative Congestion Relief Programs Bike/Ped 3% 1%1%Administrative Grade Separations 15% 430%Highways il Local Share 20% 1 Transit 30% Transportation Authority Measure A-Investing in our Transportation 5 Comparison of Measure A Program Shares Program Category Current TA Measure Proposes Transit 26% 30% Highways 29% 30% Local Share 20% 20% Grade Separations 23% 15% Pedestrian/Bike 0 3% Alternative 0.7% 1% Congestion Relief Programs Administration Up to 1% Up to 1% Total 100% 100% Transportation Authority • Transit 30%, $360 million total Dumbarton (Station Facilities) BART $24 M Extension Feasibility\ I Study$24 M Ferries 2% (Terminal Facilities)-- 2a/• Caltrain $24 M 2a Up to 50%for -Service Improvements Redi-Wheels (Capital and Operations) (Operations)� 4% 1&"/,p $192 M $48 M 4% Local Bus/Shuttle (Operations) $48 M Transportation Authority Measure A-investing in our Transportation 6 San Mateo County 1.280/Route 1 (southbound)Interchange r / 1.280 Auxiliary Lane ----- — �1 (380-Hickey) �o rs w.� Proposed Highway Program Percent of 20-Year New Measure Revenue Congested 22% $260 M Comdors Emerging 8% 5100 M Program Congestion 25 5 M , Hot Spots San Mateo County sr r�,c.a 101 Br- -y x Burlin ame Intercha e .... -414us 101/Peninsuia Avenue southbound ramps w —i U$101(Route 92-Hillsdale Blvd.) Operational Improvement Proposed Highway Program Percent of 20-Year New Measure Revenue 1� Congested 22% 5260 M Corridors Emerging 8% 5100 M Program Congestion s � Hot Spots 7 San Mateo County O 0 x iP Route 92(San Mateo Bridge-1.290) " Improvements Proposed Highway Program Percent of 20-Year New Measure Revenue Congested 22% $260 M Condors Emerging 8% 5100 M Program Congestion Hot Spots San Mateo County w o, x ... (��USIOIDumbarton Bridss Improvements--- US tol/Woodside Rd. Interchange Proposed Highway Program Percent of 20-Year New Measure Revenue Congested 22% $260 M Condors Emerging 8% 5100 M Program Congestion Hot Spots i 8 San Mateo County r Drive Route i Maur ► x overcrossing improvemer" o «r. ...m i. Route 1 San Pedro Creek Bridge replacement R teuo 42 Safety Improvements (pilarcttos Creek-HMB) proposed Highway Program Percent of 20-Year 1 New Measure Revenue Congested 22% $260 M Comdors 8% 5100 M Congestion Emerging program Hot Spots ID Mies - San Mateo County i-2801Route>--r� Auxlliary�a �;` (southbound)intercha�e'�, j (380•Hic_keYl____-- , , Us io1 SroadwaY Route i W-W Drive nte~► ` �JJ x Burd ame Intereh?�eeJ rossing mproveme : A-LIS i0ilPeninsula Avenue f Overc southbound ramps 7 Route 1 San Pedro Creek (:-,-,Dg i01(Route 92-Hilisdab Blvd))� WWI rePlacerrwM ', n saw operational US 10i-DutrdraRa+Bridge ;t Route 92 l >age ACe"hWrovement5 US 101IWood$We Rd,'. Route 92 Safety krgrove""" i Interchange 1 (Pliercltos Creek•HMB) Proposed Highway Program percent of 2Mear New Measure Revenue Coed 22% 5260 M t 4 I Comdors a% $too M , Congestion Emerging `, Hot Spots � Program 0 J Mbe Emerging Project List Route 35(Highway 280 to Sneath Lane)widening $40,000,000 Highway 101/Produce Avenue Interchange 77,300,000 Route 92(Route 35 to Highway 280)truck climbing lane 58,000,000 Willow Road adaptive signal control system 2,080,000 Highway 101(Sierra Point Parkway to SF/SM County Line)auxiliary lanes 3,400,000 Brisbane-Geneva Avenue extension 62,510,000 Daly City-John Daly Blvd./Highway 280 overcrossing(north side)widening 9,000,000 Daly City-Highway2B0/Route 1(northbound)Interchange 36,000,000 State Route 84(Woodside Road to Marsh Road)extension 57,000,000 Route 1 in HMB area(Miramontes Road to Capistrano Rd.)improvements 34,800,000 Highway 101 Candlestick Point Interchange 47,700,000 Highway 101(Sierra Point Parkway to San Bruno Avenue)auxiliary lanes 26,300,000 San Bruno-Highway280/Highway 380 local access 13,500,000 Brisbane-Sierra Point Pkwy Interchange replacement and Lagoon Way extension 30,040,000 Foster City-Triton Drive widening 710,000 Menlo Park-Sand Hill Road signal coordination 2,080,000 Redwood City-Woodside Road Widening(Highway 101 to EI Camino Real) 11,000,000 Total Estimated Cost $511,420,000 Transportation Authority Investing in our •a • Grade Separations tts a s s r.. -, an ..► s i rr �� Transportation Authority Investing in our •• • 10 7 Proposed Grade Separations City Street City Street South San Francisco Linden Avenue San Mateo 3r°Avenue San Bruno Scott Street 0 Avenue San Bruno Avenue 51'Avenue San Mateo Avenue 9' Avenue Angus Avenue 25' Avenue Millbrae Center Street Redwood City Whipple Avenue Burlingame Broadway Brewster Avenue Oak Grove Avenue Broadway North Lane Maple Street South Lane Main Street Howard Avenue Chestnut Street Bayswater Avenue Atherton Fair Oaks Lane Peninsula Avenue Watkins Avenue San Mateo Villa Terrace Menlo Park Encinal Avenue Bellevue Avenue Glenwood Avenue 111 Avenue Oak Grove Avenue 2° Avenue Ravenswood Transportation Authority Mwm e ra e Proposed Pedestrian/Bike Projects • Highway 1 pedestrian/bike trail from Montara to Half Moon Bay • Route 35/1-280 pedestrian/bike overcrossing • Highway 101/Millbrae Avenue pedestrian/bike overcrossing • Highway 101/Hillcrest Blvd.pedestrian/bike overcrossing to Bay Trail • Highway 101 near Hillsdale pedestrian/bike overcrossing • Highway 101/Ralston Avenue pedestrian/bike overcrossing • Willow Road/Bayfront Expressway pedestrian/bike tunnel upgrade • Highway 101/Willow Road pedestrian/bike overcrossing • Portola Road pedestrian/bike path paving Transportation Authority o • +w 11a 11 We - • your input. • TAplancomments@smcta.com through Feb.• Six open houses through Feb. 26. • 28, 10 . ' i •. • Workshop . • public hearing. Transportation Measure A-Investing in our Transportation Future The Measure A Outreach & Reauthorization Process May 2003 Nov. 2003-Jan. 2004 Jan-Feb 2004 Feb.2004 Focus Groups Community Workshops City Council Presentations Open Houses Feb.2004 �. March 2004 May 2004 TA releases draft TA approves draft y 't Expenditure PlanMetropolitan Transportation Expenditure Plan,which Commission approves and holds Board reflects public opinion Workshop draft plan June 2004 July 2004 Nov.2,2004 Draft Expenditure Plan must be Couy Board of Supervisors approved by the majority of cities the final draft then representing the majority of the Japp'r'oves submits to Registrar of Voters Election county's population for placement on ballot Our Future? rte° 1ji7 Transportation Authority Investing in our Transportation _ Our Future? i; - �' �`' 't M, A Well-funded Transportation Future Transportation Authority 13 ���CITY o� STAFF REPORT B W11QeAME AGENDA ITEM# 6a A ,0 MTG. 2/17/04 O�oN�TEO'J NE�,9 DATE To: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL suBMITTED B DATE: February 9. 2004 �J APPR D ` / F'ROm: Parks & Recreation Director (558-7307) BY /U SUBJECT: APPEAL OF BEAUTIFICATION COMMISSI DECISION ON PROTECTED TREE AT 1537 WESTMOOR ROAD RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that Council uphold the denial by the Commission and encourage the appellants to return to the Commission with documented third party expert opinion showing a direct relationship between the chimney problems/interior damage (cracks) and the tree. BACKGROUND: On September 19 Frouk Kouchek-Ali, the property owner at 1537 Westmoor Road, and his neighbor Peter Tokarski of 1533 Westmoor Road submitted an application for a permit to remove a protected tree (exceeds 48" in circumference at 54" above ground level). The tree is a Coast Live Oak. Reasons cited included interference with the draw of the fireplace chimney, possible damage to the house foundation, lifting of an incidental path in the yard, and acorn nuisance. There were no submittals from third party experts, e.g. Certified Arborist, experts in chimney functions. The City Arborist inspected the tree. He found the tree to be in good health with many years of life expectancy. He did see interior cracks, but there was no demonstration that they were related to the tree, e.g. exposure of roots at foundation. He did observe a lifted yard path. The City Arborist would have given consideration to the draw of the chimney, but nothing other than personal opinion was presented showing a relationship between the functioning of the chimney and the presence of the tree. Based on the inspection and lack of supporting documents, the City Arborist denied the permit application. He believed that the tree could be managed by routine pruning. The denial was appealed to the Beautification Commission by Mr. Kouchek-Ali and Mr. Tokarski. Both repeated their belief that the tree was in an inappropriate location, that it might be affecting the draw of the chimney, and that interior cracks in the house may be related to its presence. They also pointed to the damage to the yard path and the nuisance/damage caused by dropping acorns. They both believed that their ability to enjoy their yard was diminished by the tree. Neither expressed an interest in routinely maintaining the tree. Both expressed a willingness to plant any replacement trees that the Commission might require. Invoices for chimney maintenance by a chimney sweep were presented, but no third party expert opinions on the condition of the chimney were presented. The Commission denied the appeal, believing that the tree was a valuable asset and could be managed with adequate maintenance. The letter of denial to the appellants also invited a rehearing based upon the submittal of compelling expert opinion. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Permit Application 2. Correspondence related to application 3. Beautification Commission minutes from November 6, 2003 BUDGET IMPACT: None CITY o CITY OF BURLINGAME o�Park�� BY R j1 w GAME PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT 850 Burlingame Avenue,Burlingame,California 94010-2899 ;_ Telephone (650)558-7300 a Parks/Trees (650)558-7330 rw Fax (650)696-7216 E-mail: recreation @ burlingame.org - February 9, 2004 Farrok Kouchek-Ali Peter Tokarski 1537 Westmoor Road 1533 Westmoor Road Burlingame, CA 94010 Burlingame, CA 94010 RE: APPEAL OF THE DENIAL TO REMOVE THE PROTECTED OAK TREE @ 1537 WESTMOOR ROAD -BURLINGAME We are in receipt of your check in the amount of$250 for the Master Fee Schedule. Your appeal for the removal of a private Oak tree at 1537 Westmoor Road will be placed on the Tuesday, February 17`x' City Council meeting. The Council meets at 7:00 p.m. at City Hall, 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, should you wish to attend and address the Council regarding your appeal. Sincerely, Randy Schwartz Parks &Recreation Director RS/kh CC: Susan Gambrioli Carol & Ray Teani TRS 1541 Westmoor Road 1540 Westmoor Road Burlingame, CA 94010 Burlingame, CA 94010 Angela Fregosi TR Janine Poimiroo 1536 Westmoor Road 1532 Westmoor Road Burlingame, CA 94010 Burlingame, CA 94010 ti CITY o CITY OFUR-LPT A1` E BU12L1NGAME PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT 850 Burlingame Avenue,Burlingame, California 94010-2899 s Telephone (650)558-7300 D Parks/Trees (650) 558-7330 N.-ATHD 9 Fax 650)696-7216 a E-mail: recreation@burlingame.org January 9, 2004 Farrok Kouchek-Ali Peter Tokarski 1537 Westmoor Road 1533 Westmoor Road Burlingame, CA 94010 Burlingame, CA 94010 RE: APPEAL OF THE DENIAL TO REMOVE THE PROTECTED OAK TREE @ 1537 WESTMOOR ROAD -BURLINGAME Your appeal for the removal of the private Oak tree at 1537 Westmoor Road has been scheduled for hearing at the Tuesday,February 17`h City Council's meeting. A$250 fee to appeal commission decisions to Council(per the Master Fee Schedule), is now required. To confirm the date of your hearing, a check in the amount of $250 ( made payable to the City of Burlingame), must be delivered to the City Clerk no later than Monday, February 9a'. The Council meets at 7:00 p.m. at City Hall, 501 Primrose Road,Burlingame, should you wish to attend and address the Council regarding your appeal. Sincerely, Randy Schwartz W Parks &Recreation Director RS/kh CC: Susan Gambrioli Carol & Ray Teani TRS 1541 Westmoor Road 1540 Westmoor Road Burlingame, CA 94010 Burlingame, CA 94010 Angela Fregosi TR Janine Poimiroo 1536 Westmoor Road 1532 Westmoor Road Burlingame, CA 94010 Burlingame, CA 94010 ' FROM ?�UALINGAME POLICE DEPT. (MON) 1. 5' 04 13:46/ST. 13:46/NO. 4862744406 P 1 RECEIVED 1-OS-04 JAN 5 MC, CITY CLERK'S OFFICE Larry Anderson CITY OF BURLINGAME City Attorney City of Burlingame FAX 556-9281 Dear Mr. Anderson, I have just been advised this morning that my cm was on the City Council Agenda for tonight. I was not notified of this, and have not prepared to make a presentation. When the Beautification Committee made their ruling, I was told I would be notified when I was placed on the agenda. Please re-schedule this item for the February City Council Meeting. r. J Pete T&arski 1533 Westmoor Rd. Burlingame, CA. 94010 697-4184 11-14-2003 Burlingame City Council 501 Primrose AV.. Burlingame, CA 94010 Dear Council, I wish to appeal this decision of the city Beautification Committee. The committee did not take into consideration the health and well being of our families, or the damage to our properties. The committee also refused to take into account our testimony of previous problems. Sincerely, Farrok Kouchek-Ali , 1537 Westmoor Rd. Burlingame, CA 94010 / Peter Tokarski 1533 Westmoor Rd. Burlingame, CA. 94010 7H1S tS f N fz F{�tL,p 2�u(J�At A. i Ze OV �C12TX-6Z c r C)Q. 2 vi H i Q4 wr�S I ,I '--iJ Z/ TFft 3c-1 UT I r t (2z*M rr�– CITY OF BURL P-AiGz"t"ME SL RLPARIK-S & R.ECR-EATION DEPAPITMEN I 850 Burlingame Avenue, Burlin-aine, Califoinia 94010-28099 M�� - C N IN, Telephone (650)558-7300 - Parks/Trees (650) 5580-73.3 30 R�opFax (650) 6196-71-16 - E-mail: recreation@burlinoame.org November 7, 2003 ) Farrok Kouchek-Ah Peter Tokarski 1537 Westi—noor Road 1533 Westmoor Road Burlingame, CA 94010 Burlingame, CA 94010 OA,K RE: APPEAL OF THE DENTAL TO REMOVE A REDW8,83D TREE @ 1537 7 WEST1\1OOR RD. - BURLINGAME At its meeting of November 6, 2003,), the Beautification Commission voted 5 - I (absent) - I (vacancy) to deny your appeal of the denial to remove one Oak tree at the above address. The decision was based on the Commi*sslon's belief that crown reduction pruning and thinning of the tree would address the key problems associated with the tree. This decision may be appealed to the City Council in writing vvitliin 10 days of receipt of this letter (November 24th) or you may make re-application with a report from an independent certified arborist specifically addressing the issues cited. If you have any questions regarding this matter, you may call the.Parks Division at (65 0) 558-7330. Sincerely, Tim Richmond Parks Superintendent TR/kh CC: Susan Gambrioli Carol & Ray Teani TRS 1541 Westmoor Road 1540 Westmoor Road Burlingame, CA 94010 Burlingame, CA 94010 ZD Angela Fregosi TR Janine Poimiroo 1536 Westmoor Road 1532 Westmoor Road , BurlingameCA 94010 g Burlinaame, CA 94010 NEW BUSINESS Appeal of Denial of Request for Removal of a Private Oak Tree (a, 1537 Westmoor Road - Superintendent Richmond noted that the appeal is based on Section 1 of the Urban Reforestation and Tree Protection Ordinance; that is, the tree's proximity to the house and the economic consequences of the property owner. He added that no additional documentation had been presented by the property owner to substantiate the claim that the chimney draft is affected by the Oak tree. Arborist Porter reported that the permit was denied because the Oak tree is a healthy, well-balanced specimen, and the applicant's reasons sited did not fall within the criteria justifying removal of the tree. The applicant sited possible root damage to the foundation, but no documentation verifying the claim had been submitted to the City by a qualified arborist. Arborist Porter concluded that the smoke backing up in the chimney could be mitigated by thinning out the tree and by"windowing"the tree to allow wind to pass through. Commissioner Locke asked Arborist Porter about the life span of this variety of Oak tree? Arborist Porter responded that the life span of a Coast Live Oak is about 50 years. Commissioner Ellis asked how much larger the tree may grow? Arborist Porter stated that the trunk will increase by 34", but without maintenance the canopy could grow much larger. Commissioner Hesselgren asked if thinning the tree would help the draft of the chimney? Arborist Porter responded that it could, however, he added he also has a chimney that has a bad draft because it was incorrectly built in the 50's; that it is hard to tell if the tree is the actual cause. Commissioner Locke asked how much of the canopy could be removed without harming the tree? Arborist Porter responded that up to one third of the canopy can be removed without causing damage to the tree. Commissioner Ellis asked how likely was it that large limbs could fall from the tree? Arborist Porter responded that during his inspection he did not observe any limbs that appeared hazardous. Commissioner Ellis asked if "worms" reported by the appellant could be effectively eradicated by spraying? Arborist Porter responded that spraying for the"worms"is effective if conducted annually, and probably would cost about $150. Commissioner Lauder asked how much root pruning could be done to prevent the appellants claim that the trees roots are lifting the foundation? Arborist Porter responded that up to one third of the tree's roots could be pruned by a qualified arborist. Commissioner Ellis noted that the pathway is buckled but had been patched. Arborist Porter commented that some root pruning could be done near the trunks base, but root excavation would need to be done to determine if the roots had actually affected the house foundation. Commissioner Locke asked if the tree had out grown the area? Arborist Porter responded that if pruning of the canopy and root pruning were conducted on the tree it could remain for many years before it had "out grown" its space. Commissioner Hesselgren noted that smoke also backs up in her chimney but she has no trees. Superintendent Richmond stated that no expertise as to the chimney's problem had been presented by the appellants for evaluation by the commission. Commissioner Locke noted that "chimney sweeps" are not qualified to evaluate a chimney's draft, but someone who constructs chimneys would be able to determine the problem with the draft. Commissioner Locke added that the data supporting the problem with the chimney draft is inconclusive and is not in writing. Chairperson Hesselgren recognized Mr. Kouchek and Mr. Tokarski and asked for their comments. Mr. Tokarski of 1533 Westmoor Road, stated that his neighbor's tree affects both chimneys at both addresses. He added that a flue inspector unsuccessfully tried to correct the draft. Mr. Tokarski then submitted documentation verifying the flue inspection. Mr. Tokarski stated that the tree was sick and was trimmed 7 years ago; the tree is now very healthy and covers his entire yard, blocking the sun each day from his yard beginning at noon. After the tree was trimmed 7 years ago, the chimney worked a little better. He stated that he wants to enjoy his fireplace at Christmas time, that the smoke affects his asthma, that the large tree devalues his property and if he wanted to sell the house, he would need to disclose the chimney problem, and that living under the tree devalues his lifestyle. He noted that a limb fell and broke a table and that the tree drops acorns and debris preventing him and his children from using the backyard; to trim, spray, excavate roots, and make repairs to the walkways is too costly. He stated that he knows Burlingame is a Tree City, that is why he lives here, but he never thought this tree could cause so much trouble. Mr. Tokarski concluded that two people who share a tree should be able to remove the tree and he hopes the Commission will decide to uphold the appeal. Mr. Kouchek, 1537 Westmoor Road, stated that if the appeal is upheld he would plant 3-4 trees elsewhere on the property. He stated that since the trees roots have lifted his pathway, he believes it must also be affecting the foundation. He has placed bricks in the area because lawn would not grow in the area due to the roots. Commissioner Lauder asked if the applicants would be willing to trim the tree to see if that would affect the chimney draft problem. Mr. Tokarski stated the tree was trimmed 7 years ago, that it helped a little, but the tree would still be hanging over his yard and would still be too close to the chimney. Chairperson Hesselgren closed the hearing. Chairperson Hesselgren commented that she is not sure if the fireplace problem is caused by the tree, but noted that the tree had not been maintained or trimmed and no documentation had been submitted showing the tree's roots are causing cracks in the house. Commissioner Ellis clarified that the tree hangs over the deck at 1533 Westmoor, but does not hang over the entire yard. Commissioner Lauder stated that she sympathizes with the applicants,but it is up to property owners to maintain their private trees. Commissioner Locke stated that the issues regarding the tree are multifaceted primarily due to the tree's size, which also contributes to the leaf drop, bugs, fireplace draft problems and the canopy of the tree blocking the sun. She stated that the overall size of the tree is the common denominator and asked Arborist Porter if this tree would tolerate trimming to open up the canopy and reduce the size? Arborist Porter stated that this species would tolerate canopy reduction as well as pruning the offending roots. Cormnissioner Locke stated that the decision is a tough call and she sympathized with the impending cost to the appellants to trim and spray the tree. Commissioner Locke then moved that the appeal be denied because significant pruning to achieve canopy reduction and thinning will address 4 of the key problems: 1) Chimney draw, 2) Leaf and acorn drop, 3) Branch drop, and 4) Insect infestation; seconded (Lauder). Motion carried 5 - 1 (Absent/Webb)-(Vacant Position). Applicants were informed of appeal procedures available to them. CITY e; ` W OF BURLINGAMEPARKS & RECREEATION DEPARTMENT BU RLINGAME � fY 850 Burlingame Avenue,Burlingame, California 94010-2899 -" s Telephone (650) 558-7300 Q Parks/Trees (650)558-7330 J i '^✓c�RPO RAT EO � Fax (650) 696-7216 E-mail: recreation@burlingame.org - October 29, 2003 Farrok Kouchek-Ali Peter Tokarski 1537 Westmoor Road 1533 Westmoor Road Burlingame, CA 94010 Burlingame, CA 94010 RE: APPEAL OF THE DENIAL TO REMOVE ONE OAK TREE @ 1537 WESTMOOR ROAD - BURLINGAME Your letter of September 30' appealing the denial to remove an Oak tree in the back yard of the above address has been received at our office. Your appeal will be placed on the November 6th agenda of the Beautification Commission meeting. If you wish,you may attend this meeting and address your concerns to the Commission. The Commission meets at 5:30 p.m. in Conference Room"A" at City Hall, 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame. Your neighbors are being sent copies of this letter, pursuant to City Ordinance, so they may attend the Commission meeting and make any comments. If you have any questions, please contact our office at(650) 558-7330. Sincerely, Tim Richmond Parks Superintendent 'IR/kh CC: Susan Gambrioli Carol & Ray Teani TRS 1541 Westmoor Road 1540 Westmoor Road Burlingame, CA 94010 Burlingame, CA 94010 Angela Fregosi TR Janine Poimiroo 1536 Westmoor Road 1532 Westmoor Road Burlingame, CA 94010 Burlingame, CA 94010 9-30-2003 Burlingame Beautification Commission Dear Commission, I wish to appeal this decision of the city arborist. The arborist has not taken into consideration the health and well being of our families, or the damage to our properties. Sincerely, F Farrok Kouchek-Ali 1537`Vestmoor Rd. Burlingame, CA 94010 Peter Tokarski 1533 Westmoor Rd. 1 Burlingame, CA. 94010 r N Y 9111 BURL d;I 1GAME RTD, EPITT BURLINGAME _ARKS 7 850 BLit�l 1 ie Veil ie, i ur 1L cis a% l 97-1010-1-270099 W. Crr cm t iia 1Cpyy;.tG1.650) 558-7 300 3 Pal_S i iTrees l� 7—.40 16 E-li_ul.rec_eatoil`b-,u iry %?e.,3r?� iF-i_ i50i 696-71 r' IA�.~ 11 September 26,2003 Farrokh Kouchek-Ali 1537 Westmoor Road Burlingame, CA 94010 RE: REQUEST FOR REMOV4L OF ONE OAK TREE a 1537 RESTMOOR ROD - BZjRLLIVOA -,[E I reviewed-your request for the removal of one Oak tree in the back yard, along the South fence line of the property, at the above address and have made the following determination: 1) The Oak tree is a healthy, mature well-balanced specimen. 2) The reasons cited by applicant for permitted removal of the tree does not fall within the criteria used for approval. 3) Therefore, the application has been denied. This decision may be appealed to the Burlingmne Bemitificcation Commission bjr filing a writter2 appeal by October 13th, 2003. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (65 0) 558-7330. Sincerely, Stev en Porter City Arborist - (ISA WC-3073) SP/kh CC- Peter Tokarski Susan Gambrioli Carol & Ray Teani TRS 1533 Westmoor Road 1541 Westmoor Road 1540 Westmoor Road Burlingame, CA 94010 Burlingame, CA 94010 Burlingame, CA 94010 Angela Fregosi TR Janine Poilmiroo 1536 Westmoor Road 1532 Westmoor Road Burlingame, CA_ 94010 Burlingame, CA 94010 11" T TED TREE REMOVAL PEP.,.AIIT APPLICATION PARS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT 8.50 BURLNGAME AVENUE BURLLNGAA1F,_CA 94010 (650) 558-7330 The undersigned owner of the property at: ADDRESS:_ ' � (print or type) hereby applies for a permit to remove or prune more than 1/3 of the crown or roots of the following protected tree(s): SPECIES (7 . CIRCUMFERENCE LOCATION ON PROPERTY A(. ON.S i c - WORK TO BE PERFORIIVIFD REASON WORK IS NECESSARY <�E -�j`p � (please use back of form for additional comments) NOTE: A PHOTOGRAPH OWNER c 1", k'— A! . OF THE TREE(S) MUST BE SUBAHTTED ALONG WITH ADDRESS 13-37_ b�° .(�-;t `;; t 2 d A x`25.00 CHECK TO: //THE CITY OF B MZLING_4-1TE. PHONE (L4 i -------------------------------------------------------------------�----------------------------------------------------------- PERNIIT This permit allows the applicant to remove or prune the above listed tree(s)in accordance with the provisions of the Urban Reforestation and Tree Protection Ordinance (Municipal Code Chapter 11.06). By signing,this permit, the applicant acknowledges receipt of a copy of Chapter 11.06, and agrees to comply with its provisions and all conditions listed below; and that all appeals have expired or been resol ed. 01VINER CITY ARBORIST PARKS &RECREATION DIRECTOR CONDITIONS: 24 - inch box size landscape tree(s) will be required and may be planted any where on the property. If conditions are not inet within the allotted time as specified in Section 11.06.080,payment of S400 for each tree into the tree replacennen.t fiend will be required. NO replacenzent(s) required Contact the Parks Division at (650) 558-7330 when renzoval(s) conipleted. DATE PEPrHT EFFECTIVE PERMIT EXPIRES A copy of this permit niust be available at the job site at all tinies when work is behigpeyformed 4XIA03 v • �lllli�.;l}lil �I .,�h , ;f 'i•�,1. v r�. 'w .,7J, .t a �� 'rti:� 4G II�,If 4 i =.r s. X w"�,. d••y i .t... - l y�. ?a R'1\ ('�pp�9+C � dj ♦.7 •:�a.. � �.�. �# x +•r• S � r �a 3i'r � .n ?r - � � ♦ '`� a �. '�4ary. 's� � �J+ F i F2 � -��y pry... �1..,I' a!-.. J .a yJ ,,�;, <Ya �^�•9 � ' �•'.1' ,'�S Y'.� �a ��.r., ..a,., R fDAre 5 p ,� I ®'a,.`a M.:t'1 f�' t `r' r:�• , @� � — u by�� it"�aY S �" , �'.;�'1r � e�'aJ� �• r ; r�. _. <_ d+ a{4.,-'t. N� r�R��r�•'u',�.'Y �� �yF��",y`y� z`k y_ J `^ �R.�.. � ^6.••' Y�.. •,� •4�}� ,t, rllp•P � � 4"� i�• a'�'r7"�, 7k.�� •('. dL �= 4 Y ;rJ4 :t ^• ,7 9-19-03 Steve Porter Arborist City of Burlingame Parks and Rec Dept. 850 Burlingame Ave. Burlingame, Ca 94010 Dear Sir, I have spoken with my neighbor Farrokh Kouchek-Ali, and we are both in agreement that the tree that is on his property at 1537 Westmoor, which sits approx. 3 ft. north of the fence line of my property at 1533 Westmoor, should be removed. A large part of the canopy of this tree is over my property. The prevailing winds have caused this tree to growmostly toward the south. This tree is causing two problems: 1. The fire place at both addresses will not work. When I use the fire place the smoke backs up into the house so badly the alarms go off. There is smoke damage in both homes due to the problem. [x7ith a fire going, you can watch the smoke puff downward constantly. I have had two tree services to my residence, and both confirm that a tree this large causes down drafts that will not allow the chimney to properly draw. I have had my chimney cleaned and the chimney service also has confirmed that the trees down draft will not allow the chimney to work. I had a very expensive cap put on the chimney in the hope that this would solve the problem, and it did not. The fire place company that I purchased the cap from also told me the tree was the problem and the cap may, but most likely would not, solve the problem. 2. The tree appears to be lifting the north west corner of my house. Although there is no root visible, the walls inside the house are cracking above the doorway in the north west room. These cracks do not go away when re-plastered and always appear in the exact same location. These cracks are not superficial, and go deep into the wall board and are growing constantly larger. Sincerely, Pete Tokarski 1533 Westmoor Rd. Burlingame, Ca 94010 697-4184 CITY STAFF REPORT BURLINGAME AGENDA ITEM# 8a MTG. A� DATE 2.17.04 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL SUBMITTE BY DATE: FEBRUARY 4, 2004 APPROVED�& FRoM: CITY PLANNER BY SUBJECT: INTRODUCE ORDINANCE TO ADD USES TO THE B OADWAY COMMERCIAL AREA, ZONED C-1 BROADWAY COMMERCIAL AREA. CITY COUNCIL ACTION: City Council should consider first the applicant's request to allow on the first floor four uses presently prohibited in the Broadway Commercial area. These uses are: financial institutions, real estate, medical offices and general office uses. Action alternatives are: ➢ If Council should determine that any or all of these four uses should be considered as permitted or conditional uses in the Broadway Commercial Area, Council should direct staff accordingly and introduce an ordinance to amend the zoning requirements for the Broadway Commercial Area. ➢ If Council should decide that no change to the existing zoning in the Broadway Commercial Area is appropriate at this time; and the four uses should remain prohibited, Council should direct staff. No public hearing is required and the matter is closed. If Council should direct any change to the current zoning requirements for the Broadway Commercial area, Council should set a public hearing and second reading of an ordinance. Staff would recommend that this item be set for public hearing at your meeting on March 1, 2004. Introduction requires the following council actions. A. Request City Clerk to read title of the proposed ordinance. B. Waive further reading of the ordinance. C. Introduce the proposed ordinance. D. Direct the city clerk to publish a summary of the ordinance at least five days before proposed adoption. Request: Garbis and Maida Bezdjian, the owners of the property at 1199 Broadway, have requested that four land uses, currently prohibited in the Broadway Commercial Area (shown on the attached map), should be allowed on the first/ground floor either as permitted or conditional uses. The four uses are: financial institutions, real estate offices, health services and general office uses. The applicant stated no preference for whether the uses would be allowed as permitted or conditional uses. INTRODUCE ORDINANCE TO ADD USES TO THE BROADWAY COMMERCIAL AREA, ZONED Gl BROADWAY COMMERCIAL AREA. FEBRUARY 17,2004 The request was reviewed by the Planning Commission at study on December 8, 2003. The public hearing and action was taken by the Commission on January 12, 2004. The Planning Commission recommended that the City Council consider allowing only one of the uses, financial institutions and that they be allowed only as a conditional uses. In addition they felt that financial institutions should only be allowed for a trial period of 24 months. Commissioners felt that the remaining three uses requested should continue to be prohibited on the first floor. These uses to be prohibited are: real estate, health services and general offices. It should be noted that health services and general office uses currently are allowed above the first floor in the Broadway Commercial Area. The Commission proposed that these uses continue to be allowed above the first floor. In their action the Commission found that the portion of the request they could recommend, financial uses for 24 months, was consistent with the existing General Plan as it describes the character of the Broadway Commercial Area and for that reason their recommendation was not subject to CEQA review. (see below) General Plan Compliance The General Plan Land Use Element, adopted in 1969, allowed on the first floor in the Broadway Commercial Area the uses presently requested to be allowed on the first floor: financial institutions, real estate(offices), health services, and general office uses. Since 1969 the zoning has been changed in the Broadway Commercial Area to prohibit these four uses on the first floor; however, the land use description in the General Plan was not amended for the Broadway Commercial Area, as a result these uses may be allowed once again as either a permitted or conditional use without amending the General Plan Land Use Element. Environmental Review/CEQA Compliance If the present request to add financial institutions, real estate offices, health services and general office uses on the first floor is found to be consistent with the Burlingame General Plan, then it appears that the addition of the four requested uses in the Broadway Commercial Area is consistent with CEQA and no additional environmental action seems required. Planning Commission Action: At their meeting on January 12, 2004, the Planning Commission held a public hearing and voted 5-1-1 (C. Brownrigg dissenting, C. Keele absent)to recommend to the City Council that the zoning code be amended for the Broadway Commercial area to allow financial institutions as a conditional use for 24 months and that real estate, health service and general office uses remain prohibited on the first floor. In their discussion about their recommendation the commissioners noted: it is surprising that a space would go two years without a tenant and wondered if this was the result of market restrictions or market pricing, because believe if a space were truly below market price it would be occupied; did own research of residents west of Broadway and employees in the Airport Blvd. area, do not want dental offices, financial institutions on Broadway, they want more retail; Broadway impacted by genesis of larger full service businesses, community loyalty has drifted away, now need to infuse quality merchants to draw people, not want windows curtained with no view into stores; feel health services would impact negatively, don't generate much foot traffic, patients occupy parking for longer than retail user, and these uses would occupy a lot of street frontage on the first floor, questions is how would each of these uses generate pedestrian activity? Asked for more information from applicant so could understand the difference in pedestrian activity generated by each use but the applicant did not provide. Commission continued: Could do a trial but unwilling to do that without knowing how fast the impact might occur, would it result in 40% of the first floor areas being occupied by office during the trial period, which then become nonconforming thus potentially permanent; input of residents and merchants is mixed, survey was helpful, but people who live here's vision of Broadway is more of a local serving business area, INTRODUCE ORDINANCE TOADD USES TO THE BROAD WAY COMMERCIAL AREA, ZONED C-1 BROADWAY COMMERCM AREA. FEBRUARY 17,2004 Burlingame Avenue is the primary downtown; concerned about uses with"closed shutters" on the first floor, could have the same impact as10 vacancies; feel that financial institutions and real estate uses should be allowed for 18 months because they are a part of a neighborhood service area, health services and general offices should not be allowed on the first floor at all, want a commercial area which draws people in; concerned that existing tenant spaces or properties will be merged and larger, first floor office spaces (greater than 4,000 SF) created which would have a negative impact on the character of the retail commercial area; developers are successful because they know what they need to do to bring quality tenants into an area, that is the approach needed on Broadway; Broadway has an advantage as a retail area, people live nearby; in addition lots of merchants and people are concerned about this change and that it will increase rents which will squeeze out small businesses. Of the 5 vacancies in the Broadway area now, three are in the applicant's building, that means there are only 2 vacancies and that is not enough to justify a change in the uses in the commercial area; zoning should be left as it is and small business tenants should be sought out. BACKGROUND: History: In 1969 the City of Burlingame adopted its General Plan, including the Land Use Element. At the time the General Plan was adopted financial institutions, real estate offices, health services and general office uses were all allowed on the first floor on Broadway. In the General Plan, the Broadway area was described: "Broadway Center: Outlets in this center now provide convenience goods and consumer services for residents in the general vicinity. Although many of the businesses here are well established and apparently successful enterprises, better circulation, more parking, and better urban design would enhance this center. Separation of vehicular and pedestrian circulation and reduction of through-traffic on Broadway is needed. Recommendations for improving the traffic circulation pattern are presented in the Circulation Element. These include a grade separation for the railroad tracks and improvement of the Broadway-Bayshore Freeway interchange to relieve traffic congestion at that point. Consideration should be given to creating a pedestrian precinct on Broadway in the section between Laguna Avenue and Capuchino Avenue. Additional off-street parking access to such lots from the new streets indicated on the plan diagram. An urban design plan should be developed for this center to provide more detailed guidance for future changes." (Land Use Element, page L-5) And the Goals and Policies established for the Broadway Center were as follows: VI Goal: To encourage mixed commercial uses to provide a transition between districts fully commercial or residential and to provide housing opportunities for those dependent on transit and desiring a pedestrian-oriented living environment. Policy L(G): The City should retain three general categories of commercial uses: Shopping and Service, service and Special Sales, and Office Use; as well as Waterfront Commercial along the waterfront area. Policy L(14): Broadway Center: outlets provide convenience goods and consumer services for residents in the general vicinity: 1)Better circulation, more parking and better urban design would enhance this center including separation of vehicular and pedestrian circulation and reduction of through-traffic on Broadway. INTRODUCE ORDINANCE TO ADD USES TO THE BROADWAY COMMERCIAL AREA, ZONED C-1 BROADWAY COMMERCIAL AREA. FEBRUARY 17,2004 2)Consider creating a pedestrian precinct on Broadway in the section between Laguna Avenue and Capuchino Avenue. 3)Provide off street parking to the rear of present business outlets fronting on Broadway with access to such lots from new streets. 4) Develop an urban design plan to provide more detailed guidance for future changes. The Land Use Element adopted in 1969 was broadly implemented by the C-1 zoning district and all the uses, permitted and conditional in the C-1 district were allowed in the "Broadway Center". In 1984 the Broadway Commercial Area was created to facilitate implementation of the General Plan and the map defining the area adopted. As a part of adopting the Broadway Commercial Area the city also limited the uses in the area by prohibiting banks, building and loan associations, financial institutions and offices on the first floor (this would include medical offices). Later the prohibited uses on Broadway were expanded to include real estate and psychic services; in addition food establishments were limited in number and by type. However, it should be noted that all of these uses were originally allowed in the 1969 General Plan. The changes to the permitted uses over time occurred at the request of the local business operators and property owners with the intention of promoting retail sales of convenience goods and customer services for those living in the area and supporting a separation of vehicular and pedestrian circulation. The General Plan was not amended as uses were restricted because it was thought that the changes to the land uses were consistent with the planned goals, policies, role and function of the Broadway Center. Zoning Changes Presently the four uses requested to be allowed on the first floor in the Broadway Commercial Area are prohibited. Since California law does not permit "use variances", there is no way these uses can be approved in the Broadway Commercial Area except to amend the zoning code and establish them as either permitted or conditional uses. As it now stands the zoning for the Broadway Commercial Area builds on the C-1 zoning district regulations. This means that all uses permitted or conditional in the C-1 zone are allowed in the Broadway Commercial Area except as limited by the provisions of the Broadway Commercial Area, CS 25.36.041. The current Broadway Commercial Area zoning provisions make some currently permitted uses in the C-1 district conditional uses and prohibit some uses which are permitted or conditional uses in the C-1 district. In a figurative sense the Broadway Commercial Area regulations "overlay" the C-1 district and provide for additional land use limitations. The requested changes in land uses would take four uses in the Broadway Commercial Area from the prohibited uses and make them permitted. The commission can determine if each of these uses should be permitted as a matter of right (e.g. without public hearing or Commission review) or if each should be allowed as a conditional use only. A conditional use is one that is reviewed by the Planning Commission and upon review can be "conditioned" or limited so that the proposed use can best addresses the circumstances of the particular location, e.g. parking availability, pedestrian accessibility, common business hours, layout to be consistent with existing street frontages, etc. Presently two of the four uses requested are conditional uses in the underlying C-1 district: financial institutions and real estate. Health service uses on the first floor or above are prohibited in the C-1 district. However, health service uses are currently allowed above the first floor in Broadway Commercial Area as a conditional use. General office uses are prohibited on the first floor and above in the C-ldistrict except in the area bounded by El Camino Real-Murchison-California Drive-Dufferin where they are permitted. It would be more consistent administratively to have uses which are conditional in the C-1 district also be conditional in A INTRODUCE ORDINANCE TO ADD USES TO THE BROAD WAYCOMMERCIAL AREA, ZONED GI BROADWAY COMMERCIAL AREA. FEBRUARY 17,2004 the Broadway Commercial Area; however, there is no requirement that this be the case. The Commission may determine the designation of each of the four uses. The choices are: permitted, conditional use, prohibited. The attached memo Annotation of Requested Changes to Uses Allowed in the Broadway Commercial Area, December 30, 2003, reviews the zoning options. Survey of Merchants and Property Owners In October 2003, the City Council directed staff to do a survey of the property owners and merchants in the Broadway Commercial Area. The purpose of the survey was to obtain a reading of how the property owners and merchants felt about the requested change in uses in the Broadway Commercial Area. Staff mailed 133 questionnaires and 43% were returned. Almost two-thirds (63%) of those responding were merchants. The questionnaire addressed each of the four land uses asking if the use should be allowed to occur (yes or no). For the "yes" option there were two independent choices, "yes without a public hearing" and "yes with a public hearing". The question was asked in this manner to measure which of these uses proposed to be allowed the respondents might feel should be conditional rather than permitted uses. The results in summary were: 75% of the respondents felt that financial institutions should be allowed on the first floor ; 14% of the respondents felt that financial institutions should be a conditional use. Total supporting adding financial institutions on the first floor was 89%. For real estate uses 74% felt that this use should be allowed, 11% of those responding felt that real estate uses should be conditional. Total supporting adding real estate uses on the first floor was 85%. For health services on the first floor 67% of the respondents felt they should be allowed; 19% of the respondents felt they should be conditional uses. Total supporting adding health service uses on the first floor was 86%. Finally, for General office uses on the first floor 72% responded that they should be allowed, but 14% of those responding felt that they should be a conditional use. Total supporting adding general office uses on the first floor was 86%. The majority of those responding to the survey felt that all four uses should be allowed as permitted uses. Two-thirds to three quarters felt that the four uses should be allowed as a matter of right (no public hearing required). Of the four uses health services was the one that the most respondents wanted to be a conditional use, 29%. The tabulation of the survey results and the letter which accompanied the survey are included in the packet for your reference. Also included with the survey is a compilation of all the comments made on the survey form. These comments indicate that the property owners are most interested in the change in uses to reduce vacant store fronts. The merchant's responses are less consistent. On the one hand they want fewer land use restrictions; on the other hand they want the local serving retail business district preserved Staff Comments: The Broadway Commercial Area is a regulation placed over the base C-1 (retail sales and services) zoning district which further limits uses in the Broadway Commercial Area to achieve certain planning benefits e.g. contiguous retail development to encourage pedestrian circulation. As noted above over the years the uses permitted in the Broadway Commercial Area have changed. The four uses presently requested were at one time allowed in the area either as permitted or conditional uses. Since consistency in zoning administration and "a level playing field" for property owners and prospective tenants is important, staff would suggest that should any or all of these four uses be allowed, they follow the pattern of the C-1 zone. If they are conditional uses in the C-1 zone they be conditional uses in the Broadway Commercial Area. On this basis health services should be a conditional use on the first floor since they are allowed as a conditional use on the second floor in the Broadway Commercial Area now. Financial and real estate uses should be conditional uses on the first floor because they are conditional uses in the base C-1 zone at this time. In the case of General Office uses they are permitted in a limited area along El Camino Real zoned C-1, but otherwise are prohibited in the c INTRODUCE ORDINANCE TO ADD USES TO THE BROADWAY COMMERCIAL AREA, ZONED C-1 BROADWAY COMMERCIAL AREA. FEBRUARY 17,2004 C-1 zone, indicating the serious impact this use could have on a predominantly retail area. For that reason General Office uses if allowed also should be conditional uses. The Planning Commission felt that, in the absence of studies to show the impacts these new uses could have on the rent structure or circulation/parking activities in the Broadway Commercial Area, if any of these uses or all of them were allowed it should be on an experimental or trial basis. In zoning such a trail is achieved by a "sunset clause", e.g. the opportunity for the use expires on a given date. The Planning Commission suggested that for financial institutions, the only use of the four which they recommended, that the opportunity"sunset" in 24 months. The annotations document dated December 30, 2003, included in the Planning Commission Staff Report, January 12, 2004, discusses these issues. ATTACHMENTS: Revisions to Unapproved Planning Commission Minutes January 12, 2004, Item 8 Planning Commission Staff Report, January 12, 2004, with attachments Frankie Meyer letter January 26, 2004, to Meg Monroe, City Planner, Re: Shopping Districts in Burlingame Draft Ordinance of the City of Burlingame Amendment Section 25.36.041 to Allow Financial Institutions as Conditional Uses in the Broadway Commercial Area U:\CCStaffRepts\CCSR2004\IntroNewUsesBroadway 2.17.04.doc Revisions to City of Burlingame Unapproved Minutes January 12, 2004 Corrections proposed by Commissioner Brownrigg to Item 8 of the City of Burlingame, Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes, January 12, 2004 Proposed corrections shown in s*^�aAt and italics below 8. APPLICATION FOR A ZONING AMENDMENT TO ADD FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS, REAL ESTATE OFFICES, HEALTH SERVICES AND GENERAL OFFICE USES ON THE FIRST FLOOR AS CONDITIONAL USES IN THE BROADWAY COMMERCIAL AREA (349 RADIUS NOTICE/95 MERCHANTS NOTICED/STREET POSTED/NEWSPAPER NOTICE)PROJECT PLANNER: MARGARET MONROE Reference staff report January 12, 2004, with attachments. CP Monroe reviewed the application to add four uses on the first floor in the Broadway Commercial Area, noting that if these uses were found to be consistent with the General Plan designation for the Broadway Center, CEQA issues would be addressed. Commissioners asked: if one of these uses were allowed for a trial period, say 24 months, by condition could the commission limit the lease to 24 months. CA responded it would be a problem for enforcement, leases are not city business, if the use were conditional the city could make it "temporary" and limit the use permit to 5 years for example, as we do on the Bayfront and the conditional use permit would be subject to review and could be revoked at that time; however, in general it should be expected that if uses are allowed and spaces filled that they will remain as the currently non-conforming uses in the Broadway Area have. In 1969 when the General Plan was approved any use was allowed them in 1984 the uses were limited, why? In the early 1980's the city was looking at Burlingame Avenue to create a high pedestrian traffic retail center (subarea A), Broadway merchants and property owners asked to be treated the same; so the Broadway Commercial Area was created with the same regulations as Subarea A of the Burlingame Commercial Area. How many store fronts are vacant at this time? CP did not know exact number at this time. Can the same kind of limitation of number and type used for food establishments be created for financial institutions and real estate offices. CA responded we do not have enough information to be able to determine the correct number; with food establishments we started with the number in the area at the time we established the regulation, that would not work here since the issue is creating opportunity for more of each of these four uses. Regulating the number and mix of uses needs to be based on a plan for Broadway. There is no plan or vision for Broadway which addresses the appropriate number of each of these four uses. Commissioner asked if any limit on the maximum square footage of each of these uses is proposed. CP noted no, in general the lots are small on Broadway and that limits the size of the individual commercial areas. Commissioner asked if two of each use could be allowed and the city could develop a lottery system to decide how to fill the opportunities. CP noted that the city had some experience with a lottery system as the food establishment regulations evolved and it was unhappy. Would not like to repeat. Do these uses address issues like Pilates? CP noted the City has other regulations in effect now which address physical fitness and training in the Broadway area. There were no further questions or comments from the commission. 1 Chair Bojues opened the public hearing. David Hinkle, 1616 Sanchez; John Root, 1407 Montero; Virginia Vince, 1301 Paloma; Maida Bezdjian, applicant, 1199 Broadway; Garbis Bezdjian, applicant, 1199 Broadway; Ross Bruce, President Broadway BID; Saco Bezdjian, 1199 Broadway all spoke. As a BID advisory board member support the merchants opinion as expressed in the 80% support for the four uses in survey; position of BID board is to support members recommendation and to recommend if adopt the four uses, you should include a two year trial period; as a citizen, merchant and property owner on Broadway opposed to any change to the retail structure in the Broadway Commercial Area, like to keep the pedestrian orientation and protect retail. Afraid of unintended consequences, fear that allowing these uses will result in "shuttered windows and store fronts", doctors do not open windows for people passing by to look into; San Mateo has had a lot of experience with this, the Judd Green store for example which went dot.com with a very bad result on the retail area, in the end they did the same thing—limited these uses. Would like to see the retail neighborhood "feel" with small businesses of Broadway preserved, lots of change new families; feel that Broadway has turned the corner on the vacancies; contacted Paul Ferrari CEO of the Italian Market Place, he expressed desire to explore Broadway because he is looking for neighborhood locations e.g. location with quality, small businesses not corporate, see Broadway as an opportunity to support small local businesses which is different from Burlingame Avenue. Commissioner asked why start business on Broadway? Demographics in area have changed, lot of new young _ families can walk or bike to Broadway, rents have skyrocketed on Burlingame Avenue, Broadway rents much more reasonable. Commissioner asked do you think banks and real estate offices would be detrimental to Broadway? Had banks before, so OK, object to health services and other business offices; real estate seems more appropriate on El Camino Real where there is more space; Broadway is for small businesses, a destination for shopping, bakery, deli's, where people will continue to return. Public comment continued: applicant stated heard pros and cons, the property at 1199 Broadway has been vacant for more than two years, now 4 to 5 vacancies besides 1199; current restrictions on uses hurt her financially, few people go to the stores, have had several prospective tenants, dentists, asset to Broadway, would raise revenue for the city and would generate foot traffic, there is a lot of available parking; also get a lot of calls for restaurants and delis, 4 to 5 today, referred them to the city; took a petition to 91 merchants and property owners who signed it, available to the city, supports removal of all C-1 zoning regulations in the Broadway area; BID wrote a letter to the Planning Department requesting that the city allow dental office on first floor at 1199, there was no response; have spent a lot of time and effort to rent, nothing has happened; need to remove restrictions it would benefit the merchants and the city revenue. Commissioner asked there are a few new businesses on Broadway, why has your site been empty two years? Don't know, the interested people are dentists and delis. Lot of vacancy on Broadway, people come and go, tenants change during the time this request for uses has been processed; time to change uses allowed, have had inquiries from mortgage company, real 2 estate, insurance company health service; problem really is discrimination, there are already eye doctors and physical therapists on Broadway, have been told I cannot have a real estate office in my own building; no use in allowing health services on the second floor when the building does not have ADA accessibility; over 90 people signed the petition we took around, met with city staff, they noted that the wording was for the removal of all C-1 restrictions, city staff wanted to do it their own way, OK; asked BID to write a letter. Commission asked to see the petition; it was not provided. CA noted that staff did not tell the applicant not to submit the petition. Submitted September 19, 2003, letter requested from BID supporting allowing the four uses requested and noting that the petition was not intending to eliminate the entire C-1 zoning restrictions but was to allow the four requested uses (health services, other office uses, real estate and financial institutions). The letter noted that "The petition was merely loosely worded". Applicant noted that City planner did do "ballot" on Broadway. The record is clear, there is discrimination, his family is suffering, want these four uses to get rid of the vacancy in his building, need to lease it soon. Commissioners asked it is surprising to be two years without tenants. Now asking city to change zoning; want to determine if this is a result of market restrictions or market pricing, therefore it is fair to ask which will have an impact on other residents, based on the fact that you have vacancies what rent are you asking? Mefehants-want-the ehange, the mafket e Br-eadway now is -ie* retail. Asking $2.29 to $2.49 per square foot, way below Burlingame Avenue; have made improvements to building including a new roof and awning, think that his rate is below market. Commissioner noted that if truly below market the space would be full. Applicant noted that uses most interested are not allowed, restaurants and delis. Comments from public indicated actual average rents on Broadway. Commissioner asked over the years Broadway has gone through a genesis, are there other types of businesses which might do well there now? Don't know, would like to loosen regulations and let the free market make the decisions because we are having difficulty now. Commissioner asked based on your real estate experience what is the current range of rental rates in the Broadway area? Depends upon the size of the space and the condition of the building, but generally range from $1.50 to $2.00 per square foot; $2.29 per square foot is not below market rate; 1199 is the newest building on the street, it has some dedicated parking on-site and a good corner location, can get better rents than older, run down building. Public comment continued: For the record there are 8 first floor vacancies on Broadway, 3 have leases pending, of the 5 remaining vacancies , three are in Mr. Bezdjian's building at 1199; there are a couple of offices on the second floor also vacant. Would like all four uses to be conditional uses for a two year trial period, this would give the city control and flexibility as well as giving the ability to see if there were unintended consequences. Been a tenant at 1199 for two years, issue has been blurred, these four uses would not result in "closed shutters", they would be neighborhood businesses and would regenerate Broadway; his four employees generate business for Broadway, without service businesses retail would not survive because there is not enough foot traffic; look into allowing for 24 months, stop after that, Broadway needs something. There was no more comment from the floor. The public hearing was closed. Commission discussion: did own research of residents west of Broadway and people who work on Airport Blvd.; consensus was do not want dental offices, financial institutions on Broadway, 3 want more retail; need to hear from residents. In the past uses rolled in and out of Broadway, may have dried up because of competition from Big Boxes and Burlingame Plaza — sucked away by the larger full service businesses; community loyalty drifted away, need to infuse quality merchants to draw people, agree not want windows curtained to block view into stores. Question the value of health service, visits take an hour or more, dentist sees 8 – 10 people a day much less foot traffic than retail and uses a lot of street frontage space; what we need to do is rejuvenate quality merchants; financial institutions and real estate uses generate pedestrian activity, real question is how does the use add foot traffic. At last meeting asked for more data to understand existing conditions and understand what effects change in use might have; information like existing FAR by use; no information provided so cannot make a educated decision. Mentioned before that could do a trial, but without information unwilling because don't know if open to office might result in 40% of Broadway becoming office use; talked to merchants, lot of residents and received mixed responses; merchant survey helpful; people live here, the vision of Broadway is more local Business, Burlingame Avenue is the primary source of business revenue; need data about what is there, the percentage of different types of businesses, exact vacancies and where they are located. Concerned about comments about shutters being closed affecting the street, all closed could have the same effect as 10 vacancies; a lot of people talk about wanting a bakery on Broadway. CA noted could do now if there was no seating. Commission discussion continued: If rezone for one landowner, do we need to consider the input of others; sympathetic toward financial institutions and real estate uses, should be permitted; an 18 month trial period should be considered. General office and health service i uses should be by eenditiefial use permit ofily not be allowed at all. an !8 month trial should be ensider- a. Big impact is unlikely in 18 months since it will take anyone several months to put a business together and find a location; banks and real estate offices can be a part of a neighborhood service area. Agree an 18 –24 month trial period may be the answer; concerned that may join existing spaces to create offices and get 4,000 SF which would have a big impact; hear testimony that employees create foot traffic, want commercial area that draws people in, lived here 30 years seen Broadway change; all agree on what we would like to see, but cannot compel it to happen; if restrict real estate cannot be certain the vacant space will cause a bakery to locate there. As real estate professional would like to see rent survey, when a space remains vacant it can take years to recoup loss. Believe in free enterprise but more comfortable keeping area as is because not enough information to evaluate impact, article in Independent about Fourth Street area in Berkeley, developer successful because he knew what it took to bring quality tenants to area,that is the approach to take; Broadway has the advantage of having residents nearby, lot of people and merchants concerned about change, and resulting increase in rents which would squeeze out small businesses. There are 5 vacancies in the Broadway area now, 3 are in the applicant's building, this means that there are really 2 vacancies and this is not enough to justify a change in uses; applicant reduced his rent he could fill his space from the current use list; should leave zoning uses are is and seek out small businesses. Chair Bojues moved to recommend to the City Council that they deny the request for four additional uses in Broadway Commercial Area. The motion was seconded by C. Auran. 4 Comment on the motion: Would be willing to consider financial institutions if it would help es in keeping with the neighborhood "main street"; the current number of - vacancies is not enough to justify this kind of change; several commissioners noted they could support financial institutions as a permitted use; given definition, if allow financial institutions should be a conditional use because they are a conditional use in the C-1 district; is there a way to allow the applicant to operate a real estate business from his building without changing the code. CA responded no, would need to identify real estate use as either a permitted or conditional use. C. Osterling made a motion to amended his original motion to recommend to City Council that financial institutions be allowed as a conditional use in the Broadway Commercial Area with a 24 month sunset. C. Auran, second to the original motion, agreed to the amendment. Chair Bojues called for a roll call vote on the motion to recommend to the City Council that they deny the request change from prohibited to permitted real estate, general office and health service uses on the first floor in the Broadway Commercial Area and that they change from prohibited to a conditional use financial institutions on the first floor in the Broadway Commercial Area for a period of 24 months. Following the 24 months financial institutions would become, once again, a prohibited use in the Broadway Commercial Area. The motion passed on a roll call vote 5-1-1 (C. Brownrigg dissenting, C. Keele absent). It was noted that this action now goes forward to the City Council as a recommendation for their action. This item concluded at 10:15 p.m. 5 Item # g City of Burlingame Action Calendar Action on Request to Add Financial Institutions, Real Estate Offices, Health Vervices and General Office Uses on the First Floor as Permitted Or Conditional Uses in the Broadway Commercial Area Meeting Date: January 12, 2004 Planning Commission Action: The proposed request to add four land uses on the first floor to the Broadway Commercial Area is a change to zoning, therefore the Planning Commission's action is a recommendation to City Council. The Commission is being asked to make two decisions as a part of its recommendation to the City Council: 1. Are the requested changes in land use consistent with the General Plan; and 2. Does the Planning Commission approve the changes to the land uses requested in the Broadway Commercial Area? In the Commission's recommendation to the City Council you have the opportunity to determine if all four uses should be permitted or some should be conditional or some continue to be prohibited;the Commission may also determine if whatever change in uses is recommended should"sunset"i.e_ should be allowed for a stated period of time then revert to the current regulation(prohibition). CEQA Compliance: If the present request to add financial institutions,real estate offices,health services and general office uses on the first floor is found to be consistent with the Burlingame General Plan then it appears that the addition of the four requested uses are consistent with CEQA and no additional environmental action seems required. Request: Garbis and Maida Bezdjian, the owners of the property at 1199 Broadway, have requested that four land uses, currently prohibited in the Broadway Commercial Area (shown on the attached map), should be allowed on the first/ground floor either as permitted or conditional uses. The four uses are: financial institutions, real estate offices, health services and general office uses. History: In 1969 the City of Burlingame adopted its General Plan,including the Land Use Element. At the time the General Plan was adopted financial institutions,real estate offices,health services and general office uses were all allowed on the first floor on Broadway. In the General Plan,the Broadway area was described: "Broadway Center: Outlets in this center now provide convenience goods and consumer services for residents in the general vicinity. Although many of the businesses here are well established and apparently successful enterprises, better circulation, more parking, and better urban design would enhance this center. Separation of vehicular and pedestrian circulation and reduction of through-traffic on Broadway is needed. Action on Request to Add Financial Institutions,Real Estate Offices,Health Services and General Office Uses on the Fust Floor as Permitted or Conditional Uses in the Broadway CommercialArea January 12,2004 Recommendations for improving the traffic circulation pattern are presented in the Circulation Element. These include a grade separation for the railroad tracks and improvement of the Broadway-Bayshore Freeway interchange to relieve traffic congestion at that point. Consideration should be given to creating a pedestrian precinct on Broadway in the section between Laguna Avenue and Capuchino Avenue. Additional off-street parking access to such lots from the new streets indicated on the plan diagram. An urban design plan should be developed for this center to provide more detailed guidance for future changes." (Land Use Element, page L-5) And the Goals and Policies established for the Broadway Center were as follows: VI Goal: To encourage mixed commercial uses to provide a transition between districts fully commercial or residential and to provide housing opportunities for those dependent on transit and desiring a pedestrian-oriented living environment. Policy L(G): The City should retain three general categories of commercial uses: Shopping and Service, service and Special Sales, and Office Use; as well as Waterfront Commercial along the waterfront area. Policy L(14): Broadway Center: outlets provide convenience goods and consumer services for residents in the general vicinity: 1) Better circulation, more parking and better urban design would enhance this center including separation of vehicular and pedestrian circulation and reduction of through- traffic on Broadway. 2) Consider creating a pedestrian precinct on Broadway in the section between Laguna Avenue and Capuchino Avenue. 3) Provide off street parking to the rear of present business outlets fronting on Broadway with access to such lots from new streets. 4) Develop an urban design plan to provide more detailed guidance for future changes. The Land Use EIement adopted in 1969 was broadly implemented by the C-1 zoning district and all the uses, permitted and conditional in the C-1 district were allowed in the "Broadway Center". In 1984 the Broadway Commercial Area was created to facilitate implementation of the General Plan and the map of the area adopted. As a part of adopting the Broadway Commercial Area the city also limited the uses in the area by prohibiting banks,building and loan associations,financial institutions and offices on the first floor (this would include medical offices). Later the prohibited uses on Broadway were expanded to include real estate and psychic services;in addition food establishments were limited in number and by type. However, it should be noted that all of these uses were originally allowed in the General Plan. The changes to the permitted uses over time occurred at the request of the local business operators and property owners with the intention of promoting retail sales of convenience goods and customer services for those living in the area and supporting a separation of vehicular and pedestrian circulation. The General Plan was not amended as uses were restricted because it was thought that the changes to the land uses were 2 Action on Request to Add Financial Institutions,Real Estate Offices,Health Services and General Office Uses on the First Floor as Permitted or Conditional Uses in the Broadway Commercial Area January 12,2004 consistent with the planned goals, policies, role and function of the Broadway Center.. Zoning Changes Presently the four uses requested to be allowed on the first floor in the Broadway Commercial Area are prohibited. Since California law does not permit "use variances", there is no way these uses can be approved in the Broadway Commercial Area except to amend the zoning code and establish them as either permitted or conditional uses. As it now stands the zoning for the Broadway Commercial Area builds on the C-1 zoning district regulations. This means that all uses permitted or conditional in the C-1 zone are allowed in the Broadway Commercial Area except as limited by the provisions of the Broadway Commercial Area, CS 25.36.041. The current Broadway Commercial Area zoning provisions make some currently permitted uses in the C-1 district conditional uses and prohibit some uses which are permitted or conditional uses in the C-1. In a figurative sense the Broadway Commercial Area regulations "overlay" the C-1 district and provide for additional land use limitations. The requested changes in land uses would take four uses in the Broadway Commercial Area from the prohibited uses and make them permitted. The commission can determine if each of these uses should be permitted as a matter of right (e.g. without public hearing or Commission review) or if each should be allowed as a conditional use only. A conditional use is one that is reviewed by the Planning Commission and upon review can be "conditioned" or limited so that the proposed use can best addresses the circumstances of the particular location, e.g. parking availability,pedestrian accessibility,common business ` hours, layout to be consistent with existing street frontages etc. C- ( 61SIM C-t-- S CLIP Presently two of the four uses requested are con 'tional uses in the C-1 district: financial institutions and real estate. 11galth service uses on the first floor or ove are prohibited in the C-1 distn rt.However,health semwe uses are currently allowed above the fir in Broadway Commercial Area as a conditional use. General office uses are prohibited on the first floor and above in the C-1 district exce in the area bounded by El Camino Real-Murchison-California Drive-Dufferin where they are permitte . t would be consistent administratively to have uses which are conditional in the C-1 district al o be condi conal in the Broadway Commercial Area;however,there is no re ement that this be the cas The Commissii may determine Ithe designation of each of the four uses. a choices are: en-nit d, conditional use, rop hibited. The attached memo Annotation of Requested Changes to Uses Allowed in the Broadway Commercial Area, December 30, 2003, reviews the zoning options. Survey of Merchants and Property Owners In October 2003,the City Council directed staff to do a survey of the property owners and merchants in the Broadway Commercial Area_ The purpose of the survey was to obtain a reading of how they felt about the requested change in uses in the Broadway Commercial Area. Staff mailed 133 questionnaires and 43% were returned_ Almost two-thirds (63%) of those responding were merchants. The questionnaire addressed each of the four land uses asking if the use should be allowed to occur(yes or no)_ For the "yes" option there were two independent choices, "yes without a public hearing" and "yes with a public hearing". The question was asked in this manner to measure which of these uses the respondents might feel 3 W'QL 1r An OU jkj:,-It�R 1W YMGW lna»a c U,z-L 0&-- 't-2 t4st'—� e:pA CC6 C_Q hevaM fru tis Ok_.., Action on e%est FZ ncial Institutions,Real Estate Offices,Health Services and General Office Uses on the First Floor as Permitted or Conditional Uses in the Broadway CommercialArea January 12,2004 should be conditional rather than permitted uses. The results in summary were: 75%of the respondents felt that financial institutions should be allowed on the first floor ; 14% of the respondents felt that financial institutions should be a conditional use. Total supporting adding financial institutions on the first floor was 89%. For real estate uses 74%felt that this use should be allowed, 11% of those responding felt that real estate uses should be conditional. Total supporting adding real estate uses on the first floor was 85%_ For health services on the first floor 67%of the respondents felt they should be allowed; 19% of the respondents felt they should be conditional uses. Total supporting adding health service uses on the first floor was 86%. Finally,for General office uses on the first floor 72%responded that they should be allowed,but 14%ofthose responding felt that they should be a conditional use. Total supporting adding general office uses on the first floor was 86%. The majority of those responding to the survey felt that all four uses should be allowed as permitted uses. Two-thirds to three quarters felt that the four uses should be allowed as a matter of right(no public hearing required). Of the four uses health services was the one that the most respondents wanted to be a conditional use,29%. The tabulation of the survey results and the letter which accompanied the survey are included in the packet for your reference. Also included with the survey is a compilation of all the comments made on the survey form. These comments indicate that the property owners are most interested in the change in uses to reduce vacant store fronts. The merchant's responses are less consistent. On the one hand they want fewer land use restrictions; on the other hand they want the local serving retail business district preserved Staff Comments: At the study meeting the Planning Commission raised two issues: (1)the need for additional data from the applicant to address issues such as changes in traffic circulation and volume as well as parking demand;and (2) could this change be "tried" for a period of time. The applicant has not responded to the planning commission's request for additional studies of the impacts which might be caused by the requested change in land uses.He did submit a letter dated October I5,2003, indicating that he would support a 24 month trial period for the four uses on the first floor. If the Commission determines that the requested land use changes are consistent with the present General Plan for the Broadway Center, such studies are not necessary to comply with the California Environmental Quality Act. In fact if the action were found to be consistent with the General Plan, no CEQA document seems necessary since allowing some or all of the uses requested would be allowing uses which were permitted or conditional uses in this area at the time the General Plan was adopted e.g. no intensification of land use. If the Commission feels that the additional studies and data is necessary to make your determination on whether these uses should be allowed on the first floor on Broadway as it exists today, then the lackpf the information may affect the direction of your vote on the request to add the four uses on the first floor.lLjbVAU On the second issue of whether these four uses could be"tried"for a period of time,the answer is yes. On several occasions the city has enacted zoning regulations which"sunset" e.g. expire on a given date_ The time period for the expiration can be recommended by the Planning Commission. Since it often takes property owners time for different types of uses to become aware of new opportunities resulting from 4 Action on Request to Add Financial Institutions,Real Estate Offices,Health Services and General Office Uses on the First Floor as Permitted or Conditional Uses in the Broadway CommereialArea January 12,2004 zoning use changes, sunset clauses usually go for at least 18 months to 2 years. However,the Commission may choose whatever time frame they wish. Staff would point out that when using a sunset option, those uses which to come into the area during the period of permission will become nonconforming after the sunset of the regulation. Ifthe use is permitted at a given site one business after another of the same type can continue indefinitely at that location, but it cannot expand or intensify. The nonconformity is only lost if the nonconforming use is replaced by permitted use. If the use at a given site is a conditional use,then it may be replaced by another business of the same type which is willing to operate under the conditions established for that use on that property. A business which is a nonconforming conditional use may not ask for amendments to its conditional use permit that increase or intensify the use after the permitted status is lost. These factors should be considered when the Commission determines whether various uses should be tried as permitted or conditional. Margaret Monroe City Planner Attachments Map of the Broadway Commercial Area Annotation of Requested Changes to Uses Allowed in the Broadway Commercial Area, December 30, 2003 Application for C-1 zoning Change, Garbis and Maida Bezdjian with attachments Garbis Bezdjian letter October 15, 2003, amending application Monroe letter to Mr. and Mrs. Garbis Bezdjian, October 31, 2003, requesting additional studies With attachments Planning Commission Minutes, September 8, 2003 Monroe letter to Broadway Business Improvement District Board Members, September 12, 2003 Monroe letter to Garbis and Maida Bezdjian, August 25, 2003, explaining Commission direction with Planning Commission minutes of July 28, 2003 attached Ross Bruce letter to Planning Department, July 9, 2003 Results of Use Survey of the Broadway Merchants and Property Owners, November 2003, Planning Department Memo, December 2, 2003, with survey letter attached Mrs. Manal Arikat, Golden West Diamond Corporation, December 10, 2003, regarding parking in the Broadway Commercial Area Notice of Public Hearing, published January 2, 2004; notices mailed to all property owners and merchants were mailed December 31, 2003; notices posted in Commercial Area December 31, 2003. 5 n , � 011 J ® •► co 1�� � A� N X.X �v' ® � a r ,H p� n.," M• �' X '711- k O r II O ®�p� �v® a tt J cc uj V • 'err r1f�A "r�nn' . ' ... r r t E Z 7AV yyr" y I! ,w., t.A •, u• r ,!f Jl t / D 01.. O ie 0 0 _ s. i �rrrr rr it ar ei ' ai t! si si rr.. t or ai or �.. ,.�,J . x at u x x'.r a''j: IcoWIN � ■, ' rcc .. .._ x a ri i tr r i' or c or r Or r . �, x ►11w ` ©i r/ Q r/ eO .A 11 , O r st , rl �ior�,i♦ It or v' 0 — _ y �} .t „oD ,, — O S. or of u , vi si ri �� ' X60 S60 a � 960 r Z60 O 9 rr ® © t cap. p ti' sr s Q t it 8 p 4 F ! 'a I u n a ri (2) Q' !r1 o ar n �• (:1 ' /,r GA I I ('1 rof ,4000( j December 30, 2003 Annotation of Requested Changes to Uses Allowed in the Broadway Commercial Area Text additions are shown in "italics". Text removals are shown as soiketh ghss. These revisions make some assumptions which the Commission can adjusted as shown in the annotations. 25.36.041 Broadway commercial area. (a) Permitted uses in the Broadway Commercial Area. Except as otherwise provided in this section, uses permitted in the C-1 district are permitted uses in the Broadway Commercial Area. (b) Conditional uses in the Broadway Commercial Area. In addition to the conditional uses allowed in the C-1 district, the following uses are only allowed in the Broadway Commercial Area pursuant to a conditional use permit: (1)Food establishments; (2) Graphics arts and design retail businesses on the first floor only; (3)Personal trainer and assessment businesses on the first floor or above; and (4)Health services on the first floor or above the first floor only; (5)Financial institutions on the first floor or above; (6)Real estate on the first floor or above;and (7)All other offices on the first floor or above. Annotation: It is suggested that all four uses be added as conditional uses for the following reasons. Health services are currently a conditional use on the second floor, therefore, it is consistent to make them conditional uses on the first floor. Financial institutions are a conditional use in the C-1 zoning district which is the base district for the area. It is consistent to make these uses conditional in the Broadway Commercial area. If they were to be made permitted uses section a above would need to be amended to read "Permitted uses in the Broadway Commercial Area including financial institutions on the first floor". Real estate uses are also conditional uses in the C-1 zone, so again for consistency it make sense, if they are to be allowed, to make them conditional uses in the Broadway Commercial Area. If real estate uses were to be added as permitted uses the phrase above including financial institutions would be amended to add real estate uses. Finally all other office uses or general office uses are permitted uses in the C-I zone only in the area bounded by EI Camino Real-Murchison Drive- California Drive and Dufferin Avenue, in all other cases they are prohibited in the C-1 zone. For consistency the general office uses could be added to the permitted list along with financial institutions and real estate uses or they could be a conditional use. In the case of general office uses a conditional use seems more appropriate, since the reason such uses were prohibited in the C-1 zoning district was because of the varying impacts they have on parking and traffic. The city has discovered over the years that an attorney's office,for example, may have 2 people in 1,000 SF or as many as 5 people in the same amount of space. The impacts of the same use can be substantially different. The same rational applies to real estate offices. In the Burlingame Avenue area a number of Annotation of Requested Changes to Uses Allowed in the Broadway Commercial Area December 30,2003 years ago,staff discovered a real estate office with one person per 90 SF and others with 2 people per 1000 SF.Real Estate offices often have many agents who have desks at the office but spend much of their time in the field;however,weekly meetings bring all the agents into the office at one time for a block of time and this has a significant impact on parking. This was a serious problem in the City Hall area in the late 1980's. The impacts of health services on parking and circulation depend upon the type of service being offered and the tum over of people being seen e.g.the number of people the provider sees in an hour. Financial institutions such as banks or savings and loans have similar impacts, but also need available,high turnover parking on site or near by. Taken as a whole,and given the recent complaint about lack of parking in the Broadway area(see Mrs.Manal Arikat, Golden West Diamond Corporation,letter December 10,2003), it seems it would be advisable to evaluate each application for its localized impacts before the business becomes established. Conditions can also insure that subsequent tenants conform to the same limitations if they turn out to be effective. (be) Prohibited uses in the Broadway Commercial Area. In addition to the uses prohibited in the C-1 district,the following uses are prohibited in the Broadway Commercial Area: (1) Financial institutions; i2YR,ea"stat- (3) All on theF.t_floor-;and (4) Psychic services. Add CS 25.36.041(d) (d) The following uses shall become prohibited uses in the Broadway Commercial Area on October 1,2005:financial institutions on the first,lloor,real estate on the first floor or above,health services on the first floor,and all other office uses on the first floor. Annotation: This section,if adopted would cause the additional uses requested to be allowed in the Broadway Commercial Area to return to prohibited status 18 months after the change becomes effective. This would allow a trial period for these four uses on the first floor,during which the city could evaluate the effect of them on the functioning of the Broadway Commercial Area. The sunset clause can be over ridden by the City Council amending the code to remove it. Generally this occurs prior to the expiration date. This action can be initiated by the merchants and/or property owners in the Broadway Commercial Area. It should be noted that any of these uses which are opened in the Broadway Commercial Area as a result of changing the code would be allowed to continue as nonconforming uses should the permission for the use"sunset". Also it should be noted that an existing nonconforming use can be replaced by the same nonconforming use at the same site. The nonconformity does not go away until the use on the site is changed. Any subsequent nonconforming use would have to abide by the conditions set out in the conditional use permit issued while the use was allowed. Changes to conditions of approval for uses which become prohibited are not allowed. Drafted: 2 City of Budingame Planning Department 501 Primrose Road P(650)558-7250 F(650)696-3790 www.budinow.org om APPLICATION TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION Type of application: Design Review Conditional Use Permit Variance Special Permit Other Parcel Number: Project address:l/9q L a'�0.4��AY �.eLi.✓�.9ri APPLICANT PROPERTY OWNER Name: 114-14 s S - Name:4,AgdIs ,' 4.OAIAA A7 Address: Address:- 0ZP 141A!Z City/State/Zip: I�//Gcw� toug r/ L 9ticip City/State/Zip:/V//L L s Qo2az,C"y a9y0/o Phone(w): 6 SD _,3,gf-g -q Phone(w): Gro - --34t c/-ar?;z oR oxirr (h): lL�Q - :3V'q- VC, 9 -34W o4 7 S' ARCMTECT/DESIGNER Name: Address: City/StateJZip: Please indicate with an asterisk * -. Phone(w): the contact person for this project. ror. RECEIVED JUN - 2 2003 CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING DEPT. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: AFFADAVIT/SIGNATURE: I hereby certify under penalty of perjury that the information given herein is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. Applicant's signature--4( �iDate:. I know about the proposed application and hereby authorize the above applicant to submit this application to the Planning Commission. Property owner's signature_® ' (Lg Date: 6-2--47-13 Date submitted: 46- 2 -03 PCA"-FRM RECEIVE 4 JUN - 2 2003 CITY OF BURLINGAME SIB PLANNING DEPT_ GARBIS & MAIDA BEZDJIAN 40 BERRYESSA WAY HILLSBOROUGH, CA. 94010 June 2, 2003 HONORABLE MAYOR, MS MARY JANNEY AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS 501 PRIMROSE ROAD BURLINGAME, CA. 94010-3997 Honorable Mayer Janney and Burlingame City Council Members: I am writing to you regarding Broadway Plaza at 1199 Broadway, Burlingame. This property that is the `jewel' of Broadway has been vacant for almost two (2) years. The Planning Department has objected to every prospective tenant that has called us. They maintain that there are restraints on certain businesses and that only retail business is _ allowed. These restrictions are hurting us financially as well as emotionally. Callers wonder why the space has been vacant for so long; when we tell them that there are restrictions imposed by the planning department, they shy away from Broadway and several have gone to other towns and have leased spaces without going through any hassle. Case and point; the planning department objected to a qualified dentist with many years experience Who wanted to lease a space from us. We decided to conduct our own real estate business; we too were turned down. We thought we owned the building; I guess we don't. We have no right or the freedom to use our own building the way we see fit. This is not right at all; this is a violation of our civil rights, a violation of anti-trust laws and outright discrimination. Every time we embark on a plan for our property, we face new resistance and hurdles. There are 24 restaurants on Broadway at the present time and now the planning department is preparing to increase the number to 29. Yet there are only three (3) real estate offices (by the way there used to be a fourth one.) This is unfair and irrational; when there are 24 restaurants, five (5) gas stations and a cluster of beauty and nail salons, but only three (3) real estate offices. There is absolutely no justification or rationale to the objections. What really bothers us is the special statute, which states there will be no real estate office, why not restaurants, beauty salons, etc. When I was discussing this matter with the Broadway Merchant's Association President, he pointed out an interesting fact; there used to be four(4)real estate offices on Broadway that I should be allowed to replace the one that is no longer here and I should be able to secure my business license. I urge you to drive by on Broadway and check our building; it is one of the most appealing buildings on the street with striking architecture and exceptionally well maintained. Very few properties on Broadway have their own parking lots, ours does. It is a shame for such a building to be vacant for so long(2 years)because of the limitations imposed presently. We are asking you all to reconsider some of the C-1 zoning laws and change Section 25.36. 041. A. 94 Use prohibited of health services on the first floor. This should be changed since most of the buildings on Broadway don't have elevators. How would the handicap or the elderly reach the second floor? B. #1 Use prohibited of financial institutions. This also should be changed; financial institutions generate interest on Broadway and benefit the city, its residents and merchants. C. #2 Use prohibited of real estate office. We should have more than three(3)real estate offices on Broadway. It compels people to frequent the street thus,creating more revenue for the city. If a person is unhappy with one real estate firm,he or she should have the option of finding another one on the same street rather than going to Millbrae or San Mateo. D. #3 All other offices prohibited from being on the first floor. Offices should be given the choice to either be on the first or second floor. We appeal to you to reevaluate the C-1 Zoning regulations based on the reasons we stated above. Laws are not etched in stone;they can be changed. Even the US Constitution has undergone changes in the form of amendments. We would like to ask you to put the wheels into motion and allow us to establish our real estate office and lease the vacant spaces to benefit the city and alleviate our financial burden. Sincerely, Garbis S. Bezdjian &Nfaida M. ezdjian Cc: Mr. Larry Anderson, City Attorney, Ms Margaret Monroe, Planning Department .w• � ` 4 t • •: ! �• •e'v�M••=/``C"•!w�u1s��w ~;v. �. ,��e�� •as,,.�• �+r•! ir.w. :�+.r F$i .'I• v" � ,! a. �,�',.•"• '•• *•, ;:, �p-.•.. • b,1• •+.�.'� +c••i���. •Iw�=•"y�.1 • '�1'v�%a � '�+�♦•>�•�,• RA y T a a♦ .. • v�9. Ne •-� � .'> ♦, 4"iv'..''�•'��•.>. •'� �..�«� p j4►r►•I� � T •j Mq �+ p � �•' . , ,w�iy •� �•. ••�►�.� wa.a�•�Ali ww n.���. ..v L +: +p.�d . �� �v.•• t• ", 'r:,.T .•'w t : . - d1 .,�,+ •r'- "•71• +*1�•�;�:•�.`.�'•p e.�'++•i�`••• t 4 p n �> 'i �A!`' 4' •.}S In M• �rR w Y: •.RwI � 6 .! w�, A�•1..,.� , t t�" 4 r ��Z.• A •,*�� ar 0 aF `fix. .tly', r1y •�� `►� p� f •+," R tai` •4yp fiwi ' .••.ice- �.a '?s.�r. ,!�'� •,,.e � � n rte'Az °Ca"•4 I ! +•CITi �• e or 40 F b. ••��• L bl � M h � 1'. d �7r�a' �• :. r ti•r ars�„� N. "�� a�A• tt T;?�• .. �_ it f t •• '�•s..,v",ys> J11 :� ,� a• � • t�jnC%t`bL '' •.e 1, • '• w a .^ Kfre."G ratl++ H rt' ..r y'� ••,"yr p •f 0,;.1 .�-•••,.®' -! i✓''.JM'n,. 'e'"-v 'XII 4 r..'�•�.,,� .F.• '.,1 S Eye.\Fy M , 11 • S ;aryti1�:1 M1,b , w � _.°. -apS"l "4 9."t7h' tea...•. 3 <♦ 4keA' ✓!M fir..',� W^ "G,�'fi •$Y AY. M �''� Y y,'yY�"j.P� y9F' S,, v 7'+',�i.,,C �a4`��ue,• ,�r�^ •� e L p�'YY 11-410'ff tri ^ ""�". . ._ ^ `.., " '.;• "" .' �..y r. i•, ^„ ,..i � .. 371 M' - •�� JUN - 2 2003 CITY OF BURLINGAME Pl NTNG DEPT. 1� •��r lt, N 'r� r' , r p. i t• rt ` v• � �• 'r�. 3�- s 3 �• S ••t . yd3Q 9NIN40 A110 3WV`JN11a(18 d0 Booz �- Nnr I, i I G 1 avo GAMS d,WArCDA (BEz IIAN 40 (BER7ESSA WA7 H.TLLM0X0VG7f, (A. 94010 October 15, 2003 RECEIVED OCT 1 6 2003 BURLINGAME CITY HALL CITY OF BURLINGAME MS MARGARET MONROE, CITY PLANNER PLANNING DEPT. 501 PRIMROSE ROAD BURLINGAME, CA 94010-3997 Dear Ms. Monroe: I am writing this letter regarding the Planning Commission and the Staff Study Meeting at Burlingame City Hall on the eve of October 14, 2003 where discussions and recommendations were made. Ms Ann Keighean recommended a 24-month trial period. After consultation with my family, we decided to go along with that recommendation provided we do not have to do the comprehensive study some commissioners talked about at the meeting. We hope after all is said and done, we could all benefit from the outcome. We feel a 24-month trial period would give us a real time, real world indication as to if the proposed policy will benefit or hurt Broadway. Complex studies are expensive, time consuming and ultimately theoretical. The studies cannot accurately anticipate between a good market and a bad market — a 60% office ratio versus a 15% office ratio. Additionally, we agree with Mr. Root's concern that the offices should not be curtained or shuttered to present a blank, closed face to the public. We would like to start our real estate and travel business as soon as we can; we also have a number of prospective tenants who are interested in the spaces but we cannot act upon until we receive the OK from the City. Please let us know as soon as possible of your decision so that we can get the ball rolling. Sincerely, Garbis S. Bezdjian Cc: Mr. Larry Anderson, City Attorney Mr. James Nantell, City Manager CITY O 9URL INGAME o� g ATED.w1E` _- The City of Burlingame CITY HALL 501 PRWROSE ROAD TEL: (650)558-7250 PLANNING DEPARTMENT BURLINGAlvIE,CALIFORNIA 94010-3997 FAX: (650)6963790 October 31, 2002 Mr. and Mrs. Garbis Bezdjian 40 Berryessa Way Hillsborough, CA 94010 Dear Mr. and Mrs. Bezdjian, At the Planning Commission meeting on October 14, 2003, the Planning Commission asked that the applicant prepare a number of studies to facilitate the environmental evaluation of the request to amend the zoning to allow real estate offices,financial institutions,health services and general office uses on the first floor in the Broadway Commercial Area. The following studies to address the environmental impacts of the change in use were requested: • Parking, traffic and pedestrian flow, compare existing conditions to what is proposed; • Economic impact of the change; • Effect on City services and infrastructure with the intensification or diminished use of the area; • Environmental analysis of parking if 25% of the area were office uses and if 50%were office; • Analysis should compare to existing conditions as a baseline,existing floor area ofthe various uses in the area, compared to the proposed change; • Need to consider the effects of having convenient transportation as part of the traffic and parking analysis,some employers might like the location because employees can take the train,may be less of an impact on parking; and • Need a cumulative analysis of impacts of different categories of change,at level of 25%office,or 50%office, should do a matrix analysis,each use with different floor areas within these categories_ In addition at the City Council meeting on October 20, 2003, Council directed Planning Staff to prepare and distribute and evaluate a mailed survey ofthe merchants and property owners in the Broadway Commercial Area. The purpose of the survey is to ask their opinion about the requested changes to.the uses allowed on the first floor in the commercial area. Before the request for the addition of the four uses to the Broadway Commercial Area can be scheduled for a public hearing and action by the Planning Commission Planning two things need to be done. Planning staffneeds complete the mailed survey of the Broadway merchants and property owners. The Planning Commission needs to hear from you in writing regarding whether you wish to provide any ofthe additional studies requested and/or vhat other additional information you may have to share that addresses the request to allow the four additional "uses in the Broadway Commercial Area. Finally, you should tell us in writing if you wish to modify your application in any way. If you have any questions regarding the next steps in the processing of your request,I can be reached at(650) 558-7255. A copy of the minutes of the October 14,2003,Planning Commission meeting are attached for you information. Sincerely yours, �28etnroe City Planner Attachments: Planning Commission Meeting Minutes,October 14,2003 cc. Lary Anderson,City Attorney 1199 Broadway,address file. 2 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes October 14, 2003 Applicant response: Bi7re ods, project architect, and L ouri Ram, property owner sponded and noted that the original plansapproved to replace exist' g deck but then the owner ted a curved balcony; the front door was shed out 2 foot and the chi y was removed; tried not t lock the neighbors view, the lower deck ' used for access and fire sa ty egress for two sons an one daughter, not adding to occupancy; l er deck is only 4' wide and I not be used for furniture is is not an apartment building; crying to ' imize the expanse of wall to fset the blank wall, make sthetically pleasing, not extending to reate artment; expanding house for se by family, insulted that meone would tell us how in eople can ' e in house. There were no f her comments and the pu is hearing was closed. Commission discussion: bel' ve that there is a hardship n this property, sloping lot in s it difficult to enjoy yard, good job in res nding to concerns, ahnos atches the previous deck, it isduced in size from the previous proposal, 9 SF deck off the master be oom does not impede views, c cerned with failure to sidewalk dueto this roject, would like to see pplicant work out issues wit eighbor; safety issue is justification fort variance, need egress for drooms, this is a unique prop e y; viewed from 6 Belvedere Court, did not a obstruction of distant vie s; findings support the reques d variance; excellent solution to safety probl with the connection to lower deck. C. Vis 'ca moved to approve the ap ication, by resolution, with t following conditions: l) that the project sha a built as shown on the ans submitted to the Planni Department date stamped September 30, 2 3, sheets CSI, Al throu A10, and L1, and that any c ges to building materials, exterior finishes, ootprint or floor area of t building shall require an am dment to this permit; and that that the floor area ratio variances shall onl pply to this building (and th decks) and shall become void if the building (or the decks) are ever expan d, demolished or destroyed y catastrophe or natural disaster or if they are rept K3) or modified in any ay; 2) that the conditions o e City Engineer's June 23, 2003 memo shall be that the applicant all comply with Ordinanc 503, the City of Burlingame Storm Water Mana ent and Discharge Co of Ordinance; 4) that du ' g demolition of the existing residence, site pr aration and constructio f the new residence, the plicant shall use all applicable "best managem t practices" as identified ' Burlingame's Storm Wa Ordinance, to prevent erosion and off-site sed' entation of storm water off; 5) that the project is s 'ect to the state-mandated water conservation gram, and a complete Irrig on Water Management PI must be submitted with landscape and irrigat' n plans at time of permit ap ication; 6) that demolitio f the existing structures and any grading or a moving on the site shall be quired to comply with al a regulations of the Bay Area Air Quality agement District; 7) that any improvements for the us hall meet all California Building and Fire Co es, 2001 Edition as amended by the City of Burlingame. a motion was seconded by C. Auran. Chair Boju6s ca ed for a voice vote on the motion to ap ve. The motion passed on a 6-0-1 (C. Brownrigg). peal procedures were advised. This item ncluded at 8:20 p.m. IX. DESIGN REVIEW STUDY ITEMS 6. ENVIRONMENTAL SCOPING FOR REQUEST TO ADD FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS, REAL ESTATE OFFICES, HEALTH SERVICES AND GENERAL OFFICE USES ON THE FIRST FLOOR AS CONDITIONAL USES IN THE BROADWAY COMMERCIAL AREA (41 RADIUS NOTICE/89 MERCHANTS NOTICED/STREET POSTED) PROJECT PLANNER: MAUREEN BROOKS SP Brooks briefly presented the project description, noting that this is an environmental scoping session to -� determine what issues the commission considers to be potential environmental impacts of the proposed application to change to the zoning regulations for Broadway. There were no questions of staff. 6 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes October 14, 2003 Chair Bojues opened the public comment. Ross Bruce,President of the Broadway Business Improvement District (BID) Board of Directors, noted that the BID has come out in favor of the proposal, they were concerned with the original proposal because it would have removed the current controls on restaurant uses, this request is to include various office uses,so the BID now supports. He noted that he had taken a sample survey of several Broadway merchants,and the response has been in favor;there is one Board member who does not support the proposal,and he is here to state his opinion. Gerald Weisl,Weimax Wines located on Broadway, lives at 136 Bloomfield, noted that the amount of available office space in Burlingame is significant,but retail is precious and limited,after looking at the proposal,would like to retain Broadway as largely retail. John Kevranian, 1241 Broadway, spoke in favor of the proposed zoning changes, noting that it is time to make changes to Broadway, but the types of retail that have come in recently do not attract foot traffic, business is slow and there are a lot of vacancies, want to bring it back to the way it used to be, financial institutions would be beneficial on the first floor, the economy will change,we want to attract the type of business that will bring larger numbers of customers. Commissioners asked if the merchants thought that the proposed uses would bring more foot traffic and asked when they had observed the changes and the decreased pedestrian traffic on Broadway. Mr.Kevranian noted that he believes the offices will bring in more foot traffic and noticed the decline about 4 to 5 years ago, he doesn't feel that it is just in response to the economic downturn. Commissioners noted that there were financial institutions on Broadway and they moved out on their own,how will the changes to zoning bring them back, confused that offices will bring more people, with a professional doctor's office, there would only be a handful of people, retail would bring more. Mr. Kevranian noted that dental offices can bring 60 to 70 people a day depending on the number of hygienists in the office,you could have a Mailboxes Etc.with a check cashing service which is not allowed now,real estate offices generate a lot of people that will patronize business, would like to see retail, but recently there has been the wrong kind of retail that doesn't generate foot traffic. Commissioners asked if opening up to office use could be the beginning of a dramatic change to the general use and flavor of Broadway,where retail will decline and more potential offices will move in and replace retail. Mr. Kevranian noted that before the current restrictions on office were put in place,Broadway was not taken over by offices. Ross Bruce noted that the BID did not collect any data to determine what this change would do,membership decided to roll the dice;think freedom would be helpful to Broadway now and later,it might push out retail later;Broadway goes through phases,used to be all antique stores,then real estate and insurance,should free up the restrictions to allow it to go through the phases;this may have unintended consequence,but we don't think so. Commissioners asked if the BID would like to see a mix of office and retail,or an area that is more offices and financial institutions together,what is the vision;how do you envision the mix in 10 years. Mr. Bruce responded that they see a combination of uses with retail,we do not always get what is anticipated, but a fair number of members feel that the current experiment with the office restrictions has run its course and a looser, free market approach may be worthwhile;have seen so many different versions of Broadway, don't know what percentage would work best,the area prospered during most phases,would like to see it seek its own level. Commissioner Keighran noted that she had met with Ross Bruce, Gerald Weisl and Dave Arminino to discuss this issue,presently we have restrictions on the number of restaurants,can we do that for offices,or could we try a trial run for two years and then revisit the issue. CA Anderson noted that approach can be 7 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes October 14, 2003 done,the City can try to structure a balance;when the controls on restaurants were put in place,the number was set by those that existed at the time the ordinance was adopted, would need to determine the criteria carefully;but once the business is allowed in, it will exist and it can't be taken back;you could also revisit the issue by adopting a new ordinance to pull it back to the previous regulations at any time. Garbis Bezdjian,applicant,noted that he has been on Broadway since the 1960's,has owned property there since 1967-68,Broadway is struggling,suffering,hurting,need changes right away;retail uses come and go, need a variety of businesses,two dentists were turned down by the Planning Department,if health services have to be on the second floor, there would be no access for the handicapped; need to keep a balance of businesses, all of the Broadway business owners want change, one building has been vacant almost two years,he is just asking for what was allowed before. Commissioners ask if the BID had identified any environmental concerns with this change,such as parking or traffic. Ross Bruce noted that they had not identified environmental changes from converting from retail to office,parking in the area hasn't been as big of an issue as it used to be,do not believe that the nature of the business would change the rent structure, three years ago with the controls in place, retail rents still spiked,BID members thought that based on previous experience,this change feels right. Mr.Bezdjian noted that if you look at the Broadway area during lunch hour,there are a lot of vacant parking spaces,so there is parking available,his building has eight parking spaces;the market is what controls rent;don't believe there would be any environmental impacts because the uses would be what was allowed before. John Root, 1407 Montero Avenue, noted that he is not a merchant, but visits Broadway a lot, a similar situation happened in San Mateo,and San Mateo adopted changes that prohibited offices because they found that when offices went in to replace retail,the office tenant closed off the window frontage on the street and -� didn't present a face to the street; it became an issue of compatibility with the retail merchants. Chair Boju6s closed the public comment. Commission discussion: Broadway is a gateway to Burlingame and we should be careful what we do,need to determine what the personality is that we want for this area,should it be like Burlingame Avenue,or like 25`x'Avenue in San Mateo;we have talked about making the Broadway area attractive to hotel guests;since the parking requirement is higher for offices, each office tenant will have to ask for parking variances, parking is an issue in this area,we have to look ahead not just 2 years but 5 to 10 years,what do the citizens want for Broadway,office commands higher rent than retail,rents will skyrocket,once a use is in place,it can't be removed, we need to look at the long term ramifications; have mixed feelings, don't know how impacted the area is presently,there is plenty of parking in the afternoon,many restaurants are not open for lunch because there is not enough business,we need to look at the parking issue before a decision is made; concern with office rent,which is more expensive than retail,would like to find out what the market rate is for rent on Broadway compared to the office rent;may be good thing as a mixed use,what we have now is not working,tried different things and haven't found the right mix;mentioned in staff report that there is a signed petition,would like an opportunity to see it to have a better idea what the petitioners want;don't think anyone knows what Broadway needs,what is the vision,we are reacting instead of being proactive,is this a center for locals with special retail,what will work well, should it be more service oriented,we can't rush, we need to look at it carefully. The Commission identified the following issues which need to be analyzed in the environmental studies, - based on the application as it now stands, with a request to add financial institutions, real estate offices, health services and general office use on the first floor as a conditional use in the Broadway Commercial 8 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes October 14, 2003 Area. SP Brooks noted that the applicant would be responsible to pay for the environmental studies requested by the Commission. • Parking, traffic and pedestrian flow, compare existing conditions to what is proposed; • Economic impact of the change; • Effect on City services and infrastructure with the intensification or diminished use of the area; • Environmental analysis of parking if 25% of the area were office uses and if 50%were office; • Analysis should compare to existing conditions as a baseline,existing floor area of the various uses in the area, compared to the proposed change; • Need to consider the effects of having convenient transportation as part of the traffic and parking analysis, some employers might like the location because employees can take the train,may be less of an impact on parking; and • Need a cumulative analysis of impacts of different categories of change, at level of 25%office, or 50%office, should do a matrix analysis,each use with different floor areas within these categories. Continued Commission discussion: See Broadway as a pedestrian environment, can be service and retail, some office uses may fit because they provide a service to the neighborhood,would have to be careful how the ordinance is crafted; need to look at a vision statement for Broadway, concerned with John Root's comments about windows closed off at the street level, need to take into consideration the fact that restaurants are closed for lunch, this could be addressed by the merchants. 7. 1340 DRAKE AVENU , ONED R-1 —APPLICA ON FOR DESIGN RE W FOR A FIRST AND SECOND STORY ADDI ON (GREG HAGE) , ORTH SUNSERI HA Y ARCHITECTS, APPLICANT AND ARCHIT T; RANDY LEE, PRO RTY OWNER) (64 NO CED) PROJECT PLA ER: CATHERINE BARB R C. Auran ecused himself because he li within 500 feet of the su 'ect property. PlanneXBaer fly presentedt project description. Commi ion asked if staff could fin out the heights of29 Drake Avenu from the files. There were no estions of staff. Chair Bojues open d the public comment. Greg agey, 650 California Stre t, San Francisco, project architect,was avails to answer questions,and note hat proposal is a modest ad ition,the owner's intent is to maintain the charac r of the street frontage,and kee 'ng existing roofline,locate assing in the center of the house and pushed it ck,tried to repeat the detail o e existing house in the adds 'on. Commission noted that there are no covere porches on the house. Project chitect noted that the front try is existing with no cover, trying to retain e existing front as is, but there ' a rear porch off the kitche which does hav roof over because the door is set back. There were no other omments from the floor an he public hearin was closed. The Planet Commission had the foll ing comments: • Need landscape plan, include 1 er evergreens to reduce the in s and retain the Burlingame nested 116ok; • Include a�t e protection plan with the ndscape plan. Chair Bojues made a motion to place this item on the consent calendar at a tim when the requested revisions have been made. This motion was seconded by C. Visitica. 9 City oJBurlingame Planning Commission Minutes September 8,2003 street;can trees be placed on the perimeter;it was noted that this should not necessarily be treated as an interim use,since the interim long term parking use across the street has been there for decades. Chair Boju6s opened the public comment. Paul Salisbury,architect, 1555 Bayshore Highway,and Shelly Takasato,representing the property owner Boca Lake Office,Inc.;Jonathan Wu,President of Anza Parking Corporation. They noted that the property owner views this as an interim use,hope to generate hotel revenue to the city within a decade;site deserves better than a long term airport parking use;hope to build hotel within 5 years; have discussed the landscaping in the BCDC jurisdiction with them,it will take the trees 5 to 10 years to look like something; the site is presently unsightly,hope this use will enable them to clean it up,take care of drainage issues presently on the site,and provide some income to the property owner.It was noted that Anza Parking Corporation was required to provide 15%of their site in landscaping. Staffnoted that the requirement is 10%within the parking lot and 15% of the entire site. There were no further comments from the floor and the public comment was closed. Chair Boju6s noted that the comments made would be incorporated into the environmental document.When the document has been prepared it will come back to the Planning Commission with the project for a public hearing and action. The item will be re-noticed at that time. The Planning Commission's action is advisory and not appealable.This time concluded at 9:40 p.m. X. PLANNER REPORTS - Review of City Council regular meeting of September 2,2003. CP Monroe reviewed the actions of the Council meeting of September 2,2003. She noted that Council had adopted ordinances clarifying the recent inclusionary zoning regulations as well as clarifying the provisions of the commissioner's stipend. Council has rescheduled their September 15 meeting to Tuesday,September 16, 2003,and Council supported having a public meeting with neighbors to discuss the location ofthe sound wall extension along Rollins Road. The sound wall is a part of the Auxiliary Lane project on US 101.This meeting will be later in September or October. Council discussed the use of State land on the Bayfront for recreational purposes,if it is determined that more recreation area is necessary in the Bayfront Planning Area. They asked staff to discuss with the State Lands Commission representatives. Recreation uses could be incorporated into a proposed hotel development since the remaining state parcel is a key hotel location. CP Monroe passed out forms for the Commissioners to indicate how they would like to take their stipend for the coming fiscal year. X - FYI—Correspondence on Broadway zoning changes Commissioners commented on a letter to the City Planner from a property owner on Broadway requesting that the Commission consider his application sooner. Commissioners indicated that as part of this determination they would like to see a poll of the merchants and property owners about land uses prepared by the BID. Could staff ask the BID if they could prepare this poll sooner? Staff noted that they would write a letter of request to the BID Board. XI. ADJOURNMENT Chair Boju6s adjourned the meeting at 10:07 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Tim Auran,Secretary 13 rCIT , Y O� BURUNGAME op ,q The City of Burlingame CITY]TALI. 501 PRIMROSE ROAD TEL: (650)558-7250 PLANNING DEPARTMENT BURLINGAME,CALIFORNIA 94010-3997 FAX: (650)696-3790 September 12, 2003 Broadway Business Improvement District Board Members David Hinkle Earthbeam Natural Foods 1399 Broadway Burlingame, CA 94010 Subject: Survey of Merchants and Property Owners in the Broadway Commercial Area Regarding Changes in Land Use Dear Board Members, At their meeting on September 9, 2003, in response to a letter from an applicant at 1199 Broadway, the Planning Commission directed me to contact you. The applicant's request was to add health services, other office uses, real estate and financial institutions as permitted or conditional uses on the first floor in the Broadway Commercial Area. On July 28, 2003, the Planning Commission studied this request. At that time there was a letter from the Broadway Business Improvement District Board President stating that "the merchants voted two months ago not to review this matter until January. The letter noted that "the merchants want to have a 100% ballot voting measure for all the Broadway Merchants on this issue in January". (Broadway Business Improvement District, July 9, 2003) In response to the applicant's request and the BID letter, the Commission directed staff to continue this item until after the Commission has received input from the merchants and property owners as indicated in the BID letter. Recently a second letter was sent to the City by the applicant requesting an earlier consideration of his request to add health services, other offices, real estate and financial institution uses on the first floor in the Broadway Commercial Area. Planning Commission reviewed this letter at their September 8, 2003, meeting and directed staff to ask the Broadway BID if it was possible for them to survey the merchants and property owners within the improvement district sooner than January 2004. 1 I look forward to hearing from you regarding this matter. I can be reached at(650) 558-7255. Please do not hesitate to call me if there are any questions regarding this request. Sincerely yours, V� M— Mar�gare tMonroe City Planner cc. Planning Commission 2 �6 CITYjcc, BUWJNGAME o° 0 4A7ED.1nE°- The City of Burlingame CITY HALL 501 PRR,4ROSE ROADTEL:(650)558-7250 PLANNING DEPARTMENT BURLINGAI E,CALIFORNIA 94010-399WAX:(650)696-3790 August 25, 2003 Garbis and Maida Bezdjian 40 Berryessa Way Hillsborough CA 94010 Subject: Request for Changing the Permitted/Conditional Uses in the Broadway Commercial Area, Zoned C-1 Broadway Commercial Area Dear Garbis and Maida Bezdjian, Please find attached a copy of the Unapproved Planning Commission Minutes from the meeting of July 28,2003. Since the Planning Commission cancelled their meeting on August 11,2003, the July 28, 2003 Minutes will not be reviewed by the commission and acted on until tonight. Usually action letters are written following the Commission's approval of their minutes. The Commission's direction to staff regarding the processing of your request for the change of zoning regulations for the Broadway Commercial Area was to continue this matter until the merchants association is able to complete a poll of the property owners and merchants in the Broadway Commerical Area. Attached is a copy of the letter that the Business Improvement District sent to the Planning Commission regarding your request with their comments on timing. This was included in the Planning Commission's packet for the meeting of July 28, 2003. That packet was mailed to you before the meeting as well. We appreciate that you also attended the July 28, 2003, Planning Commission meeting. If you would like to discuss this scheduling decision by the Planning Commission, you may come to any Planning Commission meeting and speak at the From the Floor portion of their Action Letter Request jor Changing the Permitted/Condifional Uses in the Broadway CommercialArea,Zoned Gl Broadway CommercialArea August 25,2003 agenda. The rules of procedure do not allow the Commission to give direction at the meeting at which you speak, but they may agenized the item for discussion at a future meeting. Sincerely yours, Margaret Monroe City Planner cc. Larry Anderson, City Attorney Bezdjian FAX Number: (650) 344-0579 2 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes July 28,2003 2. ZONING CHANGE TO BROADWAY COMMERCIAL AREA—APPLICATION FOR A ZONING CHANGE TO ADD FINANCIAL INSTITUTION,REAL ESTATE OFFICES,HEALTH SERVICE AND GENERAL OFFICE USES ON THE FIRST FLOOR AS CONDITIONAL USES IN THE BROADWAY COMMERCIAL AREA (GARBIS S. MAIDA M_ BEZDJIAN APPLICANTS AND PROPERTY OWNERS)PROJECT PLANNER: MARGARET MON-ROE C.Vistica arrived at 7:25 p.m. CP Monroe presented a summary of the staff report indicating that the Planning Commission needed to give direction on the consistency of the request with the current General Plan policy so that staff could make a determination on what CEQA review would be required,as well as any additional information on the zoning request. CP noted that Commission had received a letter from the Broadway BID noting that they had decided to table any action on zoning in the Broadway area until January so that they could see the status of the economy and vacancy rates;they also noted that they had agreed that in the future they would poll their membership before taking any positions on use changes in the area. Commissioners asked: how is the optometrist use on Broadway now classified;are the two real estate offices on Broadway non-conforming;would like to know the opinion of the merchants about this request and what their vision is for Broadway; can we add a review-of the number of restaurants on Broadway to this discussion; do we need to be concerned about ADA compliance for health services on the second floor,we are presently doing two major land use studies, the Bayfront and North End/Rollins Road, and have developed a process involving committees and public input for these kinds of changes,this change would be as broad and am concerned about doing this on the basis of one applicant's request, merchants want to delay this action and am hesitant to go forward on anything at this time. Would like to know the effect ofoffice on the first floor experienced by other cities, know San Mateo recently prohibited offices on the first floor in their retail area,why? Would like staffto contact other communities such as Millbrae, San Mateo and others with similar commercial areas to see what their issues are, what they have done, and would like feedback from merchants in the area. C. Osterling noted in the graphic on the BID letterhead there are real estate and banks shown, should that give us some direction;survey should include merchants and building owners, so moved to continue this item until after we have received input from the merchants and property owners on Broadway. Motion was seconded by C_ Keighran. Chair Bojues called for a voice vote on the motion to continue this item. The motion passed on a 5-0-2 (Cern. Brownrigg and Keele absent)voice vote. This item concluded at 7:35 p.m. VII. ACTION ITEMS Consent Calendar-Items on the consent calendar are considered to be routine. They are acted on simultaneously unless separate discussion and/or action is requested by the applicant,a member of the public or a commissioner prior to the time the commission votes on the motion to adopt. There were no items set for the consent calendar 2 AFTER PREPARA i W OF S?AFF R.EP0 • • BROADWAY BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT d • 1399 Broadway, Burlingame, CA 94010 ® y a z � h ®® July 9, 2003 G Planning Department Rp Attention: Meg Monroe M q City Hall Z. 501 Primrose Road Burlingame, CA 94010-3997 ® m �M Re: Garbis Bezdjian's petition to change Broadway's C-1 district restrictions, as well as overlay district modification. Dear Meg, 0 � N< I would like to thank you for your letter of June 18, 2003, informing the Broadway �� oI _ ®® Merchants of Mr.Bezdjian's desire to change our C-1 and overlay restrictions. Unfortunately, the merchants voted two months ago to not review this matter until o ®� January. The issue of modifying Broadway's controlling ordinances is a very Lln controversial topic. Broadway is deeply divided on this issue, and the merchants want to Z � have a 100% ballot voting measure for all of the Broadway Merchants on this issue in Z January, after we all have had a chance to see how the economy is doing and have a look at the vacancy factor on Broadway at that time. Meg, thank you again for your letter inviting the merchant's-opinion on this proposal. ® Though we can't respond this time, please keep us on the list, we do wish to provide you with our opinion on important planning matters. h Q Sincerely, 3 N l � 1(e 7. _ Ross Bruce President; BID ._ a W V � V ®® CITY I PLANNING DEPARTMENT MEMO BURUNGAMI= ti m 9 u C,A DATE: December 2, 2003 RE: Results of a Use Survey of Broadway Merchants and Property Owners, November 2003 In response to an application for an amendment to the uses allowed in the Broadway Commercial Area, all the merchants and property owners in the area were surveyed in November 2003. The request in the application was to allow the following four new uses on the first floor(street level) in the Broadway Commercial Area. The tally of the results of the survey follows. The City mailed a total of 133 questionnaires. All responses were anonymous. These were divided among 37(28%) property owners,94(71%) merchants and 2(1%)requests by phone. Of the 133 mailed, 57 or 43%were returned. The typical return for a mailed questionnaire is 25%. The 57 respondents broke out compared to total responses as follows: Property owners 13 (23%) Merchants 36 (63%) Owner/Merchant 5 (9%) Not Reported 3 (5%) Respondents were given three choices for each of the four first floor (street level) uses proposed (financial institutions, real estate, health services and general office uses). These choices were to allow the use without a public hearing, to allow the use but require a public hearing, and to not allow the use. The raw data is shown in the table below: Uses Yes,without yes,with hearing No Not marked TOTAL hearing Financial Institutions 43 75%) 8 (14%) 5 (9%) 1 57 Real Estate 42 (74%) 6 (11%) 9 (15%) 0 57 Health Services 38 67%) 11 (19%) 8 (14%) 0 57 General Office Uses 41 (72%) 8 (14%) 8 (14%) 0 57 Results of a Use Survey of Broadway Merchants and Property Owners,November 2003 December 2,2003 In the case of each use the majority of the respondents felt that the use should be allowed without a public hearing. The affirmative responses without a hearing ranged from a low of 67%for health services to a high of 75%for financial institutions. The most"no"votes were cast for real estate uses on the first floor,9 or 15%. Health service use was the use that drew the highest number of responses for requiring a public hearing,11 or 19%. Comments from the Survey Cards: Space was left on the survey card for respondents to make open-ended comments.Attached is the list of the comments divided by those from property owners,from merchants and from those who both own a property and are a merchant in the area.You may wish to review these. In brief summary: ➢ The property owners who commented seemed to favor the addition ofmore use options for Broadway. It was noted that only one of the properties on Broadway at California is in the designated Broadway Commercial Area, suggesting that the city might consider adding the other comer property to the Commercial Area designation. ➢ The merchants observations were more varied: no restrictions try free enterprise; Broadway is a retail district preserve it, keep the local flavor; too many food businesses,not enough of the needed food businesses;lack of parking;enough real estate and financial institutions. ➢ The property owners who are also merchants responded that Broadway will not change its character as a combination restaurant service area;any legal business should be allowed to operate;a conditional use permit(public hearing)for the four uses is a good idea. Thanks to all those who took the time to fill out their questionnaires and return them. Your input in the form of these survey results will be forwarded to the Planning Commission along with the staffreport when they consider the applicant's request for a change to the uses allowed on the first floor(at the street level)in the Broadway Commercial Area.All merchants and property owners who received a survey card will also receive a public notice of the Planning Commissions hearing on this matter. 2 COMMENTS FROM PROPERTY OWNERS 1) "Fill up the spaces" `— 2) "A healthy mix of retail, service, restaurant and office merchants leads to a successful downtown. I believe we should restrict street level to 25%-30% for office/financial/real estate or health care uses." 3) "Store fronts — the majority — are small. It has little impact as who goes in. Notice the Chevron gas station at the corner of Broadway and California is not in the Broadway District. It does not look right for a property facing Broadway not to be included in the Broadway Commercial Area." 4) "No restriction, no conditional use" COMMENTS FROM MERCHANTS 1) "No restrictions, no conditional use" (6 surveys has this comment from merchants) 2) "Broadway has too many restrictions" 3) "Broadway is a retail business district. Please preserve it as such. Turning into an office park is a sad way to go. You can't take retail businesses and expect them to survive on the 3rd floor of an office building for example. Retail space is a rare commodity. Please preserve it on Broadway" 4) "Don't let what happened to Burlingame Avenue happen on Broadway. The local flavor is lost. 5) "More retail — not real estate and financial institutions" 6) "Let's try free enterprise and see what happens" 7) "We need all kinds of business on Broadway besides food business!! ! There are too many food businesses!! We need something else!!" 8) "We need more like bakery type, healthy juice store instead of coffee and too many beauty salons" 9) "Broadway is hurting badly!! Anything that can potentially promote foot traffic is welcomed and encouraged H" 10) "Parking or lack thereof is the issue" 11) "Of the ones checked `no' — we have enough already" (checked no to real estate and financial institutions) COMMENTS FROM OWNER/MERCHANTS: 1) "Please, please this street has not been the same since restrictions" (checked yes to all uses without a hearing) 2) "Broadway is and always will be a combination restaurant service use area" 3) "Commercial area should allow operation of any legal business" 4) "1 think a conditional use permit for these uses is a good idea" r�CITY C BUIRUNGME e whr.wn�a- The City of Burlingame CITY HALL 501 PRIMROSE ROAD TEL:(650)558-7150 PLANNING DEPARTMENT BURLINGANfE,CALIFORNIA 94010-3997 FAX (650)69&3-M November 6, 2003 Dear Broadway Merchant and/or Property Owner, The City has received a request to change the land use regulations in the Broadway Commercial Area. (Map on the reverse side). The request is to modify the zoning regulations to allow real estate offices,financial institutions, health services and general office uses on the first floor throughout the Broadway Commercial Area. The City Council has asked Planning Staff to do a survey of the merchants and property owners in the area. to determine your opinion about whether these additional uses should be allowed in the Broadway Commercial Area. Please note your thoughts on the enclosed card and drop it in the mail by November 20, 2003 The zoning code defines what types of businesses are allowed in each of the categories requested to be added: ■ Real Estate uses include: real estate broker or agent,title insurance, real estate investment, real - estate management, real estate developer or similar business. ■ Financial Institution uses include: a state licensed bank, national bank, savings and loan association, savings bank,Federal credit union, state-licensed credit union,industrial loan company or finance company and money machines associated with them. ■ Health Service uses include: office, clinic, laboratory or any other facility engaged in furnishing medical, surgical or other services include a physician, dentist, dental technician, chiropractor, acupressurist, acupuncturist, therapist, counselor or other similar occupation. ■ General Office uses include: a room or group of rooms used for conducting the affairs of a business, profession , service , industry or government. This would include among other businesses accountants,e-commerce businesses,administrative and management centers for other businesses, accountants, tax preparers, attorneys, etc. With the provisions of the zoning code,some uses are simply allowed without the need for a public;hearing or any other planning permit. These uses are called"permitted uses". Other uses are subject to a public hearing before the Planning Commission in order to determine if the proposed use,given its size and intensity, is appropriate for the specific location. After a public hearing son such a use the Planning Commission is able to impose conditions on the use to ensure that it is conducted in an appropriate way. These uses are called"conditional uses." Finally, some uses are simply not allowed in a particular zoning district. These uses are called"prohibited uses". The added first floor uses proposed in the present request(financial institutions,real estate,health services on the first floor,and general office uses)would shift four of the uses which are currently"prohibited",e.g.not allowed, in the Broadway Commercial Area to either"permitted" uses(no public hearing) or"conditional" uses (public hearing and Planning Commission action required). As a businessperson and/or property owner in the Broadway Commercial Area the Planning Commission and City Council need your input on this change. Please fill out the attached postcard and mail it to the Planning _ Department at your earliest convenience but no later than November 23, 2003. You will receive a public notice about the public hearing date on this matter. If you have any questions regarding this survey please call Meg Monroe, 558-7250, at the Planning Department. Thank you for your participation in this important survey. We look forward to your continued participation as the future of the Broadway Commercial Area is discussed at the public hearings- You can make a difference in the future of the Broadway Commercial Area! CALIFIDOWIL S. , ----------------- M..-A -B 1 / 9 .p� 5 . i 1 aa.. ■tf. .. ✓. ✓ q -M -1 � v w'f 1 1l 111 _ i CHU" b C O) O_' a a O O o O ` e O Qi% 1 1 ,, 9 Io , O O O 1 y .r f ✓_ 192 p W ~ O` 2 L b0 Z� IZS a '0 LACUNA � p O O O O O ® O p ..W o �u�r0 O O O p , �:. 6 - r •� h � e ., �_.y _ n .f D , t 22 21- 19 1 S 7 e 9 to f(O� 1 2 .3 nf' 21 24 u ® © 0 © Q © = Q ©i- r CN'UCHIHO J. M '-«1 «f - }\JE'I.JE .azs• - ` ' O $l s I h ti r v I 26 Z$ Z! Z3 22 21 y l . .O r� ■� .- ■�•■- - `•YAP futiC a - 3 EL C4MINO Rex BROADWAY COMMERCIAL AREA ORDINANCE 1272 OLDEN���%��WES DIAMOND CORPORATION RECEIVED DEC 15 2003 CITY CEER..K'S 0 FICE December 10, 2003 CITY OF BURLIN60,81E Mayor O'Mahony 501 Primose Road Burlingame, Ca. 94010 Dear Mayor O'Mahony, I am the Store manager of a local high volume jewelry store here in Burlingame, The Jewelry Exchange. We have been at our address of 1301 Broadway since October 1993. And recently are troubled by the parking situation here on Broadway. There are currently 30 people under our employ and since the parking meters in the Paloma/ Broadway lot were changed from 8 hour meters to 2 hour meters our employee's have received a ridiculous amount of parking tickets. Patrons of our store have complained on various occasions for the same reason. Parking on the side streets is very scarce due to the amount of apartment buildings in the area.And homeowners become agitated when we park in front of their homes to frequently. Please reconsider the S hour parking meters. We are open to any suggestions you may have for our problem. Such as a flat rate for daily parking, etc. Your prompt attention to this matter would be greatly appreciated. Thank you, DISTRI U ION: �tylcouncil ( please respond pity Manager L: City Attorney ❑ No Response Required G Dir.Finance C,"Planner F, Dir.Public Works I man Resources G Zice Chief Mrs. Manal ArikatL; Fire Chief O On Next Agenda Parks&Rec Librarian PLEASE SEND A COPY OF YOUR RESPONSE TO THE CITY CLERK Jewel Chicago San Francisco Boston raclofy wlCy Washington D.G Detroit J we 630-530-0444 650-579-4700 978-443-0550 301-654-9699 734-525-3200 Source Exchange Los Angeles Dallas Seattle Tampa New York Philadelphia Cleveland Houston 714-542-9000 972-671-6700 425-687-8000 813-882-4000 201-525-1300 610-292-0200 216-475-1111 832-249-7999 www.jewelryexchange.com AME The City of Burlingame CITY HALL 501 PRIMROSE ROAD TEL:650-558-7250 PLANNING DEPARTMENT BURLINGAME,CALIFORNIA 94010-3997 FAX:650-696-3790 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING BROADWAY COMMERICAL AREA ZONING REGULATIONS AMENDMENT The CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION will hold a public hearing to consider an amendment to the zoning regulations for the Broadway Commercial Area to add financial institutions, real estate offices, health services, and general office uses on the first floor as conditional uses. The hearing will be held on Monday, January 12, 2004, at 7:00 p.m. in the City Hall Council Chambers at 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, California. Posted : December 31, 2003 NOTICE 8F PUSLIC HEAPING The CITY OF OUNLINUME PLANNING COMMISSION will hold QCOG ha'"no to ��' 'In Amendment fa WI ragu- lo to for the Broad"y Cornm.pafad Ara• W edd llnancdal lnst►dytlbna, reel aws of l' , Q", h0th wrvlceu, And Banaral o�f f lco Uaea . on t���floor a� cotlgit�na►mss. The hDB� v4rlll b®held on Mondd ,Jew- � 72 2004, at 7:00 .M. Jr, the �, y Hall Council Champ et b01 Primrose Ro Putiln�a►ne, csiitQml®, da, A eppy 6f the propooecl ardlnenMe may pa We"d pprior to the meeting, Qt the Planpin P 1IMaht ®t 50, Primrose Eurlingame, Crllfomle, fl a San Maw; County Timav, #315007 anuary 2, 2004 rncucr -p L)unjc n�n�e RECEIVED JAN 2 6 2004 CITY Of BURLINGAME PLANNING DEPT. pear Meg: Thawles for askZtwg mw opLwtow about the shoppLwg AstyLcts Lw gurLtV�gavue. I,twfortuwateLt , I thLw12 the three AstrLots have beew separated, awd categorized Lwto AstLwctLt Afferent bwSLwesS areas. There are several walls Of LoorZLVLg at the areas—awd the servLee, retail awd restaura1&t/AVk1v"g experiences the pubLLc evtjous frovu. each area. I feel the cLtu Ls overlook'Ztwg the potewtLaL draw that each of these areas offer. gurL OPVLLe Ls a destLvLatLovL loeattow. It Ls VLot a tDwrLst ctt5—evevL though tourists pass bu ow zo2 or 220 each loll. It rectutres ay.effort to come Lwto our toww—bU traLvl., car or wow b� gart. It Ls LwterestLwg to me that two of these areas—groadwau awd the Plaza ---which are *CV'. cowswered the weaker of the shopptwg Astr%ets –are reallu the "corwersto"S" of gurLLKgaMe. C)O,e the ewtrawoe frowL 202, awd the other—wLth a Little promotlovL—avother ev�travze to gurw game from gART. gurUmgnme AVevtue-ow the other havLd has`aLwaus been covLsLdered the mates shopping/AVdVLg area -eveMthough Lt Ls not eRSU to fend: ALL of the shopptAg districts are su f ferLVLg durLKe the ecoK.OvVic dowvLturn we have beev" facLvuq the Last few ears. ALL have store closures and vacaweies. Froadwa5, evevL with Lt's Kew streetseape Ls troubled with truLwg to ftwd a good 'ndK" of retaU, service and 06'LtV',g. I uv0erstavLd they are trUtKg to change some of the zoviMwg restrict%ons to aLLow o f f bce space to come Lwto former retaU areas. I would hope that the planning cove-mu ssiow would develop a vision of aU three districts worizLwg together rather thaw at odds with each other—with pettU jeaLousLes etc I tKVL{2 that the CLtu Ls 16[Uwg Lts ctolden coose...so to speaVZ.. as Lt alLows more av of more corporate stores to 012e over the ctwaLwt, howLetoww feeling that origLwaLLU brought people to our town. As owe LookZs around to even the "fake'towv,,s being built–b� Ivvterwest avLd others--the uvLLCLue, small stores are supported ovLd eweouraged. I Look'Z at our streets UlI e a "Asplau' of goods to be sold: The smaller, more LwterestLvug Ltewt.s are uswaLLU Ln the frowt..so that they mem e caesons 308 Lorton Avenue • Burlingame, CA 94010 • (650.) 347-4626 .00000�� L)unjc rnCUCr' * nunje are easilt seen, and show character, and charnt—while the Iger and bolder, more recognizable (chain stores) would be in the bac42ground. Santa Barbara uses this p6jilosopht vert success fullt on state street. The street is alive with actin and both sMall and large stores have an equal presence in the area. t favored the restaurant vuoratorttcnt when it was orrnalr put into place—because t believed that people would rather stroll along Burlingavue Ave_ 1oo46ng at store windows rather than other diners eating at other restaurants. L'tnfortunatelt, now the windows people looks into are olupUcated throughout the countrt in every vu.all. should we have a Mall MoratoriuVw?? There is no "east fix—but ! do hope that the plan to put the chain stores along Bu►-lingavu.e Avenue and the independent boutiques along the side streets mLght be re%sited. The charm and character of the town has certainit changed! Residents and people from out of the area have all voiced their distaste for what has happened to BurUvtgavu.e. ThcWZ tou for allowing vve to share mU thoughts and ideas. sincerer, ,Aoell-� Fran42ie Meter mem- �Je aes�u�s 308 Lorton Avenue • Burlingame, CA 94010 • (650) 347-4626 I ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME AMENDING SECTION 25.36.041 TO ALLOW FINANCIAL INSITUTIONS AS CONDITIONAL USES 2 IN THE BROADWAY COMMERCIAL AREA 3 4 The City Council of the City of Burlingame ordains as follows: 5 6 Section 1. The economic and social health of the Broadway Commercial Area is a vital part of 7 the Burlingame community.Broadway merchants and property owners have requested the City to loosen 8 some of the controls that were put in place to sustain the retail character of the area,so there is more 9 flexibility in tenants and business opportunities. This ordinance will allow financial institutions as a 10 conditional use so that the size,frontage,traffic impacts of locating such a use at a specific property in 11 the area can be evaluated,while at the same time providing an opportunity for such a business. The 12 ordinance change will only last for two years,so that it can be reevaluated for its effect on the area. 13 14 Section 2. Section 25.36.041 is amended to read as follows: 15 25.36.041 Broadway commercial area. 16 (a) Permitted uses in the Broadway Commercial Area. Except as otherwise provided in this 17 section,uses permitted in the C-1 district are permitted uses in the Broadway Commercial Area. 18 (b)Conditional uses in the Broadway Commercial Area. In addition to the conditional uses 19 allowed in the C-1 district,the following uses are only allowed in the Broadway Commercial Area 20 pursuant to a conditional use permit: 21 (1)Food establishments; 22 (2)Graphics arts and design retail businesses on the first floor only; 23 (3)Personal trainer and assessment businesses on the first floor or above;and 24 (4)Health services above the first floor only. 25 (b)Prohibited uses in the Broadway Commercial Area. In addition to the uses prohibited in the 26 C-1 district,the following uses are prohibited in the Broadway Commercial Area: 27 (1) Real estate; 28 (2) All other offices on the first floor;and 1 (3) Psychic services. 2 3 4 Section 3. This ordinance shall be effective until March 31, 2005, unless earlier repealed, and 5 shall have no further force and effect beyond that date. If the ordinance ceases to be effective, the 6 provisions of Section 25.36.041 in effect when this ordinance was adopted shall be reinstated unless 7 otherwise provided by an ordinance subsequent to this one. 8 9 Section 4. This ordinance shall be published as required by law. 10 11 Mayor 12 13 11 ANN T. MUSSO, City Clerk of the City of Burlingame, do hereby certify that the foregoing 14 ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the day of , 2004, and 15 adopted thereafter at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the day of , 16 20041 by the following vote: 17 AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: 18 NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: 19 20 City Clerk 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 CITY 0 STAFF REPORT AGENDA ITEM# 8b BURUNGAME FINANCE DEPARTMENT MEETING DATE: 2-17-04 bo> e g0 �AOTEo J NE� February 17, 2004 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council SUBMITTED BY: FROM: Jesus Nava, Finance Director APPROVED BY: L 650-558-7222 SUBJECT: Resolutions 1) Accepting BFI Solid Waste Rates for 2004; 2) Approving the Commercial Organics Collection Program for Burlingame Businesses and Authorizing a 25% Rate Reduction Incentive RECOMMENDATION: Approve resolutions: 1) Accepting rates proposed by BFI for 2004, including the second phase of a three-year increase in commercial waste compactor rates. 2) Approving the Second Amendment to the BFI Uniform Franchise Agreement for Solid Waste, Recyclable Materials and Plant Materials Collection Services to implement the Commercial Organics Collection Program and authorizing a 25%rate reduction incentive for participating Burlingame businesses. BACKGROUND: The City of Burlingame is a member of the South Bayside Waste Management Authority Joint Powers Agreement (SBWMA) and has an exclusive franchise agreement with Browning Ferris Industries (BFI) of San Mateo County for residential and commercial solid waste, residential recycling and residential green waste (brush &yard clippings). All SBWMA cities have a uniform franchise agreement with BFI. The franchise agreement contains a methodology for setting rates based on BFI's audited financial statements. It uses a fixed rate of return known as an operating ratio, which is 91% and allows BFI a 9% before-tax return on all operating expenses excluding pass-through expenses (disposal fees and franchise fees). Rate increases are determined individually for each SBWMA city based on revenue shortfalls or surpluses from prior year activities. Revenue and operating costs are maintained for each city in individual balancing accounts. The SBWMA reviews the BFI rate proposals but each city must approve the rate adjustments. The firm of Hilton, Farnkopf and Hobson (HFH), a consulting firm specializing in rate analysis, audits the rate 2004 13171 Rates City Council Agenda Report.DOC Page 1 2/10/2004 proposals and makes recommendations to the SBWMA member cities. A complete copy of HFH's report is available in the City Clerk's Office for public inspection. The recommended rate increase is 17%based on a 2003 revenue shortfall for Burlingame solid waste operations. The 2003 rates (adopted February 18, 2003) were projected to produce $6,126,996 in revenue (an 11.43% increase from the 2002 rate year). Instead only$5,706,564 was realized for a shortfall of$420,432 (6.86%). Overall, the number of Burlingame accounts decreased by half a percent, therefore the consultants conclude that the loss of revenue was due to accounts migrating from multiple to single collection accounts as a result of rate restructuring and the slow economy. The loss of revenue in 2003 is compounded in 2004 and represents 11% of the proposed 2004 rate adjustment of 17%. The balance of the rate adjustment is due to labor& insurance costs (1.6%), a disposal rate increase (.7%), the Organics Collections Program (1.2%), steam cleaning (.9%) and an increase in BFI's 2003 expenses over estimate (1.6%), primarily due to labor and insurance increases. Last year, the Council approved a recommendation to restructure rates for Burlingame customers. A uniform per-gallon charge for residential and commercial customers was implemented. Prior to this, commercial accounts paid less for a gallon of waste than residential customers. In addition, multiple-can discounts were eliminated because they work against Burlingame's recycling goals to reduce material going to the landfill. A progressive rate structure that increases per-gallon costs as the frequency of waste collection increases was also approved to encourage recycling. The new rate structure also changed rates for compacted garbage from a per-yard basis (which is volume-based and assumes that garbage is loose and not compacted) to a revised structure that takes into account that compacted garbage weighs more per yard. The assumption is that compacted trash still ends up taking the same amount of space in the landfill. Because the calculation for the compacted garbage produced a 48%rate increase, a three-year, phase-in of the new rates was approved. This is the second of the three-year rate adjustments. The 2004 recommended rates implement the overall 17% increase in revenue that is required to cover the 2003 shortfall and 2004 BFI operations. Sample rates for the typical can and bin sizes are as follows: TYPE OF SERVICE CURRENT MO. RATE NEW MO. RATE PERCENT INC. Residential, 1-32 gallon can $10.72 $12.54 17% Commercial 1-32 gallon can $10.72 $12.54 17% Commercial Bin 1-1 yd. bin $67.66 $79.16 17% Compactor Account 30 yd $872.93 $1,091.25 25% Commercial Organics Recycling Program To help lessen the impact of the rate adjustments and promote greater recycling among commercial accounts, especially compactor customers, the SBWMA and BFI developed the Commercial Organics Collection Program. The SBWMA Recycling Committee has extensively reviewed the proposed program and met with BFI to negotiate costs and other details. Implementation of the program in each jurisdiction requires the approval of the City Council and an Amendment to the Uniform Franchise Agreement with BFI. 2004 BFI Rates City Council Agenda Report.DOC Page 2 2/10/2004 The Commercial Organics Program is modeled similar to a successful program in San Francisco. Businesses that generate vegetables, meat, poultry, fish, baked goods, waxed cardboard, wooden crates, floral trimmings, tree trimmings, brush, leaves and grass will be targeted. The collected material will be transported to the San Carlos Transfer Station and sent to BFI's Newby Island for composting. The finished compost product will be available on a limited basis free of charge to participating cities. Each jurisdiction can receive one bag of compost for every two tons of recycled organic material. This valuable material can be used in city projects (e.g. parks) or made available to residents. Additional bags can be purchased at a nominal cost. The program includes a consultant to work with SBWMA member cities on the use of the compost and to help develop green purchasing policies where desired. Applied Compost Consultants (ACC) and BFI Recycling Coordinators will work closely with Burlingame businesses to provide training, monitoring and troubleshooting services. ACC worked with San Francisco's program and has a diverse staff fluent in different languages. Businesses will receive new collection containers for use inside and outside their businesses. The program also includes the purchase of new, watertight collection vehicles by BFI to handle the wet organic material. These vehicles can be used for general garbage or recycling collection if necessary. Over 170,000 tons of commercial waste was buried in the landfill in 2002 and only 29,000 commercial tons were recycled (SBWMA total). One of the most effective ways for Burlingame to meet and sustain its 50% diversion rate under AB 939 is to increase commercial recycling. The organics program offers an opportunity to recycle more commercial waste given that 20% of the waste is comprised of organics. The following table provides the BFI estimates for recycled tonnage from the program. Year Ton of commercial organics recycled 1 11,000 2 19,000 3 22,000 4 24,000 5 26,000 If approved by the City Council, BFI will order new containers and collection equipment, develop marketing materials, start outreach to Burlingame businesses and prepare internal logistics. Actual collection and processing of the material is scheduled to begin in September 2004. Fiscal Impacts of the Commercial Organics Collection Program BFI currently provides commercial garbage and recycling services to Burlingame businesses. Recycling services include: collection of cans, bottles, plastic, cardboard and mixed paper at no additional charge. Costs for recycling services are added to their garbage collection rates. The processing fees for the organics recycling program are based on the contamination level of the organic waste. Contamination levels will be evaluated quarterly by BFI. Customers with contaminated 2004 BFI Rates City Council Agenda Report.DOC Page 3 2/10/2004 organic material will be identified and given technical assistance to eliminate the contamination. Customers that consistently have contaminated material will be discontinued from the program. The tiered pricing will remain in effect without an escalator through the current Term of the Franchise Agreements. Tier 2 pricing of$32.00 per ton will be applicable for the first quarter of the program. Thereafter, pricing will be determined based on the level of contamination in the organic waste. The following table lists the processing fees that will go into effect after the contamination levels of the waste stream have been determined. Contamination Level Processing fee (per ton Tier 1 Less than 5% $30.00 Tier 2 5% to less than 10% $32.00 Tier 3 10%to less than 15% $36.00 Tier 4 15%to less than 20% $38.00 Tier 5 Greater than 20% $40.00 SBWMA and BFI also recommend that Council approve a minimum 25% rate discount(from the garbage rate) for Burlingame businesses that participate in this program. This incentive will serve to motivate businesses to participate in the program and recycle their organic waste. The current rate impact of the Commercial Organics Program is estimated to be 1.2%. The future costs of the rate incentive and the reduction in garbage service for participating businesses are not included in this 1.2%rate impact because we do not know how many businesses will participate and how they will reduce their garbage service. Cc: SBWMA Board of Directors Nadine Muller, Hilton, Farnkopf&Hobson, LLC Chris Valbusa, BFI 2004 13171 Rates City Council Agenda Report.DOC Page 4 2/10/2004 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME AUTHORIZING BFI WASTE SYSTEMS OF NORTH AMERICA,INC. (BFI) TO INCREASE RATES FOR REFUSE COLLECTION AND RECYCLING SERVICES RESOLVED,by the City Council of the City of Burlingame: WHEREAS, BFI Waste Systems of North America, (BFI) holds a franchise from the City to collect and dispose of refuse and various recyclables within the City; and WHEREAS,pursuant to that franchise and Municipal Code Section 8.16.040, BFI has applied for a rate increase for its services; and WHEREAS, the rate increase is intended to meet the funding and revenue requirements of the franchise agreement; and WHEREAS,the City has had Hilton Farnkopf& Hobson, independent consultants, evaluate the rate request and concurs that the rate increases requested are consistent with the franchise; and WHEREAS, the proposed rate structure will ensure that the differences in burdens on commercial and residential ratepayers are minimized; and WHEREAS,the proposed rate structure phases in elimination of benefits that compacted garbage seems to currently enjoy, because compacted garbage can actually be a detriment to the pick-up system and the landfill; and WHEREAS, the recommended rates appear just and reasonable and necessary for continued operation of the franchise within the City, NOW, THEREFORE,IT IS RESOLVED AND ORDERED: 1. The Refuse Collection and Recycling Rates are accepted as follows, and BFI is authorized to utilize such rates effective January 1, 2004: A. Commercial bin and can rates are increased by 17%; B. Commercial compactor rates are increased by 25.01% C. Residential rates are increased by 17%with the except of cart rental rates, which will not increase. MAYOR 1 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 2003,and was adopted thereafter by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: CITY CLERK 2 2 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME APPROVING SECOND AMENDMENT TO FRANCHISE AGREEMENT WITH BROWNING-FERRIS INDUSTRIES (BFI) FOR SOLID WASTE, RECYCLABLE MATERIALS, AND PLANT MATERIALS RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Burlingame: WHEREAS,the current franchise agreement with BFI provides that BFI is to provide certain special collections; and WHEREAS,the City and BFI wish to provide for a Commercial Organics Collection Program for green waste of commercial customers; and WHEREAS,the Second Amendment to the Franchise Agreement will establish the Program, standards, and cost recovery, NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS RESOLVED AND ORDERED: 1. The Mayor is authorized and requested to execute the Second Amendment to the Franchise Agreement between the City and BFI as contained in Exhibit A hereto. 2. The Clerk is directed to attest to the signature of the Mayor. 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 Second Amendment to the Agreement for Solid Waste, Recyclable Materials, and Plant Materials Collection Services 1 THIS SECOND AMENDMENT to the Agreement for Solid Waste, Recyclable Materials, 2 and Plant Materials Collection Services ("Agreement"), dated for reference February 17, 2004, is 3 made by and between the City of Burlingame ("Agency") and BFI WASTE SYSTEMS OF 4 NORTH AMERICA, Inc. ("Contractor") of San Mateo County. 5 RECITALS 6 Whereas,Agency and Contractor entered into the Agreement,dated March 1,2000; and, 7 Whereas Agreement anticipates that the Agency may request additional services or the 8 modification of existing services there under;and, 9 Whereas, the Agreement provides that Agency may direct Contractor to submit 10 proposals from time to time to provide additional or expanded services;and 11 Whereas, the Agency is a Member Agency of the South Bayside Waste Management 12 Authority("Authority"),and the Authority,on behalf of Agency,has requested a proposal from 13 Contractor for a Commercial Organics Collection Program;and, 14 Whereas, Contractor has prepared a proposal in response to the Authority's request; 15 and, 16 Whereas,Contractor and Agency now desire to amend the Agreement to incorporate the 17 Commercial Organics Collection Program; 18 NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS AGREED AS FOLLOWS: 19 1. Contractor shall implement the program to diverted commercial organic material 20 from landfill disposal (hereinafter the "Commercial Organics Collection Program", or 21 "Program") consistent with Contractor's November 20, 2002 proposal (Attachment 1), and 22 subsequent clarifications and revisions dated:January 27, 2003 (Attachment 2);February 7,2003 23 (Attachment 3); March 14, 2003 (Attachment 4); August 6, 2003 (Attachment 5); and August 13, 24 2003 (Attachment 6). Copies of the foregoing documents are on file with the Authority, the 25 Agency,and the Contractor. 26 2. The Commercial Organics Collection Program shall commence not later than 27 September 1, 2004, and shall continue for the remaining term of the Agreement and any 28 extension thereof. 29 3. Contractor shall report Program tonnage information and other such other 30 operational information (e.g., changes in participants' solid waste service levels), in a content 31 and format satisfactory to the Authority, as part of the existing quarterly MIS report provided 32 by Contractor to Authority. In addition, Contractor shall submit Program financial information 33 as a part of Contractor's annual rate application consistent with the provisions of Article 6 of the 34 Agreement. 35 4. The Contractor shall be compensated for services rendered hereunder in 36 accordance with Article 6 of the Agreement,except as provided below for processing expenses. Second Amendment-Organics Collections Program.doc Page 1 2/10/2004 Second Amendment to the Agreement for Solid Waste, Recyclable Materials, and Plant Materials Collection Services 37 5. Accounting for processing expenses incurred hereunder shall be the product of 38 multiplying the number of commercial organic tons processed by Contractor by the applicable 39 Processing Fee (per ton) specified below (hereinafter referred to as the "Processing Fee"). Contamination Level Processing Fee (per ton) Tier 1 Less than 5% $ 30.00 Tier 2 5% to less than 10% $ 32.00 Tier 3 10% to less than 15% $ 36.00 Tier 4 15% to less than 20% $ 38.00 Tier 5 Greater than 20% $ 40.00 40 41 6. The applicable Processing Fee will be based on the quarterly assessment process 42 as described in the Contractor's proposal letter dated March 14, 2003,referred to in paragraph 1 43 above. The Authority and/or Agency may monitor the Contractor's quarterly assessment 44 process to ensure that it reflects an accurate accounting of the contamination level for purposes 45 of establishing the applicable Processing Fee. The Tier 2 Processing Fee of$32.00 per ton will be 46 applicable for the first quarter of the program. 47 7. The Tiered Processing Fee schedule will remain in effect without adjustment 48 until December 31, 2006, the end of the current term of the Agreement. Any new governmental 49 or regulatory agency fees that become effective during the current term of the Agreement will 50 be added to the Tiered Processing Fee schedule. 51 8. Commencing January 1, 2007, and on every twelve month anniversary thereof 52 ("Adjustment Date") the Tiered Processing Fee schedule shall be adjusted to reflect the change 53 in the Consumer Price Index, All Urban Consumers, All Items Indexes, for the San Francisco- 54 Oakland-San Jose Metropolitan Area, (Series ID: CUURA422SAO) published by the United 55 States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics ("Index"). The Index for the month of 56 April preceding the Adjustment Date shall be the Comparison Index; the Index for the month of 57 April twelve months prior thereto shall be the Base Index. On each Adjustment Date, each 58 Tiered Processing Fee shall be adjusted to an amount equal to the product obtained by 59 multiplying each TPF for the prior year by a factor equal to one (1) plus the percentage change 60 in the Index between the Base Index and the Comparison Index. Any new governmental or 61 regulatory agency fees that become effective after January 1, 2007, will be added to the Tiered 62 Processing Fee schedule. 63 9. As an additional part of the Program, Contractor shall provide Agency with 64 finished compost measured by the inbound tonnage of organic material delivered to the Newby 65 Compost Facility from Agency's Service Area. Agency may elect to receive finished compost in 66 accordance with the following exchange factors: (a) one cubic yard of bulk compost in exchange 67 for each incoming ton of material delivered; (b) one, one cubic foot Lbqg o compost in exchange 68 for each two tons of material delivered;or (c) any combination of the foregoing. Contractor will Second Amendment-Organics Collections Program.doc Page 2 2/10/2004 Second Amendment to the Agreement for Solid Waste, Recyclable Materials, and Plant Materials Collection Services 69 provide additional bagged compost at $1.00 per bag, subject to a CPI adjustment after the 70 December 31, 2004. Compost requested by Agency within a calendar year shall be charged 71 against inbound tonnage only in the same calendar year. 72 10. In the event the Agreement is not extended after December 31, 2006, the 73 Authority shall pay the Contractor the Net Book Value of the vehicles and containers acquired 74 for the Commercial Organics Collection Program. In such event, the Authority shall have the 75 option, but not the obligation, to assume ownership of such vehicles and/or containers. If the 76 Agreement is extended after December 31, 2006, then the Authority shall have the option, but 77 not the obligation, to purchase the commercial organics collection vehicles and/or containers by 78 payment to Contractor of the Net Book Value thereof at the end of the final term of any such 79 extensions. 80 IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties hereto have executed this SECOND AMENDMENT 81 to the Agreement on the date indicated below. 82 BFI Waste Systems 83 of North America, Inc. City of Burlingame,California 84 85 86 By: By: 87 District Manager Mayor 88 89 Date: Date: Second Amendment-Organics Collections Program.doc Page 3 2/10/2004 STAFF REPORT AGENDA BUWUP!9.AME $c ITEM# y a MTG. bg0�p nq�6'0O DATE 2.17.04 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL SUBMITTED BY DATE: JANUARY 20,2004 APPROVE FROM: CITY PLANNER BY l SUBJECT: INTRODUCE ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE SEGO UNIT AMNESTY PROGRAM AND IMPLEMENT CHANGES TO THE SECOND UNIT ZONING REGULATIONS. Introduction: City Council should set the public hearing and second reading of an ordinance amend the zoning regulations implementing the second unit amnesty program to provide for changes to the program. Staff would recommend that this item be set for public hearing at your meeting on March 1, 2004. Introduction requires the following council actions. A. Request City Clerk to read title of the proposed ordinance. B. Waive further reading of the ordinance. C. Introduce the proposed ordinance. D. Direct the city clerk to publish a summary of the ordinance at least five days before proposed adoption. Planning Commission Action As a part of implementing the Work Program for the 2001 Housing Element, a subcommittee of the Planning Commission reviewed the city's Second Unit Amnesty Program and made recommendations to the Planning Commission which address: (1) making the program permanent and (2) adjusting the requirements based on the past two year's experience. At their meeting on January 12, 2004, the Commission held a public hearing and voted 6-0-1 (C. Keele absent)to recommend the amended program and zoning changes to the City Council for action. During their discussion of the program changes the Commissioners asked for clarification of several issues: How appeals would be handled? Any action of the City Planner can be appealed to the Planning Commission, the Second Unit Amnesty Program is the same. How will affordable unit be managed? The provisions of CS 25.63.020 (c)which apply to inclusionary affordable multi family units will apply to the second unit program. Essentially, the homeowner will be required to work with a non-profit housing group to select/place tenants and insure the unit remains affordable in exchange for being allowed to have no covered parking on site. How will the qualifying criteria be enforced? Compliance with the safe and sanitary criteria would be done through inspections for compliance with any building permits issued. Otherwise enforcement would be on complaint but the owner would be allowed to repair the unit rather than remove it. INTRODUCE ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE SECOND UNIT AMNESTYPROGRAMAND IMPLEMENT CHANGES TO THE SECOND UNIT ZONING REGULATIONS FEBRUARY 17,2004 BACKGROUND: The Second Unit Amnesty Program, effectuated through CS 25.59 of the zoning code, is a program to preserve second units built on single family zoned lots before 1954. These units have been an on-going part of the City's housing stock for many years. The impacts of these second units have been absorbed by the neighborhoods in which they are located. Because of their small size they provide more affordable housing for single people starting out and for the city's older residents. Because of the age of these second units and their uncertain status, the City has been concerned about the condition of these units. To provide property owners incentive to retain and upgrade the quality of this component of the city's housing stock, the city instituted the Second Unit Amnesty Program in May 2001. The second unit amnesty program is an administrative program, based on performance criteria set out in the zoning code. Any existing second unit built before 1954 which complies with the performance criteria can become a legal part of the City's housing stock. Becoming a recognized part of the city's housing stock may protect the property owners from a variety of abuses from their tenant and neighbors. The Housing Element Implementation Subcommittee of the Planning Commission has reviewed our experience with the current Second Unit Amnesty Program adopted in 2001 and suggested several changes to the performance criteria. The Subcommittee has also recommended that the sunset clause in the program be removed so the program can become a permanent part of the City's housing programs and zoning regulations. Some of the parameter of the current program which are not recommended to change are: ➢ The 1954 eligibility date. To be eligible the second unit must be documented to have been built before1954. ➢ No change is proposed to the processing procedure. The procedure for processing of these units, including the building inspection and review based on the Housing Code, has worked well. ➢ All development on the lot, including the second unit, will still be required to be within the current code maximums for lot coverage (40%) and floor area ratio. Proposed Changes to the Performance Criteria While the eligibility and processing framework of the current program will remain the same, the Housing Element Subcommittee has recommended a number of changes to the performance criteria for second units as follow: ➢ The program and ordinance become permanent. This is done by removing the June 30, 2004 sunset clause. ➢ The purpose section has been expanded to state the goal of the program which is to make these second units safe and sanitary and a reminder has been added to property owners that they have one year from city action in which to accomplish safe and sanitary standards or their approval expires. ➢ Modifies the on-site parking requirements from one covered and one uncovered parking space for the primary dwelling unit plus one uncovered parking space for the second unit. The new on site parking criteria is more detailed: o On site parking for the primary dwelling based on the number of bedrooms as required by the current zoning code; INTRODUCE ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE SECOND UNIT AMNESTYPROGRAMAND IMPLEMENT CHANGES TO -THE SECOND UNIT ZONING REGULATIONS FEBRUARY I7,2004 o Plus one on-site parking space for the second unit based on the following: ■ Not more than two of the parking spaces required on site (covered or uncovered) may be in tandem configuration (one behind the other); ■ No required parking shall be in the front setback or yard except in a driveway; ■ All parking provided shall be on a hard, all weather surface and drained to a public street; and ■ All on-site parking spaces may be uncovered if the second dwelling unit is used as "affordable" housing for very low or low income individuals or couples for the duration of its existence, or for the time that all the on-site parking is uncovered. This will be formalized and enforced by requiring the property owner to record the low or very low income affordability limitation on the second unit on the deed to the property. ➢ Clarifies that the property owner must live in one unit on the site. ➢ Clarifies that the property owner has one year to make the unit safe and sanitary. After that time the approval to have a second unit will lapse. ➢ The remodel and improvement section has been clarified to note that if no covered parking was provided on-site for the primary unit and the primary dwelling unit is demolished, the new primary unit must meet the city's current off-street parking requirements, e.g. provide covered parking. ➢ Should the second dwelling unit be demolished or damaged in a natural catastrophe the second dwelling unit can be replaced just as it was (based on the plans submitted when it entered the amnesty program). ➢ Clarified the three circumstances when a second unit permit expires: the primary dwelling unit is purposely demolished; on-site parking is not provided as required; and the agreement with the city for affordability is breached and covered parking for the primary dwelling is not being provided. Attachments: Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes, January 12, 2004 Proposed Revisions to Second Unit Amnesty Program, Annotations, November 17, 2003 Chapter 25.59 Secondary Dwelling Units, Burlingame Municipal Code Second Unit Amnesty Tracking, project review history, August 5, 2003 Draft Ordinance Amending Chapter 25.59 to Permanently Institute an Amnesty Program for Pre-Existing Secondary Dwelling Units and to Allow Variations in Certain Requirements for Approval. Planning Commission Staff Report, January 12, 2004, with remaining attachments City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes January 12,2004 the office use(682.5 SF)and auto repair and service shop area(4927.5 SF)on this premise,including the location of the paint booth and three vehicles lefts,shall conform to the plans submitted to the Planning Department and date stamped April 18,2003;2)that the parking variances shall only apply to an auto repair use at this site with a maximum of one paint booth and three vehicle lifts,and shall become void if the use is intensified or if the building is ever expanded,demolished or destroyed by catastrophe or natural disaster or for replacement; 3)that the applicant shall obtain a special encroachment permit from the Public Works Department to install a curb cut to provide vehicle access to parking behind the building prior to installing the paint booth and vehicle lift;only after receiving an encroachment permit shall the applicant obtain a building permit to install the paint booth and vehicle lifts;4)that the area to the north of the building between the structure and the property line accessed from Marsten Road at 1317 Marsten Road shall be paved prior to issuance of the building permit to install the paint booth and vehicle lifts;5)that there shall be a maximum of two employees on site at any one time including the owner and all employees;that an increase in the number of employees shall only be allowed with an amendment to this parking variance;6)that the business may not be open for business except during the hours of 8:00 a.m.to 5:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday; 7)that any changes in the hours of operation,floor area,use,or number of employees which exceeds the maximums as stated in these conditions shall require an amendment to this permit; and 8)that the use and any improvements for the use shall meet all California Building and Fire Codes,2001 Edition as amended by the City of Burlingame. The motion was seconded by C.Vistica. Commissioners noted that the conditions require that the variance goes with this use and any increase in the number of employees would require an amendment to the parking variance. Chair Boju6s called for a voice vote on the motion to approve. The motion passed on a 6-0-1(Cers.Keele absent). Appeal procedures were advised. This item concluded at 8:30 p.m. 7. ACTION ON PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE SECOND UNIT AMNESTY PROGRAM AND IMPLEMENTING ZONING REGULATIONS—(NEWSPAPER NOTICE)PROJECT PLANNER: MARGARET MONROE Reference staff report January 12,2004,with attachments. CP Monroe presented the proposed changes to the present Second Unit Amnesty Program and required changes to the zoning code to implement them. Commissioner asked how very low and low income units would be managed. CP Monroe noted that the City has a process in the inclusionary zoning provisions which would be applied to qualifying second units; in general the very low and low income units would be managed by a third party,usually a non-profit housing group. There were no further questions from the Commission. Chair Boju6s opened the public hearing. Lee Tanton,Linden Avenue,spoke noting that it was recently reported in the newspaper that the city had received an"F"for meeting its affordable housing needs,clearly the current second unit program is inadequate and needs this improvement; he reviewed the history of the city's second unit amnesty program; he noted that people don't come forward to have their second units legalized because they do not trust government;city needs to do more to open up the process and create public trust;he is the only one making noise about this,if there were 50 people in the room the city would do something;you know that the units are out there,they can be used because they are nonconforming,but people cannot make improvements. There were no further comments from the floor. The public hearing was closed. 7 City ojBurlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes January 12„2004 C. Auran moved to recommend the changes to the second unit amnesty program and implementing zoning changes to the City Council for approval action The motion was seconded by C. Osterling. Comment on the motion: staff should be complimented on the amount of time they put into preparing this revision and for the quality of the work done. CP Monroe noted that she appreciated the extra time and effort, over a number of months, the Planning Commission Subcommittee put in as well. Chair Bojues called for a voice vote on the motion to recommend the second unit amnesty program and the implementing zoning changes to the City Council for approval action. The motion passed on a 6-0-1 voice vote(C. Keele absent). This item concluded at 9:00 p.m. 8. APPLICATION FOR A ZONING AMENDMENT TO ADD FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS,REAL ESTATE OFFICES, HEALTH SERVICES AND GENERAL OFFICE USES ON THE FIRST FLOOR AS CONDITIONAL USES IN THE BROADWAY COMMERCIAL AREA (349 RADIUS NOTICE/95 MERCHANTS NOTICED/STREET POSTED/NEWSPAPER NOTICE) PROJECT PLANNER: MARGARET MONROE Reference staff report January 12,2004,with attachments. CP Monroe reviewed the application to add four uses on the first floor in the Broadway Commercial Area,noting that if these uses were found to be consistent with the General Plan designation for the Broadway Center, CEQA issues would be addressed. Commissioners asked: if one of these uses were allowed for a trial period, say 24 months,by condition could the commission limit the lease to 24 months. CA responded it would be a problem for enforcement,leases are not city business, if the use were conditional the city could make it"temporary”and limit the use permit to 5 years for example, as we do on the Bayfront and the conditional use permit would be subject to review and could be revoked at that time;however, in general it should be expected that if uses are allowed and spaces filled that they will remain as the currently non-conforming uses in the Broadway Area have. In 1969 when the General Plan was approved any use was allowed them in 1984 the uses were limited, why? In the early 1980's the city was looking at Burlingame Avenue to create a high pedestrian traffic retail center(subarea A), Broadway merchants and property owners asked to be treated the same;so the Broadway Commercial Area was created with the same regulations as Subarea A of the Burlingame Commercial Area. How many store fronts are vacant at this time? CP did not know exact number at this time. Can the same kind of limitation of number and type used for food establishments be created for financial institutions and real estate offices. CA responded we do not have enough information to be able to determine the correct number; with food establishments we started with the number in the area at the time we established the regulation,that would not work here since the issue is creating opportunity for more of each of these four uses. Regulating the number and mix of uses needs to be based on a plan for Broadway. There is no plan or vision for Broadway which addresses the appropriate number of each of these four uses. Commissioner asked if any limit on the maximum square footage of each of these uses is proposed. CP noted no,in general the lots are small on Broadway and that limits the size of the individual commercial areas. Commissioner asked if two of each use could be allowed and the city could develop a lottery system to decide how to fill the opportunities. CP noted that the city had some experience with a lottery system as the food establishment regulations evolved and it was unhappy. Would not like to repeat. Do these uses address issues like Pilates? CP noted the City has other regulations in effect now which address physical fitness and training in the Broadway area. There were no finther questions or comments from the commission. Chair Bojues opened the public hearing. David Hinkle, 1616 Sanchez; John Root, 1407 Montero;Virginia Vince, 1301 Paloma; Maida Bezdjian, applicant, 1199 Broadway; Garbis Bezdjian, applicant, 1199 8 November 17, 2003 Proposed Revisions to Second Unit Amnesty Program Chapter 25.59 Secondary Dwelling Units 25.59.010 Purpose. The purpose of this chapter is to provide a means for property owners in the R-1 districts of the city to legalize the existence and usage of secondary dwelling units that were built as dwelling units before January 1, 1954. This chapter provides an owner the opportunity to apply to the city for review and approval of such a second dwelling unit in the single family zone and then complete all improvements to bring the unit into compliance with the health and safety standards of the Uniform Housing Code. The health and safety improvements must be completed within one year following the approval of the unit. This chaptef provides window of a total e two (2) years within which sueh an owner- ean apply to the city for review and appfeval and then complete all , . iprevements to bring the unit into eernpliance with the health and-safety standards fth Unifer-m Housing Cede. If the primary dwelling on the site is demolished, the secondary dwelling unit cannot be retained or replaced. This chapter also provides basic protections to the surrounding neighborhoods by requiring off-street parking, owner occupancy of one of the two units located on such a property, and limitation on the number of occupants. Annotation_ The update of the Secondary Dwelling Unit regulations would remove the "two year window" for processing an application, and simply require that health and safety improvements be completed within a year of finding the second unit complies with the performance standards of the ordinance. This section clarifies the intent of the ordinance which is to retain these smaller, less expensive rental units in the housing stock and to ensure that they provide safe and sanitary accommodations for tenants. Recognizing existing second units as a part of the legal housing stock will allow property owners to evict unruly tenants which is difficult if a property owner believes his unit to be illegal and fears it will be abated if the tenant reports it to officials. 25.59.020 Applicability. This chapter applies to any secondary dwelling unit that was built as a dwelling unit not later than December 31, 1953, and that has been in substantially the same use and envelope since that time. Annotation_ No change is proposed to this provision. December 31, 1953 was chose because the zoning regulations for the R-1 district regarding second units changed in January 1954. Proposed Revisions to Second Unit Amnesty Program November 7,2003 Annotation: No changes to the processing procedures of these applications is proposed. Over the several years this program has been in effect, this process has worked very well, as a result no change is proposed. 25.59.050 Appeals. (a) Appeals from the decision of the city planner shall be made in writing to the planning commission within seven (7) days after the public notice of the decision of the city planner is mailed. Any member of the planning commission or the city council may request a review of a decision of the city planner by making such a request to the city planner within seven (7) days of the date of the mailing of the notice. (b) Upon receipt of an appeal or a request for review, the planning commission will set the application for hearing, and notice of the public hearing will be given as set forth in Chapter 25.16. (c) The planning commission shall determine if the application meets the requirements of this chapter. If the application meets all of the requirements of this chapter, the planning commission shall approve the application with those conditions necessary to ensure conformance with this chapter. If the application does not meet all of the requirements of this chapter, the planning commission shall deny the application. (d)The decision of the city planner shall be final seven (7) days after the mailing of public notice of the city planner's decision if not appeal in writing has been filed by any person or if no request for review has been made by any planning commission or city councilmember. (e) A decision of the planning commission under this chapter is appealable pursuant to the procedures contained in chapter 25.16. Annotation: No change is proposed to this section. It should be noted that this zoning chapter refers to performance standards for second units in single family zones. The applicant either conforms to the performance standards or does not. On appeal, if the request conforms to the standards set out in the code, it cannot be denied by the Commission. On the other hand, on appeal, if the request does not conform, it must be denied by the Planning Commission. This section makes these limitations on review actions clear. Variances or exceptions cannot be granted. 25.59.060 Performance standards. A secondary dwelling unit shall meet all of the following requirements to qualify for approval under this chapter: (a) On site p ffking shall be-previded for-the pf:im--, dlvelling unit as equifed by t code, and additional pafking br-the seeendar-y dwAh"a-unit shall he at least one tineevered par-king spaee, which may be provided in tandem to another existing-paiking spaEe-,- On site parking spaces based on the number of bedrooms in the primary dwelling 3 Proposed Revisions to Second Unit Amnesty Program November 7,2003 25.59.030 Definitions. For purposes of this chapter,the following definition applies: Secondary dwelling unit."Secondary dwelling unit"means an additional dwelling unit on a single-family residential lot or parcel which dwelling contains one or more rooms and one kitchen,designed for occupancy by not more than two(2)persons for living and sleeping purposes. Annotation: No change is proposed to this provision. 25.59.040 Procedure. (a) Any person owning a secondary dwelling unit that was built as a dwelling unit not later than December 31, 1953,and that has been in substantially the same use and envelope since that time may apply to the city no lateF thaH June 20 2004,for a special permit to legalize the existence,use,and occupancy ofthe secondary dwelling unit pursuant to this chapter. Annotation: This change removes the"sunset'(e.g.expiration date)from this ordinance. With this change this program becomes a permanent part of the city's zoning regulations. (b)Applications for such a special permit shall be in writing and filed with the city planner on a form approved by the city planner. In addition to the requirements for such an application,the application shall contain a declaration under penalty of perjury detailing the history ofthe secondary dwelling unit demonstrating that it was built before January 1,1954,and that since that time,it has been used as a dwelling unit in the same size and configuration as shown in the application. (c)As established by council resolution,a fee will be charged for an application for a special permit under this chapter. (d)Upon application for a special permit pursuant to this chapter,the city planner will review the application and determine if all ofthe information required has been provided. If the application meets all ofthe requirements of this chapter,the city planner shall approve the application with those conditions necessary to ensure conformance with this chapter. If the application does not meet all ofthe requirements ofthis chapter,the city planner shall deny the application. (e)Notice of approval of a special permit pursuant to this chapter shall be mailed by the city planner to owners of property within 100 feet ofthe exterior boundaries ofthe subject property,with information regarding the right to appeal the decision of the city planner. 2 Proposed Revisions to Second Unit Amnesty Program November 7, 2003 and one (1) space for the second unit shall be provided as follows: (1) Parking for the primary dwelling as required by Ch 25. 70; (2) No more than two of the required on-site parking spaces shall be in tandem configuration, covered or uncovered, (3) No required parking may be provided in the front setback or yard, except in the driveway, (4) All parking shall be provided on a hard, all-weather surface and properly drained to the public street; and (5) Nothwithstanding subsection (a)(1) above, up to three (3) of the parking spaces required by this title may be uncovered if, but only if, the secondary dwelling unit is only used for "affordable housing" as defined in chapter 25.63. As a condition of approval under this subsection, the owner of the property will be required to enter into and record an agreement generally in conformance with section 25.63.040 to ensure continued affordability of the secondary dwelling unit. Annotation: The subcommittee recommended that it should be an objective of the second unit program to have all the required parking for the primary unit (2 or 3 parking spaces depending upon the number of bedrooms) and the secondary unit (1 space) provided on site (section (a)). For three parking spaces It was less important that the covered parking requirements be met or that the uncovered parking was provided in the driveway in tandem configuration, as long as no more than two cars were parked in tandem. For larger primary dwellings where two covered parking spaces are required by code (e.g. 5 or more bedrooms), the revisions suggest that at least on covered parking space be required. This reduces the "parking lot" appearance which could be created in the single family district where a large paved area to accommodate four uncovered parking spaces is clearly out of character with the existing development section (5)). However, the Subcommittee felt that it was important to the neighborhood character that applicant's not pave their front setbacks or front yards in order to meet the off street parking requirements (section (3)). It was important also that all parking spaces be paved (e.g. covered with a hard, all weather surface) so that there is incentive for them to be used in bad weather and they look like parking spaces from the street (section (4)). This further discourages tenants and property owners from parking on lawns in front yards and setbacks. A hard all-weather surface can be concrete, bricks, interlocking tiles, tile or other similar materials approved by the Public Works Department which also can meet the on-site drainage requirements (section (4)). Finally, the section addresses the situation where the garage was converted to a second unit before covered parking on-site was required or the garage was converted before 1954- In this case all on-site parking may continue to be provide uncovered. However the second unit must be rented as an "affordable" unit as defined by California HCD and maintained as compliant affordable housing for very low and low income individuals or couples, as along as the second unit remains on the property and required covered parking is not provided on-site. The Planning action will be conditioned on the property owner recording with the county such a deed 4 Proposed Revisions to Second Unit Amnesty Program November 7,2003 restriction. (b)No more than two(2)persons may occupy the secondary dwelling unit. (c) An owner of the subject property shall reside in at least one of the dwelling units on the property at all times. (d)The floor area of the secondary dwelling unit shall not exceed 640 square feet. (e) The secondary dwelling unit shall conform to the requirements of the California Health and Safety Code, Section 17920.3, and the Uniform Housing Code as adopted by Section 17922. Annotation: The only change proposed to these sections is a clarification that the property owner live in one unit"on the property". Otherwise, these performance standards have worked well over the past several years and do not need modification at this time. 25.59.070 Conformance. (a) An applicant for a special permit pursuant to this chapter that has been granted on conditions that it conforms to the requirements of this chapter may perform work to bring the secondary dwelling unit into conformance, such as reducing the size of the living unit, improving or constructing parking, and correcting violation of Health& Safety Code section 17920.3 and the Uniform Housing Code. However, in no event shall any improvements to the secondary dwelling unit exceed fifty percent (50%) of the replacement value of the unit. (b) Any special permit approved pursuant to this chapter that has not been brought into compliance with the requirements of this chapter within one year of approval shall lapse and be of no further force and effect. Annotation: A primary reason for acknowledging older second units was to be sure that they provided safe and sanitary housing as well as less expensive housing. Recognition of the unit is the carrot (incentive)to get the property owner to make life safety improvements to the existing building. On that basis it is important that the city be sure that the,improvements are made. Part of the sunset clause was that applicants would be given one additional year to make the structural improvements. With the removal of the sunset clause it is important to retain the one year obligation to make the life safety corrections. Section (b)establishes the obligation to make the improvements within a year or the right to use the second unit will be lost. Approval of a second unit includes a list of the corrections required.Many, if not all of the corrections, require a building permit. 25 59 080 Time fame 5 Proposed Revisions to Second Unit Amnesty Program November 7,2003 n„„t , ,+ ,,,,� rippricat ions , 2004. Any approved special peffnit that has not eemplied within 4—+;_ -in its eentained this r s section shall lapse ofno fuFthef forceandcf et on Juni 30,200�r Annotation: This section sets the time frame for the "sunset” of the ordinance. The Subcommittee has suggested that the City now has enough experience testing the effectiveness of the performance standards of this ordinance, and should make the regulation a permanent part of the city's zoning regulations. Further the provisions of the code have been effective in meeting the objectives of the city's Housing policy to support the continuation of existing more affordable housing in a safe and sanitary condition. 25.59.090 Remodeling and improvement. Following the completion of the requirements contained in section 25.59.060 above, the following limitations on remodeling, expansion, improvement, or reconstruction shall apply: (a)No increase of more than thirty(30) square feet of floor area of the secondary dwelling unit shall be allowed. (b)No remodeling or improvement to the secondary dwelling unit that exceeds fifty percent (50%)of the value of the secondary dwelling unit shall be allowed. (c) Any remodeling affecting the exterior of the secondary dwelling unit shall be matched to generally conform to the exterior treatment of the primary dwelling unit on the parcel. (d)If the secondary dwelling unit is demolished, the special permit shall lapse and be of no further force and effect, and all on-site parking requirements of chapter 25.70 shall be met for the primary dwelling on the site. Annotation: The Subcommittee wanted it to be very clear, if the on-site parking requirements were to be relaxed e.g. allow all required parking uncovered, then it needed to be clear that the exception did not extend a property right should the secondary dwelling be demolished. Moreover, if the second dwelling unit is demolished, then the primary single family dwelling must meet all on site parking requirements, even if the parking did not comply with the current code parking requirement at the time the property was originally developed. (e) If the secondary dwelling unit is destroyed or damaged by a natural catastrophe, the secondary dwelling unit may be reconstructed in exactly the same envelope and floor area as it existed immediately before the catastrophe; Annotation: The Subcommittee also wanted it to be clear that should the second unit be destroyed by a disaster it could be replaced. In that case the development on the site may be replaced exactly 6 Proposed Revisions to Second Una Amnesty Program November 7,2003 as it was,including uncovered parking and maintaining the second unit as affordable. (f)In no event,shall any increase or improvement in the secondary dwelling unit be allowed to cause the improvements on the subject property to exceed the maximum floor area ratio or lot coverage. Annotation: No change is proposed to section(f). This provision mandates that all development on the site be within the current lot coverage and FAR regulations for the site. For example,this provision over-rides the regulation that allows a 30 SF addition to an existing second unit if the total of the house plus the second unit and any accessory structures on the lot exceeds the allowed FAR and lot coverage for the site. Amended Text(see italics) 25.59.100 Revocation of special permit. A special permit granted pursuant to this chapter shall be revoked when: (a)No owner of the subject property resides on the property;or (b)The secondary dwelling unit is no longer used for residential purposes;or (b) The parking required by section 25.59.060 is no longer provided;or (c) The primary dwelling on the site is purposely demolished,•or (d)Parking is not being provided in conformance to this chapter;or (e) The agreement between the owner and the city regarding affordability of the secondary dwelling unit has been breached by the owner and covered parking is not being provided in accordance with chapter 25.70. Annotation: The purpose of these three additions to the revocation list((c),(d),and(e))is to make it clear when the second unit right expires. This section clarifies that the second unit,if approved,is not a right which goes with the property indefinitely. The added concept that the second unit remains when 3 on-site parking spaces are uncovered only if it is maintained as affordable is emphasized here as well e.g.subsection(e). Since these older,second units have been the city's housing stock for more than 50 years, are small,and have been occupied on an on-going basis,their rents have been modest and managed by the homeowners.Generally these units have been occupied by family members or relatives at low or no cost,or rented at reasonable rates to young people or older residents. However,the Subcommittee felt that those owners who would benefit from a reduction in the on-site parking requirement(providing all parking 7 Proposed Revisions to Second Unit Amnesty Program November 7,2003 uncovered)should be required provide affordable rents as a condition of the parking benefit. Since the city does not manage properties, this is accomplished by having a third party, non- profit housing group, manage the property and assume responsibility for guaranteeing that the rent is maintained as affordable for the duration of the second unit use and/or the uncovered parking exception on the property. 25.59.110 Variances prohibited. No variance under chapter 25.54 shall be granted from any requirement of this chapter 25.59. Annotation: It is the intent to continue this program as an administrative program based on performance criteria. A project either complies with the performance criteria or it is not approved. No variances are possible.This prevents arbitrary opposition based on "popularity" or one unfortunately irritating tenant. Recognizing the second units as a part of the legal housing stock will allow property owners to evict unruly tenants which is difficult if the property owner believes his unit to be illegal. Tenants occasionally refuse to pay rent for a unit they think is illegal because in order to evict them they know that the landlord must reveal the illegal unit and probably remove it. This program protects the property owner from such actions, and retains units which because of their age have no additional impact on the existing residential area. U:\ZoningIssues\SecondUnityAmnesty\TextRev3 PC Study 11.17.03.doc 8 City of Burlingame Chapter 2559 the city no Later than June 30,2004,for a special permit to legalize the e_X ence, use, and o.,cupancli of the_.` SECONDARY DWEI UNG UNITS. secondary dwelln2g»nit prusiiaut to this' cLaPter. . (b)Applications for such a special eiimit s&_dll be= 9.0)0' in Wn Ing and filowf_th'tlie city player on a foriia� t' 120' Applir�brlity. approved by the city' h in addytion `to the.. ZSR 030 DeS ons. _ requirements for such an app n,- pp` �n licatio. tl e ` litati], M040 Procctit`riie:" ' g shall contain a declaration under penalty ot=petjury 1549.050 -:A + : . P-tte `. . detailing the f. the sccondaty dwelliu , t-9,5-9.060 Pelf - history ° y g.uejL ormance standards: ' ' demonstrating that it was built ore anon 1 1954'' 55-9.0-70 Conformance. since habeen LSeda3� 559.0$0 Timeume. IQ>)w �. . - unit in the same size and corifiguiation as shoyvnii m tho-� 1559:090 "Reiuodeling ariil`14 j.4: e ; nL application '` 559.100 Revocation of special permit.. _ _._(c)As estlished by council resohrtion;:a IeZ w+dl :Varianc ` F= be hdforpes proanapon 't,»" nG+c �rthischaptet. ���Pog aPPhcafioa for a special Pe>m�t The poipose of this chaplet pum_a is tdplrovide a'menus to this cba !er the = - _ v _ } P . ,. city;plaiiuer will review the br.propert)r oow�n(�e(rrs in thep(R�.l .districts ofihe City:to applicatnin"'and detei>riine` if all of tha infoiroatioa ega2iz� $ y iliMliAg _ iegnired has been pM";ded. If the applicatw�i_ WS II aiik that were Tiud as dwcMj*xi4 befoi`c.laiinaty t, of the requirements of this clia ilei, tliccity p 95�E suns chapteipiavides a-�vmdow►of a'totaI of f wo shall approve:t�6c''applica} on with those cortons e 2 within vvhicli )years such an owi fan appy►to tle` necessary to ensure conformance withthis cliapte[: Yf :- ity for review and approval and' thin comp ett atI the application c%esrot meet-all" i the requitte nis of ecessary improvements to bring the -t: iut-o this chapter the ci I A _. =s - tip annei s$a11 denj the application; omplia}acc with the health and safefy standards of the (e)M ice of approval of a special peinuiit •" t = Imfoirii Housing Code. Tftlie pr`rmar_.C. , k l . 9. 0 the to this'chapter shalt be mailed liyK the cit}t-pfannc'to € ite is demolished; the secondary d► lhng'vnitcannot owners of property within 100: feef ol"tLe eat'e : 04eof replaced. This ch`apfer alio- provides boundaries.of the subject propeitji, with' info`nnation asic.pmtections to the surrounding neig)iborhoods b)' regarding the right to appeal the decision of the city xliadrm�g oil=street parlQn 'owner orriiupanc ofone of planner. . ie* units.located on such a piopei;�, nail limitation- (1687§ 2,'Amended, 06/0312Q62;'1653 _§ 3 (paitXMd4 un"i of oci pa 05/i0?12001) 3 (part),Added, 05/072001) 25: 050 539.020 - - -- AppSexbihty- : . (3} Appeals frorni_ the'dee ori of the ci ]au_ Thischapterappligs[oanjrseco lure unit shall lie�iriade m_ _ivii fo the h' t bnr7t" dviAenig- within 'seven plamimg_coli t mt. 'was as. a_ :)Iri t not. later (7) days i pnbhG ire of ttiie: ' ece nber31, 1953;ai iiilia_ C>ias l nen:in substanU.aIty" - decitiyoaof tfie city planner is.mailed Anji ruler qf' e same use and envelope since that tmre. the Plannmg:.codau of 653 § 3 (part),Added, 05/072001) request a review ofa deCis'ibn of the city plaimtr bpi'`' waking such a request to the city planner within scveil-'" i.59-030 Definition . F: (7) days of the date of the mailing ofili�`noticae_, . - . . .. For purposes of this chapter, the following (b) Upon receipt of an a r.. : nition lies_ appeal, ora " Ib Ir reviews, the planning commission W. 0 set Secondary dwelling unit "Secondary dwellinga licabon foland, PP i and notice'ofihepvbhchezr*g _ pit" means an additional dwelling unit on a single- will be as set f residential lot �`,�� �h m chapter$S.I6;; ly or I which dwelling contains P g (c� ie pl?nonn�comunssion shall defeimnie iftlt ee or more rooms and one kitchen designed for application-meets the requirements of flits &W,` b not more than two 2 DIY Y ( )persons far living the application meets_all of the requueme�s ofthis d sleeping p►nposes. chapter; the planning codon shall approve the; i53 § 3 (party Added, 05/072001) application with those conditions necessary to ensure conformance with this chapter If the application 59.040 Procedure. not meet all of the iegiiiremenis,o!this the chapter (a) Any Person owning a secondary dwellingunit plarmmg comnussion shall.de�the:appheatron. ' 'r it was built as a dwelling unit not later than (d) TLe decision_ of the.city planner shall be final -_ rember 31, 1953, and that has been in substantially seven (7) days after the madmg of public notice of the. .. same use and envelope since that time may apply to city planner's decision if not appeal i>i writing has been ` (25-59) 1 July 2002 City—C B*Iiiiga C _ filo 6yanx person of if request for review l at een of floor area of the-secondary'd-WeNng unit shall be made by_.. any :planning :pRua Dani ..or city allowed mer. (b) No iemodelmg or improvement-'to the (e)A decision of the Planning costiainss ori under secondary dwelling unit that exceeds fifty per.. this ebapteisis.appealahile p drsuaiitq`the.procedo es (50'/.)of the value of the secondary Awe g uirit shall... contained in chaptef 25-16 _ be allowed (1G §3(paitj,Added;05/0"!l20b1) (c)Any remodeling aflechng:tlie;ea error of thG:' secondary dwelling unit shall be matched)o geneialltt_A. ' 1SS9;QGO' perlorri lice st n ands. conform to the exterior treaUmen or me A s�iizndary dvvef ling unif shall rioeet. of the dwelling unit on the parcel.` ` foltti�virig`iequirerioeints to ijualily for approval iiiider (d) If the secondary dwe$ing`umit ihit ter: ii� P >- the special permit shall_lapse and hie of nb.fnrther foil,: ; ,(a) On-site.parking:shall_be provided• IDT' be and effect dweltin unit as ed'b -ting andthe!"' . P�?y. .: $_. �l'�. 3!. code, damaged � �_ I6ng unit des" � additi"Ij)ark ug"for the s'ecoiudar�i dvvelting iinif shall g X a 6 be at least one uncgyered parking.space,which znrsy.lie dwelling Writ may be reconstructed in.exaetiy the same' providcd'in tfindeni to another c�ostirig pa3ld4g SlSace; envelopeanclfloorarea as it existed' telyhef'ore _ (b)T�To wore than two(2)PYP the :.;..- seEond dpvelliag unit- - (e)._In no event,:Aill anyincresse of improveno t x ofihe svbOr- Obpdrty shall resit ia'•. in fire secondary dwelling unit a ono o ca at hst'one:oftlte dvveIlmg utrits_a#all times: improvements on the-subject prapertji tQ ex` u .. Ceethtli4,,-. . (dj fie,floacY_area ot'tlie`seeondasji dwellin: iinr ' $ maxinauilooi aiea ratio or.lot.coverage: shall noi iceed 640-square feet (1633.(t (parij;prided;OS%1r1/2OOy) secondary aweliii g umt small Conform to the ritii "events of t11e'Califomia lfealth and safety' 2559.100 Revocation of specratperimiif { s ... - , Code,S�ti�dri.1792©:3;andtheUnYforniliousingCode A seat'' d��7an#`fo this 'rW�......• . as addpte' Tii'Sectioii t,7922:`' . shall be revoked wlien : - (1653 3:(pattj,Added;'115/0720d1j" (a}N owner of the subject piciperfy resides oaf the' ) 25'.39:1170 66fornil ce.- o cltr a'secondary dtvellmg:�i is no lorl An applicant for a special.permit pursuant,hi this.: for residential'puipo3es; c�P lei that lia5 been` ted on conditions_that.it: . r s"` t� (c)The"parldii8re9uu'edby.Se�tion25:59tOti0ltriv_ _- . conform to the requirements of this chapter'may longer provided. perform work to brie the secondary dwelling unit_into. 1653§3 Added 05/07/2001 conformance, such as ttic size.of the j��y unit:inapibving or constructinglung,and corireeting_. 25-59110 variances prohili[ed: violation oflieahli ai Safatjr section.1792U J and No variance i>iider chapter 2:54 shall be granted the tJn foi<n-Musin;code. However, in no ievent'_ from-My.rt quirtment:of thus chapter 2 59.• , shall any iiiproveIs to;the secondary dwelling upit (1653 exce0 fifty-percent Oft)of theseplace�ent valine.of file Usk (I 63i 3(port);,Add s 0 ')12001) ,i 25S9.Q80`° T`ui�e fra>fte; - Applications for approval of at -,ectal petit shalt be made`on liefore:7une 3(1,2004: Ariy_appioved ' spcciai hermit that:Las_not oomopl ed within redtnci�oens contained in flus`section shalt lapse and. be of nb'.utei fo3ce and effect on Jute 30,2005: "' 25.59�b90 Itenateliniproveat:; FolloWiti&turn± on:of'`the' c pwcments' -r contained ii[secti6ri:2539.066:a`bo tTic'f - 'R lmritations on remodeling,exlia_"ori,improdenoen�or (a)1Vo mcreasc ofmore than thirty(30)square July 2002 (2559)i SECOND UNIT AMNESTY TRACKING - ,; :. , a ::�"v¢,� ,,,::. .;.: " ,.,• s,, -.':,�J .;:y irys ,....� r{{ats ie,'1 Yd's t I; ';?, �v :i.f U�f; '.,�,'�r ..f^>;t fid mew+ f { •a3��5 G R �! F:R 5.{ri?�N X b,1t�R� f )C l. h�.��i�w (dt'�ti: A ifa Iin'' tus fir Stuatr 1te i rt is 4 „ Status Address Received `Seco nd • door in furnace room to be weather-stripped roved 1609 324 SF, app legalize second • 2 windows permit finaled Albemarle 6.26.01 detache and none EL filed 1.28,02 Wayunit d within 3'of property finaled 4,23,02 line must be removed and alternative venting provided cannot meet main dwelling covered filed 2.6.01 (insp, 399 SF, pending parking deposit refund 845 Linden legalize second p ) Avenue 7.11,01 unit attache none with requirements/ --- EL filed 4,11.03 ($70 d issues application noticing fee) withdrawn 4.11.03 legalize second 1413 Bernal unit in order 635 SF, existing fuse permit finaled Avenue 10.25.01 complete attache box to be replaced by approved none 10.10,02 EL filed 3,1.02 addition to d a breaker panel main dwelling • existing outlets must be replaced with legalize second 374 SF, ground-fault circuit detac unit in order interrupter outlets 1232 Bernal 12.21.01 complete r 10.100.02.02• main-line approved none Permit d d over EL filed 3.1.02 Avenue addition to plumbing vent must main dwelling gage be extended • automobile access to garage must be installed s:/2ndunitamensty/tracksheet updated 8,05.03 1 Dade size d UAWProcess lug Address PR Refund StatusStatus Approval mI - v edby iieceUd applicant required to remove 2nd code unit(kitchen enforcement on only)because filed 8.2.02(insp. 826 Alpine addition to main 392 SF, applied to 117deposit refund and Avenue . .02 dwelling reveals attached N/A denied --- amnesty as the EL $70 noticing fee) second unit on result of code site enforcement- Bldg. Dept red tag,did not voluntarily I apply I legalize second 141 Pepper unit in order 414 SF, Avenue 1.28.02 complete detached over none approved none none required EL filed 3.1.02 addition to main garage dwelling • water heater vent must legalize second 416 SF, have 6 inches 804 Alpine unit in order to detached clear Avenue 4.9.02 make interior behind main 0 temperatur approved none none required so filed 7.26.02 improvements to dwelling e pressure relief unit valve must be metal pipe and run to exterior of unit unit neighbor 300 SF, �tted-see May 2, no Bldg. 1570 Cypress 4.16.02 complaint detached 2002 Bldg. approved none permit filed as so filed 7.24.02 Avenue regarding behind main Official's memo- of 7.25.03 addition to unit dwelling must apply various permits s:/2ndurdtamensty/tracksheet updated 8.05.03 Date Size and Impetus for Requirements for Deng Building Proeess Address Application Situation of Approval Status Approval Permit Status ed by Refund Status Application PP Received Seeod Unit • temperature no Bldg. 212.5 SF Pressure relief valve permit req'd detached at must be metal pipe for 1255 Bernal 62002 rear approved Legalize second and run to exterior of roved none corrections/ SO filed 9.5.02 Avenue . . unit unit Ping, detached 0 smoke inspection garage detector indicates compliance window at bathroom must be 200 SF boarded up 1249 Legalize second attached in • 5/8 no Bldg. Vancouver 6.26.02 unit front of sheetrock on garage approved none permit filed as SO filed 9.5.02 Avenue detached side wall of 7.25.03 garage • smoke detector • two windows in East wall removed sealed combustion heating unit vents relocated; legalize second • combustion unit in order 281 SF unit air openings added to no Bldg. 12 Dwight 2,14.03 complete attached to rear laundry room approved none permit filed as EL filed 8.6..03 Road addition to main of detached . pipe for of 7,25.03 dwelling gage temp and pressure relief valve from water heater cut 5/8 inch thick Type X gypsum wallboard installed on the garage side of the common wall 02ndunitamensty/tracksheet updated 8.05.03 3 I ORDINANCE NO. 2 ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME AMENDING CHAPTER 25.59 TO PERMANENTLY INSTITUTE AN AMNESTY PROGRAM FOR PRE-EXISTING 3 SECONDARY DWELLING UNITS AND TO ALLOW VARIATIONS IN CERTAIN REQUIREMENTS FOR APPROVAL 4 5 The City Council of the City of Burlingame ordains as follows: 6 7 Section 1. The purpose of this ordinance is to convert the current amnesty program for 8 secondary units from a two-year program to a permanent program. It is hoped that this will 9 encourage property owners to apply for amnesty over time. In addition,the limitations on on-site 10 parking spaces has created some hardships on property owners, and this ordinance attempts to 11 reduce that hardship in exchange for a commitment to sustain the affordability of secondary 12 dwelling unit. 13 14 Section 2. Section 25.59.010 is amended to read as follows: 15 25.59.010 Purpose. 16 The purpose of this chapter is to provide a means for property owners in the R-1 districts 17 of the city to legalize the existence and usage of secondary dwelling units that were built as 18 dwelling units before January 1, 1954. 19 20 21 22 This chapter provides a window of a total o 23 two (2)years witffin which such an ownez apply to the city fbr review mid appi oval and then 24 complete all necessary Is to bring the unit into compliance with the heafth and safet,F 25 standards of the Unifbrnif fousing eo If the primary dwelling on the site is demolished, the 26 secondary dwelling unit cannot be retained or replaced. This chapter also provides basic 27 protections to the surrounding neighborhoods by requiring off-street parking,owner occupancy of 28 one of the two units located on such a property, and limitation on the number of occupants. 1 I Section 3. Section 25.59.040(a) is amended to read as follows: 2 Any person owning a secondary dwelling unit that was built as a dwelling unit not later than 3 December 31, 1953, and that has been in substantially the same use and envelope since that time 4 may apply to the city no later than june 30,2004,for a special permit to legalize the existence,use, 5 and occupancy of the secondary dwelling unit pursuant to this chapter. 6 7 Section 4. Section 25.59.060 is amended to read as follows: 8 25.59.060 Performance standards. 9 A secondary dwelling unit shall meet all of the following requirements to qualify for 10 approval under this chapter: 11 (a ) On-site parking shall be provided f6r the primary dwelling Unit aS equired by this 12 code,and additional parking fbr the secondary dwelling unit shall be at least one uncovered parkin-6 13 space,which may be provided in talidem to another existing parking space. � �� �► 14 .CJs _ r r~ u 15 S ' 16 17 18 19 20 - 21 22 2 -: -, 3 �.-. '.V- �f 24 25 26 2719 28 2 I (b)No more than two (2)persons may occupy the secondary dwelling unit. 2 (c)An owner of the subject property shall reside in at least one of the dwelling units on 3 ` at all times. 4 (d)The floor area of the secondary dwelling unit shall not exceed 640 square feet. 5 (e)The secondary dwelling unit shall conform to the requirements of the California Health 6 and Safety Code, Section 17920.3, and the Uniform Housing Code as adopted by Section 17922. 7 8 Section 5. A new subsection 25.59.070(b) is added as follows: 9 (b) Any special permit approved pursuant to this chapter that has not been brought into 10 compliance with the requirements of this chapter within one year of approval shall lapse and be of 11 no further force and effect. 12 13 Section 6. Section 25.59.80 is repealed. 14 15 Section 7. Section 25.59.090 is amended to read as follows: 16 25.59.090 Remodeling and improvement. 17 Following the completion of the requirements contained in section 25.59.060 above, the 18 following limitations on remodeling, expansion, improvement, or reconstruction shall apply: 19 (a)No increase of more than thirty(30)square feet of floor area of the secondary dwelling 20 unit shall be allowed. 21 (b)No remodeling or improvement to the secondary dwelling unit that exceeds fifty percent 22 (50%)of the value of the secondary dwelling unit shall be allowed. 23 (c)Any remodeling affecting the exterior of the secondary dwelling unit shall be matched 24 to generally conform to the exterior treatment of the primary dwelling unit on the parcel. 25 (d)If the secondary dwelling unit is demolished,the special permit shall lapse and be of no 26 further force and effect, 27 28 (e) If the secondary dwelling unit is destroyed or damaged by a natural catastrophe, the 3 I secondary dwelling unit may be reconstructed in exactly the same envelope and floor area as it �-- 2 existed immediately before the catastrophe; 3 (f)In no event,shall any increase or improvement in the secondary dwelling unit be allowed 4 to cause the improvements on the subject property to exceed the maximum floor area ratio or lot 5 coverage. 6 7 Section 8. Section 25.59.100 is amended to read as follows: 8 25.59.100 Revocation of special permit. 9 A special permit granted pursuant to this chapter shall be revoked when: 10 (a) No owner of the subject property resides on the property; or 11 (b) The secondary dwelling unit is no longer used for residential purposes; or 12 (c) The parking required by section 25.59.060 is no longer provided;mo 13 14 `- 15 16 IN _ 17 _ 18 19 Section 9. This ordinance shall be published as required by law. 20 21 Mayor 22 23 I,ANN T.MUSSO,City Clerk of the City of Burlingame,do hereby certify that the 24 foregoing ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the_day of , 2004, and adopted thereafter at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the_ 25 _day of , 2004, by the following vote: 26 AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: 27 NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: 28 4 1 City Clerk 2 C:\FILES\ORDINANC\secondnnits2004.pin.wpd 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 5 City of Burlingame Item # Action on Proposed Changes to the Second UnitAmnesty Action Calendar Program and Implementing Zoning Regulations Meeting Date: 1/12/04 Action: The Planning Commission Should hold a public hearing and vote on whether to recommend to the City Council the proposed changes to the Second Unit Amnesty Program and the implementing zoning regulations. This item has been noticed in a newspaper of general circulation as required by law. Summary: The Second Unit Amnesty Program, effectuated through CS 25.59 of the zoning code, is a program to preserve second units built on single family zoned lots before 1954. These units have been an on-going part ofthe City's housing stock for many years;their impacts have been absorbed by the neighborhoods in which they are located. Because oftheir small size they provide more affordable housing for single people starting out and the city's older residents. Because of their age and uncertain status, the City has been concerned about the condition of these units. To provide property owners incentive to retain and upgrade the quality of this component of the city's housing stock,the city instituted the Second Unit Amnesty Program in May 2001. The second unit amnesty program is an administrative program, based on performance criteria set out in the zoning code. Any existing unit which complies with the performance criteria can become a legal part of the City's housing stock. Legality protects the property owners from a variety of abuses from tenant and neighbors. The Housing Element Implementation Subcommittee of the Planning Commission has reviewed the current program adopted in 2001 and suggested several changes to the performance criteria. The Subcommittee has also recommended that the sunset clause in the program be removed, and the program become a permanent part of the City's housing programs and zoning regulations. Some of the parameter of the current program which are not recommended to change are: ➢ The 1954 eligibility date. To be eligible the second unit must be documented to have been built beforel954. ➢ No change is proposed to the processing procedure. The procedure for processing of these units, including the building inspection and review based on the Housing Code, has worked well. ➢ All development on the lot, including the second unit,will still be required to be within the current code maximums for lot coverage(40%) and floor area ratio. Proposed Changes While the elgibilty and processing framework of the current program will remain the same, the Housing Element Subcommittee has recommended a number of changes to the performance criteria for second units. These follow: ➢ The program and ordinance become permanent_ This is done by removing the June 30,2004 sunset clause. ➢ The purpose section has been expanded to state the goal of the program which is to make these second units safe and sanitary and reminds property owners that they have one year from city action Action on Proposed Changes to the Second UnitAmnesty Program and Implementing Zoning Regulations January12,2004 in which to accomplish that, or their approval expires. _ ➢ Modifies the on-site parking requirements from one covered and one uncovered parking space for the primary dwelling unit plus one uncovered parking space for the second unit. The new criteria is more detailed: o On site parking for the primary dwelling based on the number of bedrooms as required by the current zoning code; o Plus one on-site parking space for the second unit based on the following: ■ Not more than two of the parking spaces required on site(covered or uncovered) may be in tandem configuration(one behind the other); ■ No required parking shall be in the front setback or yard except in a driveway; ■ All parking provided shall be on a hard, all weather surface and drained to a public street; ■ All on-site parking spaces may be uncovered if the second dwelling unit is used as "affordable" housing for very low or low income individuals or couples for the duration of its existence, or for the time that all the on-site parking is uncovered. This will be formalized and enforced by requiring the property owner to record the low or very low income affordability limitation on the second unit on the deed to the property. ➢ Clarifies that the property owner must live in one unit on the site. ➢ Clarifies that the property owner has one year to make the unit safe and sanitary. After that time the approval to have a second unit will lapse. ➢ The remodel and improvement section has been clarified to note that if no covered parking was provided on-site and the primary dwelling unit is demolished, the new primary unit must meet the city's current off-street parking requirements, e.g. provide covered parking. ➢ Should the second dwelling unit be demolished or damaged in a natural catastrophe the second dwelling unit can be replaced just as it was(based on the plans submitted when it was made legal). ➢ Clarified the three circumstances when a second unit permit expires: the primary dwelling unit is purposely demolished; on-site parking is not provided as required;and the agreement with the city for affordability is breached and covered parking for the primary dwelling is not being provided. Planning Commission Study At their meeting on November 24, 2003, the Planning Commission studied the proposed changes to the second unit amnesty program. The commissioners asked four questions: ➢ Page 3 talks about appeals,but thought that second units have to meet the requirements and there is no appeal. 2 Action on Proposed Changes to the Second UnitAmnesty Program and Implementing Zoning Regulations January]2,2004 Any action of the City Planner maybe appealed to the Planning Commission. The point being made on page 3 of the annotated changes, is that if the application conforms to all the performance criteria the Planning Commission must up hold the City Planner's action. ➢ Who will manage the affordable unit? The City's inclusionary zoning requirements establish in CS 25.63.020(c) that the developer, in this case the owner of the property on which the second unit is located is responsible for presenting to the city a below market rate housing program. Generally such programs are developed between a property owner and a third party, non-profit which manages low income housing. The third party has the responsibility of finding a qualified individual or couple for the available unit; and continues to find appropriate tenants so long as the unit remains in the city's affordable housing stock. The Planning Department can assist the property owner in finding an appropriate thirdparty, non-profit. ➢ How often will the requirements for the affordable unit be evaluated? The non-profit housing manager will have the responsibility of determining that the tenant is quaffed, this is a standard practice. When the property owner applies to the city for any building permit or change on his property, the Planning Department in their review of the building permit application would identify if the proposed action would change the second unit requirements on the property. ➢ How will the three criteria for the unit to remain be enforced? Staff will work with the property owner of the qualified property as they do now to insure that the second unit qualifies for the program, that the improvements needed are identified by the building department, that a buildingpermit is taken out andfinaled, and, if required, that a contract to manage the unit for a very low and/or low income household is signed between the property owner and a third party, non-profit housing agency. If the unit is required to be affordable to a very low or low income household(one or two people), that requirement will be recorded with the deed to the property and will be made evident to any future purchaser. Otherwise, the performance requirements will be enforced when building permit applications are reviewed or upon complaint, as is the case at present. Attachments: Draft Ordinance of the City of Burlingame Amending Chapter 25.59 to Permanently Institute an Amnesty Program for Pre-Existing Secondary Dwelling Units and to Allow Variations in Certain Requirements for Approval Planning Commission Minutes, November 24, 2003 Planning Commission Study Staff Report,November 24, 2003, with attachments including.- Proposed ncluding:Proposed Revisions to Second Unit Amnesty Program, Annotated,November 17, 2003 Notice of Public Hearing, Published January 2, 2003 3 CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, CA November 24, 2003 7:00 P.M. Council Chambers I. CALL TO ORDER Chair Bojues called the November 24, 2003,regular meeting of the Planning Commission to order at 7:05 p.m. H. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Auran, Bojues, Keighran, Osterling and Vistica Absent: Commissioners: Keele, Brownrigg Staff Present: City Planner, Margaret Monroe; Planner, Catherine Barber; Senior Engineer;Phil Monaghan III. MINUTES The minutes of the November 12, 2003 regular meeting of the Planning Commission were approved as mailed. W. APPROVAL OF AGENDA There were no changes to the agenda. V. FROM THE FLOOR There were no public comments. VI. STUDY ITEMS 1. REVIEW OF PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE SECOND UNIT AMNESTY PROGRAM AND IMPLEMENTING ZONING REGULATIONS -PROJECT PLANNER: MARGARET MONROE CP Monroe presented a summary of the staff report. Commissioners asked: • Page 3 talks about appeals, but thought that second units either have to meet the requirements and there is no appeal; Who will manage the affordable unit; How often will the requirements for the affordable unit be evaluated; How will the three criteria for the unit to remain be enforced. CP Monroe explained that applicant can appeal on interpretation of how the second unit meets requirements similar to a determination,but that there are no appeals if they don't meet criteria. CP Monroe also explained that if a second unit is required to be"affordable"that a third party management company will manage and monitor the unit, and evaluate the rental when tenants change. CP Monroe noted that the hearing would have to be on the January 12,2003 agenda because of the holiday we can not meet newspaper noticing requirements for December 8. This item concluded at 7:19 p.m. S:\MH�UTES\PROTECTE12003\aninutes 11.24.doc City of Burlingame Item # Review of Proposed Changes to the Second Unit Amnesty Program and Study Calendar Implementing Zoning Regulations Planning Commission Action: This is the first presentation to the Commission of the Housing Element Implementation Subcommittee's recommendation for revisions to the Second Unit Amnesty program and implementing legislation. The Commission should review and discuss the proposed changes to Chapter 25.59 Secondary Dwelling Units which will make these provisions permanent and will modify certain of the program's performance criteria. Staff should be directed about any changes to this proposal that the Commission would like to consider at the public hearing. There is no public hearing at the study meeting since this is the opportunity for the Commissioners to discuss the proposal. However, after discussion with staff, Commission may wish to set the public hearing date at the meeting. Summary: For several months the Housing Element Implementation Subcommittee of the Planning Commission has been reviewing the code requirements which implement the city's second unit amnesty program. This program applies to second units in single family zoned areas which were built before January 1, 1954. On e of the items in the 2001 Housing Element work program was to evaluate this program, initiated as a temporary program in May of 2001. Subcommittee reviewed the success of the program and the impacts of the program on the existing residential areas. As a result of that study the Subcommittee is recommending several changes to the requirements of the program. (See Proposed Revisions to Second Unit Amnesty Program Annotations,November 17,2003)_ Most importantly the Subcommittee is recommending that this administrative program to legalize second units built before 1954 become a permanent part ofthe Municipal _ Code. The Second Unit Amnesty Program, effectuated through CS 25.59 of the zoning code, is a program to preserve second units built on single family zoned lots before 1954. These units have been an on-going part ofthe city's housing stock for many years,their impacts have been absorbed by the neighborhoods,and because of their small size they provide more affordable housing for single people starting out and our older residents. Because of their age and uncertain status, the city has been concerned about the condition of these units. To provide property owners incentive to retain and upgrade the quality of this component of the city's housing stock, the city instituted the Second Unit Amnesty Program in May 2001. This is an administrative program. The zoning code sets out performance criteria for these units, any unit that complies with those criteria can become a legal part of the city's housing stock. Legality protects property owners from a variety of abuses from tenants and neighbors. In their review,the Housing Element Implementation Subcommittee of the Planning Commission suggests several changes to the performance criteria as well as recommending that this program and its enabling regulations become a permanent part of the city's housing programs and zoning regulations. Some parameters of the current program are not recommended to change: ➢ The 1954 eligibility date. To be eligible the second unit must be documented to have been built before 1954. ➢ No change is proposed to the processing procedure. The procedure for processing of these units, including the building inspection and review based on the Housing Code, has worked well. ➢ All development on the lot, including the second unit,will still be required to be within the current code maximums for lot coverage(40%) and floor area ratio. Review of Proposed Changes to the Second Unil Amnesty Program and Implementing Zoning Regulations November 24,2003 The Subcommittee's suggested changes to the performance criteria are as follows: Proposed Changes to Performance Criteria from the Current Regulations ➢ The program and ordinance become permanent.This is done by removing the June 30,2004 sunset clause. ➢ The purpose section has been expended to state the goal of the program to make these second units safe and sanitary and reminds property owners that they have one year from city action in which to accomplish that. ➢ Modifies the on-site parking requirements from one covered and one uncovered parking space for the primary dwelling unit plus one uncovered parking space for the second unit. The new criteria is more detailed: o On site parking for the primary dwelling based on the number of bedrooms as required by the current zoning code; o Plus one on-site parking space for the second unit based on the following: ■ Not more than two of the parking spaces required on site(covered or uncovered) may be in tandem configuration (one behind the other); ■ No required parking shall be in the front setback or yard except in a driveway; ■ All parking provided shall be on a hard, all weather surface and drained to a public street; ■ All on-site parking spaces may be uncovered if the second dwelling unit is used as "affordable" housing for very low or low income individuals or couples for the duration of its existence or the time that all the on-site parking is uncovered. This will be formalized by requiring the property owner to record this limitation on the second unit on the deed to the property. ➢ Clarifies that the property owner must live in one unit on the site. ➢ Clarifies that the property owner has one year to make the unit safe and sanitary_After that time the approval to have a second unit will lapse. ➢ The remodel and improvement section has been clarified to note that if no covered parking was provided on-site and the primary dwelling unit is demolished,the new primary unit must meet the city's current off-street parking requirements, e.g. provide covered parking. ➢ Should the second dwelling unit be demolished or damaged in a natural catastrophe the second dwelling unit can be replaced just as it was(based on the plans submitted when it was made legal). ➢ Clarified the three circumstances when a second unit permit expires: the primary dwelling unit is purposely demolished;on-site parking is not provided as required; and the agreement with the city for affordability is breached and covered parking for the primary dwelling is not being provided. 2 Review of Proposed Charges to the Second VnitAmnesty Program and Implementing Zoning Regulations November 24,2003 Attachments: Proposed Revisions to Second Unit Amnesty Program,Annotated,November 17,2003 Municipal Code Chapter 25.59 Secondary Dwelling Units,current zoning regulations Second Unit Amnesty Tracking,Project Log and Project Status,November 2003 Second Unit Amnesty Program Handouts and Application Forms,November 2003 3 History: The City of Burlingame first adopted a. zoning code in 1921. Revisions to the zoning code in January 1954 prohibited second units on an R-1 property. Because second units were allowed under the zoning code up to January 1954 and because many of units were built during the housing crisis associated with WWII , the focus of the amnesty program is on these early units. Purpose of the Amnesty Program: The purpose of the program is two fold. First, to retain these second units as a legal part of the city's housing stock, based on the idea that because they are smaller, older, and scattered they are both lower cost and an attractive 1housing alternative for single individuals with limited incomes. Second, since the targeted units were known to be older, often built without building permits, and designated nonconforming or illegal, many have been neglected and have over time become unsafe and/ or unsanitary. Getting these units made safe and sanitary for current and future tenants is also an important to community priority. Duration of the Amnesty Program: The amnesty program established will be in. effect for two years. Applications for special permits will be accepted in the Planning Department until June 30, 2004. Applications for building permits to bring the second units into compliance with Health and Safety codes will be accepted in the Building Department until June 30, 2005. Qualifying for the Amnesty Program: All of the following requirements must be met in order for an existing second unit to qualify for the amnesty program: • the second unit must be located in an R-1 zone; n • the second unit must have been built before January 1, 1954; - • required on-site parking shall be provided for the primary dwelling, and additional parking for.the secondary dwelling unit shall be at least one uncovered parking space, which may be provided in tandem to another existing parking space; • no more than two (2) persons may occupy the secondary dwelling unit; • an owner of the subject property shall reside in at least one of the dwelling units at all times; AMNESTYEXPLAN.SIT • the floor area of the secondary dwelling shall not exceed 640 SF;and the secondary dwelling unit shall be able and made to conform to the requirements of the California Health and Safety Code. flow the Program Works:Application to the amnesty programm must be initiated by the property owner. The legalization process will progress in the following manner: 1. Applicant submits complete application materials and fees to the Planning Department. Please see the Second Unity Amnesty Application and Submittal Requirements(attached lilac form)for details. 2. An appointment is scheduled for a Building Inspector to inspect the second unit and write a report on its age and its condition in relation to the applicable standards of California Health and Safety Code. 3. Given the Building Inspector's findings,the afsplicant will decide if he/she wishes to pursue the special permit. 4. If the applicant chooses to pursue the special permit,neighbors within 100'of the property will be noticed of the request to legalize the existing second unit. If no neighbor appeals within 7 days, the special permit will be granted to the property. If an appeal is received by the Planning Department, the request for the special permit to legalize the existing second unit will go before the Planning Commission for review at a public hearing. If the request is denied,the existing second unit will continue to be allowed as a nonconforming dwelling unit subject to the applicable provisions of the zoning code. Approval of the Special Permit for a Second Unit: Once a special permit for a second unit is approved by the Planning Department,the applicant has until June 30,2005,to submit to the Building Department for building permits to bring the second unit into compliance with the Uniform Building Code and the California Health and Safety Code. With the granting of amnesty,the following limitations will apply to theproperty: no improvements to the secondarydwelling unit can exceed fifty percent(50•/0)of the replacement _ value of the unit(replacement value to be determined by a Building Inspector); • no increase of more than thirty(30)square feet of floor area of the secondary dwelling unit shall be allowed; AMNESTYEXPLAN_SHT _any remodeling affecting the exterior of the secondary dwelling unit shall be matched to generally conform to the exterior treatment of the primary dwelling unit on the parcel; • if the secondary dwelling unit is demolished,the special permit shall lapse and be of no further force and effect; • if the secondary dwelling unit is destroyed or damaged by a natural catastrophe,the secondary dwelling unit may be reconstructed in exactly the same envelope and floor area as it existed immediately before the catastrophe; • in no event, shall any increase or improvement in the secondary dwelling unit be allowed to cause the improvements on the subject property to exceed the maximum floor area ration or lot coverage; and • required on-site parking for the primary dwelling and one on-site uncovered parking space for the second unit shall be provided and maintained When all Building Permits are issued and the second unit has received a final inspection by the Building Department, notice will be sent to San Mateo County to legalized the second unit. Note: Property owners and applicants will not be penalized if the second unit on the property does not meet the amnesty requirements: AMNESTYEXPLAN.SHT CITY OF B URLINGAME SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS Wi FOR SECOND UNIT AMNESTY plication to the Planning Department must include certain minimum information_ The applicant is responsible for submitting this information as listed below. All submittal information must be clear, and easily readable. Incomplete or illegible information cannot be accepted and will cause delays in the processing of the application. [ ] COMPLETED APPLICATION FORM: with original applicant .and property owner signatures. Photocopies or faxed signatures are unacceptable_ .Please write clearly in ink or type application forms. Identify the contact person with the most knowledge of the project with an asterisk(*). [ ] NOTICING FEE: $ 70.00 [ ] INSPECTION DEPOSIT: $ 375.00 [ ] VERIFICATION OF OWNERSHIP: If new owners. [ ] DOCUMENTATION TO VERIFY AGE OF SECOND UNIT: Can include building permits, dated pictures, signed testimonials, etc. to prove that unit existed prior to January 1, 1954. If inconclusive documentation or no documentation is provided, the building inspector will determine the approximate age for the second unit upon inspection. [ ] PLANS: (2 sets of plans drawn to scale, 8 % x 11 minimum and at least one set must be 8 %2 x 11) lot dimensions and graph paper can be obtained from the Planning Department Outlined below are guidelines for completing plans. All plans must be drawn to scale: [ ] SITE PLAN: drawn to scale showing the property lines, easements, and include the dimensions and location of the sidewalk, driveway, and all structures on site. [ ] FLOOR PLANS: show floor layouts for all floors in the main dwelling and the second unit. Partial floor plans are not acceptable. Please label rooms, identify all existing interior walls and windows, and include the interior dimensions for any garage areas(examples of symbols will be provided). { ] BUILDING ELEVATIONS: elevations showing the second.unit, dimension to show plate height,ceiling height,building height to highest ridge,windows and doors_ Note: Property owners and applicants will not be penalized if the second unit on the property does not meet the amnesty requirements. CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING DEPARTMENT 501 PRIMROSE ROAD P(650)558-7250 F(650)696-3790 cFTY t't 0'� SECOND UNIT AMNESTY APPLICATION Project Address: Parcel Number: APPLICANT PROPERTY OWNER Name: Name: Address: Address: City/State/Zip: City/State/Zip: Phone(w): Phone(w): (h)= (h)= Please indicate with an.asterisk* the contact person for this project. AFFADAVIT/SIGNATURE: I hereby certify under penalty of perjury that the information" given herein is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. Applicant's signature: Date: I know about the proposed-application and hereby authorize the above applicant to submit this application to the Planning Department. Property owner's signature: Date: Date submitted: Note: Property owners and applicants will not be penalized if_the second unit on the property does not meet the amnesty requirements. i 41 y. '.Y.. I I I. . ...,rr' I_.�., _.. ! ..'_ I ry .;. .i_ i I ... ..... ... 42, 4- --l. • 4 ..r- t----I ..A. 1 4' - -4-1 -4- .. ...... ...... --4--- JL. jAI. Lj ...........- V'Op I 4-L. I F i t-7- .. ......... .......... I. I I I 1 I II `, i- I 1 L.. t.... l.. �...,. .......... .............. .......... J............ 4-1 I j -----..... .............. Lt ............L 1 4-- ............. ...... iI. I .� ......w.... .�........_ _ f ' ...,__L__.I—_.I_... �-...i..._ t ! ��1 .._; .1. _i._..7 I I I 7"'i ' L4 41— �..a._...,r_�+.......-_.a.,._..i._...:. . L 1 .......... r--r 4- .............. .............. (Th .1 it ............. I I .4 J 1 j .......... ............ ...... ...... ... ........ ....... .... ..... .......... ............. .. .......... ............. .......... ........... ... ...... SAN MATEO COUNTY ® 'HUMAN SERVICES AGENCY OFFICE OF HOUSING OUSIN.G & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT -262 Harbor Blvd. - Bldg.A Belmont,CA 94002 (650)802-5050 Fax(650)802-5049. Housing Rehabilitation Loan Application For Rental Rehabilitation Program Thu*you for your interest in the low interest housing rehabilitation loan programs offered by Housing and Cali rxmity DeveloprnenG As this application package is lengthy and will require several different sources of information, it is recommended that you follow the suggestions as listed below for your consideration. Allow yourself a sufficient amount of time to complete thisapplication in its entirety. Do not turn in an incomplete application. Those applications which do not have the required information are returned to the applicant for completion. This will cause a delay in processing. 2. Peal the application entirely before you begin filling in the information. Gather the necessary supporting data and documents and complete the application Jn order of information requested. 3. If you have questions or need further direction, contact the Housing Specialist for your area at the number above, prior to sending it in for processing. 4. After you have completed the application, review it again to ensure its correctness, and fill in any open - data spaces._ It is usually best to put an 'N/A" in those spaces that do not apply to your.particular situation. S. Make a photocopy of the entire application for your records prior to turning it in for processing. 6. Be sure to include any supporting documents that are required, including the non-refundable Application Fee of$250.00. These-mus,accompany your completed application in order to be considered by Housing and Community Development. 7. Be patiem As this Rog-am is available to all investment property owners within ,there are usually several applicants who are in various stages of processing. Your application wil ssed in a timely mariner. 8. Detach and maintain the yellow sections for your records.......... A�q ot tiy.eG BOJ 9. Detach, copy,and disburse white sections to your tenants............ o'tic F,oTq,�cr 10. Detach,copy, and have tenants sign associated Lead Based Paint documents at back of green section- - Return signed documents with application package. (Documents must be signed for all units). - Rental R6�bration.(Rlj'Program.De. senption . PURPOSE 4 LOAN ...,= s>r t i`, '.. ` , . :, :;:,-,�,°•t The purpose of the ban is to finance the moderate and substantial rehabilitation of -: '. : buil lirigs s✓txltaining r-- 4 or moreresidential rental units, in which the.pcoperty owner is required to maintain a minimum of ::- 60%occupancy by low or very.low income tenants'at affbr dable reins LtrVv at5d very ow tricorrie 15-' defined by the US: Dept Of Housing and Urban Developrraent annually. The Pmject may be may. funded by the Courrty of San Mateo Rental Rehabilitation Pr ograrn..Any funds. required beyond.program limits as-described:below must beprovided-:bj+the`Property Owner,.:-.. Tenants occpying the units may qualify fix,but are not guaranteed. Section 8 assistance through the San'-, Mateo County Housing authority, subject to eligibility and procedures as defined by>the 1oii5irig�. Authority. APPucANT EuGIBILrry The.investor-.owner must meet banking standards of credd worthiness, and'the - pnopertymust t kt-Wd: to produce a : or net.$0 cash ffaW after rehabilitation. If the'dw.net is of tainln li'rs�her t- Poste( ) of the.project costs frorn.a loaii.secured-by the Piny.the payrr`ierOs ori this-view loan must b actafed'::: -into the msh Iow analysis. Eu�reLE Sntucrts Eligible rental unit shKtures must have a minimum of 60%law or very low income tenants as of the date- of the application OR an equivalent number of low or very low income tenants and vacancies, Eligible l units are those vvtuctlt,Ineed rehabilitation. "Need'rekraEil'rtation` is defined;as tiocrsirrg urutr` which do trot~meet U,S Housing&_Urban.Development minimum housing quality standards.or'►ocai.: building health and safety,sfarxlai-ds. APPLICABLE RENTS At least 60%of the units(distributed among urk sizes in proportion to the overall distribution of units sizes in-the.devebpmeiit)�:ryx be.rented to low or very l9*.i tenants-at"aflordahke' ordable rew:.is defined bu f lLU fords l�0[`'IE Investment Partr ershi Ad and.is neral - >' more or*ss auxrally P ` - !Y 46J For-a period of one(1)year from completion of the work, the Property Owner shall be required to ` maintain e)astirig.pre-rehab: rents on 4 units. One year from the filing of the'Notice of C - HCD wig ratify the Owner of the Affordable Rents and Household Incomes a"-n8-at time. ,These firr&wig apply to the 60%of the units. In the event eiasting r?eis arse already higher than the Atfonda[i1e Rent the owner will not bereq uir edM1 to reduce the rens but mist Weep the rent static until the Affordable Rent meets or exceeds the existing � rent. FEES Property Owner-shall!pay a nonfelkirickible Applicatim Feeof$250.subnutted'with the Loan appl`Katiom.:. This fee-shall cover HCD s-in revrmrig the-appf'xapon if the Owner:a Pr+opertjr meet lend ;staridarcis > ie Proper Ey Owner shall be it fon ned of the estmr�ated cosi 04 -pr and anY other eecbeci posts._ `Der_chooses at thrs t�rxe-to proceed with, loan,an additrorial l°oa t Fee b($2'0,must tie paid This1e wavers fide reports, or_ clk reports, recording fees,`ddcwF erg prep cation and.processlt cods: -Owner shaA be-required to j:WoMe HCD-_vv'rth a current appraisal: The,appraiser shall tie selected-by- <' County HM-' appraiser shall be paid directly by dvyner Addi#ional c s'Kmay,:fie rncrred for terrruts and s6ixtural pest M*ol reports, engineering and blueprirrts:If any of'tliese items are regi ired�arid:they-are paid for by HCD in advance,.;they rrnnt be reversed from prviceetis.of the loan Property Owner.may.elect to pay.t}iese costs in advance. NOTE: Property'ow- shallagree iii writing-tdi-be-resp�-, 4-of-the above.items and,:nAhe-: - -event of,withdrawa1 from the. program prior:toloan ban dosing,,. will reimburse- HCD within}45.days of notification to do Any Fees or e"Venses.paid by the Owner may be reimbursed from the proceeds of the loan affe- payment of all costs of the construction:- CormrvGFn►cY --� An approprbe coaitingerxy'arnoirit is included m the loan amount for.each project and may be used for disconrery work only. If the contingency is not used,.the reri-fining balance is applied directly to the loan principal. The contingency may not be used-for General Property Improvemerits, upgrades, or , substantial work not specfied.at the precorstrucbon.conference that:would rot:reasonably. be consider�ecl "Discovery Work"related to contracted items. : SuaoRDiNATION OF HCD LoANs Subordination of l e t-lousing and C&r>Rxmity lDe eloprnerit loans in the amo nts of rite balance of the senior kiari(s)'plus the costs of refinancing is acceptable as bng as appraisals irid`icate the ban too value ratio standards are not exceeded and the purpose-is to lessen the borrower's y financial obligations; The leridat. ubon"r ig a -..-'*. -io mudW.prcrinde H.C.D.with copies of the prypgsed:loan'. documentation , No subordmabons will occur which would provide cash or equity being taken from the property - Note : Al program guidelines and procedures may not be detailed above. Other program guidelines and requirements may apply. Full program explanation will be available upon requesL SAN MATEO COUNTY . HOUSING and COMMUNITI� DEVELOPMENT 262 Harbor Blvd: Bldg..A BeknontCk 99002 ' : 65p)8()2:,St Fax(650�802-5449. Y:•_; , =�. PINTURAS A BAS: DE PLOMO NOTIVI ACION A PROPRIETARIOS E INQUIUNOS DE VMENDAS CONSRUIDAS ANTES DE.1978 'ATENCION AL ENVENENAMIENTO POR PINTURASA BASE DE PLOMO'_ D eddiaoque oarPaatiora:pror sera rehab�Trb_do abajo.de!programa kxidado federal de rehbitacion de vrvieridas La; -. no aaori sera pnopdoci pada para casted abajo del.pepartrnerrto de Desarrollo.Ucbano.de.*iendas-.Re81a 24CFR;Pette 51#1, 511,:S7Q;-y 590.... _ ESTE.PRQPIEDAD ,e ca de`1978. stela posrliiidad de que corrtenga prntura a base de p Cee.. , toSiguiente Ormacion:relaaonada con elenvenamien nebo por phrra a base de pbmo:: �o�uenes 5eguido rriastan pintura superfic'ie o se comes ast�las de pirrihk,ra-coal se:despr�ende,de Prntura danada'superficres,la rri�5ticrt . de pmtua a basede pbmo puede ser pefigroso: Porro venenoso es peligrnso especiatmente en rands rrrenr,�Vie; -. Puedaricvn e)tiempo - (�strs�di�os:- `_ causer serios prvblemos a su salixi ineluso posi6rlidades de r etardacion mental,ceduera, ,persistsa hasty la - Fuentes de la pirrhra a base de pbmo. EI interior de las casas y departamentos mss pntiguos con frecuencia presenia Yintura a base de' .... . . . porno en las par-ed los ciebrrasos,los alfeizanes de las veritanas, las puertas y los'marcos de Ias,puertas La :)rnt6ra y los apnestadores a base.-de plorno tambren pueden haber sido utilizados en Balcones oderkxre , barandas,:garages,. !scaleras de incendio y posies de iluminacion. Cuando la pintura se astiIla, se descascara o se des eIi P e_puede._extsbr.jrn,: rerdadero .. p gro Para los ninos pequenos. Los nitros pueden Ilevarse a la Boca las'astillas de pirtu a o.morder las barandas. . Y s,los affe;zares de las verrtares u ctras partes pintadas cuando sus padres no estan cerca. Tambien pueden ingerir el plor.no ruendo no se: . hayan Aevado especrTcamerrte a la bots las asbllas de pintura:, Por ejempb,.cuando juegan en.un Iiigai-en el-cjue. Iay astillas sueltas de pintura o particulas de polvo que contienen pbmo,estas pueden adheriseles a las mans.y al gevarselas soca, ingerir una cantidad peligrosa de plomo. 'el'igros de la pito a a base de pbmo. EI envenenamiento con plorno es peligroso, es pecialmente para los Winos mertones de 7.'c'-.'; tr". Pueden Hegar a producir atraso mental,ceguera a aun a muerta. >urtomas del envenenamiento por piritura a base de pbmo. !Su nitros ha estado especialmente caprO)oso o irritable? ?Tierce folores de estornago o vomitos? tSe queja de dobres de cabeza? tNo quire jugar? Estos pueden ser sintomas de enveneamierito -on pbrno. Sin embargo, mufias veces no se presents sirdoma algLm. EI hecho de que no se pnesenten:sintomas no gcbere decir.-- lue usted no deba preocuparse sl su nitro ha estado expuesto a la pintura a base de pbmo. -onvienua y d dad de los exarnenes Para determiner ell mivet de pbmo enrta sargne" Si.usted tospedna que su-nirio se ha-. evado a la bora astilfas de pintura o alguien se b di o, debe Itavario al medico o a una clinica Para que b examinee, 5i el examen nuest a que el vino bene un alto nivel de pbmo en a sangre. existe tratamiento para elb. Sofrcite ayuda o mss�a su nedico o el dgmr-ta de salud mss cemano. El;prograrn Medicaid contempla el examen el tratariniento del Y pbmo-para las . ersonas e4gibles. Sr se idertifica un afto nnel de pbmo en Sangre de su nitro, notifique imrnedjatarrierite a la Oficina de DesanDfO. -omunitario u otro organismo al que usted o el propietario de su edificio hayan sdicitado asistencia para rehabrtitacion, Para que -uedan tomarse las medidas necesarias para inspec<xxw la unidad y detactar el nesgo de pintura a base de pbmo. Si Ia unidad ene pintura a base de pbmo, casted puede recibir asistencia para eliminar ese riesgo. recaucbnes para prevent el envenenamienb por pit"a base de pbmo. El envenenarniento Por pintura a base de pbmo V >vitarse tomando afgunas medidas de mantenimiento preven o. Observe las Paredes, los ciebrrasos, los rnarcos de las uerm y los alfi&ares de las ventanas. ?Existen lugares en los que la pintura.este descascararrdose,astillindose, desprendi&Aose pclverizarrdose? En eros casos, hay aertas medidas que puedo tomer de inmdediato Para proteger a su rino: 0•, SAN MATEO COUNTY 0 HUMAN SERVICES AGENCY �FFlEE OF HOUSING . Q U S C_Q.M..M-U.N 1,T Y D E V E 0 p.N1-E.N 262 Harbor Blvd. Bldg.A Belmont,CA. 94002 - (650)802=5050.,.,Fa)db5r"kclh 5049 aPP - Housing Rehbll,tttol% Loan licaion For Rental Re aUlbfion Pro (Print m lnk or Type please Please read andete this W,application tlonoughty.. Anyu�complete mforrriation"v+d case a`clelay inpro�and_ the _aPpfi may be re-turned.to you in its entirety: Where-the-information requested does`not apply to you,enter N!A lf: need:assistance,an HCD Aist 1s.avpiole -, Appl'Kar�t NOW Name Social Securrty Number A90. Co-Applicant Name or'Spouse... . Social Security.NumberAge .. Mailing Address �P -� Home Phone ! Work Phone Project AddressCit ,fZp No. Of Units -How Many Of: #:I br ) (#2br )_(#3br+ )_ Onsite Manager Name = "ger Unit Number f. .. Manager Tept�one. . Family Size and Iris 3-1s To Qual fj► For Pr�gr. _ The chart bebw shows the rnaxartxrn aAotivable household noome for fainly s¢e in W&r to wk for al H.C.D.Loan Programs. -. i toil arnual houset old excxrie is LESS than the 6rrrfs stioyrn low`a000rdrig do air j�size for yo r tenaNs.your p*d MAY be e1 joW for a%istarxe.. These income rials are ac4mW:an4 and may charge w bout r�otiae, f Income Limits FY01-02 s Income limits may change without noticejcome Family Size&Maximum Annual Household I t (I)547;600 (2)-554400 (3).%1,200 (4)5 S73 450,; S78900 7 584 300 _wpfiksl fams_wp W--App niSAB -- ' Mortga- Information t,c Lender's Ful! Name Address Loan No .= Original Loan ATxxxABalance Monthly P�Yment grid lenders Full Name Address Loan No. Original Loan Amount gee Monttify Payment-. i 3rd Lenders Fun-Name Address Loan No. Original Loan Amount Balance Monthly Payment Specify All Other Debt On This Property t Its order for ttus a{?pl�ation to be considered complete,the foilowrng-ANNUAL TENANT--SU RVEI(: grunt be"filied in " its_entirety for all units witfiin flus project It is the responsibiky-.of the Owner(s) o obtain and Transmit this'data via is form. 9iould*Y0ur-project be eiijbie and sLbsegLw*rehabilitated this fts aired to �O� P�"��Owner(s)wrd be '9 provide an updated 'ANNUAL TENANT SURVEY'each year for the duration of the mortgage. ��.'y copy this document if more space is required. SAN MATEO COUNTY HOUSING and COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT _ 262 Habor Blvd. Bldg. A &b"t,Ck 94002' (650)802-5050 Fa-<650)802_5049Note:PhotocopyBlank form Prior To Completingif More Than One Form Is Needed Verification of Mortgage [a)E to fig in and complete all information requested on fines I thiough 9. to sign and date the form on fine I0. to return this form with the attached program application_ Note:Incomplete forms Will not be processed. I_Applicant:Name 2.Mailing Address 3.City,State,Zip 4.Address of Property - 5.City,State,Zip 6.Mortgage Loan Number 7.Lender Name 8.Lender Address 9.City.State;Zip nder You are hereby requested and authorized as ry Lender to release the information below. Please complete the lower portion of this form and return it to the agency designated at the top of this form. 10. Signature Date icant-Do Not Write In This Box Lender Please complete the information below and return it to the agency desig-ated above at the earliest possible date. Mortgage Type UFoaed UVariable pBalloon Lien Position U I st 02nd 03rd pother Original Mortgage Date Loan Maturity Date original Loan Amount Current Loan Balance Monthly PA Payments Monthly Impound Account Payments Are Payments Current UYes ONo )f'No',What Is Arrearage Amount "1 Si tore and Titlo of Person Corr>pleti This Form D� _- SAN MATEO COUNT( HOUSING and COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 262 Harbor66d. Bldg_ A Mmont.CA 94002 - (650)802-5050 Fa.<650)802-5049 Note : Photoc Blank Foran Prior To C ting If More Than One Form Is Needed . Verification of Mortgage a) Applicant to fill in and complete all information requested on fines I through 9. b) Applicant to sign and date the form on fie 10. c) Applicant to return this form with the attached program application. Note: Incomplete forms will not be processed. 1.Applicant Name 2. Mairing Address 3.City, State, Tip 4.Address of Property - 5. City, State. Zip 6. Mortgage Loan Number 7. Lender Name 8. Lender Address ty, State. Zip .ender 'ou are hereby requested and authorized as my Lender to release the information below. Please complete the lower portion of this form and return it to the agency designated at the top of this form. 0. ignature Date licant- Do Not Write In This Box Lender Please complete the information below and return it to the agency designated above at the earliest possible date. Mortgage Type 05ced Wariable Walloon Lien Position ❑Ist 02nd C13rd OOther Original Mortgage Date Loan Maturity Date Original Loan Amount Current Loan Balance Monthly PA Payments Monthly Impound Account Payments Are Payments Current Dyes ONo If°No'.What Is Arrearag=Date tore and Tide of Person C letin This Form List The Type Of Work Required For Your Project List The Name,Address, Telephone, and License Number Of All Contractors You Wish To Bid On Your Project Me certify that the above Vkrrr ution is true and correct to the best of my/our knowledge. Me authorize Housing and Corrrrxxtity Development to verify such information including, but not limited to, credit, finandal, employment, and personal histories. Further, I/We authorize the release of such information to other agencies, institutions, and/or entities in connection with this application. I/We have read and understand the information and requirements contained in this application and agree to abide by all as designated. I/We also understand that there may be additional requirements in conjunction with the particular program type being applied for, ❑ Non-Refundable fee of$250.00 is enclosed With this application.. (Mandatory) Applicant Signature Date Co-Applicant Signature Date Do Not Write In Box Below- H.C.D Use On Dante Recd Date Reviewed Survey Date Rental Retabifdation i 5%Vacancy Factor Total Gross Rents Total Avabble Loan Anx"t 15%Operating Costs Annual Property Taxes Existing Debt Ratio Notes Annual Mortgages AA Loans Other Income Number of units Net Income From P - SAN MATEO COUNTY HOUSING and COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT '.262 Harbor Blvd_ Bldg. A Beknont, CA. 94002 (650.02-5050 R3D(650,02-5049 LANDLORD REQUIREMENT Concerning Notification of Possible Lead Based Paint Hazard Federal law requires that each. tenant in a building. rehabilitated under a federally funded rehabilitation program receive a copy of the attached "Notification of Possible Lead. Based Paint Hazard". In order to ensure compliance,, we are requiring that you, the Owner, provide an original and copy of t this notice to each of your tenants. The tenants must acknowledge receipt of this form by signing and returning the original. A copy of this notice with Spanish translation has been provided with this form. It is your responsibility to copy the enclosed forms in a sufficient amount so that all tenants receive the appropriate notice, and sign as receiving such notice. Housing and. Community Development will not finalize the application process until the appropriate forms have been provided in conjunction with.the program application. I/We hereby understand and agree to provide the attached "Notice of Possible Lead Based Paint Hazard" to each tenant and obtain the required signatures as a part of the application process. Signage of Owner Date This For<n And The Following mated Forms , Must Be included With Your Application. SAR MATE4-€OUtMI -_ HOUSING and COMB' UNITY,0EVEjOPMENT� 262 Harbor'eW: ::n ee ca {ssojt % Notification of Possible Lead Based Paint Hazard TQ:SJWNQS AND TENA( S OF.HOUSINGONSTRD EiEFORE.197$ : _ '. "VWEATCI-L-Ol1T flF LEAQ BASED..PAINT-POISC MNG.'. .< The building you OCCUPY is-:soon to be refiabl'rfabed under °furled, fdk7wing ren. �-: provided`to you under Di p:' nerrt d Housing&Urban fiegr arm- SFR Parti:5 IQ, '- 511,:570 and 590... + IF THIS PROPERTYwas-.consuucted before:1.978 sibl -. . - : . tFiere,n<a Posi.ity.itc_ontairis lead based�Paint: Please read.the Uawing.mon. oMneeniing teadAxia d.pkt.po, 7-5 Young children often chew onnted surfaces or eat . - --: :-r : � pal .paint chips vvt>ic-h have come off damaged painted sulfates;the�ingestioii of- lead based paint may be hazardous. Lead poisoning is dangerous,especially to children under the age of sic(6). It can eventually cause'serious h eaith'proble ns including possible menta!ra tarda 'bfi dness.paralysis or even'de'ath. Sources of Lead Based Paint. The interiors of older homes.and apairtrriehts often have Dyers of lead-based paint`on the viialk; cei&W.window sills,doors and door Games. Lead-based paint and primers may also.have been-used on outside ,.rai. g 8esi 'and lamp posts. When the paint chips.flAes or off;therie may be a-neat•danger'for babies and-yi�ig P� children. `Chddreri may eat paint clips or chew ori painted rai7Wigs,vvridow silk or tither items whenparer>tr are not aroixA: Q-ildren can also" te.ad a% n--ithoriot speicyeat77 paint chips R*e)mMple;when children play in an area where niers are loose p6 chips or dust partic -cortatrft lead,they'rriay get theseparticle's.on their harids,`put their hands into ftw. and ingest a dangerous arrib-IiA' lead.` Hazards of Lead$ased Paint lead'poiso"ng'is iangierot.rs=especialhi'to 6ildren under the age.of soc.(6): h can eventually cause mental retardation, blindness and even death. SymPtImm of Lead-Based Paint Poisoning. Has your child been especially cranky or irritable? Is he or she eating normally? Does your d_'ld Mare sbmwFed-ies and vmvbng? Does he or she complain about headaches? Is your child unwilling to play. These may. be signs of lead poi5orw Manytimes tk►ougN2hece are rio symptoms: at all,.Because there are no symptoms does not mean that.- you should no be concerned if you believe didd:has been + Your exposed t�lead-based'paart. Advisability and Avadability of Blood Lead Leve!Screerixtg If yod stnpect:that.-your cdd k�as eaten thips:of paint or:sorneone tow you this,you should take your child to the dolor or clinic for testing if the test il.16 s that your child has an elevated blood lead`' level,-treatment is available. Contact your doctor or local health department for help or more information. screeningLead` and. treatrnent are available through the Medicaid Program,for_those who are eligible. If your child is identified as having an elevated, blood lead level, ... . you shoutd"rnmcdiatelyfY the Fomrntiiirly-Developiirient of other agency to which you or your landlord is applying for rehabilitation assistance so the necessary steps can be taken to test your unit for load-based paint hazards. if your unit does have lead-based paint, you may be eligible for assistance to abate that hazard. Precautions to Take bo Prewrt Lead-Based Paint Posor>in& You can avoid lead-based paint poisoning by performing some Preventive maintenance. Look at your wails. ceilings, doors, door frames and window sills. Ane there places vvfiero thie paint is !fin&flaking, ChiPP">& or powdering? If so,there are some things you can do iriunediatey to protect your child: wpGicsl_fo�.`"P�"'ePP-ui5-98 -- - -- CALIFORNIA HEALTH& SAFETY CODE § 179203.Substandard building; conditions Any building or portion thereof including any dwelling unit;guestroom or suite of rooms, or the premises on which the same is located,in which there exists any of the following listed conditions to an extent that endangers the life, limb,health,property,safety,or welfare of the public or the occupants thereof shall be deemed and hereby is declared to be a substandard building: (a)Inadequate sanitation shall include,but not be limited to,the following: (1)Lack of, or improper water closet,lavatory,or bathtub or shower in a dwelling unit. (2)Lack of, or improper water closets, lavatories, and bathtubs or showers per number of guests in a hotel. ✓ (3) Lack of, or improper kitchen sink. (4)Lack of hot and cold running water to plumbing fixtures in a hotel. (5)Lack of hot and cold running water to plumbing fixtures in a dwelling unit. (6)Lack of adequate heating. (7)Lack of,or improper operation of required ventilating equipment. (8)Lack of minimum amounts of natural light and ventilation required by this code, (9)Room and space dimensions Iess than required by this code. (10)Lack of required electrical lighting. (11)Dampness of habitable rooms_ (12)Infestation of insects, vermin,or rodents as determined by the health officer. . (13)General dilapidation or improper maintenance. (14)Lack of connection to required sewage disposal system. (15)Lack of adequate garbage and rubbish storage and removal facilities as determined by the health officer. 1 - (b)Structural hazards shall include,but not be limited to,the following: (1)Deteriorated or inadequate foundations. (2)Defective or deteriorated flooring or-floor supports. (3)Flooring or floor supports of insufficient size to carry imposed loads with safety. (4)Members of walls,partitions, or other vertical supports that split; lean, list,or buckle due to defective material or deterioration. (5)Members of walls,partitions, or other vertical supports that are of insufficient size to carry imposed loads with safety. (6)Members of ceilings,roofs, ceilings and roof supports,or other horizontal members which sag,split,or buckle due to defective material or deterioration. (7)Members of ceiling,roofs, ceiling and roof supports, or other horizontal members that are of insufficient size to carry imposed Ioads with safety. (8)Fireplaces or chimneys which list, bulge, or settle due to.defective material or deterioration. (9)Fireplaces or chimneys which are of insufficient size or strength to carry imposed loads with safety. (c)Any nuisance. (d)All wiring,except that which conformed with all applicable laws in effect at the time- of installation if it is currently in good and safe condition and working properly. (e)All plumbing,except plumbing that conformed with all applicable laws in effect at the time of installation and has been maintained in good condition,or that may not have conformed with all applicable laws in effect at the time of installation but is currently in good and safe condition and working properly, and that is free of cross connections and siphonage between fixtures. (f)All mechanical equipment; including vents,except equipment that-conformed with all applicable laws in effect at the time of installation and that has been maintained in good and safe condition,or that may not have conformed with all applicable laws in effect at the time of- installation but is currently in good and safe condition and working properly. (g)Faulty weather protection,which shall include,but not be limited to, the following: 2 _ (1)Deteriorated,crumbling,or loose plaster. (2)Deteriorated or ineffective waterproofing of exterior walls,roof,foundations,or floors, including broken windows or doors. (3)Defective or lack of weather protection for exterior wall coverings,including.lack of- paint, or weathering due to lack of paint or other approved protective covering. (4)Broken;rotted, split,or buckled exterior wallcoverings or roof coverings. (h)Any building or portion thereof,device;apparatus,equipment,combustible waste,or vegetation that,in the opinion of the chief of the fire department or his deputy,is in such a condition as to cause a fire or explosion or provide a ready fuel to augment the spread and intensity of fire or explosion arising from any cause. (i)All materials of construction,except those which are specifically allowed or approved by this code, and which have been adequately maintained in good and safe condition. (j)Those premises on which an accumulation of weeds,vegetation,junk, dead organic matter,debris,garbage,offal,rodent harborages, stagnant water,combustible materials, and similar materials or conditions constitute fire,health,or'safety hazards. (k)Any building or portion thereof that is determined to be an unsafe building due to inadequate maintenance, in accordance with the latest edition of the Uniform Building Code. (1)All buildings or portions thereof not provided with adequate exit facilities as required by this code,except those buildings or portions thereof whose exit facilities conformed with all applicable laws at the time of their construction and that have been adequately maintained and increased in relation to any increase in occupant load, alteration or addition,or any change in occupancy.- When an unsafe condition exists through lack of,or improper location of,exits, additional exits may-be required to be installed. (m)All buildings or portions thereof that are not provided with the fire-resistive' construction or fire-extinguishing systems or equipment required by this code;except those -buildings or portions thereof that conformed with all applicable laws at the time of their -construction and whose fire-resistive integrity and fire-extinguishing systems or equipment have been adequately maintained and improved in relation to any increase in occupant load,alteration or addition,.or any change in occupancy. (n)-All buildings or portions thereof occupied for living,sleeping,cooking,or dining purposes that were not designed or intended to be used for those occupancies- 3 (o)Inadequate structural resistance to horizontal.forces. "Substandard building" includes a building not in compliance with Section 13143.2. However,a condition that would require displacement of sound walls or ceilings to meet height,length,or width requirements for ceilings,rooms, and dwelling units shall not by itself be considered sufficient existence of dangerous conditions making a building a substandard building,unless the building was constructed,altered,or converted in violation of those requirements in effect at the time of construction, alteration, or conversion. § 17922.Administrative code rules and regulations; uniform housing code requirements; local requirements (a)Except as otherwise specifically provided by law,the building standards adopted and submitted by the department for approval pursuant to Chapter 4(commencing with Section 18935)of Part 2.5 and the other rules and regulations,which are contained in Title 24 of the California Administrative Code,adopted, amended,or repealed from time to time pursuant to this chapter shall be adopted by reference,except that-the building standards and rules and regulations shall include any additions or deletions made by the department. The building standards.and rules and regulations shall impose substantially the same requirements as are contained in the most recent editions of the following uniform industry codes as adopted by the- _ organizations specified: (1)The Uniform Housing Code of the International Conference of Building Officials, except.its definition of"substandard building." (2)The Uniform Building Code of the International Conference of Building Officials. (3)The Uniform Plumbing Code of the International Association of Plumbing and Mechanical-Officials. (4)The Uniform.Mechanical Code of the International Conference of Building Officials and the International Association of Plumbing and Mechanical Officials. (5)The National Electrical Code of the National Fire Protection Association. In adopting building standards for approval pursuant to Chapter 4(commencing with Section 18935)of Part 2.5 for publication in the State Building Standards Code and in promulgating other regulations, the department shall consider local conditions and any amendments to the uniform codes referred to in this section. Except as provided in Part 2.5 (commencing with Section 18901),in the absence of adoption by regulation,-the most recent editions of the uniform codes referred to in this section shall be considered to be adopted one year after the date of publication of the 4 — uniform codes_ (6)Appendix Chapter 1 of the Uniform Code for Building Conservation of the International Conference of Building Officials. (b)Except as provided in Section 17959:5, local use zone requirements, local fire zones, building setback,side and.rear yard requirements, and property line requirements are hereby specifically and entirely reserved to the local jurisdictions notwithstanding any requirements found or set forth in this part. - (c)Regulations other than building standards which are adopted, amended, or repealed by the department,and building standards adopted and subn1itted by the department for approval pursuant to Chapter 4(commencing with Section 18935)of Part 2.5, governing alteration and repair of existing buildings-and moving of apartment houses and dwellings shall permit the replacement,retention,and extension of original materials and the continued use of original methods of construction as long as the hotel,lodginghouse,motel;apartment house, or dwelling, or portions thereof, or building and structure accessory thereto, complies with the provisions published in the State Building Standards Code and the other rules and regulations of the - department or alternative local standards adopted pursuant to'subdivision(b)of Section 17920.7 or 17958.5 and does not become or continue to be a substandard building. Building additions or alterations which increase the area,volume, or size of an existing building,and foundations for- apartment orapartment houses and dwellings moved, shall comply with the requirements for new buildings or structures specified in this part,or in building standards published in the State Building Standards Code,or in the other rules and regulations adopted pursuant to this part. However,the additions and alterations shall not cause the building to exceed area or height limitations applicable to new.construction. (d)Regulations other than building standards which are adopted by the department and building standards adopted and submitted by the department for approval pursuant to Chapter 4 (commencing with Section 18935)of Part 2:5 governing alteration and repair of existing buildings shall permit the use of alternate materials,appliances, installations,devices, arrangements; or methods of construction if the material,appliance,installation,device, arrangement,or method is,for the purpose intended,at least the equivalent-of that prescribed in this part,the building standards published in the.State Building Standards Code, and the rules and regulations promulgated pursuant to the provisions of this part in performance,safety,and for the protection of life and health. Regulations governing abatement of substandard buildings shall permit those conditions prescribed by Section 17920.3 which do not endanger the life,limb, health,property,safety,or welfare of the public or.the occupant thereof. (e)No local enforcement agency may prohibit the use of materials,appliances, installations,devices,arrangements, or methods of construction specifically permitted by the 5 department to be used-in the-alteration or repair of existing buildings,but such materials, appliances,installations,devices,arrangements,or methods of constriction may be specifically prohibited by local ordinance as provided pursuant to Section-17958.5. (f)No local ordinance may permit any action or proceeding to abate violations of regulations governing maintenance of existing buildings,unless the building is a substandard building or the violation is a misdemeanor. 6 _ I ORDINANCE NO. 2 ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME AMENDING CHAPTER 25.59 TO PERMANENTLY INSTITUTE AN AMNESTY PROGRAM FOR PRE-EXISTING 3 SECONDARY DWELLING UNITS AND TO ALLOW VARIATIONS IN CERTAIN REQUIREMENTS FOR APPROVAL 4 5 The City Council of the City of Burlingame ordains as follows: 6 7 Section 1. The purpose of this ordinance is to convert the current amnesty program for 8 secondary units from a two-year program to a permanent program. It is hoped that this will 9 encourage property owners to apply for amnesty over time. In addition,the limitations on on-site 10 parking spaces has created some hardships on property owners, and this ordinance attempts to 11 reduce that hardship in exchange for a commitment to sustain the affordability of secondary 12 dwelling unit. 13 14 Section 2. Section 25.59.010 is amended to read as follows: 15 25.59.010 Purpose. 16 The purpose of this chapter is to provide a means for property owners in the R-1 districts 17 of the city to legalize the existence and usage of secondary dwelling units that were built as 18 dwelling units before January 1, 1954. 19 20 21 22 This chapter provides a window of a total of 23 two (2)years within vviiich such mi owner cmi apply to the city fbr review mid approval and thein 24 complete all I . provemen o bring the unit into complimice with the health mid saf�t 25 standards of ttic unif6rin f f onsing eo If the primary dwelling on the site is demolished, the 26 secondary dwelling unit cannot be retained or replaced. This chapter also provides basic 27 protections to the surrounding neighborhoods by requiring off-street parking,owner occupancy of 28 one of the two units located on such a property, and limitation on the number of occupants. 211712004 1 I Section 3. Section 25.59.040(a) is amended to read as follows: 2 Any person owning a secondary dwelling unit that was built as a dwelling unit not later than 3 December 31, 1953, and that has been in substantially the same use and envelope since that time 4 may apply to the city no later than june 3 0,2004,for a special permit to legalize the existence,use, 5 and occupancy of the secondary dwelling unit pursuant to this chapter. 6 7 Section 4. Section 25.59.060 is amended to read as follows: 8 25.59.060 Performance standards. 9 A secondary dwelling unit shall meet all of the following requirements to qualify for 10 approval under this chapter: 11 (a ) On-site12 code,and additional parking fbr the secondary dwelling unit shall be at least one uncovered parkin 13 space,which may be provided in tandem to another existing paAing space-.- 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2117/2004 2 I (b)No more than two (2)persons may occupy the secondary dwelling unit. 2 (c)An owner of the subject property shall reside in at least one of the dwelling units on 3 at all times. 4 (d)The floor area ofthe secondary dwelling unit shall not exceed 640 square feet. 5 (e)The secondary dwelling unit shall conform to the requirements of the California Health 6 and Safety Code, Section 17920.3, and the Uniform Housing Code as adopted by Section 17922. 7 8 Section 5. A new subsection 25.59.070(b) is added as follows: 9 (b) Any special permit approved pursuant to this chapter that has not been brought into 10 compliance with the requirements of this chapter within one year of approval shall lapse and be of 11 no further force and effect. 12 13 Section 6. Section 25.59.80 is repealed. 14 15 Section 7. Subsection 25.59.090(d) is amended to read as follows: 16 (d)If the secondary dwelling unit is demolished,the special permit shall lapse and be of no 17 further force and effect, 18 19 20 Section 8. Section 25.59.100 is amended to read as follows: 21 25.59.100 Revocation of special permit. 22 A special permit granted pursuant to this chapter shall be revoked when: 23 (a) No owner of the subject property resides on the property; or 24 (b) The secondary dwelling unit is no longer used for residential purposes; or 25 (c) The parking required by section 25.59.060 is no longer provided; 26 27 �— 28 2/17/2004 3 1Oil 2 3 4 Section 9. This ordinance shall be published as required by law. 5 6 Mayor 7 8 I,ANN T.MUSSO,City Clerk of the City of Burlingame,do hereby certify that the 9 foregoing ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the_day of , 2004, and adopted thereafter at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the_ 10 _day of , 2004, by the following vote: 11 AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: 12 NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: 13 14 City Clerk C:\FII.ES\ORDINANC\secondunits2004.pin.wpd 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2/17/2004 4 DEC.29.2003 9:26AM t WSF'APERS NO.640 P.3i10 NOTICE OF PM)C MWING The CITY OF 15UFILPW K p1M"JNQ COMMMSM wtp hid a pA41r haedne con- �� me tha mnl�ne r lt� ;Poi0.t'dmr�a copy oq q e ppropoaed ordwww a may be radlewetl prbf ttle6m I= Road, Caitfpmle. Sen MateoCotudy �316gp6 Janasry$�"'+ CITY oz STAFF REPORT BURUNGAME AGENDA . . . . . . . ... . ITEM # 9a .� tee,,. 2/ 17/04 DATE / TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL sUBMgTED BY DATE: February 10, 2004 APPRO FROM: Director of Parks & Recreation (558-7307) BY SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION TO APPROVE LEASE AGREEMENT WITH RINO BETTI FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1080 HOWARD AVENUE RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council approve the lease agreement between the City of Burlingame and Rino Betti, dba Sam's Sandwiches, for the property located at 1080 Howard Avenue, Burlingame. BACKGROUND: The Depot, located at 1080 Howard Avenue, Burlingame, was built in 1939 as a Depot for the Greyhound Bus Line. It was one of 24 Greyhound locations in the Bay Area and was operated by Greyhound until the 1980's. In 1993, after remaining unused for several years, the City of Burlingame renovated the structure. Retrofitting, re-roofing, modification of the entrance, and handicap accessibilitywere a major part of the renovation and was conducted by Marshall Construction of Half Moon Bay. In June of 1993, the City of Burlingame reopened the building as "The Depot" to serve as a meeting area for the community to be managed by the Burlingame Parks and Recreation Department. In 2003, minimal use by the community and the downturn of the economy warranted the City to reevaluate the usage of the facility. As part of the plan to balance the City' s budget, staff, working with Commercial Realtor, Tim Auran, located several parties interested in leasing The Depot. The proposals were evaluated for their economic benefit to the City, as well as their long-term feasibility and amount of necessary improvements. Sam's Sandwiches (Tenant) was selected as the best proposal and the City entered into negotiations with owner, Rino Betti, resulting in the attached agreement. The major points to the agreement are: 1 . The lease agreement is for a 10-year period from April 1 , 2004 to March 31 , 2014, 2. This Agreement can be renewed for additional five-year terms, with the consent of both parties. 3. The City can terminate the contract as of March 31, 2009, but would need to compensate the Tenant for any fixtures that the Tenant has placed on the Premises at fifty percent (50%) of the purchase price. 4. Tenant agrees to pay $1,000 per month until moving in to the property, no later than February 2005, and$2,000 per month thereafter. 5. Tenant will be responsible for all landscaping and maintenance of the planting area around the building, including the turf area, and maintenance of the building and hard surfaces on the Premises, other than the sidewalks. ATTACHMENTS: Commercial Lease Agreement dated January 19, 2004 between the City of Burlingame and Rino Betti, dba Sam's Sandwiches and Addendum A. BUDGET IMPACT: The City will receive $1,000 per month payments for the first 12 months and $2,000 per month payments thereafter, adjusted annually according to increases in the San Francisco Bay Area CPI. The agreement also calls for the Tenant to handle any necessary maintenance to the facility and adjacent landscape areas. RESOLUTION RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME APPROVING LEASE AGREEMENT WITH RINO BETTI FOR THE USE OF 1080 HOWARD AVENUE (GREYHOUND DEPOT), BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE LEASE AGREEMENT AND ADDENDUM ON BEHALF OF THE CITY RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Burlingame: WHEREAS, after an open request for interest from persons for the use of the Greyhound Deport at 1080 Howard Avenue, the City has been negotiating with Rino Betti to use the property as a sandwich shop; and WHEREAS, Rino Betti is willing to enter into a 10-year lease with the City, subject to certain conditions as provided in the Lease Agreement and Addendum attached as Exhibit A hereto; and WHEREAS, the lease agreement is in the public interest in providing additional revenue for the City, updated improvements to the property, and a tenant that has been an important contributor to the Burlingame Avenue area for many years, NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED: 1. The Lease Agreement and Addendum attached hereto as Exhibit A are approved, and the City Manager is authorized to execute the Agreement and the Addendum for and on behalf of the City of Burlingame. 2. The City Clerk is directed to witness the Manager's signature on behalf of the City. 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 cALIFORN[A COMMERCIAL LEASE AGREEMENT AS s o c[wT[O N (C.A.R.Form CL,Revised 10101) _/- OF REALTORS' Date(For reference only):January 19, 2004 City of Burlingame ("Landlord")and A&% R tt db s s dw n ("Tenant)agree as follows: 1. PROPERTY: Landlord rents to Tenant and Tenant rents from Landlord, the real property and improvements described as: 1080 rd A B 1'ng CA 94010 ("Premmes",which comprise approximately 100.000 %of the total square footage of rentable space in the entire property.See exhibit for a further description of the Premises. 2. TERM:The term shall be for ten years and 0 months,beginning on(date) April 1, 2004 ("Commencement Date"), (Check A or B): ❑x A. Lease:and shall terminate on(date) Ma—h 31 2014 at six ❑AM ❑x PM. Any holding over after the term of this agreement expires,with Landlord's consent,shall create a month-to-month tenancy that either party may terminate as specified in paragraph 2B.Rent shall be at a rate equal to the rent for the immediately preceding month,payable in advance.All other terms and conditions of this agreement shall remain in full force and effect. ❑ B. MonthAo-month:and continues as a month-to-month tenancy.Either party may terminate the tenancy by giving written notice to the other at least 30 days prior to the intended termination date,subject to any applicable local laws.Such notice may be given on any date. ❑x C. RENEWAL OR EXTENSION TERMS:See attached addendum A 3. BASE RENT: A. Tenant agrees to pay Base Rent at the rate of(CHECK ONE ONLY:) ❑ (1)$ per month,for the term of the agreement. n (2)$1,000.00 per month,for the first 12 months of the agreement.Commencing with the 13th month,and upon expiration of each 12 months thereafter,rent shall be adjusted according to any increase in the U.S.Consumer Price Index of the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the Department of Labor for All Urban Consumers("CPI")for Fan Francisco Bay Area (the city nearest the location of the Premises),based on the following formula:Base Beryl will be multiplied by the most current CPI preceding the first calendar month during which the adjustment is to take effect,and divided by the most recent CPI preceding the Commencement Date.In no event shall any adjusted Base Rent be less than the Base Rent for the month immediately preceding the adjustment.If the CPI is no longer published,then the adjustment to Base Rent shall be based on an alternate index that most closely reflects the CPI. ❑ (3) $ per month for the period commencing and ending and $ per month for the period commencing and ending and $ per month for the period commencing and ending H (4) In accordance with the attached rent schedule. (5)Other. B. Base Rent is payable m advance on the 1st(or )day of each calendar month,and is delinquent on the next day. C. If Commencement Date falls on any day other than the first day of the month,Base Rent for the first calendar month shall be prorated based on a 30-day period.If Tenant has paid one full month's Base Rent in advance of Commencement Date,Base Rent for the second calendar month shall be prorated based on a 30-day period. 4. RENT: A. Definition:("Rent")shall mean all monetary obligations of Tenant to Landlord under the terms of this agreement,except security deposit. B. Payment Rent shall be paid to(Name) city of Burlingame ,at(address) 500 Primrose Road Burlingame, CA 94010 ,or at any other location specified by Landlord in writing to Tenant. C. Timing:Base Rent shall be paid as specified in paragraph 3.All other Rent shall be paid within 30 days after Tenant is billed by Landlord. 5. EARLY POSSESSION:Tenant is entitled to possession of the Premises on Apzil 1 2004 If Tenant is in possession prior to the Commencement Date,during this time(1)Tenant is not obligated to pay Base Rent,and(11)Tenant is ❑is not obligated to pay Rent other than Base Rent.Whether or not Tenant is obligated to pay Rent prior to Commencement Date,Tenant is obligated to comply with all other terms of this agreement. 6. SECURITY DEPOSIT: A. Tenant agrees topay Landlord$4 000.00 as a security deposit.Tenant agrees not to hold Broker responsible for its return. (IF CHECKED:) If Base Rent increases during the term of this agreement,Tenant agrees to increase security deposit by the same proportion as the increase in Base Rent. B. All or any portion of the security deposit may be used,as reasonably necessary,to:(i)cure Tenant's default in payment of Rent,late charges, non-sufficient funds("NSF")fees,or other sums due;(it)repair damage,excluding ordinary wear and tear,caused by Tenant or by a guest or licensee of Tenant;(lit)broom clean the Premises,if necessary,upon termination of tenancy;and(iv)cover any other unfulfilled obligation of Tenant.SECURITY DEPOSIT SHALL NOT BE USED BY TENANT IN LIEU OF PAYMENT OF LAST MONTH'S RENT.If all or any portion of the security deposit is used during tenancy,Tenant agrees to reinstate the total security deposit within 5 days after written notice is delivered to Tenant.Within 30 days after Landlord receives possession of the Premises,Landlord shall:(1)furnish Tenant an itemized statement indicating the amount of any security deposit received and the basis for its disposition,and(it)return any remaining portion of security deposit to Tenant. However,if the Landlord's only claim upon the security deposit is for unpaid Rent,then the remaining portion of the security deposit,after deduction of unpaid Rent,shall be returned within 14 days after the Landlord receives possession. C. No interest will be paid on security deposit,unless required by local ordinance. The copyright laws of the United States(Title 17 U.S.Code)forbid the Landlord and Tenant acknowledge receipt of a copy of this unauthorized reproduction of this form,or any portion thereof,by photocopy page. machine or any other means,including facsimile or computerized formats. Landlord's Initials( )( ) Copyright C 1998-2001,CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS®, Tenant's Initials( )( ) INC.ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. ^rvarnwry Reviewed by CL-11 REVISED 10/01(PAGE 1 of 6) erdcerorDesignee Date COMMERCIAL LEASE AGREEMENT(CL-11 PAGE 1 OF 6) Auran Tim-Realtor PO Box 1084 Burlingame CA 94011 Phone:(650)3473300 Fax:(650) Tim Aumn T5625954.ZFX Premises: 1080 Howard Avenue, Burlingame CA 94010 _ Dale January 19, 2004 18. ALTERATIONS:Tenant shall not make any alterations in or about the Premises, including installation of trade fixtures and signs,without Landlord's prior written consent, which shall not be unreasonably withheld.Any alterations to the Premises shall be done according to Law and with required permits. Tenant shall give Landlord advance notice of the commencement date of any planned alteration, so that Landlord, at its option,may post a Notice of Non-Responsibility to prevent potential liens against Landlord's interest in the Premises. Landlord may also require Tenant to provide Landlord with lien releases from any contractor performing work on the Premises. 19. GOVERNMENT IMPOSED ALTERATIONS: Any alterations required by Law as a result of Tenant's use shall be Tenant's responsibility. Landlord shall be responsible for any other alterations required by Law. 20. ENTRY:Tenant shall make Premises available to Landlord or Landlord's agent for the purpose of entering to make inspections,necessary or agreed repairs, alterations, or improvements, or to supply necessary or agreed services, or to show Premises to prospective or actual purchasers,tenants, mortgagees, lenders, appraisers, or contractors. Landlord and Tenant agree that 24 hours notice (oral or written) shall be reasonable and sufficient notice. In an emergency,Landlord or Landlord's representative may enter Premises at any time without prior notice. 21. SIGNS:Tenant authorizes Landlord to place a FOR SALE sign on the Premises at any time, and a FOR LEASE sign on the Premises within the 90 (or ❑ )day period preceding the termination of the agreement. 22. SUBLETTINGIASSIGNMENT:Tenant shall not sublet or encumber all or any part of Premises,or assign or transfer this agreement or any interest in it, without the prior written consent of Landlord, which shall not be unreasonably withheld. Unless such consent is obtained, any subletting, assignment,transfer,or encumbrance of the Premises,agreement,or tenancy,by voluntary act of Tenant,operation of law,or otherwise,shall be null and void, and, at the option of Landlord, terminate this agreement. Any proposed sublessee, assignee, or transferee shall submit to Landlord an application and credit information for Landlord's approval, and, if approved, sign a separate written agreement with Landlord and Tenant. Landlord's consent to any one sublease, assignment, or transfer, shall not be construed as consent to any subsequent sublease, assignment, or transfer, and does not release Tenant of Tenant's obligation under this agreement. 23. POSSESSION: If Landlord is unable to deliver possession of Premises on Commencement Date, such date shall be extended to the date on which possession is made available to Tenant. However, the expiration date shall remain the same as specified in paragraph 2. If Landlord is unable to deliver possession within 60(or❑ ) calendar days after agreed Commencement Date, Tenant may terminate this agreement by giving written notice to Landlord,and shall be refunded all Rent and security deposit paid. 24. TENANT'S OBLIGATIONS UPON VACATING PREMISES: Upon termination of agreement, Tenant shall: (t)give Landlord all copies of all keys or opening devices to Premises, including any common areas; (ii) vacate Premises and surrender it to Landlord empty of all persons and personal property; (tit) vacate all parking and storage spaces; (iv) deliver Premises to Landlord in the same condition as referenced in paragraph 11; (v) clean Premises;(vi)give written notice to Landlord of Tenant's forwarding address;and,(vii) All improvements installed by Tenant, with or without Landlord's consent, become the property of Landlord upon termination. Landlord may nevertheless require Tenant to remove any such improvement that did not exist at the time possession was made available to Tenant. 25. BREACH OF CONTRACTIEARLY TERMINATION: In event Tenant,prior to expiration of this agreement,breaches any obligation in this agreement, abandons the premises,or gives notice of tenant's intent to terminate this tenancy prior to its expiration, in addition to any obligations established by paragraph 24, Tenant shall also be responsible for lost rent, rental commissions, advertising expenses, and painting costs necessary to ready Premises for re-rental.Landlord may also recover from Tenant:(t)the worth,at the time of award,of the unpaid Rent that had been earned at the time of termination;(it)the worth,at the time of award,of the amount by which the unpaid Rent that would have been earned after expiration until the time of award exceeds the amount of such rental loss the Tenant proves could have been reasonably avoided;and(iii)the worth,at the time of award, of the amount by which the unpaid Rent for the balance of the term after the time of award exceeds the amount of such rental loss that Tenant proves could be reasonably avoided. Landlord may elect to continue the tenancy in effect for so long as Landlord does not terminate Tenant's right to possession, by either written notice of termination of possession or by reletting the Premises to another who takes possession, and Landlord may enforce all Landlord's rights and remedies under this agreement,including the right to recover the Rent as it becomes due. 26. DAMAGE TO PREMISES: If, by no fault of Tenant, Premises are totally or partially damaged or destroyed by fire, earthquake, accident or other casualty, Landlord shall have the right to restore the Premises by repair or rebuilding. If Landlord elects to repair or rebuild,and is able to complete such restoration within 90 days from the date of damage, subject to terms of this paragraph, this agreement shall remain in full force and effect. If Landlord is unable to restore the Premises within this time, or if Landlord elects not to restore, then either Landlord or Tenant may terminate this agreement by giving the other written notice. Rent shall be abated as of the date of damage. The abated amount shall be the current monthly Base Rent prorated on a 30-day basis.If this agreement is not terminated,and the damage is not repaired,then Rent shall be reduced based on the extent to which the damage interferes with Tenants reasonable use of Premises. If damage occurs as a result of an act of Tenant or Tenant's guests, only Landlord shall have the right of termination,and no reduction in Rent shall be made. 27. HAZARDOUS MATERIALS: Tenant shall not use, store, generate, release or dispose of any hazardous material on the Premises or the property of which the Premises are part. However, Tenant is permitted to make use of such materials that are required to be used in the normal course of Tenant's business provided that Tenant complies with all applicable Laws related to the hazardous materials. Tenant is responsible for the cost of removal and remediation,or any clean-up of any contamination caused by Tenant. 28. CONDEMNATION: If all or part of the Premises is condemned for public use,either parry may terminate this agreement as of the dale possession is given to the condemner.All condemnation proceeds,exclusive of those allocated by the condemner to Tenant's relocation costs and trade fixtures, belong to Landlord. 29. INSURANCE:Tenant's personal property,fixtures,equipment,inventory and vehicles are not insured by Landlord against loss or damage due to fire, theft, vandalism, rain, water, criminal or negligent acts of others, or any other cause. Tenant is to carry Tenant's own property insurance to protect Tenant from any such loss.In addition,Tenant shall carry liability insurance in an amount of not less than$1,000,000.00 .Tenants liability insurance shall name Landlord and Landlord's agent as additional insured.Tenant, upon Landlord's request,shall provide Landlord with a certificate of insurance establishing Tenant's compliance. Landlord shall maintain liability insurance insuring Landlord, but not Tenant,in an amount of at least $ ' plus property insurance in an amount sufficient to cover the replacement cost of the property. Tenant is advised to carry business interruption insurance in an amount at least sufficient to cover Tenant's complete rental obligation to Landlord. Landlord is advised to obtain a policy of rental loss insurance.Both Landlord and Tenant release each other,and waive their respective rights to subrogation against each other,for loss or damage covered by insurance. The copyright laws of the United States (Title 17 U.S. Code) forbid the Landlord and Tenant acknowledge receipt of a copy of this unauthorized reproduction of this form,or any portion thereof,by photocopy page. machine or any other means,including facsimile or computerized formats. Landlord's Initials( )( ) 121 Copyright ® 1998-2001, CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS®, Tenant's Initials( )( ) INC.ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. awaarwrx Reviewed by CLA 1 REVISED 10101 (PAGE 3 of 6) Broker w Designee Date COMMERCIAL LEASE AGREEMENT(CLA I PAGE 3 OF 6) T5625954.ZFX Premises: 1080 Howard Avenue, Burlingame. CA 94010 Date January 19, 2004 7. PAYMENTS: PAYMENT TOTAL DUE RECEIVED BALANCE DUE DUE DATE A. Rent:From 01/01/2004 To 03/31/2004 $ 1,500.00 $ 1,500.00 $ Date Date B. Security Deposit .. . .. ... .. ... .. .. . . ..... .. $ 4,000.00 $ $ 4,000.00 C. Other: $ $ $ Category D. Other: $ $ $ Category E. Total: . . $ 5,500.00 $ 1,500.00 $ 4,000.00 8. PARKING:Tenant is entitled to no unreserved and no reserved vehicle parking spaces.The right to parking ❑ is © is not included in the Base Rent charged pursuant to paragraph 3. If not included in the Base Rent,the parking rental fee shall be an additional$ per month. Parking space(s)are to be used for parking operable motor vehicles, except for trailers, boats, campers, buses or trucks (other than pick-up trucks). Tenant shall park in assigned space(s) only. Parking space(s) are to be kept clean.Vehicles leaking oil, gas or other motor vehicle fluids shall not be parked in parking spaces or on the Premises. Mechanical work or storage of inoperable vehicles is not allowed in parking space(s)or elsewhere on the Premises.No overnight parking is permitted. 9. ADDITIONAL STORAGE:Storage is permitted as follows: not applicable The right to additional storage space❑ is © is not included in the Base Rent charged pursuant to paragraph 3. If not included in Base Rent, storage space shall be an additional$ per month. Tenant shall store only personal property that Tenant owns, and shall not store property that is claimed by another,or in which another has any right,title, or interest.Tenant shall not store any improperly packaged food or perishable goods, flammable materials, explosives, or other dangerous or hazardous material. Tenant shall pay for, and be responsible for, the clean-up of any contamination caused by Tenant's use of the storage area. 10. LATE CHARGE;INTEREST;NSF CHECKS:Tenant acknowledges that either late payment of Rent or issuance of a NSF check may cause Landlord to incur costs and expenses, the exact amount of which are extremely difficult and impractical to determine. These costs may include, but are not limited to,processing, enforcement and accounting expenses, and late charges imposed on Landlord. If any installment of Rent due from Tenant is not received by Landlord within 5 calendar days after date due, or if a check is returned NSF, Tenant shall pay to Landlord, respekdively, $ 100.00 as late charge, plus 10% interest per annum on the delinquent amount and $25.00 as a NSF fee, any of which shall be deemed additional Rent. Landlord and Tenant agree that these charges represent a fair and reasonable estimate of the costs Landlord may incur by reason of Tenant's late or NSF payment. Any late charge, delinquent interest, or NSF fee due shall be paid with the current installment of Rent. Landlord's acceptance of any late charge or NSF fee shall not constitute a waiver as to any default of Tenant.Landlord's right to collect a Late Charge or NSF fee shall not be deemed an extension of the date Rent is due under paragraph 4, or prevent Landlord from exercising any other rights and remedies under this agreement,and as provided by law. 11. CONDITION OF PREMISES: Tenant has examined the Premises and acknowledges that Premise is clean and in operative condition, with the fallowing exceptions:No exceptions Items listed as exceptions shall be dealt with in the following manner: 12. ZONING AND LAND USE:Tenant accepts the Premises subject to all local, state and federal laws, regulations and ordinances("Laws"). Landlord makes no representations or warranty that Premises are now or in the future will be suitable for Tenant's use.Tenant has made its own investigation regarding all applicable Laws. 13. TENANT OPERATING EXPENSES:Tenant agrees to pay for all utilities and services directly billed to Tenant. utilities include, water, as electricity, garbage, gardening, telephone d cable 14. PROPERTY OPERATING EXPENSES: A.Tenant agrees to pay its proportionate share of Landlord's estimated monthly property operating expenses, including but not limited to, common area maintenance,consolidated utility and service bills,insurance,and real estate taxes,based on the ratio of the square footage of the Premises to the total square footage of the rentable space in the entire property. OR B.© (If checked)Paragraph 14 does not apply. 15. USE:The Premises are for the sole use as a sandwich shop No other use is permitted without Landlord's prior written consent. If any use by Tenant causes an increase in the premium on Landlord's existing property insurance,Tenant shall pay for the increased cost.Tenant will comply with all Laws affecting its use of the Premises. 16. RULESIREGULATIONS:Tenant agrees to comply with all rules and regulations of Landlord (and, if applicable, Owner's Association)that are at any time posted on the Premises or delivered to Tenant. Tenant shall not, and shall ensure that guests and licensees of Tenant do not, disturb, annoy, endanger, or interfere with other tenants of the building or neighbors, or use the Premises for any unlawful purposes, including, but not limited to, using, manufacturing, selling, storing, or transporting illicit drugs or other contraband, or violate any law or ordinance, or committing a waste or nuisance on or about the Premises. 17. MAINTENANCE: A.Tenant OR❑ (If checked, Landlord) shall professionally maintain the Premises including heating, air conditioning, electrical, plumbing and water systems, if any,and keep glass,windows and doors in operable and safe condition. Unless Landlord is checked, if Tenant fails to maintain the Premises,Landlord may contract for or perform such maintenance,and charge Tenant for Landlord's cost. B.Landlord ORF_] (If checked,Tenant)shall maintain the roof,foundation,exterior walls,common areas and exterior painting and Trees The copyright laws of the United States (Title 17 U.S. Code) forbid the Landlord and Tenant acknowledge receipt of a copy of this unauthorized reproduction of this form,or any portion thereof,by photocopy page. machine or any other means,including facsimile or computerized formats. Landlord's Initials( )( ) Copyright C 1998-2001, CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS®, Tenant's Initials( )( ) a INC.ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Reviewed by CL-11 REVISED 10101 (PAGE 2 of 6) 1 Broker or Designee Date COMMERCIAL LEASE AGREEMENT(CLA I PAGE 2 OF 6) T5625954.ZFX Premises: 1080 Howard Avenue, Hurli=rame G 94010 Date January 19, 2004 30. TENANCY STATEMENT (ESTOPPEL CERTIFICATE): Tenant shall execute and return a tenancy statement (estoppel certificate), delivered to Tenant by Landlord or Landlord's agent,within 3 days after its receipt. The tenancy statement shall acknowledge that this agreement is unmodified and in full force, or in full force as modified, and state the modifications. Failure to comply with this requirement: (i) shall be deemed Tenant's acknowledgment that the tenancy statement is true and correct,and may be relied upon by a prospective lender or purchaser;and(ii)may be treated by Landlord as a material breach of this agreement.Tenant shall also prepare,execute,and deliver to Landlord any financial statement(which will be held in confidence)reasonably requested by a prospective lender or buyer. 31. LANDLORD'S TRANSFER:Tenant agrees that the transferee of Landlord's interest shall be substituted as Landlord under this agreement.Landlord will be released of any further obligation to Tenant regarding the security deposit,only if the security deposit is returned to Tenant upon such transfer, or if the security deposit is actually transferred to the transferee. For all other obligations under this agreement, Landlord is released of any further liability to Tenant,upon Landlord's transfer. 32. SUBORDINATION: This agreement shall be subordinate to all existing liens and, at Landlord's option, the lien of any first deed of trust or first mortgage subsequently placed upon the real property of which the Premises are a part, and to any advances made on the security of the Premises, and to all renewals,modifications,consolidations,replacements,and extensions.However,as to the lien of any deed of trust or mortgage entered into after execution of this agreement, Tenant's right to quiet possession of the Premises shall not be disturbed if Tenant is not in default and so long as Tenant pays the Rent and observes and performs all of the provisions of this agreement,unless this agreement is otherwise terminated pursuant to its terms. If any mortgagee,trustee, or ground lessor elects to have this agreement placed in a security position prior to the lien of a mortgage,deed of trust,or ground lease,and gives written notice to Tenant,this agreement shall be deemed prior to that mortgage,deed of trust,or ground lease,or the date of recording. 33. TENANT REPRESENTATIONS; CREDIT: Tenant warrants that all statements in Tenant's financial documents and rental application are accurate. Tenant authorizes Landlord and Broker(s) to obtain Tenant's credit report at time of application and periodically during tenancy in connection with approval, modification, or enforcement of this agreement Landlord may cancel this agreement: (i)before occupancy begins, upon disapproval of the credit report(s); or(ii) at any time, upon discovering that information in Tenant's application is false. A negative credit report reflecting on Tenant's record may be submitted to a credit reporting agency, if Tenant fails to pay Rent or comply with any other obligation under this agreement. 34. DISPUTE RESOLUTION: A. MEDIATION:Tenant and Landlord agree to mediate any dispute or claim arising between them out of this agreement,or any resulting transaction, before resorting to arbitration or court action, subject to paragraph 346(2) below. Paragraphs 34B(2)and (3)apply whether or not the arbitration provision is initialed.Mediation fees, if any,shall be divided equally among the parties involved. If for any dispute or claim to which this paragraph applies, any party commences an action without first attempting to resolve the matter through mediation,or refuses to mediate after a request has been made,then that party shall not be entitled to recover attorney fees, even if they would otherwise be available to that party in any such action. THIS MEDIATION PROVISION APPLIES WHETHER OR NOT THE ARBITRATION PROVISION IS INITIALED. B. ARBITRATION OF DISPUTES:(1)Tenant and Landlord agree that any dispute or claim in Law or equity arising between them out of this agreement or any resulting transaction, which is not settled through mediation, shall be decided by neutral, binding arbitration, including and subject to paragraphs 346(2)and(3)below.The arbitrator shall be a retired judge or justice,or an attorney with at least 5 years of real estate transactional law experience, unless the parties mutually agree to a different arbitrator,who shall render an award in accordance with substantive California Law.In all other respects,the arbitration shall be conducted in accordance with Part III,Title 9 of the California Code of Civil Procedure.Judgment upon the award of the arbitrator(s)may be entered in any court having jurisdiction.The parties shall have the right to discovery in accordance with Code of Civil Procedure§1283.05. (2) EXCLUSIONS FROM MEDIATION AND ARBITRATION: The following matters are excluded from Mediation and Arbitration hereunder: (t) a judicial or nonmjudicial foreclosure or other action or proceeding to enforce a deed of trust,mortgage,or installment land sale contract as defined in Civil Code§2985;(ii)an unlawful detainer action;(iii)the filing or enforcement of a mechanic's lien;(iv)any matter that is within the jurisdiction of a probate,small claims, or bankruptcy court; and (v)an action for bodily injury or wrongful death, or for latent or patent defects to which Code of Civil Procedure§337.1 or§337.15 applies.The filing of a court action to enable the recording of a notice of pending action,for order of attachment, receivership,injunction,or other provisional remedies,shall not constitute a violation of the mediation and arbitration provisions. (3) BROKERS: Tenant and Landlord agree to mediate and arbitrate disputes or claims involving either or both Brokers, provided either or both Brokers shall have agreed to such mediation or arbitration, prior to,or within a reasonable time after the dispute or claim is presented to Brokers. Any election by either or both Brokers to participate in mediation or arbitration shall not result in Brokers being deemed parties to the agreement. "NOTICE: BY INITIALING IN THE SPACE BELOW YOU ARE AGREEING TO HAVE ANY DISPUTE ARISING OUT OF THE MATTERS INCLUDED IN THE'ARBITRATION OF DISPUTES' PROVISION DECIDED BY NEUTRAL ARBITRATION AS PROVIDED BY CALIFORNIA LAW AND YOU ARE GIVING UP ANY RIGHTS YOU MIGHT POSSESS TO HAVE THE DISPUTE LITIGATED IN A COURT OR JURY TRIAL. BY INITIALING IN THE SPACE BELOW YOU ARE GIVING UP YOUR JUDICIAL RIGHTS TO DISCOVERY AND APPEAL, UNLESS THOSE RIGHTS ARE SPECIFICALLY INCLUDED IN THE 'ARBITRATION OF DISPUTES' PROVISION. IF YOU REFUSE TO SUBMIT TO ARBITRATION AFTER AGREEING TO THIS PROVISION, YOU MAY BE COMPELLED TO ARBITRATE UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF THE CALIFORNIA CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE. YOUR AGREEMENT TO THIS ARBITRATION PROVISION IS VOLUNTARY." "WE HAVE READ AND UNDERSTAND THE FOREGOING AND AGREE TO SUBMIT DISPUTES ARISING OUT OF THE MATTERS INCLUDED IN THE 'ARBITRATION OF DISPUTES' PROVISION TO NEUTRAL ARBITRATION." Landlord's Initials / Tenant's Initials / The copyright laws of the United States (Title 17 U.S. Code) forbid the Landlord and Tenant acknowledge receipt of a copy of this unauthorized reproduction of this forth,or any portion thereof,by photocopy page. machine or any other means,including facsimile or computerized formats. Landlord's Initials( )( ) Copyright ® 1998-2001, CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS®, Tenant's Initials( )( ) INC.ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. i NTMTY Reviewed by CL-11 REVISED 10/01 (PAGE 4 of 6) Broker or Designee Date COMMERCIAL LEASE AGREEMENT(CL-11 PAGE 4 OF 6) Premises: 1080 Howard Avenue, Burlingame, CA 94010 Date.7anuary 19, 2004 35. JOINT AND INDIVIDUAL OBLIGATIONS: If there is more than one Tenant, each one shall be individually and completely responsible for the performance of all obligations of Tenant under this agreement,jointly with every other Tenant,and individually,whether or not in possession. 36. NOTICE:Notices may be served by mail,facsimile,or courier at the following address or location,or at any other location subsequently designated: Landlord: City of Burlingame Tenant:Rino Bette 500 Primrose Road 1080 Howard Avenue Burlingame, CA 94010 Burlingame, CA 94010 Notice is deemed effective upon the earliest of the following:(1)personal receipt by either party or their agent;(it)written acknowledgement of notice; or(111)5 days after mailing notice to such location by first Gass mail,postage pre-paid. 37. WAIVER:The waiver of any breach shall not be construed as a continuing waiver of the same breach or a waiver of any subsequent breach. 36. INDEMNIFICATION: Tenant shall indemnify, defend and hold Landlord harmless from all claims, disputes, litigation, judgments and attorney fees arising out of Tenant's use of the Premises. 39. OTHER TERMS AND CONDITIONSISUPPLEMENTS: See addendum A. 39a The $1500 received is a non-refundable option to lease The tenant will pay $1000. per month begaaaing April 1, 2004. Upon opening for business or February 1, 2005 whichever occurs first the rent will increase to $2000. per month and adjust annually as per paragraph 3A(2) of this lease. The following ATTACHED supplementslexhibits are incorporated in this agreement:Addendum A 40. ATTORNEY FEES: In any action or proceeding arising out of this agreement, the prevailing party between Landlord and Tenant shall be entitled to reasonable attorney fees and costs from the non-prevailing Landlord or Tenant,except as provided in paragraph 34A. 41. ENTIRE CONTRACT: Time is of the essence. All prior agreements between Landlord and Tenant are incorporated in this agreement, which constitutes the entire contract. It is intended as a final expression of the parties' agreement, and may not be contradicted by evidence of any prior agreement or contemporaneous oral agreement.The parties further intend that this agreement constitutes the complete and exclusive statement of its terms,and that no extrinsic evidence whatsoever may be introduced in any judicial or other proceeding,if any,involving this agreement.Any provision of this agreement that is held to be invalid shall not affect the validity or enforceability of any other provision in this agreement. This agreement shall be binding upon,and inure to the benefit of,the heirs,assignees and successors to the parties. 42. BROKERAGE: Landlord and Tenant shall each pay to Broker(s) the fee agreed to, if any, in a separate written agreement. Neither Tenant nor Landlord has utilized the services of, or for any other reason owes compensation to, a licensed real estate broker(individual or corporate), agent, finder, or other entity, other than as named in this agreement, in connection with any act relating to the Premises, including, but not limited to, inquiries, introductions, consultations, and negotiations leading to this agreement. Tenant and Landlord each agree to indemnify, defend and hold harmless the other, and the Brokers specified herein, and their agents, from and against any costs, expenses, or liability for compensation claimed inconsistent with the warranty and representation in this paragraph 42. 43. AGENCY CONFIRMATION:The following agency relationships are hereby confirmed for this transaction: Listing Agent: Tim Auran (Print Firm Name)is the agent of(check one): ®the Landlord exclusively;or ❑both the Tenant and Landlord. Selling Agent: Tim Auran (Print Firm Name)(if not same as Listing Agent)is the agent of(check one): ❑the Tenant exclusively;or ❑x the Landlord exclusively;or ❑both the Tenant and Landlord. Real Estate Brokers are not parties to the agreement between Tenant and Landlord. The copyright laws of the United States (Title 17 U.S. Code) forbid the Landlord and Tenant acknowledge receipt of a copy of this unauthorized reproduction of this form,or any portion thereof,by photocopy page. machine or any other means,including facsimile or computerized formats. Landlord's Initials( )( ) Copyright ® 1998-2001, CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS®, Tenant's Initials( )( ) INC.ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. err Reviewed by CL-11 REVISED 10101 (PAGE 5 of 6) Broker or Designee tate COMMERCIAL LEASE AGREEMENT(CL-11 PAGE 5 OF 6) T5625954.ZFX Premises: 1080 Howard Avenue, Burlingame CA 94010 Date January 19, 2004 Landlord and Tenant acknowledge and agree that Brokers: (1) do not guarantee the condition of the Premises; (ii) cannot verify representations made by others; (iii)will not verify zoning and land use restrictions; (iv) cannot provide legal or tax advice; (v) will not provide other advice or information that exceeds the knowledge, education or experience required to obtain a real estate license. Furthermore, if Brokers are not also acting as Landlord in this agreement, Brokers: (vi) do not decide what rental rate a Tenant should pay or Landlord should accept; and (vii) do not decide upon the length or other terms of tenancy. Landlord and Tenant agree that they will seek legal, tax, Insurance, and other desired assistance from appropriate professionals. Tenant Date Rino Betti (Print name) Address 115 Hunboldt Road City Burlingame State C-4 Zip 94010 Tenant Date (Print name) Address City Stale Zip Landlord Date (owner or agent with authority to enter into this agreement) City of Burlingame Address 501 Primrose Road City Burlingame State CA Zip 94010 Landlord Date (owner or agent with authority to enter into this agreement) Address City State Zip Agency relationships are confirmed as above. Real estate brokers who are not also Landlord in this agreement are not a parry to the agreement between Landlord and Tenant. Real Estate Broker(Leasing Finn)Tim Ai=^ By(Agent) Date Tim Auran Address 1323 Bernal Avenue City Burlingame State C_Zip 94010 Telephone (650)347-3300 Fax !650)347-3460 E-mail timauran@worldnet.att.net Real Estate Broker(Listing Firm) Tim Auran By(Agent) Date Address City State Zip Telephone Fax E-mail THIS FORM HAS BEEN APPROVED BY THE CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS®(C.A.R.).NO REPRESENTATION IS MADE AS TO THE LEGAL VALIDITY OR ADEQUACY OF ANY PROVISION IN ANY SPECIFIC TRANSACTION. A REAL ESTATE BROKER IS THE PERSON QUALIFIED TO ADVISE ON REAL ESTATE TRANSACTIONS.IF YOU DESIRE LEGAL OR TAX ADVICE,CONSULTAN APPROPRIATE PROFESSIONAL. This form is available for use by the entire real estate industry.It is not intended to identity the user as a REALTORS.REALTOR®is a mgistered collective membership mark which may be used only by members of the NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS®who subscribe to its Code of Ethics. Pudic a DislrbA dby: REAL ESTATE BUSINESS SERVICES,INC. a subsilary gen CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS® Reviewed by ` 525 Saulh Virgil Avenue,Los Arg ,CaM w 90020 CL-11 REVISED 10101 (PAGE 6 OF 6) BnoIworDesignee Date COMMERCIAL LEASE AGREEMENT(CLA 1 PAGE 6 OF 6) Tw2sys<zrx ADDENDUM A The following terms and conditions are hereby incorporated into and made a part of the Commercial Lease Agreement, dated , on the property known as 1080 Howard Avenue, Burlingame, CA (Greyhound Bus Depot), in which Rino Betti is referred to as Tenant, and the City of Burlingame is referred to as Landlord. I. Tenant acknowledges the Historic Value and importance of the Premises as a former Greyhound Bus Depot. No signage, alteration, or painting of the exterior or interior of the Premises is allowed without express written consent of the City of Burlingame. 2. A. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Lease Agreement, no later than September 14, 2008, Landlord may give written notice to Tenant of termination of this Lease Agreement as of March 31, 2009, if(1) the City will be using the property as part of a redevlopment project, (2) the City needs use of the project in accordance with a Federal, State or County contract or (3) the City will lose funding from a Federal, State or County agency. B. Upon such a termination, Landlord agrees to compensate Tenant for any fixtures that Tenant has purchased and placed on the Premises at sixty-five percent (65%) of the purchase price paid by Tenant for such fixtures and that Tenant has elected to leave on the Premises upon Tenant's vacation of the Premises. Tenant may elect, however, to remove these fixtures rather than make them subject to compensation under this paragraph so long as the removal complies with the other terms and conditions of this Lease Agreement. C. The only fixtures eligible for compensation under this paragraph are those that have been documented by Tenant by submission of purchase receipts to Landlord and confirmation in writing by inspection by Landlord no later than June 30, 2005. D. If the City exercises its termination right under this paragraph, the City shall not operate or allow others to operate a food establishment as defined in the City zoning code on this property until after April 1, 2014. 3. Landlord and Tenant agree to meet no later than September 30, 2013, in order to attempt to reach agreement on an extension of this Lease Agreement. However, nothing in this paragraph shall be construed as imposing an obligation on either party to actually reach such an agreement, but is solely an obligation to meet and discuss such a possibility. 4. The use of the Premises will be limited to a retail store that primarily sells sandwiches, drinks, chips, salads, soups, and pasta, and as an incidental use, sales of Sam's logo hats and t-shirts. No alcohol or tobacco will be sold at the Premises. Any changes or additions to this description or the nature of the use shall require the written permission of the Landlord, which may approve or deny in its sole discretion. 5. The following notice is provided pursuant to California Revenue&Taxation Code § 107.6: The property is owned by the City of Burlingame, and the City is exempt from real property and personal property taxes. However, this Lease Agreement between the City and the Tenant may create a possessory interest by the Tenant subject to property taxation, and the Tenant may be subject to the payment of property taxes levied on that interest by the State of California or the County of San Mateo. The Tenant shall be solely responsible for the payment of any such property taxes. 6. The Tenant shall be responsible for all landscaping and maintenance of the planting area around the building and the turf area. The Tenant shall meet the following minimum maintenance standards: A. Turf shall be cut and edged at least once a week. B. Turf shall be adequately fertilized to ensure that grass is healthy and growing vigorously. This usually means at least two fertilizations per year. Aeration as required but at least once per year. C. Pick-up of litter shall occur at least once a day, seven days a week. D. All landscaping will be cleaned or replaced when appearance has noticeably deteriorated or an accumulation of sand, dirt, leaves, and debris distract from the appearance or safety of the area. E. The City of Burlingame will maintain the trees on the Premises. 7. All building and hard surfaces on the Premises, other than sidewalks, shall be cleaned, repaired, repainted, or replaced whenever its appearance has noticeably deteriorated or an accumulation of dirt and other effects distract from the appearance of the Premises. Walkways shall be regularly swept and kept clean. Any graffiti will be removed or painted over within twenty-four hours of its placement on any part of the Premises. 8. This Lease Agreement is contingent on the approval of the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame with regard to the conditional use and parking variance for the proposed use, and it'the Commission approval is appealed to the City Council, is contingent on the approval of the City Council under that appeal. 9. This Lease Agreement is further contingent on the Tenant's acceptance of the conditions that may be imposed in the Commission or Council approval (described in paragraph 8 above) given the costs of improvements made necessary by those conditions. The Tenant shall have thirty(30)days from the date of final approval by the Planning Commission, or if appealed, from the date of final approval by the City Council,to determine if the conditions of approval are acceptable. If the Tenant finds the conditions are unacceptable,the Tenant shall notify the City of Burlingame in writing that it is cancelling the Lease Agreement, and upon giving that notice,the Tenant will forfeit the security deposit made pursuant to paragraph 6(A)of the Commercial Lease Agreement. If the Tenant fails to give such a notice within the 30-day period, the Lease Agreement will become fully effective. The foregoing terms and conditions are hereby agreed to, and the undersigned acknowledge receipt of this Addendum A. Date Date Tenant Landlord City of Burlingame By Rino Beth ���CITY o� STAFF REPORT BURUNGAME AGENDA 9b ITEM# 00 MTG. Y_zau.ab 0 DATE 2.17.04 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL SUBMITTED BY 0 a zarc+ DATE: FEBRUARY 6, 2004 APPROVED FRoM: CITY PLANNER BY SUBJECT: OPPOSE LEGISLATION THAT WOULD EMPOWER Td E STATE'S EXECUTIVE BRANCH TO UNILATERALLY OVERTURN LCOAL LAND USE DECISIONS. RECOMMENDATION: The City Council should review Senate Bill 744 and adopt a Council Resolution of opposition. Currently this bill has been approved by the California Senate and is on its way to the Assembly. If Council adopts the Resolution of opposition, staff will communicate your action to the appropriate decisions-makers in Sacramento and continue to follow this legislation's progress. BACKGROUND: Senate Bill 744 (SB 744) gives the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) the authority to overturn local land use decisions on housing projects, based on appeals from housing development applicants. This means that the local action for a housing project including affordable housing, now final with the City Council, could be appealed by an applicant to HCD. The applicant could appeal, not only a denial of a project, but ask for relief of any conditions the city might have placed on the project in granting approval. Clearly this legislation represents a major shift in land use regulation away from local government. If enacted it would be the"toe hold" for even greater erosion of local authority to govern land use. Most important is the precedent established by this legislation. In the near term, SB 744 would extent to the State government control over one aspect of local land use, housing. In the long term this action could expand State authority and reduce local control over one of the most fundamental expressions of local character and community values, as well as local economic base. There must be a better way for the State to achieve its "expressed" need for affordable housing. The League of California Cities cites the following reasons for opposing SB 744: ➢ SB 744 empowers HCD to encourage developers to do an"end run" around any local conditions imposed on a housing development approved at the local level (or denied). HCD would have the authority to "order" the local government to remove any condition which they find "infeasible" or"not reasonable or consistent with meeting local housing needs"; moreover, even if the conditions imposed by the local government are legally valid, they may be overturned based on a political decision by HCD. OPPOSE LEGISLATION THAT WOULD EMPOWER THE STATE'S EXECUTIVE BRANCH TO UNILATERALLY OVERTURN LCOAL LAND USE DECISIONS February 17,2004 ➢ HCD would have the authority to vacate the entire local decision and order the local government to issue any necessary approval or permit to the applicant. ➢ Once an applicant had demonstrated that a local decision rendered a project infeasible or was not reasonable, the local jurisdiction would bear the burden of proof to HCD to show that its decision was reasonable. This poses a number of problems: HCD is not politically accountable to anyone in the community; HCD is administering a political process not a legal one; HCD is inherently sympathetic to developer concerns given the focus of their department (provide more housing) where local elected officials have to balance the broader concerns of a community. ➢ SB 744 is duplicative and therefore unnecessary because developers who believe that local government has unjustly treated their projects have recourse to the court. ➢ SB 744 which is punitive distracts from other more significant barriers to affordable housing production like state imposed conditions such as prevailing wage requirements among others which can cause a substantial increase in the cost of building housing. Attachments: Resolution of the City Council of the City of Burlingame Opposing SB 744 that Would Empower the State's Executive Branch to Unilaterally Overturn Local Land Use Decisions Senate Bill 744, February 21, 2003 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME OPPOSING SB 744 THAT WOULD EMPOWER THE STATE'S EXECUTIVE BRANCH TO UNILATERALLY OVERTURN LOCAL LAND USE DECISIONS RESOLVED by the CITY COUNCIL of the CITY of BURLINGAME that: WHEREAS,the State Legislature is considering SB 744 that would empower the Executive Branch of State Government through the Department of Housing and Community Development to unilaterally overturn land use decisions that the Department decides were not reasonable or consistent with its views of local housing needs; and WHEREAS,the State of California has no general plan and no coherent State housing program, but instead has pushed fiscal and political responsibility for all housing in the State onto local governments; and WHEREAS,this bill would allow the State's bureaucracy, which is not responsive or accountable to local citizens or communities, to seize control of local land use and serve the special interests concentrated in the State Capitol; and WHEREAS, local governments have the only processes,plans, and accountability to decide local land use issues in a democratic form of government; and WHEREAS,the State of California should devote its energies to putting its own house in order over the coming years rather than ordering local governments how to govern, NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby resolved: 1. The State Legislature is urged to defeat SB 744 as an unwarranted, unfunded, and improper intrusion in local affairs. 2. Should the bill be passed by the Legislature, the Governor is urged to veto SB 744. 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 adopted thereafter by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBER: NOES: COUNCILMEMBER: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBER: City Clerk AMENDED IN SENATE JUNE 3, 2003 AMENDED IN SENATE APRIL 21, 2003 SENATE BILL No. 744 Introduced by Senators Dunn and Ducheny (Principal coauthor: Senator Hollingsworth) (Principal coauthor: Assembly Member Steinberg) (Coauthors: Senators Burton and Florez) February 21, 2003 An act to add Section 65585.4 to the Government Code, relating to planning. LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST SB 744, as amended, Dunn. Planning: housing. Existing law requires each city,county,or city and county to prepare and adopt a general plan for its jurisdiction that contains certain mandatory elements, including a housing element. One part of the housing element is an assessment of housing needs and inventory of resources and constraints relevant to meeting these needs. The assessment includes the locality's share of regional housing needs which is determined by the appropriate council of governments,subject to revision by the Department of Housing and Community Development. This bill would establish •"' require the department-&44ousing speei€Ied, to hear appeals of city, county, or city and county decisions on applications for the construction of housing developments that meet specified affordability requirements. 97 SB 744 —2— Vote: 2— Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes. State-mandated local program: no. The people of the State of California do enact as follows: 1 SECTION 1. Section 65585.4 is added to the Government 2 Code, to read: 3 65585.4. (a) Thefe shall be within the depaAment a Housing 4 5 is 6 , 7 exeept that eithef may designate em employee of his of hef! 8 9 f:emaining thfee inembefs shall be appointed by the Gavemof with 10 the-adviee anddeense ftt of the Senate. O member- shall be 11 inembef of a eivy eatmeil of baafd of s , ad one othe 12 13 affordable hattsing. The appointed ffieffibefs shall serve for-tefina 14 . 15 16 of hef sefviees,but shall be reimbufsed by the depatlinent faf a14 17 18 peffefffianee of h�s or-her-effleial duties. The eafth-Rittee shall he 19 65585.4. (a) The department shall hear appeals pursuant to 20 this section at least quaftefly of: fner-e often as neeessafy. T 21 eenunittee. The department shall conduct the hearings in 22 accordance with rules and regulations established by the 23 24 department. 25 (b) Any applicant who proposes to construct a housing 26 development that meets the criteria of subdivision(c) and whose 27 application is either denied or approved with conditions that in his 28 or her judgment render the provision of housing infeasible, may 29 appeal the decision of the city, county, or city and county to the 30 department. However, 31 conditions or mitigation measures impose pursuant to a local 32 coastal permit or an environmental review required by the 33 California Environmental Quality Act(Division 13 (commencing 34 with Section 21000) of the Public Resources Code) may not be 35 appealed. 97 -3— SB 744 1 (c) An applicant may file an appeal with the eommittee 2 department if both of the following criteria are met: 3 (1) The proposed housing development will meet any of the 4 following affordability requirements: 5 (A) Five percent of the total housing of the housing 6 development is available at affordable housing cost to extremely 7 low income households whose household income is less than or 8 equal to 30 percent of the area median income. 9 (B) Ten percent of the total housing of the development is 10 available at affordable housing cost to very low income 11 households, as defined in Section 50105 of the Health and Safety 12 Code. 13 (C) Twenty percent of the total housing of the development is 14 available at affordable housing cost to lower income households, 15 as defined in Section 50079.5 of the Health and Safety Code. 16 (D) Fifty percent of the total housing of the development is 17 available at affordable housing cost to moderate-income 18 households, consistent with Section 50052.5 of the Health and 19 Safety Code. 20 (2) Either of the following criteria is met as of the date on which 21 the application to the city, county, or city and county is deemed 22 complete: 23 (A) The city, county, or city and county has adopted a housing 24 element that the department has determined pursuant to Section 25 65585 to be in substantial compliance with the requirements of this 26 article, and the proposed housing development, exclusive of any 27 density bonus granted pursuant to Section 65915, is consistent 28 with both the density allowed by the jurisdiction's zoning 29 ordinance and the general plan land use designation as specified 30 in any element of the general plan as of the date the application was 31 deemed complete, provided that consistency shall not be required 32 with the zoning ordinance or land use designation if the 33 jurisdiction has not amended the ordinance or the designation to 34 conform to the adopted housing element. 35 (B) The city, county, or city and county has not adopted a 36 housing element that the department has determined pursuant to 37 Section 65585 to be in substantial compliance with the 38 requirements of this article, and the proposed housing 39 development;is located on a site that is designated for residential 97 SB 744 —4- 1 4- 1 or commercial uses in any element of the general plan as of the date 2 the application was deemed complete. 3 (d) An applicant may file an appeal with the eerittee 4 department within 20 days after the date of the decision by the 5 local agency to deny the application or approve the application 6 with conditions that render the provision of housing infeasible. 7 The eammittee-department shall notify the local agency of the 8 filing ofsueh an appeal within 10 days,and the local agency shall, 9 within 10 days of the receipt of the notice, transmit a copy of its 10 decision and the reasons therefor to the eemmittee-department. 11 The appeal shall be heard within 30 days after receipt of the request 12 for an appeal by the applicant. The appeal hearing may be 13 eandueted by the board, 14 of the boafd, or a hearing effieef appointed by the ehaif of the 15 boafd appeal hearing may be conducted by the department or a 16 hearing officer appointed by the director of the department. A 17 stenographic record of the proceedings shall be kept. ^`sex 18 Within 30 days of the appeals hearing, 19 the department shall render a written decision, based upon a 20 majority vote, stating its findings of fact, its conclusions and the 21 reasons therefor. The hearing by the Housing Aeeountabifity 22 wee department shall be limited to the issue of whether, in 23 the case of the denial of an application, the decision of the city, 24 county, or city and county was reasonable and consistent with 25 meeting local housing needs as determined pursuant to Section 26 65584 and, in the case of an approval of an application with 27 conditions and requirements imposed, whether those conditions 28 and requirements render the provision of housing infeasible and 29 whether they are reasonable and consistent with meeting local 30 housing needs as determined pursuant to Section 65584. If the 31 eewn-nittee- department finds, in the case of a denial, that the 32 decision of the local agency is not reasonable or consistent with 33 meeting local housing needs, it shall vacate the decision and shall 34 direct the local agency to issue any necessary approval or permit 35 to the applicant. If the eeittee-department finds, in the case of 36 an approval with conditions and requirements imposed, that the 37 decision of the board renders the provision of housing infeasible 38 and is not reasonable or consistent with meeting local housing 39 needs, it shall order the local agency to modify or remove any such 40 condition or requirement so as to make the project no longer 97 -5— SB 744 1 infeasible and to issue any necessary permit or approval. Decisions 2 or conditions and requirements imposed by a local agency that are 3 consistent with meeting local housing needs shall not be vacated, 4 modified, or removed by the eommittee--department 5 notwithstanding that those decisions or conditions and 6 requirements have the effect of rendering the provision of housing 7 infeasible. 8 (e) In any appeal before the eonh-flittee—department, the 9 applicant shall have the initial burden of proof to show that it has 10 met the requirements of subdivision(c). In a case of approval with 11 conditions or requirements imposed,the applicant shall also have 12 the burden of proof to show that the conditions and requirements 13 render the provision of housing infeasible. If the applicant meets 14 the initial burden of proof,then the city,county,or city and county 15 shall have the burden of proof to show that its action was 16 reasonable in that denial of the project or the failure to implement 17 the conditions and requirements, as proposed, would have a 18 specific, adverse impact, as defined in Section 65589.5, upon the 19 public health or safety, the physical environment, or on any real 20 property that is listed in the California Register of Historical 21 Resources, that there is no feasible method to satisfactorily 22 mitigate or avoid the specific adverse impact without rendering the 23 project infeasible, and that the mitigation or avoidance of such 24 impacts outweigh local housing needs. 25 (f) The Housing Aeeattmability Commit4ee department or the 26 applicant shall have the power to enforce the orders of the 27 eenh-nittee-department at law or in equity in the superior court. 28 The city, county, or city and county shall carry out the order of the 29 Hausing Aeeotmtabifity Committee department within 30 days of 30 its entry and, upon failure to do so, the order of theeemmittee 31 department shall for all purposes,be deemed to be the action of the 32 local agency,unless the applicant consents to a different decision 33 or order by the local agency. 34 (g) The department may charge a fee to cover actual costs 35 directly related to the activities of the Housing Aeeatintability 36 e department in administering this section. The fee shall 37 initially be paid by the applicant. If the eenmnittee department 38 orders approval of the proposed development or modifies or 39 removes any conditions or requirements imposed upon the 97 SB 744 —6- 1 6-1 applicant, the city, county, or city and county shall reimburse the 2 applicant for the fee paid pursuant to this subdivision. 3 (h) (1) For the purposes of this section, "housing 4 development" means a development project consisting of one or 5 more residential dwelling units or an emergency shelter facility. 6 (2) For the purposes of this section, an adopted housing 7 element that has been self-certified pursuant to Section 65585.1 8 shall be deemed to have been approved by the department,unless 9 a court finds that the jurisdiction's housing element does not 10 substantially comply with this article. 11 (i) The remedies provided in this section are in addition to any 12 other remedy provided by law. O 97 $2,324,324.18 Ck.No.93264-93802 Excludes Library Cks.93264-93295 RECOMMENDED FOR PAYMENT APPROVED FOR PAYMENT Payroll for January 2004 $3,295,649.59 Ck.No.157009-157484 INCLUDES ELECTRONIC FUNDS TRANSFERS PERS HEALTH PERS RETIREMENT FEDERAL 941 TAX STATE DISABILITY TAX STATE INCOME TAX PERS&ICMA DEFERRED COMP SECTION 125 DEDUCTION !!!Please note that January 2004 has 3 pay dates as well as the POA uniform allowance III CL 3 Q OG W W (D � 3 U � S:\FINEXCEL\MISCELLANEOUS\COUNCILCKS.XLS J 6 T CITY OF BURLINGAME 02.05-2004 W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 11 FUND RECAP 03-04 NAME FUND AMOUNT GENERAL FUND 101 123,983.73 PAYROLL REVOLVING FUND 130 6,469.60 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS FUND 320 16,226.66 WATER CAPITAL PROJECT FUND 326 75,736.11 WATER FUND 526 182,969.55 SEWER FUND 527 5,144.85 PARKING ENTERPRISE FUND 530 4,030.40 SELF INSURANCE FUND 618 19,052.52 FACILITIES SERVICES FUND 619 8,710.33 EQUIPMENT SERVICES FUND 620 966.23 INFORMATION SERVICES FUND 621 922.12 FIRE MECHANIC SERVICES FUND 625 172.65 TRUST AND AGENCY FUND 731 300.00 STATE GRANTS FUND 734 2,452.42 UTILITY REVOLVING FUND 896 58,047.93 TOTAL FOR APPROVAL 8505 185..10 I > VO1n CLL 41.�j� y(�aF(p3 VolDG1c 88b3g 3�i�1�o3 Iv HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL: THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE CLAIMS LISTED ON PAGES NUMBERED FROM 1 THROUGH 11 INCLUSIVE, AND/OR CLAIMS NUMBERED FROM 93669 THROUGH 93802 INCLUSIVE,TOTALING IN THE AMOUNT OF $505,185.10, HAVE BEEN CHECKED IN DETAIL AND APPROVED BY THE PROPER OFFICIALS, AND IN MY OPINION REPRESENT FAIR AND JUST CHARGES AGAINST THE CITY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THEIR RESPECTIVE AMOUNTS AS INDICATED THEREON. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, ......... ........... ........ ...... .. .../.../... FINANCE DIRECTOR DATE APPROVED FOR PAYMENT .......... ...................... . ... .../.. ./... COUNCIL DATE CITY OF BURLINGAME WARRANT REG I ST ER PAGE 10 02/05/04 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT '•' Denotes Hand Written Checks 93797 SMCFCA 24742 400.00 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 400.00 101 65200 240 93798 PRIMROSE PLAZA PARTNERS 24743 1,000.00 DEPOSIT REFUNDS 1,000.00 101 22520 93799 CUSTOM TRUCK 24744 179.64 MISCELLANEOUS 179.64 618 64520 604 93800 NEIL ALCARIA 24745 150.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 150.00 101 68010 220 1422 93801 HEADSETS.COM 24746 194.74 OFFICE EXPENSE 194.74 526 69020 110 93802 THE INVIRONMENTALISTS 24747 370.00 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 370.00 619 64460 210 5150 TOTAL 8505,185.10 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 9 02/05/04 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 93782 AT&T WIRELESS 24640 242.89 COMMUNICATIONS 242.89 101 66100 160 93783 DIAMOND COMMUNICATIONS INC 24659 450.00 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 150.00 101 66210 210 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 150.00 526 69020 210 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 150.00 527 66520 210 93784 ROB EICHENSEHR 24676 150.00 DEPOSIT REFUNDS 150.00 101 22520 93785 BIANCHI TRAFFIC SAFETY 24705 2,452.42 TRAINING EXPENSE 2,452.42 734 65196 260 93786 OCLC, INC. 24731 5,000.00 LIBRARY CATALOGING EXPENSE 5,000.00 101 67500 124 93787 JESS LICON 24732 200.00 TRAINING EXPENSE 200.00 101 66210 260 93788 RUSSELL S. COHEN 24733 53.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 53.00 101 64540 220 93789 COMMITTEE TO ELECT MARY JANNEY 24734 53.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 53.00 101 64540 220 93790 PAUL PRENDIVILLE 24735 53.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 53.00 101 64540 220 93791 GOLDEN GATE GENERAL CONTRACTORS, 24736 11680.00 DEPOSIT REFUNDS 1 ,680.00 101 22520 93792 DAN ANDERSEN FOR CITY COUNCIL 24737 53.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 53.00 101 64540 220 93793 CITIZENS FOR TERRY NAGEL 24738 53.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 53.00 101 64540 220 93794 MIKE COFFEY FOR CITY COUNCIL 24739 53.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 53.00 101 64540 220 93795 RONALD KARP 24740 300.00 MISCELLANEOUS 300.00 101 36630 93796 COMPUTER & BUSINESS PRINTING 24741 953.78 MISC. SUPPLIES 953.78 530 65400 120 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 8 02/05/04 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 93767 SUTTER HEALTH a WORK MEDICAL ASS 24381 163.80 CLAIMS ADJUSTING SERVICES 163.80 618 64520 225 93768 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 24466 501.36 MISC. SUPPLIES 90.12 619 64460 120 SMALL TOOLS 411.24 619 64460 130 93769 COMPUCOM 24467 702.59 OFFICE EXPENSE 702.59 101 64350 110 93770 BURLINGAME FIREFIGHTERS FUND 24518 4,085.00 MISCELLANEOUS 4,085.00 130 20016 93771 BURLINGAME FIREFIGHTERS FUND 24519 48.00 UNION DUES 48.00 130 21080 93772 BURLINGAME POLICE ADMINISTRATION 24520 200.00 MISCELLANEOUS 200.00 130 20024 93773 BURLINGAME POLICE OFFICERS ASSN 24521 620.00 MISCELLANEOUS 620.00 130 20024 93774 C.L.E.A. 24523 741.00 MISCELLANEOUS 741.00 130 20026 93775 TEAMSTERS#856 24526 455.00 UNION DUES 455.00 130 21091 93776 TEAMSTERS UNION LOCAL 856 24528 320.60 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 10.44 130 21015 MISCELLANEOUS 310.16 130 21092 93777 HONEYWELL 24546 4,470.40 PROFESSIONAL&SPECIALIZED S 2,350.25 320 80790 210 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 2,120.15 320 76010 220 93778 AT&T WIRELESS 24607 1,060.18 COMMUNICATIONS 346.69 101 65200 160 COMMUNICATIONS 713.49 101 65100 160 93779 JOHN BOLOGNA 24628 168.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 168.00 101 68010 220 1780 93780 BRYAN ROSENBERG 24631 84.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 84.00 101 68010 220 1780 93781 GOODIN,MACBRIDE,SOUERI,RITCHIE& 24638 21,276.02 PROFESSIONAL&SPECIALIZED S 21,276.02 101 64350 210 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 7 02/05/04 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 93754 STATE OF CALIFORNIA 23460 14,526.00 MISCELLANEOUS 3,697.00 101 68010 010 1100 MISCELLANEOUS 5, 180.00 101 65300 010 TEMPORARY EMPLOYMENT SVC. 1 ,785.00 101 68020 011 2300 TEMPORARY EMPLOYMENT SVC. 192.00 101 68010 011 1100 TEMPORARY EMPLOYMENT SVC. 1 ,089.00 101 67500 011 MISCELLANEOUS 2,583.00 530 65400 010 93755 KORALEEN ENTERPRISES 23510 516.39 MISCELLANEOUS 516.39 526 69020 233 93756 ERLER AND KALINOWSKI , INC. 23531 75,736. 11 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 21 ,073.42 326 80722 210 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 54,662.69 326 80870 210 93757 MCMASTER-CARR SUPPLY CO. 23611 588.78 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 588.78 619 64460 210 5240 93758 GWENDOLYN BORGER 23703 3,955.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 3,955.00 101 68010 220 1331 93759 SBC/MCI 23728 4,871 .36 COMMUNICATIONS 18.86 101 66210 160 COMMUNICATIONS 18.86 526 69020 160 COMMUNICATIONS 18.86 527 66520 160 COMMUNICATIONS 18.86 619 64460 160 UTILITY EXPENSE 4,795.92 896 20281 93760 WILLIAMSON CUSTOM CABINETS 23765 1 ,500.00 MISC. SUPPLIES 1 ,500.00 320 80790 120 93761 DAVID GRANUCCI 23777 376.21 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 376.21 101 64420 210 93762 DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 23905 2, 116.00 MISCELLANEOUS 2, 116.00 101 23620 93763 CHOICE POINT BUSINESS AND GOVERN 23935 250.00 POLICE INVESTIGATION EXPENSE 250.00 101 65100 292 93764 FLORA ROBELET 24167 50.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 50.00 101 68010 220 1521 93765 ERIC GATTMAN 24169 234.40 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 234.40 101 68010 220 1521 93766 WATTCO 24270 73.53 FIRE APPARATUS MAINT. 73.53 101 65200 203 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 6 02/05/04 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 93740 WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES 21769 3,145.00 PROFESSIONAL &SPECIALIZED S 3,145.00 320 80480 210 93741 PROVIDENCE PEST TERMITE 21947 290.00 PROFESSIONAL&SPECIALIZED S 42.00 619 64460 210 5170 PROFESSIONAL &SPECIALIZED S 79.00 619 64460 210 5110 PROFESSIONAL &SPECIALIZED S 42.00 619 64460 210 5160 PROFESSIONAL &SPECIALIZED S 42.00 619 64460 210 5150 PROFESSIONAL &SPECIALIZED S 85.00 619 64460 210 5180 93742 DONALD SHEPLEY 22375 217.00 PROFESSIONAL& SPECIALIZED S 217.00 101 64420 210 93743 STEVE NELSON 22449 84.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 84.00 101 68010 220 1780 93744 VERIZON WIRELESS 22593 39.61 COMMUNICATIONS 39.61 101 68010 160 1100 93745 PITNEY BOWES RESERVE ACCOUNT 22624 5,000.00 MISCELLANEOUS 5,000.00 101 15500 93746 JAMES YARBOROUGH 22793 126.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 126.00 101 68010 220 1780 93747 ALLIED IRON CO. 22855 6,77 FIRE APPARATUS MAINT. 6.77 625 65213 203 93748 IMAGISTICS INTERNATIONAL 22924 395.32 OFFICE EXPENSE 86.32 101 65100 110 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 309.00 101 65100 220 93749 PITNEY BOWES 23128 512.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 512.00 101 65100 220 93750 THE MOBILE STORAGE GROUP 23138 190.00 PROFESSIONAL&SPECIALIZED S 190.00 526 69020 210 93751 ALLIANCE GAS PRODUCTS 23245 61.70 FIRE APPARATUS MAINT. 61.70 101 65200 203 93752 801SE CASCADE OFFICE PRODUCTS CO 23306 296.00 OFFICE EXPENSE 108.77 101 68010 110 1101 OFFICE EXPENSE 121.79 101 64420 110 OFFICE EXPENSE 65.44 101 65200 110 93753 REPUBLIC ELECTRIC 23382 - 2,569.85 PROFESSIONAL&SPECIALIZED S 2,569.85 101 66240 210 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 5 02/05/04 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 93725 PENINSULA CORRIDOR JOINT 20060 3,860.00 RENTS & LEASES 1 ,930.00 526 69020 180 RENTS & LEASES 1 ,930.00 527 66520 180 93726 AFFINITEL COMMUNICATIONS 20246 435.00 COMMUNICATIONS 435.00 621 64450 160 93727 DAPPER TIRE CO. , INC. 20464 163.07 SUPPLIES 163.07 620 15000 93728 ARLETTE PETERSON 20547 680.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 680.00 101 68010 220 1349 93729 PHIL SCOTT 20550 441 .73 MISC. SUPPLIES 441 .73 527 66520 120 93730 ELLEN MAllONI 20614 300.00 DEPOSIT REFUNDS 300.00 731 22520 93731 BRIDGE WIRELESS 20633 88.00 SUPPLIES 88.00 620 15000 93732 RENEE RAMSEY 21136 885.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 885.00 101 68010 220 1331 93733 QUICK MIX CONCRETE 21140 1 ,750.33 MISC. SUPPLIES 487.10 101 66210 120 SIDEWALK REPAIR EXPENSE 622.44 101 66210 219 MISC. SUPPLIES 640.79 527 66520 120 93734 PEEK TRAFFIC 21317 28797.04 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 2,797.04 101 66240 210 93735 SPARTAN TOOL LLC 21329 27. 19 MISC. SUPPLIES 27. 19 527 66520 120 93736 THE BANK OF NEW YORK 21439 1 ,500.00 MISCELLANEOUS 11500.00 101 32100 93737 COW GOVERNMENT, INC. 21482 117.54 OFFICE EXPENSE 58.77 101 64200 110 OFFICE EXPENSE 58.77 101 64250 110 93738 SAVIN CORPORATION 21630 178. 13 OFFICE EXPENSE 178. 13 101 68010 110 1101 93739 CINGULAR WIRELESS 21747 143.60 COMMUNICATIONS 143.60 101 65300 160 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 4 02/05/04 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT '*' Denotes Hand Written Checks 93711 STANDARD REGISTER 17495 1,832.39 OFFICE EXPENSE 1,345.27 101 64250 110 CITY HALL MAINTENANCE 487.12 621 64450 220 93712 COLORPRINT 17497 81.46 OFFICE EXPENSE 81.46 619 64460 110 93713 COLUMBIA CASCADE COMPANY 17789 1,600.14 BLDG. &GROUNDS MAINT. 1,600.14 101 68020 190 2200 93714 BAY ALARM 18854 2,563.50 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 189.00 619 64460 220 5190 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 348.00 619 64460 220 5180 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,872.00 619 64460 220 5110 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 154.50 619 64460 220 5210 93715 JJR CONSTRUCTION 18979 9,500.00 SIDEWALK REPAIR EXPENSE 9,500.00 101 66210 219 93716 ACCESS UNIFORMS&EMBROIDERY 18990 64.50 UNIFORMS AND EQUIPMENT 64.50 526 69020 140 93717 PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY 19027 442.41 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 442.41 101 65200 220 93718 AMC NEWSPAPERS 19083 600.96 MISC. SUPPLIES 113.20 101 64400 120 PUBLICATIONS&ADVERTISING 308.12 101 64200 150 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 179.64 320 80520 220 93719 LIEBERT CASSIDY WHITMORE 19095 692.80 PROFESSIONAL&SPECIALIZED S 692.80 101 64420 210 93720 MINOLTA BUSINESS SYSTEMS 19131 518.93 EQUIPMENT MAINT. 518.93 101 65200 200 93721 ARROWHEAD MOUNTAIN SPRING WATER 19330 19.11 MISC. SUPPLIES 19.11 620 66700 120 93722 BURTON'S FIRE APPARATUS 19366 98,79 FIRE APPARATUS MAINT. -67.09 101 65200 203 FIRE APPARATUS MAINT. 165.88 625 65213 203 93723 TROYER AUTOMATIC DOORS INC. 19685 2,460.00 PROFESSIONAL&SPECIALIZED S 2,460.00 619 64460 210 5240 93724 CREATIVE INTERCONNECT 19768 228.36 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 228.36 101 65200 220 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 3 02/05/04 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 93699 PIP PRINTING 10620 30.31 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 30.31 320 79300 220 93700 CHIEF BILL REILLY 11568 1,844.56 OFFICE EXPENSE 9.69 101 65500 110 MISC. SUPPLIES 223.25 101 65200 111 MISC. SUPPLIES 28.28 101 65500 120 MISC. SUPPLIES 178.67 101 65200 120 FIRE--SUPPLIES 8.65 101 65200 127 UNIFORMS AND EQUIPMENT 20.00 101 65200 140 COMMUNICATIONS 4.95 101 65200 160 BLDG. & GROUNDS MAINT. 197.02 101 65200 190 FIRE APPARATUS MAINT. 131.64 101 65200 203 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 235.00 101 65200 240 TRAINING EXPENSE 105.20 101 65500 260 TRAINING EXPENSE 702.21 101 65200 260 93701 INVENSYS METERING SYSTEMS 14144 14,242.66 CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 14,242.66 526 69020 803 93702 BAY AREA AIR QUALITY 14358 282.00 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 282.00 320 76010 210 93703 ROYAL WHOLESALE ELECTRIC 14855 522.61 PUMP EQUIPMENT REPAIR 522.61 527 66520 230 93704 TRESSER'S TOW SERVICE 15543 25.00 SUPPLIES 25.00 620 15000 93705 IZMIRIAN ROOFING 15573 342.30 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 342.30 618 64520 210 93706 TELEKEY SCADA SYSTEMS INC. 16085 2,523.92 PUMP EQUIPMENT REPAIR 1,261.96 526 69020 230 PUMP EQUIPMENT REPAIR 1,261.96 527 66520 230 93707 SYDNEY MALKOO 16347 46.73 SMALL TOOLS 46.73 620 66700 130 93708 LINDA HOECK 16390 1,720.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,720.00 101 68010 220 1349 93709 CELSOC 16802 67.13 MISC. SUPPLIES 67.13 101 66100 120 93710 METRO MOBILE COMMUNICATIONS 17402 47.05 COMMUNICATIONS 47.05 101 65100 160 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 2 02/05/04 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 93684 P. G. & E. 03054 69,735.16 GAS & ELECTRIC 20,355.23 101 66240 170 UTILITY EXPENSE 49,379.93 896 20280 93685 SBC 03080 _ 105.53 OFFICE EXPENSE 105.53 101 65100 110 93686 KPMG LLP 03109 5,000.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 5,000.00 101 64560 220 93687 SAN FRANCISCO WATER DEPT. 03353 164,279.20 WATER PURCHASES 164,279.20 526 69020 171 93688 CITY OF SAN MATEO 03366 6,000.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 6,000.00 101 65200 220 93689 INFORMATION SERVICES DEPT. 03378 18.14 - EQUIPMENT MAINT. 18.14 101 65200 200 93690 THM & ASSOCIATES 03749 616.02 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 616.02 320 77190 210 93691 TIMBERLINE TREE SERVICE, INC. 03760 5,946.24 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 5,946.24 320 76350 220 93692 WITMER-TYSON IMPORTS, INC. 03788 300.00 MISC. SUPPLIES 300.00 101 65100 120 93693 B.E.I. ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES 09072 10.86 MISC. SUPPLIES 10.86 619 64460 120 5130 93694 POM INC. 09248 493.62 MISC. SUPPLIES 493.62 530 65400 120 93695 LIFE ASSIST 09392 83.28 MISCELLANEOUS -0.70 101 23611 SUPPLIES 83.98 101 65200 112 93696 STERICYCLE, INC. 09439 160.04 SUPPLIES 160.04 101 65200 112 93697 ABAG - LIABILITY 09518 18,366.78 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 8,127.27 618 64520 210 CLAIMS PAYMENTS 10,239.51 618 64520 601 93698 ALERT DOOR SERVICE, INC. 10059 1,728.35 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 1,728.35 619 64460 210 5150 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 1 02/05/04 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 93669 ALAN STEEL & SUPPLY CO. 01059 109.87 MISC. SUPPLIES 95.80 101 65100 120 EQUIPMENT MA1NT. 14.07 101 68020200 2200 93670 WHITE CAP 01250 416.68 MISC. SUPPLIES 416.68 101 66210 120 93671 BAUER COMPRESSORS 01309 211.35 FIRE APPARATUS MAINT. 211.35 101 65200 203 93672 BRENTON SAFETY, INC. 01400 151.71 TRAINING EXPENSE 151.71 527 66520 260 93673 BURLINGAME CHAMBER OF COMMERCE 01637 2,301.63 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 2,301.63 101 64560 220 93674 BURLINGAME RECREATION DEPT. 01663 609.00 RECREATION EXPENSES 609.00 101 10700 93675 L. N. CURTIS & SONS 02027 86.06 UNIFORMS AND EQUIPMENT 86.06 101 65200 140 93676 EWING IRRIGATION PRODUCTS 02157 100.66 MISCELLANEOUS 100.66 101 68020 192 2200 93677 FEDERAL EXPRESS 02160 85.41 OFFICE EXPENSE 40.75 101 64250 110 MISC. SUPPLIES 44.66 101 64400 120 93678 WATER/FINANCE PETTY CASH 02184 3,872.08 MISCELLANEOUS 3,872.08 896 20282 93679 W.W. GRAINGER, INC. 02248 97.16 TRAINING EXPENSE 97.16 619 64460 260 93680 GRANITE ROCK COMPANY 02261 - 927.70 SIDEWALK REPAIR EXPENSE 248.05 101 66210 219 STREET RESURFACING EXPENSE 558.41 101 66210 226 MISC. SUPPLIES 121.24 526 69020 120 93681 PENINSULA BATTERIES 02625 624.32 SUPPLIES 624.32 620 15000 93682 K & W DISCOUNT LIGHTING & SUPP 02645 57.05 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 57.05 320 76010 220 93683 MAYNE TREE EXPERT CO., INC. 02872 262.50 MISC. SUPPLIES 262.50 101 68020 120 2300 CITY OF BURLINGAME 01 -30-2004 WARRANT REG I ST ER PAGE 9 FUND RECAP 03-04 NAME FUND AMOUNT GENERAL FUND 101 59,654.03 PAYROLL REVOLVING FUND 130 21 ,820.98 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS FUND 320 57,777.97 SEWER CAPITAL PROJECT FUND 327 12,623.05 WATER FUND 526 1 ,543.42 SEWER FUND 527 241 ,264.21 SOLID WASTE FUND 528 12, 112.61 SELF INSURANCE FUND 618 22,044.15 FACILITIES SERVICES FUND 619 3,829.91 EQUIPMENT SERVICES FUND 620 68,486.22 INFORMATION SERVICES FUND 621 1 ,358. 14 FIRE MECHANIC SERVICES FUND 625 280.36 TRUST AND AGENCY FUND 731 1861963.71 UTILITY REVOLVING FUND 896 727.05 TOTAL FOR APPROVAL $690,485.81 c,o - Vo i 1> uc� 3to�2 HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL: THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE CLAIMS LISTED ON PAGES NUMBERED FROM 1 THROUGH 9 INCLUSIVE, AND/OR CLAIMS NUMBERED FROM 93564 THROUGH 93668 INCLUSIVE,TOTALING IN THE AMOUNT OF $690,485.81 , HAVE BEEN CHECKED IN DETAIL AND APPROVED BY THE PROPER OFFICIALS, AND IN MY OPINION REPRESENT FAIR AND JUST CHARGES AGAINST THE CITY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THEIR RESPECTIVE AMOUNTS AS INDICATED THEREON. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ./. . ./. . . FINANCE DIRECTOR DATE APPROVED FOR PAYMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ./. . ./. . . COUNCIL DATE CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 8 01/30/04 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 93660 TURF TIME WEST INC. 24722 8,600.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 8,600.00 320 78490 220 93661 GRASS FARM 24723 358.40 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 358.40 320 78490 220 93662 SAN MATEO MEDICAL CENTER 24724 225.00 TRAVEL&MEETINGS 225.00 101 64100 250 93663 JOHN WAKABAYASHI 24725 945.00 PROFESSIONAL &SPECIALIZED S 945.00 101 64350 210 93664 TELECENTER 24726 525.01 BLDG. &GROUNDS MAINT. 525.01 101 65200 190 93665 TELSTAR INSTRUMENTS, INC 24727 1,965.39 PUMP EQUIPMENT REPAIR 464.77 101 66210 230 PUMP EQUIPMENT REPAIR 1,500.62 527 66520 230 93666 RANDY THORNTON 24728 750.00 DEPOSIT REFUNDS 750.00 101 22520 93667 RLH PROTECTION 24729 2,000.00 DEPOSIT REFUNDS 2,000.00 101 22520 93668 FESS PARKER$' DOUBLETREE 24730 504.00 .TRAVEL&MEETINGS 504.00 101 66100 250 TOTAL $690,485.81 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 7 01/30/04 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Cheeks 93645 SCS FIELD SERVICES 23727 10,941.39 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 10,941.39 528 66600 210 93646 WEST VALLEY CONSTRUCTION 23895 85.00 MISCELLANEOUS 85.00 526 22502 93647 UNIVERSAL BUILDING SERVICES 23941 529.49 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 115.00 619 64460 220 5120 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 172.89 619 64460 220 5130 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 241.60 619 64460 220 5110 93648 INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE 23981 16,788.66 MISCELLANEOUS 16,788.66 130 21180 93649 QUILL 24090 192.77 OFFICE EXPENSE 192.77 621 64450 110 93650 JENNIFER MURRAY 24191 429.44 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 429.44 101 64420 210 93651 OMEGA ENGRAVING 24337 35.56 MISCELLANEOUS -2.56 101 23611 MISC. SUPPLIES 38.12 101 64100 120 93652 LCC PENINSULA DIVISION 24407 160.00 TRAVEL & MEETINGS 40.00 101 64150 250 TRAVEL & MEETINGS 120.00 101 64100 250 93653 COHEN & JACOBSON 24416 648.70 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 648.70 101 64350 210 93654 C&N TRACTORS 24468 124.81 EQUIPMENT MAINT. 124.81 101 68020 200 2200 93655 HONEYWELL 24546 1,071.00 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 1,071.00 320 80790 210 93656 AT&T WIRELESS 24607 727.05 UTILITY EXPENSE 727.05 896 20281 93657 WEST BAY CONCRETE 24625 500.00 DEPOSIT REFUNDS 500.00 101 22520 93658 RUTAN & TUCKER LLP 24678 1,350.25 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 1,350.25 618 64520 210 93659 W.L. BUTLER 24697 300.00 DEPOSIT REFUNDS 300.00 101 22520 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 6 01/30/04 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 93630 VB GOLF LLC 21948 2,943.20 GAS & ELECTRIC 2,943.20 101 68010 170 1286 93631 AT&T 22138 22.12 COMMUNICATIONS 22.12 101 65100 160 93632 ROBERTS AND BRUNE 22178 136.38 MISC. SUPPLIES 136.38 527 66520 120 93633 GERALD TAYLOR 22213 23.82 MISC. SUPPLIES 23.82 101 64420 120 93634 COUNTY OF SAN MATEO 22620 13,669.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 13,669.00 101 65200 220 93635 JONES AND MAYER 22818 3,472.00 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 3,472.00 101 64350 210 93636 JENKINS/ATHENS INS 22851 9,184.00 CLAIMS ADJUSTING SERVICES 9,184.00 618 64520 225 93637 LANDS' END, INC. 22854 64.17 MISC. SUPPLIES 64.17 101 64100 120 93638 PITNEY BOWES 23128 548.00 CITY HALL MAINTENANCE 548.00 621 64450 200 93639 OFFICE DEPOT 23153 639.09 OFFICE EXPENSE 639.09 101 68010 110 1101 93640 EAST BAY TRUCK CENTER 23295 280.36 FIRE APPARATUS MAINT. 280.36 625 65213 203 93641 BOISE CASCADE OFFICE PRODUCTS CO 23306 726.65 OFFICE EXPENSE 56.18 101 68010 110 1101 OFFICE EXPENSE 320.02 101 65200 110 OFFICE EXPENSE 250.54 101 68010 110 1101 OFFICE EXPENSE 99.91 101 64250 110 93642 STATE OF CALIFORNIA 23460 5,032.32 MISCELLANEOUS 5,032.32 130 21180 93643 MCMASTER-CARR SUPPLY CO. 23611 413.53 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 413.53 619 64460 210 5240 93644 REFRIGERATION SUPPLIES DISTRIBUT 23639 55.52 MISC. SUPPLIES 55.52 619 64460 120 5240 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 5 01/30/04 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 93617 BAY AREA BUSINESS CARDS INC 19588 392.95 OFFICE EXPENSE 299.85 101 64100 110 OFFICE EXPENSE 20.57 101 65300 110 MISCELLANEOUS 72.53 101 64400 115 93618 EL CAMINO CHARTER LINES INC 20105 1,260.00 MISC. SUPPLIES 1,260.00 101 68010 120 1422 93619 S 8 C FORD 20190 68,212.50 CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 68,212.50 620 66700 800 93620 AFFINITEL COMMUNICATIONS 20246 617.37 COMMUNICATIONS 617.37 621 64450 160 93621 NOLTE 8 ASSOCIATES, INC. 20376 12,375.92 PROFESSIONAL 8 SPECIALIZED S 12,375.92 327 77040 210 93622 FRANKLIN OFFICE SUPPLIES 20523 98.02 OFFICE EXPENSE 98.02 101 64420 110 93623 SPRINT PCS 20724 74.32 COMMUNICATIONS 38.49 101 64150 160 COMMUNICATIONS 35.83 101. 64420 160 93624 H.V. CARTER CO., INC. 20876 160.42 EQUIPMENT MAINT. 160.42 101 68020 200 2200 93625 ESA ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE ASSOC 21160 8,596.13 DEPOSIT REFUND 8,596.13 731 22590 93626 THYSSENKRUPP ELEVATOR-042 21240 200.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 200.00 619 64460 220 5130 93627 UNITY BUSINESS SERVICE 21364 1,135.58 EQUIPMENT MAINT. 1,135.58 101 65300 200 93628 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES, INC. 21634 1,360.65 UNIFORMS AND EQUIPMENT 44.71 101 66240 140 UNIFORMS AND EQUIPMENT 347.11 101 66210 140 UNIFORMS AND EQUIPMENT 367.16 526 69020 140 UNIFORMS AND EQUIPMENT 354.05 527 66520 140 UNIFORMS AND EQUIPMENT 59.94 528 66600 140 UNIFORMS AND EQUIPMENT 107.35 619 64460 140 UNIFORMS AND EQUIPMENT 80.33 620 66700 140 93629 D.L. FALK CONSTRUCTION INC. 21647 26,055.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 26,055.00 320 80370 220 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 4 01/30/04 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 93602 IZMIRIAN ROOFING 15573 837.24 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 837.24 618 64520 210 93603 ALL CITY MANAGEMENT 15595 1 ,727.70 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1 ,727.70 101 65100 220 93604 MCDONOUGH, HOLLAND & ALLEN 16148 6, 114. 16 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 6, 114. 16 101 64350 210 93605 SYDNEY MALK00 16347 64.43 SMALL TOOLS 64.43 620 66700 130 93606 CUMMINS WEST, INC. 16414 963.75 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 963.75 619 64460 210 5240 93607 SERVICE PRESS, INC. 16555 86.06 OFFICE EXPENSE 86.06 101 66100 110 93608 MUNICIPAL MAINTENANCE 16629 45.68 SUPPLIES 45.68 620 15000 93609 MIKE SMITH 16637 52.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 52.00 101 68010 220 1789 93610 MIKE SPINELLI 17403 23.82 MISC. SUPPLIES 23.82 101 64420 120 93611 STEWART AND STEVENSON 17983 1 ,531 .67 GAS, OIL & GREASE 1 ,531 .67 101 65200 201 93612 KELLEHER & ASSOCIATES 18239 6,638.81 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 6,638.81 618 64520 210 93613 ACCESS UNIFORMS & EMBROIDERY 18990 172.69 UNIFORMS AND EQUIPMENT 54.72 101 66240 140 UNIFORMS AND EQUIPMENT 117.97 527 66520 140 93614 PREFERRED ALLIANCE 19025 237.60 PERSONNEL EXAMINATIONS 237.60 101 64420 121 93615 ANG NEWSPAPERS 19083 35.43 PUBLICATIONS & ADVERTISING 35.43 101 64200 150 93616 POWER WASHING SERVICE 19564 1 , 111 .28 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 1 , 111 .28 528 66600 210 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 3 01/30/04 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT '•' Denotes Hand Written Checks 93589 SIERRA PACIFIC TURF SUPPLY 09459 8,954.34 MISC. SUPPLIES 613.67 101 68020 120 2200 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 8,340.67 320 78490 220 93590 OCE'-BRUNiNG, INC. 09493 857.35 PROFESSIONAL 8 SPECIALIZED S 857.35 101 66100 210 93591 ABAG - LIABILITY 09518 4,033.85 PROFESSIONAL 8 SPECIALIZED S 2,190.03 618 64520 210 CLAIMS PAYMENTS 1,843.82 618 64520 601 93592 INTERSTATE TRAFFIC 09790 716.61 MISC. SUPPLIES 347.48 101 66210 120 TRAFFIC CONTROL MATERIALS 194.85 101 66210 222 MISC. SUPPLIES 174.28 327 80681 120 93593 BARKER BLUE REPROGRAPHICS 09990 269.03 MISC. SUPPLIES 269.03 320 80370 120 93594 3 T EQUIPMENT CO. 10077 1,164.20 MISC. SUPPLIES 1,164.20 527 66520 120 93595 TELECOMMUNICATIONS ENGINEERING A 10101 225.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 225.00 101 65200 220 93596 AUGUST SUPPLY, INC 10256 420.88 MISC. SUPPLIES 420.88 101 65200 111 93597 CAL-STEAM 10557 930.63 MISCELLANEOUS 81.97 101 68020 192 2200 MISC. SUPPLIES 72.85 327 80681 120 MISC. SUPPLIES 433.74 527 66520 120 MISC. SUPPLIES 17.54 619 64460 120 5130 MISC. SUPPLIES 297.47 619 64460 120 5180 MISC. SUPPLIES 27.06 619 64460 120 5190 93598 SCHWAAS, INC. 11684 484.70 OFFICE EXPENSE 484.70 101 64250 110 93599 BOETHING TREELAND FARMS, INC. 13743 881.53 MISCELLANEOUS 881.53 731 22560 93600 MALCOLM TOWNS 13985 23.82 OFFICE EXPENSE 23.82 101 64420 110 93601 ROYAL WHOLESALE ELECTRIC 14855 124.49 MISC. SUPPLIES 124.49 619 64460 120 5130 C CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 2 01/30/04 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 93575 GRANITE ROCK COMPANY 02261 1,273.25 STREET RESURFACING EXPENSE 550.04 101 66210 226 MISC. SUPPLIES 373.92 526 69020 120 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 349.29 526 69020 210 93576 IRVINE & JACHENS INC. 02599 439.50 MISC. SUPPLIES 439.50 101 64100 120 93577 K & W DISCOUNT LIGHTING & SUPP 02645 912.56 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 912.56 619 64460 210 5240 93578 SBC 03080 98.69 COMMUNICATIONS 98.69 101 65100 160 93579 PUTNAM BUICK PONTIAC GMC 03206 83.28 SUPPLIES 83.28 620 15000 93580 CITY OF SAN MATEO 03366 358.00 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 358.00 101 64150 210 93581 INFORMATION SERVICES DEPT. 03378 1,835.84 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,835.84 101 65150 220 93582 SAN MATEO COUNTY CONVENTION & 03431 177,412.07 TRAVEL & MEETINGS 58.00 101 64100 250 TRAVEL & MEETINGS 58.00 101 64150 250 MISCELLANEOUS 177,296.07 731 22587 93583 CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO 03483 38,422.25 OTHER AGENCY CONTRIBUTIONS 38,422.25 527 66530 270 93584 RANDY SCHWARTZ 03518 611.44 MISCELLANEOUS 611.44 101 68010 031 93585 TIMBERLINE TREE SERVICE, INC. 03760 4,828.71 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 4,828.71 320 76350 220 93586 WEST GROUP PAYMENT CTR. 03964 412.38 MISC. SUPPLIES 412.38 101 64350 120 93587 CALIFORNIA FIRE MECHANICS ACAD. 09187 800.00 TRAINING EXPENSE 800.00 101 65200 260 93588 CITY OF MILLBRAE 09234 3,152.82 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 3,152.82 101 64350 210 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 1 01/30/04 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT *� Denotes Hand Written Checks 93564 * BURLINGAME PUBLIC LIBRARY 09490 731.96 OFFICE EXPENSE 37.00 101 67500 110 MISC. SUPPLIES 31.03 101 67500 120 LIBRARY--PERIODICALS 12.50 101 67500 122 LIBRARY--BOOKS AND MAPS 106.10 101 67500 129 EQUIPMENT MAINT. 162.13 101 67500 200 MISCELLANEOUS 108.22 101 67500 235 TRAVEL & MEETINGS 48.00 101 67500 250 STAFF & MEETINGS 37.00 101 67500 252 LIBRARY EXPENSES 189.98 731 22531 93565 * STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION 11707 1,012.00 OFFICE EXPENSE 3.86 101 67500 110 MISC. SUPPLIES 8.77 101 67500 120 LIBRARY--BOOKS AND MAPS 837.09 101 67500 129 BLDG. & GROUNDS MAINT. 1.18 101 67500 190 EQUIPMENT MAINT. 161.10 101 67500 200 93566 * OFFICE DEPOT CREDIT PLAN 22216 387.36 OFFICE EXPENSE 387.36 101 65100 110 93567 * DAHANUKAR BRANDES ARCHITECTS 23051 1,879.53 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 1,879.53 320 80370 210 93568 ALAN STEEL & SUPPLY CO. 01059 368.05 MISC, SUPPLIES 368.05 526 69020 120 93569 LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES 01745 425.00 TRAVEL & MEETINGS 425.00 101 66100 250 93570 CITY OF REDWOOD CITY 01862 6,375.63 MISCELLANEOUS 3,187.81 320 76010 010 MISCELLANEOUS 3,187.82 320 80420 400 93571 L. N. CURTIS & SONS 02027 2,601.26 UNIFORMS AND EQUIPMENT 2,601.26 101 65200 140 93572 US FILTER OPERATING SERVICES 02110 199,135.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 199,135.00 527 66530 220 93573 EWING IRRIGATION PRODUCTS 02157 70.61 MISCELLANEOUS 70.61 101 68020 192 2200 93574 W.W. GRAINGER, INC. 02248 623.93 MISC. SUPPLIES 442.78 101 68020 120 2200 MISC. SUPPLIES 83.59 619 64460 120 5110 MISC. SUPPLIES 97.56 619 64460 120 CITY OF BURLINGAME 01-22-2004 WARRANT REG I ST ER PAGE 10 FUND RECAP - 03-04 NAME FUND AMOUNT GENERAL FUND 101 127,118.01 WATER CAPITAL PROJECT FUND 326 274,911.00 SEWER CAPITAL PROJECT FUND 327 259,196.67 WATER FUND 526 8,628.96 SEWER FUND 527 46,622.45 SOLID WASTE FUND 528 2,704.28 PARKING ENTERPRISE FUND 530 1,136.63 FACILITIES SERVICES FUND 619 795.80 EQUIPMENT SERVICES FUND 620 1,711.75 INFORMATION SERVICES FUND 621 27,098.29 FIRE MECHANIC SERVICES FUND 625 1,742.01 OTHER LOCAL GRANTS/DONATIONS 730 750.00 TRUST AND AGENCY FUND 731 26,891.66 STATE GRANTS FUND 734 2,452.42 BURLINGAME TRAIN SHUTTLE PROGRAM 736 20,340.16 UTILITY REVOLVING FUND 896 702.90 DEBT SERVICE FUND 930 1,000.00 TOTAL FOR APPROVAL 8803,802.99 voio r✓�c. 43S�E'7 35 v.s7 HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL: THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE CLAIMS LISTED ON PAGES NUMBERED FROM 1 THROUGH 10 INCLUSIVE, AND/OR CLAIMS NUMBERED FROM 93441 THROUGH 93563 INCLUSIVE,TOTALING IN THE AMOUNT OF 8803,802.99, HAVE BEEN CHECKED IN DETAIL AND APPROVED BY THE PROPER OFFICIALS, AND IN MY OPINION REPRESENT FAIR AND JUST CHARGES AGAINST THE CITY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THEIR RESPECTIVE AMOUNTS AS INDICATED THEREON. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, .................................... .../.../... FINANCE DIRECTOR DATE APPROVED FOR,PAYMENT .................................... .../.../... COUNCIL DATE CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 9 01/22/04 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 93560 THE POWER SOURCE 24718 1,136.63 MISC. SUPPLIES 1,136.63 530 65400 120 93561 THOMAS ICKES 24719 63.82 OFFICE EXPENSE 63.82 101 64420 110 93562 SILICON VALLEY BARGAINS 24720 107.17 MISCELLANEOUS 107.17 101 68010 400 1100 93563 LIANG'S ELECTRICAL 24721 70.00 MISCELLANEOUS 5.00 101 22518 MISCELLANEOUS 65.00 101 31510 TOTAL $803,802.99 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 8 01/22/04 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 93544 DHS OCP 24639 615.00 TRAINING EXPENSE 615.00 526 69020 260 93545 DIAMOND COMMUNICATIONS INC 24659 180.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 180.00 619 64460 220 5120 93546 WESTWOOD CONTRACTORS 24692 940.00 MISCELLANEOUS 940.00 101 22546 93547 BIANCHI TRAFFIC SAFETY 24705 2,452.42 TRAINING EXPENSE 2,452.42 734 65196 260 93548 TIM HEALY 24706 439.65 TRAINING EXPENSE 439.65 101 65500 260 93549 PAUL DANSOLD 24707 5,600.00 MISCELLANEOUS 5,600.00 101 22512 93550 PUBLIC AGENCY TRAINING COUNCIL 24708 425.00 TRAINING EXPENSE 425.00 101 65200 260 93551 REBECCA HASKETT 24709 210.00 MISCELLANEOUS 210.00 101 36630 93552 BINEY SAGOO 24710 110.00 MISCELLANEOUS 110.00 101 36630 93553 INSITE DESIGN 24711 1 ,620.00 MISCELLANEOUS 1 ,620.00 101 22546 93554 FRANCIS TSE 24712 300.00 DEPOSIT REFUNDS 300.00 101 22520 93555 EL GATO PAINTING 24713 300.00 DEPOSIT REFUNDS 300.00 101 22520 93556 MANAGED HEALTH NETWORK 24714 611 .00 MISCELLANEOUS 611 .00 101 64420 030 93557 CA ADVANCED IMAGING MED ASSOC 24715 52.00 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 52.00 101 64420 210 93558 CHARLES COTCHETT 24716 616.00 DEPOSIT REFUNDS 616.00 101 22520 93559 LAMANET FAMILY TRUST 24717 600.00 DEPOSIT REFUNDS 600.00 101 22520 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 7 01/22/04 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 93528 WEST VALLEY CONSTRUCTION 23895 530.98 MISCELLANEOUS 530.98 526 22502 93529 DEWEY SERVICES, INC. 23902 2,620.00 RAT CONTROL PROGRAM 100.00 101 66210 218 RAT CONTROL PROGRAM 2,520.00 527 66520 218 93530 DUNBAR ARMORED 23925 1,506.12 BANKING SERVICE FEES 1,506.12 101 64250 120 93531 UNIVERSAL BUILDING SERVICES 23941 170.17 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 170.17 619 64460 220 5130 93532 RON REED 23972 189.57 MISCELLANEOUS 189.57 101 64420 040 93533 BAUDVILLE 24099 41.70 MISC. SUPPLIES 41.70 101 64420 120 93534 CHARLES SAUL 24141 2,163.38 MISCELLANEOUS 2,163.38 526 36730 93535 CWS UTILITY SERVICES 24249 1,182.00 MISCELLANEOUS 1,182.00 526 69020 233 93536 EASYLINK SERVICES CORP 24430 3.91 COMMUNICATIONS 3.91 101 65100 160 93537 C&N TRACTORS 24468 55.95 EQUIPMENT MAINT. 55.95 101 68020 200 2200 93538 C.W. ROEN CO. 24474 81,974.22 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 81,974.22 327 79480 220 93539 BAY AREA BANK 24490 27,491.10 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 27,491.10 326 80770 220 93540 WATER SOLUTIONS 24532 2,400.00 TRAINING EXPENSE 2,400.00 526 69020 260 93541 BEACON FIRE & SAFETY 24535 392.00 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 392.00 619 64460 210 5140 93542 JOHN BOLOGNA 24628 252.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 252.00 101 68010 220 1780 93543 BRYAN ROSENBERG 24631 189.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 189.00 101 68010 220 1780 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 6 01/22/04 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Nand Written Checks 93514 MARTY SPRINGER 22916 73.50 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 73.50 101 68010 220 1660 93515 BONDLOGISTIX 23088 1,000.00 OTHER DEBT EXPENSES 1,000.00 930 66830 764 93516 BOISE CASCADE OFFICE PRODUCTS CO 23306 388.20 OFFICE EXPENSE 107.62 101 68010 110 1101 OFFICE EXPENSE 194.01 101 64400 110 OFFICE EXPENSE 39.79 101 66100 110 OFFICE EXPENSE 20.51 101 64400 110 OFFICE EXPENSE 26.27 101 64420 110 93517 SAN FRANCISCO EXAMINER 23366 5,186.25 MISCELLANEOUS 5,186.25 101 68010 115 1101 93518 DATASAFE 23410 256.74 OFFICE EXPENSE 9.83 101 64200 110 OFFICE EXPENSE 31.90 101 64420 110 OFFICE EXPENSE 89.83 101 66100 110 BANKING SERVICE FEES 125.18 101 64250 120 93519 RECALL- TOTAL INFORMATION MGMT 23411 37.80 MISCELLANEOUS 37.80 101 22518 93520 IBM CORPORATION 23425 251.49 EQUIPMENT MAINT. 251.49 101 65300 200 93521 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC. 23436 1,573.15 CITY HALL MAINTENANCE 1,573.15 621 64450 200 93522 ATANACIO RODRIGUEZ 23543 300.00 DEPOSIT REFUNDS 300.00 101 22520 93523 ANDREW FREEMAN 23653 750.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 750.00 730 69533 220 93524 THE MARLIN COMPANY 23712 40.60 TRAINING EXPENSE 40.60 526 69020 260 93525 SBC/MCI 23728 179.26 COMMUNICATIONS 179.26 101 65150 160 93526 AVR REALTY 23855 66.57 MISCELLANEOUS 66.57 526 22502 93527 CITY OF HALF MOON BAY 23862 468.37 MISCELLANEOUS 468.37 731 22587 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 5 01/22/04 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 93498 FILTERFRESH COFFEE EXCELLENCE 21623 213.15 BLDG. & GROUNDS MAINT. 213. 15 621 64450 190 93499 AUTO DIESEL ELECTRIC INC. 21648 37.70 FIRE APPARATUS MAINT. 37.70 101 65200 203 93500 JAMES SHANNON 21707 300.00 MISCELLANEOUS 300.00 101 22525 93501 CINGULAR WIRELESS 21747 138.51 COMMUNICATIONS 138.51 101 66100 160 93502 TURBO DATA SYSTEMS, INC. 21767 9,867.39 MISCELLANEOUS 9,867.39 101 37010 93503 SAN MATEO COUNTY CONTROLLERS OFF 21897 17,654.50 MISCELLANEOUS 17,654.50 101 37010 93504 UNDERGROUND CONSTRUCTION MANAGER 22305 33, 109.95 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 33, 109.95 327 80681 210 93505 DONALD SHEPLEY 22375 741 .95 MISCELLANEOUS 741 .95 101 64420 030 93506 STEVE NELSON 22449 84.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 84.00 101 68010 220 1780 93507 PARKING COMPANY OF AMERICA 22500 20,340.16 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 13, 140. 10 736 64571 220 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 7,200.06 736 64570 220 93508 VERIZON WIRELESS 22593 41 .49 COMMUNICATIONS 41 .49 101 68010 160 1100 93509 SAN MATEO REGIONAL NETWORK, INC. 22759 520.00 UTILITY EXPENSE 520.00 896 20281 93510 BURLINGAME FAMILY PET HOSPITAL 22773 101 .76 MISC. SUPPLIES 101 .76 101 65100 120 93511 CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA SANITARY DI 22792 170.00 MISC. SUPPLIES 170.00 327 80681 120 93512 JAMES YARBOROUGH 22793 126.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 126.00 101 68010 220 1780 93513 DAVID FLYER 22834 439.65 TRAINING EXPENSE 439.65 101 65500 260 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 4 01/22/04 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 93483 BURTON'S FIRE APPARATUS 19366 135.22 FIRE APPARATUS MAINT. 135.22 101 65200 203 93484 POWER WASHING SERVICE 19564 2,704.28 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 2,704.28 528 66600 210 93485 ALL FENCE COMPANY, INC. 19710 1,650.00 RENTS & LEASES 825.00 526 69020 180 RENTS & LEASES 825.00 527 66520 180 93486 AMIR SHAHMIRZA 19931 85.00 MISCELLANEOUS 85.00 101 36630 93487 PENINSULA CORRIDOR JOINT 20060 120.00 RENTS & LEASES 120.00 527 66520 180 93488 GE CAPITAL 20216 12.51 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 12.51 101 68010 220 1101 93489 AFFINITEL COMMUNICATIONS 20246 90.00 COMMUNICATIONS 90.00 621 64450 160 93490 FRANKLIN OFFICE SUPPLIES 20523 169.67 OFFICE EXPENSE 169.67 101 64420 110 93491 EIP ASSOCIATES 20526 37,279.17 DEPOSIT REFUND 37,279.17 101 22590 93492 JULIO MORAN 20564 176.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 176.00 101 68010 220 1780 93493 PAUL ROSS WALLACH 20752 300.00 DEPOSIT REFUNDS 300.00 101 22520 93494 H.V. CARTER CO., INC. 20876 152.16 EQUIPMENT MAINT. 152.16 101 68020 200 2200 93495 QUICK MIX CONCRETE 21140 440.97 MISC. SUPPLIES 440.97 101 66210 120 93496 SPARTAN TOOL LLC 21329 1,030.39 MISC. SUPPLIES 1,030.39 527 66520 120 93497 CDW GOVERNMENT, INC. 21482 113.07 OFFICE EXPENSE 55.92 101 64250 110 MISCELLANEOUS 57.15 101 66100 702 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 3 01/22/04 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 93469 LINHART PETERSEN POWERS ASSOC. 16599 19,256.87 MISCELLANEOUS 13,496.87 101 22515 MISCELLANEOUS 5,760.00 101 65300 010 93470 STEVE'S CHRISTMAS TREES 16767 647.02 MISCELLANEOUS 647.02 526 22502 93471 CINTAS CORP. #464 16911 620.84 UNIFORMS AND EQUIPMENT 155.21 101 68020 140 2100 UNIFORMS AND EQUIPMENT 465.63 101 68020 140 2200 93472 STATE OF CALIFORNIA 16919 1,186.56 SUPPLIES 1,186.56 620 15000 93473 METRO MOBILE COMMUNICATIONS 17402 417.00 RADIO MAINT. 417.00 101 65200 205 93474 STANDARD REGISTER 17495 655.69 OFFICE EXPENSE 655.69 101 64250 110 93475 COLORPRINT 17497 15.16 MISC. SUPPLIES 15.16 101 66240 120 93476 SHAW PIPELINE INC 17959 247,419.90 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 247,419.90 326 80770 220 93477 GEORGE MASTALIR 18088 78.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 78.00 101 68010 220 1789 93478 SAN FRANCISCO GIANTS 18459 7,241.00 MISC. SUPPLIES 920.00 101 68010 120 1521 MISC. SUPPLIES 4,191.00 101 68010 120 1222 MISC. SUPPLIES 1,110.00 101 68010 120 1422 MISC. SUPPLIES 1,020.00 101 68010 120 1423 93479 VALLEY CREST TREE COMPANY 18713 860.50 MISCELLANEOUS 860.50 731 22560 93480 PLASTI-PRINT, INC 18794 35.29 MISC. SUPPLIES 35.29 527 66520 120 93481 ANG NEWSPAPERS 19083 93.05 MISC. SUPPLIES 93.05 101 64400 120 93482 IMAGEMAX, INC. 19145 129.58 MISCELLANEOUS 129.58 101 22518 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 2 01/22/04 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 93455 PATTERSON PARTS, INC 03106 17.93 SMALL TOOLS -417.86 101 65200 130 FIRE APPARATUS MAINT. 84.65 101 65200 203 SUPPLIES 218.95 620 15000 FIRE APPARATUS MAINT. 132.19 625 65213 203 93456 SAN MATEO UNION HIGH 03471 10,518.66 SCHOOL DEVELOPMENT FEE 10,518.66 731 22562 93457 SAN MATEO COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFC. 09433 3,232.00 PRISONER EXPENSE 3,232.00 101 65100 291 93458 WINGFOOT COMMERCIAL TIRE SYSTEMS 11316 1,034.21 FIRE APPARATUS MAINT. 1,034.21 101 65200 203 93459 CAMINO REAL PET CLINIC 11577 490.00 MISC. SUPPLIES 490.00 101 65100 120 93460 THE MAGIC PRESS CORP. 13759 86.60 POLICE INVESTIGATION EXPENSE 86.60 101 65100 292 93461 DOCUMENT PROCESSING SYSTEMS 13890 105.27 OFFICE EXPENSE 105.27 101 64250 110 93462 A T & T 13940 303.37 COMMUNICATIONS 120.47 621 64450 160 UTILITY EXPENSE 182.90 896 20281 93463 STANDARD BUSINESS MACHINES 14252 155.73 OFFICE EXPENSE 155.73 101 68010 110 1101 93464 TRESSER'S TOW SERVICE 15543 45.00 SUPPLIES 45.00 620 15000 93465 VALLEY OIL CO. 15764 190.52 FIRE APPARATUS MAINT. 190.52 101 65200 203 93466 MOSS RUBBER & EQUIPMENT CORP. 16225 41.42 SUPPLIES 41.42 620 15000 93467 SYDNEY MALKOO 16347 59.51 SMALL TOOLS 59.51 620 66700 130 93468 COMMUNITY GATEPATH 16575 24.75 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 24.75 101 66210 210 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 1 01/22/04 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Cheeks 93441 ALPINE AWARDS, INC. 01052 23.27 MISC. SUPPLIES 23.27 527 66520 120 93442 BAYSHORE INTERNATIONAL TRUCKS 01236 5,699.05 FIRE APPARATUS MAINT. 4,089.23 101 65200 203 FIRE APPARATUS MAINT. 1,609.82 625 65213 203 93443 BROADWAY HARDWARE 01435 7.57 MISC. SUPPLIES 7.57 101 66210 120 93444 BURLINGAME ELEM. SCHOOL DIST. 01500 15,044.13 SCHOOL DEVELOPMENT FEE 15,044.13 731 22563 93445 GCS WESTERN POWER& 01857 115.31 SUPPLIES 115.31 620 15000 93446 CITY OF REDWOOD CITY 01862 24,137.08 COMMUNICATIONS 300.00 621 64450 160 CITY HALL MAINTENANCE 23,837.08 621 64450 220 93447 COMPUTER TECHNICIANS, INC., 01987 964.44 CITY HALL MAINTENANCE 964.44 621 64450 200 93448 CORPORATE ENVIRONMENTS, INC., 01992 255.10 MISC. SUPPLIES 255.10 527 66520 120 93449 D&M TOWING, INC. 02029 45.00 SUPPLIES 45.00 620 15000 93450 US FILTER OPERATING SERVICES 02110 185,366.80 PROFESSIONAL &SPECIALIZED S 143,942.50 327 79480 210 BLDG. &GROUNDS MAINT. 9,488.80 527 66530 190 PROFESSIONAL&SPECIALIZED S 354.25 527 66530 210 CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 31,581.25 527 66530 800 93451 W.W. GRAINGER, INC. 02248 212.04 MISC. SUPPLIES 158.41 526 69020 120 MISC. SUPPLIES 53.63 619 64460 120 93452 HASELBACH SURVEYING INSTRUMENT 02410 378.87 MISC. SUPPLIES 378.87 527 66520 120 93453 K&W DISCOUNT LIGHTING&SUPP 02645 55.30 MISC. SUPPLIES 55.30 101 66210 120 93454 P. G. &E. 03054 10.23 GAS&ELECTRIC 10.23 527 66520 170 CITY OF BURLINGAME 01-16-2004 WARRANT REGI ST ER PAGE 11 FUND RECAP 03-04 NAME FUND AMOUNT GENERAL FUND 101 791495.50 PAYROLL REVOLVING FUND 130 519.00 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS FUND 320 31 , 166.41 WATER CAPITAL PROJECT FUND 326 40,520.95 SEWER CAPITAL PROJECT FUND 327 91 ,414.39 WATER FUND 526 341785.72 SEWER FUND 527 187.00 SOLID WASTE FUND 528 2,371 .65 SELF INSURANCE FUND 618 1 ,047.89 FACILITIES SERVICES FUND 619 2,011 .86 EQUIPMENT SERVICES FUND 620 652.64 INFORMATION SERVICES FUND 621 435.58 OTHER LOCAL GRANTS/DONATIONS 730 3,479.83 TRUST AND AGENCY FUND 731 1 ,303.83 STATE GRANTS FUND 734 35,636.17 UTILITY REVOLVING FUND 896 2,704.28 TOTAL FOR APPROVAL $327,732.70 HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL: THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE CLAIMS LISTED ON PAGES NUMBERED FROM 1 THROUGH 11 INCLUSIVE, AND/OR CLAIMS NUMBERED FROM 93296 THROUGH 93440 INCLUSIVE,TOTALING IN THE AMOUNT OF $327,732.70, HAVE BEEN CHECKED IN DETAIL AND APPROVED BY THE PROPER OFFICIALS, AND IN MY OPINION REPRESENT FAIR AND JUST CHARGES AGAINST THE CITY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THEIR RESPECTIVE AMOUNTS AS INDICATED THEREON. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ./. . ./. . . FINANCE DIRECTOR DATE APPROVED FOR PAYMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ./. . ./. . . COUNCIL DATE CITY OF BURLINGAME WARRANT REG 1 ST ER PAGE 10 01/16/04 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT *� Denotes Hand Written Checks 93425 JOHNSON CONSTRUCTION 24688 1,727.00 MISCELLANEOUS 1,727.00 101 22546 93426 DATA 911 24689 35,636.17 CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 35,636.17 734 65195 800 93427 ALLAN ROE 24690 23.82 MISCELLANEOUS 23.82 101 64420 040 93428 B&0 INC 24691 3,940.00 DEPOSIT REFUNDS 3,940.00 101 22520 93429 WESTWOOD CONTRACTORS 24692 300.00 DEPOSIT REFUNDS 300.00 101 22520 93430 ZACK LOUDON 24693 400.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 400.00 101 68010 220 1781 93431 RYAN PETERSON 24694 400.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 400.00 101 68010 220 1781 93432 EMPLOYER RESOURCE INSTITUTE 24695 367.00 DUES&SUBSCRIPTIONS 367.00 101 64420 240 93433 GOLDEN STATE FLOW MEASUREMENT IN 24696 420.49 MISC. SUPPLIES 420.49 526 69020 120 93434 W.L. BUTLER 24697 1,000.00 DEPOSIT REFUNDS 1,000.00 101 22520 93435 MIKE ALLEN 24698 150.00 DEPOSIT REFUNDS 150.00 101 22520 93436 SAN MATEO COUNTY CITY MANAGERS A 24699 100.00 DUES&SUBSCRIPTIONS 100.00 101 64150 240 93437 SAN MATEO COUNTY FORENSIC LAB 24700 9,506.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 9,506.00 101 65100 220 93438 SUSAN KOHN 24701 113.20 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 113.20 101 68010 220 1331 93439 CAPITAL PARTNERS FINANCIAL CORP 24702 334.49 OFFICE EXPENSE 334.49 101 64250 110 93440 DAN FLERES 24703 400.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 400.00 101 68010 220 1781 TOTAL / $327,732.70 / CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 9 01/16/04 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 93409 MASAYO YOSHIDA 24209 213.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 213.00 101 68010 220 1644 93410 KUMUDIN] MURTHY 24210 960.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 960.00 101 68010 220 1644 93411 VIRGINIA BOYN 24232 300.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 300.00 101 68010 220 1661 93412 RANGER PIPELINES INC 24433 91,414.39 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 91,414.39 327 80681 220 93413 SUSAN MCKEE 24442 580.13 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 580.13 101 68010 220 1661 93414 GRETCHEN LOTT 24452 1,860.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,860.00 101 68010 220 1661 93415 TOM DUNCAN 24497 500.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 500.00 101 68010 220 1761 93416 WATER SOLUTIONS 24532 4,200.00 TRAINING EXPENSE 4,200.00 526 69020 260 93417 HONEYWELL 24546 714.00 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 714.00 320 80790 210 93418 GLENDA FREIBERG 24553 312.00 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 312.00 130 20060 93419 WESTERN STATES SURFACING 24557 12,677.65 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 12,677.65 320 80832 220 93420 JOHN ALGARME 24573 260.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 260.00 101 68010 220 1661 93421 LIFE FITNESS 24618 5,621.72 MISC. SUPPLIES 5,621.72 320 76010 120 93422 AT&T WIRELESS 24640 103.64 COMMUNICATIONS 103.64 101 66100 160 93423 GOLDEN BAY CONSTRUCTION 24686 300.00 DEPOSIT REFUNDS 300.00 101 22520 93424 MIKE WAICZIS 24687 125.00 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 125.00 101 64400 210 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 8 01/16/04 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 93393 SBC/MCI 23728 532.54 COMMUNICATIONS 532.54 101 65200 160 93394 KELLY MOORE 23779 5,271 .78 CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 5,271 .78 101 66210 800 93395 INDUSTRIAL PLUMBING SUPPLY 23857 118.51 MISC. SUPPLIES 118.51 619 64460 120 5190 93396 DAVE CREAMER 23876 640.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 560.00 101 68010 220 1644 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 80.00 101 68010 220 1646 93397 CHERI NICHOL 23901 340.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 340.00 101 68010 220 1661 93398 UNIVERSAL BUILDING SERVICES 23941 490.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 490.00 619 64460 220 5150 93399 RONALD AUGUST FAATZ 24004 700.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 700.00 101 68010 220 1781 93400 KATHERINE PARODI 24007 700.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 700.00 101 68010 220 1781 93401 CITICORP VENDOR FINANCE 24030 66.71 EQUIPMENT MAINT. 66.71 101 65200 200 93402 FIBREX PRODUCTS 24055 761 .00 MISCELLANEOUS 761 .00 730 69560 400 93403 BILL LASKEY 24066 500.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 500.00 101 68010 220 1781 93404 BRIANT CHUN HOON 24067 500.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 500.00 101 68010 220 1781 93405 CUSTOM LABEL INC. 24148 662.75 OFFICE EXPENSE 662.75 101 65100 110 93406 GLOBAL DOCUGRAPHIX 24170 683.50 OFFICE EXPENSE 683.50 101 64250 110 93407 DAVID DELBON 24186 250.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 250.00 101 68010 220 1781 93408 JEFF OSBERG 24187 700.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 700.00 101 68010 220 1781 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 7 01/16/04 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Herd Written Checks 93379 NENAD VUKIC 23166 1,300.00 MISCELLANEOUS 1,300.00 101 22546 93380 AT&T WIRELESS 23169 49.00 COMMUNICATIONS 49.00 101 65200 160 93381 NADINE RONSON 23195 306.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 306.00 101 68010 220 1661 93382 KELLY VENEZIA 23320 160.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 160.00 101 68010 220 1661 93383 ELLIOTT INVESTMENT GROUP 23348 1,000.00 DEPOSIT REFUNDS 1,000.00 101 22520 93384 SAN FRANCISCO EXAMINER 23366 126.75 PUBLICATIONS&ADVERTISING 126.75 101 64200 150 93385 DATASAFE 23410 1,313.43 OFFICE EXPENSE 437.13 101 66100 110 OFFICE EXPENSE 235.39 101 64200 110 OFFICE EXPENSE 116.49 101 64420 110 BANKING SERVICE FEES 409.42 101 64250 120 MISC. SUPPLIES 41.40 101 64400 120 MISC. SUPPLIES 73.60 101 64350 120 93386 CULVER GROUP 23448 40,520.95 PROFESSIONAL&SPECIALIZED S 40,520.95 326 80770 210 93387 PAT BELDING 23489 500.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 500.00 101 68010 220 1781 93388 MCMASTER-CARR SUPPLY CO. 23611 50.89 MISC. SUPPLIES 50.89 619 64460 120 5130 93389 REFRIGERATION SUPPLIES DISTRIBUT 23639 364.63 PROFESSIONAL&SPECIALIZED S 364.63 619 64460 210 5180 93390 CLARE EVANS 23645 550.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 550.00 101 68010 220 1781 93391 AT&T 23661 23.08 COMMUNICATIONS 23.08 621 64450 160 93392 GSA MASTER SERIES INC. 23693 5,275.22 MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSE 5,275.22 526 69020 290 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 6 01/16/04 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 93363 CINGULAR WIRELESS 21747 84.66 COMMUNICATIONS 84.66 526 69020 160 93364 WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES 21769 5,453.05 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 5,453.05 320 79080 210 93365 SEWER RAT 21821 300.00 DEPOSIT REFUNDS 300.00 101 22520 93366 DENISE LAUGESEN 21963 1,050.00 DEPOSIT REFUNDS 1,050.00 101 22520 93367 JIM STOCKWELL 22048 2,100.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 2,100.00 101 68010 220 1781 93368 MARK MEYERS 22051 1,200.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,200.00 101 68010 220 1781 93369 ARCH WIRELESS 22089 18.36 COMMUNICATIONS 18.36 101 65100 160 93370 BRIAN BRINKERHOFF 22102 1,000.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,000.00 101 68010 220 1781 93371 AUTO PRIDE CAR WASH 22278 170.05 VEHICLE MAINT. 170.05 101 65200 202 93372 ENGINEERING NEWS RECORD 22686 82.00 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 82.00 101 66100 240 93373 HOLDEN DANIELS 22687 725.00 TRAINING EXPENSE 725.00 101 65200 260 93374 MATT LENNON 22748 550.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 550.00 101 68010 220 1781 93375 CARL DEOUANT 22842 600.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 600.00 101 68010 220 1781 93376 DAVE MICHAELIS 22847 250.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 250.00 101 68010 220 1781 93377 KATI LOUKIANOFF 22907 500.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 500.00 101 68010 220 1781 93378 IMAGISTICS INTERNATIONAL 22924 324.28 OFFICE EXPENSE 14.12 101 65100 110 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 310.16 101 65100 220 C CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 5 01/16/04 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT *� Denotes Hand Written-Checks 93347 PEGGY GUARALDI 19044 320.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 320.00 101 68010 220 1661 93348 BPS REPROGRAPHIC SERVICES 19047 146.82 OFFICE EXPENSE 146.82 320 79380 110 93349 TOM AMES 19502 640.00 TRAINING EXPENSE 640.00 101 65200 260 93350 MCCUNE AUDIO/VISUAL/VIDEO 19621 1,700.20 OFFICE EXPENSE 1,700.20 730 69547 110 93351 CAL-LINE EQUIPMENT INC 19697 39.97 SMALL TOOLS 39.97 101 68020 130 2300 93352 KATHY KARAS 19812 225.75 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 225.75 101 68010 220 1644 93353 MONICA OLSEN 19832 570.40 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 570.40 101 68010 220 1661 93354 AFFINITEL COMMUNICATIONS 20246 412.50 COMMUNICATIONS 412.50 621 64450 160 93355 BOLLINGER FOWLER CO. 20553 1,000.00 MISC. SUPPLIES 1,000.00 101 68010 120 1787 93356 ELLEN MAllONI 20614 300.00 DEPOSIT REFUNDS 300.00 101 22520 93357 FRANCOTYP•POSTALIA, INC. 20967 103.90 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 103.90 101 65100 220 93358 RICK KALBHENN 21426 700.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 700.00 101 68010 220 1781 93359 OLEN SIMON 21477 600.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 600.00 101 68010 220 1781 93360 MONICA EHLERS 21627 740.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 740.00 101 68010 220 1661 93361 MISSION VALLEY FORD 21675 20.81 SUPPLIES 20.81 620 15000 93362 JOSEPH BENEDETTI 21734 300.00 DEPOSIT REFUNDS 300.00 101 22520 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 4 01/16/04 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 93332 TEAM CLEAN 15827 303.04 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 303.04 101 65200 220 93333 ACTION SPORTS 16167 1,920.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,920.00 101 68010 220 1781 93334 BROADWAY BUSINESS 16849 150.00 MISCELLANEOUS 150.00 731 22555 93335 GOLDEN NURSERY 17128 241.79 MISC. SUPPLIES 241.79 101 68020 120 2200 93336 DAVID MANI 17477 300.00 DEPOSIT REFUNDS 300.00 101 22520 93337 PENINSULA DIGITAL IMAGING 17534 144.68 OFFICE EXPENSE 144.68 320 80370 110 93338 SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA WATER 17764 17,552.00 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 17,552.00 526 69020 240 93339 BAILEY'S 18733 250.64 TRAINING EXPENSE 250.64 101 68020 260 2300 93340 LYNNE FIRESTONE 18746 640.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 640.00 101 68010 220 1331 93341 CARPENTER RIGGING & 18747 257.72 SUPPLIES 257.72 620 15000 93342 VERIZON WIRELESS MESSAGING SERVI 18763 87.90 COMMUNICATIONS 29.30 101 66210 160 COMMUNICATIONS 29.30 526 69020 160 COMMUNICATIONS 29.30 527 66520 160 93343 UNITROL 18939 78.64 SUPPLIES 78.64 620 15000 93344 WESTERN RIGGING PRODUCTS INC 18976 5,953.75 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 5,953.75 320 79390 220 93345 ACCESS UNIFORMS & EMBROIDERY 18990 136.66 UNIFORMS AND EQUIPMENT 33.06 101 66240 140 UNIFORMS AND EQUIPMENT 103.60 527 66520 140 93346 MARY JANNEY 19042 207.00 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 207.00 130 20015 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 3 01/16/04 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 93321 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWARE 09670 1 ,290.71 MISC. SUPPLIES 12.97 101 65200 111 MISC. SUPPLIES 209.96 101 68020 120 2200 MISC. SUPPLIES 108. 17 101 66210 120 SMALL TOOLS 61 .66 101 66210 130 SMALL TOOLS 210.44 101 68020 130 2200 BLDG. & GROUNDS MAINT. 21 .62 101 68020 190 2200 FIRE APPARATUS MAINT. 84.50 101 65200 203 STREET RESURFACING EXPENSE 68.72 101 66210 226 MISC. SUPPLIES 163. 16 526 69020 120 SMALL TOOLS 54.10 527 66520 130 MISC. SUPPLIES 144.90 619 64460 120 5170 MISC. SUPPLIES 98.67 619 64460 120 5180 MISC. SUPPLIES 51 .84 619 64460 120 5220 93322 BARKER BLUE REPROGRAPHICS 09990 393. 16 MISCELLANEOUS 393.16 101 64400 115 93323 PETERS-DE LAET, INC. 11589 75.34 SMALL TOOLS 75.34 101 65200 130 93324 STATE BAR OF CALIFORNIA 11637 380.00 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 380.00 101 64350 240 93325 THE MAGIC PRESS CORP. 13759 792.39 OFFICE EXPENSE 792.39 101 65100 110 93326 ROYAL WHOLESALE ELECTRIC 14855 124.49 MISC. SUPPLIES 124.49 619 64460 120 5130 93327 MICHAEL LENNON 15302 550.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 550.00 101 68010 220 1781 93328 IZMIRIAN ROOFING 15573 169.09 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 169.09 619 64460 210 5150 93329 ALL CITY MANAGEMENT 15595 1 ,727.70 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 11727.70 101 65100 220 93330 MILLBRAE LOCK SHOP 15739 191 .42 OFFICE EXPENSE 43.47 101 65100 110 BLDG. & GROUNDS MAINT. 87. 12 101 68020 190 2200 BLDG. & GROUNDS MAINT. 8.55 101 65100 190 MISC. SUPPLIES 52.28 619 64460 120 5240 93331 VALLEY OIL CO. 15764 606.70 GAS, OIL & GREASE 606.70 101 65200 201 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 2 01/16/04 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT *� Denotes Hand Written Checks 93311 FRANK TEALDI 03743 189.57 MISCELLANEOUS 189.57 101 64420 040 93312 WEST GROUP PAYMENT CTR. 03964 843.00 MISC. SUPPLIES 843.00 101 64350 120 93313 B.E.I. ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES 09072 219.91 MISC. SUPPLIES 72.94 101 65200 120 MISC. SUPPLIES 13.53 101 66210 120 MISC. SUPPLIES -278.08 619 64460 120 5140 MISC. SUPPLIES 71.40 619 64460 120 MISC. SUPPLIES -31.35 619 64460 120 5130 MISC. SUPPLIES 167.32 619 64460 120 5240 MISC. SUPPLIES 26.32 619 64460 120 5180 MISC. SUPPLIES 34.81 619 64460 120 5130 SMALL TOOLS 143.02 620.66700 130 93314 STATE OF CA/CONSERVATION DEPT 09073 1,153.83 MISCELLANEOUS 1,153.83 731 22550 93315 FASTSIGNS 09136 1,018.63 OFFICE EXPENSE 1,018.63 730 69547 110 93316 TURF& INDUSTRIAL EQUIPMENT CO. 09319 152.45 SUPPLIES 152.45 620 15000 93317 STERICYCLE, INC. 09439 145.80 PRISONER EXPENSE 145.80 101 65100 291 93318 ABAG - LIABILITY 09518 800.00 CLAIMS PAYMENTS 800.00 618 64520 601 93319 SAN MATEO LAWN MOWER SHOP 09560 597.89 MISC. SUPPLIES 157.91 101 66210 120 EQUIPMENT MAINT. 192.09 101 68020 200 2200 MISCELLANEOUS 247.89 618 64520 604 93320 MARGARET KRAMER 09612 2,880.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 2,880.00 101 68010 220 1661 J CITY OF BURLINGAME J J W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 1 01/16/04 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT *� Denotes Hand Written Checks 93296 HARBOR SAND & GRAVEL 01313 52.91 MISC. SUPPLIES 52.91 101 66210 120 93297 BURLINGAME RECREATION DEPT. 01663 100.00 RECREATION EXPENSES 100.00 101 10700 93298 ANASTASIA COLE 01945 2,304.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 2,304.00 101 68010 220 1644 93299 EWING IRRIGATION PRODUCTS 02157 49.15 MISCELLANEOUS 49.15 101 68020 192 2200 93300 W.W. GRAINGER, INC. 02248 454.74 MISC. SUPPLIES 454.74 320 80790 120 93301 GRANITE ROCK COMPANY 02261 4,724.35 STREET RESURFACING EXPENSE 4,724.35 101 66210 226 93302 CHARLES J. HAPP 02360 600.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 600.00 101 68010 220 1781 93303 MACTEC ENGINEERING 02365 1,936.48 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 1,936.48 528 66600 210 93304 LAWSON PRODUCTS, INC. 02755 307.43 MISC. SUPPLIES 307.43 619 64460 120 93305 NATIONAL WATERWORKS, INC. 02880 7,060.89 MISC. SUPPLIES 3,706.80 526 69020 120 MISCELLANEOUS 3,354.09 526 69020 400 93306 NATIONWIDE WIRE & BRUSH MFG. 03002 435.17 MISC. SUPPLIES 435.17 528 66600 120 93307 SBC 03080 2,704.28 UTILITY EXPENSE 2,704.28 896 20281 93308 SANDRA POKE 03175 2,169.50 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 564.00 101 68010 220 1646 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,605.50 101 68010 220 1644 93309 MARGARET PRENDERGAST 03179 615.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 615.00 101 68010 220 1641 93310 R & S ERECTION OF 03234 48.71 MISC. SUPPLIES 48.71 619 64460 120 5130 CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION UNAPPROVED MINUTES 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, CA February 9, 2004 Council Chambers I. CALL TO ORDER Chair Bojues called the February 9, 2004 regular meeting of the Planning Commission to order at 7: 12 p.m. II. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Auran, Bojues, Keighran, Keele, Osterling and Vistica Absent: Commissioner Michael Brownrigg Staff Present: City Planner, Margaret Monroe; Planner, Ruben Hurin; City Attorney, Larry Anderson; Senior Engineer; Phil Monaghan III. MINUTES The minutes of the January 26, 2004 regular meeting of the Planning Commission were approved as mailed. The minutes of the January 12, 2004 regular meeting of the Planning Commission were approved as corrected. IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA There were no changes to the agenda. V. FROM THE FLOOR There were no public comments. VI. STUDY ITEMS There are 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 commissionerprior to the time the commission votes on the motion to adopt. 1A. 1433 BALBOA AVENUE, ZONED R-1 — APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW FOR A NEW TWO- STORY SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING (JAMES CHU, CHU DESIGN AND ENGINEERING, INC., APPLICANT AND DESIGNER; GARY PARTEE, PROPERTY OWNER) (75 NOTICED) PROJECT PLANNER: RUBEN HURIN 111. 9 BAYSWATER AVENUE, ZONED R-1- APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW FOR A FIRST AND SECOND STORY ADDITION (ANDREA COSTANZO, ADAMES DESIGN GROUP, APPLICANT AND DESIGNER; GLENN AND ALMA GROSSMAN, PROPERTY OWNERS) (64 NOTICED) PROJECT PLANNER: RUBEN HURIN Chair Bojues asked if anyone in the audience or on the Commission wished to call any item off the consent calendar. There were no requests. C. Vistica noted on the project at 9 Bayswater Avenue all the light fixtures on the outside of the house should match those added to the second floor balcony and asked that this be added as a condition of approval. C. Keighran clarified that the staff report for the project at 1008 Toyon, item 2, is noted as a consent item but in fact is an action item. Staff acknowledged that this was so. C. Osterling moved approval of the consent calendar based on the facts in the staff reports, commissioners comments and the findings in the staff reports with recommended conditions in each staff report and by City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes February 9, 2004 resolution. The motion was seconded by C. Keighran. Chair called for a voice vote on the motion and it passed 6-0-1 (C. Brownrigg absent). Appeal procedures were advised. This item concluded at 7:15 p.m. -� VIII. REGULAR ACTION ITEM 2. 1008 TOYON DRIVE, ZONED R-1 —APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW FOR A FIRST AND SECOND STORY ADDITION (RANDY GRANGE, TRG ARCHITECTS, APPLICANT AND PROPERTY OWNER; WAYNE FAIRBROTHER AND JENNIFER HEATH,PROPERTY OWNERS) (43 NOTICED) PROJECT PLANNER: CATHERINE BARBER Reference staff report 2.9.04 with attachments. Plr Hurin presented the report,reviewed criteria and staff comments. Ten conditions were suggested for consideration. Commission had no questions of staff. Chair Bojues opened the public hearing.Randy Grange,205 Park Road,architect represented the project.He noted that at Commission direction they worked on the entry,adding an eyebrow;requested moving the item from the consent calendar because the owner had a number of minor changes,window size,etc.which he wished to make at the same time. Commission noted that because the house is so close to the maximum FAR, a condition should be added to verify the setbacks in the field prior to the foundation being poured. There were no other comments from the floor and the public hearing was closed. C.Auran moved to approve the application as modified with the facts in the staff report,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 January 28, 2004, Sheets A-1 through A-5, site plan, floor plans, building elevations; that all skylights shall be tinted to reduce the impact of night glow on the neighbors and --� neighborhood; 2) that any increase to the habitable basement floor area and any changes to the size or envelope of the first or second floors, which would include expanding the footprint or floor area of the structure,replacing or relocating a window(s),adding a dormer(s)or changing the roof height or pitch,shall be subject to design review; 3) that prior to pouring the new foundation for the first floor addition, all setbacks shall be verified in the field by Planning staff;4) that the conditions of the Recycling Specialist's, Fire Marshal's,and City Engineer's memos of November 24,2003,shall be met; 5) that prior to scheduling the roof deck inspection, a licensed surveyor shall establish the height of the roof ridge and provide certification of that height; 6)that prior to scheduling the framing inspection,the project architect,engineer or other licensed professional shall provide architectural certification that the architectural details such as window locations and bays are built as shown on the approved plans; if there is no licensed professional involved in the project, the property owner or contractor shall provide the certification under penalty of perjury; certifications shall be submitted to the Building Department; 7) that prior to final inspection, Planning Department staff shall inspect and note compliance of the architectural details (trim materials, window type,etc.)to verify that the project has been built according to the approved Planning and Building plans; 8) that all air ducts, plumbing vents, and flues shall be combined, where possible, to a single termination and installed on the portions of the roof not visible from the street;and that these venting details shall be included and approved in the construction plans before a Building permit is issued; 9) that the project shall comply with the Construction and Demolition Debris Recycling Ordinance which requires affected demolition,new construction and alteration projects to submit a Waste Reduction Plan and meet recycling requirements; any partial or full demolition of a structure, interior or exterior, shall require a demolition permit; 10)that the applicant shall comply with Ordinance 1503,the City of Burlingame Storm Water Management and Discharge Control Ordinance; and 11) that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Fire Codes, 2001 edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame. The motion was seconded by C. Keighran. 2 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes February 9, 2004 Chair Boju6s called for a voice vote on the motion to approve the project as revised. The motion passed on a voice vote 6-0-1 (C. Brownrigg absent). Appeal procedures were advised. This item concluded at 7:27 p.m. 3. 1440 CHAPIN AVENUE,ZONED C-1,SUBAREA B—APPLICATION FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR REAL ESTATE (GRAM REALTY, INC., APPLICANT; S.J. SUNG & ASSOCIATES, ARCHITECT; CORTINA INVESTMENTS LTD., PROPERTY OWNER) (92 NOTICED) PROJECT PLANNER: RUBEN HURIN Reference staff report 2.9.04 with attachments. CP Monroe presented the report,reviewed criteria and staff comments. Nine conditions were suggested for consideration. Commissioner asked if based on the conditions the applicant would have to return to the Commission if the number of employees was increased. CA Anderson responded yes and Commission could decide at that time what to do. Chair Boju6s opened the public hearing. Mark Hudak, attorney, 216 Park Road, represented APR realty which is now the corporate name of the applicant. Larry Knapp and Joann Wandalowski,office manager, were also present to answer questions. Noted would like to change the application to move the weekly agent meeting from Tuesday to Monday,work better with weekly pre-listing house tours;meeting would be over by 10 a.m.because of house tours;feel meeting would be over before there was a demand for retail parking in the area. 1440 Chapin is located away from the intersection of Primrose and Chapin where 6 real estate businesses are located,few with any parking on site and most underparked;this office building has parking to current code plus 8 spaces on site,one of few in area;beside the Monday morning agent meeting there are few people in this leased space.Concerned about condition 2 which places a restriction on the sub-tenant for the remainder of the space,building has parking to code on site,maximum usage of the real estate use is 10 people on site at one time except for Monday meetings, might be able to live with but why penalize this tenant when others in the area provide no parking; other real estate related businesses would need a conditional use permit before they could occupy the remainder of the space. Commissioners asked: Are all the employees licensed real estate agents;do they have other employment or is real estate their main source of income;how do they use the office,had a client who was a national real estate firm and agents spent a lot more time in the office each week than you indicate? All of those employed at this office will be licensed real estate agents except the clerical help;generally these agents do not have other employment. Agents work off lap tops and cell phones,have a network system from which they can access all information from home,generally come to the office to pick up/drop off things with staff. Seem to be 20 offices with doors and pool area for rest,why private offices for part time employees,also a couple of conference rooms? The more senior agents get offices as recognition,offices are small(10'x 12'); conference rooms are shared. How do you calculate the density of use in this office area? If everyone is there at once the density would be 1 person to 110 SF;actually expect a usual density of 1 person to 750 SF. Reason for weekly meeting on Tuesday was to off-set the impact of other businesses in area which have their meeting on Mondays,can you do Tuesday? When do others have their weekly meetings? Most real estate businesses meet on Mondays; not end of world on Tuesday,want Monday to coordinate with our San Mateo office and new listings tour. SAMCAR Board of Realtors meets on Tuesday mornings,another reason for Mondays. What type of real estate do you sell? How many clients come and how long do the stay? Sell residential real estate;client stays irregular,some come once for an hour,others more frequently for 5 to 10 minutes at a time, estimate 0-5 visitors on site at one time. Note in your letter that the area you intend to sublet will be to a"traditional"office use,what do you mean; some office uses do not need conditional use permits?Note was meant to indicate that other office uses would require a conditional use permit,this area is treated differently than Subareas A and B,so city would review real estate and other listed intensive office 3 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes February 9, 2004 uses; office uses which would not require a conditional use permit are attorneys and accounting firms. There were no other questions of the applicant. There were no other comments from the floor. The public —� hearing was closed. Commissioner discussion: Recently the Body Shop moved out of this building and there is more parking available now than when the parking counts were done by the applicant; feel that will be lucky if 40 people show up at the weekly meeting; lot of parking on site, if real estate agent is in the office, he is not doing business. Asked staff why condition 2 limiting the use of the sublet area to an office use with an employee ratio of 1:300 SF;CP noted that this proposed business would use more(closer to 1:100 SF)than its share of the parking allotted at 1:300 for the part of the space in the building they would use, did not want to compound this by having a high density(employee to parking)use in the almost equally sized area that they intended to sublet. Should the annual study reporting actual use of the real estate office area be prepared by an outsider to be more objective? CP noted have required this kind of study with other real estate tenants and found them to be accurate enough to determine if use coincides with observed parking impacts in the area. This office is away from concentration of real estate businesses in this area;observed a lot of parking available, would be concerned if weekly meeting stayed after 10 a.m. because would conflict with retail parking, that is not OK. Condition 3 should be changed to reflect that the weekly meeting will be held on Monday,don't think need a third party to prepare report on condition 5,like condition 2 which limits use of the remainder of the tenant space to an employee density equal to the parking ratio. If the meetings on Monday are a problem the condition allows staff to work out a change with the applicant. C.Keele moved to approve the conditional use permit for a real estate use in 7,464 SF of Suite 200 at 1440 Chapin Avenue,with the remaining 6,531 SF to be used at an employee density no greater than 1 person per 300 SF gross;with an amendment to condition 3 so that the weekly meeting is held on Monday at the same --. time as proposed and the retention of all of the following conditions: 1)that the real estate business shall be limited to 7,464 SF in Suite 200 at 1440 Chapin Avenue,as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department and date stamped January 15,2004, sheets 1 and 2(8%2"x 11");2)that the real estate business shall not expand into the remainder of the tenant space(6,531 SF); and that the subleased area shall not be occupied by any other business which has an employee to office density exceeding one person to 300 SF; 3) that the real estate business may not be open for business except during the hours of 9:00 a.m.to 9:00 p.m., seven days a week; weekly agent meetings shall be on Monday mornings between 9:00 a.m.and 10:00 a.m., with a maximum of 48 persons on site during the meeting which includes agents,full-time employees,and managers; 4)that the real estate business shall have a maximum employees/managers of 64 part-time agents and 5 full-time employees/managers (with a maximum of 10 persons on-site at any one time except on Mondays from 9:00 a.m.to 10:00 a.m. for group meetings);the number of full-time or part-time real estate agents, employees and managers for a real estate use in 7,464 SF of Suite 200 and the maximum of 10 persons on site except for 1 hour on Monday,shall not be increased(from 69)without an amendment to this permit; 5)that the owner of the property shall file a report with the City Planner by March 1 of each year declaring how many managers,employees,agents,and independent contractors have been working at the site over the previous calendar year,and the date and maximum number of employees,agents and independent contractors who have been on-site at any one time and the report shall include the usage (business and employee count) of the 6,531 SF sublet space; 6) that due to the impact of weekly agent meetings on parking in this area,the owner agrees to schedule the weekly group meetings or client conferences so that the parking impact is minimized and will consult with the City Planner on an annual basis regarding any difficult times or days of the week and shall make adjustments that may be applicable; 7) that any changes in—, operation, floor area, use, or number of employees, which exceeds the maximums as stated in thes( conditions shall require an amendment to this use permit; 8)that the use and any improvements for the use shall meet all the requirements of the California Building Code and California Fire Code,2001 edition,as 4 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes February 9, 2004 amended by the City of Burlingame; and 9)that this conditional use permit shall be reviewed in two years from the date of approval (February, 2006)or upon complaint. The motion was seconded by C. Vistica. Chair Bojues called for a voice vote on the motion to approve the conditional use permit with amended conditions. The motion passed on a 6-0-1 (C. Brownrigg absent). Appeal procedures were advised. This item concluded at 8:00 p.m. IX. DESIGN REVIEW STUDY ITEMS 4. 149 OCCIDENTAL AVENUE,ZONED R-1—APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW AND SPECIAL PERMIT FOR HEIGHT FOR A NEW TWO STORY SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING(JAMES CHU,CHU DESIGN AND ENGINEERING, INC., APPLICANT AND DESIGNER; KURT STEM, PROPERTY OWNER) (55 NOTICED)PROJECT PLANNER: CATHERINE BARBER CP Monroe briefly presented the project description. There were no questions of staff. Chair Bojues opened the public comment. Project designer James Chu, 39 W. 43`d Avenue, San Mateo, project designer, and applicant Kurt Steil, 911 N. Amplett Blvd., San Mateo, applicant,were available to answer questions, noted that this is not a typical 120 foot long lot, larger lot, house is 132 SF under the maximum FAR allowed,this number does not include 42 SF of attic space with a ceiling height of more than five feet and 176.5 SF of porch area, total 211.5 SF included in FAR, portion of the roof exceeding the height limit by 20 inches is only 15 feet long; property owner spoke to some adjacent neighbors and reviewed the plans with them,next door neighbor does not have a concern with the project,tried to contact the property owner and tenant on the left side; can revise project if necessary. Commission asked what is the reason for exceeding the height limit? The designer noted that this is a French inspired design, has steep pitched roofs, tried to minimize the mass and bulk by carrying the roof from the second floor to the first floor,roof could be clipped to meet the height limit but would prefer not to, proposed height is needed to enhance the roof and overall design. Commission asked why the landscape plan does not address the opportunity of the creek? Property owner noted that there is a path to the creek off Chapin Avenue,this side of the creek is very steep and not safe,would like to replace the existing fence and move it back a few feet. Commission noted that this is a missed opportunity,recommend visually opening the rear yard to the creek, will leave it up to the applicant to make a decision about the fence, front porch seems small, does not read like a porch, in past needed a variance to exceed the height limit but now a special permit, findings based on architectural compatibility so feel special permit for height is justified. Designer noted that the height could be reduced to comply but it would affect the roof pitch,expose more of the exterior walls and alter the floor plans. Commission noted that the landscape plan calls for a lot of plant materials, should reduce the amount of open lawn by adding trees in the lawn areas, would like to walk through more landscaping and trees as you approach the front entry. Lisa Mcconlogue, 150 Chapin Lane;Cliff Chang, 156 Chapin Lane;and Janet Garcia, 1561 Drake Avenue; spoke regarding the project, lives directly behind this lot, first time heard about the project was when received the public hearing notice,very surprised about the proposed project,thought that the redwood fence there now was on her property,concerned with loss of privacy in yard,will have a big impact,house is taller and located further back on the lot than the existing house; plans show that the existing fence is approximately five feet back from the rear property line,planted trees on my side near fence for screening, �-- moving the fence back and eliminating the 15 foot hedge is not the best way to enhance the creek,noted that when she moved in neighbors told her that none of the properties were surveyed,the area behind the fence 5 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes February 9, 2004 has been used by the owners of her property for decades,need to look into this issue. Commission pointed out that the survey submitted by the applicant shows that the existing fence is clearly on the subject property -� and is setback a few feet from the rear property line. Lives one house over and behind the subject property, never discussed the project with the applicant,creek is beautiful and natural,concerned about the location of the fence, need to be more sensitive to the existing trees and landscaping, would like to investigate the location of the fence, looks like it may be moving back as much as 6 to 12 feet,redwood fence has been in place for a long time, this is a tall house and will appear large from the rear,house will be imposing on the creek. Asked if the property owner will live in the house or will it be sold? Developer will sell the house once it's built. Property owner noted that the subject house and house directly behind will be 120 feet apart, survey completed by a licensed survey clearly shows that the existing fence is on the subject property, did not discuss the project with the neighbors at the rear because didn't feel they would be affected by the project. Designer noted that the existing landscaping along the creek would not be removed, only drip irrigation system and some small trees installed by the previous owner would be removed. There were no other comments from the floor and the public hearing was closed. The Commission had the following comments and concerns: • Landscape plan does not address the opportunity presented by the creek,this is a missed opportunity, recommend visually opening the rear yard to the creek, will leave it up to the applicant to make a decision about whether or not to include a fence at the rear; • Front porch seems small, does not read like a porch, need to be addressed; • Look at incorporating taller plant materials at the rear of the lot to provide screening and respect neighbor; • Concerned with the height and overall mass and bulk,will dominate the neighborhood and detrac' -� from the rustic quality found in the neighborhood, should downsize mass and bulk and reduce the height to below 30 feet above average top of curb; • Like the design, would prefer to see building not exceed the height limit but understands the designer's reason for height and how it will enhance the design; • Need to respect natural area adjacent to creek; • Proposed house is an improvement over what is there now,will visually help the street,proposed house is narrow without a two-car garage at the front of the property; proposed house fits comfortably on the site. • This is a nice design, other houses in the neighborhood are much smaller, only one of this size, would prefer to see the house reduced in size to fit better within existing structures; and • This area contains a wide variety of small to large houses,this lot can handle this house size; C. Keighran made a motion to place this item on the regular action calendar at a time when the suggested revisions have been made and plan checked. The motion was seconded by C. Osterling. Comment on the motion: Commissioner noted that the proposed floor area ratio will be doubled with the project. Chair Bcjues called for a roll call vote on the motion to place this item on the regular action calendar when plans had been revised as directed. The motion passed on a roll call vote 6-0-1 (C.Brownrigg absent). The Planning Commission's action is advisory and not appealable. This item concluded at 8:28 p.m. —� 6 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes February 9, 2004 5. 1521 DRAKE AVENUE, ZONED R-1- APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW AND SPECIAL PERMIT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A BASEMENT FOR A NEW TWO STORY SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING (MARK AND SHEILA BURAN, APPLICANTS AND PROPERTY OWNERS; RANDY GRANGE,TRG ARCHITECTS,ARCHITECT)(60 NOTICED)PROJECT PLANNER:RUBEN HURIN C. Keighran recused herself because she lives within 500 feet of the subject property. She stepped down from the dias and left the Council Chambers. Plr Hurin briefly presented the project description. Commission asked how much of the basement was counted in floor area ratio? Staff noted that because the basement qualifies for a 700 SF exemption from floor area, only 23 SF counted towards FAR. Randy Grange,project architect,noted that he looked at the existing house and tried to build on the existing image, the above ground FAR is 100 SF below the maximum allowed, used shingle siding to soften the house. Commission asked if the property owner intends to live in the house? No,owner intends to sell the house after it's built. Like how the designer reflected the pattern of the existing house,but am concerned with how the sides of the house relate to the adjacent properties. Architect noted that the second floor along the left side property line is set back 7'-0". Commission noted that there is an open area at the front of the existing house which will be taken up by the new footprint, house will be much closer to 1517 Drake Avenue than the current house, concerned with two story wall on north side, house is pinched by the massing,not in keeping with the houses in the neighborhood,other new houses on this block will be smaller. Chair Bojues opened the public comment. Mark and Ann Thomas, 1520 Drake Avenue; Chris Mccrum, 1540 Drake Avenue;David Taylor, 1566 Drake Avenue;Janet Garcia, 1561 Drake Avenue;Regina O'neal, 1516 Drake Avenue; and Jennifer Frolic, 1517 Drake Avenue; expressed their concerns with the project, lives across the street,house is increasing from 1454 SF(0.24 FAR)to 4039 SF(0.56 FAR),would like to �.. see project referred to a design reviewer,out of character with the neighborhood,need to look at the broader context, a lot of development on this street, five new big houses are proposed, going from existing homes which have a total of 6 to 7 bedrooms to collection of new houses with a total of 20 bedrooms, will see impacts to parking and traffic,we have reached a tipping point on this block,cumulative impact needs to be looked at as a whole, would like to see a separate study session to address these impacts; existing house is charming,was previously occupied by a young couple starting out and before that an elderly couple,need to preserve smaller `starter' houses, at the October 27, 2003, meeting the Commission raised several issues including reducing the FAR for developers and houses with basements and developing different standards for different types of lots,what are other cities doing, at least 80 houses have been demolished in the past three years,what has come of all this? Should not place this project for action until the entire block has been studied;this is the fifth house in a row of seven houses now affected,house have been increased in height and density,will have a substantial effect on the neighborhood;Commission has more information on this block than any other block in Burlingame,staff and neighbors provided information of the median size house on this block,proposed house at 4000 SF will exceed the median by 50%,would like to see project sent back for a redesign and house reduced below 3000 SF;not opposed to replacement and development,adds value to existing houses, however there is a significant change occurring in the Easton Addition, need to re- evaluate trend of developers,many designing to maximum FAR,seeking exceptions to height,basements, etc.,most of the larger houses come from the developers,understand that they need to maximize their profit, but the Commission needs to think about the impact to the community;the diversity of people is changing, first time homeowners are being outbid;developers ask for maximum FAR and when reduce house by 5 to 10 percent they look like heroes,in reality they are almost at maximum FAR,homeowners do not ask for so much SF;needs parking and traffic study on block before this project is reviewed again,increase in density �- and number of bedrooms, there is no parking available on this block, can't turn around at end of block. 7 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes February 9, 2004 Continued comment:Five new houses on this block will change complexion,need to re-examine FAR and set different standards, incumbent on Commission to exercise maximum discretion on impact on —� neighborhood,redwood trees and traffic,Commission needs to get as much information they can get to make their decision, look at size of other houses, number of occupants, and traffic; size is too large, concerned about the proposed basement and its affect on underground water,high water table in this area,water repairs have been done at 1513 and 1517 Drake Avenue,shingle siding not consistent with the neighborhood which mostly have stucco houses, concerned with second floor balcony at rear and privacy issues, neighbor has pool in rear yard,question why basement is not included in FAR,this is more than the street can bear,over 40% of the block is being redeveloped; moved in next door a couple of weeks ago, house is crammed especially at the front,retaining wall does not extend 4 feet as shown on plans,concerned with underground water and basement,needs to be further studied and drainage reconsidered,roots ofredwood tree on adjacent property to south may extend into this property; recently in the market for a house,there is a big market for smaller houses,but outbid by developers;existing house is small but it does not need to be 4000 SF. There were no other comments from the floor and the public hearing was closed. The Commission had the following comments and concerns: • Expectation is that if basements are allowed the house should be less massive, proposed house is excessive, bedrooms are large, have two walk-in closets, this house could be trimmed down especially with a 700 SF recreation room in the basement this is not the right house for the neighborhood; • This block is getting hammered,house is too massive and bulky,FAR and number of bedrooms is being doubled; • Concerned about the basement and drainage and how if affects underground water flow; • Design does not enhance the neighborhood; • Streetscape needs to be provided for this entire block to evaluate how this project will fit in with the houses on that side of the street; 0 Concerned with size of house, size can be reduced, feel architect has received clear message to redesign project; • Need to look at what is happening on street, suggest a smaller house; and • Very little yard left, proposing a two-car garage when only one is required for this four bedroom house, single-car garage may be more appropriate,would follow neighborhood pattern of rear and front yard size. C. Boju6s made a motion to place this item on the regular action calendar at a time when the suggested revisions have been made and plan checked. This motion was seconded by C. Osterling. Comment on the motion: Cannot support the motion, still think project should be referred to a design reviewer,we are putting the architect in a bind,win or lose situation,would like to see a more collaborative process to address the concerns,need more than just some minor changes,need to reduce by 5 to 10%;feel that architect knows the process,he can decide to consult with a design reviewer if he chooses;want to make sure the applicant addresses the affect of the basement on the underground water,this is a wet area. Chair Boju6s called for a roll call vote on the motion to place this item on the regular action calendar when plans had been revised as directed. The motion passed on a roll call vote 4-1-1-1 (C. Keele dissenting, C. --- Keighran abstaining, and C. Brownrigg absent). The Planning Commission's action is advisory and not appealable. This item concluded at 9:06 p.m. 8 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes February 9, 2004 6. 1504 ALTURAS DRIVE,LOT 1 AND LOT 2 ZONED R-1- A. 1504 ALTURAS DRIVE,LOT 1 -APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW,HILLSIDE AREA CONSTRUCTION PERMIT, SIDE SETBACK VARIANCE AND SPECIAL PERMIT FOR AN ATTACHED GARAGE FOR A NEW TWO-STORY SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING B. 1504 ALTURAS DRIVE,LOT 2-APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW,HILLSIDE AREA CONSTRUCTION PERMIT AND SPECIAL PERMIT FOR AN ATTACHED GARAGE FOR A NEW TWO-STORY SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING C. APPLICATION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR RE-EMERGING LOTS (DEREK CHUNG,APPLICANT AND PROPERTY OWNER; ABR ARCHITECTURE, ARCHITECT) (56 NOTICED)PROJECT PLANNER: CATHERINE BARBER CP Monroe briefly presented the project description. Commission asked how is a tree measured to determine whether it's a protected-size tree? CP noted that a tree is of protected size if it has a circumference of 48 inches or greater measured 54 inches above adjacent grade. CA Anderson noted that the guidelines for measuring a tree are set in the reforestation ordinance,but that the Commission could evaluate the trees with a different criteria if they felt it was appropriate for this project. Commission noted that the concrete driveway on Lot 2 extends to the second floor of the house,could the driveway be designed to end at the ground floor? Sr. E. Monaghan noted that the proposed driveway has a maximum 15%slope,to get the driveway to the first floor would require a steeper driveway slope,he pointed out that a 15-20%driveway slope would require City Engineer approval,a+20%driveway slope would require a variance from the plan. Michael Jung,project architect,4075 Papazian Way, Suite 204,Fremont,noted that the two houses will sit �- at the base of a downhill slope, all existing houses are two story on this side of the block,clarified that the proposed driveway slope on Lot 2 is 15%and would extend to the garage on the upper floor,the side setback variance for the house on Lot 1 is for a set of stairs from the deck to the rear of the lot, this is a tight triangular lot,without the stairs would lose the windows at the rear,there is also a 10 foot easement along the right side property line,distance between the house on Lot 1 and the neighboring house is substantial and therefore see no impact from the side setback variance. Commission pointed out that there are a lot of issues with this project:would like to see both proposed developments on one site plan so that the Commission can see how the projects fit;would like a better match to the design guidelines; can the house be pushed further back so that a traditional at-grade driveway can be installed. The architect noted that it would be difficult to push the house further back because there are two existing 48-inch diameter trees and an existing public utility easement at the rear of the lot. Commission expressed a concern with the style of the two houses and that they don't respect the style of the existing house being demolished. Architect noted that there are mixed styles in the neighborhood, there is no predominant style, this design reflects the varying styles in the neighborhood,the bulk of these houses will be below the street level and therefore will not be visible,will probably see half of the second story and roof,matures trees surround the site,both houses will be screened well. Commission commented that by working with the arborist and engineer,the house could be carefully designed to move the house further back; would like to see landscape plan for both lots on one sheet; proposed houses do not resemble character of the street at all,houses need to be scaled down,too grandiose, lot of mass with two houses together,not consistent with design guidelines. Commission asked the architect to clarify the plate heights; architect noted that 9 foot and 10 foot plate height are proposed on the first and second floors, respectively, felt that plate heights could be greater since houses are below the street level. Both houses need to be scaled down,high entry windows and plate heights,project did not follow the design guidelines,houses need to fit better into the block,need to look beyond the numbers to the design guidelines. 9 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes February 9, 2004 Chair Bojues opened the public comment. John Hagenah, 1500 Alturas;Fred Platt, 1505 Alturas Drive;Bart Gross, 1503 La Mesa Drive;Raj Sarkar, 1508 Alturas Drive,expressed their concerns with the project,noted that the adjacent house has a 10 foot sewer and storm drain easement, concerned with trees across his property line, concerned with white ash trees to be planted along his property line,will grow 60 to 80 feet tall and will be 50 to 60 feet above his single story house, these trees lose many leaves and seed cases, concerned with safety and tree limbs falling on calm and windy days,also concerned with fallout from trees with regard to the storm drain and roots damaging sewer lines,these houses don't require these very tall trees since they are below the street level,would like to see type of tree changed from white ash to an evergreen tree with a lower growth height, four new trees are too close to the sanitary sewer easement; the proposed design is radical given the rest of the block,but it is the new style. Asked if side setback variance would apply to just the stairs or for all construction; staff noted that it would apply to just the stairs, a separate variance would be required for any other part of the house encroaching into the required setback;his house was built in 1950, had a great view, now overgrown trees across the street block view, concerned with protected-sized redwood tree—needs to be trimmed, oak trees on property also need to be pruned, many houses in this area have water problems;concerned with the height of the houses as measured from adjacent grade, asked how is overall height measured,foundation and crawl space will add to the height;live below the subject property,concerned about impact on privacy, area is currently well-wooded and makes it a nice place to live,project is poorly thought out;he gets runoff from hill on Alturas Drive,during heavy rains need to sand bag around house, concerned with runoff from roof drainage and irrigation;would like to see both site plans on one sheet, houses will be very close to each other even though houses comply with setbacks, concerned with drainage, in the past there has been two feet of standing water on this property, water problems on this property will affect adjacent and downhill properties; there are a variety of architectural styles in this neighborhood,proposed houses appear to be shoe-horned into the lots,both house forced into --� the northwest corner of the acute lot,house is close to corner and to curb,will have a big impact on property; concerned with the proposed design,not consistent with any of the houses on between 1508-1528 Alturas Drive. There were no other comments from the floor and the public hearing was closed. The Commission had the following comments and concerns: • Would like to see both proposed developments on one site plan so that the Commission can see how the projects fit; also show both landscape plans on one sheet, show location of adjacent houses on plan; • Need to see site sections with adjacent houses to show relationship of mass and bulk; • Concerned with the driveway on Lot 2 extending to the second floor,would like architect to consider installing an at-grade driveway;working with the arborist and engineer,the house could be carefully designed to move the house further back to incorporate an at-grade driveway; • Proposed houses do not resemble character of the street; • House designs are too grandiose, lot of mass with two houses together,not consistent with design guidelines as they would apply in this neighborhood; • Both houses need to be scaled down, high entry windows and plate heights not consistent with design guidelines,houses need to reflect adjacent houses and fit better into the character of the block, need to look beyond the numbers to the intent and spirit of the design guidelines; • Concern with the style of the two houses and that they don't respect the style of the existing house being demolished; • Applicant should address screening issues raised by the adjacent neighbors and the size and -� placement of trees which might affect distant views; and 10 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes February 9, 2004 • Side setback variance for stairs on Lot 1 should be eliminated,there are other design options for new construction, see no justification for variance. C.Osterling made a motion to send this project to a design reviewer with the comments made. This motion was seconded by C. Vistica. Chair Boju6s called for a vote on the motion to refer this item to a design review with the comments and suggestion made. The motion passed on a voice vote 6-0-1 (C. Brownrigg absent). The Planning Commission's action is advisory and not appealable. This item concluded at 9:50 p.m. 7. 1136 DRAKE AVENUE,ZONED R-1—APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW,FRONT AND SIDE SETBACK VARIANCES, SPECIAL PERMIT FOR DECLINING HEIGHT ENVELOPE AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A FIRST AND SECOND STORY ADDITION AND DETACHED GARAGE (GREG TERRY, APPLICANT AND PROPERTY OWNER; ESSALAT HEKMAT ARCHITECTS, ARCHITECT) (65 NOTICED)PROJECT PLANNER: RUBEN HURIN Pir.Hurin briefly presented the project description.Commissioners asked staff what was the new amount of encroachment into the declining height; an area 6'6" in length about 24 SF total. There were no other questions of staff. Chair Boju6s opened the public comment. Essalat Hekmat, architect, 312 North San Mateo Drive, represented the project. He noted that the addition was to the back of the house,increasing the kitchen and family room,increasing the second floor 80 SF to increase the master bath and adding a porch at the front,an architectural element to add interest, there is no functional reason for the porch. The bay window in the kitchen at the sink encroaches into the side setback. The garage is being replaced as a part of the project because it is in such bad condition. Commissioners asked : How do the garage doors open; what is the hardship on the property for the front setback? Applicant noted the garage doors roll up. Other houses have a similar entry porch, copied existing, the features (window and porch) are internally consistent with the architectural style. The articulation at the front could be achieved in other ways, with a trellis or a bay window which would not require a setback variance. There were no other comments from the floor and the public comment was closed. Comment on the motion: concerned about the porch,nice job;same concern,the porch really articulates the house, a"classy" solution,but do not see the hardship on the property to justify, the house next door has much greater setbacks;hope you can find a way to articulate the front and side and not ask for a variance;the addition blends into the existing architecture. Unfortunate needs a variance, not see significant hardship with the property, confident the architect can find a solution without a front or side setback variance; feel the declining height is not a problem.. C. Vistica made a motion to place this item on the regular action calendar at a time when the following revisions have been made and plan checked: • the front of the house has been redesigned to provide articulation without requiring a front setback variance; and • the side of the house has been redesigned to retain suitable articulation while eliminating the side setback variance. This motion was seconded by C. Keighran. 11 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes February 9, 2004 Chair Boju6s called for a vote on the motion to place this item on the on the regular action calendar when plans had been revised as directed, checked by staff and there is space on the agenda. The motion passed on a voice vote 6-0-1 (C. Brownrigg absent). The Planning Commission's action is advisory and not appealable. This item concluded at 10:05 p.m. 8. 1216 CABRILLO AVENUE, ZONED R-1 —APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW FOR A FIRST AND SECOND STORY ADDITION (JD & ASSOCIATES, JERRY DEAL, APPLICANT AND DESIGNER; JONATHAN AND JENNIFER VARNI, PROPERTY OWNERS) (64 NOTICED)PROJECT PLANNER: CATHERINE BARBER Plr Hurin briefly presented the project description. Chair Boju6s noted that all the commissioners have visited the site. There were no questions of staff. Chair Boju6s opened the public comment.Jon and Jennifer Varni,property owners,represented the project. See this project as an opportunity to invest in Burlingame, have 3 children need to expand; want to stay. There were no other comments from the floor. The public comment was closed. C.Keighran noted that this was a good job of integrating the addition into the existing building and made a motion to bring this project back on the consent calendar. The motion was seconded by C. Osterling. Chair Boju6s called for a voice vote on the motion to place this item on the consent calendar when there is space on the agenda. The motion passed on a voice vote 6-0-1 (C. Brownrigg absent). The Planning Commission's action is advisory and not appealable. This item concluded at 10:10 p.m. 9. 137 CRESCENT AVENUE, ZONED R-1 —APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW AND SPECIAL PERMITS FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A BASEMENT AND FOR DECLINING HEIGHT ENVELOPE FOR A NEW TWO STORY SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING (CLEMENT HUNG, APPLICANT AND PROPERTY OWNER; JD &ASSOCIATES,DESIGNER) (51 NOTICED) PROJECT PLANNER: RUBEN HURIN Plr Hurin briefly presented the project description. Chair Boju6s noted that all the commissioners have made a site visit. Commissioners clarified that this project is 137 Crescent not 1521 Drake. Staff noted the typo and,yes,this project is located at 137 Crescent Avenue. How big is the basement on this project. Plr Hurin noted that the basement is 664 SF,the maximum basement area exempt from inclusion in the floor area ratio is 700 SF. Chair Boju6s opened the public comment. Jerry Deal,designer, 1228 Paloma,represented the project. Tim O'Brien, 133 Crescent spoke. Applicant submitted one change to the plans,moving the chimney stack from the left side of the fire box to the right side. Commissioners asked about the declining height exception. Applicant noted the exception was at the very front right side,at the hip roof. Concerned with the south side of the project because live there, this will be the third new house adjacent to his house, this project will affect his daylight access, is a big, new two story house next to his one story bungalow, uses the entire 30 foot height;plans show garage one foot off the property line,if it goes closer he will not be able to get access to the side and rear of his garage,would like the 12 inches insured;the landscaping plan at the driveway does not address whether a fence will be installed on property line between the driveways of the two properties,if a fence is placed between the driveways it will squeeze his driveway,do not want a fence. If they build the garage where they show it they will have a water problem, because of the slope in the area when the neighbor built his house it drained into this yard,there is a 4 foot difference;concerned that there is asbestos 12 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes February 9, 2004 in the house,how will this be addressed when the house is demolished because his property is down wind. Who will address this? There were no more comments from the floor and the public comment was closed. ~` Commissioners comments: How would asbestos on this property be addressed?Sr.Eng.noted that when a building is demolished they are required to get a permit from the Bay Area Air Quality Management District, this would require a survey for asbestos and removal before demolition. C. Osterling noted that this project is consistent with the design guidelines and the design is appropriate to the site and should go forward with a fence down the driveway,he then made a motion to place this project on the consent calendar. The motion was seconded by C. Auran. Comment on the motion: this is a big house but it is well done, concerned about star jasmine on the drive way,a small plant,need something to soften the edge;star j asmine will trail on the fence;not much yard left with two covered parking spaces; should note that the application is conditioned to "build to plan"which means that the garage will be placed one foot from property line at the rear and side as shown on these plans if approved; concerned about the size, mass, bulk and height of this house, it is not consistent with the neighborhood,its all maxed out,cannot support. CA noted that he thought that the neighbor did not want a fence between his driveway and the one on this property, could something lower, shrubs or a hedge be placed along this property line? The numbers look close to the maximum, but the variety of the design balances this, it is well articulated, on the front and south elevations the roof comes down to break the second story and the mass and bulk of the structure, it is possible to reduce the fence to 3 or 4 feet and put jasmine on it or install a low hedge to define the edge between the two properties, it would break up the expanse of hard scape now present between the properties. Applicant clipped the gable ends to reduce the mass and worked in with the hip roofs;articulated the mass well,it is tight on the site,not much yard left but within bounds; nice design but would like to see smaller. Chair Boju6s called for a voice vote on the motion to place this item on the consent calendar with some attention to landscaping. The motion passed 5-1-0-1 (C. Keele dissenting, C. Brownrigg absent) The Planning Commission's action is advisory and not appealable. This item concluded at 10:28 p.m. 10. 9 MILLS CANYON COURT, ZONED R-1- APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW FOR A FIRST AND SECOND STORY ADDITION (MARK STOKLOSA ARCHITECTS, APPLICANT AND ARCHITECT; JOHN AND CAROLINE LEE, PROPERTY OWNERS) (25 NOTICED) PROJECT PLANNER: CATHERINE BARBER Plr Hurin briefly presented the project description. Chair Boju6s noted that all commissioners had visited the site. There were no questions of staff. Chair Boju6s opened the public comment. Mark Stoklosa,architect,represented the project. He noted that this house was built 10 years ago. There were no other comments from the floor and the public comment was closed. C. Vistica noted that this was a modest addition to this house and made a motion to place this item on the consent calendar for action when there is space available. The motion was seconded by C. Keele. Chair Boju6s called for a voice vote on the motion to place this project on the consent calendar for action when there is space. The motion passed on a 6-0-1 (C. Brownrigg absent) voice vote. The Planning Commission's action is advisory. This item concluded at 10:31 p.m. 13 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes February 9, 2004 11. 2838 ADELINE DRIVE, ZONED R-1 — APPLICATION FOR A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION,DESIGN REVIEW AND SPECIAL PERMIT FOR AN ATTACHED GARAGE FOR A -� NEW TWO STORY SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING (MICHAEL GAUL, APPLICANT, DESIGNER AND PROPERTY OWNER) 23 NOTICED) PROJECT PLANNER: CATHERINE BARBER CP Monroe briefly presented the project description. Chair Bojues noted that all commissioners had made a site visit. Commissioners noted to staff that the Negative Declaration did not include any analysis of the impact of removing stand of trees on this site on the long distance views,which the General Plan indicates is a concern. Also concerned with fire department access for equipment. Report notes applicant would be responsible for repair of damage to Sisters of Mercy trail caused by construction,can such a requirement be made of two private property owners. Do not see why the tree stumps need to be ground within 24 hours of trimming, does this relate in some way to maintaining slope stability during construction of the retaining walls. These items need to be address in the Negative Declaration before it can be adopted. There were no further questions to staff from Commission on the Negative Declaration or the project. Chair Bojues opened the public comment. Michael Gaul, 1237 Laguna Avenue, architect and contractor, represented the project. Trees on site have not been cared for,will remove for construction and replant 60 trees,do not want to increase paving unnecessarily;don't know where we will be able to find a distant view of the site, all the area is heavily vegetated with trees. Commissioner noted that the General Plan states these distant views of hillside area are to be protected, need to know that project or change is being evaluated with this project. Spoke with Fire Marshal and he identified a combination of fire protections, including a turn out on the street at the top of the site, a stair directly into the site from the street and installation of a commercial fire sprinkler system,which would be adequate. The requirement for trail repair was included if it was necessary to gain access from that side for construction,will put in drive way first and will not need to enter Sisters of Mercy property. Will hire a tree removal company,do not care if they must grind stumps within 24 hours. This is a beautiful spot,have designed the house into the site;need the special permit for attached garages because have a handicapped child and need place to drive in and get out of car, slope on lot dictates location on site,with a detached garage would have more driveway and paving on site. The size of the house is within city standards, the neighbors are located in the unincorporated county and they are allowed a lot more square footage and two units as well;would prefer not to install story poles as required with the environmental scoping,it will be difficult and will not see much but roof. Commissioner noted that the roof would be the most important item seen as on drives by this site, sure you want composition shingles? Applicant noted will plant along the street to screen view of the roof and will use a textured composition shingle. Would like to delete the sidewalk requirement along the street,since no one else in the area has a sidewalk. CA noted there are legal requirements for sidewalks, need to determine before respond. Applicant also noted that would prefer to use natural drainage into existing downhill drain and not pump to street as mentioned in Public Works memo. Sr. Eng. noted that could look into alternate drainage since drain at street level empties into drain which runs downhill on site. Public comments continued: Commissioner noted that there seem to be some inconsistencies between the landscape plan and the house plans,need to be corrected;also selection of trees does not seem to be sensitive to the water balance on the lot and to the existing oak tree, too much variety in plant choice will have an inconsistent look when done, new trees need to support the existing oak, with proper care oaks can grow closely;some of the trees suggested are not trees but shrubs;also need a more detailed erosion control plan, the use of"j"hooks seems to be in error. CP noted that city employee who reviews for NPDES compliance -� will review plans. Water balance on site should drive landscape plan and it needs to be substantially revise and the planter on the south side of the house needs to be removed to allow access to the garage. Why is chain link fence being used instead of wood along property line? Applicant noted wanted an open feel, 14 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes February 9,2004 neighbors use chain link, thought could plant on it. Chain link fence exists on three sides. There were no other comments and the public comment was closed. C.Keighran made a motion to refer this project to the action calendar when the amendments had been made to the Negative Declaration and the landscape plan and plant materials have been corrected; she noted that while she had concerns about the landscaping, this is a nice job of design, the house is large but the lot is large,glad he is not splitting the lot when he could;in addition to negative declaration items and landscaping should address fire access, consistency on plans of side walls of the building, and water/drainage on site when resubmit. The motion was seconded by C. Auran. Comment on the motion: look like a house designed by people who will live in it with shingle siding, sandstone and a stucco chimney. Chair Boju6s called for a voice vote on the motion to refer the item to the action calendar after the additional studies for the negative declaration and project and corrections to the plans have been completed and checked by staff. The motion passed on a 6-0-1 (C. Brownrigg absent) voice vote. The Planning Commission's action is advisory and not appealable. This item concluded at 11:10 p.m. 12. NORTH BURLINGAME/ROLLINS ROAD SPECIFIC PLAN—STUDY SESSION ON LAND USE SECTION(272 NOTICED)PROJECT PLANNERS: MARGARET MONROE/MAUREEN BROOKS CP Monroe briefly presented the Land Use Chapter of the Draft North Burlingame/Rollins Road Specific Plan. She noted that the land use plan has two distinct areas,the Rollins Road area and the El Camino Real North area,with four subareas within each area. She first reviewed the Rollins Road area land uses,noting that the area would continue as a strong industrial area, with the addition of auto sales and service along Adrian Road. The Commission then reviewed the Rollins Road area by subarea. A-1 —The Northern Gateway Area: The proposal for this area is to continue the industrial base,but to allow the option of live/work uses on a limited basis,where the land use fits in with the industrial character and there was one living unit per work space. She noted that C.Brownrigg had sent in comments,asking if the live/work concept could be expanded so that one larger shared work space could serve several living units. Commissioners noted that this might be hard to regulate, and since this area is isolated from the rest of Burlingame's commercial areas and services, this might not be the best option, noting the difficulty is evaluating what uses would be allowed as live work; it might include architects, photographers, interior designers,but these are traditionally professional office uses,and would not normally be compatible with the area's industrial environment;it makes more sense to place residential uses in the El Camino Real corridor, that area is still within one-third mile of the transit corridor, when medical offices are relocated to the hospital campus,there will be a real opportunity to put housing in that area which will better integrate with the rest of the community. Live/work might work if there were some control on the size of the work space and living unit and type of use, but it may be too hard to regulate. In conclusion, the Commission recommended the following for the Northern Gateway Area: • Leave out the option for live-work in this area,concentrate residential in the El Camino Real North Area, continue the current light industrial uses. 15 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes February 9, 2004 A-2 — The Central Rollins Road Subarea: This area is intended to remain the industrial core of the Rollins Road Area. Commissioners recommended the following: • The proposed system of trails along the creeks should be shown on a map, and • The proposed green spaces along the trails should also be shown on the same map. • Train development shall be a part of development proposals on creek side properties and shall be subject to environmental review before being designed. Rare and endangered species and their habitats shall be protected. A-3—The Southern Gateway Subarea: This is a transitional area,with the Broadway frontage on the west side of Rollins Road shown as commercial use to tie in with the Broadway Commercial area. The plan proposes a 0.5 floor area ratio (FAR) for this area, with a 0.05 FAR bonus for a project that includes a gateway feature. A property owner has submitted a letter requesting that the commercial transition area be extended to include the northeast corner of Broadway and Rollins Road, and asked that the Commission consider a higher floor area ratio(1.0 to 2.0)for this area rather than providing an incentive for the gateway feature. Commissioners asked: won't there be parking and access issues for the area on the northeast corner? CP Monroe noted that the access issues would be addressed at the time of development, there might be an opportunity to consolidate parcels or have a combined entry point to improve upon what is there now. Commissioners recommended the following: • Include the area at the northeast corner of Broadway and Rollins as a part of the commercial transition; • Keep the FAR at 0.50; and • Offer a greater than 0.05 FAR density bonus incentive for consolidating parcels and improving access. A-4—The Adrian Road Auto District: CP Monroe explained that the auto row feature would be added as an overlay to the light industrial uses now allowed in this area,and noted that the draft plan proposes a new access point between Rollins and Adrian Road within this area. However,the road connection shown now on the plan will not work because of the location of existing parking. The Commission may not want to designate a specific location for this connecting roadway,but language could be included in the plan that would encourage an additional consideration of access road with new development in this area. In his comments,C.Brownrigg expressed a concern with signage along the Auto Row corridor as it faces 101 and establishes a community identity; and would like to see more specific signage guidelines. Commissioners made the following recommendations: • Eliminate the road connection as it is shown on the land use map,but encourage a connection to be determined as development occurs; • Add separate sign requirements for auto row signage in the design guidelines,including a consistent theme, address issues of illumination and flashing lights. CP Monroe reviewed the El Camino Real North Area, noting that the area is proposed to continue as a mixed use area,with residential,retail,office and a medical node. The Commission then reviewed the four subareas within the El Camino Real North Area. 16 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes February 9, 2004 B-1—The Burlingame Plaza Subarea: This area would maintain its function as a primary shopping center to serve the surrounding area. The Draft Plan proposes to provide for mixed use or residential use along the El Camino Real frontage, incorporating the existing frontage road into the shopping center property. Commissioners made the following recommendations: • Should not include the concept of residential use along the El Camino Real frontage,there is varied ownership in the shopping center and the new development would block the shopping center's visibility; • Don't think it's appropriate to put residential on the west side of El Camino, the east side would provide for a continuation of the residential feel along El Camino Real as it exists to the south,the west side to the south of this area will be dominated by the new hospital, should continue with non- residential uses on the west side. • Can include a green space/pedestrian walkway using the frontage road property along the west side of El Camino Real, it could stay in City ownership rather than revert to adjoining owners, and provide a focused access to the shopping center and tree lined entry—pedestrian access along El Camino Real on the west side. B-2—The El Camino Real Gateway Corridor: This area now allows a mix of uses,it is zoned C-1 with a multiple family residential overlay. The Draft Plan proposes to continue this mix of uses. This area is close to BART and Caltrain,making it ideal for higher density residential. The plan proposes to incorporate the frontage road along El Camino Real,which will provide an incentive for reuse and bring future residential development closer to El Camino Real as is the case to the south. Commissioners made the following recommendations: �. • Concerned about the potential mix of uses with commercial right next to or a part of residential, would rather see this area on the east side of El Camino Real all residential to be consistent with the rest of El Camino Real in Burlingame; • This area would be appropriate for higher densities given its location proximate to retail and the transit corridor, up to 40 to 50 units per acre could be allowed if the parking, height, setback and design guideline standards are met on site along with aviation restrictions. B-3 —The Mills Peninsula Hospital Block: This area is dominated by the hospital site, the Draft Plan proposes to keep the medical office and convalescent hospital uses along Trousdale,and proposes residential uses along Marco Polo Way. The Hospital District submitted a letter requesting that the Marco Polo block continue to be designated for office commercial uses,with residential added as another choice;they would not like to be limited to residential only. Commissioners made the following recommendations: • Would like to see the east side of Marco Polo as residential to be consistent with the residential uses now existing on the west side, the existing commercial sites on that block could convert to residential use; • Do not envision residential uses on the south side of Trousdale frontage,this area should keep its office commercial designation. The North of Trousdale Drive Subarea: This area now consists primarily of office uses,the plan proposes mixed use to include residential and offices in this subarea. The representative of a property owner on Ogden Drive had submitted a letter requesting that the residential density for this subarea be increased from ~" 30 units per acre to 40 units per acre, and wanted to be allowed to build a four-story residential project. 17 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes February 9, 2004 Commissioners made the following recommendations: • The office buildings in this area now have residential setbacks, having residential projects interspersed in this area would work; • This area would also be appropriate for higher density given that the area is close to retail and to BART and Caltrain,would like to allow up to 50 units per acre, assuming that the project can meet all the other standards for parking,height setbacks, design and aviation restrictions. Chair Boju6s opened the public comment. Bruce Balshone,representing a client on Ogden Drive,indicated he was glad to see the commission's recommendation for higher density in this area, once the zoning is in place,his client will be submitting a project that will include affordable units,want it to be four-story as is proposed,and the project would fit in with the guidelines as now proposed. Peter O'Hara,representing the property at 1616 Rollins Road,had a question about the trail system in the Rollins Road area,how will the issue of protected species which have been found in the area be addressed; need to make sure that the pathway does not interfere with the habitat for the red-legged frogs which have been found in this area. CP Monroe noted that this issue would be addressed at the design stage,the paths would be above top ofbank of the creeks, so it should not be an issue, review would be done at the project level. He also asked if the location of the road connection between Rollins Road and Adrian had been determined, and noted that the drainage easement and the protected species found there might be an issue for the road connection as well. CP Monroe noted that the location of the road had not been specified and acknowledged that the protected species issue would have to be addressed. Eileen Chow, representing the property at 1206-1220 Rollins Road at Broadway, asked what the final decision on floor area was for this area. CP Monroe noted that this is not the time for a final decision,but -� the Planning Commission at this point did not recommend a change to the 0.5 FAR proposed for the commercial transition area,however they did discuss an FAR incentive is proposed for consolidation of lots. There were no other comments from the floor and the public comment was closed. Chair Boju6s noted that the Commission's suggestions will be incorporated into the draft plan. This item concluded at 12:30 p.m. X. PLANNER REPORTS - Review of City Council regular meeting of February 2 and 3, 2004. CP Monroe reviewed the actions of the Council regarding the Safewayproject at 1450 Howard Avenue. Commission endorsed the site survey requirement for single family houses established earlier by the Commission. Commission also agreed that there should be a re-examination of the average front setback requirement as it applies to houses which are already included in the average and may be set forward of the existing average. CP noted that some work needs to be done on the R-1 zone and consideration of this would fit right in. A good project for next year when the advanced planning projects are done. XI. ADJOURNMENT Chair Boju6s adjourned the meeting at 12:35 a.m. Respectfully submitted, - Tim Auran, Secretary S:\N41NUTES\02.09.04unapproved.doc 18 CITY OF BURLINGAME BUILDING INSPECTION MONTHLY PERMIT ACTIVITY JANUARY, 2004 F.Y. 2003 F.Y. 2002 SAME MONTH THIS YEAR LAST YEAR THIS MONTH LAST YEAR DIFF TO DATE TO DATE DIFF Permit type # Valuation # Valuation % # Valuation # Valuation % New Single Family 0 $0 4 $1,446,834 100.0- 8 $3,279,560 13 $5,024,535 34.7- New Multi-Family 0 $0 0 $0 .0 0 $0 1 $850,000 100.0- New Commercial 0 $0 0 $0 .0 2 $2,500,000 0 $0 .0 Alterations-Res 31 $1,364,910 25 $784,200 74.1 195 $9,691,877 171 $7,160,664 35.3 Alterations-NonRes 6 $260,200 10 $259,100 .4 48 $6,211,250 47 $5,172,806 20.1 Demolition 4 $3,800 5 $75,000 94.9- 38 $120,800 50 $76,725 57.4 Swimming Pool 0 $0 0 $0 .0 2 $50,000 1 $31,800 57.2 Sign Permits 1 $7,500 4 $24,400 69.3- 18 $81,950 20 $148,151 44.7- Fences 0 si. 1 $9,200 100.0- 2 $9,500 3 $10,700 11.2- Reroofing 14 $136,490 18 $215,920 36.8- 204 $2,224,208 178 $2,107,993 5.5 Repairs 2 $86,200 5 $32,310 166.8 24 $287,750 20 $281,360 2.3 Window Repl 9 $64,413 8 $90,775 29.0- 59 $593,011 44 $374,269 58.4 Miscellaneous 2 $38,000 4 $20,030 89.7 18 $233,401 48 $452,997 48.5- TOTALS...... 69 $1,961,513 84 $2,957,769 33.7- 616 $25,283,307 596 $21,692,000 16.6 2/03/04 15:49:59 CITY OF BURLINGAME Portfolio Management Portfolio Summary January 31 , 2004 Par Market Book % of Days to YTM YTM Investments Value Value Value Portfolio Term Maturity 360 Equiv. 365 Equiv. LAIF & County Pool 22,400,432.25 22,400,432.25 22,400,432.25 81.75 1 1 2.659 2.696 Federal Agency Issues - Coupon 5,000,000.00 5,013,760.00 5,000,000.00 18.25 950 918 2.683 2.720 Investments 27,400,432.25 27,414,192.25 27,400,432.25 100.00% 174 168 2.663 2.700 Total Earnings January 31 Month Ending Fiscal Year To Date Current Year 62,934.10 426,434.90 Average Daily Balance 27,634,361.64 26,753,695.20 Effective Rate of Return 2.68% 2.71% Pursuant to State law, there are sufficient available funds to meet Burlingame's expenditure requirements for the coming 6 months. Total funds invested represent consolidation of all fund types, and availability f some of these funds is restricted by law (e.g. Gas Tax, Trust & Agency funds, Capital Projects, and Enterprise funds). JES NAVA, FI ANCE DIR./TREASURER Portfolio CITY CID Run Dale:02/10/2004 • 11;58 PM (PRF PM1)SyrnRept V6.21 Report Ver. 5.00 CITY OF BURLINGAME Portfolio Management Page 2 Portfolio Details - Investments January 31, 2004 Average Purchase Stated YTM Days to Maturity CUSIP Investment# Issuer Balance Date Par Value Market Value Book Value Rate Moody's 365 Maturity Date LAIF&County Pool SYS77 77 LOCAL AGENCY INV.FD. 3,046,703.24 3,046,703.24 3,046,703.24 1.528 1.528 1 SYS79 79 S M COUNTY POOL 19,353,729.01 19,353,729.01 19,353,729.01 2.880 2.880 1 Subtotal and Average 25,440,813.25 22,400,432.25 22,400,432.25 22,400,432.25 2.696 1 Federal Agency Issues-Coupon 3128X1605 513 FEDERAL HOME LOAN MORTG.CORP. 11/17/2003 2,000,000.00 2,013,760.00 2,000,000.00 2.300 2.300 655 11/17/2005 3128X2NA9 514 FEDERAL HOME LOAN MORTG.CORP. 01/30/2004 3,000,000.00 3,000,000.00 3,000,000.00 3.000 3.000 1,094 01/30/2007 Subtotal and Average 2,193,548.39 5,000,000.00 5,013,760.00 5,000,000.00 2.720 918 Total and Average 27,634,361.64 27,400,432.25 27,414,192.25 27,400,432.25 2.700 168 Portfolio CITY CP Run Date:02/10/2004-11:58 PM(PRF_PM2)SymRept V6.21 IN Ver.5.00 CITY OF BURLINGAME Portfolio Management Page 3 YY Type Activit B T e January 1, 2004 through January 31, 2004 Beginning Stated Transaction Purchases Redemptions Ending CUSIP Investment# Issuer Balance Rate Date or Deposits or Withdrawals Balance LAIF&County Pool (Monthly Summary) SYS77 77 LOCAL AGENCY INV.FD. 1.528 15,567.92 1,300,000.00 SYS79 79 S M COUNTY POOL 2.880 504,648.69 3,500,000.00 Subtotal 26,680,215.64 520,216.61 4,800,000.00 22,400,432.25 Federal Agency Issues-Coupon 3128X2NA9 514 FEDERAL HOME LOAN MORTG.CORP. 3.000 01/30/2004 3,000,000.00 0.00 Subtotal 2,000,000.00 3,000,000.00 0.00 5,000,000.00 Total 28,680,215.64 3,520,216.61 4,800,000.00 27,400,432.25 Portfolio CITY CP Run Dale:02/10/2004.11:58 PM(PRF PM3)SyrnRept V6.21 Report Ver,5.00 CITY OF BURLINGAME Portfolio Management Page 4 Activity Summary January 2003 through January 2004 Yield to Maturity Managed Number Number Month Number of Total 360 365 Pool of Investments of Investments Average Average End Year Securities Invested Equivalent Equivalent Rate Purchased Redeemed Term Days to Maturity January 2003 8 28,462,240.55 3.173 3.217 2.967 0 0 309 194 February 2003 6 24,523,884.18 3.286 3.331 3.184 0 2 202 106 March 2003 5 26,845,084.01 3.006 3.048 2.998 0 1 117 93 April 2003 5 28,790,353.07 2.861 2.900 2.837 0 0 109 83 May 2003 5 29,305,724.20 2.827 2.866 2.801 0 0 107 79 June 2003 4 27,121,153.01 2.783 2.821 2.799 0 1 82 62 July 2003 4 27,157,885.07 2.671 2.709 2.677 0 0 82 60 August 2003 4 27,176,303.04 2.697 2.734 2.705 0 0 82 58 September 2003 3 25,384,046.40 2.799 2.838 2.831 0 1 44 31 October 2003 3 26,475,202.01 2.711 2.749 2.739 0 0 42 29 November 2003 3 26,087,655.91 2.614 2.651 2.680 1 1 57 56 December 2003 3 28,680,215.64 2.617 2.654 2.680 0 0 52 49 . January 2004 4 27,400,432.25 2.663 2.700 2.696 1 0 174 168 Average 4 27,185,398.41 2.824% 2.863% 2.815 0 0 112 82 Portfolio CITY CP Run Date:02/10/2004-11:58 PM(PRF oM4)SymRept V6.21 Report Ver.5,00 CITY OF BURLINGAME Portfolio Management Page 5 Distribution of Investments By Type January 2003 through January 2004 January February March April May June July August September October November December January Average Security Type 2003 2003 2003 2003 2003 2003 2003 2003 2003 2003 2003 2003 2004 by Period LAIF&County Pool 71.9 83.7 88.8 89.6 89.8 92.6 92.6 92.6 96.1 96.2 92.3 93.0 81.8 89.3% Certificates of Deposit-Bank Certificates of Deposit-S&L Certificates of Deposit-Thrift&Ln Negotiable CD's-Bank CORP NOTES Bankers Acceptances Commercial Paper-Interest Bearing Commercial Paper-Discount Federal Agency Issues-Coupon 28.1 16.3 11.2 10.4 10.2 7.4 7.4 7.4 3.9 3.8 7.7 7.0 18.3 10.7% Federal Agency Issues-Discount Treasury Securities-Coupon Treasury Securities-Discount Miscellaneous Securities-Coupon Miscellaneous Securities-Discount Non Interest Bearing Investments Mortgage Backed Securities Miscellaneous Discounts-At Cost 2 Miscellaneous Discounts-At Cost 3 Portfolio CITY CP Run Date:02/10/2004-11:58 PM(PRF PM5)SymRept V6.21 Report Ver.5.00 CITY OF BURLINGAME Portfolio Management Page 6 Interest Earnings Summary January 31, 2004 January 31 Month Ending Fiscal Year To Date CD/Coupon/Discount Investments: Interest Collected 0.00 31,000.00 Plus Accrued Interest at End of Period 9,705.56 9,705.56 Less Accrued Interest at Beginning of Period ( 5,622.22) ( 13,816.67) Less Accrued Interest at Purchase During Period ( 0.00) ( 0.00) Interest Earned during Period 4,083.34 26,888.89 Adjusted by Capital Gains or Losses 0.00 0.00 Earnings during Periods 4,083.34 26,888.89 Pass Through Securities: Interest Collected 0.00 0.00 Plus Accrued Interest at End of Period 0.00 0.00 Less Accrued Interest at Beginning of Period ( 0.00) ( 0.00) Less Accrued Interest at Purchase During Period ( 0.00) ( 0.00) Interest Earned during Period 0.00 0.00 Adjusted by Premiums and Discounts 0.00 0.00 Adjusted by Capital Gains or Losses 0.00 0.00 Earnings during Periods 0.00 0.00 Cash/Checking Accounts: Interest Collected 169,111.29 518,429,73 Plus Accrued Interest at End of Period 288,781.15 288,781.15 Less Accrued Interest at Beginning of Period ( 399,041.68) ( 407,664.87) Interest Earned during Period 58,850.76 399,546.01 Total Interest Earned during Period 62,934.10 426,434.90 Total Capital Gains or Losses 0.00 0.00 Total Earnings during Period 62,934.10 426,434.90 Portfolio CITY CP Run Date:02/10/200/4•11:58 / PM(PRF_PM6)SynnRept V6.21 1 ! Report Ver.5.00 98BD Portfolio Management Portfolio Summary January 31, 2004 Par Market Book %of Days to YTM YTM Investments Value Value Value Portfolio Term Maturity 360 Equiv. 365 Equiv, Federal Agency Coupon Securities 1,710,000.00 1,729,767.60 1,710,000.00 100.00 1,461 1,331 3.383 3.430 Investments 1,710,000.00 1,729,767.60 1,710,000.00 100.00% 1,461 1,331 3.383 3.430 Total Earnings January 31 Month Ending Fiscal Year To Date Current Year 4,887.74 27,202.98 Average Daily Balance 1,710,000.00 1,704,644.78 Effective Rate of Return 3.37% 2.71% Pursuant to State law,there are sufficient available funds to meet Burlingame's expenditure requirements for the coming 6 months.Total funds invested represent consolidation of all fund types,and availabifltkof some of these funds is restricted by law(e.g.Gas Tax,Trust&Agency funds,Capital Projects,and Enterprise funds). &I J s Nava, finance Director/Treasurer Portfolio 98BD CP Run Date:02/10/2004-12:00 PM(PRF_PMl)SymRepl V6.21 Report Ver.5.00 98BD Portfolio Management Page 2 Portfolio Details m Investments January 31, 2004 Average Purchase Stated YTM Days to Maturity CUSIP Investment# Issuer Balance Date Par Value Market Value Book Value Rate Moody's 365 Maturity Date Managed Pool Accounts SYS84 84 LOCAL AGENCY INVEST FUND 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.590 1.590 1 Subtotal and Average 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.000 0 Federal Agency Coupon Securities 3136F4HM9 512 Fannie mae 09/24/2003 1,710,000.00 1,729,767.60 1,710,000.00 3.430 3.430 1,331 09/24/2007 Subtotal and Average 1,710,000.00 1,710,000.00 1,729,767.60 1,710,000.00 3.430 1,331 Total and Average 1,710,000.00 1,710,000.00 1,729,767.60 1,710,000.00 3.430 1,331 Portfolio 98BD Run Date:02/10/2004-12:00 CP PM(PRF_PM2)SymRept V6.21 port Ver.5.00 01 BD Portfolio Management Portfolio Summary January 31, 2004 Par Market Book %of Days to YTM YTM Investments Value Value Value Portfolio Term Maturity 360 Equiv. 365 Equiv. Managed Pool Accounts 1,115,359.22 1,115,359.22 1,115,359.22 100.00 1 1 1.507 1.528 Investments 1,115,359.22 1,115,359.22 1,115,359.22 100.00% 1 1 1.507 1.528 Total Earnings January 31 Month Ending Fiscal Year To Date Current Year 1,460.46 10,358.42 Average Daily Balance 1,113,388.88 1,108,789.41 Effective Rate of Return 1.54% 1.59% Pursuant to State law,there are sufficient available funds to meet Burlingame's expenditure requirements for the coming 6 months.Total funds invested represent consolidation of some of these funds is restricte law(e.g. G�s Tax,T t&Agency funds,Capital Projects,and Enterprise funds). /O ZaD Jes s Nava, Fi nce Dir./Treasurer Portfolio 01 BD CP Run Date:02/10/2004•12:00 PM(PRF_PM1)SynnRept V6.21 Report Ver.5.00 01 BD Portfolio Management Page 2 Portfolio Details - Investments January 31, 2004 Average Purchase Stated YTM YTM Days to Maturity CUSIP Investment# Issuer Balance Date Par Value Market Value Book Value Rate 360 365 Maturity Date Managed Pool Accounts SYS83 83 local Agency Inv.Fd 1,115,359.22 1,115,359.22 1,115,359.22 1.528 1.507 1.528 1 Subtotal and Average 1,113,388.88 1,115,359.22 1,115,359.22 1,115,359.22 1.507 1.528 1 Total and Average 1,113,388.88 1,115,359.22 1,115,359.22 1,115,359.22 1.507 1.528 1 Portfolio 01 BD Run Date:02/10/2004-12:00 CP PM(PRF_PM2)SyrnRept V6.21 port Ver.5.00 03BD Portfolio Management Portfolio Summary January 31, 2004 Par Market Book %of Days to YTM YTM Investments Value Value Value Portfolio Term Maturity 360 Equiv. 365 Equiv. Managed Pool Accounts 2,070,193.59 2,070,193.59 2,070,193.59 100.00 1 1 1.507 1.528 Investments 2,070,193.59 2,070,193.59 2,070,193.59 100.00% 1 1 1.507 1.528 Total Earnings January 31 Month Ending Fiscal Year To Date Current Year 2,761.00 44,707,31 Average Daily Balance 2,104,850.95 4,721,673.35 Effective Rate of Return 1.54% 1.61% Pursuant to State law,there are sufficient available funds to meet Burlingame's expenditure requirements for the coming 6 months.Total funds invested represent consolidation of some of these funds is restricted law(e.g. Gas Tax,Tru t&Agency funds,Capital Projects,and Enterprise funds). Jes Nava, Ft ance Director/Treasurer Portfolio 03BD CP Run Date:02/10/2004.12:01 PM(PRF_PM1)SyrnRept V6.21 Report Ver.5.00 03BD Portfolio Management Page 2 Portfolio Details - Investments January 31, 2004 Average Purchase Stated YTM YTM Days to Maturity CUSIP Investment# Issuer Balance Date Par Value Market Value Book Value Rate 360 365 Maturity Date Managed Pool Accounts SYS82 82 Local Agency Investment Fund 2,070,193.59 2,070,193.59 2,070,193.59 1.528 1.507 1.528 1 Subtotal and Average 2,104,850.95 2,070,193.59 2,070,193.59 2,070,193.59 1.507 1.528 1 Total and Average 2,104,850.95 2,070,193.59 2,070,193,59 2,070,193.59 1.507 1.528 1 Portfolio 036D Run Date:02/10/2004-12:01 CP ( PM(PRF PM2)SyrnRept V6.21 ( Irt Ver.5.00