Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet - CC - 2004.08.16 �� BURLINGAME CITY COUNCIL AGENDA City of Burlingame BURLINGAME Regular Meeting - Monday, August 16, 2004 CITY HALL - 501 PRIMROSE ROAD Page 1 of 3 BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA 94010 (650) 558-7200 CLOSED SESSION: a. Threatened Litigation (Government Code § 54956.9(b)(1), 6:30 p.m. Conference Room A (3)(0)) Late claim of Lorraine Hahn b. Conference with Real Property Negotiators pursuant to Government Code § 54956.8: Property: San Francisco Public Utilities Commission Railway Property - 12+ acres along California Drive and Caltrain; Agency Negotiators: Jim Nantell, Larry Anderson& George Bagdon; Negotiating parties: City& County of San Francisco; Under negotiation: Purchase of property or easements C. Pending Litigation (Government Code § 54956.9(a)): Teamsters Local 856 vs. City of Burlingame, San Mateo Superior Court Case No. 429950 1. CALL TO ORDER 7:00 p.m. Council Chambers 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG 3. ROLL CALL 4. MINUTES - Regular meeting of July 19, 2004 Approve 5. PRESENTATIONS a. City of Burlingame Adopt-a-Unit award presentation Presentation 6. PUBLIC HEARINGS The mayor may limit speakers to three minutes each. a. Adopt Ordinance to amend Chapter 6.36 regarding Hearing/Action regulation of taxicab fares and adopt Resolution setting maximum fares to be charged b. Adoption of use rules and regulations for Parks and Hearing/Action Recreational areas C. Resolution fixing an assessment for rubbish abatement at Hearing/Action 1200-1240 Bayshore Highway d. Review of the Planning Commission's approval of an Hearing/Action amendment to a previously approved hillside area construction permit for roof changes to the single family dwelling and detached garage at 2700 Martinez Drive, Zoned R-1 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. BURLINGAME CITY COUNCIL AGENDA BURLINGAME City of Burlingame Regular Meeting - Monday, August 16, 2004 CITY HALL- 501 PRIMROSE ROAD Page 2 of 3 BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA 94010 (650) 558-7200 8. STAFF REPORTS AND COMMUNICATIONS a. Introduction of amendment to the sign code for the C-4 Introduce Zoning District (Waterfront commercial) b. Accept City Clerk resignation and appoint replacement Discuss/Action C. Commission Vacancies Discuss/Action 9. CONSENT CALENDAR Approve a. Fresh Market permanent relocation to northern portion of Park Road b. Resolution approving professional services agreement with Erler& Kalinowski, Inc. for FY 2004-05 program management of water system capital improvements program C. Resolution to revert Lots P, Q, and Y from 2-hour parking to a combination of 2-hour and 10-hour parking d. Resolution awarding Sanchez Creek box culvert cleaning from Carolan Avenue to Sanchez Lagoon to JMB Construction, Inc. e. Resolution awarding California Drive storm drain improvements to JMB Construction, Inc. f. Resolution awarding at Almer-Bellevue storm drain improvements to Harty Pipelines, Inc. g. Resolution authorizing the City buildings janitorial contract to Universal Building Services h. Report on Central County Fire Department Board election and appointments I. City Council letter supporting the San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury recommendations regarding Workplace Relationship Policies j. Warrants & Payroll 10. COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS 11. OLD BUSINESS 12. NEW BUSINESS 13. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS a. Commission Minutes: Planning, July 26, 2004 CI BURLINGAME CITY COUNCIL AGENDA City of Burlingame Regular Meeting - Monday, August 16, 2004 CITY HALL - 501 PRIMROSE ROAD Page 3 of 3 BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA 94010 (650) 558-7200 b. Department Reports: Police, June, 2004; Building, July, 2004; Finance, June & July, 2004 C. Letters from Sustainable San Mateo County; Parca; Mission Hospice; Community Gatepath; Shelter Network; and Friends for Youth acknowledging the City's contribution to their organizations d. Two letters from Comcast concerning programming adjustments e. Two letters from residents concerning the sidewalk repairs f. Mayor's press release on ordinance change 14. ADJOURNMENT NOTICE:Any attendees wishing accommodations for disabilities,please contact the City Clerk at (650)558-7203 at least 24 hours before the meeting. A copy of the Agenda Packet is available for public review at the City Clerk's office,City Hall, 501 Primrose Road,from 8:00 a.m.to 5:00 p.m. before the meeting and at the meeting. Visit the City's website at www.burlingame.org. Agendas and minutes are available at this site. NEXT MEETING—Tuesday, September 7, 2004 CITY �w AGENDA 4 /: j*4 ITEM# BURLJNGAME STAFF REPORT MTG. DATE 8/16/2004 $9nT[o+uue 6.'00 TO: Honorable Mayor and Council SUBMITTED.- BY UBMITTED BY DATE: August 12, 2004 APPROVED BY— FROM: Y FROM: Larry E. Anderson, City Attorney r� SUBJECT: DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE ACQUISITION OF SAN FRANCISCO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION RIGHT OF WAY RECOMMENDATION: Discuss the Council's possible interest in further exploring acquisition of San Francisco Public Utilities Commission right of way in closed session. DISCUSSION: In January 2002, the City Council discussed the possible acquisition of some or all of the San Francisco PUC right of way along the Caltrain right-of-way. This closed session is to update the Council on the SFPUC position and discuss possible options. �41 CITY G A BURUNGAME yx.. . BURLINGAME CITY COUNCIL Unapproved Minutes Regular Meeting of July 19, 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 Joe LaMariana. 3. ROLL CALL COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT: Baylock, Coffey, Galligan,Nagel, O'Mahony COUNCILMEMBERS ABSENT: None 4. MINUTES Vice Mayor Galligan made a motion to approve the minutes of the July 19, 2004 Council meeting; seconded by Councilwoman Baylock, approved unanimously by voice vote, 5-0. CLOSED SESSION Council met in closed session and directed staff regarding the following: a. Conference with Labor Negotiators pursuant to Government Code § 54957.6: City Negotiators: Jim Nantell, Bob Bell; Labor Negotiators: Police/Fire Administrators; AFSCME, Locals 2190 and 829 b. Pending litigation (Government Code § 54956.9(a)): Dennis J. Amoroso Construction Company C. Pending litigation (Government Code § 54956.9(a)): Jefferson-Martin Transmission Project (CPUC Application) 5. PRESENTATION a. BURLINGAME GIRLS SOFTBALL UPDATE PRD Schwartz introduced the Burlingame Girls Softball league as well as Coach Joe LaMariana and Coach John Hunter, who gave an update on the league to Council. 1 Burlingame City Council July 19,2004 Unapproved Minutes b. JOINT POWERS BOARD/CALTRAIN BROADWAY AND BURLINGAME AVENUE TRAIN STATION IMPROVEMENTS A presentation was given by the Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board; staff recommended Council provide feedback on the planned Broadway and Burlingame Avenue Train Station improvements. 5. PUBLIC HEARINGS a. CONSIDER APPROVAL OF AMUSEMENT PERMIT FOR 221 PARK ROAD COCKTAIL LOUNGE CA Anderson recommended Council consider an amusement permit for 221 Park Road for disc jockey and karaoke from 3:00 p.m. to 1:30 a.m., seven nights a week and video machine for a six-month period. Mayor O'Mahony opened the public hearing. There were no comments from the floor and the hearing was closed. Vice Mayor Galligan made a motion to approve the amusement permit for 221 Park Road; seconded by Councilman Coffey, approved unanimously by voice vote, 5-0. b. ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE TO AMEND DEVELOPMENT FEES FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS IN THE BAYFRONT SPECIFIC AREA PLAN CP Monroe requested Council hold a public hearing and take action on the ordinance to amend the Bayfront Development Fee. Mayor O'Mahony opened the public hearing. There were no comments from the floor and the hearing was closed. Councilman Coffey made a motion to approve the amusement permit for 221 Park Road; seconded by Councilwoman Baylock, approved unanimously by voice vote, 5-0. C. ANNUAL COST OF LIVING ADJUSTMENTS TO THE CITY OF BURLINGAME MASTER FEE SCHEDULE FD Nava recommended Council hold a public hearing and adopt Resolution#61-2004 to adjust the City of Burlingame Master Fee Schedule. Mayor O'Mahony opened the public hearing. There were no comments from the floor and the hearing was closed. Councilwoman Baylock made a motion to approve the adjustments to the master fee schedule; seconded by Councilman Coffey, approved unanimously by voice vote, 5-0. d. RE-ADOPT ORDINANCE #1738 APPROVING AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT BETWEEN CITY AND CALPERS TO PROVIDE FIRE SERVICE EMPLOYEES WITH CREDIT FOR UNUSED SICK LEAVE AND CANCELLATION OF PAYMENT FOR OPTIONAL SERVICE CREDIT 2 Burlingame City Council July 19, 2004 Unapproved Minutes CA Anderson recommended Council readopt Ordinance#1738 approving amendment to contract between City and CALPERS to provide fire service employees with credit for unused sick leave and cancellation of payment for optional service credit. Noted that this was not published in the San Mateo Time as requested and scheduled by the City Clerk. Mayor O'Mahony opened the public hearing. There were no comments from the floor and the hearing was closed. Vice Mayor Galligan made a motion to approve the ordinance approving amendment to contract between City and CALPERS to provide fire service employees with credit for unused sick leave and cancellation of payment for optional service credit; seconded by Councilwoman Baylock, approved unanimously by voice vote, 5-0. 6. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no comments from the floor. 7. STAFF REPORTS a. INTRODUCE ALTERNATIVE ORDINANCES TO AMEND CHAPTER 6.36 REGARDING REGULATION OF TAXICAB FARES CA Anderson requested Council introduce each alternative proposed ordinance regarding regulation of taxicab fares. Mayor O'Mahony requested CC Musso read the title of the first proposed ordinance. Councilman Coffey made a motion to waive further reading of the proposed ordinance; seconded by Vice Mayor Galligan, approved unanimously by voice vote, 5-0. Councilwoman Baylock made a motion to introduce the first proposed ordinance; seconded by Vice Mayor Galligan, approved unanimously by voice vote, 5-0. Mayor O'Mahony requested CC Musso read the title of the second proposed ordinance. Councilman Coffey made a motion to waive further reading of the proposed ordinance; seconded by Councilwoman Baylock, approved unanimously by voice vote, 5-0. Councilman Coffey made a motion to introduce the second proposed ordinance; seconded by Councilwoman Baylock, approved unanimously by voice vote, 5-0. b. INTRODUCTION OF ORDINANCE TO AMEND CHAPTER 10.55 TO UPDATE PROVISIONS REGARDING USE OF PARKS AND RECREATIONAL AREAS DPR Schwartz recommended that the City Council introduce an ordinance to amend Chapter 10.55 to update provisions regarding the use of Parks and Recreational areas as proposed by the Parks & Recreation Commission. Included is a new regulation that would prohibit dogs from City playground areas. Vice Mayor Galligan made a motion to adopt the Parks rules and regulations to include prohibiting dogs from City playground areas; seconded by Councilwoman Baylock, approved unanimously by voice vote, 5- 0. 3 Burlingame City Council July 19,2004 Unapproved Minutes Mayor O'Mahony requested CC Musso read the title of the second proposed ordinance. Vice Mayor Galligan made a motion to waive further reading of the proposed ordinance; seconded by Councilwoman Baylock, approved unanimously by voice vote, 5-0. Vice Mayor Galligan made a motion to introduce second proposed ordinance; seconded by Councilwoman Baylock, approved unanimously by voice vote, 5-0. C. PRESENTATION OF SAFEWAY STORE PUBLIC OPINION RESEARCH AND DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE CHANGES IN PREVIOUSLY DENIED PROPOSAL FOR SAFEWAY WALGREENS AT EL CAMINO REAL AND HOWARD AVENUE CM Nantell requested Council review and discuss presentation relative to telephone survey and signature gathering efforts regarding the Safeway project that was acted on by the Council in February, 2003. Mark Hudak, Attorney representing Safeway, and David Binder, CEO of DBR, an independent research company, made a presentation to Council regarding their survey. MaryAnne Saucedo also made a presentation on the status of her signature gathering efforts. The following residents spoke against the previously denied proposal: RenaSi I-i awn 1518 Burlingame Avenue, Don Corey, 833 Alpine, Dick Fuller, 2210 Poppy, Charlene Schmitz 1237, Bellevue, Mike Spinelli, 1301 Mills Avenue, Sheila Myers, 1400 Floribunda Avenue, Tom Paine, 728 Concord Way, Rudy Horak, Kerbey Altman, 1537 Cypress, Janet Martin, 741 Cumberland, Carl Martin, 741 Cumberland, John Root, 1407 Montero Way, Charles Voltz, 735 Vernon Way, Jennifer Pfaff, 615 Bayswater, Russ Cohen, 605 Lexington. The following residents spoke in favor the previously denied proposal: Evelyn Walker, 804 Fairfield, Jeriann Fleres, 1552 Ralston, Dave Dewey, 1415 Capuchino, Linda Humber, 119 Primrose, Bob Appleby, 500 Almer Road, Pam Appleby, 500 Almer Road. 8. CONSENT CALENDAR a. CITY COUNCIL LETTER SUPPORTING SAN MATEO COUNTY CIVIL GRAND JURY RECOMMENDATIONS FOR POLICE DEPARTMENTS TO CONTINUALLY REVIEW AND FOLLOW ESTABLISHED SEXUAL ASSAULT PROTOCOLS PC VanEtten requested Council support the 2003/04 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury's report on Sexual Assault Cases in San Mateo County, and their recommendation for all county police departments to adhere to officer training, review and following established county sexual assault protocols. b. RESOLUTION #67-2004 AUTHORIZING CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH THE TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH TO PROVIDE HUMAN RESOURCE SERVICES HRD Bell requested Council authorize the City Manager to execute an agreement to provide Human Resource services to the Town of Hillsborough. 4 Burlingame City Council July 19,2004 Unapproved Minutes C. APPROVAL OF OUT-OF-STATE TRAVEL FOR FIRE MARSHAL TO ATTEND THE NATIONAL FIRE ACADEMY IN MARYLAND FC Reilly requested Council approve the out of state travel for Fire Marshal Rocque Yballa to attend a "Management of Fire Prevention Programs" Course at the National Emergency Training Center at Emmitsburg, MD. d. APPROVAL OF ATTENDANCE AT OUT-OF-STATE CONFERENCE FOR FOUR PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT STAFF IN NEVADA DPW Bagdon recommended that Council approve the attendance of four staff members at an out-of-state conference in Sparks, Nevada, for the California Water Environmental Association (CWEA). e. ADOPT RESOLUTION #65-2004, RULES AND REGULATIONS PROHIBITING DOGS FROM CITY PLAYGROUND AREAS P&RD Schwartz recommended that the City Council adopt Resolution#65-2004, rules and regulations prohibiting dogs from City playground areas as proposed by the Parks &Recreation Commission under Municipal Code Section 10.55.030, Rules and Regulations. L ADOPT RESOLUTION#66-2004 AWARDING BURLINGAME PARK SUBDIVISION SEWER REHABILITATION PROJECT, PHASE 2 DPW Bagdon recommended that Council approve Resolution#66-2004 awarding the Burlingame Park Subdivision Sewer Rehabilitation project to D'arcy&Harty Construction, Inc. in the amount of$1,289,657 including the base bid and alternate bid number 1. g. ADOPT RESOLUTION#64-2004 APPROVAL THE AMENDMENT TO THE BART MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING REGARDING LANDSCAPING AND TREE REPLACEMENT P&RD Schwartz recommended that Council approve the Resolution#64-2004 approving the amendment to the BART Memorandum of Understanding. L APPROVE RESOLUTION #62-2004 AUTHORIZING ASSOCIATIN OF POLICE ADMINISTRATORS AGREEMENT HRD Bell recommends Council approve Resolution#62-2004 authorizing the City Manager to incorporate the Tentative Agreement between the Police Administrators and the City of Burlingame into the Police Administrators Memorandum of Understanding. k. WARRANTS AND PAYROLL FD Nava requested approval for payment of Warrants #96004-96426 duly audited, in the amount of $2,777,889.07 (excluding library checks 96004-96040), Payroll checks #158690-159009 in the amount of $2,128,767.79 for the month of June 2004. Mayor O'Mahony pulled items 8h and 8j from the consent calendar for further discussion. 5 Burlingame City Council July 19,2004 Unapproved Minutes Vice Mayor Galligan made a motion to approve the Consent Calendar, excluding items 8h and 8j; seconded by Councilwoman Baylock, approved unanimously by voice vote, 5-1. h. APPROVE RESOLUTION #63-2004 AUTHORIZING AMERICAN FEDERAL OF STATE, COUNTY AND MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES (AFSCME) LOCALS 829 AND 2190 LABOR AGREEMENT HRD Bell recommends Council approve Resolution#63-2004 authorizing the City Manager to incorporate the tentative agreement between AFSCME Locals 829 and 2190 and the City of Burlingame into the Memorandum of Understanding for each of these units. Mayor O'Mahony expressed gratitude for Locals 829 and 2190, which agreed to a salary freeze the last two years as well as agreeing to a modified cafeteria plan to help contain health costs for the City of Burlingame. Councilman Coffey made a motion to approve item 8h of the consent calendar; seconded by Vice Mayor Galligan, approved unanimously by voice vote, 5-0. j. REQUEST TO SCHEDULE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING ON AUGUST 16, 2004 CC Musso requested Council schedule a special City Council meeting for August 16th at 6:30 p.m. in Conference Room A to award the following three storm drainage construction projects: 1) Sanchez Creek dredging; 2) Storm drain line crossing California Drive; 3) Storm drain line in Almer and Bellevue Avenues. Mayor O'Mahony requested that this meeting be changed from a special meeting to a regular meeting. Vice Mayor Galligan made a motion to approve item 8j of the consent calendar; seconded by Councilwoman Baylock; approved unanimously by voice vote, 5-0. 9. COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS Council reported on various events and committee meetings they each attended on behalf of the City. 10. OLD BUSINESS 11. NEW BUSINESS Mayor O'Mahony requested that the August 2nd meeting be cancelled. Councilman Coffey made a motion to cancel the meeting of August 2nd; seconded by Councilwoman Baylock, approved unanimously by voice vote, 5-0. Vice Mayor Galligan requested the appeal for 2700 Martinez be pulled and placed on the agenda for August 16tH An appeal hearing for 620 Airport Boulevard was scheduled for September 7, 2004. Councilwoman Nagel responded to comments made in the newspaper by Vice Mayor Galligan. 12. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 6 Burlingame City Council July 19,2004 Unapproved Minutes a. Commission Minutes: Parks &Recreation Committee, June 17, 2004; Planning Commission, June 28, 2004 and July 12, 2004; Traffic, Safety and Parking, July 8, 2004 b. Department Reports: Building, June 2004; Police, May, 2004 c. Two letters from Comcast concerning CableCard service for digital-cable-read devices and a programming adjustment to Digital Premier services d. Letter from RCN concerning an increase in rates for digital vision tier and multiple premium channels cable services e. Letter from William Schwartz concerning the loud music coming from Abercrombie & Fitch 13. ADJOURNMENT Mayor O'Mahony adjourned the meeting at 10:42 p.m. in honor/memory of J.D. "Tex"Patterson and Olga Nava, and requested prayers for former Mayor Gloria Barton. Respectfully submitted, Ann T. Musso City Clerk 7 Burlingame City Council July 19,2004 Unapproved Minutes CITY AGENDA 6a OYMPE ° ITEM#STAFF REPORT MTG. DATE 8/16/2004 PNMT uN[d`0oe TO: Honorable Mayor and Council SUBMIT BY- DATE: August 5, 2004 APPROVED �. BY FROM: Larry E. Anderson, City Attorney SUBJECT: ADOPT ORDINANCE TO AMEND CHAPTER 6.36 REGARDING REGULATION OF TAXICAB FARES AND ADOPT RESOLUTION SETTING MAXIMUM FARES TO BE CHARGED RECOMMENDATION: A. Adopt the ordinance allowing maximum taxicab fares to be set by resolution by adopting the proposed ordinance and directing the City Clerk to publish a summary of the ordinance within 15 days of adoption. B. Adopt resolution setting maximum fares. DISCUSSION: The Burlingame Municipal Code contains a specific cap on taxicab fares for taxis that are subject to City permit when picking up passengers in the City. These fares($2.00 pick-up and $1.60 per mile)have not been changed since 1993. The taxicab operators are in desperate need of relief so that they can charge fares that are fair and consistent with the fares in other cities. The attached letter from a number of taxicab operators proposes an increase in fares on a two-rate basis: $2.50 for pick- up and $2.50 per mile within the County; and $3.00 for pick-up and $3.00 per mile outside the County. These rates are consistent with those being charged elsewhere. On July 19,2004, the Council introduced two alternative ordinances: one would lift fare regulations and instead simply require taxicab operators to file their fares with the Police Department before they can be charged. The other would allow the maximum fares to be set by resolution,which is the approach supported by the Police Department at this time. Staff has also checked with other agencies in the County to see what regulations other agencies use. As can be seen in the attachment, six cities and the County regulate taxis, and of these, five set maximum fares. Three of them do it by resolution, two by ordinance. Attachments Letter of July 8,2004 from taxicab operators Proposed alternative ordinances Summary of County agency taxi regulation Proposed Resolution setting maximum taxi fares Distribution: Chief of Police, Thomas Baldwin July 08,2004 Mayor's Office, City council of Burlingame Attn:City attorney Larry Anderson Dear sir, We,the cab companies of Burlingame Yellow Allied Cab Co. Owners Name:LEEPAK ?,Q ASHAR ---------------- Signature e,�.a -----`-- --S---- ABC Cab Co. Owner's Name: j Zi"ficsp0 L. A 6ru l Lst� ---------------- Signature :_--_--� California Cab CO. Owner's Name:II''htk�1'_—Ull tva Signature John 3:16 Cab Co. Owner's Name:- {IT _�(W CZ _ Signature W------------ Airport Express Cab Co. Owner's Name:— Signature Rainbow Cab Owner's Owner's Name:_ Signature Request that the existing meter rates of no less than rate one$2.50 flag down,$2.50 per mile for the greater Burlingame area.Rate two$3.00 flag down,$3.00 per mile for outside San Mateo County. Be accepted as the authorized meter rates for taxicab companies operating in the Burlingame; area. We feel that these rates are not only fare but neccessary for us to operate under present economic conditions. We thank you for your consideration on this matter and eagerly await your decision at the July 19,2004 meeting. ' Tliank Youl Sincerely, Burlingame Cab Companies. Thomas E.Boldwin Yellow Allied Cab CO. I 2 .�7 0�� 1 ORDINANCE No. 2 ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME AMENDING CHAPTER 6.36 TO PROVIDE A PUBLIC HEARING AND RESOLUTION PROCESS TO INCREASE MAXIMUM TAXICAB FARES 4 5 The CITY COUNCIL of the CITY OF BURLINGAME does hereby ordain as follows: 6 Section 1 . Taxicab fares for any taxicab picking up passengers in the City are currently 7 regulated by ordinance. However, regulation by ordinance makes any changes difficult and time- 8 consuming and the fare levels have not been increased for over a decade. This ordinance will 9 change the regulation to provide for fare increases by resolution, so that the process may be 10 simplified. 11 Section 2. Section 6.36.110(d) is amended to read as follows: 12 (d) Rates. It is unlawful for the owner or driver of any taxicab in the city to fix, charge, or l3 collect for a service a rate more than the rate approved by resolution of the city council. 14 Applications for any adjustment in rates shall first be filed in writing with the city clerk, setting 15 forth justification for such adjustment and requesting a hearing thereon. The application shall 16 include a comparison to rates being charged in other cities in San Mateo and Santa Clara Counties. 17 The city council shall set the matter for hearing and any interested person may be heard concerning 18 the requested adjustment. 19 Section 3. This ordinance shall be published as required by law. 20 21 Mayor 22 I, ANN T. MUSSO, City Clerk of the City of Burlingame, do hereby certify that the 23 foregoing ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 19'h day of July, 2004, and adopted thereafter at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the _ day 24 of , 20045 by the following vote: 25 AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: 26 NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: 27 28 City Clerk ALTERNATIVE #1 I ORDINANCE No. 2 ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME AMENDING CHAPTER 6.36 TO SUSPEND REGULATION OF TAXICAB FARES 3 AND PROVIDE FOR FILING OF FARES WITH CITY 4 5 The CITY COUNCIL of the CITY OF BURLINGAME does hereby ordain as follows: 6 Section 1. Taxicab fares for any taxicab picking up passengers in the City are currently 7 regulated by ordinance. However,regulation by ordinance makes any changes difficult and time- 8 consuming and the fare levels have not been increased for over a decade. It appears that taxicab 9 rates are largely self-regulating because of customer's ability to shop around for the best service 10 and rates. This ordinance will change the regulation to no longer regulate taxicab rates for the time 11 being; rate regulation could be reinstituted if this lack of regulation causes inconvenience or 12 difficulties for the community. However,taxicab rates must be filed with the Police Department 13 in order to provide a means for consumer verification of the rates' legitimacy and to make the rates 14 readily available to the public. 15 Section 2. Section 6.36.110(d) is amended to read as follows: 16 (d)Rates. It is unlawful for the owner or driver of any taxicab in the city to fix, charge, or 17 collect for a service a rate more than the rate on file with the police department. 18 Section 3. This ordinance shall be published as required by law. 19 20 Mayor 21 1,ANN T.MUSSO,City Clerk of the City of Burlingame,do hereby certify that the 22 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 23 _day of , 2004, by the following vote: 24 AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: 25 NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: 26 27 City Clerk 28 ALTERNATIVE #2 TAXICAB REGULATION AND FARE SETTING IN SAN MATEO COUNTY Agency Taxicab Regulation Fare Regulation No Taxicab Regulation Atherton X Belmont X X(Ordinance) County of San Mateo X Daly City X X(Resolution) East Palo Alto X Foster City X Hillsborough X Menlo Park X Millbrae X X(Ordinance) Pacifica X Portola Valley X Redwood City X San Bruno X San Carlos X San Mateo X X(Resolution) South San Francisco X X(Resolution) Woodside X Note—Palo Alto regulates taxicabs,but only requires that rate schedules be filed with City(4.42.200). RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Burlingame: WHEREAS, Chapter 6.36 provides that the City Council is to establish maximum fares for taxicabs when operating under City of Burlingame taxicab permit; and WHEREAS, taxicab companies have submitted a request to increase fares; and WHEREAS, the City Council has held a public hearing on the proposed fares and taken testimony from all interested persons who wished to testify on the matter; and WHEREAS, these fares seem to be fair and equitable and in general conformance to fares being charged elsewhere in the area, NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS RESOLVED AND ORDERED: 1 . The following maximum fares for taxicabs when operating under a City of Burlingame permit are approved: $2.50 for flag down/pick-up for transport within the County of San Mateo $2.50 per mile for transport within the County of San Mateo $3.00 for flag down/pick-up for transport outside the County of San Mateo $3.00 per mile for transport outside the County of San Mateo For waiting time, a charge may be made at a rate not to exceed $25.00 per hour as is indicated on the taxicab meter to the nearest ten cents, and it is to be included in the total registered fare; provided that the waiting time charged shall not apply to traffic delays or crossing delays for train passage. 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: 1 AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: CITY CLERK 2 2 BURLINGAME STAFF REPORT AGENDA 6b ITEM# MTG. DATE 8/16/04 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL SUB TED BY Q —' DATE: July 27, 2004 APPROVED FROM: Director of Parks & Recreation BY sUBJECr: ADOPTION OF USE RULES AND REGULATIO S FOR PARKS AND RECREATIONAL AREAS RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached rules and regulations for the use of Burlingame's parks and recreational areas, as proposed by the Parks & Recreation Commission under Municipal Code Section 10.55.030,Rules and Regulations by: A. Adopt proposed ordinance and direct the City Clerk to publish a summary of the ordinance within 15 days of adoption. BACKGROUND: The attached ordinance summarizes the City's existing Parks Use Rules and Regulations and is being re-adopted to ease enforcement. The ordinance defines parks and recreational areas, hours, permitted uses, enforcement and special uses. ATTACHMENTS: EXHIBIT "A" — Ordinance of the City of Burlingame Amending Chapter 10.55 to Update Provisions Regarding Use of Parks and Recreational Areas BUDGET IMPACT: Approximately $1,000 from the Department budget will be required for signage at the 12 locations. I ORDINANCE NO. 2 ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME AMENDING CHAPTER 10.55 TO UPDATE PROVISIONS REGARDING USE OF PARKS AND RECREATIONAL 3 AREAS 4 5 The City Council of the City of Burlingame ordains as follows: 6 7 Section 1. Chapter 10.55 establishes the basic regulations for use of the City's parks and 8 recreation facilities,and in order to better define the authority of the City Manager and the Director 9 of Parks & Recreation and incorporate rules and regulations that have been approved by the City 10 Council, minor amendments to the provisions should be made. 11 12 Section 2. Chapter 10.55 is amended to read as follows: 13 Chapter 10.55 REGULATIONS FOR PARKS AND RECREATIONAL AREAS 14 Sections: 10.55.005 Definitions. 15 10.55.010 Trespassing prohibited. 10.55.015 Hours. 16 10.55.020 Exceptions. 10.55.025 Use of parks and recreational areas. 17 10.55.028 General rules and regulations. 10.55.030 Additional rules and regulations. 18 10.55.035 Enforcement of rules and regulations. 10.55.040 Special events and group use. 19 10.55.045 Closing parks and recreational areas. 20 Section 10.55.005 Definitions. 21 For purpose of this chapter, the following definitions apply: 22 (a) "Director" or "director of parks and recreation" means the city director of parks and 23 recreation or the director's authorized designee. 24 (b) "Park" or "recreation area" means any property, grounds, or facilities under the 25 supervision of the department of parks and recreation. This includes but is not limited to city 26 parks,pools,recreation centers, golf center,playgrounds, fields, open spaces, and all parking lots 27 and structures involved in these facilities,and school facilities when scheduled or programmed by 28 the city. 1 I Section 10.55.010 Trespassing prohibited. 2 (a) It is unlawful for any person to trespass upon the grounds and facilities of any park or 3 recreational area of the city which are restricted to the exclusive use of such persons as may-be 4 permitted thereon by the rules and regulations governing the use thereof by the general public or 5 as may be engaged in the recreational programs of the city, and the employees assigned thereto. 6 (b) The city manager or the director of parks and recreation is authorized to have excluded 7 from any park any person violating the provisions of this chapter or any of the rules and 8 regulations. Any person thus excluded who fails to leave the park forthwith, or who thereafter 9 enters therein or thereupon, except with the consent of the city manager or director of parks and 10 recreation, is guilty of a misdemeanor or infraction as determined pursuant to this code. 11 I 2 Section 10.55.015 Hours. 111 Except as provided in Section 10.55.020, the parks, recreational areas and all facilities 14 located therein,including the parking lots serving the parks and recreational areas,shall be closed 1 to the public between the hours of nine(9)p.m.and six(6)a.m.the following morning. In addition 16 to all city owned facilities, the provisions of this section shall also apply to that area known as 17 Wooley Park, located between 150 Anza Boulevard and the entrance to Anza Lagoon, except it 18 shall not apply to the adjacent parking lot or to persons traversing the bayfront pathway between 19 that parking lot and the bridge at Anza Lagoon. 20 21 Section 10.55.020 Exceptions. 22 The hours established by Section 10.55.015 hereof shall not apply to: 2 3 (a)The parking lots serving and immediate area of any municipal recreation building during 24 the time the building is being used with permission and for one hour after the closing thereof; 2 (b)Any recreation program conducted or authorized by the parks and recreation department 26 and for one hour after the completion thereof. 27 28 I Section 10.55.025 Use of parks and recreational areas. 2 It is unlawful for any unauthorized person to use,cross or remain in any park or recreational 3 area and the parking lots adjacent thereto except during the hours such park or recreational area and 4 parking lot is open to the public as provided in Sections 10.55.015 and 10.55.020. 5 6 Section 10.55.028 General rules and regulations 7 It is unlawful for any person, group, or organization to do any of the following in any city 8 park or recreational area without the express permission of the director of parks and recreation,or 9 the director's authorized designee: 10 (a) Open, expose or interfere with any water or gas pipe, hydrant, stopcock, sewer, basin 11 or other construction, or any natural or artificial drainage; 12 (b) Remove turf, soil, grass, rock, sand or gravel, tree, shrub or wood or portion thereof; 13 (c)Make or kindle a fire for any purpose,except in places provided therefor or in a portable 14 barbecue in an area designated for such purpose; 15 (d) Play or practice golf or archery or fly or operate motor-driven models, except in areas 16 specifically designated and posted for such purposes; 17 (e) Take into, exhibit or use any firearm, air gun, slingshot, firecracker,torpedo,rocket or 18 weapon of any sort,whether manufactured or improvised. This prohibition includes the use of any 19 item or utensil in such a manner as to approximate a weapon or to cast fear into another; 20 (f) Cut, break, injure, deface or disturb any tree, shrub, plant, rock, building, cage, pen, 21 monument, fence, bench, path, walk or other structure, apparatus or property, or mark or write 22 thereon; 23 (g) Practice, carry on, conduct or solicit for any trade, occupation, business or profession 24 without a permit therefore endorsed by the director of parks and recreation; 25 (h) Sell or offer for sale, any merchandise, article or thing, whatsoever, without a permit 26 therefore endorsed by the director of parks and recreation; 27 (i)Use or attempt to use or interfere with the use of any table,space or facility which at the 28 time is reserved for any other person or group; 3 1 (j) Enter any area which is posted by the city as being closed to the public; 2 (k)Operate or park any vehicle except upon areas designated or as may be permitted by the 3 director of parks; 4 (1)Place litter or debris elsewhere than in container designed to receive such litter or debris; 5 (m) Play any game of chance or carry on betting of any kind; 6 (n) Fish, wade, swim or bathe except in the places designated therefor; 7 (o) Set up or use a volleyball net so as to exceed a maximum of two such nets in a park at 8 any time; 9 (p) Have in his or her possession or control any exotic animal, as defined by Section 10 9.08.050 of this code,regardless of size,or to release any such animal in a park or recreational area; 1 l (q) Operate any of the following equipment, without express written permit from the 12 director of parks and recreation: 13 (1) Generator for producing electrical voltage; or 14 (2) Sound amplification equipment; or 15 (3) Any radio or sound reproduction equipment which causes any noise that disturbs the 16 peace and quiet of the neighborhood or other users of the park or facility; or 17 (4) Inflatable play equipment, such as astro jumps and similar items; or 18 (5)Batting machines,except on designated lighted ballfields between the hours of 9:00 a.m. 19 and 9:00 p.m. on Mondays through Saturdays and between 10:00 a.m. and 9:00 p.m. on Sundays, 20 and on designated unlighted ballfields between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and dusk on Mondays 21 through Saturdays and between 10:00 a.m. and dusk on Sundays. However, for Ray Park on 22 Sundays,batting machines are only permitted on the designated ballfields between 11:00 a.m. and 23 5:00 p.m. 24 (r) Gather in groups of fifteen (15) persons or more without specific written permission 25 from the director of parks and recreation in the following locations: 26 (1) Cuernavaca Park at any time; or 27 (2) Village Park on weekdays between 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m.; or 28 (3) Pershing Park on weekdays between 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m.; I (s)Engage in any activity involving batted balls in any park or recreational area,except on 2 a designated ballfield at Bayside Park, Cuernavaca Park, Ray Park, or Washington Park. 3 (t)Possess, serve or sell alcoholic beverages at any park or recreational area,except by the 4 city's authorized golf center operator at the Burlingame Golf Center; or 5 (v) Allow dogs in or around any playground as designated by the surface material at the 6 playground equipment in Cuernavaca Park,Pershing Park,Ray Park,Trenton Park,Victoria Park, 7 Village Park, or Washington Park, or as designated by the fenced area surrounding the City's tot 8 lots at Alpine Park, "Y' Lot, Laguna Playground and Paloma Playground. 9 10 Section 10.55.030 Additional rules and regulations. 11 In addition to the general rules and regulations contained in this chapter, the parks and 12 recreation commission may promulgate and submit to the council for approval, rules and 13 regulations governing the administration, operation, use and maintenance of each park and 14 recreational area. Such rules and regulations may stipulate, among other things: 15 (a) The facilities, equipment and provisions of each park together with the maximum 16 number which may safely use such facilities, equipment and provisions at one time; 17 (b)The areas of each park designated for particular uses,whether passive or otherwise and 18 any specific limitations thereon designed to promote the public safety and enhance the greatest use 19 by the greatest number of people; 20 (c) The terms by which park facilities such as tennis courts, ball fields, etc., may be used 21 and any specific requirements designed to protect the playing surface and to insure the safety of 22 participants and spectators; 23 (d) Areas suitable for public assembly and the number which may be accommodated 24 without injury to the park, its plant life or any facilities therein; 25 (e)Areas where sound amplification equipment may be made available or where it may be 26 used together with the maximum sound level at which it may be operated so as to provide full 27 dissemination of sound within the area when occupied by the maximum number allowed so as not 28 to interfere with the reasonable enjoyment by the public of adjacent areas or of private citizens 5 I within adjacent private property; and (f) Procedures for securing the exclusive use of any park or recreational area or facility 3 together with any fee schedule or security deposit requirements necessary to insure compliance with 4 the terms of the permit or to protect the general public from liability for the extra maintenance 5 necessitated by such exclusive use. Such procedure shall include the provisions for appeal to the 6 council. 7 8 Section 10.55.035 Enforcement of rules and regulations. 9 (a) It is unlawful for any person, group, or organization to violate any rule or regulation 10 adopted pursuant to sections 10.55.030 above. 11 (b)In addition to the other remedies provides by this code and state law,the city manager 12 or the director of parks and recreation may suspend the privilege of a person,group,or organization 13 that violates the provisions of this chapter or the terms and conditions of any permit issued pursuant 14 to this chapter to obtain any further permit for use of any park or recreational area for such time as 15 the manager or director determines is an appropriate suspension. Any person, group, or 16 organization whose privilege is suspended under this subsection may appeal the suspension to the 17 city council by filing a written appeal together with an appeal fee with the city clerk within ten(10) 18 days of the written notice of suspension. The city council will then hear the appeal within a 19 reasonable period of time and render a decision on the suspension. The decision of the city council 20 shall be final and conclusive. 21 22 Section 10.55.040 Special events and group use. 23 The city manager and the director of parks and recreation shall provide a permit process for 24 group reservations of park areas and recreational areas, special events, and circumstances not 25 covered by this chapter or the rules and regulations. In so doing the city manager or director shall 26 ensure that the parks and recreational areas are available and provided for the comfort and 27 convenience of all. 28 I Section 10.55.045 Closing parks and recreational areas. 2 The city manager or the director of parks and recreation may close any park or recreational 3 area and remove all persons therefrom when in his judgment such closing will best preserve the 4 public peace,prevent damage to public property or quell riots,mobs or violence.The city manager 5 or the director may also cause any and all persons whose presence on the premises is disruptive to 6 the normal and safe use and enjoyment thereof by the greatest number of people to be removed. 7 8 Section 3. This ordinance shall be published as required by law and shall take effect thirty 9 days after its adoption. 10 11 12 Mayor 13 I, ANN T. MUSSO, City Clerk of the City of Burlingame, do hereby certify that the 14 foregoing ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 20`" day 15 of July,2004,and adopted thereafter at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the day 16 of , 2004, by the following vote: 17 AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: 18 NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: 19 ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: 20 City Clerk 21 C:\FILES\ORDINANC\parks&recrules.p&r.wpd 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 7 BURLINGAME STAFF REPORT AGENDA ITEM# 6c MTG. 8/16/04 DATE TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL SUBMITTED DATE: August 5, 2004 BY APPROVED FROM: PUBLIC WORKS BY l SUBJECT: RESOLUTION FIXING AN ASSESSMENT FOR RUBBIS /BATEMENTAT 1200-1240 BAYSHORE HIGHWAY RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that Council hold a public hearing regarding the rubbish abatement at 1200-1240 Bayshore Highway and approve the attached resolution fixing a rubbish assessment in the amount of $2,242.50. BACKGROUND: In January 2002, the City code enforcement officer received a weed and rubbish complaint at 1200-1240 Bayshore Highway and followed up with a field inspection.A letter was then sent to the property owner requesting abatement of the weeds and rubbish in accordance with the City Code. In April 2002, Council passed a resolution declaring weeds and rubbish as a nuisance for properties within the City including 1200-1240 Bayshore Highway. In May 2002,a public hearing was held to receive any protests from the property owners regarding weeds and rubbish abatement and no protest was made by the property owner of 1200-1240 Bayshore Highway. Subsequently the property owner cleaned the weeds but did not remove the rubbish from the property. DISCUSSION:In October 2002,staff sent a second letter to the property owner requesting abatement of the rubbish as well as posted notices on the property(see attachment). Upon receiving no response from the property owner,the City hired a contractor,Action Cleaning Services to abate the rubbish. The rubbish abatement was completed by the City contractor in March 2003; and the property owner was invoiced for the abatement cost in the amount of $2,242.50 (see attachments). Until now, staff has tried to avoid placing a lien against the property to collect the abatement costs; however, the property owner has not been responsive for over a year. Staff has no choice but to recommend approval of this resolution which places a lien against the property. Once approved,the resolution will be forwarded to the San Mateo County Assessor for collection. EXHIBITS: Resolution, copy of notices sent to the property owner, copy of staff report regarding public hearing, copy of contractor's invoice, copy of City invoice to the property owner,photos of before and after abatement. Syed za, P.E. Asst. Director of Public Works 650-558-7230 c: City Clerk, City Attorney, Finance Director Property Owner of 1200-1240 Bayshore Highway SAA Public Works Directory\Staff Reports\WEEDASSESSMENTS.WPD RESOLUTION NO. FIXING ASSESSMENT FOR WEED AND RUBBISH ABATEMENT WHEREAS, the City Engineer has filed with the City Clerk a report of the cost of the weed and rubbish abatement pursuant to Resolution No. 47-2004 of the City Council; and WHEREAS, the City Clerk,pursuant to the requirements of law, has posted a copy of such report near the entrance of the City Hall,together with a notice of filing thereof,and of the time and place when and where it shall be submitted to the City Council for confirmation, and a like notice was published twice in the SAN MATEO COUNTY TIMES; and WHEREAS, the posting and first publication of said notice was made and completed at least ten (10) days before the time such report was submitted to the City Council; and WHEREAS, at the time and place fixed for receiving and considering this report, the City Council heard the same and there were no persons appearing who objected to the filing and adoption of said report, and no modification of the proposed assessments was requested; NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED,AND IT IS HEREBY ORDERED,that the said report of the City Engineer heretofore filed, be and the same hereby is, adopted and confirmed, the amounts therein assessed shall constitute a special assessment against each respective lot or parcel of land therein set forth and shall also constitute a lien on such property for the amount of such assessment until paid, and the County Assessor is hereby directed to place said assessment on the tax rolls of the County of San Mateo. 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 SAA Public Works Directory\MISCELLANEOUS\WEEDASES.RES 1 BURLJNGAME STAFF REPORT AGENDA ITEM # MTG. DATE 5/20/02 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL SUBMITTED DATE: MAY 8, 2002 BY APPROVED FROM: PUBLIC WORKS BY SUBJECT: WEEDS AND RUBBISH ABATEMENT OF PRIVATE PROPERTY - PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION - CITY JOB NO. 80610 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that Council hold a public hearing to receive any objections to proposed weed and rubbish removal and approve a resolution "Ordering the Destruction of Noxious and Dangerous Weeds and Rubbish a Nuisance in the City of Burlingame." BACKGROUND: Each year the City establishes the Weed and Rubbish Abatement Program. As part of the program, Council declared weeds and rubbish a nuisance on April 1, 2002. Since then, staff has surveyed the City and posted property which requires abatement. The Public Works Director will have a list of all posted properties available at the time of the hearing. After Council approves the resolution, staff will notify the affected property owners by certified mail as to the deadline for weed and rubbish removal. All unabated nuisances will be addressed by a city contractor and a lien will be placed on the property to recover the removal expenses. EXHIBITS: Resolution; Sample Posting Notice A, 9 �� — Syed u za, P.E. City Engineer (650) 558-7230 pa c: City Clerk S:\W Public Works Directory\Staff Reports\WEED.STF RESOLUTION NO. ORDERING THE DESTRUCTION OF NOXIOUS AND DANGEROUS WEEDS AND RUBBISH A NUISANCE IN THE CITY OF BURLINGAME RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Burlingame: WHEREAS,the City Council of the City of Burlingame on April 1,2002, at a regular meeting of said Council, adopted a resolution declaring certain weeds growing upon various streets, squares, lanes, alleys, avenues, courts and places within said municipality, and upon private property within said municipality,which said weeds bear seeds of a wingy or downy nature and are otherwise obnoxious and dangerous, and all rubbish, refuse and dirt upon parkways, sidewalks or private property,to constitute a public nuisance;and WHEREAS,said resolution fixed Monday,the 20°`day of May,2002,at the hour of seven p.m.of said day, at the City Council Chambers of the City of Burlingame,located in the City Hall of said City,as the time and place when objections to the proposed removal of such weeds shall be heard and given due consideration;and WHEREAS it appears that notice of said hearing has been given for the time and in the manner and form provided by law;and WHEREAS, it appears that no objections to the proposed removal of such weeds were presented; 1 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Burlingame that the City Engineer of the City of Burlingame be, and he hereby is directed to remove and eradicate such weeds as described in the Resolution of Intention passed and adopted on April 1, 2002. AND said City Engineer of said City of Burlingame is hereby authorized and directed to fix the costs of such removal and eradication of weeds, and in the event of any delinquency of the payment of said costs to report the same to the City Clerk of the City of Burlingame so that the costs may be collected in the manner provided by law. 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 , 2002, and was adopted thereafter by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: SAA Pubtic Works Directory\MISCELLA\WEEDDM.RES City Clerk 2 RUBBISH ABATEMENT ASSESS TO THE NEXT TAX ROLL ADDRESS LOT BLOCK SUBDIVISION ASSESSOR# CHARGE RUBBISH - - ACREAGE 026-142-020 $2,242.50 ABATEMENT AT VACANT LOT BETWEEN 1200 AND 1240 BAYSHORE HIGHWAY (ABATED MARCH 2003) S:\A Public Works Directory\MISCELLANEOUS\RUBBISH ABATEMENT ASSESS TO 20042005 TAX ROLL.wpd 1 r�\ LOCA 7-/6i1/5 OF WEE-,OS IZZ Q NI.W T NOT/CIES./?OSTED 20-o z o h w � Q NOL.QcQ..T_ .oN PRRCEL NO 4 Z Q W _R_E1YI14TZ/C 5 V4e4Aur 1-0r5/3Erw.-rEid o26-142-020 ¢ l /200 1240 N16,qwAy 0Z6-/¢2-030 �� x >< X /0/C.4L/FOWA11 I DRiUF_ 2 �v�L/�/GAi�E Foga �o � X UIICA.v7/�UiLD/,v 98 CAL/Go/2.v/A pRiU� 4 L/SE� cae La j �a X vAcgNT /ju/GDiti� CA2 5r0/LA(q--Z07-ON rll-- S CaRUEPoFP�jNS Z Q 9N/GNz4✓p 2(} �C X vACA uT Z,17 G1,025ro144GE 4o7ON T!/r' - COauE2 of 3lySWprEk�NIG//GPt/O j� � X I vAcAN T L o T /6/ �/i0/1LA.vo AvL-NU/ CAR SToRA6G GoT Co P GA BURLINME C � L � / O D M t The City of Burlingame PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT CITY HALL- 501 PRIMROSE ROAD CORPORATION YARD (650)696-7230 BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA 94010-3997 (650) 696-7260 July 29, 2004 Mr. Robert P. Wadell, P.E. P.O. Box 1819 Burlingame, CA 94011-1819 Re: Rubbish Abatement at Vacant Lot Between 1200 & 1240 Bayshore Highway APN 026-142-020 and 030 Dear Mr. Wadell: This letter is to advise you that as of the above date, we have not received payment of$2,242.50 for the rubbish abatement performed on your property by the City of Burlingame on March 2, 2003. If you wish to dispute this bill, you may do so at the City Council public hearing on August 16, 2004 at 7:00 p.m. Otherwise, the bill will be added to your next tax roll. The location of the meeting is as follows: Burlingame City Hall 501 Primrose Road Burlingame, CA 94010 City Council Chambers Yours very truly, THE CITY OF BURLINGAME -7 - 2 cl _ p,, SYED MURTUZA, P.E. ASST. DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS GC SQA, /Z / .l1q CAC By j;g Edwin Chung Engineering Technician SAA Public Works Directory\Author, By Name\Ed Chung Letters\wadelLltr.wpd • City of Burlingame BURUNGaME Office of the City Attorney Code Enforcement Bureau 501 Primrose Road,Burlingame,California 94010 (650)558-7208,Fax:(650)342-8386 October 9, 2002 Mr.Robert P. Wadell PO Box 1819 Burlingame, CA 94011 Re: Assessor's parcels 026 142 020 and 030 Dear Mr. Wadell: This office has received another complaint regarding the litter on your property. A site inspection revealed that there is in fact litter and debris scattered throughout the parcels. Ongoing maintenance appears to be required due to the frequent winds in the area This is a violation of our city ordinances and needs to be corrected. In order for you to avoid enforcement action on our part we are requesting that you take steps to clean your property by no later than October 30, 2002. Enforcement action may include the city hiring a contractor to clean up the trash and bill you for the appropriate costs. Your anticipated cooperation in this matter is appreciated. Sincerely, Alfred J. Palmer Code Enforcement Officer cc: City Attorney / Ed Chung -Public Works Det P • City of Burlingame BURLINGAME Office of the City Attorney Code Enforcement Bureau 501 Primrose Road,Burlingame,California 94010 (650)558-7208, Fax: (650)342-8386 January 29, 2002 Mr. Robert P. Wadell PO Box 1819 Burlingame, CA 94011 Re: Assessor's parcels 026 142 020 and 030 Dear Mr. Wadell: This office has received a complaint regarding the I trash and litter on your property. f_ A site inspection revealed that there is in fact litter 7. and debris scattered throughout the parcels. This is a violation of our city ordinances and needs to be corrected. ' In order for you to avoid enforcement action on our part we are requesting that you take steps to clean your property by no later than February 15, 2002. Enforcement action may include the city hiring a contractor to clean up the trash and bill you for the appropriate costs. Your anticipated cooperation in this matter is appreciated. Sincerely, Alfred J. Palmer 2 nn Code Enforcement Officer D E V cc: City Attorney MAO - 6 2002 DEPT.OF PUBLIC WORKS CITY OF BURLINGAME ACTION CLEANING SERVICES P. O. BOX 5122 Invoice SAN MATEO, CA 94402 MATE tNv©rcE# 3/2103 50109 BILL TO SHIP TO City Of Burlingame 501 Primrose Rd_ Burlingame,CA 94010 4tiE©ATE P.0 NUMBER 3/7/03 IT-rz- d+i DESCRIPTION QTY RAtE AMOUNT CofB Outside cleaning 1 1,950.00 E Vu � V E D MAR - 5 2003 MA DEPT.OF PUBLIC WORKS CITY OF BURLINGAME MAR 1 4 2003 ' I t r- Thank you for your business! Subtotal 1,950.00 0%Tax Total 1.95©oQ INVOICE 2nd NOTICE OCT - CITY OF BURLINGAME FINANCE DEPT. 501 PRIMROSE ROAD BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA 94010 PLEASE RETURN ONE COPY OF THIS INVOICE WITH PAYMENT DATE:August 29, 2003 ANGELA&ROBERT WADELL P.O. BOX 1819 CONTACT: BURLINGAME, CA 94011-1819 ED CHUNG, PUBLIC WORKS DEPT. ACCOUNT NO. 101-06210-221 TELEPHONE: 6501558-7230 TRASH ABATEMENT(PAPERS, WOODEN BOARDS, ETC.) FROM THE VACANT LOT AND ALSO IN THE CREEK ON BAYSHORE HIGHWAY BETWEEN 1200 BAYSHORE $1,950.00 HIGHWAY AND 1240 BAYSHORE HIGHWAY. ABATED IN MARCH 2003 PER PURCHASE ORDER#13100,APN 026-142-020& 026-142-030. PLEASE PAY THIS BILL WITHIN 45 DAYS FROM THE INVOICE DATE. 15% 0&S $ 292.50 TOTAL: $2,242.50 t 2 COPIES TO PAYER 3 COPIES TO FINANCE (STAPLED) 1 COPY TO FILE FAWP51TILESVNVOICE I - INVOICE CITY OF BURLINGAME FINANCE DEPT. 501 PRIMROSE ROAD BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA 94010 PLEASE RETURN ONE COPY OF THIS INVOICE WITH PAYMENT DATE:August 29, 2003 ANGELA& ROBERT WADELL P.O. BOX 1819 CONTACT: BURLINGAME, CA 94011-1819 ED CHUNG, PUBLIC WORKS DEPT. ACCOUNT NO. 101-66210-221 TELEPHONE: 650/558-7230 TRASH ABATEMENT(PAPERS, WOODEN BOARDS, ETC.) FROM THE VACANT LOT AND ALSO IN THE CREEK ON BAYSHORE HIGHWAY BETWEEN 1200 BAYSHORE $1,950.00 HIGHWAY AND 1240 BAYSHORE HIGHWAY. --- ABATED IN MARCH 2003 PER PURCHASE ORDER#13100, APN 026-142-020 & 026-142-030. PLEASE PAY THIS BILL WITHIN 45 DAYS FROM THE INVOICE DATE. 15% O & S $ 292.50 TOTAL: $2,242.50 2 COPIES TO PAYER1 3 COPIES TO FINANCE (STAPLED) 1 COPY TO FILE F:\WP51TILESUNVOICE 2 3- m ems. s x B BEFORE ABATEMENT BY CITY CONTRACTOR �� ira �. ���,. �..�, . �. .. .. _... �. :. �'�V''z"��' #` ' +�� �< �_, ._._ E�Sc�w._.m,� -�d,3.�...,...,_,�_. ,... ,.. a �'. ' iF `; �_:"g-ice" :.._a, n F.,,., �.' � ��,_... - mm�-._.___'— r � a —.�.,,.,....w y � r �. S �. � s. ,� ...� � .p7 }� .... � �,�° �a" ;� � � II 'r;Y��`J-�A• s: %� .3`Vt�t�+'*�i5 [a�� � ass' _ r i , T W �. }tom•. 41 y� ; .: tAb 3FJ. � �"{ �r-,'r �,i{���' T", 77,77, °i ¢ .'._' f CITY STAFF REPORT BURLII AME AGENDA 64 ITEM# m MTG. °q4 DATE 8.16.04 oA,4TEo.U1�6• TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL SUBMITTED r BY 1 - DATE: AUGUST 4 2004 APPROVED FROM: CITY PLANNER BY SUBJECT: REVIEW OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED HLLSIDE AREA CONSTRUCITON PERMIT FOR ROOF CHANGES TO THE SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING AND DETACHED GARAGE AT 2700 MARTINEZ DRIVE,ZONED R-1. RECOMMENDATION: The City Council should hold a public hearing and take action. Affirmative action should be by resolution and should include findings for the hillside area construction permit. The reasons for any action should be clearly stated for the record. (Action Alternatives and required findings for the Hillside Area Construction Permit are attached at the end of the staff report). Conditions Approved by the Planning Commission, July 12, 2004: 1) that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department date stamped June 18, 2004, sheet T-1 and sheet A-1 through A-11, and that any changes to building materials, exterior finishes, footprint or floor area of the building shall require an amendment to this permit; and that the addition to the house shall have two parallel roof ridges, that shall be 2'-6" lower than the existing roof ridge with a maximum height of 14' and a 4:12 roof pitch for the residential addition, and that the garage shall have a plate height of 8'1" with a 2:12 roof pitch and a maximum height not to exceed 11'4"; 2) 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; 3) that the conditions of the City Engineer's, the Fire Marshal's, the Chief Building Inspector's, and the Recycling Specialist's June 30, 2003 memos shall be met; 4) that the applicant shall submit a certified arborist report to detail tree protection measures for the protected-size Pepper tree at the front of the property and that this report shall be reviewed and approved by the City Arborist prior to any grading on the site and prior to the issuance of a Building permit; and if the protected-size Pepper tree is to be removed, the applicant shall apply for and receive a Protected-size Tree Removal Permit from the Parks Department prior to removing the tree, 5) that the applicant shall comply with Ordinance 1503, the City of Burlingame Storm Water Management and Discharge Control Ordinance; RErIEW Ole' THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED HLLSIDE AREA CONSTRUCITON PERMIT FOR ROOF CHANGES TO THE SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING AND DETACHED GARAGEAT 2700 MARTINEZDRIVE,ZONED R-1. August 16,2004 6) that during demolition and grading for the addition, the applicant shall use all applicable "best management practices" as identified in Burlingame's Storm Water Ordinance, to prevent erosion and off-site sedimentation of storm water runoff, 7) that the project is subject to the state-mandated water conservation program, and a complete Irrigation Water Management Plan must be submitted with landscape and irrigation plans at time of permit application; 8) that demolition of the existing structures and any grading or earth moving on the site shall be required to comply with all the regulations of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District; and 9) that any improvements for the use shall meet all California Building and Fire Codes, 2001 Edition as amended by the City of Burlingame. Condition 10 from the original approval was deleted because it required that the new roof ridges be installed at the same height as the story poles. Since the ridges have been built and their elevation confirmed, the condition was not applicable. If the applicant were directed to replace any of the roof ridges, a condition should be added that the replacement ridge(s) shall be surveyed at framing to insure that they are the same height as they were proposed in the original approval. Planning Commission Action At their meeting on July 12, 2004, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the request to amend the previous approval for a change in the roof on the house and garage and some minor changes to the fagade. The Commission voted 3-2-0-2 (Crs. Bojues, Vistica dissenting; Crs. Brownrigg, Keighran absent)to approve the structural changes proposed by the developer. In their actions the commissioners noted in favor of the request,that the developer did respect the approved height which was key to the view issue and the neighbor has not expressed a concern about the impact on the change on his view, even though the roof was not built as approved and the city was not notified of the changes; the issue is view protection and the photos submitted indicate that the change causes no change in view and the neighbor has not complained; this change does not impact the protected view, which is the subject of this permit, so appears hands are tied, but need to send a message to the development community that if this were a design review, would require removal of the roof. In opposition to the motion to approve the proposed changes, the commissioners commented: would like the garage roof to be kept at a 4:12 pitch to be consistent with the original proposal and with the roof pitch on the house, particularly since the garage sits in front of the house; it is important that the plans be followed, this is not the first time that this applicant has showed Commission something for original approval that cannot be built and made a change in the field without coming to the Commission before he changed the structure; the mass and bulk of the garage are increased by the change to the roof slope and am offended that the applicant proceeded without regard for the city's concerns; the biggest design impacts are the higher plate line and flatter slope on the roof on the garage, this is beyond design review the applicant has knowingly violated a contract with the city on this and other projects; maker of the motion refused to revise the motion to require the applicant to remove the garage roof, lower the plate to 7 feet and put a 4:12 pitch roof on the garage as originally approved. APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION'S DERTERMINATION THAT THE SECOND UNIT WAS NOT BUILT BEFORE 1954 AT 826 ALPINE AVENUE,ZONED R-1 SEPTEMBER 16,2002 BACKGROUND: History: At their meeting on October 12, 2003, the Planning Commission reviewed an application for a hillside area construction permit to add 896 SF to the first floor of the main dwelling and to change the roof on the existing garage at 2700 Martinez Drive, a corner lot of Martinez at Toledo Avenue. The front of the house is on Martinez and the garage is located at the front of the property, forward of the main dwelling unit by about 30 feet. With the addition proposed the house would remain a single story house. The proposed improvements would increase the lot coverage from 29%to 38%where 40% is the maximum allowed; they would also increase floor area ratio from 0.28 (2,763 SF)to 0.38 (3.659 SF)where a maximum FAR of 0.45 (4,358 SF) is allowed. The changes to the garage roof would not affect the size of the area provided for covered parking (20' x 20"). The minutes of the October 14, 2003, meeting indicate that at that time the concerns of the Commission were focused on reducing the plate height on the garage to 7 feet and to make a gable, rather than a flat, roof with a 4:12 roof ridge to address the neighbors concerns about the height and impacts on their view from the proposed project; neighbor at 2704 Martinez provided pictures of the story poles and noted that he was not opposing the project since the plate height was lower than the existing roof ridge. The Commission added a tenth condition which required that the roof ridge height would not be taller than the story poles installed and photographed by the neighbor. Commission noted as revised with the 4/12 pitch on the roof the project meets design criteria; as viewed from neighbor's dining room the roof ridge as shown by story pole would not affect view. In their action two conditions were added: that the construction will match the story poles (refer to pictures attached) and the garage plate height will be no higher than 7 feet. (See planning commission minutes October 14, 2003 for all of the original conditions). A building permit was issued for the construction of the remodel on January 14, 2004. On May 4, 2004 a building inspector was called out for a final framing inspection on the garage and noted a discrepancy between what was built and what was approved (change in roof pitch from 4:12 to 2:12). On May 27, 2004, the building inspector was called for a framing inspection on the house and noted that the roof design had been changed and that there were two ridges where the plans showed a single ridge. The inspector issued a verbal warning to the contractor and wrote on the inspection card that the builder would need to submit revisions of his plans for the house and garage to the Building and Planning Departments for approval before work could commence on the construction of either the house or garage. Currently all work on the project has ceased and cannot resume until the City Council acts on the appeal and the Building Department has approved any changes required to the building permit for the plans consistent with the Council action. Current Request: The applicant is requesting that the Hillside Area Construction Permit be amended to reflect the following changes to the October 2003 approved plans, the roofing portions of which have already been built: Roof Framing—Dwelling 1) The roof above the living room area approved with 1 ridge with a 4:12 pitch, be revised to have 2 ridges, each with a 4:12 pitch and maintain the height of 14 feet; Garage 1) The approved plate height of 7 feet on the garage be increased to 8'-1"; z REVIEW OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED HLLSIDE AREA CONSTRUCITON PERMIT FOR ROOF CHANGES TO THE SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING AND DETACHED GARAGE AT 2700 MARTINEZ DRIVE,ZONED R-1. August 16,2004 2) The approved roof pitch on the garage of 4:12 to match the roof pitch on the house be changed to 2:12 and the maximum height of the garage at 1 P-4". *These proposed changes to the garage would maintain the overall height of the garage at 1 P-4" which was the height approved in October 2003; the original garage had a flat roof and was 10'-3" tall. Front Elevation—Dwelling 1) The front entry approved with double doors be changed to a single door with a window on each side. Staff Comments: Planning staff would note that the application was originally for a Hillside Area Construction Permit (view protection) and the amendment is to the approved Hillside Area Construction Permit. Because it is a one story addition, the addition to the house is not subject to design review, including the changes to the garage facade, and the footprint and siting of the house with the addition meets all other zoning code requirements. It should also be noted that the neighbors at 2704 Martinez who originally called up the Hillside Area Construction Permit submitted comments objecting to any changes to the originally approved (October 2003) heights of the structures. ATTACHMENTS: Action Alternatives and Code Required Criteria for a Hillside Area Construction Permit at 2700 Martinez Monroe letter, July 20, 2004, to Virginia Pon and Kevin Parkin, setting appeal hearing Wilson Ng-A.M. Peak Design Construction Co. letter, June 16, 2004, to the Planning Department: response Chuck Mullaney, Advantage Truss Co. LLC, letter, June 17, 2004,to City of Burlingame: regarding dual pitch trusses. Photographs of 2700 Martinez at time construction was stopped; 4 photos Photo: View of 2700 Martinez Drive from inside 2704 Martinez Drive, 7/6/04, submitted at 7/12/04 meeting Planning Commission Minutes, October 14, 2003 Planning Commission Staff Report, October 14, 2003, without attachments Planning Commission Minutes, July 12, 2004 Planning Commission Staff Report, July 12, 2004, with attachments Notice of Appeal Hearing, Mailed August 6, 2004 Originally Approved Plans, 11" x 17", date stamped June 18, 2004 Revised Plans, oversized, date stamped June 18, 2004 A Action Alternatives and Code Required Finding Criteria for an Hillside Area Construction Permit at 2700 Martinez Drive �— ACTION ALTERNATIVES 1. City council may vote in favor of an applicant's request. If the action is a variance,use permit,hillside area construction permit, fence exception, sign exception or exception to the antenna ordinance,the Council must make findings as required by the code. Findings must be particular to the given properties and request. Actions on use permits should be by resolution. A majority of the Council members seated during the public hearing must agree in order to pass an affirmative motion. 2. City Council may deny an applicant's request. The reasons for denial should be clearly stated for the record. 3. City Council may deny a request without prejudice. This action should be used when the application made to the City Council is not the same as that heard by the Planning Commission;when a Planning Commission action has been justifiably,with clear direction,denied without prejudice; or when the proposed project raises questions or issues on which the Council would like additional information or additional design work before acting on the project. Direction about additional information required to be given to staff,applicant and Planning Commission/City Council for the further consideration should be made very clear. Council should also direct whether any subsequent hearing should be held before the City Council or the Planning Commission. REQUIRED FINDINGS FOR AN HILLSIDE AREA CONSTRUCTION PERMIT Code Sec. 25.61.060: Review by the planning commission or city council shall be based upon the obstruction by the construction of the existing distant views of nearby properties. Emphasis shall be given to the obstruction of �.. distant views from habitable areas within a dwelling unit. The City of Burlingame CITY HALL 501 PRIMROSE ROAD TEL: (650)558-7250 PLANNING DEPARTMENT BURLINGAME,CALIFORNIA 94010-3997 FAX: (650)696-3790 July 20, 2004 Virginia Pon or Kevin Parkin 2700 Martinez Drive Burlingame, CA 94010 Dear Ms. Pon and Mr. Parkin, At the City Council meeting of July 19, 2004 your project at 2700 Martinez Drive, zoned R-1, was called up for review. The City Council scheduled an appeal hearing for your project at their next meeting on Monday, August 16, 2004 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, CA. We look forward to seeing you there to present your project. Please call me at 650-558- 7250 if you have any questions. Sincerely yours, vi�90&)ITZ, Margaret Monroe City Planner c: City Clerk Jane H. Chuan, property owner 2700 Martinez Drive Burlingame, CA 94010 "PEAK DESIGN& CONSTRUCTION COMPANY 8255 Skyline Blvd., Oakland, California 94611 (510) 339-3233 RESPONSE LETTER TO: CITY OF BURINGAME- PLANNING DEPT. 501 PRIMROSE ROAD, BURLINGAME, CA 94010-3997 (650) 558-7250 FAX (650) 696-3790 DATE: JUNE 16, 2004 SUBMIT DATE: 6/7/04 CHECK DATE: 6/11/04 EXPIRATION DATE: (180 DAYS) FROM SUBMIT DATE PROJECTS: 2700 MARTINEZ ST.- BURLINGAME, CA PERMIT NUMBER: 2024919- (REV. TO 2023653) ZONE: R-1 OCCUPANCY GROUP: R3 TYPE OF CONSTR.: VN RESPONSE TO: PLANNING DEPT. COMMENTS AND ATTACHED COMMENTS REQ'D SUBMITTAL: RESPONSE LETTER �— PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS: SUMMMARY OF CHANGES AND INCONSISTENCIES (DENOTE WITH SYMBOL AND CLOUDED) 1. GARAGE—PLATE REVISED FROM 7' TO 8'-1"AND ROOF PITCH REVISED FROM 12:4 TO 12:2. SEE ROOF PLANS AND GARAGE ELEVATIONS. 2. HOUSE: ROOF RIDGE REVISED TO TWO RIDGES WITH 12:4. SEE ROOF PLAN. 3. FRONT ELEVATIONS: FRONT ENTRY CHANGED DOUBLE DOORS TO SINGLE DOOR WITH SIDE LIGHTS. PLANS AND ELEVAION REVISED. 4. RIGHT SIDE: (NORTH ELEVATION AND SOUTH ELEVATION) ELEVATION OF WINDOWS TO LIVING ROOM, DINING, MASTER BEDROOM, BATHROOMS HAS BEEN REVISED TO MEET FLOOR PLANS. SEE ELEVATIONS 5. ROOF PLAN: REVISED ROOF PITCH ON GARAGE TO 12:2-SHEET A-8 r WILSON Nq/AMPM`k IJESIG& CONSTRUCTION CO. A � Advasntacge Truss RECEIVED Company LLC JUN 1 8 2004 CITY Of. BURLINGAME PLANNING DEPT. DATE: 06/17/04 TO- CITY OF Br tRT-WC A h is AL Y'A�-,TAGG "I'WSS CC. LLC REGARDINU: DUAL PITCH TRUSSES Dear Sir. The "Irises on 2700 Martinez, are Dual Pitchcd to match the exterior elevation and hei&ht regW.'runient required by itis City,,also the ridge is.at rnwamuiri height. The Scissor Resign is the oniy application that will meet the City of Burlingame',s, Building and Planning Department's requirements. There have been no deviations of the Slope and Pitch. Chuck Mullaney, PesidenT Advantage Truss Co., LLC / 2025 San Juan Road, Hollister, CA 95023 Phone 831-635-0377 • Fax 831-635-0379 �I� � t S fi c .�y��?"{A� ,�1'..-t �999 ' �• t ��{,( r rAA•R � 1 { �<j a �'1 FI � �f tt 11 H I { � Y14I •1 '�, �q1 I Ile 01 IPA I� 'tJ 9 y •,4r C j'� l f+5�� � 1 ( t 1 1 Y { I I. 4 I f Yy,,� 5 ["�' L„� tx' tip' ; }a<S,hl�'�•: :� Y;::F'.?ojy!.,e::. Y.it.fr}� �' � f Cab t N t F } '3'F r f r�Tve�✓M ynG. ��•il 1d �� t. �''t, y,r r ..� @i 4 k ,�a >.5't � V .✓ o $'� N`b {4 r�i'§°,r} 'f' P4 r I �a � f1 t ♦.s kl<I .,� r ;�,�( s>~r f t 'R�'Fr 2 Y� t T+ . r ,y>✓ r l d I L� G �'. i„Yf Yl: Irr � ]�w hkk'S ?wr ia} G i r t'k ix7� y o w 3e: WN I 1 at�� V 94 « , y R c X11 t YX� it M 'U15 I n`: T05 1 1ypp1�g �r ”� Y' � I r `' � � _ I�lry+lsi��1�,'�„^� .�w �Ra� +hrl df ! a y.FAi.d 'r ✓,bl° � I ,„; !if� r , I r 4 a r �r. .. w W m:'� q{kl 1 ,,{iiia p�4 ply duu w` �'� ' •C M �M I I 'TI y . ;, .•:. .. .1 ,.. :'-../ t;:.u.. Ey :.: �'L,:*t � IIL:,:_ III,:�� !I:. .?ti �,,.,. s.. ,. <.... .�.� ,, ., ...•.. ..:.•. A-k w, . .a .... x a+n 1` '.;�.,• kw'gy. ',.� �,;�' -���, tk.i. �� I NI 'y ra :111;1 .'/'7 i, `�� `", _..,>,S�� � �I la -._ r,dur,•..• .: �� � ,,� .fr`•a{ � `P"" .§ sr�; �'•5;.z ;€: •ti. a9.k t,g..; v> r, vr [ ��€ 'g.9 ,,, ,r' 'vy •� "3, ;� i ,�• is `,�t � i 'r�•� ,�, �k. $a 9, s '�, x*,,5,�x :.r.. � a< ¢ v:, 't 31,3t�; •�Y. laa�i�,s }ty jr ¢ E� r}} l��i 4 't' '�''���'� � .9.Z: �� a�, 1 MOW" 6 ti '* ,:,,�f� "`..� •• �Q'�bra t., 6.4 r., gym.„,.•• wr dE( .�• A i y N .a 7 1 l 'fi �st,f r..: e + t_, tr• j'a�, � >ti t� 'M�. .'�'4i„ y "ti�!� ` - s �,�1•� ,�• < 1 M { n h •' y'r';kCt a tri w � �. ��; F1� s t ..J*-^. F19^.Y:�na' � r ,�'�'�a� I.�✓J'Jr�h.4�p t�. _ � u h: � � ry '; (^�'> rF r d'fi itt �;� 1 I <��� t.�^ x�S�, , 'I:;����l:i�f' x 11 ,�.i 1� i''.?• { ' 'A-, ,d �I �57 � 1 -1. ,i,.F�',�• L 4 t�l'' 0 •F t d .{, .,,` 4y' -ir, ? $,, i: � �i' ..t.�', .nd'; I.'Nl.l�'r tr •� ,.1. '�.,i, �"�Q y}�' .h.;• -<e ��,i � r J , i � t � € It:A 7 Y�+ a• t �ar;� i e arr;�3< +'t ,I A3��'.:r ���"tr � � ,' :1 f',,« ,,.y'' Vp'w�•.n`.{t� n,.« , r..,rtt rt r�� t" , v+Y s 5iy k. t[��� 5 rt„ i. tis r.+ is R ,arr, t y kFt l i 7 ., wk, JIM 3 y, µ 1 ,~ i ,�t`1t t;;1�1Y'}} '. - _ @,,�� _� Sa t�u J,C t • I°ht } y �4 ti l y k sf # u Yq� n$ ,.J4 1 K O i d5 3'9in 1}1 ,l;;{�,I'fl 1 d'#!`tL7 F�ll:�!;."j ' 1 ':-i' pd s• i�,a yi' j.x, t. I � I4� '. j.wP { § .}.!. ,a ,.. 71. � i '°�, .1.,h,):';:. a�rf ,>t p�,iwl:.• kr :3:-d:1�1 u'+:c' � .•r.: �, !4.,. �� ..t 1.. , .,}.y' 77 :•r, .7. 1 :�. te'. f �,.,jP, i# :s�',. fi�S.Ak 'Fi t� a. I , F. g1,.,g� w:l�. r ,.S_�,.' �(�{ !l i i •�. .;7 i': � �f> i. ,.�, w. .J } i v ,W'.,h i�.ir. �: ) �". '.�. �;i b,1 r.� •• .1 6ifi�': 'k• -� .F''`"t ;. Y ....::z "...v �:•", �. .:. .:.+. ,,.9 r. ,r._ I �y-r Z I.'1..N � t :.t. E;'3 � .,r 'k �1{T r.�%MLS.,.. m: ,. : .- -'- •:. If..;s'-.., .:.,. :.,.' ':i ,. Yq.. � 1'.m. w' 4.r,:k ij }!::, , t(�.j:i-:�v ! o-$... a. s d. .+y,d ti� I t �Ir>l', ..:,.-: ,,, ! 2t..ra., �: ,., t ,.�1 r ..:�:.. ..... :'N.-aVl,r I�.f .�13s •�, ��� f'-i. � {,.;,I } •,.�.RI �� •?S•' �.5:. .:��7�' �:�... � !1t :I v, t r.A I; _ ,,.<<. �P;;d: .:4." ,. ;; .j :Ir•.1:n,: .!*, ,: .j{,., ,, i�: ,.( d ca'I �i i .rc a �' tl r 4';J v' , U:;I ,�t•. Ix y. ,�, .�;w -1141,::ii. �r, I .''i �` r� 4,1: � �. . '�' �:.5 ,�'.vI} ,'�. -'rn ,R, .+,�'a I I :ur• ,,:. .a 1:: :,i !;� ..� e �..}.r}�'• I; •.� x'1.1-r�n`f ,`g�. :� t � i•' II rc� �' N S� i,•Ga. .1�� I;��.{.. 1.1111 ni�.r yl 7,1'�9� h. � I::' I, � �' ,{, {f�1 r 4; 11 f,9,;•,I ,t��,. t�,I M �N,� �. i.;l�(ll x ,qp��' II r.. Y:•r f. � � 1 ,. 1, ,' , d.' ,j' '1 I�,. # I .u•y 1 ; !.r ., N , Id .;.L . :,�: �4'; d. �I I I .I 16 , ,,9!". , . ` ,+ ��'. p1 J{ I ,L`�''' �4,!:h . Ola'I'if .r ..� tll.. �nr I. 4 r,r. i:' i" a a{I tid. G i l.k i'/,i�.ea}r 1,� a�.,, '�.F ,I I ( ���•'!• I �N.I�I ,.�a 1 I• � I l u1:,1:�.! It I�,Ir. l`f 1�1 I•�. I �' I �,r i. �. 'r:l�nlf �/ff1 � 'I� I q:.C.:, h+ .1, �al. 'll '•� ) 'I I I N.'Lc. I 10',el.@t � � � Ing, 1 R '#�i:l S Il.l d+';!4„I� Y � 'q. ;i• fl"� '� I 'i I- I 1 I � I � 't .,I� }H t'��. Ii I'•, II ry� 'yl ,.k. �Nh1 9 � �I� al I�;�: I '�� 1' II ,f`', �••{{ iry�' r 6"+I P� i�'I'1! ;�. I '!I 1 r I�1'r� i,r Jl q;•r !'II� I"' 't '�' ,c.p 3.,, ,�f'{,�r. `'�� a ! i 'r ,I ::t �ar � ';��1. .kl� I�Y�, r ' d., ,4�t'�� "q A u ,tF���P;I'k' ��Ij. �,�1y, P„ ,I�I. '♦) ', t I �y!� A I �� I{ I 1 - i .p:ti'1?.. i I� .F•�f., Ad. �tll :d. �' Y:.. 44:1 M..h t...'t +r�• r:.I,: I!,. �.,v,' III .� tF .� a I•. I v � r��, "h I. w^"ia^r 'c h• :y r I b ,� I:yy' •.�,�,8P',,,C ��i;l. � i R d �*19.;� ( r .�I:,c. e � c,� '� 'k"d?.3, dr �a �, C 9 "yy �,.��P� 9 � �qs� 4 u 1g ,5,� z � F.�S ,�y�d ��� a a g ..� s„ � c9• �� gyp,# .y a �o.p,I S 'F•'. u5&� r^r, '�'r,� c i` Nus a. �� ,�. •8�, N I i ,4 �� �i t " 4 A I ,.��YKG� i. � d • '^�'' y�. .'a r ' G`•�:�iai, � � ,q � M? fi 1�w� .p�f1'?LY: h M1 r 3355�'i�i 'K 'R,• ..Y.. b i�;Y�%:F L:!' 4 qr: i.:p 1 <6 •.I. b 1 1'�. f tp'<' Yy' i "• 1 -11 K-�p >;• 4:!''Jf 2P 1#ttnS:�� ,.iS';d }r 1St.,• 'i .P rrtt -. { J, ,..:: .. s• ,rt ,. ;^,:. �"trFx , x-`t�17)'I s '� i{ -t:+ ,.:•ti i F{w.. i }�. f t !+, ! G�+S..;� r.'.I."�' "4r.• i�F".-.r} 1•".. :If i !.:f. •,.� ,. '"# �:,. t z.., � ':��E ! t .�+� �'�: x .,t.:ir ' t'.,r t „d3r. •�#, ti.'r;: r$°'�f� i 4';� ��„ �4,�, ,.;� 'i ��' a� 1,�7 1'4'f r "xfkd ° 1 t a x•�t b,t t t �a tw 1��{' If'�°� �r 5�g3 � ft ^.+e 'awM dry ata ,Y•. rw r, a $•y;4b '��+�iGrp �1. rF� '� ,Yn I I VII , ' bb it r , ALI Wm�I III,:, ar, '7 1 �� r _ • u� M 4 c �.• iS •i' �4v 1 'w. t fJG„ir' '?i y IJS t,, d .. 'N' i•r _ ,q # Yr�,j 1 y I,,,i,,§,1 W I .;I � dn;��-i.:�J• F e� r City of Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes October 14, 2003 Commissioners asked: • Are there are lot of substandard 4,000 SF lots in this area, if so, have any other variances been granted for these lots; • Why are the new stairs not located inside of the house, could locate them where the laundry and bath are currently located and move laundry and bath upstairs, it is easier to put on outside of house,but not compliant with code; and • Need to see tree protection plan for the birches in the front yard, have City Arborist review prior to returning the project for action. This item was set for the regular action calendar when all the information has been submitted and reviewed by the Planning Department. This item concluded at 7:16 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. No consent items for review VIII. REGULAR ACTION ITEM 2. 2700 MARTINEZ DRIVE,ZONED R-1—APPLICATION FOR A HILLSIDE AREA CONSTRUCTION PERMIT FOR A SINGLE STORY ADDITION (VIRGINIA PON, APPLICANT; WILSON NG, DESIGNER; JANE CHUAN, PROPERTY OWNER) (44 NOTICED) PROJECT PLANNER: ERIKA ^� LEWIT Reference staff report October 14, 2003, with attachments. SP Brooks presented the report, reviewed criteria and staff comments. Nine conditions were suggested for consideration.Commission asked ifthe story poles had been surveyed. SP Brooks explained that there was no requirement to have story poles surveyed, unless specifically requested story poles are not surveyed. Chair Bojues noted that all Commissioners had visited the site. Chair Bojues opened the public hearing. Wilson Ng, project designer, was available to answer questions. Spoke with the neighbor and agreed to lower height. Existing flat roof on the garage is 10'-6", so agreed to lower the plate line to 7' and make gable with a 4:12 pitch to prevent blockage of view. Kevin Slaboda,2704 Martinez Drive, submitted pictures of the story poles, not opposing project now since plate height was lowered. There were no further comments and the public hearing was closed. Commission discussion: design meets criteria; neighbor is not opposed; went to Mr. Slaboda's house and viewed the story poles from his dining room, distant views will not be impacted; would like to add two additional conditions 1) that construction will match story poles (refer to pictures); and 2) garage plate height will be no higher than 7 feet. C.Keighran moved to approve the application,by resolution,with the following amended conditions: 1)that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department date stamped October 1, 2003, sheet T-1 and sheet A-1 through A-11, and that any changes to building materials, exterior finishes, footprint or floor area ofthe building shall require an amendment to this permit;and that the roof ridge ofthe addition shall be 2'-6" lower than the existing roof ridge with a 4:12 roof pitch for the addition, and that the 2 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes October 14, 2003 garage shall have a 4:12 roof pitch, and the plate height of the garage shall not exceed 7 feet; 2)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; 3) that the conditions of the City Engineer=s,the Fire Marshal=s,the Chief Building Inspector=s, and the Recycling Specialist's June 30,2003 memos shall be met; 4) that the applicant shall submit a certified arborist report to detail tree protection measures for the protected-size Pepper tree at the front ofthe property and that this report shall be reviewed and approved by the City Arborist prior to any grading on the site and prior to the issuance of a Building permit; and if the protected-size Pepper tree is to be removed, the applicant shall apply for and receive a Protected-size Tree Removal Permit from the Parks Department prior to removing the tree; 5) that the applicant shall comply with Ordinance 1503, the City of Burlingame Storm Water Management and Discharge Control Ordinance; 6)that during demolition and grading for the addition,the applicant shall use all applicable"best management practices" as identified in Burlingame's Storm Water Ordinance,to prevent erosion and off-site sedimentation of storm water runoff,7)Water Management Plan must be submitted with landscape and irrigation plans at time of permit application; 8)that demolition of the existing structures and any grading or earth moving on the site shall be required to comply with all the regulations of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District;9)that any improvements for the use shall meet all California Building and Fire Codes,2001 Edition as amended by the City of Burlingame;and 10)that the construction shall match the height and location of the story poles erected prior to construction, as shown in photos date stamped October 14, 2003. The motion was seconded by C. Osterling. Chair Boju6s called for a voice vote on the motion to approve. The motion passed on a 6-0-1 (C. Brownrigg). Appeal procedures were advised. This item concluded at 7:23 p.m. 1401 PALM DRIVE, ZONED R-1 — APPLICATION FOR A PARKING VARIANCE, SPECIAL PERMIT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS TO CONVERT A DETACHED GARAGE TO A RECREATION ROOM(PARCA, JERRY MARTIN, APPLICANT AND PROPERTY OWNER;MARY DUNLAP, DESIGNER) ( 71 NOTICED)PROJECT PLANNER: RUBEN HURIN Reference staff report October 14,2003,with attachments. Planner Barber presented the report, reviewed criteria and staff comments. Five conditions were suggested for consideration. Commissioners asked CA Anderson if the use of the property can be considered extraordinary circumstances to satisfy variance findings. CA Anderson stated that yes,use can be considered to satisfy variance findings as long as the use exists,when reverts to single family use the variance would be required to return to garage use. Commission asked if staff has received any complaints or concerns on this site. Staff stated that there were no complaints or inquires received about this project. Commission asked how condition#3 will be enforced,would like to add a condition that requires property owner to notify the City when there is a change in use on this property. Chair Boju6s opened the public hearing. Jerry Martin, PARCA, 1750 El Camino Real, applicant explained that this is the only home like this in the entire County;provides service for kids 6-17 years of age, many of them have multiple disabilities and need mobility assistance, this requires more space. They are not proposing to expand the program, staff or number of children; need bathroom in recreation room since mobility is an issue,the garage door is being replaced with a new garage door so that the space can easily be converted back into a garage use. Patricia Scheppler, 1415 Palm Drive, next door neighbor, asked if the �-- garage door will be open during use, concerned with noise, parking is not currently a problem and they are not hiring more people, and are doing a fabulous job. Jerry Martin of PARCA stated that the kids will be 3 City of Burlingame Item# 2 Hillside Area Construction Permit Regular Action Calendar Address: 2700 Martinez Drive Meeting Date: 10/14/03 Request: Hillside area construction permit for a first floor addition. Applicant: Virginia Pon Date: 10/14/03 Property Owner: Jane Chuan APN: 026-084-010 Designer: Wilson Ng Lot Area: 11,688 SF General Plan: Low Density Residential Zoning: R-1 CEQA Status: Article 19. Categorically Exempt per Section: 15301 Class 1 - (e) additions to existing structures provided the addition will not result in an increase of more than 50% of the floor area of the structures before the addition. Summary: The subject site is a corner property at the intersection of Martinez Drive and Toledo Avenue. The front door faces Martinez Drive and the Martinez frontage is defined by the code to be the front of the property. There is an existing detached garage located in the front of the property that is forward of the main dwelling by approximately 30 feet. The owner applied for a hillside area construction permit through the Planning Department to add 896 SF to the first floor of the main dwelling and to change the roof on the existing garage. The proposed application also included a swimming pool to be installed in the rear yard, adjacent to the Toledo Avenue frontage of the property. Neighbors appealed the hillside area construction permit on September 2, 2003 (see attached letter and pictures from 2704 Martinez Drive). The applicant is proposing to add 896 SF to the first floor of the existing dwelling. The majority of the added floor area will be to the front of the dwelling, which will extend the existing roof ridge 32'-10" towards Martinez Drive. The applicant is also proposing to change the roof on the existing detached garage from a flat roof to a gabled roof with a 4:12 pitch that will match the existing roof of the dwelling. A hillside area construction permit is required to evaluate the issue of potentially blocked views by any construction proposed on this property. The applicant is requesting the following: • Hillside area construction permit for proposed structures that are greater than 30 inches from adjacent grade. PROPOSED EXISTING ALLOWED/REQ'D SETBACKS Front(Istflr): 20'-2" 53'-0" 20'-2" Side(left): no change 3'-1" (to detached garage) * T-0" (right): 13'-0" 20'-6" 7'-6" Hillside Area Construction Permit 2700 Martinez Drive PROPOSED EXISTING ALLOWED/REQ'D Rear: no change T-8" * 15'-0" Lot Coverage: 3,724 SF 2,796 SF 3,885 SF 38% 29% 40% FAR: 3,659SF 2,763 SF 4,358SF 0.38 FAR 0.28 FAR 0.45 FAR Parking: no change 2 covered 2 covered (20'x 20') (20'x 20') 1 uncovered 1 uncovered (9' x 20') (9'x 20') #of bedrooms: 5 4 --- Height: single-story single-story 30'-0" DHEnvelope: --- --- see code * Existing, non-conforming condition. �.. Staff Comments: See attached. Planning staff would note that this application is for Hillside Area Construction Permit only. The application is not subject to Design Review. Applications for hillside area construction permits that do not require any zoning code exceptions are first mailed to neighbors within 100' of the property, Planning Commission and City Council. Those applications that are appealed must go to a study hearing and then an action hearing before the Planning Commission. Study Meeting: At the Planning Commission study meeting on September 22, 2003, the Commission made the following comments and moved to place the project on the regular action calendar when revised plans had been submitted(September 22, 2003, Planning Commission Minutes). • Commission's comments ➢ Applicant's response o Staff response • Would like applicant to install story poles before next review so that able to see view impact in the field; and would like access to the neighbor's house, if possible, so can see impact on views after story poles are installed; ➢ The plans reviewed by the Commission at the study hearing proposed an addition to the house that would have a 5:12 roof ridge and would continue the ridge at the same height of the existirig roof ridge. In response to the neighbor's concern about a loss of view, the applicant has revised the plans(date stamped October 1, 2003), showing that the front yard �_ 2 Hillside Area Construction Permit 2700 Martinez Drive will be graded for the proposed addition and the proposed roof ridge will be 2'-6" lower than the existing ridge and the pitch for the addition will be 4:12. The plans have also been revised to change the proposed roof pitch on the garage from 5:12 to 4:12. ➢ The applicant had story poles installed on September 29, 2003 to reflect the revise plans. The neighbors (2704 Martinez Drive) that appealed the original proposal have submitted a letter and pictures to note that they are withdrawing their appeal of the addition because the revised proposal does not block their view of the bay(see attached letter dated September 23, 2003). • Would like the outline of the swimming pool demarcated by stakes and tape on the ground in the rear yard; ➢ The applicant has staked out the pool dimensions on the property. The applicant notes that there is a portion of the pool(closest to the dwelling)that cannot be staked because there is currently a sunroom on the house(proposed to be demolished)that encroaches into the pool footprint. • Plans should be amended to include the location and size of the large tree at the northwest corner of the site; ➢ The plans have been amended to show the tree in relation to the addition. The applicant has submitted a letter, dated October 3, 2003, indicating that they wish to keep the tree and will submit a certified arborist report for review with their Building permit. o The City Arborist has visited the site to evaluate the tree and the story poles were in place at the time of his visit. He has identified the tree as a protected-size Pepper --� tree that is in marginal health. The City Arborist states that he will support a Protected-size Tree Removal Permit, should the applicant choose to remove the tree. If the applicant chooses to keep the tree,he requires that a certified arborist report be submitted for his approval to address tree protection measures during grading and construction on the site. (Please see condition#4). • Plans should be amended to call out the dimensions of the setbacks and size of the pool equipment enclosure, the location of the pool house is unclear on the present plans; ➢ The plans have been revised to show that the proposed pool equipment will be located in the rear, right corner of the property, along Toledo Avenue. The equipment enclosure will be irregularly shaped,but is approximately 5'x 5'. o Refer to the attached C.S. 23.01.040,b for enclosure regulations. Enclosures that are located in the rear 30% of a lot, such as the structure proposed with this application, are exempt from setback requirements. The Building Department will determine if the structure is soundproof during the Building permit plan check. • Staff should discuss the pool ordinance and the Commission's authority to review swimming pools,this site looks as if there might be a problem with the steepness of the slope; o The swimming pool is not subject to hillside area construction permit review because this ordinance applies only to structures that are greater than 30-inches from grade(excluding fences that meet code maximums for height). The Planning Department reviews proposed pools for required setbacks (see attached C.S. 23.01.040). The pool proposed at 2700 Martinez Drive meets all required setbacks. --. 3 Hillside Area Construction Permit 2700 Martinez Drive It is the Building Department's responsibility to review proposed grading and structural requirements for the swimming pool as part of a Building permit plan check. Required Findings for Hillside Area Construction Permit: Review of a hillside area construction permit by the Planning Commission shall be based upon obstruction by construction of the existing distant views of nearby properties. Emphasis shall be given to the obstruction of distant views from habitable areas within a dwelling unit(Code Sec. 25.61.060). Planning Commission Action: The Planning Commission should hold a public hearing. Affirmative action should be by resolution and include findings made for hillside area construction permit and the reasons for any action should be clearly stated. At the public hearing the following conditions should be considered: 1. that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department date stamped October 1, 2003, sheet T-1 and sheet A-1 through A-11, and that any changes to building materials, exterior finishes, footprint or floor area of the building shall require an amendment to this permit; and that the roof ridge of the addition shall be 2'-6" lower than the existing roof ridge with a 4:12 roof pitch for the addition, and that the garage shall have a 4:12 roof pitch; 2. 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; 3. that the conditions of the City Engineer's, the Fire Marshal's, the Chief Building Inspector's, and the Recycling Specialist's June 30, 2003 memos shall be met; 4. that the applicant shall submit a certified arborist report to detail tree protection measures for the protected-size Pepper tree at the front of the property and that this report shall be reviewed and approved by the City Arborist prior to any grading on the site and prior to the issuance of a Building permit; and if the protected-size Pepper tree is to be removed, the applicant shall apply for and receive a Protected-size Tree Removal Permit from the Parks Department prior to removing the tree; 5. that the applicant shall comply with Ordinance 1503, the City of Burlingame Storm Water Management and Discharge Control Ordinance; 6. that during demolition and grading for the addition, the applicant shall use all applicable "best management practices" as identified in Burlingame's Storm Water Ordinance, to prevent erosion and off-site sedimentation of storm water runoff, `-- 4 Hillside Area Construction Permit 2700 Martinez Drive 7. that the project is subject to the state-mandated water conservation program, and a complete Irrigation Water Management Plan must be submitted with landscape and irrigation plans at time of permit application; 8. that demolition of the existing structures and any grading or earth moving on the site shall be required to comply with all the regulations of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District; and 9. that any improvements for the use shall meet all California Building and Fire Codes, 2001 Edition as amended by the City of Burlingame. Erika Lewit Planner c: Virginia Pon 5 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes July 12, 2004 Al, A2-A2.3 and A7, and date stamped July 1, 2004, sheets AO and A3-A6; and that any changes to the footprint or floor area of the building shall require and amendment to this permit, 2)that all windows on the first and second floors shall be true divided light; 3)that any changes to the size or envelope of the first or second floors, which would include adding or enlarging a dormer(s), moving or changing windows and architectural features or changing the roof height or pitch, shall be subject to design review; 4)that prior to scheduling the framing inspection,the project architect, engineer or other licensed professional shall provide architectural certification that the architectural details such as window locations and bays are built as shown on the approved plans; if there is no licensed professional involved in the project, the property owner or contractor shall provide the certification under penalty of perjury; certifications shall be submitted to the Building Department; 5) that prior to final inspection, Planning Department staff will inspect and note compliance of the architectural details(trim materials,window type, etc.)to verify that the project has been built according to the approved Planning and Building plans; 6)that all air ducts,plumbing vents, and flues shall be combined,where possible,to a single termination and installed on the portions of the roof not visible from the street;and that these venting details shall be included and approved in the construction plans before a Building permit is issued; 7) that prior to scheduling the roof deck inspection, a licensed surveyor shall shoot the height of the roof ridge and provide certification of that height to the Building Department;8)that the conditions of the City Engineer's, Chief Building Official's and Recycling Specialist's May 17, 2004 memos, and the Fire Marshal's May 24, 2004 memo shall be met; 9)that the project shall comply with the Construction and Demolition Debris Recycling Ordinance which requires affected demolition, new construction and alteration projects to submit a Waste Reduction Plan and meet recycling requirements;any partial or full demolition of a structure, interior or exterior, shall require a demolition permit; 10) that the applicant shall comply with Ordinance 1503, the City of Burlingame Storm Water Management and Discharge Control Ordinance; and 11) that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building Code and California Fire Code, 2001 edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame. The motion �— was seconded by C. Auran. Chair Osterling called for a voice vote on the motion to approve. The motion passed on a 5-0-2 (Cern. \/ Brownrigg, Keighran absent). Appeal procedures were advised. This item concluded at 7:55 p.m. 1� 6. 2700 MARTINEZ DRIVE, ZONED R-1 - APPLICATION FOR AN AMENDMENT TO A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED HILLSIDE AREA CONSTRUCTION PERMIT FOR ROOF CHANGES TO THE SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING AND DETACHED GARAGE (VIRGINIA PON AND KEVIN PARKIN, APPLICANTS, WILSON NG, DESIGNER; JANE H. CHUAN, PROPERTY OWNER) (46 NOTICED)PROJECT PLANNER: CATHERINE BARBER Reference staff report July 12, 2004,with attachments. CP Monroe presented the report, reviewed criteria and staff comments, noting that this is a review of a previously approved hillside area construction permit which was appealed to the Planning Commission and then not built according to the approved plans. The Building Department has stopped work on this project until this issue is resolved. Nine conditions were suggested for consideration. Commissioners asked: do not understand the "scissor roof'; CP noted that at the front there are two ridges of the same height parallel rather than the originally proposed single ridge line 2'-6" lower than the existing roof ridge. There seems to be a discrepancy between the roof ridges shown in the letter from the roof truss company and the ridges shown on the submitted plans; CP suggested that the commission discuss this with the applicant. Clarified that the maximum height is as approved even though there are more ridges? Yes. This one story addition did not require design review?No design review was required in the code. 6 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes July 12,2004 Chair Osterling opened the public hearing. Kevin Parkin, 446 20"'Avenue, San Francisco, represented the project. Kevin Slaboda, 2704 Martinez Drive, neighbor, also spoke. The project representative noted that with the two parallel ridges the maximum height of the roof stays the same,2'-6" lower than the existing, as originally approved and the 4:12 pitch remains the same;retained the existing garage because ofthe cost,roof pitch flattened to 2:12 because of the way the structure was framed originally,particularly the headers at the doors, at 2:12 the ridge of the garage is a lower height despite the higher plate line. At time neighbor complained about the double ridge, the truss company had made a mistake in installing the trusses, this has been corrected now and the ridges are at the lower approved height. Commission clarified:the present ridges are the same height as originally approved;yes, 2'-6" lower than existing, only added a second ridge. Why was the garage not built according to the approved plan?Am asking for a 74"plate where originally thought the plate would be T the minimum allowed, this addressed the neighbor's view concern, when opened up garage found unusual framing that would mean the entire building would have to be rebuilt to meet the approved height requirement with a roof pitch which matched the house,4:12. Changed the garage roofpitch to 2:12 because thought view more important than aesthetics. Neighbor noted the building is OK now as shown in picture, concern is roof height, before this present roof, there was a different roof with a higher ridge line; neighbor asked to sign off on that, refused and then wrote letter which resulted in them placing a new roof, as roof now done its OK with him. There were no more comments from the floor. The public hearing was closed. Commissioner discussion: to be "built to code" structure must be built as shown on the approved plan? CA noted that was the case, if not according to the approved plan the structure is not compliant with the code. Am always concerned when applicant returns to the Commission to ask approval for something done which is not in accord with the approved plans, shows lack of respect for the Commission and process;in this case -� the visual impact of the changes, especially the garage,increase the mass and bulk of the house,would like to see the garage built according to the approved plans. Did the applicant come to the Building Department and ask to amend building permit for change to roof. CP noted no. C. Auran noted that the applicant had made a strong effort to maintain the view as shown on the approved plans so would move approval by resolution with the conditions as follows: 1)that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department date stamped June 18, 2004, sheet T-1 and sheet A-1 through A-11, and that any changes to building materials, exterior finishes, footprint or floor area of the building shall require an amendment to this permit; and that the addition to the house shall have two parallel roof ridges,that shall be 2'-6"lower than the existing roof ridge with a maximum height of 14' and a 4:12 roof pitch for the addition, and that the garage shall have a plate height of 81" with a 2:12 roof pitch and a maximum height not to exceed 11'4"; 2) 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;3)that the conditions of the City Engineer's,the Fire Marshal's, the Chief Building Inspector's, and the Recycling Specialist's June 30, 2003 memos shall be met; 4) that the applicant shall submit a certified arborist report to detail tree protection measures for the protected-size Pepper tree at the front of the property and that this report shall be reviewed and approved by the City Arborist prior to any grading on the site and prior to the issuance of a Building permit; and if the protected-size Pepper tree is to be removed, the applicant shall apply for and receive a Protected-size Tree Removal Permit from the Parks Department prior to removing the tree; 5) that the applicant shall comply with Ordinance 1503,the City of Burlingame Storm Water Management and Discharge Control Ordinance; 6)that during demolition and grading for the addition,the applicant shall use all applicable"best management practices" as identified in Burlingame's Storm Water Ordinance,to prevent erosion and off-site sedimentation 7 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes July 12,2004 of storm water runoff, 7)that the project is subject to the state-mandated water conservation program,and a complete Irrigation Water Management Plan must be submitted with landscape and irrigation plans at time of N— permit application; 8)that demolition of the existing structures and any grading or earth moving on the site shall be required to comply with all the regulations of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District;and 9) that any improvements for the use shall meet all California Building and Fire Codes,2001 Edition as amended by the City of Burlingame. The motion was seconded by C. Keele. Comment on the motion: Agree that this project clearly was not built according to the approved plans, builder knew that to deviate from the plans he would need to return to the Planning Commission and Building Department, would like to slap his wrist,but in the end he did respect the approved height key to the view issue, and the neighbor has not expressed a concern about additional impact on his view. Would like the garage roof to be kept at 4:12 and like that the view was respected. It is important that the plans be followed, not the first time this applicant has come forward with a similar change in the field resulting from showing the Commission originally something that cannot be built, cannot support when he did not come to the Commission before changing the structure. What can be done to avoid this problem? CA noted that a stop work order has been placed on this project,it took some time to get to the Commission and the project sat, the Commissioners can hold tight on approvals where there is a design element and require that the project is built as approved or reconstructed,the Commission does not have to accommodate the applicant. Commission comment continued: have mixed feelings,the mass and bulk of the garage are increased by the change to the roof of the garage, am offended that applicant went ahead without regard for the city's concerns, on other hand the view issue was respected; if this were a design review would require reconstruction, only issue here is hillside area construction permit, testimony of the neighbor and the photo indicate that the change does not impact any distant views, hands are tied for this application, nothing to `-- prevent approval, but would have no hesitation to stop other projects and hope that the design community hears that message. Biggest design impact is the higher plate line and flatter roof on the garage, it is beyond design review the applicant has violated a contract with the City on this and on previous projects,at least the garage was originally agreed to.Would the maker of the motion amend the motion to require reconstruction of the garage as originally approved with a 4:12 pitch roof? Maker of the motion indicated he would not amend his motion. It should be clear to the applicant and others what the Planning Commission's concerns are regarding building which deviates from the approved plans, the project should be returned to the Commission for review and approval as opposed to walking on everyone. Chair Osterling called for a roll call vote on the motion to approve the amendment to the hillside area construction permit to allow two parallel ridges 2'-6"lower than the existing roof ridge and a 4:12 roof pitch and a garage at the same height as approved with a 2:12 roof pitch and higher plate line. The motion passed on a 3-2-0-2 (Cers. Bojues, Vistica dissenting; Cers. Brownrigg, Keighran absent) voice vote. Appeal procedures were advised. This item concluded at 8:35 p.m. 7. 1755 ROLLINS ROAD,ZONED M-1 -APPLICATION FOR PARKING VARIANCE(W.L.BUTLER, APPLICANT;JASON BELL,CARLILE COATSWORTH ARCHITECTS,INC.,ARCHITECT;GRANT RIGGS PROPERTY OWNER) (12 NOTICED)PROJECT PLANNER: CATHERINE BARBER Reference staff report July 12, 2004, with attachments. CP Monroe presented the report, reviewed criteria and staff comments. Six conditions were suggested for consideration. CP suggested, that if approved, the addition of a condition that this variance be limited to the warehouse,wholesale showroom by appointment only not to exceed 10, 000 SF use on this site. Commissioners noted what is the hardship associated with the applicant being required to replace the sidewalk on the north side of the property?How did the replacement 8 Item# (g Action Calendar City of Burlingame Hillside Area Construction Permit Amendment Address: 2700 Martinez Drive Meeting Date: 7/12/04 Request: Hillside area construction permit amendment to a hillside area construction permit approved by the Planning Commission in October 2003 for a single story addition and changes to the roof pitch of an existing garage at 2700 Martinez Drive, zoned R-1 (C.S. 25.61.060) Applicant: Virginia Pon and Kevin Parkin APN: 026-084-040 Property Owner: Jane H. Chuan Lot Area: 6,000 SF Designer: Wilson Ng Zoning: R-1 General Plan Designation: Low Density Residential Date Submitted:June 18,2004 CEQA Status: Article 19. Categorically Exempt per Section: 15301 Class 1 - (e) additions to existing structures provided the addition will not result in an increase of more than 50%of the floor area of the structures before the addition. Request: The applicant did not build the structures on this site according to the plans approved by the Planning Commission at their October 14,2003 meeting. The applicant is now requesting that the Commission approve the changes to the design. The changes include modifying the roof of the dwelling from having one 4:12 ridge above the living room, to having 2 parallel 4:12 ridges, and increasing the plate height of the detached garage from 7' to 8'1" and changing the roof pitch from 4:12 to 2:12. The subject site is a corner property at the intersection of Martinez Drive and Toledo Avenue. The front door faces Martinez Drive and the Martinez frontage is defined by the code to be the front of the property. The existing detached garage is located at the front of the property that is forward of the main dwelling by approximately 30 feet. The hillside area construction permit approved in October 2003 was for a 896 SF single story addition, most of which is areas added to the front of the dwelling going towards Martinez Drive. The permit also included changing the roof of the existing detached garage and adding a swimming pool in the rear yard. The applicant has submitted a letter from the truss company stating that the scissor design on the roof of the house is necessary in order to meet the height requirements for this project. There were no changes made to the footprint of the structures on this site and all zoning code regulations are met. The following changes have been made to the approved project. The modifications resulted in the following changes: Roof Framing—Dwelling 1) Roof above living room area approved with 1 ridge with a 4:12 roof pitch, has been constructed with 2 ridges, each with a 4:12 roof pitch; Garage 1) Plate height approved at 7', has been constructed with a 8'1"plate; 2) Roof pitch approved at 4:12, constructed at 2:12. Front Elevation 1) Front entry approved with double doors, changed to a single door with a window on each side. Dwelling PROPOSED APPROVED EXISTING ALLOWED/REQ'D CHANGES 10/14/03 SETBACKS Front(I st flr): no change 20'-2" 53'-0" 20'-2" Hillsi le Construction Permit Amendment 2700 Martinez Drive PROPOSED APPROVED EXISTING ALLOWED/REQ'D CHANGES 10/14/03 Side(left): no change no change 3'-1"(to detached garage)* 7'-0" (right): 13'-0" 20'-6" 7'-6" Rear: no change no change 7'-8" * 15'-0" Lot Coverage: no change 3,724 SF 2,796 SF 3,885 SF 38% 29% 40% FAR: no change 3,659SF 2,763 SF 4,358SF 0.38 FAR 0.28 FAR 0.45 FAR Parking: no change no change 2 covered 2 covered (20'x 20') (20'x 20') 1 uncovered 1 uncovered (9'x 20') (9'x 20') #of bedrooms: no change 5 4 --- Height: no change 14' 16'6" (single story) 30'-0" DHEnvelope: --- --- --- see code * Existing,non-conforming condition. ara e PROPOSED APPROVED EXISTING ALLOWED/REQ'D CHANGES 10/14/03 Size: No change 502 SF 587 SF 600 SF (demo storage room attached to garage) Plate height: 8'-1" 7'-0" 9'-0" 9'-0" Height: 11'-4" 1114" 10'-3" 15'-0" Staff Comments: See attached. Planning staff would note that this application is for Hillside Area Construction Permit amendment. The one story addition application is not subject to design review and meets all code requirements. Because this project is currently under construction staff determined that it could be brought back to the Commission as an action item. A letter of concern was received by the Planning Department on May 18,2004 from the original appellants at 2704 Martinez Drive(attached). They have concerns with the height of the roof addition and object to any modifications to the original plans as approved by the Planning Commission at their October 2003 meeting. Please see attached 'atter for more information. History: On August 26,2003,the Planning Department mailed out notices for a hillside area construction permit 2 Hillside Construction Permit Amendment 2700 Martinez Drive for an 896 SF a single story addition to the front of the house located at 2700 Martinez Drive,which is not subject to design review. The project also included adding an in-ground pool in the rear yard and changing the roof on the existing detached garage from a flat roof to a gabled roof with a 4:12 pitch to match the existing roof of the dwelling. The project complied with the zoning requirements but because of the Hillside Area Construction Permit requirements(C.S.25.61)notices and reduced plans were sent to the property owners within 100 feet of the subject property, along with Planning Commissioners and City Council members. There is a 7 day review period. On September 2, 2003 the neighbors at 2704 Martinez Drive appealed the Hillside Area Construction Permit. On September 22,2003 this item went to the Planning Commission as a study item,and came back as an action item on the October 14, 2003 agenda. At the study meeting the Planning Commission requested that story poles be installed. The applicant installed story poles and in response the neighbors concerns the applicant came back to the action meeting with revised the plans that included grading the front yard at the proposed addition which would result in the proposed roof ridge on the house being 2'6" lower than the existing ridge. The roof pitch was also changed from 5:12 to a 4:12 pitch. The revised plans included matching the proposed roof pitch on the garage from 5:12 to 4:12. With the story poles installed and the plans revised the neighbors that appealed the project submitted a letter, dated September 23, 2003, withdrawing their appeal. In their October 14,2003 action the Planning Commission approved the revised plans with conditions that required the roof ridge of the addition to be 2'6"lower than the existing roof ridge with a 4:12 roof pitch,and the garage to have a 4:12 roof pitch. The approval also included the standard condition that requires that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted the Planning Department with any changes to the building materials, exterior finishes, footprint or floor area requiring an amendment to the permit. There was also a condition added to the approval by the Commission that states that the construction shall match the height and location of the story poles erected prior to construction as shown in photos date stamped October 14, 2003 (attached for reference). _-N A building permit for this work was issued on January 14,2004. In June 2004 the Planning Department was notified by a Building Inspector that the work being done on this site was not consistent with the plans approved October 14, 2003 by the Planning Commission. The applicant was notified that in order to proceed with the project they must either remove the construction and re-build according to the plans approved by the Planning Commission in October 2003, or apply for an amendment to the Hillside Area Construction Permit. An application for a hillside area construction permit amendment was submitted to the Planning Department on June 18, 2004 and is summarized above. Required Findings for Hillside Area Construction Permit: Review of a hillside area construction permit by the Planning Commission shall be based upon obstruction by construction of the existing distant views of nearby properties. Emphasis shall be given to the obstruction of distant views from habitable areas within a dwelling unit (Code Sec. 25.61.060). Planning Commission Action:The Planning Commission should hold a public hearing. Affirmative action should be by resolution and include findings made for hillside area construction permit amendment and the reasons for any action should be clearly stated. At the public hearing the following conditions should be considered: 1. that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department date stamped June 18, 2004, sheet T-1 and sheet A-1 through A-11, and that any changes to building materials, exterior finishes, footprint or floor area of the building shall require an amendment to this permit; and that the addition to the house shall have two parallel roof ridges,that shall be 2'-6"lower than the existing roof ridge with a maximum height of 14' and a 4:12 roof pitch for the addition, and that the garage shall have a plate height of 8'1"with a 2:12 roof pitch and a maximum height not to exceed 11'4"; 3 Hillsile Constriction Permit Amendment 2700 Martinez Drive 2. 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; 3. that the conditions of the City Engineer's, the Fire Marshal's, the Chief Building Inspector's, and the Recycling Specialist's June 30,2003 memos shall be met; 4. that the applicant shall submit a certified arborist report to detail tree protection measures for the protected- size Pepper tree at the front of the property and that this report shall be reviewed and approved by the City Arborist prior to any grading on the site and prior to the issuance of a Building permit; and if the protected- size Pepper tree is to be removed,the applicant shall apply for and receive a Protected-size Tree Removal Permit from the Parks Department prior to removing the tree; 5. that the applicant shall comply with Ordinance 1503, the City of Burlingame Storm Water Management and Discharge Control Ordinance; 6. that during demolition and grading for the addition,the applicant shall use all applicable"best management practices" as identified in Burlingame's Storm Water Ordinance, to prevent erosion and off-site sedimentation of storm water runoff; 7. that the project is subject to the state-mandated water conservation program,and a complete Irrigation Water Management Plan must be submitted with landscape and irrigation plans at time of permit application; that demolition of the existing structures and any grading or earth moving on the site shall be required to comply with all the regulations of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District; and 9. that any improvements for the use shall meet all California Building and Fire Codes, 2001 Edition as amended by the City of Burlingame. Catherine Barber Planner c: Virginia Pon and Kevin Parkin, applicants 4 ROUTING FORM DATE: June 30, 2003 TO: _City Engineer _Chief Building Official Fire Marshal Recycling Specialist _City Arborist _City Attorney FROM: Planning Staff SUBJECT: Request for a hillside area construction permit for a single story addition at 2700 Martinez Drive, zoned R-1, APN:025-022-010. STAFF REVIEW: Monday,June 30, 2003 Applicant shall submit a Waste Reduction Plan and Recycling Deposit for this and all covered projects and sections of projects prior to any demolition, construction or permitting. Reviewed By: Date of Comments: 6 Project Comments Date: 06/21/2004 To: EI City Engineer ❑ Chief Building Official ❑ Fire Marshal ❑ Recycling Specialist ❑ City Arborist ❑ City Attorney From: Planning Staff Subject: Request for hillside area construction permit amendment at 2700 Martinez Drive, zoned R-1, APN:025-022-010 Staff Review: 06/21/2004 Reviewed by: � .-J Date: V'"v"� '�C ROUTING FORM DATE: June 30, 2003/City TO: Engineer Chief Building Official Fire Marshal Recycling Specialist _City Arborist _City Attorney FROM: Planning Staff SUBJECT: Request for a hillside area construction permit for a single story addition at 2700 Martinez Drive, zoned R-1, APN:025-022-010. STAFF REVIEW: Monday,June 30, 2003 4 Reviewed By: e/.'"" Date of Comments: Project Comments Date: 06/21/2004 To: ❑/City Engineer �t Chief Building Official ❑ Fire Marshal ❑ Recycling Specialist ❑ City Arborist ❑ City Attorney From: Planning Staff Subject: Request for hillside area construction permit amendment at 2700 Martinez Drive, zoned R-1, APN:025-022-010 Staff Review: 06/21/2004 -95e) 1-95r-- )a off Cc, V& ,Tl�"'a`/Y Reviewe by: Date: Lf s(-2-ilo-4- ROUTING FORM DATE: June 30, 2003 TO: City Engineer Chief Building Official Fire Marshal Recycling Specialist _City Arborist _City Attorney FROM: Planning Staff SUBJECT: Request for a hillside area construction permit for a single story addition at 2700 Martinez Drive, zoned R-1, APN:025-022-010. STAFF REVIEW: Monday,June 30, 2003 (/`E.000-c'/ j 4G('fj 40*S eA-Z,- 1/t�J C- &/9/ CBS C% uo�JG w Olevcic 0, Reviewed By:1(1 Date of Comments: 4 03 ROUTING FORM DATE: June 30, 2003 TO: _City Engineer _Chief Building Official X Fire Marshal Recycling Specialist _City Arborist _City Attorney FROM: Planning Staff SUBJECT: Request for a hillside area construction permit for a single story addition at 2700 Martinez Drive, zoned R-1, APN:025-022-010. STAFF REVIEW: Monday,June 30, 2003 `4"6t_je Q Reviewed By: _ Date of Comments: 3 O ROUTING FORM DATE: June 30, 2003 TO: - City Engineer Chief Building Official ire Marshal V Recycling Specialist City Arborist City Attorney FROM: Planning Staff SUBJECT: Request for a hillside area construction permit for a single story addition at 2700 Martinez Drive,zoned R-1, APN:025-022-010. STAFF REVIEW: Monday,June 30,2003 Applicant shall submit a Waste Reduction Plan and Recycling Deposit for this and all covered projects and sections of projects prior to any demolition,construction or permitting. Reviewed By: Date of Comments: ROUTING FORM DATE: 'June 30, 2003 TO: V City Engineer _Chief Building Official Fire Marshal Recycling Specialist _City Arborist _City Attorney FROM: Planning Staff SUBJECT: Request for a hillside area construction permit for a single story addition at 2700 Martinez Drive, zoned R-1, APN:025-022-010. STAFF REVIEW: Monday,June 30, 2003 Reviewed By: I-V" Date of Comments: �I; / � ROUTING FORM - DATE: June 30, 2003 TO: City Engineer -7Chief Building Official Fire Marshal Recycling Specialist _City Arborist _City Attorney FROM: Planning Staff SUBJECT: Request for a hillside area construction permit for a single story addition at 2700 Martinez Drive, zoned R-1, APN:025-022-010. STAFF REVIEW:Monday,June 30, 2003 60 o C tgez:oZ�ae�— puro65�s &f CBGQe—�% /�ar'ce �$l�ow �levc�c a�f o-1 �lzti Reviewed By: Date of Comments: O/O'sj ROUTING FORM DATE: June 30, 2003 TO: _City Engineer _Chief Building Official X Fire Marshal Recycling Specialist _City Arborist _City Attorney FROM: Planning Staff SUBJECT: Request for a hillside area construction permit for a single story addition at 2700 Martinez Drive, zoned R-1,APN:025-022-010. STAFF REVIEW: Monday,June 30, 2003 Reviewed By: Date of Comments: 3 d CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, CA September 22, 2003 Council Chambers -� I. CALL TO ORDER Chair Bojues called the September 22,2003,regular meeting of the Planning Commission to order at 7:00 p.m. II. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Auran, Bojues, Brownrigg, Keighran, Keele, Osterling and Vistica Absent: Commissioners: None Staff Present: City Planner, Margaret Monroe; Planner, Hurin; City Attorney, Larry Anderson. III. MINUTES The minutes of the September 8, 2003 regular meeting of the Planning Commission were approved as amended: Page 2 first paragraph following item 2c add"...nicely design house consistent with the neighborhood pattern, size,mass and bulk";page 8,before last paragraph add,"C.Osterling arrived at 8:30 p.m.;and page 9 1504 Arc Way,paragraph 4,"...motion to refer to a design reviewer and to place....". IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA There were no changes to the agenda. V. FROM THE FLOOR There were no public comments. VI. STUDY ITEMS 1. 2700 MARTINEZ DRIVE,ZONED R-1—APPLICATION FOR A HILLSIDE AREA CONSTRUCTION PERMIT FOR A SINGLE STORY ADDITION (VIRGINIA PON, APPLICANT; WILSON NG, DESIGNER; JANE CHUAN, PROPERTY OWNER) PROJECT PLANNER: ERIKA LEWIT PLR Hurin presented a summary of the staff report. Commissioners noted the following: • Would like applicant to install story poles before next review so that able to see view impact in the field; • Would like the outline of the swimming pool demarcated by stakes and tape on the ground in the rear yard; • Would like access to the neighbor's house,if possible, so can see impact on views after story poles are installed; • Staff should discuss the pool ordinance and the Commission's authority to review swimming pools, this site looks as if there might be a problem with the steepness of the slope; • Plans should be amended to call out the dimensions of the setbacks and size of the pool equipment enclosure, the location of the pool house is unclear on the present plans; • Plans should be amended to include the location and size of the large tree at the northwest comer of the site. This item was set for the regular action calendar when all the information has been submitted,reviewed by the Planning Department, and there is space on the agenda. This item concluded at 7:10 p.m. City of Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes October 14, 2003 Commissioners asked: • Are there are lot of substandard 4,000 SF lots in this area, if so, havether variances been granted for these lots; �" • Why are the new stairs not located inside of the house,cou cate them where the laundry and bath are currently located and move laundry and bath u irs,it is easier to put on outside of house,but not compliant with code; and • Need to see tree protection plan for t arches in the front yard,have City Arbo eview prior to returning the project for action. This item was set for the regular a . n calendar when all the information ie�eensubmitted and reviewed by the Planning Department. is item concluded at 7:16 p.m. VII. ACTION ITEM Consent alendar-Items on the consent ndar are considered to be routine. They are acted on simultaneously unless separa discussion and/or action is req ed by the applicant,a member of the public or a commissioner prior to the time the cogdhission votes on the motion to opt. No consent items for review VIII. REGULAR ACTION ITEM 2. 2700 MARTINEZ DRIVE,ZONED R-1—APPLICATION FOR A HILLSIDE AREA CONSTRUCTION PERMIT FOR A SINGLE STORY ADDITION (VIRGINIA PON, APPLICANT; WILSON NG, DESIGNER; JANE CHUAN, PROPERTY OWNER) (44 NOTICED) PROJECT PLANNER: ERIKA LEWIT Reference staff report October 14,2003,with attachments. SP Brooks presented the report,reviewed criteria and staff comments. Nine conditions were suggested for consideration.Commission asked if the story poles had been surveyed. SP Brooks explained that there was no requirement to have story poles surveyed,unless specifically requested story poles are not surveyed. Chair Bojues noted that all Commissioners had visited the site. Chair Bojues opened the public hearing. Wilson Ng,project designer,was available to answer questions. Spoke with the neighbor and agreed to lower height. Existing flat roof on the garage is 10'-6",so agreed to lower the plate line to 7' and make gable with a 4:12 pitch to prevent blockage of view. Kevin Slaboda, 2704 Martinez Drive,submitted pictures of the story poles,not opposing project now since plate height was lowered. There were no further comments and the public hearing was closed. Commission discussion: design meets criteria;neighbor is not opposed;went to Mr. Slaboda's house and viewed the story poles from his dining room, distant views will not be impacted; would like to add two additional conditions 1) that construction will match story poles (refer to pictures); and 2) garage plate height will be no higher than 7 feet. C.Keighran moved to approve the application,by resolution,with the following amended conditions: 1)that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department date stamped October 1,2003,sheet T-1 and sheet A-1 through A-11,and that any changes to building materials,exterior finishes, footprint or floor area of the building shall require an amendment to this permit; and that the roof ridge of the addition shall be 2'-6"lower than the existing roof ridge with a 4:12 roof pitch for the addition,and that 2 City olBurlingame Planning Commission Minutes October 14, 2003 the garage shall have a 4:12 roof pitch, and the plate height of the garage shall not exceed 7 feet; 2)that al l 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; 3) that the conditions of the City Engineer's,the Fire Marshal's,the Chief Building Inspector's, and the Recycling Specialist's June 30,2003 memos shall be met; 4) that the applicant shall submit a certified arborist report to detail tree protection measures for the protected-size Pepper tree at the front of the property and that this report shall be reviewed and approved by the City Arborist prior to any grading on the site and prior to the issuance of a Building permit; and if the protected-size Pepper tree is to be removed, the applicant shall apply for and receive a Protected-size Tree Removal Permit from the Parks Department prior to removing the tree; 5) that the applicant shall comply with Ordinance 1503, the City of Burlingame Storm Water Management and Discharge Control Ordinance;6)that during demolition and grading for the addition,the applicant shall use all applicable"best management practices"as identified in Burlingame's Storm Water Ordinance,to prevent erosion and off-site sedimentation of storm water runoff,7)Water Management Plan must be submitted with landscape and irrigation plans at time of permit application;8)that demolition of the existing structures and any grading or earth moving on the site shall be required to comply with all the regulations of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District; 9)that any improvements for the use shall meet all California Building and Fire Codes, 2001 Edition as amended by the City of Burlingame; and 10) that the construction shall match the height and location of the story poles erected prior to construction, as shown in photos date stamped October 14, 2003. The motion was seconded by C. Osterling. Chair Boju6s called for a voice vote on the motion to approve. The motion passed on a 6-0-1 (C. Brownrigg). Appeal procedures were advised. This item concluded at 7:23 p.m. 3. 1401 PALM DRIVE,ZONED R-1— PLICATION FOR A PARKING VARIANCE,SP CIAL PERMIT AND CONDITIONAL USE P ITS TO CONVERT A DETACHED GARAGE A RECREATION ROOM (PARCA, JERR ARTIN, APPLICANT AND PROPERTY O R; MARY DUNLAP, DESIGNER 71 NO ED PROJECT PLANNER: RUBEN HURIN Reference st report October 14,2003,with attachments. Plann artier presented the report,reviewed criteria staff comments. Five conditions were suggested consideration. Commissioners asked CA And on if the use of the property can be considered raordinary circumstances to satisfy variance f ings. CA Anderson stated that yes,use can be co 'dered to satisfy variance findings as long as the use exists,when reverts to single family use the vari would be required to return to garage use. Commission asked if staff has received any complaints or c cerns on this site. Staff stated that there were no complaints or inquires received about this project. Co fission asked how condition#3 will be enforced,would 1' o add a condition that requires property er to notify the City when there is a change in use on this operty. Chair Boju6s opened the pu is hearing.Jerry Martin,PARCA, 1750 El Camino R ,applicant explained that this is the only hom ike this in the entire County;provides service for kid -17 years of age, many of them have multiple sabilities and need mobility assistance, this requi s more space. They are not proposing to exp d the program, staff or number of children; nee athroom in recreation room since mobility is an ' ue,the garage door is being replaced with anew rage door so that the space can easily be converted ck into a garage use. Patricia Scheppler, 14 alm Drive, next door neighbor, asked if the garage or will be open during use,concerned with noise,parking is not currently a problem and they are not hiring more people, and are doing a fabulous job. Jerry Martin of PARCA stated that the kids will be 3 4��CITY O� BURUNGAME °� a °NATm.nwic°- The City of Burlingame CITY HALL 501 PRIMROSE ROAD TEL: (650)558-7250 PLANNING DEPARTMENT BURLINGAME,CALIFORNIA 94010-3997 FAX: (650)696-3790 October 27, 2003 Virginia Pon or Jane Chuan 2700 Martinez Drive Burlingame CA 94010 Dear Ms. Pon, rice there was no appeal to or suspension by the City Council, the October 14, 2003 Planning Commission approval of your application for a hillside area construction permit became effective October 24, 2003. This application was to allow for a single-story addition to an existing dwelling and a change to the roof pitch of an existing garage at 2700 Martinez Drive, zoned R-1. The October 14,2003 minutes of the Planning Commission state your application was approved with the following conditions: 1. that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department date stamped October 1,2003,sheet T-1 and sheet A-1 through A-11,and that any changes to building materials,exterior finishes, footprint or floor area of the building shall require an amendment to this permit;and that the roof ridge of the addition shall be 2'-6"lower than the existing roof ridge with a 4:12 roof pitch for the addition, and that the garage shall have a 4:12 roof pitch, and the plate height of the garage shall not exceed 7 feet; 2. 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; 3. that the conditions of the City Engineer's, the Fire Marshal's, the Chief Building Inspector's, and the Recycling Specialist's June 30, 2003 memos shall be met; 2700 Martinez Drive 4. that the applicant shall submit a certified arborist report to detail tree protection measures for the protected- size Pepper tree at the front of the property and that this report shall be reviewed and approved by the City Arborist prior to any grading on the site and prior to the issuance of a Building permit;and if the protected- size Pepper tree is to be removed,the applicant shall apply for and receive a Protected-size Tree Removal Permit from the Parks Department prior to removing the tree; 5. that the applicant shall comply with Ordinance 1503,the City of Burlingame Storm Water Management and Discharge Control Ordinance; 6. that during demolition and grading for the addition,the applicant shall use all applicable"best management practices" as identified in Burlingame's Storm Water Ordinance, to prevent erosion and off-site sedimentation of storm water runoff; 7. Water Management Plan must be submitted with landscape and irrigation plans at time of permit application; 8. that demolition of the existing structures and any grading or earth moving on the site shall be required to comply with all the regulations of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District; 9. that any improvements for the use shall meet all California Building and Fire Codes, 2001 Edition as amended by the City of Burlingame; and 10. that the construction shall match the height and location of the story poles erected prior to construction, as shown in photos date stamped October 14, 2003. All site improvements and construction work will require separate application to the Building Department. This approval is valid for one year during which time a building permit must be issued. One extension of up to one year may be considered by the Planning Commission if application is made before the end of the first year. The decision of the Council is a final administrative decision pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.6. If you wish to challenge the decision in a court of competent jurisdiction,you must do so within 90 days of the date of the decision unless a shorter time is required pursuant to state or federal law. Sincerely yours, Margaret Monroe City Planner EL 2700MART.cca Chief Building Inspector Chief Deputy Valuation, Assessor's Office --� (LOT 2 BLOCK 31 MILLS ESTATE NO 11 RSM 46/35 36; APN: 025-022-010) r �� o v ► �-�- �- ; v--\ RECEIVED OCT 14 2003 CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING DEPT. Dv, a } A ' yNo RECEIVED 0 C T 14 2003 CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING DEPT. City of Burlingame Planning Department 501 Primrose Road P(650)558-7250 F(650)696-3790 www.burlingame.org A CITY 10Z '1. APPLICATION TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION Type of application: Design Review Conditional Use Permit Variance Special Permit Other Parcel Number: Project address:_t APPLICANT PROPERTY OWNER / r Name: l�iyU � �9 � /�.✓�,��2j Name: Address: �oc� G amer �.� Address: on City/State/Zip: City/State/Zip: w Phone(w)�� ��9 Phone( ): b� ?�� - /_� (fly (fly ARCHITECT/DESIGNER Name:__./� p� Address: City/State/Zip: Please indicate with an asterisk Phone(w):_(S_l b) .3 the contact person for tl> rejN,/E D JUN 1 8 2004 CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING DEPT. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: o?n z 3�G 3 /ae� AFFADAVIT/SIGNATURE: I hereby certify under penalty of perjury that the information given herein is true andorrec to the best of my knowledge and belief. Applicant's signatur : Date:—g-- 7—C I know about the proposed application and hereby authorize the above applicant to submit this application to the Planning Commission. Property owner's signatur Date: 6' �. Date submitted: PCAPP.FRM AMPEAK DESIGN& CONSTRUCTION COMPANY -� 8255 Skyline Blvd., Oakland, California 94611 (510) 339-3233 RESPONSE LETTER TO: CITY OF BURINGAME-PLANNING DEPT. 501 PRIMROSE ROAD, BURLINGAME, CA 94010-3997 RECEIVED (650) 558-7250 FAX (650) 696-3790 DATE: JUNE 16, 2004 JUN 1 8 2004 SUBMIT DATE: 6/7/04 CHECK DATE: 6/11/04 CITY OF BURLINGAME EXPIRATION DATE: (180 DAYS) FROM SUBMIT DATE PLANNING DEPT. PROJECTS: 2700 MARTINEZ ST.- BURLINGAME, CA PERMIT NUMBER: 2024919 (REV. TO 2023653) ZONE: R-1 OCCUPANCY GROUP: R3 TYPE OF CONSTR.: VN RESPONSE TO: PLANNING DEPT. COMMENTS AND ATTACHED COMMENTS REQ'D SUBMITTAL: RESPONSE LETTER —� PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS: SUMMMARY OF CHANGES AND INCONSISTENCIES (DENOTE WITH SYMBOL AND CLOUDED) 1. GARAGE—PLATE REVISED FROM 7' TO 8'-1"AND ROOF PITCH REVISED FROM 12:4 TO 12:2. SEE ROOF PLANS AND GARAGE ELEVATIONS. 2. HOUSE: ROOF RIDGE REVISED TO TWO RIDGES WITH 12:4. SEE ROOF PLAN. 3. FRONT ELEVATIONS: FRONT ENTRY CHANGED DOUBLE DOORS TO SINGLE DOOR WITH SIDE LIGHTS. PLANS AND ELEVAION REVISED. 4. RIGHT SIDE: (NORTH ELEVATION AND SOUTH ELEVATION) ELEVATION OF WINDOWS TO LIVING ROOM, DINING, MASTER BEDROOM, BATHROOMS HAS BEEN REVISED TO MEET FLOOR PLANS. SEE ELEVATIONS 5. ROOF PLAN: REVISED ROOF PITCH ON GARAGE TO 12:2-SHEET A-8 r WILSON Nq/AMPLAK DESIG CONSTRUCTION CO. HARRY A.VELLENO P.E. 902 Fallen Leaf Redwood City, CA 94062 Phone: (650)556-1137 Fax: (650)474-2030 June 16, 2004 City of Burlingame Building Department RE : 2700 Martinez, Burlingame I have reviewed the engineered roof truss design (including calculations, details, and layout plans)prepared by Advantage Truss Company LLC dated 5-19-04. I found the design acceptable and in accordance with the structural requirements. Sincerely, 1 FESS ti � Z No.C.E.60712 m EXP. s cnnL 91FOF CALIFC��\P Harry Velleno, PE HARRY A.VELLENO P.E. 902 Fallen Leaf Redwood City, CA 94062 Phone: (650)556-1137 Fax: (650)474-2030 June 16, 2004 City of Burlingame Building Department RE : 2700 Martinez, Burlingame I have reviewed the engineered roof truss design (including calculations, details, and layout plans) prepared by Advantage Truss Company LLC dated 5-19-04. I found the design acceptable and in accordance with the structural requirements. Sincerely, Q ESS! C13o C No.C.E.6 712 m EXP.113/0i( F�f CALIFCC� Harry Velleno, PE --o RECEIVED Kevin Slaboda MAY 18 2004 Jennifer Slaboda 2704 Martinez Dr. CITY OF BURLINGAME Burlingame,CA. 94010 PLANNING DEPT. City of Burlingame Planning Department 501 Primrose Road Burlingame, CA. 94010 May 16, 2004 Dear Burlingame Planning Department, We are submitting this letter to state our concerns regarding the current construction at 2700 Martinez Drive Burlingame, CA. It is our concern that the current height of the roof addition does not match the modified plans approved in October 2003. Kevin Slaboda attended the planning commission meeting in which the plans for this property were approved and submitted photos of the story poles erected which were used to evaluate the impact the construction would have on our views. We are requesting the modified construction plans are adhered to and no modifications are approved for the construction at 2700 Martinez Drive. Best Regards, I� Kevin Slaboda ennifer Slaboda RESOLUTION APPROVING CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION AND HILLSIDE AREA CONSTRUCTION PERMIT AMENDMENT RESOLVED,by the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame that: WHEREAS,a categorical exemption has been proposed and application has been made for a hillside area construction permit amendment for modifications to a Planning Commission approval of a hillside area construction permit for a single story addition and changes to the roof pitch of an existing_garage at 2700 Martinez Drive, zoned R-1, Jane H. Chuan,property owner, APN: 025-022-010; WHEREAS,said matters were heard by the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame on July 12, 2004, at which time it reviewed and considered the staff report and all other written materials and testimony presented at said hearing; NOW, THEREFORE, it is RESOLVED and DETERMINED by this Planning Commission that: 1. On the basis of the Initial Study and the documents submitted and reviewed, and comments received and addressed by this commission, it is hereby found that there is no substantial evidence that the project set forth above will have a significant effect on the environment, and categorical exemption, per CEQA Article 19. Categorically Exempt per Section: 15301 Class 1 - (e) additions to existing structures provided the addition will not result in an increase of more than 50%of the floor area of the structures before the addition. 2. Said hillside area construction permit amendment is approved, subject to the conditions set forth in Exhibit"A"attached hereto. Findings for such hillside area construction permit amendment are as set forth in the minutes and recording of said meeting. 3. It is further directed that a certified copy of this resolution be recorded in the official records of the County of San Mateo. CHAIRMAN Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame,do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 12th day of July, 2004 ,by the following vote: AYES:COMMISSIONERS: NOES:COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: SECRETARY 1 EXHIBIT "A" Conditions of approval for categorical exemption and hillside area construction permit amendment 2700 Martinez Drive effective July 22,2004 1. that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department date stamped June 18, 2004, sheet T-1 and sheet A-1 through A-11, and that any changes to building materials, exterior finishes, footprint or floor area of the building shall require an amendment to this permit; and that the addition to the house shall have two parallel roof ridges,that shall be 2'-6" lower than the existing roof ridge with a maximum height of 14' and a 4:12 roof pitch for the addition, and that the garage shall have a plate height of 8'1"with a 2:12 roof pitch and a maximum height not to exceed 11'4"; 2. 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; 3. that the conditions of the City Engineer's,the Fire Marshal's,the Chief Building Inspector's,and the Recycling Specialist's June 30, 2003 memos shall be met; 4. that the applicant shall submit a certified arborist report to detail tree protection measures for the protected-size Pepper tree at the front of the property and that this report shall be reviewed and approved by the City Arborist prior to any grading on the site and prior to the issuance of a Building permit;and if the protected-size Pepper tree is to be removed,the applicant shall apply for and receive a Protected-size Tree Removal Permit from the Parks Department prior to removing the tree; 5. that the applicant shall comply with Ordinance 1503, the City of Burlingame Storm Water Management and Discharge Control Ordinance; 6. that during demolition and grading for the addition, the applicant shall use all applicable "best management practices"as identified in Burlingame's Storm Water Ordinance,to prevent erosion and off-site sedimentation of storm water runoff; 7. that the project is subject to the state-mandated water conservation program,and a complete Irrigation Water Management Plan must be submitted with landscape and irrigation plans at time of permit application; 8. that demolition of the existing structures and any grading or earth moving on the site shall be required to comply with all the regulations of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District; and 9. that any improvements for the use shall meet all California Building and Fire Codes,2001 Edition as amended by the City of Burlingame. C TY CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING DEPARTMENT .�.p/' 501 PRIMROSE ROAD BURLINGAME,CA 94010 •` TEL:(650)558-7250 Site: 2700 MARTINEZ DRIVE Application for an amendment to a previously PUBLIC HEARING approved hillside area construction permit for roof changes to the single family dwelling and NOTICE detached garage at: 2700 MARTINEZ DRIVE , zoned R-1. (APN: 025-022-010). The City of Burlingame Planning Commission I announces the following public hearing on Monday,July 12, 2004 at 7:00 P.M. in the City Hall Council Chambers located at 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, California. Mailed:July 2,2004 (Please refer to other side) CITY OF BURLINGAME A copy of the applica ' ay be reviewed prior to the meeting a la1 Primrose Road, Burlingame,Cal' If you cl ge t u ma be limited to raising onl hos ss ues ed a e blic hearing, described in tIV!!"c2 d to the city at or prior ti iflaWSMIN C A L 1 F O R - t A Property o ers car 1 onsl1 r I forming their tenants a t thi no i mformatio ple se call (650) 558-7250. iank Margaret City Planner A� 6� PU ICE (Please refer to other side) fi � � "�,� "`,�"� �' � �^`ta?< 4�" w" � `� �iy�,•€s �, � "t •� 'dam'^" � r� �a .r€, `i" fix,�,e���^��`o � .- s;9i W a� .. x�r� .�""' t� � ..:,1.°• ''' ? s n rf eR , an So M � �, �,._ � ^,f � � �f � � ,�3� �., }` .xy,zr �za... � r,�4 F�=x� ,.�' ta•° Sa 7,31z } x l i' ��' � ^ua k`A 6���-,x"'�" t.. :Asx �s�a,<'` _ u •� '"' r'/ ,�y f"�§5�4.°',�.,y� �, �• ,z � +"w �c s "OP', a ^h�..'� f�'`',' ,� 5 t; y^^, err `9 �--'-^, 'tea,» ,.V - �' t .a ,��� `•°��� i�uv�. '"^�Y'- � �"� �. ,. '.)= s ,�:.., ,a,, �.„.y o p :'2., e .' t�}�_ '�f ».w < ,F..•. .a .ay°moi mr ,�; d=.'��.� u, - 1,4 F "� i � f .,?'". .fir .,�•,'.. * $ `�� � �. +r r » \ . 4 Y i t A ' Apt IVA p' r;.; „; - .,,.�•�,y5 .,. ..r � .. t • '. ,.,, �' p� ar` '- �� W��= J �,'F' �.,`';fi:� 'jzw4 "� : e' 'Y,�+"s�r ''�W .�:. ,.�k `",a�.� y. �r - � � t� �tr+y �' � w��.. :L�i •x �1 a f�„! „�.,°` �.` s Y , • ..°,�, c` ',�...: "`'` •� "''""�°•'„ '^'^� 1�Y,� r•�";. � � k4, a` /'„ 'S °C,:.g.1 � 14� °d♦`,,� ,+a �i C '✓l.e.,, r "' ,` i i P aa7" !,�' r ;`•-.:$ x e� ..; . .7 `y +p!. .. ':. u �M w °`�. ""�° ..• _. ....'..m^^•-.. .,V,t' �`�' kms" r '�s"` '=f r}�••� rt. �$.;• .R �: +£},,,e .�.a c }� t's� t.,� �^ra� ! � 4�`,y;'. �' '"`$a'b"�'�'�,"`r�� .•�a "��r"� "+ �°f , b Nl- r: aw p, ,r �^':`;� '.�i��x"' �� ti�`Y • 5 _ .:�,� � r g,r 'r+ r'' .a l,: � '�-�`� ':-.3 ;';apr+�,�c 3 L-� � F �<: � ��`. �: .�, � •4x, � Mw". k ,y,1 5"fh'{. ' 3 :Sx�� R ,! ,, l-.': .. w .. a '. .. -• .,�A6'g.+,�. ,s .�'.• +*}i.x� ''ktiaav t p nq�� a>.r .. •�'. . :. 1" .,,�:- .. '. .u r a ..,. ,,", :..� �r i. r'.` ,-r iii..:: - m�"rx .�* ,g. �" ,V ..'�A ,,«,4 ° �p ;t:x � •..,� _�. �� w�'�• r' 3 �,Fnt;;,C;:`u.3( v" 'x.; � i �i w.. Y � - � , , ;n �,e x.;,.,y� "e:' ''• +21�� NrF ,k ,� �`.. 4 VY. ($t' �" YSs.'`._� :xr"• f'b �*•+': �? X�' i:V. :.�a � �''fi..'7` ye,� 4 s i a+, , x � ".. �,?"r:sem ,. ��r,+ ;r ., ::; .£ � ��' x +. ,e��e � X.•,f"i. .j` �a r�¢ +� �. iir �; 'f',. '„ va. '� _ nc+Y p � a^i'' 4�'Yytl'a' { °„ :+.V'w •cxa ,y a �. ia,T�,'� .:. .+Y ,'q,. l� •i,' ,r4, r"a.' " `.i `"S Rk. •�✓ ks�M, i' L"� i'ti: :' v +'K°�`,. �. , r .'. � w ,. �<. .}.yt ,."r, .-a 'Ya,. n a, x. �+5 ,ra.r ``� ♦♦♦♦ L s =�_< """'f�q>� a ♦ �,;• r'+d'.9 e w. ` .;ro ..: •.'. ,;c;{,." s k ° *"'�w� >3� ��' zr> i` s Fes,• r3, y € , , � a r • ` fa e , w �11 CITY o�, CITY OF BURLINGAME eURtlN4iAME PLANNING DEPARTMENT 501 PRIMROSE ROAD BURLINGAME,CA 94010 TEL:(650)558-7250 Site: 2700 MARTINEZ DRIVE Appeal to the City Council for an amendment to a previously approved hillside area PUBLIC HEARING construction permit for roof changes to a single family dwelling and detached garage at: NO'T'ICE 2700 MARTINEZ DRIVE, zoned R-1. (APN: 025-022-010). The Burlingame City Council announces the following public hearing on Monday, AUGUST 16, 2004 at 7:00 P.M. in the City Hall Council Chambers located at 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, California. Mailed: August 6,2004 (Please refer to other side) CITY OF BURLINGAME A copy of the applic �'--- ay be reviewed prior tin to the meeg a la g�D pa ent 1 Primrose Road, Burlingame,Cal' If you chal ge t u ma be limited to raising onl os ssues ed a he blic hearing, described i t c d to the city at or prior t t C A i. 1.114(;AwMAv= f a Property o ers Q_r I I nsi ori forming their 558-72500.. ` tenants t t I inple e call (650) ank Uu.. i - r bob t Margaret OD` � ! City Planner t6 ICE (Please refer to other side) MIM WRUWME The City of Burlingame CITY HALL 501 PRIMROSE ROAD TEL: (650)558-7250 PLANNING DEPARTMENT BURLINGAME,CALIFORNIA 94010-3997 FAX: (650)696-3790 July 20, 2004 Virginia Pon or Kevin Parkin 2700 Martinez Drive Burlingame, CA 94010 Dear Ms. Pon and Mr. Parkin, At the City Council meeting of July 19, 2004 your project at 2700 Martinez Drive, zoned R-1, was called up for review. The City Council scheduled an appeal hearing for your project at their next meeting on Monday, August 16, 2004 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, CA. We look forward to seeing you there to present your project. Please call me at 650-558- 7250 if you have any questions. Sincerely yours, Margaret Monroe City Planner c: City Clerk Jane H. Chuan, property owner 2700 Martinez Drive Burlingame, CA 94010 ROBERT P.WADELL,P.E. P.O.Box 1819 Burlingame,CA 94011-1819 (650)348-5010 August 16,2004 Hand Delivered Mayor Rosalie O'Mahony &City Council City of Burlingame 501 Primrose Road Burlingame,CA 94010 RE: Public Hearing - Your Invoice - Account No. 101-66210-221 Vacant Lot at 1220 Bayshore Highway Dear Mayor O'Mahony: There has been an ongoing litter problem along the Bay, at my property, and my northerly neighbor against the Bay(which many people believe is my property). For several years I have worked with city staff in addressing the matter. Mr. Palmer in particular has been helpful in meeting with the neighboring gas station which has reduced litter from the east side. However, litter continues from the bike path, Max's Restaurant takeout and the adjacent ECC building, especially near their dumpster.Additionally,the general public"imports"wood and debris to clog the drainage ditch to form a walking bridge. I have used Willow's Weed Control to spray the lot and used two licensed Burlingame landscape contractors,All-Green Landscape and Full Gardening Service.The most I have paid for complete clearing of the entire property and haul off of all weeds,liter,debris and including wood and concrete removal from the ditch is $425, and the least is $200. 1 have retained Timberline,another local firm,to remove dead tree wood and a fallen tree at a cost of$i50. Mr.Chung obtained one bid for$1,950 for litter removal only(no weed abatement)and awarded the work to Action Cleaning Services,a city vendor that apparently does not have a landscape or contractor's license. That compensation is five to ten times the amount that I have paid t licensed Burlingame firms for complete cleanup including weeds and litter/debris removal and about twenty times what a typical homeowner may pay monthly for once-a-week service.Action Cleaning Service claims to have done the work March 5,2003,yet on April 19,2003 All-Green Landscape did a complete cleaning and hauling including clearing some weeds that have grown up to 6 feet tall.Please see their attached signed testimony. I called Mr. Chung in early September after receiving the August 29,2003 invoice. Having had no response from him, I sent my October 10, 2003 letter to Mr. Chung with copies to Mayor Coffey and Finance Director Nava, stating that I believe the work either(1)was not done by Action or(2)mistakenly done to another property.This is based on the reasonableness of cost and the fact that All-Green did the complete job the next month for$425.This was discussed by telephone with Mr.Nava on Tuesday,October 14,2003. Mayor Rosalie O'Mahony August 16, 2004 Page Two Mr. Chung responded to my letter on October 23, 2003 and stated that "no weeds or other vegetation were removed under this work order because it was too early in the weed growing season". He furnished a copy of the one bid and award to Action, a city vendor. No other bids were obtained and there was no effort by Mr. Chung to determine the fair value of the bid. With respect to the August 5, 2004 staff report, there are portions that are incorrect as follows: 1. The "Background" section states that "the property owner cleaned the weeds but did not remove the rubbish from the property". Every cleaning that I have ordered has included complete weed and litter/debris. The complete service has been performed each time at a cost of $425 or less. After each cleaning I have inspected the work prior to payment. All work has been done to my satisfaction. 2. The "Discussion" section states that "the property owner has not been responsive for over a year". That statement is untrue. I phoned Mr. Chung upon receipt of his invoice in early September 2003 after the Labor Day weekend. He did not return my call. After he received my letter of October 10, 2003 he replied 13 days later on October 23, 2003 and apologized for not responding to my voice mail phone call. He knows I have contacted him during the last year. 3. Additionally I contacted the city by calling Mr. Nava the Finance Director on October 14'h to ask him to look into the contract process and the actions of Mr. Chung. I sent a copy of my October 10, 2003 letter to Mr. Nava and Mayor Coffey. In conclusion, I again ask that you void the invoice sent to me. The basis of this request is that I should not be required to pay the City of Burlingame for an amount paid by the city to an unlicensed vendor who made a false claim to the city for work that may not have been performed, and if performed had a value of about $100. 1 am available to discuss this further. Please call me at my office. 348-5010 Extension 202. Sincerely, 7 //1 ul/� Robert P. Wadell, P.E. Attachments: Wadell Letter of October 10, 2003 to Mr. Chung Statement signed by All-Green Landscape owner and employee. All-Green Invoice #496338 for $425 for complete cleanup Full Gardening Invoice EX2191 for $250 for complete cleanup INVOICE end NOTICE CITY Or SVRLINGANZ rINANCE DEPT. 301 PRIMROSE ROAD BURLINGAME, CALIrORNIA 94010 PLEASE RETURN ONE COPY OF THIS INVOICE WITH PAYMENT DATE: August 29,_2003 ANGELA & ROBERT WADELL P.O. BOX 1819 CONTACT: BURLINGAME, CA 94011-1819 ED CHUNG, PUBLIC WORKS DEPT. ACCOUNT NO. 101-66210-221 TELEPHONE 6501SW7230 TRASH ABATEMENT (PAPERS, V400DEN BOARDS, ETC.) FROM THE VACANT LOT AND ALSO IN THE CREEK ON BAYSHORE HICK MY BETWEEN 1200 BAYSHORE $10950.00 HIGHWAY AND 1240 BAYSHORE HIGHWAY. ABATED IN MARCH 2003 PER PURCHASE ORDER #13100, APN 026-142-020 & 026-142-030. PLEASE PAY THIS BILL WITHIN 45 DAYS FROM THE INVOICE DATE. 15% 0 & S $ 292.50 TOTAL: $2,242.50 2 COPIES TO PAYER 3 COPIES TO FINANCE (STAPLED) 1 COPY TO FILE F. MPSMLENNY010E AFTER 30 DAYS, UNPAID BALANCE WILL BE TURNED OVER TO COLLECTION AGENCY ROBERT P.WADELL,P.E. P.O.Box 1819 Burlingame,CA 94011-1819 (650)348-5010 October 10,2003 Mr.Ed Chung Public Works Department City of Burlingame 501 Primrose Road Burlingame,CA 94010 RE:Your Invoice-Account No.101-66210-221 Vacant Lot at 1220 Bayshore Highway Dear Mr.Chung: Upon receiving your invoice in early September,I called your office and left you voice mail that the invoice was sent to us in error in that 1 had the lot cleared and it was not done by the city. , I also asked that in the event you believe the lot was cleared by the city to please send me(1)a copy of the bids solicited by the city to do the work,(2)a copy of the contract for the work,and (3)the date the work was performed. To date,I have not had my phone call returned or reply by mail from you. In the event that the city paid someone to clean the lot, it was either(1) not done but was invoiced as if it was done,or(2)done to a different lot and mistakenly billed as my lot instead of the lot that was done. This is further evidenced by the attached signed statement by both the Owner of All-Green Landscape Service and his employee.At the time they did the work the weeds were up to six feet high.They were paid by check the total amount of$425.00 for complete cleaning and haul off.This is the same identical amount they were paid the previous year for the same work. Since the city claims to have paid$1,950.00,that invoice must have been for someone else's property. Please issue a credit memo to me with a copy to your finance department to resolve this matter. If you have any questions,please call me at my office,348-5010 Extension 202. Sincerely, Robert P.Wadeli,P.E. cc: Mayor Mike Coffey Jesus Nava,Finance Director All-Green Landscape Service 408 Bayview Ave. Millbrae, California 94030 650.253.7502 a s � � ccwt�a+�rs . P� o�►� . �o � �a���i was ►t(�d al-vi rc».;mac( p�7 t i r. ►t . ffr(� es�, s ,�. fie- 6L;tLk4 toja"-4 6So . Rajg . � . 496338 INVOICEADDRESS 4D CrrY MP CITY,STATE.ZIP x/11�1�I�n►� (A 441!30 q DATE .. ..�� F. ham` i*l i `�»l.y. - ...f*♦-. r � s r� �.ry +.+` p4=�• ���yr. ���t{. Y..� ,�"-Kit '�'�• �. J1 Y i � A Ff� r.4�ri t '.t•.M�Si• Z'/,��W V�.��+.... :•-.. .. '�7.v♦•.� � y'�i r t� y ,( '3.'ti.a .t g�' 1 Y }, .. 1 e a CITY o� STAFF REPORT BIJRLINGAME AGENDA 8a ITEM# MTG. o�gwTco.Iuabg DATE 8.16.04 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL SUBMITTED BY DATE: AUGUST 9, 2004 APPROVED FROM: CITY PLANNER BY f SUBJECT: INTRODUCTION OF AMENDMENT TO THE SIGN E FOR THE C-4 ZONING DISTRICT (WATERFRONT COMMERCIAL) Introduction: City Council should set the public hearing and second reading of an ordinance to amend Chapter 22,the Sign Code, to allow new sign regulations in the C-4 zone (waterfront commercial). Staff would recommend that this item be set for public hearing at your meeting on September 7. 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. This amendment also requires that notice be published in a newspaper of general circulation at least five days in advance of the public hearing and Council's action. Finally, if the amendment is approved it will not become effective for 30 days, October 7, 2004. Planning Commission Action The scheduling of this amendment was discussed with the Chair of the Planning Commission and he agreed that since this proposed legislation provides a correction to an existing problem in the city's sign code created by recent court rulings and the change in square footage and number of signs proposed is based on the existing signage allowed in the C-4 district; this sign code amendment should be brought forward directly to City Council. The purpose of this legislation is to make the sign code more equitable and to facilitate processing of sign applications. BACKGROUND: History A couple of years ago, the city modified its sign code in a way that significantly altered the Planning Commission's and City's ability to grant sign exceptions for the amount of signage allowed on a site. With the regulations as previously revised the city may grant "variances" to the location (placement/height) and number of signs on a site, but a variance may not be granted for the amount of signage (square footage) allowed on a parcel. Our sign code was written in 1978 before the city's high rise hotel boom. The 1978 code, as applied to the C-4 zoning district, was written in reaction to three signs which the community felt were not Introduction of Amendment to the Sign Code for the C-4 Zoning District(Waterfront Commercial August 16,2004 in keeping with the image of Burlingame: the Ramada Hotel pole sign, the roof sign on what was then the Sheraton (now the Crowne Plaza) and the roof sign on the now demolished AMFAC Hotel. The resulting signage regulations for the C-4 zoning district were very restrictive. • Each site with 50 feet of frontage was allowed 100 SF of signage which increased to a maximum of 200 SF of signage if the site had 150 feet or more of frontage; • in addition each site was allowed 75 SF of signage on each secondary frontage (facing a parking lot, public trail or public street(San Francisco bay oriented signage was allowed as secondary frontage signage in the 1992); • Two signs were allowed on each frontage; and • Pole and monument signs were limited to a maximum of 20'; • The amount of signage at the second story (24' in height) was limited to 60% of that allowed, at the third story (36' in height)the amount of signage allowed was limited to 30% and no signage was allowed at the fourth floor or above (48' in height). As the hotels and taller office buildings were constructed in the C-4 zone (the east side of Bayshore Highway and Anza and Anza Point areas)the city soon discovered two things. First , when there is more than one tall hotel, it is difficult to distinguish among them at a distance from the ground, parapet signs are useful if not necessary. Second, the city discovered that signage size needs to be proportional to the size of the building or it looks odd. On this basis substantial sign exceptions both in terms of square footage and height were granted to hotels and office buildings in the Bayfront area. In fact only those smaller hotels built after the recent sign code change conform in terms of maximum total signage square footage; and two of the three hotels (Hilton Garden Inn, Hampton Inn, Bay Landing)built after the sign code change were granted variances to put most of their total square footage of signage allowed on the parcel on the parapets. The Existing Hotel Signage Table describes the city's past practice best. There are twelve hotels in the C-4 zoning district. An analysis of the amount of signage actually approved on these sites shows: • Average square footage of signage per site is 638SF, the range of signage by total square footage goes from 108SF (Bay Landing)to 1341SF (Sheraton). • Average total number of signs per parcel is 6; and the range of total signs per site is 1 to 10. • For sites that have ground signs (less than 24'tall)the average size of ground signage per site is 215.5 SF; the range is 52SF to 620SF; • For sites that have ground signs, the average number of ground signs per parcel is 3.72. • For sites that have parapet/wall signs (placed more than 24' high)the average total square footage of signage at this height is 528SF; and the range is 137SF (Hilton Gardens)to 1168 (Sheraton). • For sites that have parapet/wall signs the average number of such signs is 3.2; and these signs range from 2 to 4 on a site. The square footages of signage and number of signs proposed in the revisions to the signage regulations for the C-4 zoning district are based on these findings from the analysis of the existing, previously approved signage for the area(Shoreline and Anza subareas). Proposed Sign Regulation Changes To bring the sign code up to date for the current C-4 zoning district and to facilitate the implementation of the Bayfront Specific Plan for the Shoreline, Anza and Anza Point subareas, there is a need to revise the sign code regulations as they apply in these areas. These changes would allow the future amounts of signage in these Bayfront subareas to be compatible the existing signage approved in the area between 1981 and 2004. 2 Introduction of Amen&nent to the Sign Code for the C-4 Zoning District(Waterfront Commercial August 16,2004 The proposed regulations also include a change in the approach used to determine the amount of signage for each parcel. It has become city practice to allow sign applicants to combine all the signage allowed for each frontage on a site into a total and to propose a signage program based on that total. Where buildings are tall, it has also become the practice to allow allocation of some of the total signage above the forth floor. Based on these now "common" practices it seemed more appropriate to take a different approach to sign regulation in these "high rise" areas. The proposed sign code amendment looks at signage based on signage which is oriented toward the street (ground signs less than 24 feet in height) and signage which is directional, higher on the building to help visitors and customers find the site (parapet/wall signs over 24 feet in height). The proposed ordinance establishes a maximum amount of signage for ground signs and a maximum amount of signage for parapet/wall signs for each parcel. Further the proposed regulations allow a great deal of latitude to the property owner or hotel operator to determine how the allowed square footage can be arranged on the property. This does not really represent a change since essentially this is what happens now. Finally, the proposed regulations will create signage standards which will apply only to properties in the current C-4 zoning district. Presently the standards applied in the C-4 zoning district also apply in the O-M and M-1 districts (CS 22.20). As these three areas have developed over the years they have lost their physical similarity, thus applying the same signage standards has ceased to work very well. These proposed changes will better address the physical differences between the development in the C-4 district (more high rise structures) and the low rise office, tilt-up warehouse development which predominates in both the O-M and M-1 zones. The proposed ordinance establishes the following standards for signage on properties currently zoned C-4 (Waterfront Commercial). These changes are explained in detail in the "C-4 Zoning District Shoreline and Anza Subareas Annotated Sign Code Amendments to Implement Bayfront Specific Plan" attached at the end of the staff report: • CS 22.20.070 (b): Ground signs (no higher than 24 feet), 100 SF of signage for the first 100 feet of primary parcel frontage with an additional one square foot of signage for each additional one foot of primary parcel frontage up to a maximum of 350 SF of signage. • Ground signs must conform to the following: o No single sign larger than 200 SF o No limit on the number or location of signs placed on the site so long as they are less than 24 feet in height. • CS 22.20.070 (c): Parapet/Wall signs (higher than 24 feet), each building frontage is allowed 300 square feet. • Parapet/Wall signs must conform to the following: o Only wall signs are allowed; o No more than 3 walls signs are allowed on any single building frontage; o No single sign shall be larger than 250 SF; o No building shall have more than four building frontages •CS 22.20.070 (d): Prohibited signs in the C-4 district shall include 3 Introduction of Amendment to the Sign Code for the C-4 Zoning District(Waterfront Commercial August 16,2004 o Roof signs and pole signs; o Off premise advertising (CS 22.48.040) • All forms of illumination are permitted. The proposed changes to the sign code also require the addition or modification of several definitions in the code. The affected definitions are "height", "wall sign", and "sign painted on wall". These are included in the attached annotations of the proposed sign code changes at the end of the staff report. ATTACHMENTS: Table: Existing Hotel Signage: Ground (24' or Less) and Parapet (Over 24'), August 2004 Hotel Sign Survey, August 2004 Current Sign Code Section 22.20 C-4, M-1 and O-M District Regulations C-4 Zoning District Shoreline and Anza Subareas Annotated Sign Code Amendments to Implement Bayfront Specific Plan, August 6, 2004 Ordinance of the City of Burlingame Amending Title 22 to Update the Sign Regulations Governing the Bayfront Area of the C-4 District U:\CCStaffRepts\CCSR2004\lntroAnzaSignCodeAmend 8.16.04.doc 4 EXISTING HOTEL SIGNAGE: GROUND(24'OR LESS)AND PARAPET(OVER 24') TOTAL SITE GROUND PARAPET SIGNAGE Hotel Name SF # SF # SF # 90 3 137 3 227 6 Hilton Gardens 46 620 6 717 2 1137 8 Embassy Suites 358 96 1 355 3 451 4 Double Tree 118 126 5 300 5 426 10 Hatt 150 193 4 562 3 755 7 Marriot 187 173 5 1168 2 1341 7 Sheraton 584 52 4 756 4 808 8 Ramada 200 4 293 3 493 7 Red Roof Inn 97 504 6 768 4 1272 10 Crown Plaza Hotel 108 1 - - 108 1 Bav Landin - - 224.7 3 224.7 3 Hampton 74.9 208 2 - - 208 2 Va abonlnn GROUND SIGNS TOTAL SIGNS ON PARCEL (sites with ground signage) Average Size: 215.5 sf Average Signage: Range in size: 90-620 sf Amt/Site: 638sr Range in size: 103-1341 sf Number: Average: 3.72 Number of signs: 6 Range: 1-6 Range(#): 1-10 PARAPET SIGNS (sites with parapetlwall signs) Average Size: 470 sf Range in size: 137-1168 sf Number: Average: 3.2 Range: 2-4 City of Burlingame Chapter 22.20 22.20.040 Number. C-41 M-1 AND O-M DISTRICT There shall be no more than two signs for REGULATIONS each frontage. (Ord. 1096 § 2 (part); January 17, 1977). 22.20.010 Permitted signs. - 22.20.020 Sign area—Primary 22.20.050 Lighting. frontage. All forms of illumination are permitted. 22.20.030 Sign area—Secondary (Ord. 1096 § 2 (part); January 17, 1977, as frontage. amended by Ord. 1216 § 3; December 7, 1981). 22.20.040 Number. 22.20.050 Lighting. 22.20.060 Height. 22.20.060 Height. No portion of any sign shall exceed twenty feet in height above the established grade below 22.20.010 Permitted signs. the sign, except that a sign erected on a building Any signs permitted by other sections of or structure may be placed higher than the first this title are permitted in the C4, M-1 and O-M floor subject to its area being reduced by the districts. (Ord. 1096 § 2 (part); January 17, following: 1977, Ord. 1521 § 5; April 17, 1995). (a) Second floor sixty percent of permitted signage; 22.20.020 Sign area—Primary frontage. (b) Third floor: thirty percent of permitted Any establishment with primary frontage signage; not exceeding fifty linear feet is entitled to one (c) Fourth floor or above: zero percent of hundred square feet of signage. For each permitted signage. additional foot of primary frontage greater than Where a structure has no floors, or the fifty feet, one additional square foot of signage floors have unusual spacing, a floor shall be shall be allowed, except that in no case shall defined as each twelve-foot increase in height. more than two hundred square feet of signage be (Ord. 1096 § 2 (part); January 17, 1977). permitted. Primary Frontage Maximum Signage Length (feet) Area (square feet) 50 or less 100 55 105 60 110 80 130 100 150 150 or more 200 maximum. (Ord. 1096 § 2 (part); January 17, 1977). 22.20.030 Sign area—Secondary frontage. (a) An additional seventy-five square feet of signage shall be allowed on each secondary frontage, regardless of frontage length. (b) Any frontage of a hotel upon San Francisco Bay shall be considered a secondary frontage. Such frontage shall not include any frontage upon Sanchez Lagoon, Sanchez Channel, or Anza Lagoon. (Ord. 1096 § 2 (part); January 17, 1977, Ord. 1450 § 3; January 22, i 1992). (22.20) 1 Amendment to C-4 Sign Code Regulations August 6,2004 C-4 Zoning District Shoreline and Anza Subareas Annotated Sign Code Amendments to Implement Bayfront Specific Plan To bring the sign code up to date for the current C-4 zoning district and to be responsive to implementation of the Bayfront Specific Plan, there is a need to revise the sign code regulations for the Shoreline and Anza Subareas of the Bayfront planning area. These changes would allow future amounts of signage in these two Bayfront subareas to match the existing signage approved in these areas between 1981 and 2004 . During this period sign exceptions for size and amount of signage allowed on a site were common. Recent revisions to the city' s sign code prohibit variances to the total amount (square footage) of signage on a site. The current sign code, adopted in 1978, would allow substantially less signage than currently exists because of past exceptions granted to square footage . This means that property owners in this area today are allowed substantially less signage on their properties than their neighbors. The proposed changes to the sign code below are based on the amounts and types of signage granted in the Shoreline and Anza Subareas between 1981 and 2004 . In addition it has become common practice in administering the sign code to allow property owners or project developers to combine the total signage allowed for each frontage and distribute it on the site as they wish. With the present code this can be done with a variance, so long as the total amount of signage is not increased. Because of this practice and in the interest of eliminating the need to go to the Commission for something that probably will be granted, these proposed changes are based on total site signage. Administratively these new requirements would allow the property owner or tenant to decide how to distribute the signage around the site. In this proposal for the overlay, the amount of signage for each site is divided with one amount of square footage for the part of the building less than 24 feet in height and one amount of square footage for the part of the building over 24 feet. In our present code there is a formula which determines the percentage of the allowed signage on a frontage which can be placed 12 feet off the ground, 36 feet off the ground etc. , with no signage over 48 feet off the ground. In the Shoreline and Anza areas where smaller footprint, taller buildings are 1 Amendment to C-4 Sign Code Regulations August 6,2004 encouraged, and parapet signs are necessary for customers or clients to find their way around, this height formula has not work well . Or rather the height formula results in every project requiring a height variance and a trip to the Planning Commission. One objective of these amendments to the sign code is to tailor our regulations closer to the needs of geographic areas and make them consistent with the development policies of each geographical area so that more sign programs can be approved without having to go to the Planning Commission. Or so that only those which are most "out of the ordinary" are required to go to the Planning Commission. Finally, it should be noted that with these requirements, while a variance may be considered for height of sign, number of signs and placement of signs; a variance may not be considered or granted for amount of signage allowed on each site. As a result the equity for all properties of the base number of square feet allowed becomes very important. Amendment to the sign regulations for the C-4 Zone CS 22.20 22.20.070 Permitted signage in the Shoreline and Anza Subareas of the Bayfront zoned C-4. Instead of the regulations contained in the other sections of this chapter, the following signage regulations apply only in the Shoreline and Anza subareas as defined in the Bayfront Specific Plan adopted by the council: Annotation: The present sign code regulations are based on zoning district. The proposed amendment creates an "overlay" signage provision within the C-4 zoning district. The "overlay" would apply only to signage in the Shoreline and Anza Subareas as they are defined in the 2004 Bayfront Specific Plan/General Plan. (a) Except as prohibited in this section, any type of sign permitted by this title is permitted so long as it conforms to this section. Annotation: This provision allows any type of signage permitted elsewhere in the sign code to be installed in this overlay area as long as its installation conforms to the requirements below. Also it should be noted that the overlay regulations take a different 2 Amendment to C-4 Sign Code Regulations August 6,2004 approach to sign regulation from the current sign code. In the present code the amount or square footage of signage is regulated by the length of the building' s frontage, primary and secondary. In this proposal signage is regulated by height, with one allocation of square footage to the "street level" (24 feet or less off the ground) and a second allocation to the parapet or upper portion of the building (greater than 24 feet off the ground) . A second divergence from our current sign code approach is that a maximum square footage and number of signs is designated for the ground level and the upper level of the building, but it is up to the property owner and tenant to decide the sides of the building they wish to use for signage. This new approach grows out of the current practice of applicants adding all allocated signage to the designated primary and secondary frontages together and asking for a sign variance to distribute it around the building in a manner different that allowed in the code. The Planning Commission and Council almost always- grants these requests. For this reason it seemed reasonable to allow the applicant this distribution latitude from the start. The focus in reviewing this approach becomes what should be the proper total amount of signage to allow on a site, at street/ pedestrian level and on the upper portions of the building. The numbers proposed here for street/pedestrian level and the upper portion of the building are based on the amount of signage granted to major projects in the Shoreline and Anza Areas between 1981 and the court decisions in 2000 which resulted in the city no longer- being able to grant an increase in the amount of signage beyond what was stated in the sign code for a given site. (b) Signs at a height of no more than twenty-four(24) feet. (i) The maximum square footage of signage at a height of twenty-four(24) feet or less on any parcel shall be based on the length of the primary parcel frontage. Each parcel is entitled to one hundred square feet of such signage, and for each additional foot of primary parcel frontage more than 100 feet,one additional square foot of such signage shall be allowed, except that no more than a total of 350 square feet of signage at a height of twenty-four(24)feet or less shall be allowed on any parcel. As an example: Primary Parcel Frontage Maximum Signage Area Length(feet) above 24 feet in height(square feet) 3 Amendment to C4 Sign Code Regulations August 6, 2004 100 or less 100 150 150 250 250 350 or more 350 (ii) Subject to safety regulations, signage at a height of twenty-four(24)feet or less may be placed anywhere on a parcel or building;and on-site signs not to exceed three (3)feet in height and no larger than three (3) square feet shall be exempt; (iii)No single sign may be larger than two hundred(200)square feet. (iv) There is no limitation on the number of signs that may be placed at a height of twenty-four(24)feet or less. Annotation: Ground signage or signage that is primarily visible and directed toward the street level or pedestrians is proposed to be regulated based on the entire site. Ground signage is defined as being: • no more than 24 feet above grade • each site, at this level, may have a minimum of 100 SF plus one additional foot for each lineal foot of primary street frontage over 100 feet up to a maximum of 350 SF of signage; • the applicant may choose where on the building less than 24 feet off the ground to place this signage; • directional signs, less than 3 SF and less than 3 feet off the ground which do not include the name or logo of the tenant are exempt from the total ground signage square footage; • the distribution of the ground signage square footage among the number of signs is up to the applicant, e.g. there is no limit on the number of ground signs; • no single ground side shall exceed 200 square feet. It should be noted that double faced signs have been counted as two signs; so one could have a monument sign with two 175 SF faces under this regulation if the site were eligible for the maximum square footage and if it were all put in one double faced sign, e.g. no other signage would be allowed on the site less than 24 feet off the ground. This section also includes an exemption for directional signs. 4 Amendment to C-4 Sign Code Regulations August 6,2004 Currently we allow an exception for developments on large sites to provide interiorly lit directional signs ("enter", "exit", etc. ) in their parking lots and on pedestrian walkways which are not counted in the total site square footage of signage or in the number of signs on site. The exemption proposed here would put the exception for this type of signage in the code. Currently we do not allow the name or logo of the business on the directional sign, the City Attorney maintains that we no longer can limit what is put on these signs in terms of logos etc. but we can limit their size and height . Q: Should directional signs be exempt from the total amount of signage on site? If they continue to be exempt is the 3 SF and 3 feet in height the appropriate dimensions? (c)Signs at a height above twenty-four(24) feet. Annotation: This section applies to all signage placed on the building at a height greater than 24 feet above grade. This signage is allowed in addition to the ground signage. Like ground signage, the wall signage allowed above 24 feet may be placed wherever the property owner/applicant wish to put it, and may be divided into only three or fewer signs. Signage above 24 feet may not be placed on, or anchored to, the roof (see below) . (i) The only signs allowed above a height of twenty-four feet are wall signs. (ii)A maximum of 300 square feet of signage at a height above twenty-four(24) feet is allowed on each building frontage. (iii)No more than three(3) signs above a height of twenty-four feet are allowed on any building frontage. (iv)No single sign shall be larger than 250 square feet. (v) For purposes of this subsection, no building shall be considered to have more than four(4)building frontages regardless of the building's design or parcel. Annotation: The requirements for signage above 24 feet include: • only wall signs; 5 Amendment to C-4 Sign Code Regulations August 6, 2004 • a 250 square foot maximum for a single sign; • a maximum of 300 SF per building frontage, and building frontages are limited to four per building; • only 3 signs are allowed per frontage e.g. so it would be possible to put one 250 SF sign and one 50 SF or three 100 SF signs, the choice is up to the property owner and his tenants. Based on the combination of ground and above 24 feet signage the maximum signage allowed on a multi-story structure (over 24 feet in height) would be 350 SF ground level visible from the street plus 1200 SF for identification at a distance; or a total of 1500 SF. However the maximum on a single frontage, should anyone have a 350 foot primary street frontage and choose to put all the ground signage on one frontage, would be 650 SF which is less than half the present Sheraton wall sign. Attached is a copy of a survey of the currently approved signage on existing hotels . The analysis was based on hotel signage because that is the use which predominates in the Shoreline and Anza area and for which the most exceptions have been granted. Since all uses in a district must have the same signage opportunities, the baseline for the area is set using hotels . A second objective in arriving at the amount of signage is as much as possible of the "reasonable" existing signage becomes conforming. This will allow flexibility for future tenants and give them the ability to have equitable amounts of signage in sign programs that best meet their corporate needs, rather than having to "ferry rig" to fit into a nonconforming situation as Crowne Plaza did on the old Sheraton site on Bayshore at Airport. The signs documented in the sign survey were, in most cases, approved before the sign code was amended to prohibit variances for the amount of signage allowed on a site. The analysis prepared shows that of the existing approved signage on a hotel the average signage over 24 feet on a site is 470 SF and the average number of signs over 24 feet per site is 2 . 6 or an average parapet sign of 180 SF. The range of existing parapet sign size is 584 SF (Sheraton) to 46 SF (Hilton Gardens) . (The Sheraton wall sign, which is in addition to the parapet signs is over 1000 SF) Finally it should be noted that, based on experience, some signs have been proven not to "help" the character of the area; these signs have been regulated out 6 Amendment to C4 Sign Code Regulations August 6,2004 either by limitations on maximum amount of signage or location on the structure. The ones that come to mind as examples of this are the wall sign on the Sheraton Hotel, the roof sign on the Crowne Plaza Hotel, and the pole sign on the Ramada Inn. None of these would be allowed under the regulations proposed. They will become nonconforming and, eventually, will be removed. However, there will be less desire to retain the nonconforming signs if there is a more equitable allocation of signage to each site. (d)Roof signs and pole signs are prohibited. Annotation: Roof signs have been prohibited in Burlingame's sign code since the first sign code was adopted in 1978 . The prohibition has worked well to keep our skyline clear of clutter. Parapet signs, which are allowed as a matter of right in this code revision, fulfill the need for "locaters" for the uninitiated looking for a hotel or office destination in the Shoreline and Anza areas . Pole signs have long been an issue in the Bayfront area, especially the Anza Area, because they can be oriented to the freeway and used for corporate advertising. Since parapet and wall signs are allowed in these proposed regulations to be located as chosen by the property owners, a franchise uses can choose to place a parapet sign on the face of his building oriented toward the freeway or bay. The need for a difficult to regulate, over-sized, hard to maintain and eventually dated looking pole sign is nullified. (e) All forms of illumination are permitted. Annotation: Presently we allow all kinds of lighting for signs in all signage districts . There seems to be no reason to alter this requirement in the overlay area. The city' s illumination requirements still must be met, e.g. the cone of light must be contained on the site and certainly must not create a traffic hazard, e.g. blinking, flashing, etc. 22.48.040 Off-premises advertising. Signs rying the advertising of a person, product, or service other than that 7 Amendment to C-4 Sign Code Regulations August 6,2004 of the occupant of the parcel land on which it the sign is placedeFthe building to Which it is attaehed are prohibited; signs ire permitted only to the actual occupant of the parcel building er pFepea -upon which the sign is displayed during the period of his occupancy. Annotation: This change is a clarification/clean up of the current wording. Off premises signage is not allowed in any district at this time. This section applies to all districts including the proposed overlay, so off-premise signage would not be allowed in the proposed overlay for the Shoreline and Anza areas. This has been the formal, stated city policy since 1978 . Add Definition for Height CS 22.04.165 Height "Height" for purposes of this title means the distance between the very topmost point of the sign and the established grade directly below the sign. Annotation: In the current code each time height was referred to the means of establishing it was written the text. This definition is based on the description "from the top of the sign to the adjacent grade below the sign" used throughout the present code. One advantage of this definition is it makes it very clear that the top of a sign is its highest point. This will reduce arguments at the counter. Revise Definitions CS 22.04.500 Wall Sign. "Wall sign" is any sign, of solid face construction or individual letters, which is placed flat against the exterior wall or any building and does not extend more than eighteen (18) inches from the exterior wall or-stmet-twe, any sign, motif, symbol, figure, word,words or object painted directly on the surface of the exterior wall of any building er stfudure. Annotation: The word structure is removed from this definition to avoid the argument that a monument/ground sign (which is a structure) might be called a wall sign. This definition has also been modified to limit the amount of projection that a wall sign can have to limit the opportunity to have unattractive propellers or projections from wall signs to attract attention. 8 Amendment to C-4 Sign Code Regulations August 6, 2004 CS 22.04.460 Sign painted on wall "Sign painted on wall" is any sign, motif, symbol, figure, word, words or object painted directly on the surface of the exterior wall of any building or-struetre. Annotation: This definition is edited for the same reason as the "wall sign" definition was changed. To remove any confusion between a wall sign and a monument/ground sign which is also a structure . Draft: July 30, 2004 August 6, 2004 9 CITY STAFF REPORT BIJRLJNGAME AGENDA ITEM# 8b MTG. DATE 8/16/04 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL SUBMITTED i BY DATE: 8/10/04 APPROVE FROM: Jim Nantell (558-7205) BY SUBJECT: Accept City Clerk Resignation and Appoint Replacement RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council regretfully accept the resignation of Ann Musso, Burlingame City Clerk, and appoint Deputy City Clerk Doris Mortensen to fill out the unexpired term of Office. BACKGROUND: As a result of some unanticipated changes in Ann Musso's personal life, she and former Assistant Fire Chief Ken Musso have decided to move closer to their vineyard property. Although this decision means the loss of a wonderful and devoted employee and City Clerk, it means that Ann will be able to spend more time with her baby daughter Gina Musso. Ann's resignation would take effect September 10th; however she will continue to be on call to work with her replacement throughout the next six months as the need arises. She indicates that her love for Burlingame, which began over 30 years ago when her mother began working for our Recreation Department, will never change and she will stay involved in many Burlingame activities not the least of which is her volunteer role in the Burlingame Adoption of the Bravo Company of the 10I't Airborne. With Ann's resignation the Council has essentially two options; sorry,refusal to accept Ann's resignation is not one of them. The City Council can decide to hold a special election or make an appointment to fill the vacancy. If you were inclined to hold a special election we estimate that it would cost in excess of$25,000 and we believe it is too late to try and place the issue on this November's ballot. Using an election to fill the vacancy would require the appointment of an interim City Clerk until the election could be held. If the Council were to concur with the staff recommendation to appoint someone to fill out the unexpired term until November of 2005 you could work with our Human Resources staff to determine a selection process or appoint Deputy City Clerk Doris Mortensen to the City Clerk position. Given Doris's excellent work during Ann's four month maternity leave and her outstanding work as Deputy Clerk since Ann's return on a part time basis from Maternity leave one year ago I would recommend her for the appointment as City Clerk effective September 10th 2004. If the Council were to appoint Mrs. Mortensen to the City Clerk position, it would be my intention, as City Manager,to continue to have her serve in the Deputy Clerk's position. EXHIBITS: 1. July 23,2004 Memo from City Attorney Re: Appointment to Vacant Elected Position 2. April 12, 1999 memo from City Attorney Re: City Clerk Duties and Selection 3. Doris Mortensen's resume 4. Letter of resignation from City Clerk Ann Musso BUDGET IMPACT: Returning the Clerk to a 40-hour schedule will increase our costs for that operation. It is our intention to try to handle this within existing budget between the City Clerk's, Public Works and other budgets. Should that not be possible it may result in the use of up to $40,000 of contingency reserve funds. • f F 4��r M E M O R A N D U M CITY OF BURLINGAME CITY ATTORNEY DATE: July 23, 2004 TO: Jim Nantell, City Manager FROM: Larry E. Anderson, City Attorney RE : Appointment to Vacant Elected Position Government Code § 36512 provides that if a vacancy occurs in an elective office,the City Council shall either fill the vacancy by appointment or call a special election to fill the vacancy;this decision must be made within 30 days of the commencement of the vacancy. There are no requirements or procedures provided for seeking applications or conducting interviews. M E M O R A N D U M CITY OF BURLINGAME CITY ATTORNEY DATE: April 12, 1999 TO: Mayor and Council FROM: Larry E. Anderson, City Attorney RE : City Clerk Duties and Selection This memorandum is intended to provide the Council with background information on the legally established duties and role of the City Clerk and on the processes by which the City Clerk can be selected. My earlier memorandum of March 25, 1999, has been revised to additionally discuss the alternatives when a City Clerk resigns or retires from office before the end of the Clerk's term in office. DUTIES OF THE CITY CLERK The office of City Clerk is provided in Government Code § 36501(b). The specific obligations are set out in Sections 40801 and following: — To keep an accurate record of the council proceedings (§ 40801) — To keep a book of city ordinances with ordinances properly numbered(§ 40806) — To be the custodian of the city seal (§ 40811) — To administer oaths and provide acknowledgments with regard to the city's business (§ 40814) Before the changes in the tax system driven by Proposition 13,the city clerk also dealt with financial and taxation records; that is no longer the case in most cities. The other role that a city clerk must play is in administering city elections and the processes leading up to and following elections. The city clerk publishes the timetable for nominations and elections,and supervises the submission of nomination papers. Usually, cities request the county clerk or elections official to provide the actual oversight and conduct of the election itself, but if not, then the city clerk is responsible for supervising the balloting and counting. Mayor and Council Re: City Clerk Duties and Selection April 12, 1999 Page 2 When recall, initiative, or referendum petitions are being prepared or filed,the city clerk is the key person in reviewing the petitions and verifying signatures. The clerk makes all of the decisions regarding the number and legitimacy of the petition signatures, and only the clerk (and the clerk's deputies) is authorized to actually see the petition signatures. The city clerk also accepts and reviews the submission of economic interest statements from city officeholders. It is the clerk's responsibility to determine whether a statement is late and usually what penalty is appropriate under the Political Reform Act for persons who may file late. SELECTION OF THE CITY CLERK The Government Code implicitly provides that the position of city clerk is an elective position. See Gov't Code § 36502. To be the city clerk, the only qualification required is that the person be a registered voter at the time nomination papers are issued to the candidate and to remain a resident of the city during the term of office. [In turn,to remove an elected city clerk during the term of office requires either a recall election or removal by a court on an accusation from a grand jury.] The Burlingame City Clerk salary is currently about $71,000. If a city wishes to change the office from elective to appointive,either a city council or an initiative petition can submit the question to the city's voters. Section 36508. If the measure to change the position to appointive is adopted,then the city clerk may be appointed by either the city council or the city manager if the council delegates the authority to the manager by ordinance. Section 36510. If the office is made appointive, the city clerk is allowed to live outside the city limits,but the city can establish the qualifications required to be city clerk. In 1991,the Burlingame City Treasurer position was made appointive rather than elective (taking effect in 1993)by popular vote. RESIGNATION OR RETIREMENT OF CITY CLERK BEFORE END OF TERM OF OFFICE If a city clerk retires or resigns from office before the end of the Clerk's term in office,then the City Council has two choices: 1) Appoint a person to fill the vacancy until the end of the unexpired term of the former Clerk; or Mayor and Council Re: City Clerk Duties and Selection April 12, 1999 Page 3 2) Call a special election on the next regularly'established election date that is at least 114 days from the date that the special election was called. The person elected would serve in the office for the unexpired term of the former Clerk. The Council's decision on which alternative to choose has to be made within 30 days of the "commencement" of the vacancy. Gov't Code § 36512(b). cc: City Clerk City Manager DORIS J. MORTENSEN 124 Myrtle Road•Burlingame, CA 94010•Post Office Box 615•Burlingame, CA 94011 Telephone: 650-343-1267(h) 650-558-7230(w) e-mail: dmortensen@hurlingame.org OBJECTIVE Public Service at City or County level EMPLOYMENT DEPUTY CITY CLERK -2003 to Present City of Burlingame, Burlingame, California Currently serving as part-time Deputy City Clerk to support City Clerk services.Provided City Clerk services,full time,from April through July,2003.Responsibilities included Council agenda preparation, attendance at regular Council meetings, Council minutes preparation, assign ordinance and resolution numbers,certify copies,contract attestation,document recordation with County, legal advertising,maintaining City seal,utilizing and updating City list serve,updating City website,updating City Roster,responding to citizen inquiries,filing of candidate nomination papers. SECRETARIAL STAFF/ADMINISTRATIVE SECRETARY - 1986 to Present City of Burlingame, Burlingame, California As Administrative Secretary to Director of Public Works,responsible for overseeing secretarial staff, maintaining storage files and administering the active filing system, effecting expedient paper flow,responding to the general public in person and over the telephone,preparing various reports, updating department website, and as secretary to the Traffic, Safety and Parking Commission,attending monthly meetings and preparing the monthly agenda and minutes. ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF SPECIALIST/ASST.STORE MANAGER/SECRETARIAL - 1962 TO 1982 Pacific Telephone, San Francisco, California Experience in Regulatory, Public Affairs, Personnel, and Commercial Departments, including research in state legislation relating to city charters and elections. Regulatory staff liaison to California Public Utilities Commission relating to telephone interconnection equipment. EDUCATION A.A.IN BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION, 1976 Notary Public classes, 1999 College of San Mateo, San Mateo, California San Mateo, California SKILLS • Computer Software: WordPerfect,Word,Excel,Microsoft Outlook,FrontPage • Office Management,Records Management PERSONAL INTERESTS • Member of Fine Arts Museums,Academy of Sciences, San Francisco Zoological Society • Member KQED&KTEH Public Broadcast Stations • Swimming/Hiking/Dancing/Music/Reading BU .LINGAME The City of Burlingame Ann T. Musso, City Clerk 501 Primrose Road Burlingame,CA 94010-3997 650-558-7203,fax: 650-342-8386 amusso(aburlinyame.org August 11, 2004 To: Honorable Mayor and City Council City Manager Jim Nantell From: Ann Musso, City Cler 1 � Subject: Resignation It is with much regret that I inform you that as of September 9, 2004, 1 will be resigning from my position as the City Clerk for the City of Burlingame. Due to unanticipated changes in my life, my husband and I have decided to move to Cameron Park in order to be closer to our family vineyard. More importantly, I wish to be able to spend more time with our daughter, Gina, as well as volunteer for various non-profit organizations in El Dorado County. In order for me to be able to accomplish this, we must relocate out of the Bay Area. When I was appointed to the position of City Clerk in January of 2000, 1 was extremely honored and proud to be a part of the wonderful City staff of Burlingame. This important and neutral position has been extremely fulfilling to me, both professionally and personally, and to come to the decision to resign was not an easy one. While I was growing up, I spent all my summers in Burlingame and consider this my hometown, one that I will never truly leave. If I can be of any assistance to the future City Clerk, please let me know. I would be honored to continue as the City Liaison for the new "City of Burlingame Adopt-A-Unit' for Bravo Company of the 101"Airborne Division, Area Coordinator for"America Supporting Americans", as well as provide help with the City website. Finally, I wish to thank each and every one of you for your understanding and support, especially this last year while I helped with the care of my mother who was suffering with cancer. Your kindness will not be forgotten. CITY AGENDA 8e oc ITEM# _-- BURLINGAME STAFF REPORT g MTG. DATE August 16, 2004 4 • • TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL SUB I E BY DATE: August 2, 2004 APPROVE FROM: Netie Shinday (558-7204) BY SUBJECT: Commission Vacancies RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that Council should call for applications for the following commissions: Commission Term Expiration Filing Deadline Beautification October 7, 2004 September 17, 2004 Parks and Rec October 7, 2004 September 17, 2004 Traffic Safety Parking November 6, 2004 October 15, 2004 Civil Service December 1, 2004 November 1 , 2004 The Mayor and Council should determine two-member committees to perform the interviews. BACKGROUND Our current commissioner appointment procedure calls for any commissioner desiring reappointment to apply in the same manner as all other candidates. The current commissioners will be invited to reapply if they wish to serve again. In the upcoming months, the following commissioners' terms will expire: Term Terms Commissioner Commission Expiration Served Jeanne Carney Beautification 10-07-04 1 Jo-Ellen Ellis Beautification 10-07-04 2 Karen Dittman Parks & Rec 10-07-04 2 Edward Larios Parks & Rec 10-07-04 3 Carol Muller Parks & Rec 10-07-04 2 James McIver Traffic Safety Parking 11-06-04 2 James Delia Civil Service 12-01-04 2 Michael Lennon, Jr. Civil Service 12-01-04 5 Victor Richmond Civil Service 12-01-04 5 AGENDA OBERLINGAME STAFF REPORT ITEM# 9a MTG. 08/16/04 ki DATE TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL SUBMITTED DATE: AUGUST 3, 2004 BY FROM: PUBLIC WORKS APPROVD BY ' SUBJECT: FRESH MARKET PERMANENT RELOCATION RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that Council approve the permanent relocation of the Fresh Market to Park Road under the following conditions: • The Chamber shall oversee the operation of the Fresh Market. • The Fresh Market shall operate on consecutive Sundays, during the months from May through November. • The street closure for the Fresh Market shall be on Sundays between 7:30 a.m. and 1:30 p.m. • The Chamber shall be responsible for providing and placing cones for the street closure in accordance with the attached revised traffic control plan and monitor the closure to ensure that the cones are not moved. • The City will post permanent"No Parking" signs indicating parking restrictions during Fresh Market operation. • The Chamber and merchants shall be responsible for removing any debris which could create a safety hazard for pedestrians and drivers prior to reopening Park Road. (The City street sweeper will clean the roadway early Monday morning as part of the regular business district sweeping program.) • The Chamber shall continue to use the storage and portable restroom located at Lot W to service the market. BACKGROLTND: On June 21, 2004, Council approved relocating the Fresh Market from Lot W to the northern portion of Park Road on a trial basis. The move was requested by the Chamber of Commerce so that the market would be closer to the core shopping area. This location would encourage higher patronage and increase business exposure along Burlingame Avenue. During the trial period, staff conducted several field surveys to evaluate the pedestrian and traffic flow impacts on surrounding streets and in the adjacent city parking lot J resulting from the street closure. Police patrols were also regularly conducted to ensure traffic and pedestrian safety. t Fresh Market Permanent Relocation August 3, 2004 Page 2 DISCUSSION: In the June 21, 2004 staff report to Council, three points were identified as criteria for consideration of a permanent relocation. Traffic and Circulation - Overall traffic safety and circulation have not been adversely affected. The Chamber and the City received no major complaints about the Fresh Market relocation.However,there was one traffic control issue on the first Sunday of operation. The setup location of a tent at the southern end of the market caused an unintended intermingling of pedestrian market traffic and vehicular traffic exiting the adjacent parking lot J. This matter was resolved before the next weekend by closing off the eastern driveway access of Lot J to Park Road. Lot traffic was re-circulated through the available driveway on Primrose Road with no significant adverse affect. Business Feedback- The Chamber provided advanced street closure notices to properties on both sides of Park Road between Burlingame Avenue and Howard Avenue. The businesses along the south side of Burlingame Avenue were also noticed. The Chamber received no subsequent negative comments on the market relocation. Both the City and the Chamber did receive positive public feedback about the relocation, and verbal comments have been supportive of the relocation in general. Debris -No debris hazards have been observed which might pose a health problem or a traffic/pedestrian problem. Based on no significant traffic, circulation and safety problems as well as positive business and community feedback, staff recommends that Council approve the permanent relocation of the Fresh Market to Park Road. EXHIBITS: Revised traffic control and street closure map FISCAL IMPACT: The City will rely on the Chamber to set up and monitor the street closure, as well as continue to receive public and business feedback regarding street access issues. The City will issue the Chamber a no-cost revocable encroachment permit for the Park Road closure. 4Astine Chou Traffic Engineer 650-558-7230 c: Bruce Carlton, Chamber Chair Georgette Naylor, Chamber President Jack Van Etten, Police Chief B U R L I N G AM E AVE > VEHICLE TRAFFIC ROAD CLOSE- ,, 1241 7 239 12, 311 308 12 1375 327 131 11225 '3 11) 121 1237 1325 '12 35 1323 I z I-A CD LN o CITY PUBLIC PARKING LOT J ---VEHICLE -TRAFFIC PUBLIC PARKING LO] J) CT) c"r—"- ul Cyl cl) > Nj BURAGENDALINGAME STAFF REPORT ITEM# 9b MT 8/16/04 DATE TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL SUBMITTED /�i '(&, DATE: August 4, 2004 BY APPROVED FROM: PUBLIC WORKS BY /mac SUBJECT:RESOLUTION APPROVING PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AG EMENT WITH ERLER&KALINOWSKI, INC. FOR FY 2004-05 PROGRAM MANAGEMENT OF WATER SYSTEM CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM -CITY PROJECT 81190 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that Council approve the attached resolution for a Professional Services Program Management Agreement with Erler&Kalinowski, Inc. (EKI) in the amount of$260,000. BACKGROUND: In July 2002,Council approved an accelerated Capital Improvement program(CIP)for the citywide water system in the amount of$4.5 million per year. This represented a 900% increase in budgeted improvements to the water system over previous years.Administering this size of program required management consultant support so that staff continued to have the capacity to administer the remainder of the CIP program. In June 2002, the City chose EKI to provide water program management services after performing an extensive consultant selection process. EKI has successfully managed the water CIP program for the past two years. DISCUSSION: The attached contract with EKI is for the third year of program management.Following is a summary of the program management work completed by EKI in the past two years. • Phase 1 design and construction of the Burlinghome/Easton Water Main Replacement Project • Phase 2 design of the Burlinghome/Easton Water Main Replacement Project • Assistance to staff in the successful transition to a chloramines disinfectant system • Staff training and development of a procedure manual for the chloramines disinfectant system • Development of the hydraulic model for the water system • Seismic review of the water system storage tanks • Study of the Trousdale pump station expansion • Development of a water system master plan • Vulnerability assessment of the water system pursuant to Federal law • Assistance to staff in updating the long term water system capital improvement program The proposed program management services for FY 2004-05 include the following projects: • Phase 2 construction of the Burlinghome/Easton Water Main Replacement Project • Design of the Burlingame/Grove Subdivision Water Main Replacement Project • Construction of the Mills Tank Seismic Improvements and Transmission Main Project • Design of the Trousdale Pump Station • Evaluation of the Washington Park irrigation well • Preparation of the Urban Water Management Plan • Studies of Water storage • Implementation of the Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition system EKI's program management responsibilities include: • Overseeing the public relations process during construction • Scheduling and monitoring the water CIP program and individual projects • Monitoring and updating the Water Capital Improvement Program Master Plan • Assisting with the consulting services selection process Page 2 The proposed fee of$260,000 for the program management services represents approximately 5.7%of the FY 2004-05 budget of$4,500,000. The program management costs, as a percentage of total water program budget, is within the 5- 7%range typical of similar programs being implemented by other Bay Area agencies. It should be noted that separate contracts with professional consultants and construction contractors will still be necessary to perform the activities cited above. Staff will return to Council periodically in the future for approval of these contracts. Based on EKI's successful performance of program management services during the previous two years, staff recommends that Council approve the attached resolution to retain EKI as program manager for the FY 2004-05 Water CIP program. EXHIBITS: Resolution; Professional Services Agreement BUDGET IMPACT: There are sufficient budgeted funds available in the FY 2004-05 budget which is financed through water bond revenues. ?Syed M r z 558-7230 c: City Clerk, City Attorney, Erler& Kalinowski, Inc. SAA Public Works Directory\Staff Reports\81190 EKI.wpd RESOLUTION NO. AUTHORIZING AGREEMENT WITH ERLER& KALINOWSKI, INC. - 2004-05 PROGRAM MANAGEMENT SERVICES OF WATER SYSTEM CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM CITY PROJECT NO. 81190 RESOLVED,by the CITY COUNCIL of the City of Burlingame, California and this Council does hereby FIND, ORDER and DETERMINE AS FOLLOWS: 1. The public interest and convenience require execution of the agreement cited in the title above. 2. The City Manager be, and he is hereby, authorized to sign said agreement for and on behalf of the City of Burlingame. 3. The City Clerk is hereby ordered and instructed to attest such signature. Mayor I, ANN T. MUSSO, City Clerk of the City of Burlingame, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the day of , 2004, and was adopted thereafter by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: City Clerk AGREEMENT FOR PROGRAM MANAGEMENT CONSULTANT SERVICES FY2004-05 WATER SYSTEM CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM CITY PROJECT NO. 81190 THIS AGREEMENT is entered into this day of , 2004, by and between the City of Burlingame, State of California, herein called the "City", and ERLER & KALINOWSKI, INC., engaged in providing PROGRAM MANAGEMENT consulting services herein called the "Consultant". RECITALS A. The City is considering undertaking activities to administer the FY 2004-05 WATER SYSTEM CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM. B. The City desires to engage a Management Consultant to provide consulting services in conjunction with the Water System Capital Improvements Program, because of Consultant's experience and qualifications to perform the desired work. C. The Consultant represents and affirms that it is qualified and willing to perform the desired work pursuant to this Agreement. AGREEMENTS NOW, THEREFORE, THE PARTIES HERETO AGREE AS FOLLOWS: EXHIBIT A SHALL BE MADE AS PART OF THIS AGREEMENT. 1. Scope of Services. The Consultant shall provide all services as set forth in Exhibit A of this agreement. 2. Time of Performance. The services of the Consultant are to commence upon the execution of this Agreement with completion as indicated in Exhibit A. 3. Compliance with Laws. The Consultant shall comply with all applicable laws, codes, ordinances, and regulations of governing federal, state and local laws. Consultant represents and warrants to City that it has all licenses, permits, qualifications and approvals of whatsoever nature which are legally required for Consultant to practice its profession. Consultant represents and warrants to City that Consultant shall, at its sole cost and expense, keep in effect or obtain at all times during the term of this Agreement any licenses, Pagel of 8 S:\A Public Works Directory\PROJECTS\81190 04-05 Water Program Management\AGREEMENT FOR EKI.wpd permits, and approvals which are legally required for Consultant to practice its profession. Consultant shall maintain a City of Burlingame business license. 4. Sole Responsibility. Consultant shall be responsible for employing or engaging all persons necessary to perform the services under this Agreement. 5. Information/Report Handling. All documents furnished to Consultant by the City and all reports and supportive data prepared by the Consultant under this Agreement are the City's property and shall be delivered to the City upon the completion of Consultant's services or at the City's written request. All reports, information, data, and exhibits prepared or assembled by Consultant in connection with the performance of its services pursuant to this Agreement are confidential until released by the City to the public, and the Consultant shall not make any of the these documents or information available to any individual or organization not employed by the Consultant or the City without the written consent of the City before such release. The City acknowledges that the reports to be prepared by the Consultant pursuant to this Agreement are for the purpose of evaluating a defined project, and City's use of the information contained in the reports prepared by the Consultant in connection with other projects shall be solely at City's risk, unless Consultant expressly consents to such use in writing. City further agrees that it will not appropriate any methodology or technique of Consultant which is and has been confirmed in writing by Consultant to be a trade secret of Consultant. 6. Compensation. Compensation for Consultant's professional services shall not exceed $260,000.00; and payment shall be based upon City approval of each task. Billing shall be accompanied by a detailed explanation ofthe work performed by whom at what rate and on what date. Also, plans, specifications, documents or other pertinent materials shall be submitted for City review, even if only in partial or draft form. 7. Availability of Records. Consultant shall maintain the records supporting this billing for not less than three (3)years following completion of the work under this Agreement. Consultant shall make these records available to authorized personnel of the City at the Consultant's offices during business hours upon written request of the City. 8. Project Manager. The Project Manager for the Consultant for the work under this Agreement shall be MATT ZUCCA. Page 2 of 8 SAA Public Works Directory\PROJECTS\81190 04-05 Water Program Management\AGREEMENT FOR EKI.wpd 9. Assignability and Subcontracting. The services to be performed under this Agreement are unique and personal to the Consultant. No portion of these services shall be assigned or subcontracted without the written consent of the City. 10. Notices. Any notice required to be given shall be deemed to be duly and properly given if mailed postage prepaid, and addressed to: To City: George Bagdon City of Burlingame 501 Primrose Road Burlingame, CA 94010 To Consultant: Matt Zucca Erler & Kalinowski, Inc. 1870 Ogden Drive Burlingame, CA 94010 or personally delivered to Consultant to such address or such other address as Consultant designates in writing to City. 11. Independent Contractor. It is understood that the Consultant, in the performance of the work and services agreed to be performed, shall act as and be an independent contractor and not an agent or employee of the City. As an independent contractor he/she shall not obtain any rights to retirement benefits or other benefits which accrue to City employee(s). With prior written consent, the Consultant may perform some obligations under this Agreement by subcontracting, but may not delegate ultimate responsibility for performance or assign or transfer interests under this Agreement. Consultant agrees to testify in any litigation brought regarding the subject of the work to be performed under this Agreement. Consultant shall be compensated for its costs and expenses in preparing for, traveling to, and testifying in such matters at its then current hourly rates of compensation, unless such litigation is brought by Consultant or is based on allegations of Consultant's negligent performance or wrongdoing. 12. Conflict of Interest. Consultant understands that its professional responsibilities is solely to the City. The Consultant has and shall not obtain any holding or interest within the City of Burlingame. Consultant has no business holdings or agreements with any individual member of the Staff or management of the City or its representatives nor shall it enter into any such holdings or agreements. In addition, Consultant warrants that it does not Page 3 of 8 SAA Public Works Duectory\PROJECTS\81190 04-05 Water Program Management\AGREEMENT FOR EKI.wpd presently and shall not acquire any direct or indirect interest adverse to those of the City in the subject of this Agreement, and it shall immediately disassociate itself from such an interest should it discover it has done so and shall, at the City's sole discretion, divest itself of such interest. Consultant shall not knowingly and shall take reasonable steps to ensure that it does not employ a person having such an interest in this performance of this Agreement. If after employment of a person, Consultant discovers it has employed a person with a direct or indirect interest that would conflict with its performance of this Agreement, Consultant shall promptly notify City of this employment relationship, and shall, at the City's sole discretion, sever any such employment relationship. 13. Equal Employment Opportunity. Consultant warrants that it is an equal opportunity employer and shall comply with applicable regulations governing equal employment opportunity. Neither Consultant nor its subcontractors do and neither shall discriminate against persons employed or seeking employment with them on the basis of age, sex, color, race, marital status, sexual orientation, ancestry, physical or mental disability, national origin, religion, or medical condition, unless based upon a bona fide occupational qualification pursuant to the California Fair Employment & Housing Act. 14. Insurance. A. Minimum Scope of Insurance: i. Consultant agrees to have and maintain, for the duration of the contract, General Liability insurance policies insuring him/her and his/her firm to an amount not less than: one million dollars ($1,000,000) combined single limit per occurrence for bodily injury,personal injury and property damage in a form at least as broad as ISO "Occurrence" Form CG 0001. ii. Consultant agrees to have and maintain for the duration of the contract, an Automobile Liability insurance policy ensuring him/her and his/her staff to an amount not less than one million dollars ($1,000,000) combined single limit per accident for bodily injury and property damage. iii. Consultant agrees to have and maintain, for the duration of the contract,professional liability insurance in amounts not less than one million dollars ($1,000,000) sufficient to insure Consultant for professional errors or omissions in the performance of the particular scope of work under this agreement. Page 4 of 8 SAA Public Works Directory\PROJECTS\81190 04-05 Water Program Management\AGREEMENT FOR EKI.wpd iv. Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the City. At the option of the City, either: the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self-insured retentions as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers; or the Contractor shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations,claim administration, and defense expenses. B. General and Automobile Liability Policies: i. The City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers are to be covered as insured as respects: liability arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of the Consultant; products and completed operations of Consultant, premises owned or used by the Consultant. The endorsement providing this additional insured coverage shall be equal to or broader than ISO Form CG 20 10 11 85 and must cover joint negligence, completed operations, and the acts of subcontractors. This requirement does not apply to the professional liability insurance required for professional errors and omissions. ii. The Consultant's insurance coverage shall be endorsed to be primary insurance as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insurances maintained by the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers shall be excess of the Consultant's insurance and shall not contribute with it. iii. Any failure to comply with reporting provisions of the policies shall not affect coverage provided to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. iv. The Consultant's insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom a claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the limits of the insurer's liability. C. In addition to these policies, Consultant shall have and maintain Workers' Compensation insurance as required by California law. Further, Consultant shall ensure that all subcontractors employed by Consultant provide the required Workers' Compensation insurance for their respective employees. Page 5 of 8 SAA Public Works Directory\PROJECTS\81190 04-05 Water Program Management\AGREEMENT FOR EKI.wpd D. All Coverages: Each insurance policy required in this item shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be suspended, voided, canceled, reduced in coverage or in limits except after thirty (3 0) days' prior written notice by certified mail,return receipt requested,has been given to the City. Current certification of such insurance shall be kept on file at all times during the term of this agreement with the City Clerk. E. Acceptability of Insurers. Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a Best's rating of no less than A-:VII and authorized to do business in the State of California. F. Verification of Coverage. Upon execution of this Agreement, Contractor shall furnish the City with certificates of insurance and with original endorsements effecting coverage required by this clause. The certificates and endorsements for each insurance policy are to be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. The certificates and endorsements are to be on forms approved by the City. All certificates and endorsements are to be received and approved by the City before any work commences. The City reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, at any time. 15. Indemnification. To the fullest extent permitted by law, he Consultant shall save, keep and hold harmless indemnify and defend the City, its officers, agent, employees and volunteers from all damages, liabilities, penalties, costs, or expenses in law or equity, including but not limited to attorneys' fees, that may at any time arise, result from, relate to, or be set up because of damages to property or personal injury received by reason of, or in the course of performing work which may be occasioned by a willful or negligent act or omissions of the Consultant, or any of the Consultant's officers, employees, or agents or any subconsultant. This provision shall not apply if the damage or injury is caused by the sole negligence or willful misconduct of the City, its officers, agents, employees, or volunteers. 16. Waiver. No failure on the part of either parry to exercise any right or remedy hereunder shall operate as a waiver of any other right or remedy that party may have hereunder, nor does waiver of a breach or default under this Agreement constitute a continuing waiver of a subsequent breach of the same or any other provision of this Agreement. 17. Governing Law. This Agreement, regardless of where executed, shall be governed by and construed to the laws of the State of California. Venue for Page 6 of 8 SAA Public Works Directory\PROJECTS\81190 04-05 Water Program Management\AGREEMENT FOR EKI.wpd any action regarding this Agreement shall be in the Superior Court of the County of San Mateo or Santa Clara. 18. Termination of Agreement. The City and the Consultant shall have the right to terminate this agreement with or without cause by giving not less than fifteen (15) days written notice of termination. In the event of termination, the Consultant shall deliver to the City all plans, files, documents, reports, performed to date by the Consultant. In the event of such termination, City shall pay Consultant an amount that bears the same ratio to the maximum contract price as the work delivered to the City bears to completed services contemplated under this Agreement, unless such termination is made for cause, in which event, compensation, if any, shall be adjusted in light of the particular facts and circumstances involved in such termination. 19. Amendment. No modification, waiver, mutual termination, or amendment of this Agreement is effective unless made in writing and signed by the City and the Consultant. 20. Disputes. In any dispute over any aspect of this Agreement, the prevailing parry shall be entitled to reasonable attorney's fees, as well as costs not to exceed $7,500 in total. 21. Entire Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the complete and exclusive statement of the Agreement between the City and Consultant. No terms, conditions, understandings or agreements purporting to modify or vary this Agreement, unless hereafter made in writing and signed by the party to be bound, shall be binding on either party. Page 7 of 8 SAA Public Works Directory\PROJECTS\81190 04-05 Water Program Management\AGREEMENT FOR EKI.wpd IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City and Consultant have executed this Agreement as of the date indicated on page one (1). City of Burlingame By City Manager Consultant: Erler & Kalinowski, Inc. Print Name Title ATTEST: Approved as to form: City Clerk City Attorney Page 8 of 8 SAA Public Works Directory\PROJECTS\81190 04-05 Water Program Management\AGREEMENT FOR EKI.wpd DRAFT EXHIBIT A Scope of Work for Program Management of the Water System and Capital Improvements Program Fiscal Year 2004-2005 The City of Burlingame ("City") is retaining Erler& Kalinowski, Inc. ("Consultant")to serve as Program Manager to assist the City with implementing a multi-year potable water system improvement program ("Program") as described below: BACKGROUND The City is implementing a Capital Improvements Projects ("CIP") for improvements to the City's water system. The Program addresses the tracking,planning, and implementation of the management of the CIP projects. Much of the City's current water system infrastructure is reportedly reaching the end of its useful life, such that approximately 50 percent of the distribution system is at least 50 years old. As a result,the City is improving or replacing portions of its water distribution system. Under a separate Scope of Work, EKI prepared a Water System Master Plan that presents an approach to infrastructure improvements over a 30 year planning horizon. These improvements include distribution system mains, storage facilities,transmission mains, pumping stations, and SCADA systems. A summary of the City's current water distribution system configuration and capacity is as follows: • Consumption averages from 4 to 5 million gallons per day ("MGD") with peak days of approximately 7 MGD. • Water is supplied to the City through 6 SFPUC meters connected to three SFPUC pipelines. • There are approximately 9,000 connections to the City water system. • The City has approximately 107 miles of water mains installed since 1904. Approximately 56 miles of the City's mains are over 50 years old. • There are a total of 7 potable water storage tanks that collectively store up to a maximum of 2.6 million gallons. • There are 4 pumping stations and 2 hydropneumatic tanks and pumps within the distribution system. • There are seven different water pressure zones. A total of 75% of the service connections are within the SFPUC service pressure zone. The remaining pressure zones are fed from pump stations and storage tanks. Page 1 of 6 3 August 2004 Exhibit A DRAFT Page 2 of 6 • The City operates one groundwater production well for non-potable, irrigation uses. The well produces 150 gallons per minute of water and stores extracted water in a 40,000-gallon storage tank. SCOPE OF WORK The following describes Consultant's general scope of work under this Agreement. Program Element A- Program Management EKI will provide general engineering management and consulting services to the City's management of the Program. The tasks covered by this program element are anticipated to include: Task 0—Program Communications EKI will meet monthly with City staff to review the progress of the Program. These meetings are anticipated to include summary reports on individual projects and updates of budgets and schedules for individual Program elements. Task 1 —Finance and Budget Tracking and Updates EKI will update the overall CIP budget on a quarterly basis with current project expenditures and will track the progress of project expenditures relative to the estimated budget. Updated budgets will be distributed to appropriate City staff. Task 2 - Schedule Trackingapdates EKI will update overall CIP program schedules on a quarterly basis with the current efforts completed and anticipated remaining work and timelines. Task 3 -Project Documentation As EKI has done for the previous two years of program management, EKI will maintain the City's files on water system CIP projects being program managed by EKI. The project documentation will be stored on behalf of the City at EKI's office in Burlingame until the end of the completion of the various projects. At that time, the project files will be forwarded to the City for storage. Task 4 - 2005-2006 CIP Budget As done for the 2004-2005 fiscal year CIP budget,EKI will prepare an estimated budget for the anticipated 2005-2006 fiscal year CIP projects. This budget will be prepared in the same format as the 2004-2005 fiscal year CIP budget. Page 2 of 6 3 August 2004 Exhibit A DRAFT Page 3 of 6 Program Element B—CIP Projects On behalf of the City in connection with the new and ongoing tasks identified above, EKI will assist the City with implementing the CIP Program. It is anticipated that EKI's efforts will consist of the following elements: 1. Coordinating the implementation of the communications plan prepared by Public Affairs Management for informing the City Council and citizens of the Program and potential disruptions that might be experienced during the implementation of various Program projects, 2. Providing assistance as requested regarding design and construction by others of the water system SCADA system, 3. Generally overseeing construction review by other consultants during construction of the Program projects, and 4. Coordinating engineering studies being prepared by others regarding CIP pump stations and storage tanks projects. The scope of each of these tasks is described below: Task 0—Project Communications EKI will oversee the implementation by the City's consultant, Public Affairs Management, of the communications plan for the CIP Program. Based upon experience during the previous year, EKI estimates a budget of 1 hour per week for a Staff Engineer and '/2 hour per week for a Senior Engineer(Matt Zucca) for the duration of the Agreement to assist the City with communications. Review time for a Supervising Engineer(Steve Tarantino) is also included. Task 1 —Pump Station Design After the pump station pre-design study is complete (performed under the 2003- 2004 program management agreement), EKI understands the City will likely continue to utilize Olivia Chen Consultants to perform the design of the pump stations. EKI will monitor the design consultant's progress, including conducting technical design reviews. For purposes of preparing a budget for this task, it was assumed that EKI will conduct two design reviews in coordination with City staff during each design. The design reviews will: • Compare the consultant's proposed design to City standards; • Identify constructability issues; • Review general clarity and consistency of design documents, and • Evaluate the design consultant's construction cost estimate based upon the more-detailed information generated as the design progresses. Page 3 of 6 3 August 2004 Exhibit A DRAFT Page 4 of 6 These design reviews are anticipated to occur at about the 30 and 90 percent completion stages of each design. It is anticipated that modified project construction cost estimates will be made at both of these levels of completion. EKI will also provide assistance to the City for acquisition of additional property from the Burlingame School District("District") for the construction of the new Trousdale Pump Station. It is possible that, once an agreement has been reached with the District, a third party service may be utilized by the City to negotiate the final acquisition agreement. EKI will provide assistance during the acquisition process, which may include but not limited to preparation of project descriptions, attendance and coordination of meetings with City staff and school district, response to questions, and other similar tasks as requested by the City. In as much as the exact scope of assistance required by the City during the acquisition of additional property cannot be determined at this time, EKI will provide assistance during the property acquisition process on a time and materials basis as requested by the City. Both the City and EKI acknowledge that the acquisition of additional property for the Trousdale Pump Station may involve significantly more effort than accounted for in this scope of work. Once the final pump station design is completed and approved by the City, EKI will provide bidding support services and will coordinate with the design consultant during the preparation of bid packages and addenda. However, because it is anticipated that pump station construction will not occur until subsequent fiscal years, EKI has not included scope or budget herein for the review of construction management services during pump station construction. Task 2—Design and Construction of Burlinghome/Easton Replacement Phase III EKI understands the City will issue a request for proposal ("RFP") for the completion of the remaining design of the Burlinghome/Easton Main Replacement Project. EKI will assist the City in the preparation of the RFP and during the consultant selection process. The design consultant will design water main replacements for the Burlinghome/Easton Subdivision No. 5, Burlingame Village, Burlingame Gate, and Burlingame-Grove Subdivisions. EKI will monitor the design consultant's progress, including conducting technical design reviews. Once the design is completed and approved by the City, EKI will coordinate with the design consultant during the design consultant's preparation of bid packages and addenda. Review of construction management during construction of the Burlinghome/Easton Subdivision No. 5 Main Replacement project will also be performed as part of this agreement. Page 4 of 6 3 August 2004 Exhibit A DRAFT Page 5 of 6 However, because it is anticipated that construction of main replacements in the Burlingame Village, Burlingame Gate, and Burlingame-Grove Subdivisions will not occur until subsequent fiscal years, EKI has not included scope or budget included herein for the review of construction management services during water main replacement construction in these subdivisions. TASK 3 - WASHINGTON PARK IRRIGATION WELL EVALUATION As part of this task, EKI will assist the City in the evaluation of ongoing operability problems at the existing Washington Park irrigation well. EKI will perform a review of existing engineering documentation and develop an assessment plan to identify existing problems within the irrigation well system ("Assessment Plan"). Because the scope and effort of implementing the Assessment Plan is uncertain, EKI has not included scope or budget herein for the implementation of the Assessment Plan. TASK 4 - URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN In 1983, the State of California enacted the Urban Water Management Planning Act("Act") (Water Code Sections 10610 - 10656). The Act states that every urban water supplier that provides water to 3,000 or more customers, or that provides over 3,000 acre-feet of water annually, should make every effort to ensure the appropriate level of reliability in its water service sufficient to meet the needs of its various categories of customers during normal, dry, and multiple dry years. The Act describes the contents of the Urban Water Management Plans ("UWMP") as well as how urban water suppliers should adopt and implement the UWMPs. In accordance with California Water Code Section 10621, each urban water supplier shall update its plan at least once every five years on or before December 31, in years ending in five and zero. The City's UWMP is scheduled for updating during 2005. EKI will prepare a UWMP in accordance with California Water Code Section 10631 that evaluates: • Projected Water Demands, • Reliability of Existing Water Supply, • Potential Use of Recycled Water, • Water Supply Contingency Plan, and • Best Management Practices. EKI will submit a draft of the UWMP to the City for review and will incorporate the City's comments prior to the preparation and submittal of a final UWMP to the City. Page 5 of 6 3 August 2004 Exhibit A DRAFT Page 6 of 6 TASK 5 - TROUSDALE AVENUE MAIN RUPTURE ASSESSMENT As part of the 2003/2004 program management agreement, EKI assisted the City in the evaluation of potential corrosion issues in water distribution system mains along Trousdale Avenue in the Donnelly Pressure Zone. However, to date, the corrosion evaluation has not identified corrosion as the likely cause of the multiple main breaks in this area. EKI will continue to assist the City in evaluating potential causes of water main failures. Inasmuch as the exact scope of work required to identify the cause of water main breaks cannot be determined at this time, EKI will provide assistance on a time and materials basis as requested by the City. It is currently anticipated that, if corrosion is not the cause of main breaks, the evaluation will next focus on potential hydraulic pressure surges in the Donnelly Pressure Zone. EKI will contact Flow Science, a consulting engineering firm specializing in hydraulic pressure surge evaluations, and determine potential additional investigations needed to quantify the potential impact of hydraulic pressure surges. Attachments: • Table 1 - Estimated Program Consulting Effort and Associated Costs, Program Management of City of Burlingame Water System and Water Quality Improvements (2004-2005 Fiscal Year), City of Burlingame, San Mateo County, California Page 6 of 6 3 August 2004 DRAFT TABLE I ESTIMATED PROGRAM CONSULTING EFFORT AND ASSOCIATED COSTS Program Management of City of Burlingame Water System and Water Quality Improvements(2004-2005 Fiscal Year) City of Burlingame,San Mateo County,California ESTIMATED LABOR(Hours) See Note 1 EXPENSES COST Labor Unit Comm Expense Line Item Task TASKS _ Subtotal Unit Quant. Cost Fee Markup Subtotal Subtotals Subtotals 66 87 1 66 1103 1 91 1941 114 114 141 2 172 2 ($) 3% 10% ($) M M PROGRAM ELEMENT A-PROGRAM MANAGEMENT TASK 0-PROGRAM COMMUNICATIONS(CIP Badget Item ab) _ - - ---- - - - •City Management (a) Monthly SummaryMeetings - 72 IS $14,040 $azt - u21 s14,461 (c) Daily Communications(Average of l hour per week for entire year) - -- - - 52 $7,904 $237 5237 $8,141 $22,602 TASK 1-FINANCE AND BUDGET TRACKING AND UPDATES(CIP Budget Item a3{) ♦Periodic Review of Project Budget and Cash Flow - (a) Bi-weekly program management budget updates 26 26 6 $7,662 - $230 $230 $7,892 (b) Quarterly CIP Cash Flow updates 64 16 4 $10,416 $312 5312 $10,728 $15620 TASK 2-SCHEDULE TRACKING AND UPDATES(CIP Budget Item a.8) •Quarterly CIP Schedule Update for Program Elements 16 4 53,120 - $94 - $94 $3,214 $3,214 TASK 3-PROJECT DOCUMENTATION(CIP Budget Item a.8) •Establishing Online Program Management Tool 24 8 2 54,2% _Is l $1,000 $129 5100 $1,229 _$5,525 •Maintaining Online Program Management Tool(1 hour per week) 52 55,928 m0 12 $195 $178 $234 $2,752 $8,680 •Establishing City Files 104 8 $8,080 $242 S242 $8,322 S22,527 TASK 4-2005-2006 CIP BUDGET(CIP Budget Item a.8) ♦Preparing 2005-2006 CIP Budget -- - 24 40 24 4 $10,984 Is 1 $150 $330 $15 $495 $11,479 $11,479 Subtotals-Program Element A 104 24 1 0 26 0 0 180 0 222 0 38 572,430 $2,173 $349 56,012 $78,442 PROGRAM ELEMENT B-CIP PROJECTS TASK 0-PROJECT COMMUNICATIONS(See Note 2)(CIP Budget Item a.8) - - -- ♦Public Outreach 1 hours per week for Staff Engineer for term of Agreement) 52 26 6 59,716 $291 $291 $10,007 $10,007 TASK I-PUMP STATION DESIGN(CIP Budget Item a.8) (Proeram Maaaeement of CIP Budeet Item e.1) •Preliminary Engineering Design Report Review and Comment 16 8 4 2 $4,072 _ $122 5122 $4,194 •Assistance during Property Acquisition 36 16 8 57,912 $237 - $237 $8,149 •Design Oversight (a) KickojfMeeting wirh Design Cons-Rant 4 2 2 $1,104 $33 $33 $1,137 (b) ConstructabilityReview 8 4 2 $1,864 $56 - $56 $1,920 (c) Meetings with City Staff ro Review Project Stupe and Details S 3 2 51,712 $51 $51 $1,763_ (d) 30%Design Review andModiftedProjectCost Estimates 8 24 8 2 $6,280 Is 1 $2,500 $188 1 $250 $2,938 $9,218 (e) 90%Design Review and Modified Project Cost Estimates 8 24 8 2 56,280 Is 1 $2,500 $188 $250 $2,938 $9,218 •Assist during Construction Bidding 16 6 2 53,080 $92 $92 $3,172 $38,773 Erler&Kalinowski,Inc. SOW Cost Estimate 2004-2005.vCity Review-3.xls Pagel oft 8/3/04 DRAFT TABLE 1 ESTIMATED PROGRAM CONSULTING EFFORT AND ASSOCIATED COSTS Program Management of City of Burlingame Water System and Water Quality Improvements(2004-2005 Fiscal Year) City of Burlingame,San Mateo County,California LSIIMAILD ESTIMATED LABOR Hours See Note 1 EXPENSES COST 3 in s e m ° ,Q labor Unit Comm Expense Line Item Task TASKS 3 G - '2 o f _ Subtotal ilnit Quant Cost Fee Markup Subtotal Subtotals Subtotals 66 87 66 103 91 94 114 114 141112 172 2 ($) 3% 10% ($) M ($) TASK 2-DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF BURLINGAME EASTON PHASE III (CIP Budeet Item a.81(Proeram Manaeement of CIP Budeet Item b.3) ♦Preliminary Engineering Design Report Review and Comment 16 8 4 2 1 $3,704 $111 $111 $3,815 ♦Design Oversight _.... (a) KickofjMeetiogwith Design Consultant 8 8 2 $2,288 $69 - $69 r143 (b) ConstruclabiBtyReview 24 8 $3,400 _ _ $102 $102 _ (c) Meetings with City Staffto Review Project Scope and Details 24 8 2 53,744 _ $112 SI l2 _ (d) 30%Design Review aodModtfed Project Cost Estimates 24 8 8 4 $5,464 $164 - S164 (e) 90%Design ReviewandModifsedPreject Cost Estimates 24 8 8 4 $5,464 $164 $164 (n RighrofEnifyAcquisition 40 16 2 $6,416 $192 5192 (g) Communications with Design Consultant and information Retrieval(t hours per week for 4 months) 16 16 2 54,232 $127 - $127 ♦Construction Bidding (a) Assist in Assembling and Distributing Bid Packages 16 8 4 2 53,536 _ _ $106 $106 $3,642 (b) Assist in Answering Bidders Questio-Trepare Addendum 16 8 4 2 53,536 $106 - $106 $3,642 (c) Assist in Bid Opening and Selection ofContraetor 16 8 4 2 53,536 ___ $106 5106 $3,642 ♦Pre-Construction Conference 24 8 1 2 1 53,744 $112 $112 $3,856 4 Oversight of Submittal Review Process 32 8 $4,472 $134 - $134 54,606 4 Oversight of Construction Management 60 24 16 $11,860 _ _ $356 5356 $12,216 4 Assistance during Project Acce tante and Final Documentation 24 8 2 1 $3,744 $112 $112 $3,956 $71,214 TASK 3-WASHINGTON PARK IRRIGATION WELL EVALUATION - 4 Review Existing Engineering Documentation 24 8 4 2 54,984 $150 $150 $5,134 4 Develop Assessment Plan to Identify Existing Problems 16 6 2 $3 0811 $92 S92 $3,172 $8,306 TASK 4-URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN - 4 Evaluation of Projected Water Demands 16 4 2 $2,776 S83 S93 $2,859 4 Evaluation of Reliability of Water Supply 24 8 2 54,296 _ $129 $129 $4,425 4 Recycled Water Evaluation 24 8 2 $4,296 $129 - $129 $4,425 4 Develop Contingency Plan 36 16 2 $6,880 $206 $206 $7,086 4 Review Best Management Practices 36 16 2 56,880 $206 $206 1 $7,086 4 Write Urban Water Management Plan 24 40 16 8 $10,456 Is 1 $500 $314 S50 5864 $11,320 $37,202 TASK 5-TROUSDALE AVENUE MAIN RUPTURE ASSESSMENT ♦Assist City in Evaluating Potential Causes of Water Main Failures 40 24 8 8 $10,040 Is 1 $5,000 $301 $500 $5,801 $15,841 $15,841 Total Estimated Hours-Program Element B 0 24 0 0 456 0 144 176 24 359 52 104 $164,848 S4,945 $1,050 $16,495 $181,343 GRAND TOTAL ESTIMATED HOURS AND BUDGET(See Note 3 1041 48 1 0 26 456 0 324 176 24 1 581 52 7142 $237,278 $7,118 $1,399 $22,507 $260,000 JI Not,: (1) Staff billing fifes have been mereased 1.0 percent to reflect a presumed two percent increase in billing fit,at the start of the 2005 calendaryear. (2) EKI has assumed that Public Affairs Management will pert the work identified in this task and EKl will menage the implementation of theireaorts- (3) Grand Total Estimate Budget has been rounded up to the nearest$1,000. Erler&Kalinowski,Inc. SOW Cost Estimate 2004-2005.vCity Review-3.xls Page 2 of 2 8/3/04 AGENDA BURLINGAME STAFF REPORT ITEM# 9C MTG. 8/16/04 DATE TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL SUBMITTED A . , DATE: AUGUST 3, 2004 BY APPROVAD, FROM: PUBLIC WORKS BY v SUBJECT: RESOLUTION TO REVERT LOTS P, Q, AND Y FROM 2-HOUR PARKING TO A COMBINATION OF 2-HOUR AND 10-HOUR PARKING RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that Council approve the attached resolution for the following modifications to City parking lots P, Q, and Y: • Change the parking time limits from 2-hours only to a combination of 2-hour and 10-hour parking. • Authorize a parking rate of$2.00 per 10-hours for all new 10-hour meters. • Authorize staff to modify, if needed, the number of 2-hour and 10-hour parking spaces after a one year evaluation period. BACKGROUND: In September of 2003, Council authorized staff to make changes to the parking rates for the Broadway Commercial District. Council authorized the rate changes based on the traffic and parking studies conducted by staff and by Wilbur Smith Associates. The rate changes included metered on-street parking and paid public parking lots. Parking lot time limits for the public parking lots in the Broadway Commercial District were also changed from a combination of 2-hour and 10-hour parking to 2-hour parking. This was based on input from the Broadway Improvement District(BID). After several public meetings,the BID advocated changing the parking time limits for all lots within the district core(lots P,Q,R,and Y)to 2-hour parking only. The BID believed that this change would better facilitate the turn-over parking for business customers and patrons. Parking by business owners, employees,and other long-term parkers was provided in long-term lots near California Drive. At that time, staff voiced the possibility of long-term parking problems in the surrounding area as a result of this change. A six- month and one-year evaluation period was informally set to assess the impacts of the time limit change. DISCUSSION: As anticipated by staff, the time limit change caused long-term parking to be displaced into the neighboring residential side streets. It became evident that employees and long-term parkers were not taking advantage of the 10-hour parking made available along California Drive. Neighboring side streets such as Paloma Avenue began experiencing long-term parking impacts. As a result, on May 13,and June 10, 2004,the Traffic, Safety and Parking Commission heard from several residents on Paloma Avenue regarding the parking problems. Initial discussions focused on a request to impose a 2-hour on-street parking limit on Paloma Avenue;however,after further discussions it was determined that the residential concerns resulted primarily from business-related parking on Paloma Avenue. The Commission reviewed the situation and held a meeting with City staff, two of its members, a BID representative, and residents of Paloma Avenue to develop a mutually agreeable solution. Staff also talked with the management and property owners of several businesses along Broadway and adjacent to parking lots P, Q, and Y. Page 2 Parking Lots P, Q, and Y August 3, 2004 The Commission, BID and residents were in agreement that some long-term parking should be re-established in the Broadway lots, as was originally advocated by staff. Field evaluations show that the lots are currently under- utilized and there are sufficient parking spaces along the Broadway frontage to meet patron and customer demands. A portion of the unused spaces in lots P, Q, and Y could easily be reverted to10-hour parking without any significant impact to customer parking demands in these lots,including patrons of Starbucks Coffee. This change would address the need for long-term employee parking for the Broadway businesses. Staff also recommends a rate of$2.00 for 10 hours parking which is consistent with Burlingame Avenue. The rate of$0.50 per hour would remain for 2-hour parking. If approved, the following number of parking spaces will be changed to 10-hour parking (see attachment): • 9 spaces out of 27 in Lot P • 10 spaces out of 55 in Lot Y • 12 spaces out of 24 in Lot Q EXHIBITS:Resolution,Exhibit A,Traffic Safety and Parking Minutes(5/13/04 and 6/10/04),Broadway Parking Lot Map e , W A pz stine Chou Traffic Engineer 650-558-7230 c: City Clerk, City Manager, City Attorney, Traffic, Safety and Parking Commission, BID (Ross Bruce) RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME REVISING THE REGULATIONS GOVERNING CITY PARKING LOT TIME LIMITS FOR PARKING LOTS P,Q,AND Y RESOLVED, by the CITY COUNCIL of the CITY OF BURLINGAME, California,that: WHEREAS, Municipal Code title 13 provides the framework for regulating the City's parking lots; and WHEREAS,this Council has from time to time established regulations for time limitations and charges for various City parking lots; and WHEREAS, the City has conducted extensive parking studies of the Burlingame Avenue and Broadway areas to determine what might be the best balance of parking availability in public off-street parking lots that will provide the greatest benefit to motorists,pedestrians,merchants,and property owners; and WHEREAS,demand from customers and citizens seems to indicate the need to provide long term parking spaces in lots spread along the Broadway area and to provide flexibility in the number of short and long terms spaces in these lots; and WHEREAS, the other time limits and parking rate charges established in Resolution No. 100-2003 shall remain unchanged, NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS RESOLVED, ORDERED and DETERMINED as follows: 1. No person shall park any vehicle on any City parking lot for longer than the designated period and,in those lots having parking meters or coin boxes,after the meter has expired or without placing required amounts in the coin box. 8/4/2004 1 2. The time limitations, meter or coin box rates, and hours of enforcement set forth on Exhibit A attached hereto are hereby adopted and shall supersede any and all such limitations and hours adopted by prior resolutions of this Council. 3. The Director of Public Works is hereby authorized and directed to procure and install parking meters or coin boxes and appropriate signs giving notice of the provisions of this resolution. 4. The Director of Public Works is specifically authorized to adjust the balance of differently timed spaces within the lots as set authorized and set forth in Exhibit A as the Director determines will best achieve the goals of providing parking to customers,employees,and residents. 5. Limitations and charges set forth in this resolution shall be operative upon the installation of such signs,meters and coin boxes; existing limitations and charges shall continue in effect until changed. 6. Resolution No. 100-2003 is repealed. 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 8/4/2004 2 EXHIBIT A CITY OF BURLINGAME PUBLIC PARKING LOTS TIME LIMITS AND RATES PARKING LOT LOCATION TIME LIMITS METER OR COIN BOX RATE A Donnelly Avenue to Bellevue 2 hours $1.50 for 2 hours Avenue adjacent to Main Library 9 hours $2.25 for 9 hours B Chapin Avenue, West 10 hours Flat rate of $2.00 for up to 10 hours B-1 Chapin Avenue, East 2 hours $1.50 for 2 hours C Donnelly Avenue, South 2 hours $1.50 for 2 hours 10 hours $2.50 for 10 hours D Donnelly Avenue at Lorton Avenue 2 hours $1.50 for 2 hours 4 hours $3.00 for 4 hours E Lorton Avenue to Park Road, 2 hours $1.50 for 2 hours South of Burlingame Avenue 4 hours $3.00 for 4 hours Lorton Avenue to Park Road, South of F 12 hours Free up to 12-hour limit Howard Avenue Park Road to Primrose Road, South of G 10 hours Flat rate of $2.00 for up to 10 hours Howard Avenue West Side of EI Camino Real at H 12 hours Free up to 12-hour limit Ralston Avenue Primrose Road to Park Road, 2 hours $1.50 for 2 hours South of Burlingame Avenue 4 hours $3.00 for 4 hours EI Camino Real, between Howard K 10 hours $2.00 for 10 hours Avenue and Burlingame Avenue K-1 Burlingame Avenue at EI Camino Real 2 hours $1.50 for 2 hours L Off Fox Plaza Lane 2 hours $1.50 for 2 hours California Drive, South of Burlingame M 2 hours $1.50 for 2 hours Avenue Lorton Avenue to Highland Avenue, N 10 hours Flat rate of $2.00 for up to 10 hours South of Howard Avenue O North Lane to Oak Grove 2 hours $1.50 for 2 hours 10 hours Flat rate of $2.00 for up to 10 hours 8/4/2004 Exhibit A - 1 PARKING LOT LOCATION TIME LIMITS METER OR COIN BOX RATE 2 hours $1.00 for 2 hours P Paloma Avenue, North of Broadway 10 hours $2.00 for 10 hours Q Capuchino Avenue to Paloma Avenue, 2 hours $1.00 for 2 hours North of Broadway 10 hours $2.00 for 10 hours R Capuchino Avenue, South of 2 hours $1.00 for 2 hours Broadway S Rhinette Avenue at California Drive 2 hours $0.20 for 2 hours 9 hours $1.00 for 9 hours T California Drive, North of Broadway 10 hours $1.00 for 10 hours U California Drive, South of Broadway 10 hours $1.00 for 10 hours California Drive, adjacent to V 2 hours $1.50 for 2 hours Burlingame Avenue Train Station Howard Avenue, between Park and W 10 hours $2.00 for 10 hours Primrose Roads X Tennis Court lot, Burlingame Avenue 4 hours Free up to 4-hour limit Y Chula Vista Avenue to Laguna 2 hours $1.00 for 2 hours Avenue South of Broadway 10 hours $2.00 for 10 hours NOTES: (1) For complete description of Lots A through N,see Map entitled PARKING LOTS BURLINGAME AVENUE OFF-STREET PARKING DISTRICT, as revised, which map is numbered C-1988, is dated February 1965, and is on file in the office of the City Engineer of the City of Burlingame. (2) All parking limitations established by this resolution shall be in effect from 8:00 a.m.to 6:00 p.m., Sundays and holidays excepted. Specific parking lots may be subject to other City ordinance, resolution, or regulation provisions. 8/4/2004 Exhibit A - 2 TRAFFIC, SAFETY AND PARKING COMMISSION Meeting Minutes - Approved Thursday, May 13, 2004 It was moved and seconded (Comms. Warden/McIver) to make this an Action item now. It was then moved and seconded(Comms. Warden/McIver)to deny this request. Unanimously approved by the Commission. 4.2.4 Request for green zone at 828 Mahler Road Mr. Chou stated that there is an on-site rear parking lot and recommended denial of this request. He also stated that this request had come before the Commission in the past, and that it was denied then. Mr. Chou explained that nothing has changed significantly between then and now. Comm. Warden stated that he viewed this site and saw that the parking lot was only 25% full. Comm. Condon noticed that handicapped clients are picked up and dropped off at the rear parking lot, and that the request was to accommodate a new tenant which would be servicing more handicapped clients. It was moved and seconded (Comms. Warden/Condon) to make this an Action item now. It was then moved and seconded(Comms. Warden/McIver)to deny this request. Unanimously approved by the Commission. 4.2.5 Request for 2-hour parking time limit for 1200 block of Paloma Avenue Mr. Chou stated that according to the request,Broadway merchants take up the majority of the on- street parking on this block, and that residents have no access to on-street parking along Paloma. He added that driveways are partially blocked by the merchants' parked cars. Mr. Chou explained that similar streets off of Broadway have 2-hour parking limits. He also stated that Parking Lots P and Q were changed to 2-hour parking as advocated by the Broadway Business Improvement District (BID). The residents of Paloma were concerned that this change in time limits in the lots was contributing to the parking problem on Paloma. Mr. Chou suggested that Mr. Ross Bruce, President of the BID, be contacted to request that Lots P and Q parking limits be changed from two hours back to a combination of two and ten hours. Staff recommended consideration to extend the existing 2-hour parking limit on the 1200 block of Paloma Avenue from 150 feet to about 400 or 500 feet from Broadway. From the floor, Mr. Field stated that the parking lots are currently underutilized. Ms. deQuant stated parked cars on Paloma extend into the driveways making access difficult. She requested 2- hour parking and parking permits exempting residents and making the lots available for merchant parking as before. Ms. McNeely counted more than 100 cars parked on this block of Paloma, while she counted 30 empty spaces in the parking lot. She also requested residential parking permits. Vice Chair Warden stated that he visited the site and suggested that the lot between Capuchin and Paloma be made into a free long-term lot for merchants. Comm. McIver suggested formation of a subcommittee to look at the situation more closely. He noted that Lots P and Q were empty when he was at the site. Chair Cohen suggested contacting the BID regarding lot parking limit changes before the Commission makes a recommendation to Council. Mr. Chou stated that staff will coordinate a meeting with interested Paloma Avenue residents and BID representatives. Vice Chair Warden volunteered to represent the Commission. The City of Burlingame Page 4 TRAFFIC, SAFETY AND PARKING COMMISSION Meeting Minutes - Approved Thursday, May 13, 2004 This will be a Discussion item next month. 4.2.6 Evaluation of sight-visibility at the intersection of Palm Drive and California Drive Mr. Chou stated that there is a problem with sight visibility at the corner due to buildings on California Drive abutting the sidewalk, and some street trees block the view. Staff recommended installing a red zone for two parking spaces at the northwest corner which would allow more visibility.Comm.Condon stated that a street light also obstructs the view,and suggested combining the pole structure with the yellow warning light pole for Fire Station 36 in the future. He also suggested posting a "No Left Turn" sign. Chair Cohen suggested height limit signs. Sgt. Cutler stated that when driving south on California Drive,drivers cannot see a stopped vehicle at Palm until nearly at the intersection. From the floor,Mr. Ward provided pictures of this intersection and stated it is a dangerous corner. This will be an Action item next month. 5. ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF NEW ITEMS. 5.1 Request for passenger loading zone at 322 Lorton Avenue Mr. Chou stated that this is a request from the owner of Ecco Restaurant to off-load customers.This will be a Discussion item next month. 5.2 Request for parking height restriction at the intersection of Oak Grove/Neuchatel Road and at Palm Drive/Neuchatel Road Mr. Chou stated that the residents are having a problem with visibility at this intersection and request height limit signs. From the floor, Mr. Ward stated that if"No Left Turn" signs are posted at Palm Drive (see Item 4.2.6), more traffic will use Neuchatel to turn left at Oak Grove where there is a visibility problem.He requested extending the existing red zone. This will be a Discussion item next month. 6. FROM THE FLOOR. 6.1 Mr. Chou submitted a letter from a Burlingame Avenue resident regarding Parking Lot H. 7. INFORMATION ITEMS. 7.1 From Staff to Commission 7.1.1 Traffic Engineer's Report 7.1.1.1 US 101 Auxiliary Lane/Soundwall Project The City of Burlingame Page 5 TRAFFIC, SAFETY AND PARKING COMMISSION Meeting Minutes -Approved Thursday, June 10, 2004 1. CALL TO ORDER. 7:05 p.m. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG. 3. ROLL CALL. 3 of 5 Commissioners present. 4. INTRODUCTION OF NEW COMMISSIONER Mr. Chou announced that the new commissioner, Victor James, was absent this evening due to medical reasons. He added that Commissioner James sent his regrets and plans to attend starting next month. 5. CURRENT BUSINESS. 5.1 ACTION ITEMS. 5.1.1 Approval of Minutes for May 13, 2004 It was moved and seconded (Comms. Condon/Warden) to approve the May 13, 2004 minutes; approved by voice vote, 3-0-2 (Comms. James and McIver absent). 5.1.2 Evaluation of sight-visibility at the intersection of Palm Drive and California Drive Mr. Chou reviewed alternatives as discussed last month. After discussion, it was moved and seconded (Comms. Warden/Condon) to install a red zone for the first two spaces north of Palm Drive on the west side of California Drive and to post a 6-foot height limitation sign at the north end of the red zone, effective up to 75 feet from the sign; approved by voice vote, 3-0-2 (Comms. James and McIver absent). 5.2 DISCUSSION ITEMS. 5.2.1 Evaluate on-street parking situation on 1300 block of Cortez Avenue and Cabrillo Avenue Comm. Condon summarized the meeting that he and Chair Cohen facilitated at Our Lady of Angels (OLA) to discuss the parking situation there. Alternatives addressed were school hour changes, usage of the upper playground during special events, parental volunteer traffic enforcement, and parking zones on Cabrillo Avenue and Cortez Avenue. He concluded that they expect two more meetings at OLA before school begins on August 24 to further work on a viable solution. The next meeting is scheduled for July 12 at 7 p.m. at OLA. 5.2.2 Request for 2-hour parking time limit for 1200 block of Paloma Avenue Vice Chair Warden summarized the recent meeting that he, Mr. Chou and Sgt. Cutler had with Ross Bruce of the Broadway Improvement District and local residents to discuss time limit changes in the nearby parking lots. As a result of that meeting, it was agreed upon by those attending that some of the 10-hour parking spaces should be restored in each of the three nearby City parking lots (Lots P, Q, and Y). The City of Burlingame Page 2 TRAFFIC, SAFETY AND PARKING COMMISSION Meeting Minutes - Approved Thursday, June 10, 2004 From the floor, Mr. Field stated that he was concerned that most drivers won't pay for 10-hour parking if free, unlimited parking is still offered on this block. He requested a 2-hour time limit be restored on the west side of Paloma between Broadway and Lincoln Avenue. Mr. Utigard stated that he disagreed with his neighbor on this issue since he lives on the west side of Paloma. Chair Cohen asked what measure would be taken to educate the public and merchants of the change in some meters back to 10 hours. Comm. Warden stated that Mr. Bruce would notify BID members of the change. Mr. Chou added that he would include updated information in the next printing order for the Broadway Parking Guide brochure. Comm. Condon asked about incentives for merchants/employees to park in the 10-hour spaces. Mr. Chou stated that his understanding from BID was that the majority of merchants and employees would rather pay to park in the 10- hour spaces,rather than encounter disgruntled residents on Paloma Avenue. Comm. Warden asked about marked parking spaces on Paloma Avenue. Mr. Chou explained that marked spaces can change the public perception of an area from residential to one of commercial. It was moved and seconded(Comms. Warden/Condon)to make this an Action Item immediately. It was then moved and seconded (Comms. Warden/) to recommend to Council to restore 10-hour parking spaces with the appropriate rates in three City parking lots: Lot P, all spaces at the north end; Lot Q, one-half of all spaces on the east side; and Lot Y, all spaces at the south end, and to deny the request for installing a 2-hour parking time limit on Paloma Avenue; both actions approved by voice vote, 3-0-2 (Comms. James and McIver absent). Mr. Chou stated that this recommendation to Council will require funding to purchase and install new 10-hour meter heads. 5.2.3 Request for passenger loading zone at 322 Lorton Avenue Mr. Chou stated that providing a passenger loading zone at this site would require removing metered parking spaces; therefore, staff recommends denial of this request. He also stated that staff was willing to work with the business on after-hours use, but could not recommend installing a passenger loading zone while parking meters were present. Vice Chair Warden stated that Il Fornaio's valet parking is available to patrons of other businesses. From the floor, Mr. Ecco stated that many of his clients are elderly and have trouble walking any distances. He suggested that the meters remain for day use and have a sign added to the spaces designating the spaces as a passenger loading zone after 6 p.m. Mr. Chou stated that a driver may legally park at the meter in front of the restaurant before 6 p.m., and they could remain parked there after 6 p.m. legally for free. There is no cause or requirement for them to move. He also stated that any added enforcement in this area would be difficult for the short-staffed police force. Sgt. Cutler suggested his patrons use the passenger loading zone at Starbucks which is nearby, and just south of the restaurant. Mr. Ecco stated that the Starbucks' To Go customers occupy that space almost exclusively. It was moved and seconded (Comms. Condon/Warden) to make this an Action Item immediately. It was then moved and seconded (Comms. Condon/Warden) to deny this request; both motions approved by voice vote, 3-0-2 (Comms. James and McIver absent). The City of Burlingame Page 3 Parking Lot "P" Parking Lot "Q" 1 f I T O A CITY OF BURLINGAME Z - � D BROADWAY PARKING Parking ' of "Y" LOTS P, Q, & Y 10-HR PARKING ° AGENDA BURLINGAME STAFF REPORT ITEM# 9d MAG. 8/16/04 DATE TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL SUBMITTED DATE: August 5, 2004 BY APPROV D'- FROM: PUBLIC WORKS BY /,,trS 411e—Z- *V SUBJECT:RESOLUTION AWARDING SANCHEZ CREEK BOX CULVERT CLEANING FROM CAROLAN AVENUE TO SANCHEZ LAGOON, TO JMB CONSTRUCTION INC. CITY PROJECT NO. 80900 RECOMMENDATION:It is recommended that City Council approve the attached resolution awarding a contract for the Sanchez Creek Box Culvert Cleaning from Carolan Avenue to Sanchez Lagoon to JMB Construction in the amount of $353,000. BACKGROUND: Bids were opened on August 5,2004 for the Sanchez Creek Box Culvert Cleaning Project. Two bids were received for$353,000 and $586,000. JMB Construction was the responsible low bidder with a bid price 9% lower than the engineer's estimate. JMB Construction has met all the requirements for the project and has been engaged in the contracting business under the present name for more than fourteen years. Experience in work of a similar nature includes underground utilities and pipeline construction in local peninsula cities. Recently, Northwest Construction, an affiliate of JMB Construction successfully completed the construction of box culverts in Easton Creek. During heavy winter rain storms, Sanchez Creek and its tributary Terrace Creek have flooded the residential areas in the 900 blocks of Paloma, Laguna, and Chula Vista Avenues. There are two box culverts that carry storm water to the Bay from Carolan Avenue under North Park Apartments and Highway 101. This project includes removing the debris and accumulated silt from the box culverts which will increase the capacity of the creek and reduce the potential for flooding damage to the residential area.The box culvert cleaning is part of the planned Terrace Creek improvements for the Laguna Area storm drain system. The project will begin in August with completion expected by winter, 2004. BUDGET IMPACT: Following is a financial summary: Expenditures Construction of new box culverts $353,000 Construction contingency (15%) 53,000 Engineering design, plans and specifications 50,000 Construction administration 42.000 Total $498,000 Funding Availability FY 2004-05 CIP Storm Drainage budget for Sanchez Creek Box Culvert Cleaning- $588,000 EXHIBITS: Resolution, Bid Summary, Contract c: City Clerk, City Attorney, Director of Finance, Public Works Director, JMB Construction S:\A Public Works Directory\Staff Reports\Sanchez Creek Box Culvert Cleaning Contract Award 8-16-04.SR.wpd RESOLUTION NO. - SANCHEZ CREEK BOX CULVERT CLEANING FROM CAROLAN AVENUE TO SANCHEZ LAGOON JMB CONSTRUCTION CITY PROJECT NO. 80900 WHEREAS, the City Council has authorized an invitation for bids for the SANCHEZ CREEK BOX CULVERT CLEANING FROM CAROLAN AVENUE TO SANCHEZ LAGOON - CITY PROJECT NO. 80900; and WHEREAS, on AUGUST 5, 2004, all bids were received and opened before the City Clerk and representatives of the Public Works Department; and WHEREAS, JMB CONSTRUCTION, submitted the lowest responsible bid for the job in the amount of$353,000. NOW, THEREFORE, be it RESOLVED, and it is hereby ORDERED, that the Plans and Specifications, including all addenda, are approved and adopted; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the bid of JMB CONSTRUCTION, for said project in the amount of$353,000, and the same hereby is accepted; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THERETO that a contract be entered into between the successful bidder hereinabove referred to and the City of Burlingame for the performance of said work,and that the City Manager be,and he hereby is authorized for and on behalf of the City of Burlingame to execute said contract and to approve the faithful performance bond and the labor and materials bond required to be furnished by the contractor. Mayor 1, 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 SAA Public Works Directory\PROJECTS\80900\ResolutnAward.wpd BID SUMMARY SANCHEZ CREEK BOX CULVERT CLEANING -Carolan Ave. to Sanchez Lagoon Project No.80900 BID OPENING DATE: August 5,2004 ITEM ESTIMATED Engineers Estimate JMB FERMA NO. QUANTITY UNIT City of Burlingame Construction Corporation UNIT PRICE TOTALS UNIT PRICE TOTALS UNIT PRICE TOTALS 1 LS 1 Mobilization(10%of total) $39,150.00 $39,150.00 $31,000.00 $31,000.00 $57,000.00 $57,000.00 1 LS 2 Structural Excavation $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $16,000.00 $16,000.00 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 1 LS 3 Clearing and Grubbing $20,000.00 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 $15,000.00 $15,000.00 1 LS 4 Clean Debris from Twin Box Culverts $205,000.00 $205,000.00 $161,000.00 $161,000.00 $320,000.00 $320,000.00 92 Tons 5 Class 2 Aggregate Base $55.00 $5,060.00 $100.00 $9,200.00 $100.00 $9,200.00 6 lAsphalt Concrete Pavement 30 Tons $175.00 $5,250.00 $300.00 $9,000.00 $200.00 $6,000.00 Cofferdam&Temporary Pump Bypass 7 S stem 1 LS $15,000.00 $15,000.00 $24,000.00 $24,000.00 $38,000.00 $38,000.00 Hatch Cover Risers (Structural 8 Concrete) 16 CY $1,200.00 $19,200.00 $1,000.00 $16,000.00 $2,000.00 $32,000.00 Steel Hatch Covers (12'-7"x8'-6" 9panels) 6 EACH $11,000.00 $66,000.00 $5,000.00 $30,000.00 $15,500.00 $93,000.00 1600 lb. 10 Hatch Cover Support System $3.00 $4,800.00 $20.00 $32,000.00 $5.00 $8,000.00 11 Concrete Curb,Gutter and Sidewalk 60 LF $35.00 $2,100.00 $80.00 $4,800.00 $50.00 $3,000.00 12 Sheeting,Bracing and Shoring* $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 TOTAL $391,560.00 $353,000.00 $586,200.00 *Required by Sections 6700-6708 of the Labor Code. Pricing for these items to be included in items 1 through 11 above 80900BID SUMMARY Sanchez Creek Box culvert cleaning 80900 8-5-04.xls 8/5/2004BID SUM1:20 PM AGREEMENT FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT SANCHEZ CREEK BOX CULVERT CLEANING FROM CAROLAN AVENUE TO SANCHEZ LAGOON CITY PROJECT NO. 80900 THIS AGREEMENT, made in duplicate and entered into in the City of Burlingame, County of San Mateo, State of California on , 2004, by and between the CITY OF BURLINGAME, a municipal corporation, hereinafter called "City", and JMB CONSTRUCTION, hereinafter called "Contractor," WITNESSETH : WHEREAS, City has taken appropriate proceedings to authorize construction of the public work and improvements herein provided for and to authorize execution of this Contract; and WHEREAS, pursuant to State law and City requirements, a notice was duly published for bids for the contract for the improvement hereinafter described; and WHEREAS, on August 16, 2004, after notice duly given, the City Council of Burlingame awarded the contract forthe construction ofthe improvements hereinafter described to Contractor, which the Council found to be the lowest responsible bidder for these improvements; and WHEREAS,City and Contractor desire to enter into this agreement for the construction of said improvements, NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS AGREED by the parties hereto as follows: 1. Scope of work. Contractor shall perform the work described in those Specifications entitled: SANCHEZ CREEK BOX CULVERT CLEANING FROM CAROLAN AVENUE TO SANCHEZ LAGOON, CITY JOB NO. 80900. 2. The Contract Documents. The complete contract consists of the following documents: this Agreement, Notice Inviting Sealed Bids, the prevailing wage rates of the State of California applicable to this project by State law,the accepted Bid Proposal,the complete plans,profiles, detailed drawings and Standard Specifications, Special Provisions and all bonds, and are hereinafter referred to as the Contract Documents. All rights and obligations of City and Contractor are fully set forth and described in the Contract Documents. All of the above described documents are intended to cooperate so that any work called for in one, and not mentioned in the other, or vice versa, is to be executed the same as if mentioned in all said documents. 3. Contract Price. The City shall pay, and the Contractor shall accept, in full, payment of the work above agreed to be done,the sum of THREE HUNDRED FIFTY-THREE THOUSAND AND NO/100 dollars($353,000.00). This price is determined by the unit prices contained in Contractor's Bid. In the event authorized work is performed or materials furnished in addition to those set forth in Contractor's Bid and the Specifications, such work and materials will be paid for at the unit prices therein contained. Said amount shall be paid in progress payments as provided in the Contract Documents. 4. Provisions Cumulative. The provisions of this Agreement are cumulative and in addition to and not in limitation of any other rights or remedies available to the City. 5. Notices. All notices shall be in writing and delivered in person or transmitted by certified mail, postage prepaid. Notices required to be given to the City shall be addressed as follows: CITY ENGINEER CITY OF BURLINGAME 501 Primrose Road Burlingame, California 94010 Notices required to be given to Contractor shall be addressed as follows: JMB CONSTRUCTION 150 EXECUTIVE PARK BLVD. SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94134 6. Interpretation. As used herein,any gender includes the other gender and the singular includes the plural and vice versa. 7. Waiver or Amendment. No modification, waiver, mutual termination, or amendment of this Agreement is effective unless made in writing and signed by the City and the Contractor. IN WITNESS WHEREOF,two identical counterparts of this Agreement, consisting of three(3)pages,including this page,each of which counterparts shall for all purposes be deemed an original of this Agreement, have been duly executed by the parties hereinabove named on the day and year first hereinabove written. CITY OF BURLINGAME, "CONTRACTOR" a Municipal Corporation By By City Manager Approved as to form: City Attorney ATTEST: City Clerk ' AGENDA BURLU STAFF REPORT ITEM9e# MAG. 8/16/04 DATE TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL SUBMITTED DATE: August 6, 2004 BY APPROVEO,l FROM: PUBLIC WORKS BY �,i SUBJECT: RESOLUTION AWARDING CALIFORNIA DRIVE STORM DRAIN IMPROVEMENTS TO JMB CONSTRUCTION INC. CITY PROJECT NO. 80880 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that City Council approve the attached resolution awarding a contract for the California Drive Storm Drain Improvements to JMB Construction in the amount of $222,000. BACKGROUND: Bids were opened on August 5,2004 for the California Drive Storm Drain Improvements Project. Two bids were received ranging from $222,000 to $274,445. JMB Construction was the responsible low bidder with a bid price 10% lower than the engineer's estimate. JMB Construction has met all the requirements for the project and has been engaged in the contracting business under the present name for more than fourteen years. Experience in work of a similar nature includes underground utilities and box culvert construction in local peninsula cities. Recently, Northwest Construction, an affiliate of JMB Construction successfully completed construction of a box culvert in Easton Creek. The project consists of improvements to the storm drain system for Terrace Creek. The project includes removal and replacement of an existing deteriorated 60 inch diameter corrugated metal pipe with a four foot by ten foot concrete box culvert. The box culvert will increase the storm drainage capacity for Terrace Creek,reducing the potential for flooding damage to residences in the 900 blocks of Paloma,Laguna,and Chula Vista Avenues. Construction also includes a new head wall and wing walls and placement of rock rip-rap in the outfall channel to serve as an energy dissipater.Construction will begin in August with completion expected by November, 2004. BUDGET IMPACT: Following is a financial summary: Expenditures Construction of new box culverts $222,000 Construction contingency(15%) 33,300 Engineering design, plans and specifications 50,000 Construction administration 42,000 Total $347,300 Funding Availability FY 2004-05 CIP Storm Drainage budget for California Drive Box Culvert Construction - $350,851 EXHIBITS: Resolution, Bid Summary, Contract c: City Clerk, City Attorney, Director of Finance, Public Works Director, JMB Construction Inc. SAA Public Works Directory\Staff Reports\California Drive Box Culvert Replacment 8-16-04.wpd RESOLUTION NO. - CALIFORNIA DRIVE STORM DRAIN IMPROVEMENTS JMB CONSTRUCTION CITY PROJECT NO. 80880 WHEREAS,the City Council has authorized an invitation for bids for the CALIFORNIA DRIVE STORM DRAIN IMPROVEMENTS -CITY PROJECT NO. 80880; and WHEREAS, on AUGUST 5, 2004, all bids were received and opened before the City Clerk and representatives of the Public Works Department; and WHEREAS, JMB CONSTRUCTION, submitted the lowest responsible bid for the job in the amount of$222,000. NOW, THEREFORE, be it RESOLVED, and it is hereby ORDERED, that the Plans and Specifications, including all addenda, are approved and adopted; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the bid of JMB CONSTRUCTION, for said project in the amount of$222,000, and the same hereby is accepted; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THERETO that a contract be entered into between the successful bidder hereinabove referred to and the City of Burlingame for the performance of said work,and that the City Manager be,and he hereby is authorized for and on behalf of the City of Burlingame to execute said contract and to approve the faithful performance bond and the labor and materials bond required to be furnished by the contractor. 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 SAA Public Works Directory\PROJECTS\80880\ResolutnAward.wpd BID SUMMARY CALIFORNIA DRIVE STORM DRAIN IMPROVEMENTS - Box Culvert at 945 California Drive Project No.80880 BID OPENING DATE:August 5,2004 ITEM ESTIMATED Engineers Estimate JMB W R Forde NO. QUANTITY UNIT City of Burlingame Construction Associates UNIT PRICE TOTALS UNIT PRIC TOTALS UNIT PRICE TOTALS 1 LS 1 Mobilization(10%of total bid) $24,600.00 $24,600.00 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $25,000.00 $25,000.00 1 LS 2 Traffic Control $40,000.00 $40,000.00 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 1 LS 3 Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program $7,340.00 $7,340.00 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $6,000.00 $6,000.00 1 LS 4 Cofferdam and Temporary Pump Bypass $23,000.00 $23,000.00 $6,000.00 $6,000.00 $25,000.00 $25,000.00 1 LS 5 Clearing,Grubbing,Demolition&Removals $23,000.00 $23,000.00 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $45,000.00 $45,000.00 6 Structural Excavation (Approx.450 C 1 LS $45,000.00 $45,000.00 $60,000.00 $60,000.00 $67,000.00 $67,000.00 4'x10'Precast Reinforced Concrete Box 7 Culvert 85 LF $150.00 $12,750.00 $500.00 $42,500.00 $285.00 $24,225.00 8 Class 2 Permeable Material 3/4"Drain Rock 79 Tons $86.08 $6,800.00 $30.00 $2,370.00 $43.00 $3,397.00 9 Structural Backfill Class 2 AB 501 Tons $60.00 $30,060.00 $30.00 $15,030.00 $33.00 $16,533.00 24 Tons 10 Asphalt Concrete Pavement $175.00 $4,200.00 $250.00 $6,000.00 $300.00 $7,200.00 11 Pavement Reinforcing Fabric 130 SY $5.00 $650.00 $10.00 $1,300.00 $8.00 $1,040.00 Structural Concrete,Transition Structure, 16 CY Wingwalls,Apron,Parapet Walls,&Misc. 12 Concrete $1,275.00 $20,400.00 $1,800.00 $28,800.00 $1,800.00 $28,800.00 13 Slope Protection,Rock Rip-Rap 15 TONS $233.34 $3,500.00 $300.00 $4,500.00 $400.00 $6,000.00 Drainage Inlet Type GO,with Frame and 1 EACH 14 Grate entrance and top section $3,500.00 $3,500.00 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 $4,000.00 $4,000.00 35 CY 15 Concrete Curb,Gutter and Sidewalk $40.00 $1,400.00 $300.00 $10,500.00 $150.00 $5,250.00 16 Sheeting,Bracing and Shoring* TOTAL $246,200.00 $222,000.00 $274,445.00 *Required by Sections 6700-6708 of the Labor Code. Pricing for these items to be included in items 1 through 15 above 80880BID SUMMARY California Drive Box Culvert 80880 8-5-04.xls 8/5/2004BID SUM1:09 PM AGREEMENT FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT CALIFORNIA DRIVE STORM DRAIN IMPROVEMENTS CITY PROJECT NO. 80880 THIS AGREEMENT, made in duplicate and entered into in the City of Burlingame, County of San Mateo, State of California on , 2004, by and between the CITY OF BURLINGAME, a municipal corporation, hereinafter called "City", and JMB CONSTRUCTION, hereinafter called "Contractor," WITNESSETH : WHEREAS, City has taken appropriate proceedings to authorize construction of the public work and improvements herein provided for and to authorize execution of this Contract; and WHEREAS, pursuant to State law and City requirements, a notice was duly published for bids for the contract for the improvement hereinafter described; and WHEREAS, on August 16, 2004, after notice duly given, the City Council of Burlingame awardedthe contract forthe construction ofthe improvements hereinafter described to Contractor, which the Council found to be the lowest responsible bidder for these improvements; and WHEREAS,City and Contractor desire to enter into this agreement for the construction of said improvements, NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS AGREED by the parties hereto as follows: 1. Scope of work. Contractor shall perform the work described in those Specifications entitled: CALIFORNIA DRIVE STORM DRAIN IMPROVEMENTS, CITY JOB NO. 80880. 2. The Contract Documents. The complete contract consists of the following documents: this Agreement, Notice Inviting Sealed Bids, the prevailing wage rates of the State of California applicable to this project by State law,the accepted Bid Proposal,the complete plans,profiles, detailed drawings and Standard Specifications, Special Provisions and all bonds, and are hereinafter referred to as the Contract Documents. All rights and obligations of City and Contractor are fully set forth and described in the Contract Documents. All of the above described documents are intended to cooperate so that any work called for in one, and not mentioned in the other, or vice versa, is to be executed the same as if mentioned in all said documents. 3. Contract Price. The City shall pay, and the Contractor shall accept, in full, payment of the work above agreed to be done,the sum of TWO HUNDRED TWENTY-TWO THOUSAND AND NO/100 dollars($222,000.00). This price is determined by the unit prices contained in Contractor's Bid. In the event authorized work is performed or materials furnished in addition to those set forth in Contractor's Bid and the Specifications, such work and materials will be paid for at the unit prices therein contained. Said amount shall be paid in progress payments as provided in the Contract Documents. 4. Provisions Cumulative. The provisions of this Agreement are cumulative and in addition to and not in limitation of any other rights or remedies available to the City. 5. Notices. All notices shall be in writing and delivered in person or transmitted by certified mail, postage prepaid. Notices required to be given to the City shall be addressed as follows: CITY ENGINEER CITY OF BURLINGAME 501 Primrose Road Burlingame, California 94010 Notices required to be given to Contractor shall be addressed as follows: JMB CONSTRUCTION 150 EXECUTIVE PARK BLVD. SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94134 6. Interpretation. As used herein,any gender includes the other gender and the singular includes the plural and vice versa. 7. Waiver or Amendment. No modification, waiver, mutual termination, or amendment of this Agreement is effective unless made in writing and signed by the City and the Contractor. IN WITNESS WHEREOF,two identical counterparts of this Agreement, consisting of three(3)pages,including this page,each of which counterparts shall for all purposes be deemed an original of this Agreement, have been duly executed by the parties hereinabove named on the day and year first hereinabove written. CITY OF BURLINGAME, "CONTRACTOR" a Municipal Corporation By By City Manager Approved as to form: City Attorney ATTEST: City Clerk law AGENDA BURLINGAME STAFF REPORT ITEM# 9f MAG. DATE 8/16/04 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL SUBMITTED DATE: August 6, 2004 BY APPROVES �,-:;,} FROM: PUBLIC WORKS BY SUBJECT: RESOLUTION AWARDING ALMER-BELLEVUE STORM DRAIN IMPROVEMENTS, TO HARTY PIPELINES, INC. CITY PROJECT NO. 80110 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that City Council approve the attached resolution awarding a contract for the Almer-Bellevue Storm Drain Improvements to Harry Construction in the amount of $138,660. BACKGROUND: Bids were opened on August 5, 2004 for the Almer-Bellevue Storm Drain Improvements Project. Four bids were received ranging from $138,660 to $235,736. Harty Pipelines was the responsible low bidder with a bid price 43 % lower than the engineer's estimate. Harty Pipelines has met all the requirements for the project and has been engaged in the contracting business under the present name for more than nineteen years. Experience in work of a similar nature includes underground utilities and sewer repairs in local peninsula cities.Recently,Harry Pipelines successfully completed sewer rehabilitation projects in San Mateo, Berkeley, and San Francisco. The project includes construction of a storm drain pipeline, manholes and lateral connections that will collect groundwater from the adjacent multiple residential units underground garages and discharge the water to Ralston Creek. The new pipeline will increase the capacity for surface storm drainage by eliminating excess ground water contributions. Construction will begin in August with completion expected by winter, 2004. BUDGET IMPACT: Two proposed and existing condominium projects have contributed towards the costs of the improvements. Following is a financial summary: Expenditures Construction $138,660 Construction contingency (15%) 20,800 Engineering design, plans and specifications 20,000 Construction administration 20,000 Total $199,460 Funding Availability FY 2004-05 CIP Storm Drainage budget for Almer-Bellevue Storm Drain Improvements - $203,579 EXHIBITS: Resolution, Bid Summary, Contract c: City Clerk, City Attorney, Director of Finance, Public Works Director, Harty Pipelines, Inc. SAA Public Works Directory\Staff Reports\Almer-Bellevue Storm Drain Improvements 8-16-04.wpd RESOLUTION NO. - ALMER-BELLEVUE STORM DRAIN IMPROVEMENTS HARTY PIPELINES, INC.. CITY PROJECT NO. 80110 WHEREAS,the City Council has authorized an invitation for bids for the ALMER-BELLEVUE STORM DRAIN IMPROVEMENTS - CITY PROJECT NO. 80110; and WHEREAS, on AUGUST 5,2004, all bids were received and opened before the City Clerk and representatives of the Public Works Department; and WHEREAS,HARTY PIPELINES, INC., submitted the lowest responsible bid for the job in the amount of$138,660. NOW, THEREFORE, be it RESOLVED, and it is hereby ORDERED, that the Plans and Specifications, including all addenda, are approved and adopted; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the bid of HARTY PIPELINES,INC.,for said project in the amount of$138,660, and the same hereby is accepted; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THERETO that a contract be entered into between the successful bidder hereinabove referred to and the City of Burlingame for the performance of said work,and that the City Manager be,and he hereby is authorized for and on behalf of the City of Burlingame to execute said contract and to approve the faithful performance bond and the labor and materials bond required to be furnished by the contractor. Mayor 1, 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 SAA Public Works Directory\PROJECTS\80110\ResolutnAward.wpd BID SUMMARY ALMER-BELLEVUE STORM DRAIN IMPROVEMENTS-535 Almer Road to 1428 Bellevue Avenue Project No.80110 BID OPENING DATE:August 5,2004 ITEM ESTIMATED Engineers Estimate Harty Pipelines Inc. Casey Construction West Valley W R Forde NO. QUANTITY UNIT Ci of Burlingame Construction Associates UNIT PRICE TOTALS UNIT PRIC TOTALS UNIT PRICE TOTALS UNIT PRICE TOTALS UNIT PRICE I TOTALS Furnish and Install Bubbler Box, 6 F.ACI I 1 complete in place $600.00 $3,600.00 $1,800.00 $10,800.00 $1,424.00 $8,544.00 $2,850.00 $17,100.00 $1,500.00 $9,000.00 Furnish and Install 8"C-900 storm 141 1.1; 2 drain pipeline,including trench $80.00 $11,280.00 $100.00 $14,100.00 $85.00 $11,985.00 $170.00 $23,970.00 $150.00 $21,150.00 Furnish and Insatll 12"C-900 storm 682 LF 3 drain pipe line,including trench $152.65 $104,110.00 $130.00 $88,660.00 $150.00 $102,300.00 $75.00 $51,150.00 $198.00 $135,036.00 AC paving for trench-6"depth in two 4200 SF 4 lifts $20.00 $84,000.00 $3.00 $12,600.00 $5.75 $24,150.00 $8.05 $33,810.00 $5.00 $21,000.00 6 HACH 5 Furnish and install storm drain manhol $2,500.00 $15,000.00 $500.00 $3,000.00 $2,900.00 $17,400.00 $5,500.00 $33,000.00 $4,800.00 $28,800.00 Connect 12"storm drain to existing 6 creek box culvert including manhole 1 I.S $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $3,000.00 $3,000.00 $5,200.00 $5,200.00 $11,000.00 $11,000.00 $6,500.00 $6,500.00 7 Remove and replace curb and gutter 200 I'll' $35.00 $7,000.00 $30.00 $6,000.00 $28.00 $5,600.00 $50.00 $10,000.00 $40.00 $8,000.00 8 Water and utility conflicts 5 HACI3 $2,000.00 $10,000.00 $100.00 $500.00 $750.00 $3,750.00 $750.00 $3,750.00 $1,250.00 $6,250.00 TOTAL $244,990.00 $138,660.00 $178,929.00 $183,780.00 $235,736.00 80110BID SUMMARY Almer-Bellevue Ground Water Storm 80110 8-5-04.xls 815/200461D SUM12:36 PM AGREEMENT FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT ALMER-BELLEVUE STORM DRAIN IMPROVEMENTS CITY PROJECT NO. 80110 THIS AGREEMENT, made in duplicate and entered into in the City of Burlingame, County of San Mateo, State of California on , 2004, by and between the CITY OF BURLINGAME, a municipal corporation, hereinafter called "City", and HARTY PIPELINES, INC., hereinafter called "Contractor," WITNESSETH : WHEREAS, City has taken appropriate proceedings to authorize construction of the public work and improvements herein provided for and to authorize execution of this Contract; and WHEREAS, pursuant to State law and City requirements, a notice was duly published for bids for the contract for the improvement hereinafter described; and WHEREAS, on August 16, 2004, after notice duly given, the City Council of Burlingame awarded the contract for the construction ofthe improvements hereinafter described to Contractor, which the Council found to be the lowest responsible bidder for these improvements; and WHEREAS,City and Contractor desire to enter into this agreement for the construction of said improvements, NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS AGREED by the parties hereto as follows: 1. Scope of work. Contractor shall perform the work described in those Specifications entitled: ALMER- BELLEVUE STORM DRAIN IMPROVEMENTS, CITY JOB NO. 80110. 2. The Contract Documents. The complete contract consists of the following documents: this Agreement, Notice Inviting Sealed Bids, the prevailing wage rates of the State of California applicable to this project by State law,the accepted Bid Proposal,the complete plans,profiles, detailed drawings and Standard Specifications, Special Provisions and all bonds, and are hereinafter referred to as the Contract Documents. All rights and obligations of City and Contractor are fully set forth and described in the Contract Documents. All of the above described documents are intended to cooperate so that any work called for in one, and not mentioned in the other, or vice versa, is to be executed the same as if mentioned in all said documents. 3. Contract Price. The City shall pay, and the Contractor shall accept, in full, payment of the work above agreed to be done, the sum of ONE HUNDRED THIRTY-EIGHT THOUSAND SIX HUNDRED SIXTY AND NO/100 dollars($138,660.00). This price is determined by the unit prices contained in Contractor's Bid. In the event authorized work is performed or materials furnished in addition to those set forth in Contractor's Bid and the Specifications,such work and materials will be paid for at the unit prices therein contained. Said amount shall be paid in progress payments as provided in the Contract Documents. 4. Provisions Cumulative. The provisions of this Agreement are cumulative and in addition to and not in limitation of any other rights or remedies available to the City. 5. Notices. All notices shall be in writing and delivered in person or transmitted by certified mail, postage prepaid. Notices required to be given to the City shall be addressed as follows: CITY ENGINEER CITY OF BURLINGAME 501 Primrose Road Burlingame, California 94010 Notices required to be given to Contractor shall be addressed as follows: HARTY PIPELINES, INC. 4085 - 19TH AVENUE SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94132 6. Interpretation. As used herein,any gender includes the other gender and the singular includes the plural and vice versa. 7. Waiver or Amendment. No modification, waiver, mutual termination, or amendment of this Agreement is effective unless made in writing and signed by the City and the Contractor. IN WITNESS WHEREOF,two identical counterparts of this Agreement, consisting of three(3)pages,including this page,each of which counterparts shall for all purposes be deemed an original of this Agreement, have been duly executed by the parties hereinabove named on the day and year first hereinabove written. CITY OF BURLINGAME, "CONTRACTOR" a Municipal Corporation By By City Manager Approved as to form: City Attorney ATTEST: City Clerk ,,CITY oz STAFF REPORT BURL INGAME , AGENDA 9 ITEM# g MTG. ATE _8/16/04 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL SUBMITTED BY DATE: July 16, 2004 APPROVElt��WhW- FROM: PUBLIC WORKS BY SUBJECT: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY BUILDI /S-JANITORIAL CONTRACT RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that Council approve the attached resolution authorizing a centralized janitorial agreement for three years with Universal Building Services in the amount of$424,104. BACKGROUND: The Facilities Division contract with Universal Building Services expires September 30, 2004. The contract includes janitorial services for nearly all City buildings for a cost of$157,000 in FY 2003-04. DISCUSSION: A comprehensive process was used to select a company for providing janitorial services over the next three years. An advertisement was placed in the San Mateo Times inviting responses to the attached questionnaire, and nine companies replied. A committee was formed to rank the companies based on experience and ability to provide the City with a level of service similar to the existing contract. The committee selected five companies as finalists and asked them to complete a bid proposal and attend an interview. The committee then reviewed the bid proposals, evaluated the interviews and completed site visits of buildings serviced by each cleaning company to assess their ability to deliver the desired level of service. The committee recommends that Universal Building Services be awarded the janitorial contract based on their experience, references and price. The committee's main objective was to select a service provider that could maintain the current level of service at the same price or lower than the existing contract. Universal Building Services bid is $139,212 for the first year, $141,360 for the second year and $143,532 for the third year or a three year total of$424,104 which is below the price of the current contract. Janitorial services include cleaning City Hall, Recreation Center, Aquatic Center, Village Park, Public Works Corporation Yard, Fire Station 36, Police Station and elevator at Donnelly Garage. The scope of work consists of activities such as vacuuming, dusting, carpet shampooing, trash removal, floor mopping, and window cleaning. EXHIBITS: Questionnaire; Resolution; Contract; Bid Results BUDGET IMPACT: Funds are available in the existing Facilities Division operating budget. 650-558-7230 c: City Clerk, Facilities Supervisor, Management Analyst Universal Building Services S:\A Public Works Directory\Staff Reports\janitorial2004.doc RESOLUTION NO. - AWARDING CONTRACT FOR CITY OF BURLINGAME CUSTODIAL SERVICES TO UNIVERSAL BUILDING SERVICES WHEREAS,the City Council has authorized an invitation for proposals for the-CITY OF BURLINGAME CUSTODIAL SERVICES. WHEREAS, on JUNE 28, 2004, all proposals were received and opened before the representatives of the Public Works Department; and WHEREAS Service Performance submitted an incomplete proposal that was rejected; and WHEREAS,UNIVERSAL BUILDING SERVICES, submitted the lowest responsible bid for the job in the amount of$424,104.00. NOW, THEREFORE, be it RESOLVED, and it is hereby ORDERED,that the Specifications are approved and adopted; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the bid of UNIVERSAL BUILDING SERVICES, for said project in the amount of$424,104.00, and the same hereby is accepted; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED the proposal of Service Performance is rejected as incomplete; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a contract be entered into between the successful bidder, UNIVERSAL BUILDING SERVICES and the City of Burlingame for the performance of said work, and that the City Manager be, and he hereby is authorized for and on behalf of the City of Burlingame to execute said contract. 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 QUALIFICATIONS QUESTIONNAIRE 1. COMPANY INFORMATION Company name: Address: Phone number: U FAX number: Owner/President name: Years in janitorial business Professional affiliations: Indicate size in dollar sales per year of your company: In which jurisdictions do you hold a business license? 2. COMPANY ORGANIZATION SECTION Please provide a complete and up-to-date organizational chart for your organization. In the space provided,please tell us what makes your company different from the others and why your company deserves the contract. 3. EXPERIENCE SECTION Is your company presently cleaning any major facilities in the area? ❑ Yes ❑ No If Yes,list properties and their location: Does your company have any experience cleaning city government facilities? ❑ Yes ❑ No If yes,list properties and dates of service. 1 4. REFERENCE SECTION Please list two (2) comparable facilities in the area which you currently maintain: Account name: Contact person: Phone number: ( ) ext Account name: Contact person: Phone number: �) ext 5. FINANCIAL SECTION Please submit proof of financial solvency. Examples of types of documents: ❑ Financial statements such as Balance Sheets and Profit-Loss Statements ❑ Last three months bank statements ❑ Last year's tax return Ll 6. INSURANCE SECTION The City of Burlingame requires Commercial General Liability Insurance, occurrence form, with a limit of not less than $ 1,000,000 each occurrence. Could you comply with this coverage? ❑ Yes ❑ No The City of Burlingame requires Automobile Insurance, occurrence form, with a limit of not less than $ 1,000,000 each occurrence. Could you comply with this coverage? ❑ Yes ❑ No Do you currently carry these amounts of insurance? ❑ Yes ❑ No If yes, please indicate the current insurance carder and insurance agents' name and phone number: 7. BONDS SECTION The City of Burlingame requires a Fidelity Bond for$100,000 to cover the contractor's employees against loss due to dishonesty, disappearance, or destruction. In addition, all employees working in City buildings will be required to be fingerprinted and will be subject to background checks by your company. Could you comply with these requirements? ❑ Yes ❑ No Do you currently carry this bonding level? ❑ Yes 2 ❑ No If yes, please identify the following: Name of bonding company Contact name: Phone number: 8. LABOR CALCULATION SECTION Which of the following statements best describes the method you use to determine the amount of labor needed to do a job: ❑ Computer Workload System ❑ Industry Standards ❑ Experience Factor ❑ Standard Rate of Accomplishment ❑ Other(Please explain on attachment) 9. ADDITIONAL SERVICES SECTION Please list on a separate sheet those services you could supply above and beyond cleaning. Please indicate next to each service if you use your own people or sub-contract the service. (Please use attachment.) 10. QUALITY CONTROL SECTION Who do you see as having responsibility for the quality level of the facility? ❑ The Building Manager(Client) ❑ YourArea/Branch Manager ❑ Other(Please explain on attachment) Please describe in brief form the system you will use for controlling quality. (Please use attachment) Do you use a work tracking system to ensure that tasks are accomplished at established intervals? ❑ Yes ❑ No If yes, please provide example. Submit the results of a recent customer satisfaction survey evaluating your services. 11. INSPECTIONS SECTION Specify the type and frequency of periodic inspections to be conducted at the job site. Attach a copy of any report form(s) to be used. 12. CLIENT INTERFACE SECTION What communications tools do you use to communicate with clients that have a desire for something to be done? Please provide any written examples. What process do you use for handling complaints? (Please use attachment) 3 What is your response time to answer a call: ❑ Phone/pager ❑ To be on site 13. EMPLOYEE SECTION Briefly describe your hiring practices, including qualifications to screen employees. (Please use attachment). Do you pay your employees prevailing wages and benefits? ❑ Yes ❑ No If yes, could you supply records to verify this, if requested? ❑ Yes ❑ No 14. TRAINING SECTION What system do you presently use to train your hourly employees in technique? ❑ Classroom ❑ Film Strip ❑ Video ❑ Manual (written) ❑ Seminars ❑ Other(explain): Which topics do you cover? ❑ Safety ❑ MSDS sheets ❑ Proper use & storage of cleaning materials ❑ Hazardous chemicals labeling ❑ Spill procedures ❑ Disposal and removal of hazardous waste ❑ Cleaning methodologies ❑ Recycling ❑ English language El 15. EQUIPMENT SECTION Describe the equipment you provide to your cleaning staff. (Please use attachment). 16. SUPPLIES SECTION Do you use environmentally preferable products, e.g. cleaners, bathroom supplies, etc.? ❑ Yes ❑ No If yes, please specify on an attachment. What procedures will you employ to ensure that bathroom paper and soap supplies are maintained at all times? (Please use attachment) 17. UNIFORMS SECTION Do you provide uniforms and identification badges for all cleaning personnel? ❑ Yes ❑ No 4 18. REPORTS SECTION What reports, if any, do you provide to your customers? (Please attach an example) 19. HEALTH 8 SAFETY SECTION Please describe what your company is doing to minimize the health, safety and environmental impacts from the products that will be utilized for this contract. Specifically, address cleaning product selection such as toxicity, VOC emissions, etc. Also, address employee training to ensure proper product usage, storage and waste disposal. Mention any particular efforts your company has undertaken in other contracts to address health and safety for workers, building occupants and the environment. Do we have your authorization to contact references and confirm the information you have provided? ❑ Yes ❑ No Person completing the questionnaire: Title/position: Signature: Date: 5 AGREEMENT FOR PUBLIC SERVICES CITY OF BURLINGAME COUNCIL AWARD THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into in the City of Burlingame, County of San Mateo, State of California, by and between the CITY OF BURLINGAME, a municipal corporation, hereinafter called "City", and herinafter called "Contractor", as of the 1 day of August , 2004_ RECITALS: (a) City has taken appropriate proceedings to authorize contracting of custodial services and execution of this contract. (b) A notice was duly published for bids for the contract for the improvement hereinafter described. (c) After notice duly given, on the date hereof, the City awarded the contract for custodial services hereinafter described to Contractor. IT IS AGREED, as follows: 1 . Scone of Work. Contractor shall perform the work according to the Contract Book therefore entitled: Custodial Services June 2004 Contract see 2.27 for details of schedule of work to be performed: Restrooms Showers Locker Rooms Lunch Rooms Common Areas Office Areas Meeting Rooms Janitorial Closets 2. Contract Price. City shall pay, the Contractor shall accept, in full payment for the work above agreed to be done the sum of Four Hundred Twenty- Four Thousand One Hundred and Four Dollars ($424,104.00) for three years. Said price is determined by the prices contained in Contractor's bid, and shall be paid as described in the Contract Book. In the event work is performed or materials furnished in addition to or a reduction of those set forth in Contractor's bid and the specifications herein, such work and materials will be paid for as described in the Contract Book. 3. The Contract Documents. The complete contract consists of the following documents: This Agreement; the Notice Inviting Sealed Proposals; the Accepted Proposal; the Contract Book which includes the Special Provisions, and the Fidelity Bond. All rights and obligations of City and Contractor are fully set forth and described in the contract documents. All of the above-named documents are intended to cooperate, so that any work called for in one, and not mentioned in the other, or vice versa, is to be executed the same as if mentioned in all said documents. The documents comprising the complete contract will hereinafter be referred to as "the contract documents". In the event of any variation or discrepancy between any portion of this agreement and any portion of the other contract documents, this agreement shall prevail. The precedence of the remaining contract documents will be as specified in the Contract Book. 4. Schedule. All work shall be performed in accordance with the schedule provided pursuant to the Contract Book. Service will commence on a mutually agreed upon date within thirty (30) days of date of contract. 5. Performance by Sureties. In the event of any termination as hereinbefore provided, City shall immediately give written notice thereof to Contractor and Contractor's sureties, and the sureties shall have the right to take over and perform the agreement, provided, however,that if the sureties, within 5 days after giving them said notice of termination, do not give City written notice of their intention to take over the performance thereof within 5 days after notice to City of such election, City may take over the work and prosecute the same to completion, by contract or by any other method it may deem advisable, for the account, and at the expense of Contractor, and the sureties shall be liable to City for any excess cost or damages occasioned City thereby; and, in such event, City may, without liability for so doing, take possession of, and utilize in completing the work, such materials, appliances,plant and other property belonging to Contractor as may be on the site of the work and necessary therefore. 6. Insurance. A. Minimum Scope of Insurance: i. Contractor agrees to have and maintain, for the duration of the contract, General Liability insurance policies insuring him/her and his/her firm to an amount not less than: two million dollars ($2,000,000) combined single limit per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage in a forme at least as broad as ISO "Occurrence" Form CG 0001. ii. Contractor agrees to have and maintain for the duration of the contract, an Automobile Liability insurance policy ensuring him/her and his/her staff to an amount not less than one million dollars ($1,000,000) combined single limit per accident for bodily injury and property damage. iii. Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the City. At the option of the City, either: the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self-insured retentions as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers; or the Contractor shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim administration, and defense expenses. B. General and Automobile Liability Policies: i. The City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers are to be covered as insured as respects: liability arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of the Contractor; products and completed operations of Contractor, premises owned or used by the Contractor. The endorsement providing this additional insured coverage shall be equal to or broader than ISO Form CG 20 10 11 85 and must cover joint negligence, completed operations, and the acts of subcontractors. This requirement does not apply to the professional liability insurance required for professional errors and omissions. ii. The Contractor's insurance coverage shall be endorsed to be primary insurance as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insurances maintained by the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers shall be excess of the Contractor's insurance and shall not contribute with it. iii. Any failure to comply with reporting provisions of the policies shall not affect coverage provided to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. iv. The Contractor's insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom a claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the limits of the insurer's liability. C. In addition to these policies, Contractor shall have and maintain Workers' Compensation insurance as required by California law. Further, Contractor shall ensure that all subcontractors employed by Contractor provide the required Workers' Compensation insurance for their respective employees. D. All Coverages: Each insurance policy required in this item shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be suspended, voided, canceled, reduced in coverage or in limits except after thirty (30) days' prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, has been given to the City. Current certification of such insurance shall be kept on file at all times during the term of this agreement with the City Clerk. E. Acceptability of Insurers. Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a Best's rating of no less than A-:VII and authorized to do business in the State of California. F. Verification of Coverage. Upon execution of this Agreement, Contractor shall furnish the City with certificates of insurance and with original endorsements effecting coverage required by this clause. The certificates and endorsements for each insurance policy are to be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. The certificates and endorsements are to be on forms approved by the City. All certificates and endorsements are to be received and approved by the City before any work commences. The City reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, at any time. 7. Hold Harmless and Indemnity Provision. Contractor agrees (1)to hold harmless and indemnify City of Burlingame and its officers and employees from and against any and all claims, loss, liability, damage, and expense arising from performance of this contract, including claims, loss, liability, damage, and expense caused or claimed to be caused by passive negligence of City of Burlingame, its officers or employees, and(2) to defend City of Burlingame, its officers or employees thereagainst; provided, however that this provision does not apply to claims, loss, liability, damage or expense arising from (a) the sole negligence or willful misconduct of City of Burlingame or(b)the active negligence of City of Burlingame; further provided, that this provision shall not affect the validity of any insurance contract, workers compensation or agreement issued by an admitted insurer as defined by the Insurance Code. 8. Attorney Fees. Attorney fees in amount not exceeding $85 per hour per attorney, and in total amount not exceeding $5,000 shall be recoverable as costs (that is, by the filing of a cost bill) by prevailing party in any action or actions to enforce the provisions of this contract. The above $5,000 limit is the total of attorney fees recoverable whether in the trial court, appellate court, or otherwise, and regardless of the number of attorneys, trials, appeals or actions. It is the intent that neither party to this contract shall have to pay the other more than $5,000 for attorney fees arising out of an action, or actions, to enforce the provisions of this contract. The parties expect and hope there will be no litigation and that any differences will be resolved amicably. 9. Mediation. Should any dispute arise out of this Agreement, any party may request that it be submitted to mediation. The parties shall meet in mediation within 30 days of a request. The mediator shall be agreed to by the mediating parties; in the absence of an agreement,the parties shall each submit one name from mediators listed by either the American Arbitration Association, the California State Board of Mediation and Conciliation, or other agreed-upon service. The mediator shall be selected by a "blindfolded" process. The cost of mediation shall be borne equally by the parties. Neither party shall be deemed the prevailing party. No party shall be permitted to file a legal action without first meeting in mediation and making a good faith attempt to reach a mediated settlement. The mediation process, once commenced by a meeting with the mediator, shall last until agreement is reached by the parties but not more than 60 days, unless the maximum time is extended by the parties. 11. Provisions Cumulative. The provisions must conform to specifications. 12. Notices. All notices shall be in writing, and delivered in person or transmitted by certified mail, postage prepaid. Universal Building Services Attn: Arnie Tong 3120 Pierce Street Richmond, CA 94804 (510) 527-1078 Notices required to be given to City shall be addressed as follows: Director of Public Works City of Burlingame 501 Primrose Road Burlingame, CA 94010 Notices required to be given to Contractor shall be addressed as appears in the signature block below. 13. Payment Terms. Contractor will invoice the City on a monthly basis for the services performed pursuant to the Contract Documents. City shall pay the amount due within thirty (30) days of the date of the invoice. 14. PREVAILING WAGES: In general, the prevailing wage scale, as determined by the Director of Industrial Relations of the State of California, in force on the day this bid was announced, will be the minimum paid to all janitors/cleaners working under the contract to be awarded under this bid process. Pursuant to Section 1773 of the Labor Code,the general prevailing wage rates in the county, or counties, in which the work is to be done have been determined by the Director of the California Department of Industrial Relations. The wages as set forth in the General Prevailing Wage Rates for this project will be posted at the job site. It is understood that it is the responsibility of the bidder to determine the correct scale. The State Prevailing Wage Rates are also included as a part of this bid package and may also be obtained from the California Department of Industrial Relations internet web site at http://www.dir.ca.gov. 15. Governing Law. This Agreement, regardless of where executed, shall be governed by and construed to the laws of the State of California. Venue for any action regarding this Agreement shall be in the Superior or Municipal Court of the County of San Mateo or Santa Clara. 16. Amendment. No modification, waiver, mutual termination, or amendment of this Agreement is effective unless made in writing and signed by the City and the Contractor. 17. Entire Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the complete and exclusive statement of the Agreement between the City and Contractor. No terms, conditions, understandings or agreements purporting to modify or vary this Agreement, unless hereafter made in writing and signed by the party to be bound, shall be binding on either party. 18. Interpretation. As used herein any gender includes each other gender, the singular includes the plural and vice versa. 19. Waiver. No failure on the part of either party to exercise any right or remedy hereunder shall operate as a waiver of any other right or remedy that party may have hereunder, nor does waiver of a breach or default under this Agreement constitute a continuing waiver of a subsequent breach of the same or any other provision of this Agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF,this agreement has been duly executed by the parties hereinabove named, as of the day and year first above written. City of Burlingame Contractor City Manager Print Name Approved as to form: Signature City Attorney Title ATTEST: City Clerk CITY OF BURLINGAME Public Works Department BID DOCUMENT Contractor Comparison & Review Job Name: City of Burlingame. California Custodial Services Type of Work: Janitorial Services Date: June 28,2004 Company Name Phone No. Fax No. Bid Amount I.Service by Medallion, Inc (650) 625-1010 (650) 625-1043 $458,313.48 2.UBS (510) 527-1078 (510) 526-7289 $424,104.00 3.American Empire (650) 756-4300 (650) 756-4301 $829,950.92 4.JaniKing (925) 588- 2490 (925) 588-2499 $446,148.00 { Agenda Item i"I Bill Reilly,Fire Chief Meeting Date d 1399 Rollins Road Burlingame, CA 94010 (650)558-7601 breillvQ..Centralcountvfd.ore Memorandum To: Mayors & Council Members CC: Anthony Constantouros, Jim Nantell From: Bill Reilly, Fire Chief Date: July 28, 2004 Re: CCFD Fire Board Election& Appointments The first meeting of the Central County Fire Department Board of Directors took place on Tuesday,July 27,2004. The Board members elected Joe Galligan as Chair and Kitty Mullooly as Vice-Chair. The Board then appointed Hillsborough City Attorney Norm Book as Legal Counsel and Hillsborough City Manager Tony Constantouros as Chief Administrative Officer. With the authority given him in the Joint Powers agreement,Chief Administrative Officer Tony Constantouros submitted a memo to the board appointing Bill Reilly as the Fire Chief; Anita Killeen, currently the Administrative Secretary for the former Burlingame Fire Department as Secretary for the Department; and Jesus Nava,currently the Finance Director for the City of Burlingame as the Treasurer for the Department. In other business the Board adopted regular meeting dates(first Tuesday of May& December), adopted the 2004-2005 Budget,adopted a purchasing and accounts payable policy,appointed Burlingame Finance as the depository of department funds,adopted a Conflict of Interest Code for Officers and employees,and adopted a business address (1399 Rollins Road, Burlingame). The Department will also submit the legal filings as required to the Secretary of State. 1 ���CITY o� STAFF REPORT BURUNGAME AGENDA ITEM# 9i 00 MTG. DATE 8/16/04 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL SUBMITTED BY DATE: August 5, 2004 APPROVED, FROM: Robert Bell, Human Resources Director BY k z SUBJECT: City Council Letter Supporting the San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury recommendations regarding Workplace Relationship Policies. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Council support the 2003-2004 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury report on Workplace Relationship Policies and authorize the City Manager to incorporate the recommendations into the City's policies on Sexual Harassment, Relationships and Nepotism. The updated policies are attached to this report as Exhibit A. BACKGROUND: The San Mateo County Grand Jury surveyed municipalities throughout the County regarding their policies and practices regarding workplace harassment, relationships and nepotism. Based on their findings as well as newly enacted legislation, the Grand Jury made several recommendations that City's should include in their policies. These recommendations include: 1. Review and update all policies related to discrimination and sexual harassment, taking into consideration recent court decisions and new State laws. 2. Provide harassment awareness training for all employees within six months of hire and not less than each three years thereafter. 3. Provide harassment response training for supervisors within six months of hire and not less than each two years thereafter. The Human Resources Director and City Attorney reviewed the City's policies on harassment and incorporated legal changes as well as best practices as they relate to a positive workplace environment. The most significant legal change that was incorporated into the policy was prohibiting discrimination due to domestic partner and gender/gender identify status. This is to comply with California's AB 205 - Domestic Partners that goes into effect on January 1, 2005. In addition the City updated the policy to better reflect the roles and responsibilities of employees and supervisors as they pertain to maintaining a positive workplace environment and investigating harassment complaints. Staff is pleased to report that the City has a very positive workplace environment and staff takes a zero tolerance stance on harassment and discrimination. Human Resources conducts training on the City's policies regarding harassment and discrimination during new hire orientation and provided all employee and supervisor response training on harassment in 2002 and 2003. As recommended by the grand jury report, additional training will be offered next year. Once approved by Council, the City's response will be signed by the Mayor and sent to the San Mateo County Grand Jury. Human Resources will transmit the new policies to all employees and employee organizations. Thank you. ATTACHMENTS: Draft response letter to Civil Grand Jury Exhibit A - City Harassment and Nepotism Policy CITY BURUNGAME Nl4D JtME•' ROSALIE M_O'MAHONY,MAYOR TEL: (650)558 7200 JOE GALLIGAN,VICE MAYOR CATHY BAYLOCK FAX: (650)342-8386 MIKE COFFEY CITY HALL—501 PRIMROSE ROAD www.budingame.org TERRY NAGEL BURLINGAME,CALIFORNIA 940103997 August 16, 2004 Honorable Jonathan E. Karesh Judge of the Superior Court Hall of Justice 400 County Center, 2nd Floor Redwood City, CA 94063 Dear Judge Karesh: Thank you for the opportunity to review the 2003-2004 San Mateo County Grand Jury's report on workplace relationship policies. The City of Burlingame is committed to providing a workplace that is free from harassment and/or discrimination. The Council and management team work proactively to maintain a positive and productive work environment. In reviewing the Grand Jury's report,the City of Burlingame agrees and supports the findings. The City's specific action on each of the Grand Jury's recommendations is as follows: Recommendation #1: By July 1, 2004, review and update all policies related to discrimination/sexual harassment,taking into consideration recent court decisions and new State laws. City of Burlingame action: Policy has been reviewed and revised. A copy of the City's revised policy is enclosed. Recommendation#2: Before September 1, 2004, adopt policies to provide, if current policies do not already do so: • annual policy reviews; • harassment awareness training for all employees within six months of hire and not less than each three years thereafter; • harassment response training for supervisors within six months of hire and not less than each two years thereafter. City of Burlingame action: The City's new policy provides for policy review and training per the Grand Jury's recommendation. The City did provide harassment training to all employees in the fall of 2002. The City also provided harassment response training in the fall of 2002 and winter of 2003 for its management team. The City will be providing management training again in 2005. It is the City's practice to provide new employees with harassment training at the time of hire. Managers and supervisors are given training regarding harassment response during their supervisor orientation conducted within 30 days of their date of hire. Recommendation#3: Include the date of creation and any revision on each page of its harassment policies. City of Burlingame action: The creation date of this policy is listed on the first page of the policy. Future revisions will include notations of the revisions on each page of the policy. Recommendation#4: Include a requirement that employees be notified of all substantive changes in any harassment policy within thirty(30) days of the effective date of the change. City of Burlingame action: Section 9(c) of the policy stipulates that the Human Resources Director is responsible for notifying employees of any substantive policy changes within thirty(30) days of the effective date of the change. Recommendation #5: Before September 1, 2004, formalize into written policy any unwritten, informal expectations and practices related to nepotism and romantic relationships. City Of Burlingame action: Section 6(i)of the policy memorializes the City's practices regarding romantic relationships as they pertain to harassment and discrimination. The City has developed a policy regarding Nepotism that is attached to this report. Recommendation#6: Before September 1, 2004, incorporate "best practice"recommendations referred to in this report, particularly those that promote trust and lessen anxiety and provide employees reason to believe that complaints will be handled promptly and fairly. City of Burlingame: The best practice recommendations are included in the new policy. Various sections of this policy encourage positive workplace behaviors that promote trust. The complaint section also confirms that complaints will be investigated in a prompt and fair fashion. Thank you for allowing us to respond to the grand jury report. Sincerely Rosalie M. O'Mahony, Mayor City of Burlingame EXHIBIT A ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES CITY OF BURLINGAME CATEGORY: Personnel July 23, 2004 PAGE: 4.14 SUBJECT: Anti-Harassment Discrimination and Retaliation Policy PURPOSE AND APPLICATION The purpose of this Policy Against Harassment, Discrimination and Retaliation is to reaffirm the City's zero tolerance of. 1) harassment and discrimination; and 2) retaliation against those who report or oppose harassment or discrimination. This Policy applies to discrimination, harassment or retaliation of or by an applicant, employee or person providing services for the City pursuant to a contract. This Policy prohibits harassment or discrimination that is based on actual or perceived race, religious creed, color, national origin, ancestry, physical disability, mental disability, medical condition (cancer-related or genetic characteristics), marital status, gender and/or gender identity, age(40 or over), or sexual orientation (including heterosexuality, homosexuality, and bisexuality). This Policy also prohibits retaliation against any individual for making a complaint of harassment or discrimination or for participating in an investigation under this Policy. Retaliation constitutes a violation of this Policy. This Policy applies to all terms and conditions of employment, including but not limited to hiring, placement, promotion, disciplinary action, layoff, recall, transfer, leave of absence, training opportunities and compensation. POLICY COVERAGE: This Policy prohibits harassment or discrimination by or of City officials, officers, employees, applicants or contractors because: 1) of an individual's protected classification; 2) of the perception that an individual has a protected classification; or 3)the individual associates with a person who has or is perceived to have a protected classification. The City does not consider conduct in violation of this Policy to be within the course and scope of employment or the direct consequence of the discharge of City duties. PROHIBITION AGAINST HARASSMENT AND DISCRIMINATION: It is the City's policy to prohibit any form of harassment or discrimination, as defined below. To that end,this Policy establishes a Complaint Procedure that applicants, officials, officers, employees or contractors can use to report potential violations. Disciplinary action, up to and including termination, will be taken against an employee, consultant, volunteer, or officer who is found to have engaged in harassment or discrimination in violation of this Policy. Any official, vendor or contractor found to have engaged in harassment and/or discrimination in violation of this Policy will be subject to appropriate sanctions. PROHIBITION AGAINST RETALIATION: In order to deter harassment and discrimination, and to support the integrity of the Complaint Procedure described below, the City also prohibits retaliation. Any employee found to have retaliated against an applicant, elected official, officer, employee, or contractor because of a complaint of harassment or discrimination or because of participation in the Complaint Procedure, shall be subject to disciplinary action. Any elected official or contractor who has been found to retaliate in violation of this Policy will be subject to appropriate sanctions. SUBJECT: Harassment Policy and Complaint Procedure PAGE: 4.14.2 A. DEFINITIONS: Protected Classifications: This Policy prohibits harassment or discrimination because of an individual's protected classification. "Protected classification" includes actual or perceived race, religious creed, color,national origin, ancestry, physical disability, mental disability, medical condition (cancer-related or genetic characteristics), marital or domestic partner status, sex, age (40 or over), sexual orientation, (including heterosexuality, homosexuality, and bisexuality). 1. Harassment and Discrimination: Depending upon the circumstances, a single act of harassment or discrimination, as defined below, can violate this Policy: a. Verbal— includes epithets,jokes, comments or slurs that identify a person on the basis of his or her protected classification, intimate or other nicknames, comments on appearance -- including dress or physical features -- or stories that tend to disparage those with a protected classification. b. Visual— includes gestures, posters, notices, bulletins, cartoons, photography, drawings or computer images communicated through the internet and email systems that tend to disparage those with a protected classification or that depict inappropriate content. c. Physical—includes the following conduct taken because of an individual's protected classification: assault, impeding or blocking movement, physically interfering with normal work or movement, pinching, grabbing, patting, propositioning, leering, making express or implied job threats or promises in return for submission of physical acts, mimicking, stalking, or taunting. d. Sexual Harassment—includes unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, or other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature that are an express or implied condition of continued employment or other term and condition of employment. 2. Retaliation: Any adverse conduct taken because a City official, officer, applicant, employee or contractor has reported harassment or discrimination, or has participated in the Complaint Procedure described below, is prohibited. "Adverse conduct" includes: taking sides because an individual has reported harassment, spreading rumors about a complaint, shunning and avoiding an individual who reports harassment, or real or implied threats of intimidation to prevent an individual from reporting harassment. The following individuals are protected from retaliation: those who make good faith reports that harassment occurred,those who are accused of harassment, and those who associate with an individual who is involved in reporting harassment or participating in a harassment complaint procedure. B. GUIDELINES FOR IDENTIFYING HARASSMENT, DISCRIMINATION AND RETALIATION: To help clarify what constitutes a violation of this Policy, use the following guidelines: 1. Harassment and discrimination include any conduct which would be "unwelcome" to an individual of the recipient's protected classification and which is taken because of the recipient's protected classification. 2. Discrimination may result when an individual is treated differently due to his or her membership in a protected classification. In addition, discrimination may result when a City policy or practice has a negative impact on a particular classification of employees as a whole. A repeated action or type of conduct by the City need not be in writing or formally approved by the City to qualify as a policy or practice. 3. It is no defense that the recipient appears to have voluntarily "consented" to the conduct at issue. A recipient may not protest for many legitimate reasons, including the need to avoid being insubordinate or to avoid being ostracized. 4. Simply because no one has complained about a joke, gesture, picture,physical contact or comment does not mean that the conduct is welcome. Harassment can evolve over time. Small, isolated incidents might be tolerated up to a point. The fact that no one is complaining now does not preclude anyone from complaining if the conduct is repeated in the future. 5. Even visual, verbal, and/or physical conduct between two individuals who appear to welcome it can constitute harassment of a third applicant, officer, official, employee or contractor who observes the conduct or learns about the conduct later. Conduct can constitute harassment even if it is not explicitly or specifically directed at an individual. 6. Conduct can constitute harassment in violation of this Policy even if the individual engaging in the conduct has no intention to harass. The City recognizes that it is legitimate for those in protected classifications to have heightened sensitivities to harassment as a result of their life experiences. Even well-intentioned conduct can violate this Policy if the conduct is directed at, or implicates a protected classification, and if an individual of the recipient's same protected classification would find it offensive (e.g., gifts, over attention, endearing nicknames). 7. Conduct can constitute retaliation under this Policy when an action is taken or an employee is treated in a particular manner due to his or her reporting of a violation of this Policy, participation in an investigation of an alleged Policy violation, or any other negative action taken against an individual because of his or her association with the complainant. 8. A single act can violate this Policy and provide grounds for discipline or other appropriate sanctions. Therefore, if you are in doubt as to whether any particular conduct may violate this Policy, do not engage in the conduct, and seek guidance from a supervisor. SUBJECT: Harassment Policy and Complaint Procedure PAGE: 4.14.4 9. This policy is not to be construed as prohibiting mutually welcome social relationships between employees that have no bearing on employment conditions, decisions or benefits. C. CONFIDENTIALITY: The City recognizes that confidentiality is important to all parties involved in a harassment investigation. Complete confidentiality cannot occur, however, due to the need to fully investigate and the duty to take effective remedial action. As a result, confidentiality will be maintained to the extent possible. An individual who is interviewed during the course of an investigation is prohibited from discussing the substance of the interview, except as otherwise directed by a supervisor or a department director. Any individual who discusses the content of an investigatory interview will be subject to discipline. The City will not disclose a completed investigation report except as it deems necessary to support a disciplinary action, to take remedial action, to defend itself in adversarial proceedings, or to comply with the law or a court order. D. COMPLAINT PROCEDURE: An applicant, employee, officer, official, or contractor who feels he or she has been harassed, discrimination against or retaliated against in violation of this Policy must report the conduct immediately and according to the following procedure so that the complaint can be resolved quickly and fairly. 1. Reporting to the Offending Individual: The City strongly encourages any individual who feels that he or she has been harassed or discrimination against in violation of this Policy to let the offending person know immediately and firmly that the conduct at issue is unwelcome, offensive, in poor taste, and/or inappropriate and must stop. The City also encourages that alleged acts of retaliation be reported in this manner as well. 2. Reporting to Management: If an individual who has been harassed prefers not to confront the offending person, he or she need not do so. If the individual does not report the harassment or discrimination to the offending individual, or does so but is not satisfied the situation has been resolved, the individual must then immediately report the conduct to any supervisor, department head, or other City management employee. The individual should provide all details of the incident or incidents, names of individuals involved, and the names of any witnesses. This report can be made orally or in writing, although a written account is preferred. 3. Interim Relief: Any official, officer, supervisor or management employee who receives a complaint or learns of a potential violation of this Policy must promptly report the information to the Human Resources Director and if necessary, take action to diffuse volatile circumstances. If the complaint involves the Human Resources Director,the person receiving the complaint must notify the City Manager. 4. Investigation: The Human Resources Director or his or her designee will immediately either direct or undertake an effective, discrete,thorough and objective investigation of the allegations at issue. All complaints will be investigated to the extent that the City deems appropriate. The investigation will normally include interviews with the reporting individual, the accused, and any other person who is believed to have relevant knowledge concerning the allegations. The investigator will remind all witnesses to maintain the confidentiality of the content of the interview, and that retaliation against those who report alleged harassment or who participate in the complaint procedure is prohibited. 5. Investigation Into Unreported Potential Violations: The City takes a proactive approach to the problems of harassment, discrimination and retaliation and will conduct an investigation if its officers, officials, supervisors or managers become aware that harassment may be occurring,regardless of whether the recipient or a third party reports a potential violation of this Policy. 6. Remedial and Disciplinary Action: If the investigation concludes that harassment or retaliation in violation of this Policy has occurred, the City will notify the offended and offending parties of the general conclusion(s) of the investigation and will take effective remedial action that is designed to end the violation(s). Any employee or officer determined to be responsible for violating this Policy will be subject to appropriate disciplinary action, up to and including termination. Disciplinary action may also be taken against any official, supervisor or manager who condones or ignores potential violations of this Policy or otherwise fails to take appropriate action to enforce this Policy. Any official or contractor found to be responsible for violating this Policy will be subject to appropriate sanctions. 7. Option to Report to Outside Administrative Agencies: Applicants, employees, officers, officials and contractors have the option to report harassment or retaliation to the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) or the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH). These governmental agencies offer legal remedies and a complaint process. The nearest DFEH and EEOC offices are listed in the government section of the telephone book or employees can check the equal employment opportunity posters that are located on City bulletin boards for office locations and telephone numbers E. INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBILITIES 1. Individual Employee/Contractor: Conduct him or herself consistently with the anti-harassment, anti-discrimination, and anti-retaliation policy described here; Report any act he or she believes in good faith constitutes harassment, discrimination or retaliation as defined here, to his or her immediate supervisor or department head; Maintain the confidentiality of any investigation the City conducts under this Policy by not disclosing the substance of any investigatory interview, except as directed; and Cooperate fully with the City's investigation into alleged violations of this Policy, by responding fully and truthfully to all questions posed during the investigation. 2. Management and Supervisory Employees: In addition to the responsibilities listed above for individual employees, management and SUBJECT: Harassment Policy and Complaint Procedure PAGE: 4.14.6 supervisory personnel are responsible to help prevent harassment, discrimination and retaliation in their departments or areas of responsibility by: Being familiar with this Policy and modeling behavior that is consistent with it; Reporting and/or investigating any violations of this policy; Informing all employees under their direction of this Policy and the complaint procedure; Receiving complaints of harassment, discrimination and retaliation in a fair and serious manner; Documenting steps taken to resolve the problem, and following up with the complaining employee to ensure that the behavior has stopped and that there have been no reprisals; Reporting any potential violations of this Policy of which he or she becomes aware; Based on the findings of the investigation, implementing appropriate disciplinary and remedial action; Informing one who complains of conduct covered by this Policy of his or her option to contact the EEOC or DFEH regarding any alleged harassment, discrimination or retaliation; and Regularly monitoring the work environment and taking immediate appropriate action to stop potential violations, such as removing inappropriate pictures, and correcting inappropriate language. 3. Human Resources Director: The Human Resources Director or his or her designee is responsible for administering the complaint procedure and authorizing and/or conducting an investigation. The Human Resources Director is also responsible for assuring employees receive recurrent training on this policy at least once every three (3) years and management employees receive training once every two (2) years. The Human Resources Director and/or his/her designee will provide new employees this policy and training regarding workplace harassment upon appointment with the City. The Human Resources Director is also responsible for reviewing this policy annually to ensure compliance with State and Federal laws. The Human Resources Director will ensure that any substantive changes to the policy will be sent to employees within thirty days of the effective date of the changes. Any questions about this Policy should be directed to the Human Resources Director. F. POLICY AGAINST RETALIATION FOR REPORTING, OPPOSING OR PARTICIPATING IN INVESTIGATIONS INTO ALLEGED MISCONDUCT 1. General Policy: It is the City's policy to prohibit retaliation against those who report, oppose, or participate (as witnesses or accused) in investigations into complaints of alleged retaliation because of that reporting, opposition, or participation. To that end,this policy establishes a complaint procedure that applicants, officials, officers, employees or contractors can use to report potential violations. Disciplinary action, up to and including termination, will be taken against an employee or officer who is found to have violated this Policy Against Retaliation. Any elected official or contractor who violates this Policy Against Retaliation will be subject to appropriate sanctions. 2. Protected Activity: This Policy Against Retaliation protects those who engage in a protected activity from being retaliated against because of that protected activity. "Protected activity" includes any of the following: a. Filing a complaint with a federal or state enforcement or administrative agency b. Participating in or cooperating with a federal or state enforcement agency that is conducting an investigation of the City regarding alleged unlawful activity c. Testifying as a party, witness, or accused regarding alleged unlawful activity d. Associating with another employee who is engaged in any of the protected activities enumerated here e. Making or filing an internal complaint with the City regarding alleged unlawful activity f. Providing informal notice to the City regarding alleged unlawful activity 3. Policy Coverage: This Policy Against Retaliation prohibits City officials, officers, employees, or contractors from retaliating against applicants, officers, officials, employees, or contractors because of any of the protected activity as defined herein. 4. Adverse Action: Except as otherwise provided, this Policy Against Retaliation prohibits adverse action that is taken because an applicant, employee, or contractor has engaged in any of the forms of protected activity as defined herein. Adverse action includes any of the following: a. Taking sides because an individual has reported alleged wrongdoing b. Spreading rumors about a complaint of alleged wrongdoing c. Shunning or avoiding an individual who has engaged in any of the forms of protected activity described above d. Real or implied threats of intimidation to attempt to prevent an individual from reporting alleged wrongdoing or because of protected activity e. Refusing to hire an individual because of protected activity f. Denying promotion to an individual because of protected activity g. Taking any form of disciplinary action because of protected activity h. Issuing a poor evaluation because of protected activity i. Extending a probationary period because of protected activity j. Altering work schedules or work assignments because of protected activity SUBJECT: Harassment Policy and Complaint Procedure PAGE: 4.14.8 5. Casual Connection: This Policy Against Retaliation prohibits adverse action that is taken because of an individual's protected activity. The Policy does not prohibit adverse action that is taken for legitimate or non-discriminatory reasons, such as: discipline for legal cause or refusing to hire because of inadequate qualifications. As a result, adverse action is only prohibited if it is causally connected to,or taken because of, the alleged protected activity. 6. Complaint Procedure: An applicant, employee, officer, official, or contractor who feels he or she has been retaliated against in violation of this Policy should immediately report the conduct according to the following procedure so that the complaint can be resolved fairly and quickly. a. Reporting to Management: The individual may make a complaint to any supervisor, department head, or a member of the Human Resources Department. The complaint should be in writing and provide all details of the incident or incidents, names of individuals involved, and the names of any witnesses. The complaint should contain a statement that the individual swears that the contents of the complaint are true, or that the individual believes them to be true. The complaint shall be filed as soon as possible after either the alleged act of retaliation, or the date the individual first becomes aware of alleged retaliation, but no later than three months thereafter. b. Interim Relief: Any official, officer, supervisor or management employee who receives a complaint or learns of a potential violation of this Policy Against Retaliation must promptly report the information to the Human Resources Department or another in the chain of command, and if necessary, take action to diffuse volatile circumstances. c. Investigation: The Human Resources Director or his or her designee will immediately undertake an effective, discrete,thorough and objective investigation of the allegations at issue. Each complaint that complies with the requirements stated in this Policy Against Retaliation will be investigated to the extent that the City deems appropriate. The investigation may include interviews with the reporting individual, the accused, and any other person who is believed to have relevant knowledge concerning the allegations. The investigator will remind all witnesses to maintain the confidentiality of the content of the interview, and that retaliation against those who report alleged wrongdoing or who participate in the complaint procedure is prohibited. d. Remedial and Disciplinary Action: If the investigation concludes that a violation of this Policy has occurred,the City will notify the offended and offending parties of the general conclusion(s) of the investigation and will take effective remedial action that is designed to end the violation(s). Any employee or officer determined to be responsible for violating this Policy will be subject to appropriate disciplinary action, up to and including termination. Disciplinary action may also be taken against any official, supervisor or Administrative Officer who condones or ignores potential violations of this Policy or otherwise fails to take appropriate action to enforce this Policy. Any official or contractor who is found to have violated this Policy will be subject to appropriate sanctions. e. Requirement to Exhaust Administrative Remedies: This Policy Against Retaliation provides an administrative remedy that individuals must use prior to resorting to judicial remedies to address the conduct described herein. 7. Individual Responsibilities: a. Individual Employee/Contractor: A City employee, officer, official or contractor is required to: i. Conduct him or herself consistently with this Policy Against Retaliation; ii. Report any act he or she believes in good faith constitutes retaliation as defined here, to his or her immediate supervisor or department head or to the Human Resources Department; iii. Maintain the confidentiality of any investigation the City conducts under this Policy Against Retaliation by not disclosing the substance of any investigatory interview, except as directed by the department head or the Human Resources Department; iv. Cooperate fully with the City's investigation into alleged violations of this Policy Against Retaliation, by responding fully and truthfully to all questions posed during the investigation. b. Management and Supervisory Employees(including Officers and Officials): In addition to the responsibilities listed above for individual employees, management and supervisory personnel(including officers and officials) are responsible to help enforce this Policy Against Retaliation within their departments or areas of responsibility by: i. Being familiar with this Policy Against Retaliation and modeling behavior that is consistent with it; ii. Informing all employees under their direction of this Policy Against Retaliation and providing training as appropriate; iii. Receiving complaints in a fair and serious manner, documenting steps taken to resolve the problem, and following up with the complaining employee to ensure that that there have been no reprisals. iv. Reporting any potential violations of this Policy Against Retaliation of which he or she becomes aware, regardless of whether a complaint has been submitted,to the Human Resources Department or the department head SUBJECT: Harassment Policy and Complaint Procedure PAGE: 4.14.10 v. Based on the findings of the investigation, implementing appropriate disciplinary and remedial action. c. Human Resources Director: The Human Resources Director is responsible for administering the complaint procedure, authorizing and/or conducting an investigation and, in consultation with the department head, recommending disciplinary action commensurate with the severity of the offense, and recommending other appropriate remedial action. James Nantell City Manager EXHIBIT A ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES CITY OF BURLINGAME Category: PERSONNEL August 2004 Page: 4.32 Subject: NEPOTISM POLICY POLICY STATEMENT No employee, prospective employee or applicant will be denied employment or benefits of employment solely on the basis of marital status or relationship to any other officer or employee. No employee, prospective employee or applicant will be given preference on the basis of kinship by blood or marriage with any existing City employee or officer. The City does retain the right to: 1. Refuse to place one spouse under the direct supervision of the other spouse where such has the potential for creating an adverse effect on supervision, safety, security, or morale. 2. Refuse to place both spouses in the same department, division, or facility where such has the potential for creating an adverse effect on supervision, safety, security, or morale, or involves potential conflicts of interest. 3. Refuse to place relatives within the third degree of kinship by blood or marriage of any City employee in the same department or division where such has the potential for creating an adverse effect on supervision, safety, security, morale, or involves potential conflict of interest. $4,454,042.31 Ck.No.96427-97040 Excludes Library cks.96430-96460 RECOMMENDED FOR PAYMENT APPROVED FOR PAYMENT Payroll for July 2004 $3,326,346.38 Ck.No.159010-159523 INCLUDES ELECTRONIC FUNDS TRANSFERS PERS HEALTH PERS RETIREMENT FEDERAL 941 TAX STATE DISABILITY TAX STATE INCOME TAX PERS&ICMA DEFERRED COMP SECTION 125 DEDUCTION m Oq m m v CD 3 m 00 S:\FINEXCEL\MISCELLANEOUS\COUNCILCKS.XLS 6 CITY OF BURLINGAME 08.05-2004 W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 12 FUND RECAP - 04-05 NAME FUND AMOUNT GENERAL FUND 101 116,773.99 PAYROLL REVOLVING FUND 130 19,029.81 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS FUND 320 157,156.40 WATER FUND 526 2,895.12 SEWER FUND 527 255,234.81 SOLID WASTE FUND 528 1,269.67 PARKING ENTERPRISE FUND 530 1,275.64 FACILITIES SERVICES FUND 619 4,425.58 EQUIPMENT SERVICES FUND 620 1,387.61 INFORMATION SERVICES FUND 621 941.57 FIRE MECHANIC SERVICES FUND 625 379.45 TRUST AND AGENCY FUND 731 350.00 UTILITY REVOLVING FUND 896 258.09 TOTAL FOR APPROVAL $561,377.74 HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL: THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE CLAIMS LISTED ON PAGES NUMBERED FROM 1 THROUGH 12 INCLUSIVE, AND/OR CLAIMS NUMBERED FROM 96920 THROUGH 97040 INCLUSIVE,TOTALING IN THE AMOUNT OF $561,377.74, HAVE BEEN CHECKED 1N DETAIL AND APPROVED BY THE PROPER OFFICIALS, AND IN MY OPINION REPRESENT FAIR AND JUST CHARGES AGAINST THE CITY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THEIR RESPECTIVE AMOUNTS AS INDICATED THEREON. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, .... ................ . .. ..I...... . ... .../. . ./.. . FINANCE DIRECTOR DATE APPROVED FOR PAYMENT ...... .. . . .. . ............ . . ......... .../. . ./. .. COUNCIL DATE CITY OF BURLINGAME 08-05-2004 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 3,729.86 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS FUND 320 10,163.50 WATER CAPITAL PROJECT FUND 326 16,447.45 SEWER CAPITAL PROJECT FUND 327 8,177.25 WATER FUND 526 19,266.85 UTILITY REVOLVING FUND 896 61,471.76 TOTAL FOR APPROVAL 8119,256.67 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 96920 THROUGH 97040 INCLUSIVE,TOTALING IN - THE AMOUNT OF $119,256.67, HAVE BEEN CHECKED IN DETAIL AND APPROVED BY THE PROPER OFFICIALS, AND IN MY OPINION REPRESENT FAIR AND JUST CHARGES AGAINST THE CITY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THEIR RESPECTIVE AMOUNTS AS INDICATED THEREON. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, .................................... .../.../... FINANCE DIRECTOR DATE APPROVED FOR PAYMENT .................................... .../.../... COUNCIL DATE CITY OF BURLINGAME 08.05-2004 W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 10 FUND RECAP - 04-05 NAME FUND AMOUNT GENERAL FUND 101 120,503.85 PAYROLL REVOLVING FUND 130 19,029.81 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS FUND 320 167,319.90 WATER CAPITAL PROJECT FUND 326 16,447.45 SEWER CAPITAL PROJECT FUND 327 8,177.25 WATER FUND 526 22,161.97 SEWER FUND 527 255,234.81 SOLID WASTE FUND 528 1,269.67 PARKING ENTERPRISE FUND 530 1,275.64 FACILITIES SERVICES FUND 619 4,425.58 EQUIPMENT SERVICES FUND 620 1,387.61 INFORMATION SERVICES FUND 621 941.57 FIRE MECHANIC SERVICES FUND 625 379.45 TRUST AND AGENCY FUND 731 350.00 UTILITY REVOLVING FUND 896 61,729.85 TOTAL FOR APPROVAL 8680,634.41 HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL: THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE CLAIMS LISTED ON PAGES NUMBERED FROM 1 THROUGH 10 INCLUSIVE, AND/OR CLAIMS NUMBERED FROM 96920 THROUGH 97040 INCLU$IVE,TOTALING IN THE AMOUNT OF 8680,634.41, 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 08/05/04 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 97034. CMTA 24971 350.00 TRAINING EXPENSE 350.00 101 64250 260 97035 TIM MC AULIFFE 24974 448.93 TRAVEL 8 MEETINGS 448.93 526 69020 250 97036 RRL BUILDERS 24975 3,000.00 MISCELLANEOUS 3,000.00 101 22546 97037 BERNARD CORRY 24976 1,000.00 MISCELLANEOUS 1,000.00 101 22525 97038 THOMAS O'CONNOR 24977 . 1,000.00 MISCELLANEOUS 1,000.00 101 22525 97039 SEAN CONNOLLY 24978 1,000.00 MISCELLANEOUS 1,000.00 101 22525 97040 MICHAEL DARDIA 24979 1,000.00 MISCELLANEOUS 1,000.00 101 22525 TOTAL 8680,634.41 I,I CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 8 08/05/04 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 97019 BURLINGAME ROTARY 24566 195.00 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 195.00 101 64150 240 97020 AT&T WIRELESS 24607 AP 558.46 COMMUNICATIONS 558.46 101 65100 160 97021 AT&T WIRELESS 24640 381 .87 COMMUNICATIONS 123.78 526 69020 160 UTILITY EXPENSE 258.09 896 20281 97022 O'NEIL PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT INC. 24675 497.30 MISC. SUPPLIES 497.30 530 65400 120 97023 SAN MATEO COUNTY FORENSIC LAB 24700 191477.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 19,477.00 101 65100 220 97024 COMPUTER & BUSINESS PRINTING 24741 578. 12 MISC. SUPPLIES 578. 12 530 65400 120 97025 AETNA 24760 2,885.30 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 2,668.26 130 20022 MISCELLANEOUS 217.04 130 20028 97026 DELTA DENTAL PLAN OF CALIFORNIA 24793 51035.63 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 5,035.63 130 20014 97027 THE HARTFORD PRIORITY ACCOUNTS 24796 5,029.28 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 4,058.94 130 20021 MISCELLANEOUS 970.34 130 20025 97028 T MOBILE 24846 30.88 COMMUNICATIONS 30.88 101 65150 160 97029 EXCEL FITNESS SOLUTIONS 24854 210. 16 EQUIPMENT MAINT. 210. 16 101 65200 200 97030 DORIS MORTENSEN 24871 21 .50 MISC. SUPPLIES 21 .50 320 81030 120 97031 ART IN ACTION 24912 1 ,353.60 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1 ,353.60 101 68010 220 1646 97032 ROBERT MORTON JONES CONSTRUCTION 24959 3,000.00 MISCELLANEOUS 3,000.00 101 22546 97033 S AND S SUPPLIES & SOLUTIONS 24963 354.20 TRAINING EXPENSE 300.62 101 66210 260 MISC. SUPPLIES 53.58 527 66520 120 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R EG I S T E R PAGE 7 08/05/04 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT 6*1 Denotes Hand Written Checks 97003 ERIC GATTMAN 24169 201.60 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 201.60 101 68010 220 1521 97004 JESUS NAVA 24204 AP 192.16 MISCELLANEOUS 192.16 101 64250 031 97005 PENINSULA AQUATICS CENTER 24375 109.20 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 109.20 101 68010 220 1372 97006 A&G SERVICES 24400 13,434.37 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 13,434.37 527 66520 220 97007 MAJID ATTISHA 24403 147.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 147.00 101 68010 220 1641 97008 STEVE ERLE 24418 1,123.20 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,123.20 101 68010 220 1372 97009 JAN FORD PUBLIC RELATIONS 24421 AP 865.04 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 865.04 101 65100 220 97010 EASYLINK SERVICES CORP 24430 9.17 COMMUNICATIONS 9.17 101 65100 160 97011 BURLINGAME FIREFIGHTERS FUND 24518 3,895.00 MISCELLANEOUS 3,895.00 130 20016 97012 BURLINGAME FIREFIGHTERS FUND 24519 64.00 UNION DUES 64.00 130 21080 97013 BURLINGAME POLICE ADMINISTRATION 24520 180.00 MISCELLANEOUS 180.00 130 20024 97014 BURLINGAME POLICE OFFICERS ASSN 24521 580.00 MISCELLANEOUS 580.00 130 20024 97015 C.L.E.A. 24523 585.00 MISCELLANEOUS 585.00 130 20026 97016 TEAMSTERS#856 24526 455.00 UNION DUES 455.00 130 21091 97017 TEAMSTERS UNION LOCAL 856 24528 320.60 MISCELLANEOUS 310.16 130 21092 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 10.44 130 21015 97018 HONEYWELL 24546 503.00 /PROFESSIONAL&SPECIALIZED S 503.00 619 64460 21100 5110 - / CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 6 08/05/04 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT '•' Denotes Hand Written Checks 96990 OFFICE TEAM 23256 1,393.00 MISCELLANEOUS 952.00 101 65300 010 MISCELLANEOUS 441.00 101 64150 010 96991 OFFICE MAX 23306 133.26 OFFICE EXPENSE 45.72 101 64400 110 OFFICE EXPENSE 42.98 101 66100 110 OFFICE EXPENSE 10.46 101 64400 110 MISC. SUPPLIES 34.10 101 66100 120 96992 WILCO SUPPLY 23333 661.18 MISC. SUPPLIES 661.18 619 64460 120 96993 PACE CONSULTING 23457 AP 1,000.00 EQUIPMENT MAINT. 1,000.00 101 65100 200 96994 ERLER AND KALINOWSKI,INC. 23531 AP 18,162.40 PROFESSIONAL 8 SPECIALIZED S 16,447.45 326 81110 210 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,714.95 526 69020 220 96995 THE MARLIN COMPANY 23712 874.33 TRAINING EXPENSE 286.93 101 66210 260 TRAINING EXPENSE 286.93 526 69020 260 TRAINING EXPENSE 300.47 527 66520 260 96996 SBC/MCI 23728 8,494.25 COMMUNICATIONS 198.50 101 67500 160 UTILITY EXPENSE 8,295.75 896 20281 96997 MATT VAUGHN 23787 1,123.20 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,123.20 101 68010 220 1372 96998 JOHN PHILIPOPOULOS 23821 1,571.70 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,571.70 101 68010 220 1372 96999 KAREN LIU 23823 1,228.50 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 240.50 101 68010 220 1645 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 988.00 101 68010 220 1646 97000 UNIVERSAL BUILDING SERVICES 23941 419.40 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 55.00 619 64460 220 5120 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 364.40 619 64460 220 5110 97001 ABE KIRSCHENBAUM 24136 475.00 TRAINING EXPENSE 475.00 619 64460 260 97002 FLORA ROBELET 24167 50.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 50.00 101 68010 220 1521 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 5 08/05/04 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT '•' Denotes Hand Written Checks 96976 RENEE RAMSEY 21136 1,200.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,200.00 101 68010 220 1331 96977 COW GOVERNMENT, INC. 21482 896.57 OFFICE EXPENSE 896.57 621 64450 110 96978 D.L. FALK CONSTRUCTION INC. 21647 155,972.70 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 155,972.70 320 80370 220 96979 CINGULAR WIRELESS 21747 AP 649.20 COMMUNICATIONS 649.20 101 65300 160 96980 EILEEN P. GOLDENBERG 21846 2,350.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 700.00 101 68010 220 1644 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,650.00 101 68010 220 1646 96981 TOWNE FORD SALES, INC. 22146 160.63 SUPPLIES 160.63 620 15000 96982 OFFICE DEPOT CREDIT PLAN 22216 1,636.57 OFFICE EXPENSE 1,436.35 101 65100 110 EQUIPMENT MAINT. 200.22 530 65400 200 96983 UNDERGROUND CONSTRUCTION MANAGER 22305 AP 8,177.25 PROFESSIONAL 8 SPECIALIZED S 8,177.25 327 81010 210 96984 HELENE RENE 22366 120.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 120.00 101 68010 220 1660 96985 NORTH AMERICAN SPORTS MANAGEMENT 22382 1,125.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,125.00 101 68010 220 1785 96986 QUENVOLDS SAFETY SHOEMOBILES 22479 1,904.18 TRAINING EXPENSE 904.18 101 66210 260 TRAINING EXPENSE 1,000.00 527 66520 260 96987 PENINSULA UNIFORM 8 EQUIPMENT 22899 1,363.33 UNIFORMS AND EQUIPMENT 1,363.33 101 65100 140 96988 IMAGISTICS INTERNATIONAL 22924 379.04 OFFICE EXPENSE 70.04 101 65100 110 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 309.00 101 65100 220 96989 MCMILLAN ELECTRIC 23066 5,520.45 PROFESSIONAL 8 SPECIALIZED S 5,520.45 320 80790 210 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 4 08/05/04 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT '•' Denotes Hand Written Checks 96962 MICHAEL ADAM 18275 346.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 280.00 101 68010 220 1788 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 66.00 101 68010 220 1785 96963 BAY ALARM 18854 AP 6,148,75 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 5,805.25 320 80790 210 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 154.50 619 64460 220 5210 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 189.00 619 64460 220 5140 96964 ACCESS UNIFORMS & EMBROIDERY 18990 371.80 UNIFORMS AND EQUIPMENT 118.00 101 66210 140 UNIFORMS AND EQUIPMENT 253.80 527 66520 140 96965 ANG NEWSPAPERS 19083 144.10 MISC. SUPPLIES 144.10 101 64400 120 96966 NOEL SHEN 19455 66.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 66.00 101 68010 220 1785 96967 WINGES ARCHITECTURE & PLANNING 19471 350.00 MISCELLANEOUS 350.00 731 22525 96968 POWER WASHING SERVICE 19564 1,111.28 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 1,111.28 $28 66600 210 96969 CLEARLITE TROPHIES 19679 947.19 UNIFORMS AND EQUIPMENT 947.19 101 68020 140 2200 96970 PENINSULA CORRIDOR JOINT 20060 3,860.00 RENTS & LEASES 1,930.00 526 69020 180 RENTS & LEASES 1,930.00 527 66520 180 96971 AFFINITEL COMMUNICATIONS 20246 45.00 COMMUNICATIONS 45.00 621 64450 160 96972 DAPPER TIRE CO., INC. 20464 532.52 SUPPLIES 532.52 620 15000 96973 DAN COFFEY 20513 140.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 140.00 101 68010 220 1788 96974 FRANKLIN OFFICE SUPPLIES 20523 149.63 OFFICE EXPENSE 149.63 101 64420 110 96975 EIP ASSOCIATES 20526 1,997.50 DEPOSIT REFUND 1,997.50 101 22590 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 3 08/05/04 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT *� Denotes Hand Written Checks 96948 3m COMPANY 13848 297.72 TRAFFIC CONTROL MATERIALS 297.72 101 66210 222 96949 DHL EXPRESS 14958 14.21 OFFICE EXPENSE 14.21 101 65100 110 96950 DON E. GIOVANNETTI 15229 272.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 140.00 101 68010 220 1788 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 132.00 101 68010 220 1785 96951 DAILY JOURNAL CORP. 15626 679.81 - DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 679.81 101 64350 240 96952 TIM OLENO 15629 56.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 56.00 101 68010 220 1788 96953 PENINSULA SPORTS OFFICIALS 15711 139.50 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 139.50 101 68010 220 1787 96954 HITECH SYSTEMS, INC. 15712 30,219.84 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 30,219.84 101 65.100 220 96955 SYDNEY MALKOO 16347 248.96 SMALL TOOLS 248.96 620 66700 130 96956 HAROLD FIELDS 16438 440.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 308.00 101 68010 220 1788 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 132.00 101 68010 220 1785 96957 UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERT 17248 421.92 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 105.48 101 66210 210 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 105.48 101 66240 210 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 105.48 526 69020 210 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 105.48 527 66520 210 96958 METRO MOBILE COMMUNICATIONS 17402 174.68 COMMUNICATIONS 174.68 101 65100 160 96959 JEFF HIPPS 17803 4,277.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 4,277.00 101 68010 220 1372 96960 CALIFORNIA MUNICIPAL 17938 200.00 .PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 200.00 101 64560 210 96961 ICMA MEMBERSHIP RENEWALS 18050 . 1,230.00 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 1,230.00 101 64250 240 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 2 08/05/04 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 96935 BAY AREA WATER 03361 AP 17,551.90 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 17,551.90 526 69020 240 96936 CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO 03483 37,407.25 OTHER AGENCY CONTRIBUTIONS 37,407.25 527 66530 270 96937 B.E.I. ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES 09072 94.82 MISC. SUPPLIES 51.53 101 66210 120 MISC. SUPPLIES 43.29 619 64460 120 5240 96938 MUFFIE CALBREATH 09125 1,104.75 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,104.75 101 68010 220 1891 96939 SAFETY KLEEN CORP. 09168 240.89 RENTS & LEASES 240.89 101 68020 180 2200 96940 SAN MATEO COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFC. 09433 4,095.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 4,095.00 101 65100 220 96941 OLE'S 09626 178.83 SUPPLIES 178.83 620 15000 96942 BARKER BLUE REPROGRAPHICS 09990 115.82 MISC. SUPPLIES 115.82 101 66210 120 96943 PIP PRINTING 10620 81.19 PUBLICATIONS & ADVERTISING 81.19 101 64420 150 96944 WINGFOOT COMMERCIAL TIRE SYSTEMS 11316 379.45 FIRE APPARATUS MAINT. 379.45 625 65213 203 96945 LEE STAMBOLIS 11361 384.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 132.00 101 68010 220 1785 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 252.00 101 68010 220 1788 96946 CHIEF BILL REILLY 11568 2,357,37 OFFICE EXPENSE 10.73 101 65200 110 MISC. SUPPLIES 3.02 101 65200 111 SMALL TOOLS 36.60 101 65200 130 UNIFORMS AND EQUIPMENT 631.63 101 65200 140 FIRE APPARATUS MAINT. 39.39 101 65200 203 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 75.00 101 65200 240 TRAVEL & MEETINGS 295.00 101 65200 250 TRAINING EXPENSE 1,266.00 101 65200 260 96947 WECO INDUSTRIES, INC. 11640 654.85 SMALL TOOLS 654.85 527 66520 130 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 1 08/05/04 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 96920 WHITE CAP 01250 636.42 SMALL TOOLS 401.92 101 66210 130 MISC. SUPPLIES 234.50 527 66520 120 96921 BAUER COMPRESSORS 01309 6.95 FIRE APPARATUS MAINT. 6.95 101 65200 203 96922 BRENTON SAFETY, INC. 01400 347.16 MISC. SUPPLIES 347.16 527 66520 120 96923 BURLINGAME GLASS COMPANY 01533 11.37 FIRE APPARATUS MAINT. 11.37 101 65200 203 96924 GCS WESTERN POWER 8 01857 434.30 MISC. SUPPLIES 434.30 619 64460 120 5170 96925 D 8 M TOWING, INC. 02029 135.00 SUPPLIES 135.00 620 15000 96926 VEOLIA WATER 02110 199,473.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 199,473.00 527 66530 220 96927 U.W. GRAINGER, INC. 02248 414.70 SMALL TOOLS 414.70 619 64460 130 96928 K 8 W DISCOUNT LIGHTING 8 SUPP 02645 1,171.56 MISC. SUPPLIES 40.35 527 66520 120 MISC. SUPPLIES 1,131.21 619 64460 120 96929 LAWSON PRODUCTS, INC. 02755 131.67 SUPPLIES 131.67 620 15000 96930 NATIONWIDE WIRE 8 BRUSH MFG. 03002 158.39 MISC. SUPPLIES 158.39 528 66600 120 96931 P. G. 8 E. 03054 69,999.20 GAS 8 ELECTRIC 16,823.19 101 66240 170 UTILITY EXPENSE 53,176.01 896 20280 96932 SBC 03080 51.95 OFFICE EXPENSE 51.95 101 65100 110 96933 DON PLAGMANN 03172 280.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 280.00 101 68010 220 1788 96934 MARGARET PRENDERGAST 03179 742.50 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 742.50 101 68010 220 1641 CITY OF BURLINGAME 07-30-2004 W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 14 FUND RECAP - 04-05 NAME FUND AMOUNT GENERAL FUND 101 91,346.07 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS FUND 320 2,821.62 SEWER CAPITAL PROJECT FUND 327 32,092.20 WATER FUND 526 11,484.80 SEWER FUND 527 373.29 SELF INSURANCE FUND 618 3,848.11 FACILITIES SERVICES FUND 619 1,461.58 EQUIPMENT SERVICES FUND 620 2,583.35 INFORMATION SERVICES FUND 621 548.00 FIRE MECHANIC SERVICES FUND 625 148.19 OTHER LOCAL GRANTS/DONATIONS 730 295.04 TRUST AND AGENCY FUND 731 150,418.00 UTILITY REVOLVING FUND 896 2,593.34 TOTAL FOR APPROVAL 8300,013.59 HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL: THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE CLAIMS LISTED ON PAGES NUMBERED FROM 1 THROUGH 14 INCLUSIVE, AND/OR CLAIMS NUMBERED FROM 96778 THROUGH 96919 INCLUSIVE,TOTALING IN THE AMOUNT OF 8300,013.59, HAVE BEEN CHECKED IN DETAIL AND APPROVED BY THE PROPER OFFICIALS, AND IN MY OPINION REPRESENT FAIR AND JUST CHARGES AGAINST THE CITY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THEIR RESPECTIVE AMOUNTS AS INDICATED THEREON. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, ....................I..........I.... .../.../... FINANCE DIRECTOR DATE APPROVED FOR PAYMENT .................................... .../.../... COUNCIL DATE CITY OF BURLINGAME 07-30-2004 WARRANT REG 1 ST ER PAGE 13 FUND RECAP - 03-04 NAME FUND AMOUNT GENERAL FUND 101 24,821 .52 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS FUND 320 106,080.83 WATER CAPITAL PROJECT FUND 326 10,942.02 SEWER CAPITAL PROJECT FUND 327 4751328.90 WATER FUND 526 293,062.84 SEWER FUND 527 184.42 SOLID WASTE FUND 528 3,053.03 SELF INSURANCE FUND 618 5,477.90 FACILITIES SERVICES FUND 619 136.64 EQUIPMENT SERVICES FUND 620 1 ,846.28 INFORMATION SERVICES FUND 621 1 , 110.00 BURLINGAME TRAIN SHUTTLE PROGRAM 736 14,556.90 UTILITY REVOLVING FUND 896 708.24 TOTAL FOR APPROVAL $937,309.52 HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL: THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE CLAIMS LISTED ON PAGES NUMBERED FROM 1 THROUGH 13 INCLUSIVE, AND/OR CLAIMS NUMBERED FROM 96778 THROUGH 96919 INCLUSIVE,TOTALING IN THE AMOUNT OF $937,309.52, 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 07-30-2004 W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 12 FUND RECAP - 04-05 NAME FUND AMOUNT GENERAL FUND 101 116,167.59 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS FUND 320 108,902.45 WATER CAPITAL PROJECT FUND 326 10,942.02 SEWER CAPITAL PROJECT FUND 327 507,421.10 WATER FUND 526 304,547.64 SEWER FUND 527 557.71 SOLID WASTE FUND 528 3,053.03 SELF INSURANCE FUND 618 9,326.01 FACILITIES SERVICES FUND 619 1,598.22 EQUPMENT SERVICES FUND 620 4,429.63 INFORMATION SERVICES FUND 621 1,658.00 FIRE MECHANIC SERVICES FUND 625 148.19 OTHER LOCAL GRANTS/DONATIONS 730 295.04 TRUST AND AGENCY FUND 731 150,418.00 BURLINGAME TRAIN SHUTTLE PROGRAM 736 14,556.90 UTILITY REVOLVING FUND 896 3,301.58 TOTAL FOR APPROVAL $1,237,323.11 HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL: THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE CLAIMS LISTED ON PAGES NUMBERED FROM 1 THROUGH 12 INCLUSIVE, AND/OR CLAIMS NUMBERED FROM 96778 THROUGH 96919 INCLUSIVE,TOTALING IN THE AMOUNT OF 51,237,323.11, 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 11 07/30/04 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT '*' Denotes Hand Written Checks 96909 VCD 24960 346.57 BLDG. & GROUNDS MAINT. 346.57 101 65200 190 96910 WILSON TRUJILLO 24961 200.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 200.00 101 68010 220 1780 96911 MERCURY TOURS 24962 430.14 MISC. SUPPLIES 430.14 101 68010 120 1521 96912 S AND S SUPPLIES & SOLUTIONS 24963 70.37 TRAINING EXPENSE 70.37 101 66210 260 96913 LAURA MARSH 24964 960.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 960.00 101 68010 220 1646 96914 SILVA BAKESSIAN 24965 700.00 MISCELLANEOUS 700.00 101 22546 96915 ROBBI HOLLON 24966 1,575.61 CLAIMS PAYMENTS 1,575.61 618 64520 601 96916 COYOTES LACROSSE CLUB 24967 1,660.75 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,660.75 101 68010 220 1372 96917 DENHAM LLC 24968 625.29 MISCELLANEOUS 625.29 526 22502 96918 AMERICAN HEALTH AND SAFETY TRAIN 24969 AP 510.94 MISCELLANEOUS 510.94 101 22585 96919 COMERICA BANK 24970 AP 98,108.33 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 98,108.33 320 80831 220 TOTAL $1,237,323.11 J ) CITY OF BURLINGAME WARRANT REG I ST ER PAGE 10 07/30/04 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 96894 STEVE BRUMBAUGH 24183 400.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 400.00 101 68010 220 1780 96895 JESUS NAVA 24204 AP 1 ,041 .24 MISCELLANEOUS 1 ,041 .24 101 64250 031 96896 KUMUDINI MURTHY 24210 1 ,097.25 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1 ,097.25 101 68010 220 1646 96897 WEST GROUP 24326 437.39 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 437.39 101 64350 210 96898 C.W. ROEN CO. 24474 AP 410,741 . 10 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 410,741 . 10 327 79480 220 96899 IMEDD INCORPORATED 24550 150.00 TRAINING EXPENSE 150.00 101 68020 260 2300 96900 AT&T WIRELESS 24607 AP 1 ,222.09 COMMUNICATIONS 464.60 101 65200 160 COMMUNICATIONS 58.39 101 64250 160 UTILITY EXPENSE 699.10 896 20281 96901 BANK OF WALNUT CREEK 24613 AP 45,637.90 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 45,637.90 327 79480 220 96902 LIFE FITNESS 24618 AP 127.50 MISC. SUPPLIES 127.50 527 66520 120 96903 BRYAN ROSENBERG 24631 315.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 315.00 101 68010 220 1780 96904 RUTAN & TUCKER LLP 24678 AP 51477.90 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 5,477.90 618 64520 210 96905 MANAGED HEALTH NETWORK 24714 592.20 MISCELLANEOUS 592.20 101 64420 030 96906 JENNIFER KLINE 24804 200.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 200.00 101 68010 220 1780 96907 JACOBSEN'S OF ADAIR 24919 62.99 MISCELLANEOUS 62.99 526 69020 233 96908 ROBERT MORTON JONES CONSTRUCTION 24959 870.00 MISCELLANEOUS 870.00 101 22546 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 9 07/30/04 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 96881 SCS FIELD SERVICES 23727 AP 3,053.03 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 3,053.03 528 66600 210 96882 SBC/MCI 23728 AP 92.47 COMMUNICATIONS 37.26 101 67500 160 COMMUNICATIONS 18.47 101 65150 160 COMMUNICATIONS 36.74 101 67500 160 96883 JANNETTE GREER 23769 264.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 264.00 101 68010 220 1648 96884 KAREN LIU 23823 575.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 350.00 101 68010 220 1646 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 225.00 101 68010 220 1645 96885 CRAIG HANSEN 23833 200.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 200.00 101 68010 220 1780 96886 KAITLYN SPILLANE 23834 250.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 250.00 101 68010 220 1780 96887 MIKE AMAROLI 23839 200.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 200.00 101 68010 220 1780 96888 3 DAY ENVELOPE 23859 165.00 OFFICE EXPENSE 165.00 101 64420 110 96889 MLS CAMPS 23875 2,928.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 2,928.00 101 68010 220 1372 96890 DAVE CREAMER 23876 960.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 640.00 101 68010 220 1644 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 320.00 101 68010 220 1646 96891 MELISSA GINSBERG 23877 640.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 640.00 101 68010 220 1646 96892 UNIVERSAL BUILDING SERVICES 23941 1,522.76 MISC. SUPPLIES 113.44 101 68010 120 1114 MISC. SUPPLIES 687.64 101 68010 120 1111 MISC. SUPPLIES 431.37 101 68010 120 1114 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 265.48 619 64460 220 5130 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 24.83 619 64460 220 5240 96893 JOHNSON W00 24137 558.77 MISC. SUPPLIES 558.77 619 64460 120 1 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 8 07/30/04 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 96866 CARL DEQUANT 22842 200.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 200.00 101 68010 220 1780 96867 SCOTT SHAFFER 22845 200.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 200.00 101 68010 220 1780 96868 ALLIED IRON CO. 22855 AP 52.34 FIRE APPARATUS MAINT. 52.34 101 65200 203 96869 S&S WORLDWIDE 23085 340.02 MISC. SUPPLIES 340.02 101 68010 120 1423 96870 PITNEY BOWES 23128 548.00 CITY HALL MAINTENANCE 548.00 621 64450 200 96871 OFFICE DEPOT 23153 AP 623.98 OFFICE EXPENSE 623.98 101 68010 110 1101 96872 CRAIG DILL 23171 310.00 TRAINING EXPENSE 155.00 101 66210 260 TRAINING EXPENSE 155.00 619 64460 260 96873 OFFICE TEAM 23256 761.60 MISCELLANEOUS 761.60 101 65300 010 96874 OFFICE MAX 23306 434.62 OFFICE EXPENSE 58.93 101 65200 110 OFFICE EXPENSE 324.07 101 68010 110 1101 OFFICE EXPENSE 51.62 101 64400 110 96875 RECALL- TOTAL INFORMATION MGMT 23411 101.00 MISCELLANEOUS 101.00 101 22518 96876 CULVER GROUP 23448 AP 10,942.02 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 10,942.02 326 80770 210 96877 PAT BELDING 23489 200.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 200.00 101 68010 220 1780 96878 REFRIGERATION SUPPLIES DISTRIBUT 23639 122.65 MISC. SUPPLIES 122.65 619 64460 120 5120 96879 NORTRAX 23681 990.42 SUPPLIES 990.42 620 15000 96880 GWENDOLYN BOGER 23703 4,674.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 4,674.00 101 68010 220 1331 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 7 07/30/04 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 96851 MANDEGO, INC. 21855 437.66 MISC. SUPPLIES 220.18 101 68010 120 1788 MISC. SUPPLIES 217.48 101 68010 120 1785 96852 JIM STOCKWELL 22048 588.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 588.00 101 68010 220 1780 96853 MARK MEYERS 22051 200.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 200.00 101 68010 220 1780 96854 BRIAN BRINKERHOFF 22102 200.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 200.00 101 68010 220 1780 96855 AT&T 22138 AP 31.23 COMMUNICATIONS- 22.09 101 65100 160 UTILITY EXPENSE 9.14 896 20281 96856 TOWNE FORD SALES, INC. 22146 257.88 SUPPLIES 257.88 620 15000 96857 UNDERGROUND CONSTRUCTION MANAGER 22305 AP 18,949.90 PROFESSIONAL&SPECIALIZED S 18,949.90 327 81010 210 96858 STEVE NELSON 22449 231.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 231.00 101 68010 220 1780 96859 CSG CONSULTANTS 22465 AP 765.00 MISCELLANEOUS 765.00 101 35220 96860 OUENVOLDS SAFETY SHOEMOBILES 22479 156.96 TRAINING EXPENSE 156.96 620 66700 260 96861 PARKING COMPANY OF AMERICA 22500 AP 12,838.70 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 12,838.70 736 64571 220 96862 LINCOLN EQUIPMENT 22529 443.89 MISC. SUPPLIES 443.89 101 68010 120 1114 96863 EXPRESS TOWING 22633 40.00 SUPPLIES 40.00 620 15000 96864 JAMES YARBOROUGH 22793 378.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 378.00 101 68010 220 1780 96865 NEIL SMITH 22837 200.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 200.00 101 68010 220 1780 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 6 07/30/04 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 96836 AFFINITEL COMMUNICATIONS 20246 AP 1 , 110.00 COMMUNICATIONS 11110.00 621 64450 160 96837 HERTZ EQUIPMENT RENTAL CORP. 20284 689.95 RENTS & LEASES 689.95 101 66210 180 96838 RACQUET SMITH 20339 6,015.20 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 6,015.20 101 68010 220 1782 96839 DAPPER TIRE CO. , INC. 20464 177.65 SUPPLIES 177.65 620 15000 96840 FRANKLIN OFFICE SUPPLIES 20523 64.47 OFFICE EXPENSE 64.47 101 64420 110 96841 DENNIS HASKETT 20654 300.00 MISCELLANEOUS 300.00 101 22546 96842 SPRINT PCS 20724 AP 74.24 COMMUNICATIONS 39. 15 101 64150 160 COMMUNICATIONS 35.09 101 64420 160 96843 JEFF DOWD 20779 1 , 170.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1 , 170.00 101 68010 220 1372 96844 QUICK MIX CONCRETE 21140 271 . 17 SIDEWALK REPAIR EXPENSE 271 . 17 101 66210 219 96845 CIR 21211 AP 52.93 MISC. SUPPLIES 52.93 527 66520 120 96846 THYSSENKRUPP ELEVATOR-042 21240 210.82 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 210.82 619 64460 220 5130 96847 FRANK WEBER 21344 126.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 126.00 101 68010 220 1780 96848 PORTOSAN 21656 597.47 MISC. SUPPLIES 597.47 101 68010 120 1372 96849 TRACY SIRI 21685 80.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 80.00 101 68010 220 1645 96850 CINGULAR WIRELESS 21747 AP 478.00 COMMUNICATIONS 478.00 101 66100 160 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 5 07/30/04 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT '•' Denotes Hand Written Checks - 96822 DUKE'S SALES&SERVICE, INC 18062 32,092.20 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 32,092.20 327 80730 220 96823 DOUG'S MOTORCYCLE SERVICE 18337 687.09 SUPPLIES 687.09 620 15000 96824 DEAN'S AUTO BODY & 18795 1,400.00 MISCELLANEOUS 1,400.00 618 64520 604 96825 MIKE HURLEY 18956 200.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 200.00 101 68010 220 1780 96826 INDUSTRIAL SAFETY SUPPLY 18991 AP 140.44 TRAINING EXPENSE 140.44 526 69020 260 96827 GOETZ BROTHERS 19045 319.34 MISC. SUPPLIES 319.34 101 68010 120 1787 96828 ANG NEWSPAPERS 19083 57.16 PUBLICATIONS&ADVERTISING 57.16 101 64200 150 96829 ARROWHEAD MOUNTAIN SPRING WATER 19330 127.02 MISC. SUPPLIES 98.63 101 65200 111 MISC. SUPPLIES 28.39 620 66700 120 96830 BURTON'S FIRE APPARATUS 19366 148.19 FIRE APPARATUS MAINT. 148.19 625 65213 203 96831 BAY AREA BUSINESS CARDS INC 19588 227.87 OFFICE EXPENSE 202.97 101 65200 110 MISCELLANEOUS 24.90 101 64400 115 96832 CLEARLITE TROPHIES 19679 AP 673.32 MISC. SUPPLIES 673.32 101 68010 120 1106 96833 KATHY KARAS 19812 320.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 320.00 101 68010 220 1644 96834 PENINSULA CORRIDOR JOINT 20060 AP 1,718.20 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,718.20 736 64570 220 96835 SYED MURTUZA 20201 328.40 MISC. SUPPLIES 328.40 101 66100 120 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 4 07/30/04 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 96811 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWARE 09670 AP 1,933.58 MISC. SUPPLIES 67.76 101 68010 120 1283 MISC. SUPPLIES 74.50 101 68020 120 2200 MISC. SUPPLIES 32.45 101 66210 120 SMALL TOOLS 148.55 101 68020 130 2200 BLDG. & GROUNDS MAINT. 58.36 101 68020 190 2200 MISC. SUPPLIES 163.55 526 69020 120 SMALL TOOLS 1,182.05 526 69020 130 MISCELLANEOUS 65.73 526 69020 233 SMALL TOOLS 3.99 527 66520 130 MISC. SUPPLIES 91.00 619 64460 120 MISC. SUPPLIES 45.64 619 64460 120 5130 96812 LEONA MORIARTY 09979 3,339.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES . 3,339.00 101 68010 220 1646 96813 AUGUST SUPPLY, INC 10256 83.84 MISC. SUPPLIES 83.84 10165200 111 96814 PIP PRINTING 10620 515.41 MISC. SUPPLIES 246.92 101 68020 120 2300 MISC. SUPPLIES 268.49 101 68020 120 2200 96815 MEYERS, NAVE, RIBACK, SILVER 11101 AP 653.40 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 653.40 101 64350 210 96816 WINGFOOT COMMERCIAL TIRE SYSTEMS 11316 752.37 FIRE APPARATUS MAINT. 752.37 101 65200 203 96817 LEE STAMBOLIS 11361 126.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 126.00 101 68010 220 1780 96818 STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION 11707 AP 488.00 OFFICE EXPENSE 62.14 101 67500 110 MISC. SUPPLIES 109.69 101 67500 120 LIBRARY--BOOKS AND MAPS 310.82 101 67500 129 BLDG. & GROUNDS MAINT. 5.35 101 67500 190 96819 RECHARGE-EM 14523 140.73 OFFICE EXPENSE 140.73 101 65200 110 96820 PAUL FERRARI 15061 200.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 200.00 101 68010 220 1780 96821 JEFF HIPPS 17803 4,641.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 4,641.00 101 68010 220 1372 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 3 07/30/04 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 96804 BURLINGAME REC. DEPT./PETTY CASH 03910 3,807.88 OFFICE EXPENSE 165.35 101 68010 110 1101 MISC. SUPPLIES 75.00 101 68010 120 1424 MISC. SUPPLIES 51.92 101 68010 120 1781 MISC. SUPPLIES 642.46 101 68010 120 1423 MISC. SUPPLIES 38.70 101 68010 120 1520 MISC. SUPPLIES 50.00 101 68010 120 1892 MISC. SUPPLIES 76.25 101 68010 120 1890 MISC. SUPPLIES 46.12 101 68010 120 1521 MISC. SUPPLIES 703.54 101 68010 120 1370 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 172.00 101 68010 220 1644 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 241.50 101 68010 220 1349 . CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,090.00 101 68010 220 1646 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 55.00 101 68010 220 1648 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 105.00 101 68010 220 1645 MISC. SUPPLIES 282.06 730 69533 120 MISC. SUPPLIES 12.98 730 69544 120 96805 ROBERT GOODMAN 09048 80.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 80.00 101 68010 220 1660 96806 TESTING ENGINEERS, INC. 09270 AP 7,972.50 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 7,972.50 320 80831 210 96807 SAN MATEO COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFC. 09433 29,882.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 29,882.00 101 65500 220 96808 SIERRA PACIFIC TURF SUPPLY 09459 1,623.75 MISC. SUPPLIES 1,623.75 101 68020 120 2200 96809 BURLINGAME PUBLIC LIBRARY 09490 588.02 MISCELLANEOUS 70.00 101 36320 OFFICE EXPENSE 201.29 101 67500 110 MISC. SUPPLIES 144.25 101 67500 120 LIBRARY--RECORDS AND CASSETT 5.00 101 67500 125 LIBRARY--BOOKS AND MAPS 15.16 101 67500 129 EQUIPMENT MAINT. 40.32 101 67500 200 STAFF & MEETINGS 112.00 101 67500 252 96810 ABAG - LIABILITY 09518 872.50 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 872.50 618 64520 210 C CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 2 07/30/04 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 96792 LAWSON PRODUCTS, INC. 02755 244.96 SUPPLIES 244.96 620 15000 96793 MILLBRAE LUMBER CO. 02898 AP 230. 16 SIDEWALK REPAIR EXPENSE 230.16 101 66210 219 96794 SBC 03080 AP 100.51 COMMUNICATIONS 100.51 101 65100 160 96795 PERSONAL AWARDS, INC. 03145 147.22 MISC. SUPPLIES 147.22 101 68010 120 1788 96796 STEPHEN J. PICCHI 03168 1 ,930.50 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1 ,930.50 101 68010 220 1372 96797 SANDRA POBE 03175 766.50 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 766.50 101 68010 220 1646 96798 R & S ERECTION OF 03234 70.36 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 70.36 619 64460 210 5150 96799 SAN FRANCISCO WATER DEPT. 03353 AP 291 ,511 .07 WATER PURCHASES 291 ,511 .07 526 69020 171 96800 SAN MATEO COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL 03380 10,633.83 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 10,633.83 526 69020 210 96801 SAN MATEO COUNTY CONVENTION & 03431 1501418.00 MISCELLANEOUS 150,418.00 731 22587 96802 CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO 03483 500.00 PERSONNEL EXAMINATIONS 500.00 101 64420 121 96803 COUNTY OF SAN MATEO- 03547 11500.00 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 1 ,500.00 101 64560 240 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 1 07/30/04 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 96778 * MTC 23770 2,821.62 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 2,821.62 320 81160 210 96779 * U S POSTAL SERVICE 03821 2,800.00 MISCELLANEOUS 2,800.00 101 68010 114 1100 96780 LEXISNEXIS MATTHEW BENDER 01312 1,125.00 OFFICE EXPENSE 1,125.00 101 64200 110 96781 BRENTON SAFETY, INC. 01400 373.29 TRAINING EXPENSE 373.29 527 66520 260 96782 BURLINGAME AUTO SUPPLY 01507 AP 1,957.50 VEHICLE MAINT. 19.92 101 65200 202 FIRE APPARATUS MAINT. 91.30 101 65200 203 SUPPLIES 1,833.21 620 15000 MISC. SUPPLIES 13.07 620 66700 120 96783 BURLINGAME CHAMBER OF COMMERCE 01637 AP 18,000.00 MISCELLANEOUS 18,000.00 101 26012 96784 GENE EVANS 02149 18.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 18.00 101 68010 220 1644 96785 EWING IRRIGATION PRODUCTS 02157 163.48 MISCELLANEOUS 163.48 101 68020 192 2200 96786 FEDEX 02160 18.05 MISC. SUPPLIES 18.05 101 64400 120 96787 WATER/FINANCE PETTY CASH 02184 2,593.34 MISCELLANEOUS 2,593.34 896 20282 96788 W.W. GRAINGER, INC. 02248 216.36 MISCELLANEOUS 162.69 526 69020 233 MISC. SUPPLIES 20.59 619 64460 120 5110 MISC. SUPPLIES 33.08 619 64460 120 5120 96789 GRANITE ROCK COMPANY 02261 62.79 STREET RESURFACING EXPENSE 62.79 101 66210 226 96790 CHARLES J. HAPP 02360 200.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 200.00 101 68010 220 1780 96791 INDUSTRIAL EMERGENCY COUNCIL 02499 175.00 TRAINING EXPENSE 175.00 101 65200 260 CITY OF BURLINGAME 07-22.2004 WARRANT REG 1 ST ER PAGE 14 FUND RECAP - 04-05 NAME FUND AMOUNT GENERAL FUND 101 78,249.50 WATER FUND 526 12,643.10 SEWER FUND 527 1,530.91 SELF INSURANCE FUND 618 453,480.27 FACILITIES SERVICES FUND 619 573.59 INFORMATION SERVICES FUND 621 202.64 STATE GRANTS FUND 734 980.85 UTILITY REVOLVING FUND 896 520.00 TOTAL FOR APPROVAL $548,180.86 HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL: THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE CLAIMS LISTED ON PAGES NUMBERED FROM 1 THROUGH 14 INCLUSIVE, AND/OR CLAIMS NUMBERED FROM 96641 THROUGH 96777 INCLUSIVE,TOTALING IN THE AMOUNT OF 8548,180.86, 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 .............................I...... .../. ./. CW NC I L DATE CITY OF BURLINGAME 07-22-2004 WARRANT REG I ST ER PAGE 13 FUND RECAP - 03.04 NAME FUND AMOUNT GENERAL FUND 101 130,567.02 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS FUND 320 64,679.37 WATER CAPITAL PROJECT FUND 326 300.00 SEWER CAPITAL PROJECT FUND 327 449.36 WATER FUND 526 7,486.27 SEWER FUND 527 14,238.05 PARKING ENTERPRISE FUND 530 1,390.83 FACILITIES SERVICES FUND 619 4,991.82 EQUIPMENT SERVICES FUND 620 1,388.06 INFORMATION SERVICES FUND 621 23,982.08 FIRE MECHANIC SERVICES FUND 625 453.06 OTHER LOCAL GRANTS/DONATIONS 730 150.47 TRUST AND AGENCY FUND 731 12.95 BURLINGAME TRAIN SHUTTLE PROGRAM 736 1,688.02 UTILITY REVOLVING FUND 896 374.54 TOTAL FOR APPROVAL $252,151.90 HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL: THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE CLAIMS LISTED ON PAGES NUMBERED FROM 1 THROUGH 13 INCLUSIVE, AND/OR CLAIMS NUMBERED FROM 96641 THROUGH 96777 INCLUSIVE,TOTALING IN THE AMOUNT OF $252,151.90, 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 C < < CITY OF BURLINGAME 07-22.2004 W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 12 FUND RECAP 04-05 NAME FUND AMOUNT GENERAL FUND 101 208,816.52 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS FUND 320 64,679.37 WATER CAPITAL PROJECT FUND 326 300.00 SEWER CAPITAL PROJECT FUND 327 449.36 WATER FUND 526 20,129.37 SEWER FUND 527 15,768.96 PARKING ENTERPRISE FUND 530 1,390.83 SELF INSURANCE FUND 618 453,480.27 FACILITIES SERVICES FUND 619 5,565.41 EQUIPMENT SERVICES FUND .620 1,388.06 INFORMATION SERVICES FUND 621 24,184.72 FIRE MECHANIC SERVICES FUND 625 453.06 OTHER LOCAL GRANTS/DONATIONS 730 150.47 TRUST AND AGENCY FUND 731 12.95 STATE GRANTS FUND 734 980.85. BURLINGAME TRAIN SHUTTLE PROGRAM 736 1,688.02 UTILITY REVOLVING FUND 896 894.54 TOTAL FOR APPROVAL $800,332.76 HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL: THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE CLAIMS LISTED ON PAGES NUMBERED FROM 1 THROUGH 12 INCLUSIVE, AND/OR CLAIMS NUMBERED FROM 96641 THROUGH 96777 INCLUSIVE,TOTALING IN THE AMOUNT OF $800,332.76, HAVE BEEN CHECKED IN DETAIL AND APPROVED BY THE PROPER OFFICIALS, AND IN MY OPINION REPRESENT FAIR AND JUST CHARGES AGAINST THE CITY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THEIR RESPECTIVE AMOUNTS AS INDICATED THEREON. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, - ....................I............... .../.../... FINANCE DIRECTOR DATE APPROVED FOR PAYMENT .................................... .../.../... COUNCIL DATE CITY OF BURLINGAME WARRANT REGI ST ER PAGE 11 07/22/04 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 96773 IMPCO 24953 150.00 EQUIPMENT MAINT. 150.00 101 68010 200 1286 96774 LINDA FINLOF 24954 375.00 MISCELLANEOUS 375.00 101 36620 96775 INTERNATIONAL PUBLIC MANAGEMENT 24955 40.00 MISCELLANEOUS 40.00 101 64420 031, 96776 BAY AREA SMART AUTO GLASS 24956 447.38 EQUIPMENT MAINT. 447.38 101 68020 200 2200 96777 QUARTERMASTER UNIFORM MANUFACTUR 24957 827.68 UNIFORMS AND EQUIPMENT 92.00 101 65150 140 UNIFORMS AND EQUIPMENT 735.68 101 65100 140 TOTAL 8800,332.76 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 10 07/22/04 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 96761 I .M.P.A.C. GOVERNMENT SERVICES 24752 AP 4,454.24 LIBRARY EXPENSES -16.60 101 22521 OFFICE EXPENSE 56.37 101 67500 110 OFFICE EXPENSE 134.06 101 65200 110 MISC. SUPPLIES 1 ,360.99 101 64420 120 MISC. SUPPLIES 19.84 101 67500 120 MISC. SUPPLIES 432.00 101 68010 120 1101 LIBRARY--BOOKS AND MAPS 147.89 101 67500 129 BLDG. & GROUNDS MAINT. 158. 14 101 67500 190 EQUIPMENT MAINT. 371 .53 101 65100 200 EQUIPMENT MAINT. 1 ,211 .58 101 65150 200 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 97.41 101 65100 210 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 214.03 101 64400 210 TRAINING EXPENSE 267.00 620 66700 260 96762 ART IN ACTION 24912 1 ,743.60 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1 ,743.60 101 68010 220 1646 96763 BAY AREA WATER SUPPLY 24943 11 ,419.00 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 11 ,419.00 526 69020 240 96764 CODY BROCK INC. 24944 300.00 DEPOSIT REFUNDS 300.00 101 22520 96765 GRAND INDUSTRIES INC. 24945 300.00 DEPOSIT REFUNDS 300.00 101 22520 96766 HCC/SWI 24946 3,000.00 DEPOSIT REFUNDS 3,000.00 101 22520 96767 GRAHAM CONTRACTORS INC. 24947 750.00 MISCELLANEOUS 750.00 526 22502 96768 IMBELLONI CONSTRUCTION 24948 3,380.00 MISCELLANEOUS 3,380.00 101 22546 96769 JARED SINES 24949 950.00 MISCELLANEOUS 950.00 101 36630 96770 RENE ARIAS 24950 1 ,975.00 MISCELLANEOUS 1 ,975.00 101 22546 96771 MASON HARRIS 24951 67.60 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 67.60 101 68010 220 1644 96772 SAGE ASSOCIATES 24952 5, 100.00 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 5, 100.00 101 64350 210 3100 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 9 07/22/04 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 96749 CITICORP VENDOR FINANCE 24030 AP 66.71 EQUIPMENT MAINT. 66.71 101 65200 200 96750 QUILL 24090 202.64 OFFICE EXPENSE 202.64 621 64450 110 96751 SPANGLE ASSOCIATES 24113 AP 3,818.30 DEPOSIT REFUND 3,818.30 101 22590 96752 GLOBAL DOCUGRAPHIX 24170 AP 271.30 OFFICE EXPENSE 271.30 101 64250 110 96753 CNS UTILITY SERVICES 24249 AP 864.00 MISCELLANEOUS 864.00 526 69020 233 96754 88 PHOTO LAB 24279 AP 11.89 MISC. SUPPLIES 11.89 101 68020 120 2300 96755 RICHARD DWYER 24342 10,500.00 DEPOSIT REFUNDS 10,500.00 101 22520 96756 BERRYMAN&HENIGAR 24363 AP 8,170.00 PROFESSIONAL&SPECIALIZED S 8,170.00' 527 66520 210 96757 COMPUCOM 24467 AP 4,282.32 PROFESSIONAL&SPECIALIZED S 894.30 101 64400 210 MISCELLANEOUS 3,388.02 101 68010 400 1100 96758 PRESERVATION PAINTING 24552 AP 3,000.00 PROFESSIONAL&SPECIALIZED S 3,000.00 619 64460 210 96759 GOODIN,MACBRIDE,SQUERI,RITCHIE& 24638 11,984.80 PROFESSIONAL&SPECIALIZED S 11,984.80 101 64350 210 3100 96760 JESS LICON 24732 AP 262.50 TRAINING EXPENSE 262.50 101 66210 260 C � v CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 8 07/22/04 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 96738 SIERRA OFFICE SUPPLIES 23301 AP 1,012.09 OFFICE EXPENSE 41.30 101 64150 110 OFFICE EXPENSE - 108.78 101 64350 110 OFFICE EXPENSE 117.97 101 65300 110 OFFICE EXPENSE 223.48 101 65100 110 OFFICE EXPENSE 118.02 101 65300 110 MISC. SUPPLIES 270.99 101 66210 120 MISC, SUPPLIES 123.37 526 69020 120 OFFICE EXPENSE 8.18 620 66700 110 96739 OFFICE MAX 23306 138.80 OFFICE EXPENSE 26.37 101 64250 110 OFFICE EXPENSE 44.82 101 64420 110 OFFICE EXPENSE 67.61 101 65200 110 96740 DAY WIRELESS SYSTEMS 23424 AP 8,632.94 MISC. SUPPLIES 4,708.89 526 69020 120 MISCELLANEOUS 3,924.05 527 66520 400 96741 CRESCO EQUIPMENT RENTALS 23470 AP 140.73 STREET RESURFACING EXPENSE 77.94 101 66210 226 SMALL TOOLS 62.79 526 69020 130 96742 EMERALD PLUMBING & FIRE PROTECTI 23586 150.00 DEPOSIT REFUNDS 150.00 101 22520 96743 KEITH MARTIN 23788 AP 97.20 OFFICE EXPENSE 39.51 526 69020 110 MISC. SUPPLIES 6.08 527 66520 120 TRAVEL & MEETINGS 36.57 527 66520 250 MISC. SUPPLIES 15.04 619 64460 120 5140 96744 VENTURE BUILDERS 23824 1,575.00 MISCELLANEOUS 1,575.00 101 22546 96745 BRIAN ROCHE 23865 7,950.00 DEPOSIT REFUNDS 5,000.00 101 22520 MISCELLANEOUS 2,950.00 101 22546 96746 DUNBAR ARMORED 23925 AP 1,862.64 BANKING SERVICE FEES 508.77 101 64250 120 MISC. SUPPLIES 1,353.87 530 65400 120 96747 CHOICE POINT BUSINESS AND GOVERN 23935 AP 250.00 POLICE INVESTIGATION EXPENSE 250.00 101 65100 292 96748 UNIVERSAL BUILDING SERVICES 23941 AP 1,052.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,052.00 619 64460 220 5130 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 6 07/22/04 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT *� Denotes Hand Written Checks 96709 AFFINITEL COMMUNICATIONS 20246 AP 2,245.32 OFFICE EXPENSE 2,115.32 101 65200 110 COMMUNICATIONS 130.00 621 64450 160 96710 RACQUET SMITH 20339 1,459.20 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,459.20 101 68010 220 1782 96711 LYNX TECHNOLOGIES 20501 AP 300.00 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 300.00 326 75170 210 96712 EIP ASSOCIATES 20526 AP 39,644.81 DEPOSIT REFUND 39,644.81 101 22590 96713 PHIL SCOTT 20550 597.00 TRAVEL & MEETINGS 597.00 527 66520 250 96714 JEFF DOWD 20779 4,703.40 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 4,703.40 101 68010 220 1372 96715 DELL MARKETING L.P. 20900 AP 6,861.46 MISCELLANEOUS 5,880.61 101 68010 400 1100 MISCELLANEOUS 980.85 734 65198 400 96716 QUICK MIX CONCRETE 21140 257.64 SIDEWALK REPAIR EXPENSE 257.64 101 66210 219 96717 ANN MOSSO 21178 2,500.00 MISCELLANEOUS 2,500.00 101 64200 031 96718 CDW GOVERNMENT, INC. 21482 366.03 MISC. SUPPLIES 366.03 101 65300 120 96719 ALFAX WHOLESALE FURNITURE, INC. 21505 AP 555.69 MISCELLANEOUS 555.69 101 68010 400 1100 96720 DU-ALL SAFETY 21613 AP 2,042.50 TRAINING EXPENSE 612.75 101 66210 260 TRAINING EXPENSE 612.75 526 69020 260 TRAINING EXPENSE 612.75 527 66520 260 TRAINING EXPENSE 204.25 619 64460 260 96721 TURBO DATA SYSTEMS, INC. 21767 AP 11,511.03 MISCELLANEOUS 11,511.03 101 37010 96722 SEWER RAT 21821 150.00 DEPOSIT REFUNDS 150.00 101 22520 C � \ CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 7 07/22/04 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 96723 SAN MATEO COUNTY CONTROLLERS OFF 21897 AP 24,061 .00 MISCELLANEOUS 24,061 .00 101 37010 96724 EXPRESS PLUMBING 22092 150.00 DEPOSIT REFUNDS 150.00 101 22520 96725 AT&T 22138 AP 3.84 COMMUNICATIONS 3.84 101 67500 160 96726 ROBERTS AND BRUNE 22178 900.41 MISC. SUPPLIES 900.41 527 66520 120 96727 MIKE TANG 22261 296.40 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 296.40 101 68010 220 1372 96728 UNDERGROUND CONSTRUCTION MANAGER 22305 AP 3,060.00 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 3,060.00 320 80520 210 96729 TECHNOLOGY,ENGINEERING & CONSTRU 22435 474. 10 MISCELLANEOUS 474. 10 526 22502 96730 RONALD GROVE 22576 1 ,000.00 MISCELLANEOUS 1 ,000.00 101 36630 96731 ANZA ENGINEERING 22634 AP 49,200.98 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 49,200.98 320 79411 210 96732 SAN MATEO REGIONAL NETWORK, INC. 22759 520.00 UTILITY EXPENSE 520.00 896 20281 96733 JIM NANTELL 22762 300.00 MISCELLANEOUS 300.00 101 64150 031 96734 BURLINGAME FAMILY PET HOSPITAL 22773 AP 97.00 MISC. SUPPLIES 97.00 101 65100 120 96735 JONES AND MAYER 22818 AP 752.00 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 752.00 101 64350 210 96736 PITNEY BOWES 23128 AP 476.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 476.00 101 65100 220 96737 OFFICE TEAM 23256 902.30 MISCELLANEOUS 325.50 101 64150 010 MISCELLANEOUS 261 .80 101 65300 010 MISCELLANEOUS 315.00 101 64150 010 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 5 07/22/04 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT '•' Denotes Hand Written Checks 96695 KELLEHER&ASSOCIATES 18239 3,434.27 PROFESSIONAL &SPECIALIZED S 3,434.27 618 64520 210 96696 DAMON CARLUCCI 18418 52.50 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 52.50 101 68010 220 1646 96697 TROY HAGER 18512 134.90 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 134.90 101 68010 220 1644 96698 ACCESS UNIFORMS&EMBROIDERY 18990 AP 273.55 UNIFORMS AND EQUIPMENT 273.55 527 66520 140 96699 PREFERRED ALLIANCE 19025 AP 432.60 PERSONNEL EXAMINATIONS 432.60 101 64420 121 96700 PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY 19027 AP 2,799.57 UNIFORMS AND EQUIPMENT 739.37 101 66210 140 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 272.95 101 65200 220 UNIFORMS AND EQUIPMENT 292.41 526 69020 140 UNIFORMS AND EQUIPMENT 672.13 527 66520 140 UNIFORMS AND EQUIPMENT 368.60 619 64460 140 UNIFORMS AND EQUIPMENT 454.11 620 66700 140 96701 LIEBERT CASSIDY WHITMORE 19095 AP 2,368.00 PROFESSIONAL&SPECIALIZED S 2,368.00 101 64420 210 96702 ARROWHEAD MOUNTAIN SPRING WATER 19330 165.82 MISC. SUPPLIES 165.82 101 65200 111 96703 BURTON'S FIRE APPARATUS 19366 774.11 FIRE APPARATUS MAINT. 692.92 101 65200 203 FIRE APPARATUS MAINT. 81.19 625 65213 203 96704 WILSEY&HAM 19397 AP 12,161.62 PROFESSIONAL&SPECIALIZED S 12,161.62 320 80900 210 96705 PENINSULA CORRIDOR JOINT 20060 AP 1,688.02 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,688.02 736 64570 220 96706 EL CAMINO CHARTER LINES INC 20105 AP 446.72 MISC. SUPPLIES 446.72 101 68010 120 1521 96707 DIANNA ARIANI 20117 2,358.40 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 2,358.40 101 68010 220 1331 96708 GE CAPITAL 20216 498.67 OFFICE EXPENSE 99.73 101 68020 110 2100 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 398.94 101 68010 220 1101 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 4 07/22/04 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 96682 CAL-STEAM 10557 AP 398.51 MISC. SUPPLIES 141 .45 101 66210 120 MISC. SUPPLIES 51 . 12 526 69020 120 MISC. SUPPLIES 14.95 527 66520 120 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 184.31 619 64460 210 5180 FIRE APPARATUS MAINT. 6.68 625 65213 203 96683 MEYERS, NAVE, RIBACK, SILVER 11101 AP 1 ,296.00 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 1 ,296.00 101 64350 210 96684 LC ACTION POLICE SUPPLY 11532 643.68 UNIFORMS AND EQUIPMENT 643.68 101 65100 140 96685 CAMINO REAL PET CLINIC 11577 AP 84.00 MISC. SUPPLIES 84.00 101 65100 120 96686 RADIOSHACK CORPORATION 11749 AP 36.96 EQUIPMENT MAINT. 36.96 530 65400 200 96687 3M COMPANY 13848 AP 259.80 TRAFFIC CONTROL MATERIALS 259.80 101 66210 222 96688 A T & T 13940 AP 374.54 UTILITY EXPENSE 374.54 896 20281 96689 AETHER SYSTEMS 16394 AP 2,363.00 MISC. SUPPLIES 2,363.00 101 65200 120 96690 CINTAS CORP. #464 16911 AP 695.01 UNIFORMS AND EQUIPMENT 695.01 101 68020 140 2200 96691 STATE OF CALIFORNIA 16919 AP 661 .00 MISCELLANEOUS 584.37 101 23611 BANKING SERVICE FEES -0.87 101 64250 120 MISCELLANEOUS 8.19 526 23611 MISCELLANEOUS 39.85 527 23611 MISCELLANEOUS 14.42 619 23611 MISCELLANEOUS 2.09 625 23611 MISCELLANEOUS 12.95 731 23611 96692 GOLDEN NURSERY 17128 AP 25.72 MISC. SUPPLIES 25.72 101 68020 120 2200 96693 PENINSULA DIGITAL IMAGING 17534 AP 449.36 MISC. SUPPLIES 449.36 327 81010 120 96694 JEFF HIPPS 17803 4,004.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 4,004.00 101 68010 220 1372 CITY OF BURLINGAME - W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 3 07/22/04 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 96669 CITY OF MILLBRAE 09234 AP 3,152.82 PROFESSIONAL 8 SPECIALIZED S 3,152.82 101 64350 210 96670 SAN MATEO COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFC. 09433 AP 1,616.00 PRISONER EXPENSE 1,616.00 101 65100 291 96671 STERICYCLE, INC. 09439 158.91 PRISONER EXPENSE 158.91 101 65100 291 96672 OCE'-BRUNING, INC. 09493 857.35 PROFESSIONAL 8 SPECIALIZED S 857.35 101 66100 210 96673 NOEL L. MILLER, INC, 09499 AP 353.95 SUPPLIES 353.95 620 15000 96674 ABAG - LIABILITY 09518 450,046.00 CLAIMS ADJUSTING SERVICES 162,727.00 618 64520 225 INSURANCE PREMIUMS 287,319.00 618 64520 602 96675 SAN MATEO LAWN MOWER SHOP 09560 AP 1,896.91 EQUIPMENT MAINT. 513.06 101 68020 200 2200 MISCELLANEOUS 1,383.85 101 68020 400 2200 96676 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWARE 09670 AP 86.37 OFFICE EXPENSE 17.30 101 65100 110 FIRE APPARATUS MAINT. 69.07 101 65200 203 96677 TAB PRODUCTS CO. 09677 31.98 OFFICE EXPENSE 31.98 101 64250 110 96678 INTERSTATE TRAFFIC 09790 AP 2,632.94 TRAFFIC CONTROL MATERIALS 2,116.04 101 66210 222 TRAINING EXPENSE 146.14 526 69020 260 TRAFFIC CONTROL MATERIALS 370.76 527 66520 222 96679 BARKER BLUE REPROGRAPHICS 09990 AP 406.59 MISCELLANEOUS 406.59 526 69020 233 96680 TELECOMMUNICATIONS ENGINEERING A 10101 491.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 491.00 101 65200 220 - 96681 AUGUST SUPPLY, INC 10256 AP 694.53 MISC. SUPPLIES 694.53 101 65200 111 C \ CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 2 07/22/04 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 96655 K & W DISCOUNT LIGHTING & SUPP 02645 351 .71 MISC. SUPPLIES 351 .71 101 66240 120 96656 LAWSON PRODUCTS, INC. 02755 573.59 MISC. SUPPLIES 573.59 619 64460 120 96657 MILLBRAE LUMBER CO. 02898 AP 92.46 MISC. SUPPLIES 43.61 101 66210 120 BLDG. & GROUNDS MAINT. 17.72 101 68020 190 2200 MISC. SUPPLIES 23.80 527 66520 120 MISC. SUPPLIES 7.33 619 64460 120 5180 96658 PACIFIC NURSERIES 03041 AP 194.31 MISC. SUPPLIES 43.84 101 68020 120 2200 MISC. SUPPLIES 150.47 730 69560 120 96659 P. G. & E. 03054 10.23 GAS & ELECTRIC 10.23 527 66520 170 96660 SBC 03080 AP 35.66 COMMUNICATIONS 35.66 101 67500 160 96661 PATTERSON PARTS, INC 03106 AP 84.65 FIRE APPARATUS MAINT. 84.65 101 65200 203 96662 STEPHEN J. PICCHI 03168 815. 10 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 815. 10 101 68010 220 1372 96663 CITY OF SAN MATEO 03366 AP 6,000.00 TRAINING EXPENSE 6,000.00 101 65200 260 96664 SERRAMONTE FORD INC. 03523 5. 17 VEHICLE MAINT. 5. 17 101 65200 202 96665 SNAP ON TOOLS 03587 AP 554.83 VEHICLE MAINT. 554.83 101 65200 202 96666 WITMER-TYSON IMPORTS, INC. 03788 AP 300.00 MISC. SUPPLIES 300.00 101 65100 120 96667 JULIE COHN 09122 1 , 140.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1 , 140.00 101 68010 220 1646 96668 LYNGSO GARDEN MATERIALS 09143 AP 332.89 MISC. SUPPLIES 162.38 101 66210 120 MISC. SUPPLIES 170.51 526 69020 120 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 1 07/22/04 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 96641 GRAY'S PAINT, BURLINGAME 01025 AP 5.90 MISC. SUPPLIES 5.90 619 64460 120 5150 96642 ALPINE AWARDS, INC. 01052 23.27 MISC. SUPPLIES 23.27 527 66520 120 96643 BAYSHORE INTERNATIONAL TRUCKS 01236 AP 363.10 FIRE APPARATUS MAINT. 363.10 625 65213 203 96644 BAUER COMPRESSORS 01309 AP 1,600.82 FIRE APPARATUS MAINT. 1,600.82 101 65200 203 96645 HARBOR SAND & GRAVEL 01313 AP 166.80 MISC. SUPPLIES 166.80 101 66210 120 96646 BRENTON SAFETY, INC. 01400 AP 93.56 TRAINING EXPENSE 93.56 527 66520 260 96647 BURLINGAME RECREATION DEPT. 01663 1,844.00 RECREATION EXPENSES 1,844.00 101 10700 96648 EDWARD COMERFORD 01756 97.50 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 97.50 101 68010 220 1660 96649 CITY OF REDWOOD CITY 01862 AP 23,852.08 COMMUNICATIONS 300.00 621 64450 160 CITY HALL MAINTENANCE 23,552.08 621 64450 220 96650 WACEK DENNAOUI 02044 840.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 840.00 101 68010 220 1641 96651 GENE EVANS 02149 150.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 150.00 101 68010 220 1644 96652 FEDEX 02160 AP 60.00 OFFICE EXPENSE 19.43 101 64420 110 OFFICE EXPENSE 18.15 101 64100 110 MISCELLANEOUS 22.42 101 64350 114 96653 GRANITE ROCK COMPANY 02261 AP 1,774.42 SIDEWALK REPAIR EXPENSE 256.01 101 66210 219 STREET RESURFACING EXPENSE 1,518.41 101 66210 226 96654 PENINSULA BATTERIES 02625 AP 701.56 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 256.77 320 80520 210 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 46.66 619 64460 210 5180 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 93.31 619 64460 210 5240 SUPPLIES 304.82 620 15000 CITY OF BURLINGAME 07.16-2004 W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 16 FUND RECAP 04.05 NAME FUND AMOUNT GENERAL FUND 101 83,800.66 PAYROLL REVOLVING FUND 130 6,140.66 WATER FUND 526 15,663.06 SOLID WASTE FUND 528 2,548.93 SELF INSURANCE FUND 618 48,661.00 EQUIPMENT SERVICES.FUND 620 81.18 INFORMATION SERVICES FUND 621 2,720.98 OTHER LOCAL GRANTS/DONATIONS 730 900.00 PUBLIC TV ACCESS FUND 738 19,789.00 TOTAL FOR APPROVAL $180,305.47 HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL: THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE CLAIMS LISTED ON PAGES NUMBERED FROM 1 THROUGH 16 INCLUSIVE, AND/OR CLAIMS NUMBERED FROM 96461 THROUGH 96640 INCLUSIVE,TOTALING IN THE AMOUNT OF$180,305.47, HAVE BEEN CHECKED IN DETAIL AND APPROVED BY THE PROPER OFFICIALS, AND IN MY OPINION REPRESENT FAIR AND JUST CHARGES AGAINST THE CITY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THEIR RESPECTIVE AMOUNTS AS INDICATED THEREON. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, .....................I.-.......... .../.../... FINANCE DIRECTOR DATE APPROVED FOR PAYMENT .......... ................ .../. ./. COUNCIL DATE CITY OF BURLINGAME 07-16-2004 WARRANT REG 1 ST ER PAGE 15 FUND RECAP - 03-04 NAME FUND AMOUNT GENERAL FUND 101 170,191.67 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS FUND 320 1,033,025.00 SEWER CAPITAL PROJECT FUND 327 108,597.25 WATER FUND 526 9,644.77 SEWER FUND 527 89,049.91 SELF INSURANCE FUND 618 10,607.37 FACILITIES SERVICES FUND 619 19,809.15 EQUIPMENT SERVICES FUND 620 2,590.97 INFORMATION SERVICES FUND 621 7,680.87 FIRE MECHANIC SERVICES FUND 625 473.67 OTHER LOCAL GRANTS/DONATIONS 730 265.75 TRUST AND AGENCY FUND 731 95,080.69 STATE GRANTS FUND 734 7,967.94 UTILITY REVOLVING FUND 896 461.55 TOTAL FOR APPROVAL 81,555,446.56 HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL: THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE CLAIMS LISTED ON PAGES NUMBERED FROM 1 THROUGH 15 INCLUSIVE, AND/OR CLAIMS NUMBERED FROM 96461 THROUGH 96640 INCLUSIVE,TOTALING IN THE AMOUNT OF 81,555,446.56, 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 .........................I.......... .../. ./. COUNCIL DATE CITY OF BURLINGAME 07.16.2004 WARRANT REG I S T ER PAGE 14 FUND RECAP - 04-05 NAME FUND AMOUNT .GENERAL FUND 101 253,992.33 PAYROLL REVOLVING FUND 130 6,140.66 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS FUND 320 1,033,OZ5.00 SEWER CAPITAL PROJECT FUND. 327 108,597.25 WATER FUND - 526 25,307.83 SEWER FUND 527 - 89,049.91 SOLID WASTE FUND 528 2,548.93 SELF INSURANCE FUND 618 -59,268.37 FACILITIES SERVICES FUND 619 19,809.15 EQUIPMENT SERVICES FUND 620 2,672.15 INFORMATION SERVICES FUND 621 10,401.85 FIRE MECHANIC SERVICES FUND 625 473.67 OTHER LOCAL GRANTS/DONATIONS 730 1,165.75 TRUST AND AGENCY FUND 731 95,080.69 STATE GRANTS FUND 734 7,967.94 PUBLIC TV ACCESS FUND 738 19,789.00 UTILITY REVOLVING FUND 896 461.55 TOTAL FOR APPROVAL $1,735,752.03 HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL: THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE CLAIMS LISTED ON PAGES NUMBERED FROM 1 THROUGH 14 INCLUSIVE, AND/OR CLAIMS NUMBERED FROM 96461 THROUGH 96640 INCLUSIVE,TOTALING IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,735,752.03,HAVE BEEN CHECKED IN DETAIL AND APPROVED BY THE PROPER OFFICIALS, AND IN MY OPINION REPRESENT FAIR AND JUST CHARGES AGAINST THE CITY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THEIR RESPECTIVE AMOUNTS AS INDICATED. THEREON. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, ..... ............ .../. ./.. FINANCE DIRECTOR DATE APPROVED FOR PAYMENT ........................... ./. COUNCIL DATE CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 13 07/16/04 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 96626 FIX AIR 24841 AP 118.84 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 118.84 619 64460 210 5120 96627 T MOBILE 24846 AP 30.88 COMMUNICATIONS 30.88 101 65150 160 96628 SETON IDENTIFICATION PRODUCTS 24855 AP 38.26 MISC. SUPPLIES 38.26 619 64460 120 5130 96629 JOSH RUEMMELE 24858 AP 112.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 112.00 101 68010 220 1787 96630 A.L.D. COMPANY INC 24897 AP 842.31 TRAINING EXPENSE 842.31 101 65100 260 96631 MARK BURAN 24904 AP 4,600.00 MISCELLANEOUS 4,600.00 101 22546 96632 ART IN ACTION 24912 AP 2, 157.60 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 2, 157.60 101 68010 220 1646 96633 MICHAEL GONG 24935 AP 450.00 DEPOSIT REFUNDS 450.00 101 22520 96634 GUIDO LORENZI 24936 AP 45 .35 MISCELLANEOUS 45.35 526 22502 96635 ROADWAY EXPRESS 24937 AP 92. 10 MISC. SUPPLIES 92.10 101 68010 120 1101 96636 SHAWNELL HARRISON 24938 AP 242.37 MISCELLANEOUS 242.37 101 64420 030 96637 WESTERN AUDIO VIDEO 24939 AP 7,967.94 CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 7,967.94 734 65198 800 96638 K.C. COMPRESSOR WORKS INC 24940 AP 235.38 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 235.38 619 64460 210 5130 96639 SALLY LOUCKS 24941 AP 823.20 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 823.20 327 80681 220 96640 ALLEN D 'AMBRA 24942 AP 300.00 DEPOSIT REFUNDS 300.00 101 22520 TOTAL $1 ,732,050.60 CITY OF BURLINGAME WARRANT REG 1 ST ER PAGE 12 07/16/04 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 96611 SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO TIRE SERVICE 23950 AP 1,150.16 SUPPLIES 1,150.16 620 15000 96612 FLORA ROBELET 24167 AP 50.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 50.00 101 68010 220 1521 96613 ERIC GATTMAN 24169 AP 561.60 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 561.60 101 68010 220 1521 96614 BAYSIDE PRINTED PRODUCTS 24192 AP 8,262.96 OFFICE EXPENSE 605.71 101 64250 110 MISCELLANEOUS 7,657.25 621 64450 400 96615 PENINSULA AQUATICS CENTER 24375 AP 709.80 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 709.80 101.68010 220 1372 96616 DISPLAY SALES 24384 AP 85.38 MISC. SUPPLIES 85.38 730 69544 120 - 96617 MAYBELLE PINSON 24419 AP 76.50 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 76.50 101 68010 220 1644 96618 TOLL ARCHITECTURAL GRAPHICS 24476 AP 316.03 PROFESSIONAL &SPECIALIZED S 316.03 619 64460 210 5120 96619 CSAC EXCESS INSURANCE AGENCY 24561 39,477.00 INSURANCE PREMIUMS 39,477.00 618 64520 602 96620 DHS OCP 24639 355.00 TRAINING EXPENSE 355.00 526 69020 260 96621 AT&T WIRELESS 24640 AP 111.03 COMMUNICATIONS 35.19 101 66210 160 COMMUNICATIONS 75.84 526 69020 160 96622 DIAMOND COMMUNICATIONS INC 24659 AP 225.00 PROFESSIONAL&SPECIALIZED S 225.00 619 64460 210 5130 96623 MANAGED HEALTH NETWORK 24714 592.20 MISCELLANEOUS 592.20 101 64420 030 96624 BRIAN MCKAGUE 24778 44.90 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 44.90 130 20060 96625 SHIRLEY LADDY 24826 765.00 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 765.00 130 20015 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T REG 1 ST ER PAGE 11 07/16/04 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 96599 GORDON GOTTSCHE 23625 AP 848.75 TRAINING EXPENSE 848.75 101 65500 260 96600 SHRM 23632 160.00 MISCELLANEOUS 160.00 101 64420 031 96601 AT&T 23661 AP 23.62 COMMUNICATIONS 23.62 621 64450 160 96602 THE MARLIN COMPANY 23712 AP 27.06 TRAINING EXPENSE 27.06 527 66520 260 96603 SBC/MCI 23728 AP 178.60 COMMUNICATIONS 178.60 101 65150 160 96604 SAFE HARBOR 23811 6,480.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 6,480.00 101 64560 220 96605 BRENDA JENSEN 23813 AP 3,404.80 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 3,404.80 101 68010 220 1330 96606 JOHN PHILIPOPOULOS 23821 AP 3,807.70 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 3,807.70 101 68010 220 1372 96607 VENTURE BUILDERS 23824 AP 7,500.00 MISCELLANEOUS 7,500.00 101 22546 96608 DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 23905 AP 1,728.00 MISCELLANEOUS 1,728.00 101 23620 96609 UNIVERSAL BUILDING SERVICES 23941 AP 14,032.15 MISC. SUPPLIES 28.48 101 68010 120 1111 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 601.67 619 64460 220 5240 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 896.00 619 64460 220 5190 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,967.00 619 64460 220 5130 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,885.00 619 64460 220 5110 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 3,386.00 619 64460 220 5240 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 225.00 619 64460 220 5120 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 355.00 619 64460 220 5170 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 732.00 619 64460 220 5210 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 3,856.00 619 64460 220 5180 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 100.00 619 64460 220 5230 96610 NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS 23946 AP 591.65 COMMUNICATIONS 317.92 101 68020 160 2200 COMMUNICATIONS 273.73 619 64460 160 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 10 07/16/04 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT �•' Denotes Hand Written Checks 96587 AT&T WIRELESS 23169 AP 49.00 COMMUNICATIONS 49.00 101 65200 160 96588 CRAIG DILL 23171 AP 640.00 TRAINING EXPENSE 213.00 526 69020 260 TRAINING EXPENSE 213.00 527 66520 260 TRAINING EXPENSE 214.00 619 64460 260 96589 OFFICE TEAM 23256 AP 1,844.50 MISCELLANEOUS 336.00 101 64150 010 MISCELLANEOUS 952.00 101 65300 010 MISCELLANEOUS 556.50 101 64150 010 96590 EAST BAY TRUCK CENTER 23295 AP 56.01 FIRE APPARATUS MAINT. 56.01 101 65200 203 96591 OFFICE MAX 23306 AP 523.38 OFFICE EXPENSE 116.96 101 65200 110 OFFICE EXPENSE 402.51 101 68010 110 1101 OFFICE EXPENSE 3.91 101 64400 110 96592 METROTECH 23337 AP 3,718.39 MISC. SUPPLIES 3,718.39 526 69020 120 96593 DATASAFE 23410 AP 1,443.77 OFFICE EXPENSE 194.77 101 64200 110 OFFICE EXPENSE 75.10 101 64420 110 OFFICE EXPENSE 479.85 101 66100 110 OFFICE EXPENSE 41.74 101 64420 110 BANKING SERVICE FEES 486.46 101 64250 120 MISC. SUPPLIES 110.68 101 64350 120 MISC. SUPPLIES 55.17 101 64400 120 96594 IBM CORPORATION 23425 303.00 EQUIPMENT MAINT. 303.00 101 65300 200 96595 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC. 23436 1,573.15 CITY HALL MAINTENANCE 1,573.15 621 64450 200 96596 KAREN SCHEIKOWITZ 23507 AP 139.20 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 139.20 101 68010 220 1661 96597 ICE CENTER OF SAN MATEO 23512 AP 1,017.60 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,017.60 101 68010 220 1762 96598 MCMASTER•CARR SUPPLY CO. 23611 AP 104.24 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S - 55.39 619 64460 210 5180 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 48.85 619 64460 210 5120 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 9 07/16/04 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT �•� Denotes Hand Written Checks 96572 PENINSULA T.V. 22442 19,789.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 19,789.00 738 64580 220 96573 COMMUTER CHECK CORP 22485 1,248.00 MISCELLANEOUS 1,248.00 101 15400 96574 LESCO INC. 22540 AP 591.05 BLDG. & GROUNDS MAINT. 591.05 101 68020 190 2200 96575 VERIZON WIRELESS 22593 AP 38.73 COMMUNICATIONS 38.73 101 68010 160 1101 96576 SMELLY MEL'S PLUMBING 22763 AP 270.00 MISCELLANEOUS 270.00 101 36310 96577 MINOLTA BUSINESS SOLUTIONS 22803 1,980.00 MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSE 1,980.00 526 69020 290 96578 SAN MATEO DAILY JOURNAL 22804 AP 2,297.73 MISC. SUPPLIES 150.00 101 64400 120 PUBLICATIONS & ADVERTISING 500.00 101 68010 150 1950 MISCELLANEOUS 1,647.73 526 69020 233 96579 JONES AND MAYER 22818 AP 1,349.00 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 1,349.00 101 64350 210 96580 JENKINS/ATHENS INS 22851 9,184.00 CLAIMS ADJUSTING SERVICES 9,184.00 618 64520 225 96581 PENINSULA UNIFORM & EQUIPMENT 22899 AP 93.04 UNIFORMS AND EQUIPMENT 93.04 101 65100 140 96582 CALMONT PARTY 23032 AP 303.75 MISC. SUPPLIES 303.75 101 65200 120 96583 THE MOBILE STORAGE GROUP 23138 190.00 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 190.00 526 69020 210 96584 STACIE JOHNSON 23146 AP 3,404.80 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 3,404.80 101 68010 220 1330 96585 LEGAL AID SOCIETY 23149 2,025.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 2,025.00 101 64560 220 96586 TLC ADMINISTRATORS 23156 175.00 MISCELLANEOUS 175.00 101 64420 031 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 8 07/16/04 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT '•' Denotes Hand Written Checks 96556 QUICK MIX CONCRETE 21140 AP 660.32 SIDEWALK REPAIR EXPENSE 660.32 101 66210 219 96557 GEORGE BAGDON 21174 1,659.00 MISCELLANEOUS 1,659.00 101 66210 031 96558 CEB 21210 AP 287.40 MISC. SUPPLIES 287.40 101 64350 120 96559 CIR 21211 AP 263.77 MISC. SUPPLIES 263.77 527 66520 120 96560 AUTOMATIC CONTROLS 21336 AP 4,280.00 PROFESSIONAL 8 SPECIALIZED S 4,280.00 619 64460 210 96561 STAR COFFEE INC. 21623 160.83 BLDG. 8 GROUNDS MAINT, 160.83 621 64450 190 96562 HILLYARD 21658 AP 486.03 MISC. SUPPLIES 486.03 101 68020 120 2200 96563 GARY MISSEL 21677 273.00 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 273.00 130 20060 96564 TRACY SIRI 21685 AP 80.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 80.00 101 68010 220 1645 96565 CHRISSY HOLMES 21723 AP 240.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 240.00 101 68010 220 1644 96566 VS GOLF LLC 21948 AP 2,952.75 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 2,952.75 101 68010 220 1784 96567 TOM MCGOVERN 22273 AP 609.39 MISC. SUPPLIES 609.39 101 65300 120 96568 AUTO PRIDE CAR WASH 22278 AP 44.75 VEHICLE MAINT. 44.75 101 65200 202 96569 SUSTAINABLE SAN MATEO COUNTY 22351 1,215.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,215.00 101 64560 220 96570 ANDERSON PACIFIC ENGINEERING CON 22387 AP 148,950.00 PROFESSIONAL 8 SPECIALIZED S 148,950.00 320 80520 210 96571 ACOM SOLUTIONS 22426 986.00 EQUIPMENT MAINT. 986.00 101 65300 200 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 7 07/16/04 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 96541 SIX FLAGS MARINE WORLD 19119 AP 1,671.24 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,671.24 101 68010 220 1212 96542 BURTON-S FIRE APPARATUS 19366 AP 252.05 FIRE APPARATUS MAINT. 102.48 101 65200 203 FIRE APPARATUS MAINT. 149.57 625 65213 203 96543 JOHN CAHALAN, ASLA 19561 AP 700.00 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 700.00 320 79300 210 96544 BAY AREA BUSINESS CARDS INC 19588 AP 45.47 OFFICE EXPENSE 20.57 101 66100 110 OFFICE EXPENSE 24.90 101 65300 110 96545 CREATIVE INTERCONNECT 19768 AP 228.36 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 228.36 101 65200 220 96546 BURLINGAME COMMUNITY THEATER 20074 2,835.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 2,835.00 101 64560 220 96547 RACQUET SMITH 20339 AP 7,650.40 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 7,650.40 101 68010 220 1782 96548 NOLTE & ASSOCIATES, INC. 20376 AP 334.75 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 334.75 327 77040 210 96549 BRIDGE WIRELESS 20633 AP 288.50 COMMUNICATIONS 288.50 527 66520 160 96550 GOLDEN STATE COMMUNICATIONS INC 20634 AP 165.00 COMMUNICATIONS 165.00 527 66520 160 96551 JEFF DOWD 20779 1,058.85 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,058.85 101 68010 220 1372 96552 H.V. CARTER CO., INC. 20876 48.52 EQUIPMENT MAINT. 48.52 101 68020 200 2200 96553 DELL MARKETING L.P. 20900 AP 3,277.38 MISC. SUPPLIES 135.38 101 65100 120 MISCELLANEOUS 1,753.16 101 68010 400 1100 MISCELLANEOUS 1,388.84 101 65100 400 96554 FRANCOTYP-POSTALIA, INC. 20967 103.90 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 103.90 101 65100 220 96555 RENEE RAMSEY - 21136 AP 1,200.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,200.00 101 68010 220 1331 C CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 6 07/16/04 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 96527 STATE OF CALIFORNIA 16919 AP 1,080.36 SUPPLIES 1,080.36 620 15000 96528 SHELTER NETWORK 17107 4,050.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 4,050.00 101 64560 220 96529 LEE & ASSOCIATES 17568 AP 1,197.63 SUPPLIES 1,197.63 101 65200 112 96530 SAN MATEO COUNTY FIRE SAFE 17910 AP 2,800.00 MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSE 2,800.00 101 65200 290 96531 PARAMOUNT'S GREAT AMERICA 18078 AP 3,720.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 3,720.00 101 68010 220 1212 96532 O'GRADY PAVING 18184 AP 882,975.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 882,975.00 320 80831 220 96533 DEESIGNS 18388 AP 1,997.33 MISC. SUPPLIES 1,997.33 526 69020 120 96534 RICH SCIUTTO 18572 AP 1,127.10 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,127.10 101 68010 220 1372 96535 VERIZON WIRELESS MESSAGING SERVI 18763 AP 44.92 COMMUNICATIONS 22.46 526 69020 160 COMMUNICATIONS 22.46 527 66520 160 96536 AMERICAN WATER WORKS ASSN. 18951 199.50 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 131.00 526 69020 240 TRAINING EXPENSE 68.50 526 69020 260 96537 ACCESS UNIFORMS & EMBROIDERY 18990 AP 4,045.09 UNIFORMS AND EQUIPMENT 4,045.09 101 65200 140 96538 PEGGY GUARALDI 19044 AP 240.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 240.00 101 68010 220 1660 96539 ANG NEWSPAPERS 19083 AP 1,195.46 MISC. SUPPLIES 140.24 101 64400 120 PUBLICATIONS & ADVERTISING 99.70 101 64200 150 PUBLICATIONS & ADVERTISING 799.76 101 68010 150 1950 PUBLICATIONS & ADVERTISING 69.34 101 64200 150 MISC. SUPPLIES 86.42 327 81010 120 96540 LIEBERT CASSIDY WHITMORE 19095 3,760.00 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 3,760.00 101 64420 210 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R EG I S T E R PAGE 5 07/16/04 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 96511 PARCA/PROJECT REACH 13924 1,620.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,620.00 101 64560 220 96512 SAMARITAN HOUSE & 13925 6,480.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 6,480.00 101 64560 220 96513 COMMUNITY OVERCOMING RELATIONSHI 13926 2,835.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 2,835.00 101 64560 220 96514 YFA CRISIS INTERVENTION AND 13927 2,025.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 2,025.00 101 64560 220 96515 PROJECT FOCYS 13980 3,240.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 3,240.00 101 64560 220 96516 THE PAIGE COMPANY, INC. 14138 AP 301.92 OFFICE EXPENSE 301.92 101 64200 110 96517 LAERDAL MEDICAL CORP. 15055 AP 344.91 MISCELLANEOUS 344.91 101 22585 96518 DAILY JOURNAL CORP. 15626 679.81 MISC. SUPPLIES 679.81 101 64350 120 96519 TEAM CLEAN 15827 AP 286.64 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 286.64 101 65200 220 96520 LOS ALTOS TYPEWRITER 15853 AP 115.29 OFFICE EXPENSE 115.29 101 65200 110 96521 SYDNEY MALKO0 16347 211.07 SMALL TOOLS 211.07 620 66700 130 96522 MASATOSHI MORITA 16464 AP 377.60 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 377.60 101 68010 220 1762 96523 COMMUNITY GATEPATH 16575 4,050.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 4,050.00 101 64560 220 96524 LINHART PETERSEN POWERS ASSOC. 16599 AP 47,140.09 MISCELLANEOUS 47,140.09 101 22515 96525 MUNICIPAL MAINTENANCE 16629 AP 128.03 SUPPLIES 128.03 620 15000 96526 THE SF NEWSPAPER COMPANY 16914 AP 403.86 PUBLICATIONS & ADVERTISING 377.86 101 68010 150 1950 MISCELLANEOUS 26.00 526 69020 233 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 4 07/16/04 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 96496 ABAG - LIABILITY 09518 AP 10,607.37 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 9,460.21 618 64520 210 CLAIMS PAYMENTS 11147.16 618 64520 601 96497 CRAIG W. REED 09881 AP 676.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 676.00 101 68010 220 1787 96498 ANA FITZGERALD 09975 AP 720.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 720.00 101 68010 220 1646 96499 TELECOMMUNICATIONS ENGINEERING A 10101 14,814.00 COMMUNICATIONS 14,814.00 101 65150 160 96500 AUGUST SUPPLY, INC 10256 AP 290.98 MISC. SUPPLIES 290.98 101 65200 111 96501 PIP PRINTING 10620 AP 307.65 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 307.65 101 64350 210 96502 WINGFOOT COMMERCIAL TIRE SYSTEMS 11316 AP 2,010. 13 FIRE APPARATUS MAINT. 1 ,686.03 101 65200 203 FIRE APPARATUS MAINT. 324.10 625 65213 203 96503 ROMEO PACKING CO 11348 1 ,526.33 MISC. SUPPLIES 1 ,526.33 101 68020 120 2200 96504 WECO INDUSTRIES, INC. 11640 AP 179.82 MISC. SUPPLIES 179.82 527 66520 120 96505 DOCUMENT PROCESSING SYSTEMS 13890 105.27 EQUIPMENT MAINT. 105.27 101 64250 200 96506 CALL-PRIMROSE CENTER 13918 40455.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 4,455.00 101 64560 220 96507 CENTER FOR INDEPENDENCE 13919 1 ,215.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1 ,215.00 101 64560 220 96508 FRIENDS FOR YOUTH 13921 810.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 810.00 101 64560 220 96509 HUMAN INVESTMENT PROJECT 13922 1 ,620.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1 ,620.00 101 64560 220 96510 MISSION HOSPICE 13923 1 ,620.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1 ,620.00 101 64560 220 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 3 07/16/04 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT *� Denotes Hand Written Checks 96488 BURLINGAME REC. DEPT./PETTY CASH 03910 AP 3,347.27 OFFICE EXPENSE 68.79 101 68010 110 1101 MISC. SUPPLIES 101.85 101 68010 120 1893 MISC. SUPPLIES 94.16 101 68010 120 1890 MISC. SUPPLIES 270.66 101 68010 120 1423 MISC. SUPPLIES 8.64 101 68010 120 1521 MISC. SUPPLIES 232.59 101 68010 120 1370 MISC. SUPPLIES 389.93 101 68010 120 1330 MISC. SUPPLIES 56.29 101 68010 120 1520 MISC. SUPPLIES 256.00 101 68010 120 1422 MISC, SUPPLIES 132.76 101 68010 120 1891 UNIFORMS AND EQUIPMENT 22.00 101 68010 140 1893 PUBLICATIONS&ADVERTISING 117.50 101 68010 150 1950 COMMUNICATIONS 112.50 101 68020 160 2300 BLDG. &GROUNDS MAINT. 43.45 101 68020 190 2200 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 90.00 101 68010 220 1645 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 70.00 101 68010 220 1349 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 220.00 101 68010 220 1331 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 172.00 101 68010 220 1644 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 420.00 101 68010 220 1646 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 120.00 101 68010 220 1330 TRAINING EXPENSE 167.78 101 68020 260 2200 MISC. SUPPLIES 180.37 730 69533.120 96489 WEST GROUP PAYMENT CTR. 03964 AP 370.02 MISC. SUPPLIES 370.02 101 64350 120 96490 STATE OF CA/CONSERVATION DEPT 09073 AP 2,049.89 MISCELLANEOUS 2,049.89 731 22550 96491 FRANK ERBACHER 09195 1,536.00 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 1,536.00 130 20015 96492 CITY OF MILLBRAE 09234 AP 17,754.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 17,754.00 101 65200 220 96493 TESTING ENGINEERS, INC. 09270 AP 400.00 PROFESSIONAL&SPECIALIZED S 400.00 320 80831 210 96494 LIFE ASSIST 09392 AP 1,578.56 SUPPLIES 1,578.56 101 65200 112 96495 STERICYCLE, INC. 09439 AP 100.61 SUPPLIES 100.61 101 65200 112 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 2 07/16/04 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 96476 IRVINE & JACHENS INC. 02599 4,317.23 UNIFORMS AND EQUIPMENT 4,317.23 101 65200 140 96477 SBC 03080 AP 461.55 UTILITY EXPENSE 461.55 896 20281 96478 STEPHEN J. PICCHI 03168 AP 3,264.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 3,264.00 101 68010 220 1372 96479 SANDRA POSE 03175 AP 1,140.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,140.00 101 68010 220 1644 96480 CITY OF SAN MATEO 03366 AP 1,339.00 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 450.00 101 64150 210 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 889.00 101 65100 220 96481 SAN MATEO COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL 03380 11,900.36 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 11,900.36 526 69020 210 96482 LEE BUFFINGTON TAX COLLECTOR 03465 1,106.70 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,106.70 526 69020 220 96483 SAN MATEO UNION HIGH 03471 AP 38,319.20 SCHOOL DEVELOPMENT FEE 38,319.20 731 22562 96484 RANDY SCHWARTZ 03518 AP 203.40 MISCELLANEOUS 203.40 101 68010 031 96485 FRANK TEALDI 03743 551.10 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 551.10 130 20060 96486 TIMBERLINE TREE SERVICE, INC. 03760 AP 6,569.48 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 6,569.48 101 68020 220 2300 96487 U S POSTAL SERVICE 03821 3,000.00 MISCELLANEOUS 3,000.00 101 64250 114 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T- R E G I S T E R PAGE 1 07/16/04 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT '•' Denotes Hand Written Checks 96461 ALPINE AWARDS, INC. 01052 AP 302.18 MISC. SUPPLIES 302.18 101 68010 120 1781 96462 BAYSHORE INTERNATIONAL TRUCKS 01236 AP 7.53 SUPPLIES 7.53 620 15000 96463 WHITE CAP 01250 AP 455.42 SMALL TOOLS 455.42 527 66520 130 96464 RAHN BECKER 01305 169.23 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 169.23 130 20060 96465 BURLINGAME ELEM. SCHOOL DIST. 01500 AP 54,711.60 SCHOOL DEVELOPMENT FEE 54,711.60 731 22563 96466 BURLINGAME RECREATION DEPT. 01663 AP 2,518.38 RECREATION EXPENSES 2,518.38 101 10700 96467 CALIFORNIA PARK & RECREATION 01726 545.00 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 545.00 101 68010 240 1100 96468 COMPUTER TECHNICIANS, INC., 01987 987.00 CITY HALL MAINTENANCE 987.00 621 64450 200 96469 L. N. CURTIS & SONS 02027 AP 6,229.03 UNIFORMS AND EQUIPMENT 6,229.03 101 65200 140 96470 D & M TOWING, INC. 02029 AP 95.00 SUPPLIES 95.00 620 15000 96471 VEOLIA WATER 02110 AP 194,787.76 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 107,352.88 327 79480 210 BLDG. & GROUNDS MAINT. 17,813.35 527 66530 190 OTHER AGENCY CONTRIBUTIONS 33,823.00 527 66530 270 - CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 35,798.53 527 66530 800 96472 GENE EVANS 02149 AP 9.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 9.00 101 66010 220 1644 96473 EWING IRRIGATION PRODUCTS 02157 AP 936.72 MISCELLANEOUS 936.72 101 68020 192 2200 96474 W.W. GRAINGER, INC. 02248 AP 1,830.17 SMALL TOOLS 1,830.17 526 69020 130 96475 MACTEC ENGINEERING 02365 -2,548.93 PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S 2,548.93 528 66600 210 CITY OF BURLINGAME W A R R A N T R E G I S T E R PAGE 1 07/16/04 NUMBER NAME VENDOR DETAIL ACCOUNT AMOUNT Denotes Hand Written Checks 96427 * BRIAN WACHHORST 24372 500.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 500.00 730 69544 220 96428 * AETNA 24760 2,801 .43 MISCELLANEOUS 217.04 130 20028 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 2,584.39 130 20022 96429 * JACK JOHNSON 24932 400.00 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 400.00 730 69544 220 TOTAL $3,701 .43 CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION UNAPPROVED MINUTES 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, CA July 26, 2004 Council Chambers I. CALL TO ORDER Chair Osterling called the July 26, 2004, regular meeting of the Planning Commission to order at 7:02 p.m. II. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Auran, Bcjues, Brownrigg, Osterling and Vistica Absent: Commissioners: Keighran and Keele Staff Present: City Planner, Margaret Monroe; Senior Planner, Maureen Brooks; Planner, Catherine Barber; Hospital Project Planner Karen Kristiansson; City Attorney, Larry Anderson; Senior Engineer, Doug Bell. III. MINUTES The minutes of the July 12, 2004 regular meeting of the Planning Commission were approved as mailed. IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA There were no changes to the agenda. V. FROM THE FLOOR There were no public comments. I. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PUBLIC COMMENT 1. 1783 EL CAMINO REAL, ZONED UNCLASSIFIED AND C-3 — PUBLIC COMMENT ON THE REVISED DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT PREPARED FOR AN APPLICATION TO REPLACE THE EXISTING PENINSULA HOSPITAL WITH A NEW SIX TO SEVEN-STORY HOSPITAL BUILDING, A FOUR TO FIVE-STORY OFFICE BUILDING FOR HOSPITAL SUPPORT SPACE AND MEDICAL OFFICES, A PARKING GARAGE AND A HELIPAD (239 NOTICED) PROJECT PLANNERS: MAUREEN BROOKS/KAREN KRISTIANSSON CP Monroe gave a brief overview of the project and the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) process, noting that the Revised Draft EIR is being re-circulated based on revisions made to the project by the applicant, there is a 45-day comment period which will end on August 13, 2004, comments will be taken at this public hearing, and comments in writing may be submitted until 5 :00 p.m. on August 13, 2004. Rodney Jeung and Trixie Martelino from EIP Associates, as well as Jane Bierdsted and Jaime Hicks, traffic engineers from Fehr and Peers, were available to review the Revised Draft EIR and respond to questions from the Commission. Mr. Jeung presented a description of the Revised Draft EIR process, reviewed the key changes which were made to the project in response to the issues raised in the original Draft EIR regarding the Proposed Project, and noted that the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires that if a substantial modification is made to a project, re-circulation of the Draft EIR is required. Mr. Jeung further noted that the applicant's goals for the Revised Project were to address the City's concerns with the original design relating to open space and the gateway character of El Camino Real, to eliminate or reduce the number of significant unavoidable impacts identified regarding the loss of open space along El Camino Real, the conflict with the City's visual and design goals, and the on-site parking deficit identified during the construction period, and to incorporate the mitigation measures which were identified in the Draft City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes July 26, 2004 EIR. Key features of the Revised Project are to relocate of the main entrance on Trousdale to align with Magnolia Avenue, relocate the parking structure away from Davis Drive, provide improved pedestrian -� access,relocate the San Francisco Water District water pipeline to the front of the site on El Camino Real, and increase the landscaped setback, relocate the medical office building to the El Camino Real frontage, and to reorient the hospital building towards Trousdale. In comparing the key effects of the originally Proposed Project with the Revised Project,Mr. Jeung noted that the Revised Project eliminates two major land use/visual impacts related to conformance with the General Plan open space policies and the open space and gateway characters along El Camino Real. However, the visual impacts of the Revised Project, as viewed from Davis Drive; is significant and unavoidable. He also noted that the key impacts regarding circulation and parking were less with the Revised Project than with the originally Proposed Project,particularly with the parking supply and demand during construction. With the Revised Project,the entire parking garage could be built in the first phase,and would be available for use during construction and to accommodate some construction workers. Mr.Jeung explained that the Revised DEIR looked at one other option,Alternative C,which is similar in its layout to the originally Proposed Project, but with the cooling towers moved to the side of the hospital building and providing a greater setback and more open space along El Camino Real. The Revised Draft EIR concluded that because it causes the fewest significant and unavoidable impacts,the Revised Project is the environmentally superior alternative. Mr.Jeung noted that the next steps in the process are to receive any comments on the Revised DEIR,prepare responses to those comments and develop a mitigation monitoring program. Once these documents are completed,the information would be presented to the Planning Commission and City Council in the form of a Final EIR. The Planning Commission and City Council would have to consider and take action to certify the EIR before taking action on the project. Commissioners asked the following questions of the environmental consultant: What maturity of the landscaping is assumed in the visual simulations? Thought that the cooling towers at the rear of the hospital would be partially underground and screened with an acoustic wall and landscaping, is this taken into account in the noise analysis? Is there a comparison of the lighting impacts between the original Proposed Project and the Revised Project,what are the impacts of light and glare from the interior lighting from rooms and access stairs, given that the hospital will operate 24 hours a day, as opposed to the medical office building,which would generally be vacant at night. What is meant by the term"undeveloped area"and why did the amount decrease? Is there a difference between what is landscaping and public spaces and land slated for future development? Mr. Jeung noted that the visual simulations used a ten-year time frame for the proposed landscaping. The noise analysis looked at the Revised Project with the cooling towers partially underground and including the proposed screening wall. It was concluded that with these features, there would be no significant noise impact along the property line adjacent to Davis Drive. The interior lighting for the new hospital will be required to meet the City's standard for lighting which requires that no light will spill over to adjacent properties,with proper glass installed in the windows and stair wells facing Davis Drive,the light and glare from the building will be minimized. The term "undeveloped area" includes both the landscaped areas as well as the area which is shown for future development. In the original Proposed Project, this future--� development was less defined and was estimated to be 4.4 acres. On the revised plan, the circulation wa: refined,and the future development area is now proposed to be 4.1 acres. The area dedicated to landscaping and public space is approximately the same in the original Proposed Project and the Revised Project. 2 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes July 26, 2004 Commissioner questions continued: Are there some things that can be done in the design of the building to help reduce the visual impact from Davis Drive, such as creating a color palette that will help the building blend into distant views? In the visual simulation showing El Camino Real looking south,it appears that the parking structure is taller than was shown in earlier sketches, it was originally proposed to be lower with bermed landscaping. It would be helpful if the visual simulations from the original proposed project could be included together with the revised project so that the impacts could be compared side by side. Mr. Jeung responded that a refined color palette could be considered as mitigation, it would be up to the project sponsor to determine if it can be done as apart of the project. The parking structure has been refined from earlier sketches,in the final drawings,the architect determined that because of the grade changes and the water pipeline, it would not be feasible to sink the garage as far as was originally proposed,in addition, the planting over the water easement is limited, so berming became infeasible. Chairman Osterling opened the public comment. Evelyn Clayton, 2950 Trousdale Drive; Terry Huebner, 1708 Davis Drive;Pat Giorni, 1445 Balboa Avenue; Sigrun Franco, 1700 Davis Drive;Leonie Wohl, 1608 Davis Drive;and Kathy Smith, 1811 Davis Drive,had the following comments regarding the Revised Draft EIR: At an earlier meeting,had presented a petition documenting opposition to moving the location of the hospital's main driveway to Trousdale Drive, there has been no response to this opposition to date, is this opposition being considered by the Planning Commission and is a response forthcoming;understand that the Planning Commission had asked that the traffic study consider the impact on traffic flow on Trousdale from Freeway 280 to El Camino Real, was it done, was traffic looked at when school is in session, has this information been made public and is it included in the materials being considered; also understand that BART conducted a study of traffic growth in this area, was that considered? El Camino Real is a State highway,it is the responsibility of the State to maintain,changing the entrance to Trousdale would shift the burden of street maintenance in front of the entrance to Burlingame; Trousdale is the entrance and exit for three schools,this change to the entrance will channel more traffic on this roadway and will create gridlock. Continued public comment: Would like to express concern with the access to the shopping center across from the hospital's proposed entrance at Trousdale and Magnolia, there are expected to be 3500 more cars daily on Trousdale,there are now two entrances/exits on Trousdale from the shopping center,one of these will be lost to people traveling eastbound on Trousdale from the Ray Park neighborhood because the left turn into the shopping center will be eliminated. Also,due to the increased traffic volumes,trucks which have to deliver to the front of stores in the shopping center may have difficulty exiting onto Trousdale. The alley on the Magnolia side of the shopping center will also be impacted, there are a lot of trucks which load and unload on Magnolia, it is difficult to see around these trucks when trying to exit from the alley,there is not enough room for two cars to pass in the alley;it will be hard to get into the shopping center at Murchison as well, traffic will be diverted to Millbrae streets, there is a 108-unit condominium being built nearby in Millbrae,this will also impact traffic,am concerned that the shopping center will lose business. There needs to be a comprehensive study of car and truck movements at the shopping center. Public comment continued: In looking at the changes made to the project, and the impacts raised in the Draft EIR,it looks like the Revised Project is the best of the bunch reviewed,but would like to point out that pedestrian friendly access does not exist on El Camino Real;walking or riding a bike across Trousdale into the shopping center will be dangerous, now as cars come off the freeway to go to the hospital,there is one entrance on El Camino Real, now they will have to contend with the Trousdale traffic; concern with the service entrance, trucks will have to exit south, how will they go north and redirect to Trousdale without going through the neighborhoods. Would like to thank the applicant for moving the parking structure, thought the original location next to the residences would cause health issues; am still concerned with the 3 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes July 26, 2004 existing access way to the hospital parking lot from Davis Drive,would like to see this entrance closed at the beginning of the construction period,would not like to see it used by heavy equipment, this would impact the neighborhood;was originally told that the greenbelt on the southern property line would extend to Marco Polo Way,this plan shows the parking lot as it now exists,with no landscaping adjacent to the property line bordering the residences on Davis near Marco Polo. Additional public comment: Concerned with the proposed location of the cooling towers along the southerly property line, the existing cooling tower noise now disturbs the neighbors, could they be moved further away; would like to make sure that the plans include soundproofing of the HVAC system and the Central Utility Plant, and that the solid sound wall proposed adjacent to the cooling towers does not produce bouncing of the noise;would like a clarification on how the ambient noise level plus the cooling tower noise was calculated,how does it add up? What recourse would the neighbors have it noise exceeded the General Plan limit? The original plan showed the medical office building near the residences because of activities which would close down at night, now the hospital is proposed in that location, which will be a 24-hour building,would like to see the lowered,staggered medical office building close to residences;there will be a 128-foot high building looking down on residences,am concerned with the opacity of the glass as well as the reflectivity and glare;would like the landscaped screening to be planted early in the construction so that it will reach maturity at an earlier time; concern with the loss of trees in the area where the water pipe will be relocated and the inability to replant over the line, will an adequate screen be achieved? Concern with security on the pedestrian path, could it be closed at night and have security lighting; would like to see landscape trees and ivy on the roof of the parking structure to provide a screen. At the existing hospital,the service vehicles that deliver to the hospital and to the Mills facility in San Mateo use the Marco Polo employee entrance,will that use continue with the new facility, these service vehicles -� leave at 7:15 a.m. every Saturday morning and speed through the neighborhood,they are diesel trucks 40 feet long; would like to see a limitation on these service trucks through the residential neighborhoods during construction as well as once the new hospital is in operation;will the medical office building have additional truck trips beyond what is described in the Revised DEIR? Chairman Osterling closed the public comment. Commissioners asked if the comments which they made at the beginning of the meeting would be addressed in the Final EIR. CP Monroe noted that they would, and noted that there were three letters received prior to the public hearing,a response to these letters would also be included in the final document. In addition,Commissioners asked that the following be addressed: How will the service vehicles exit the site and travel northbound? Make sure EIR adequately address the issue of parking once the hospital is open. Chair Osterling complimented the speakers from the public, noting that everybody came forth with constructive ideas. This item concluded at 8:05 p.m. VII. STUDY ITEMS 2. 1257 CABRILLO AVENUE, ZONED R-1 — APPLICATION FOR MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND CREEK ENCLOSURE PERMIT TO REPLACE EXISTING CHANNEL WALLS WHICH SUPPORTS AN EXISTING GARAGE STRUCTURE (PETER HAASE, FALL CREEK ENGINEERING, INC., APPLICANT AND DESIGNER; JUDY AND RICK KELL, PROPERTY OWNERS)PROJECT PLANNER: MAUREEN BROOKS CP Monroe presented a summary of the staff report. 4 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes July 26, 2004 Commissioners asked: • If the Fish and Game or Army Corps permits require changes to the project, will it return to the 1" Planning Commission? • Is a permit required from the Regional Water Quality Control Board? and will it include NPDES compliance? • Are the health concerns regarding West Nile virus being addressed? Should the San Mateo County Public Health and Mosquito Abatement organizations be contacted? • Is the applicant aware of the added processing time for getting permits from these other agencies? A Commissioner noted that the applicant acknowledged to him that he probably wouldn't be able to build this project until next year. • A condition should be added holding the City harmless for any construction or results of construction in the creek. This item was set for the consent calendar when all the information has been submitted and reviewed by the Planning Department. This item concluded at 8:15 p.m. VIII. ACTION ITEMS Consent Calendar-Items on the consent calendar are considered to be routine. They are acted on simultaneously unless separate discussion and/or action is requested by the applicant,a member of the public or a commissioner prior to the time the commission votes on the motion to adopt. 3. 1115 HOWARD AVENUE,ZONED C-1,SUBAREA B,BURLINGAME AVENUE COMMERCIAL AREA - APPLICATION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A FITNESS AND WEIGHT LOSS CENTER (LISA ANTER, APPLICANT; DAVE ADAMS, PROPERTY OWNER) (35 NOTICED) PROJECT PLANNER: RUBEN HURIN Chair Osterling asked if anyone in the audience or on the Commission wished to call any item off the consent calendar. There were no requests. C. Auran moved approval of the consent calendar based on the facts in the staff report, commissioners comments and the findings in the staff reports with recommended conditions in the staff report and by resolution. The motion was seconded by C. Brownrigg. Chair called for a voice vote on the motion and it passed 5-0-2 (Crs. Keighran and Keele absent). Appeal procedures were advised. IX. REGULAR ACTION ITEM 4. 1751 ESCALANTE WAY, ZONED R-1 - APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW AND HILLSIDE AREA CONSTRUCTION PERMIT FOR A SECOND STORY ADDITION(MICHAEL MA,APPLICANT AND ARCHITECT; SHIRLEY PANG, PROPERTY OWNER) (27 NOTICED) PROJECT PLANNER: RUBEN HURIN Reference staff report July 26, 2004, with attachments. Plr Barber presented the report, reviewed criteria and staff comments. Ten conditions were suggested for consideration. There were no questions of staff. 5 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes July 26, 2004 Chair Osterling opened the public hearing. Michael Ma,architect,represented the owner.He noted that this project was approved 18 months ago,the property has sold since and the new owner would like to make this addition, but the approval had expired. Commissioner asked if the window on the rear elevation on the second floor on the right should have been shown as a divided light. Architect responded that they felt that the small bathroom window was too small for divided lights. There were no other questions of the applicant and there were no comments from the floor. The public hearing was closed. C. Vistica noted that he supports this project,the changes made from the project as originally approved are minor so moved to approve the application,by resolution,with the following conditions: 1)that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department date stamped June 17, 2004, sheets A-1 through A-6, and that any changes to the footprint or floor area of the building shall require and amendment to this permit; 2)that any changes to the size or envelope of the first or second floors,or garage, which would include adding or enlarging a dormer(s), moving or changing windows and architectural features or changing the roof height or pitch, shall be subject to design review; 3)that prior to scheduling the roof deck inspection,a licensed surveyor shall shoot the height of the roof ridge and provide certification of that height to the Building Department; 4) that prior to scheduling the framing inspection, the project architect,engineer or other licensed professional shall provide architectural certification that the architectural details such as window locations and bays are built as shown on the approved plans;if there is no licensed professional involved in the project, the property owner or contractor shall provide the certification under penalty of perjury. Certifications shall be submitted to the Building Department; 5) that prior to final inspection, Planning Department staff will inspect and note compliance of the architectural details (trim materials,window type,etc.)to verify that the project has been built according to the approved Planning and Building plans; 6) that all air ducts, plumbing vents, and flues shall be combined, where possible, to a single termination and installed on the portions of the roof not visible from the street;and that these venting details shall be included and approved in the construction plans before a Building permit is issued; 7)that the conditions of the City Engineer's June 21, 2004 and September 3, 2002 memos, the Chief Building Official's June 21,2004 memo,and the Recycling Specialist's June 21,2004 and September 3,2002,memos shall be met; 8) 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; 9)that the applicant shall comply with Ordinance 1503,the City of Burlingame Storm Water Management and Discharge Control Ordinance; and 10)that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Uniform Fire Codes,2001 Edition,as amended by the City of Burlingame. The motion was seconded by C. Brownrigg. Chair Osterling called for a voice vote on the motion to approve project as approved 18 months ago with the minor changes. The motion passed on a 5-0-2 (Crs.Keighran and Keele absent). Appeal procedures were advised. This item concluded at 8:20 p.m. 5e 2108 EASTON DRIVE, ZONED R-1 - APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW, SPECIAL PERMIT, FLOOR AREA RATIO AND SIDE SETBACK VARIANCES FOR A NEW ATTACHED GARAGE (ERNIE AND PHYLLIS BODEN, APPLICANTS AND PROPERTY OWNERS; 2 STUDIO ARCHITECTS, ARCHITECT) (54 NOTICED)PROJECT PLANNER: CATHERINE BARBER C. Auran recused himself because he lives within 500 feet of the proposed project. He stepped down from the dias and left the chambers. 6 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes July 26, 2004 Reference staff report July 26,2004,with attachments. Plr. Barber presented the report,reviewed criteria and staff comments. Fourteen conditions were suggested for consideration. Commissioner asked if property owner installed a storage shed like the ones for sell at OSH would it count in FAR. CP noted that if the shed were less than 100 SF and not on a foundation it would not be counted in FAR. There were no further questions of staff. Chair Osterling opened the public hearing. David Boden, son of the property owners, and Phyllis Boden, property owner at 2108 Easton Drive,represented the project. Since the Commission's last review have gone to the expense of an arborist report to determine the impact on the redwood tree of relocating the garage, Mayne Tree endorsed the location of the garage attached to the house. Because the property exceeds the FAR only asking for a one car garage, so there is no place to store garden and wood working equipment, have spent a lot of money to preserve the tree, do not want to remove it,need the variance to keep the tree. Commissioner asked you are close to the FAR, if removed 18 inches more across the rear would be under FAR? Applicants responded have cut the structure at the V, if cut further will remove the support beam, endanger the existing structure, and will have to replace the beam at greater expense. How many tools do you have to store? Want to keep the existing tools, have a lot of power tools, table saw, tool bench, leaf blower, gardening tools; it is fair to let us retain the shed, will not affect the tree nor cause its removal. Commissioner noted can you clarify the hardship on the property for the FAR variance?The hardship is the tree. Commissioner noted have trouble understanding the arborist's reasoning that a garage cannot be placed at the rear, since its foot print would be smaller than the shed, so the impact would be the same as existing. Applicant noted that the arborist's problem was the vehicle traveling continually over the root zone; in addition the arborist said in 1989 when the variance for parking was granted that the garage should not be relocated to the rear because of the roots; the issue is the same today as in 1989. Commissioner noted that some hardship is created by the redwood tree,is justification for the one foot side setback variance but is not suitable justification for the FAR variance. Commissioner asked if reducing the size of the shed was an option;because if shed is reduced the FAR variance would be less than 100 SF. Applicant noted that if take 18 inches off across rear would have to rebuild shed because the roof support would be removed; can the side setback and FAR variances be conditioned that if the tree is ever removed the shed and the garage would have to be removed as well. There were no further comments from the floor. The pubic hearing was closed. Commissioner discussion: Not opposed to the attached garage,the problem is the shed;the attached garage also affects the FAR allowed on the site,it appears that there is less than 100 SF of the existing garage used for tool storage,not see the rational for the hardship for the FAR variance; it is clear that if the garage were detached more FAR would be allowed on the site, since a detached garage is not allowed it is unfair to penalize,this is a good way to protect the redwood tree and redwoods are not particularly easy to live with, neighbor at 2112 is the only one affected by the one foot side setback and retention of the shed and they have not complained,one way to look at this is that the proposed FAR is only 20 SF over what was allowed on the site when their garage was detached. Think that there is an alternative location for a single car garage at the rear of the site, 5 feet behind the existing shed, it would be smaller, 225 SF, Commission has seen there are ways for driveways to be designed within redwood tree root zone, understand that the attached garage is more economical solution but that does not justify the FAR,can put in a tool shed up to 100 SF and not count in FAR, should not grant an FAR exception. Applicant needs shed to store collected tools as well as to work in, size is reasonable justified, adjacent neighbor has said nothing, city is better off with the tree retained,if the tree goes then the garage should go or if the house is demolished all the variances should go away, cannot see the shed from the street. Remove 100 SF and make the FAR variance go away. Should reduce size, Burlingame is better off if there is more space between houses than the three feet which will 7 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes July 26, 2004 exist here. One foot setback has bothered me,problem is that the neighbor has not objected. An alternative is not to grant request and can put garage at rear. There is space in the proposed garage for the table saw. C. Brownrigg made a motion to approve the project as proposed because granting 19 SF of floor area over what would be allowed seems like a small price to pay to protect a heritage tree with the additional condition that should the redwood tree ever be removed the side setback an floor area ratio variances would be voided, with the conditions in the staff report and by resolution. Chair Osterling seconded the motion. Chair Osterling called for a roll call vote on the motion to approve with the added condition that the variances would become void if the redwood tree were ever removed. The motion was denied on a split vote, 2-2-2-1 (Crs. Bojues and Vistica dissenting, Crs. Keighran and Keele absent, C. Auran abstaining). Commissioner discussion on the action: would it matter if the FAR was considered as if there were a detached garage on the site,and the applicant reduced 20SF from the shed;no because there is an alternative for a detached garage on the site; CA presented a number of choices for action: approve without the shed; reduce the size of the shed 100 SF or less, let the motion stand denied; form a new motion with direction; and deny without prejudice. C. Vistica made a motion to deny the project without prejudice and asked the applicant to consider the comments in the record should they choose to resubmit. The motion was seconded by C. Bojues. Chair Osterling called for a roll call vote on the motion to deny without prejudice. The motion passed on a 4-0-2-1 (Crs. Keighran and Keele absent; C. Auran abstaining) roll call vote. Appeal procedures were advised. This item concluded at 9:00 p.m. C. Auran re-entered the chambers and took his seat in the dias. 6. 508 PENINSULA AVENUE, ZONED R-3 — APPLICATION FOR CONDOMINIUM PERMIT AND FRONT SETBACK LANDSCAPE VARIANCE FOR A NEW THREE-UNIT RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM (DINO ROPALIDIS,APPLICANT AND PROPERTY OWNER; JAIME RAPADAS, A/R DESIGN GROUP) (54 NOTICED)PROJECT PLANNER: RUBEN HURIN A. CONDOMINIUM PERMIT AND FRONT SETBACK LANDSCAPING B. TENTATIVE CONDOMINIUM MAP Reference staff report July 26,2004,with attachments. CP Monroe presented the report,reviewed criteria and staff comments. Twenty-seven conditions were suggested for consideration. Commission asked if open pavers with turf block were used in the delivery vehicle parking area would we count it as landscaping. CP Monroe responded that it would not count toward landscaping, not suggesting that it be used since sometimes it does well and looks just like grass and then people do not know to use it for parking. Chair Osterling opened the public hearing. Dino Ropalidis, 839 Laurel Avenue,Burlingame,was available to answer questions. He is a 20 year Burlingame resident. Commission noted that the mailboxes appear to be free standing, kind of a prominent features, can they be set in a wall or moved back into the landscape area? Jaime Rapadas,architect,801 Mahler Road#106,Burlingame,stated that the mailboxes are 3 stations located by the driveway,will look at relocating them. Commission noted that is area on the eastern side of the property between the parking curb and property line there are only a few pockets of landscaping noted on sheet A2, can additional landscaping and irrigation be added. Mr. Ropalidis stated that they can add 8 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes July 26, 2004 landscaping in the whole length of this area, from the property line to the wheel stops. Commission noted that they would also like to see some trees added to this area for a vertical element,take trees from the City tree list. Front elevation is kind of bland,can you use wood shingles for front canopy overhangs. Can you move second story,unit#3 bedrooms windows towards the center of the building,would add balance to the elevation. Glenn Hout, owner of 12 Clarendon Road, concerned with parking, cars line the side streets that abut Peninsula Avenue,local apartment buildings only have one parking space permit unit but occupants have 2 cars,or have campers stored in parking space and keep cars on the street;would like to see a minimum of 2 parking spaces required for each unit and 3 guest parking spaces. If this request can not be met then would like to request that there be no overnight parking allowed at the top of Clarendon Road, by Peninsula Avenue. Because of this parking overflow onto the side street, chose to move to Margarita Avenue in the Burlingame Hills. There were no further comments from the floor and the public hearing was closed. CA Anderson noted that the City has tried to enforce the existing law which is on the books that prohibits on-street parking form 2:00 a.m. to 5:00 a.m., but the neighbors do not support this enforcement and complain to the police. Commission on discussion: this is the third or fourth time this project has been reviewed, applicant has invested a lot in this plan,o.k.with the project as is,aware of the parking problem but this project meets the on-site parking and delivery space requirement,can see how the landscape requirement can't be met for this site,would like see approve with conditions added: 1)that landscaping be added along the eastern property line between the parking curb and the property line including trees taken from the City street tree list, 2) second story bedroom windows be centered on front elevation,3)that the mailboxes be relocated into a wall, and 4)that the exterior building light comply with the City ordinance that the cone of light will be contained on-site. C.Vistica moved to approve the application,by resolution,with the following amended conditions: 1)that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department date stamped June 22, 2004, sheets A-1 through A-4 and L-1, and that any changes to the size or envelope of the building,which would include expanding the footprint or floor area of the structure, replacing or relocating windows or changing the roof height or pitch,shall be subject to Planning Commission review;2)that lot coverage shall not exceed 50% of the lot area and any increase in the lot area shall require an amendment to the Condominium Permit and Tentative Map and a variance from the Planning Commission; 3) that the conditions of the Chief Building Official's March 1, 2004 memo, the Fire Marshal's February 23, 2004 memo,the Recycling Specialist's February 25,2004,memo,and the City Engineer's July 15 and March 10, 2004 memos shall be met; 4) that the maximum elevation at the top of the roof ridge shall not exceed elevation 57.28' as measured from the average elevation at the top of the curb along Peninsula Avenue (23.11')for a maximum height of 34'-2",and that the top of each floor and final roof ridge shall be surveyed and approved by the City Engineer as the framing proceeds and prior to final framing and roofing inspections. Should any framing exceed the stated elevation at any point it shall be removed or adjusted so that the final height of the structure with roof shall not exceed the maximum height shown on the approved plans; 5)that this proposal shall comply with all the requirements of the Tree Protection and Reforestation Ordinance adopted by the City of Burlingame in 1993 and enforced by the Parks Department; complete landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted at the time of building permit application and the street trees will be protected during construction as required by the City Arborist;6)that common landscape areas �- shall be designed to reduce excess irrigation run-off, promote surface filtration and minimize the use of fertilizers, herbicides and pesticides; 7) that one (1) guest parking stall (8' x 17' compact space) shall be 9 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes July 26, 2004 designated and clearly marked at the rear of the site and marked on the final map and plans, shall not be assigned to any unit or used for any kind of enclosure,but shall be owned,maintained,and kept available for —. guest parking by the condominium association; 8)that parking assignments to each dwelling unit shall be left to the developer and tenant association however at least one space shall be assigned to each unit; 9)that the parking garage shall be designed to city standards and shall be managed and maintained by the condominium association to provide parking at no additional fee, solely for the condominium owners, and no portion of any parking area and the egress aisles shall be converted to any other use or any support activity such as storage or utilities; 10) that the Covenants Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs) for the condominium project shall require that the guest parking stall shall be reserved for guests only and shall not be used by condominium residents; 11) that the final inspection shall be completed and a certificate of occupancy issued before the close of escrow on the sale of each unit; 12)that the developer shall provide to the initial purchaser of each unit and to the board of directors of the condominium association, an owner purchaser manual which shall contain the name and address of all contractors who performed work on the project,copies of all warranties or guarantees of appliances and fixtures and the estimated life expectancy of all depreciable component parts of the property,including but not limited to the roof,painting,common area carpets, drapes and furniture; 13)that the trash receptacles, furnaces, and water heaters shall be shown in a legal compartment outside the required parking and landscaping and in conformance with zoning and California Building and Fire Code requirements before a building permit is issued; 14)that if a gate system is installed across the driveway,there shall be an intercom system connected to each dwelling which allows residents to provide guest access to their site by pushing a button inside their units; 15)that the project shall meet the requirements of the Municipal Code Chapter 15.14 Storm Water Management and Discharge Control including the Storm Water Pollution Prevention guidelines; 16)that the project shall be required to comply with all the standards of the California Building and Fire Codes, 2001 edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame for structural stability; 17)that storage of construction materials and equipment on the -� street or in the public right-of-way shall be prohibited; 18) that all runoff created during construction and future discharge from the site shall be required to meet National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)standards; 19)that the applicant shall submit an erosion and sedimentation control plan describing BMPs(Best Management Practices)to be used to prevent soil,dirt and debris from entering the storm drain system;the plan shall include a site plan showing the property lines, existing and proposed topography and slope; areas to be disturbed, locations of cut/fill and soil storage/disposal areas; areas with existing vegetation to be protected; existing and proposed drainage patterns and structures;watercourse or sensitive areas on-site or immediately downstream of a project; and designated construction access routes, staging areas and washout areas; 20)that methods and procedures such as sediment basins or traps,silt fences,straw bale dikes, storm drain inlet protection such as soil blanket or mats, and covers for soil stock piles to stabilize denuded areas shall be installed to maintain temporary erosion controls and sediment control continuously until permanent erosion controls have been established;21)that if construction is done during the wet season (October 15 through April 15), that prior to October 15 the developer shall implement a winterization program to minimize the potential for erosion and polluted runoff by inspecting,maintaining and cleaning all soil erosion and sediment control prior to,during,and immediately after each storm even; stabilizing disturbed soils throughout temporary or permanent seeding,mulching matting,or tarping;rocking unpaved vehicle access to limit dispersion of mud onto public right-of-way; covering/tarping stored construction materials, fuels and other chemicals; 22) that trash enclosures and dumpster areas shall be covered and protected from roof and surface drainage and that if water cannot be diverted from these areas,a self-contained drainage system shall be provided that discharges to an interceptor;23)that demolition of the existing structures and any grading or earth moving on the site shall be required to comply with all the regulations of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District; 24) that the applicant shall install fire sprinklers and a fire alarm system monitored by an approved central station prior to the final inspection for building permit; 25)that all construction shall abide by the construction hours established in the Municipal 10 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes July 26, 2004 Code;26)that the applicant shall comply with Ordinance 1645,the City of Burlingame Recycling and Waste Reduction Ordinance,and shall submit a waste reduction plan and recycling deposit for demolition and new construction, before receiving a demolition permit; 27) that this project shall comply with Ordinance No. 1477, Exterior Illumination Ordinance; 28) that the area in between the parking curbs and eastern property line from the front setback to the rear property line shall be fully landscaped and property irrigated and that at least 3 appropriate tree species taken from the City tree list be planted in this area; 29)that the second story,unit#3 bedroom windows be centered to balance the front elevation; and 30) that the mailboxes be relocated into a wall. The motion was seconded by C. Auran. Chair Osterling called for a voice vote on the motion to approve. The motion passed on a 5-0-2 (Crs. Keighran and Keele absent). Appeal procedures were advised. This item concluded at 9:19 p.m. B. TENTATIVE CONDOMINIUM MAP C. Bojues made a motion to recommended approval of the tentative condominium map for a new three unit residential condominium building to City Council. The motion was seconded by C. Vistica. Chair Osterling called for a voice vote on the motion to recommend approval of the tentative map. The motion passed on a 5-0-2 (Crs. Keighran and Keele absent). This item concluded at 9:20 p.m. 7. 1864 ROLLINS ROAD,ZONED M-1 -APPLICATION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT,PARKING AND LANDSCAPE VARIANCES FOR AN INDOOR PAINTBALL FACILITY (COMMERCIAL RECREATION USE) (GRANT TAKAMOTO, APPLICANT AND DESIGNER; ARTHUR RUDE JR., PROPERTY OWNER) 14 NOTICED)PROJECT PLANNER: RUBEN HURIN Reference staff report July 26, 2004,with attachments. CP Monroe presented the report,reviewed criteria and staff comments. Eight conditions were suggested for consideration. Chair Osterling opened the public hearing. Grant Takamoto, project architect, and Will Archie,property owner, were available to answer questions. Site is required to have 10%landscaping in order to soften the look of the building and make it more acceptable. However, in order to conform, or come close to conforming with this regulation need to add landscaping down the side and at the rear of the site. It is very hard to conform to this requirement with the existing building. This is a start-up business and it is very expensive, seems like there is not much gained by adding the landscaping in these side and rear yard locations, won't really be seen by passers by. Commission noted that landscape calculation comes very close to meeting requirement, isn't there any way to get that extra 1%required. Mr. Takamoto noted that there are quite a few recreation uses in the area that also received landscape variances,the basketball facility didn't provide the required 60% front landscaping, the batting cages and also the go-cart facility received landscaping variances. This is not a huge request. Commission asked if there was any way to add just an extra 400 SF to the landscaping to get that extra 1%. Mr. Takamoto noted that when they first started working on the site there was only 1% on-site landscaping, increased to 7% and now 9.6%, but this is a hardship to the business owner and it won't benefit the public much, would 7 or 6% suffice? Project architect also noted that as an alternative to just ground cover landscaping that they are proposing vertical landscaping elements like vines on the side of the concrete building to soften the presence. Sheila Janakos, 720 Howard Avenue, stated that she is a 20 year Burlingame resident and has owned �... businesses in Burlingame, has 3 children, 2 teenagers, is happy to see more recreational uses in town, supports project. There were no further comments from the floor and the public hearing was closed. 11 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes July 26, 2004 Commission discussion: would like to see an added condition for vertical landscaping,this business will be open from 3:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m., impact on parking will be minimal,very close to meeting the landscape requirement; staff report says that variance will go with use, yes commercial recreation use; great to see another recreation use on Rollins Road. C. Boju6s moved to approve the application,by resolution,with the following amended conditions: 1)that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department and date stamped July 14, 2004, sheet A-1.1, and date stamped July 8, 2004, sheets A-1.0, A-2.0, A-2.1 and A-3.0; 2) that the existing and proposed landscaping shall be installed as shown on the Site Plan,date stamped July 14, 2004,with vertical landscaping including vines planted on the walls of the building,and that all areas of landscaping shall be irrigated by an automatic sprinkler system on a timer and shall be maintained by the property owner in good operating condition at all times; 3)that the indoor paintball facility shall only be open Wednesday through Friday from 3:00 p.m.to 10:00 p.m. and on weekends from 10:00 a.m.to 10:00 p.m., with a maximum of 3 full-time employees and a maximum of eight active players and eight players waiting to play; that any changes to the floor area,use,hours of operation,or number of employees or paintball players which exceeds the maximums as stated in these conditions shall require an amendment to this conditional use permit;4)that there shall be no more than 19 people on-site at any one time,including the owner,employees and customers; 5)that the indoor paintball facility shall be limited to a lobby and retail area(5 55 SF),equipment storage(642 SF),an orientation room(144 SF)and paintball activity area(17,010 SF);that outdoor areas shall not be used for any activities associated with the paintball business;6)that the variances for on-site parking spaces,number of compact spaces,total on-site landscaping and front setback landscaping shall expire with the termination of the commercial recreation use on this site; shall be reviewed with any amendment to the conditional use permit granted to the paintball facility use;and shall expire should the building on the site be deliberately demolished or destroyed by a natural catastrophe or disaster or should a major remodel of the building be proposed; 7) that the conditions of the Chief Building Official's June 4,2004,memo,the Fire Marshal's June 7,2004,memo,and the City Engineer's and Recycling Specialist's June 2, 2004, memos shall be met; and 8) that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Uniform Fire Codes, 2001 Edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame. The motion was seconded by C. Auran. Chair Osterling called for a voice vote on the motion to approve. The motion passed on a 5-0-2 (Crs. Keighran and Keele absent). Appeal procedures were advised. This item concluded at 9:35 p.m. 8. 1755 ROLLINS ROAD,ZONED M-1 -APPLICATION FOR PARKING VARIANCE(W.L.BUTLER, APPLICANT;JASON BELL,CARLILE COATSWORTH ARCHITECTS,INC.,ARCHITECT;GRANT RIGGS, PROPERTY OWNER) (12 NOTICED) PROJECT PLANNER: CATHERINE BARBER (CONTINUED FROM JULY 12, 2004 MEETING) Reference staff report July 26, 2004, with attachments. Plr. Barber presented the report,reviewed criteria and staff comments. Seven conditions were suggested for consideration. There were no questions of staff. Chair Osterling opened the public hearing. Robert Grant Riggs,business and property owner, 1755 Rollins Road,was available to answer questions. Commission asked how the loading dock will affect cars entering and exiting the required parking? Mr. Riggs noted the Guittard Road loading docks are going to be for future use,driveway is already widened,it is over 50',almost 76',are proposing to keep same width.The old plans that were submitted for the last variance showed a narrower driveway but they do not want to close it in. Want to keep the driveway as wide as it is now to allow three trucks in the docks while at the same time 12 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes July 26, 2004 have cars come in and out of the parking area when the trucks are parked at the docks. Trying to make this a high end facility. By taking away the two parking spaces it will allow there to be maneuverability in the parking area while the loading dock(s) are in use. Right now there is only about one-third of the on-site parking being used. The showroom is not intended for consumers,but will be visited by architects,interior designers, and builders,but will not be selling directly to the public. CP Monroe asked if the business is in full operation at this time. Mr. Riggs explained that they are not yet in full operation,the showroom is not yet open and will open in approximately 18 months,still in development. CP Monroe asked for clarification on the driveway width, 24' wide driveway approved, proposed plan show 48' driveway, if driveway is actually 76' wide now then there will be more on-site parking spaces lost than just two. Mr. Riggs responded that the plans submitted show exactly what they are proposing on-site,driveway width is not 76', whatever is shown on the plans submitted is correct. There were no further comments and the public hearing was closed. C.Vistica moved to approve the application,by resolution,with the following conditions and an amendment to conditions number 6, stating that the variance is tied to the non-retail showrooms use as defined in the staff report: 1)that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department and date stamped May 28, 2004, sheets A1.0 site plan, floor plan and landscape plan, with a 48' curb cut on Guittard Road;with a total of 54 on-site parking spaces and 11,030 SF of on-site landscaping,and a total of three loading docks on the north side of the property; and these conditions shall be amended to the other conditions granted on this site for the warehouse,office use composed of 10,000 SF of showroom,8,083 SF of office and 65,888 SF of warehouse; 2)that the building shall have 65,888 SF of warehouse, 8,083 SF of office and 10,000 SF of showroom, any change to this configuration shall be reviewed by the Planning Department and may require Planning Commission approval;3)that the maximum number ofpeople on-site at any one time will be 50 persons,and the maximum number of employees on-site at any one time shall be 34; 4) that all the existing and new landscaping to be installed on site will be irrigated by an automatic sprinkler system that shall be maintained by the property owner in good operating condition at all times; 5) that all signage shall require a separate permit from the Planning and Building Departments; 6) that the parking variance approved under this resolution shall be limited to the warehouse/office use with a non-retail showroom use as defined in the staff report, and that should this building ever be demolished or have a major remodel that would affect the building footprint,the parking variances granted in association with this use shall become void; and 7) that any improvements for the use shall meet all California Building and Fire Codes, 2001 Edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame. The motion was seconded by C. Brownrigg. Comment on the motion: this is an approvable project;do not see a parking problem in this area;tenant has made many improvements to the site; nice landscaping added. Chair Osterling called for a voice vote on the motion to approve. The motion passed on a 5-0-2 (Crs. Keighran and Keele absent). Appeal procedures were advised. This item concluded at 9:55 p.m. XI. DESIGN REVIEW STUDY ITEMS 9. 1570 CYPRESS AVENUE, ZONED R-1 - APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW AND SPECIAL PERMIT FOR HEIGHT FOR A NEW,TWO-STORY SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING WITH DETACHED GARAGE(BRIAN ROCHE,APPLICANT AND PROPERTY OWNER;JAMES CHU,CHU DESIGN& ENGR., INC., DESIGNER) (59 NOTICED) PROJECT PLANNER: RUBEN HURIN 13 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes July 26, 2004 Plr. Barber briefly presented the project description. Commission asked if staff could provide information on the new house just built at 1555 Cypress, height, floor area, lot coverage, etc. There were no further -� questions of staff. Chair Osterling opened the public comment. James Chu, 39 W. 43rd Avenue, San Mateo,project designer was available to answer questions. Noted that he designed the house at 1555 Cypress and that is was about 3,424 SF in area, and there may have been a special permit for height but during the process plans were revised to do away with special permit,also changed style to address neighbor's concerns. This property is larger 54' X 120', will be the private residence from Mr. Roche. All of the zoning requirements are met except for height, owner met with the two adjacent neighbors and they support the project. Commission asked if the windows will be true divided light windows. Mr.Chu noted that yes,the windows will be trued divided light windows. Commission noted that the site plan states that the house next door is a one-story house, but it is two stories. There were no other comments from the floor and the public comment was closed. C. Auran made a motion to place this item on the consent calendar. Comment on motion: Commission noted that there are couple of larger homes in the area,this house is big but nicely broken up, have no problem with the height of this proposal; Commission noted that this is a nicely design house, might consider adding stone or some kind of detailing to the chimney at the front elevation, since it is a very prominent feature. This motion was seconded by C. Brownrigg. Chair Osterling called for a vote on the motion to place this item on the consent calendar when plans had been revised as directed. The motion passed on a voice vote 5-0-2(Crs. Keighran and Keele absent). The Planning Commission's action is advisory and not appealable. This item concluded at 10:00 p.m. 10. 1208 DONNELLY AVENUE, ZONED C-1, SUBAREA B, BURLINGAME AVENUE COMMERCIAL AREA — APPLICATION FOR COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW FOR A NEW RETAIL TENANT (SMITH AND HAWKEN, APPLICANT; SILMA GONZALEZ, ASHDOWN DOWNEY LLP, ARCHITECT; CAPITAL REALTY GROUP, PROPERTY OWNER) (68 NOTICED) PROJECT PLANNER: CATHERINE BARBER Plr.Barber briefly presented the project description. Commission asked if this is a historical building. Staff noted that there is no information indicating that it is a historic building. Commission noted that there is no signage shown on the plans. Staff explained that signage is handled under a separate permitting process. There were no further questions of staff. Chair Osterling opened the public comment. Andrew Wattum of Smith and Hawken,4 Hamilton Landing, Novato, and Silma Gonzalez, Ashdown Downey Architects, were both present to answer questions. Mr. Wattum noted that his office is in Novato but lives in Burlingame. Smith and Hawken has 60 stores around the country, open an average of 5 stores per year. Has opened stores in rehabilitated buildings in Chicago and Boston. Has shopped at the Burlingame Antique Market for many years,got a call from someone that it was going to be available and knew it was perfect for Smith and Hawken. Not a Burlingame Avenue,main street kind of tenant,like to on go side street location. Commission asked if the building will be red in colo? as shown on the rendering. Silma Gonzalez noted that no,it will be off white. Mr.Wattum noted that they are trying to take the building back to what it was,retain Spanish style. Commission noted that there is no 14 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes July 26, 2004 parking on-site and none will be added but was curious about the number of transactions per day. Mr. Wattum noted that this not a weekend peak store,have customers in and out very quickly at various times during the day. The number of transactions varies wildly,around 50-60 per day. Usually customers order a product and come back in a week or two to pick it up. Commission stated that this will be a great store to have in Burlingame. Note that the sidewalks in this area are pretty tight and there are no trees in front of the building. The new design brings the building which is recessed, out to the street, can you maintain the recess or soften the edge of the sidewalk. Silma Gonzalez noted that they are planning to open the sidewalk in front of the columns, like I1 Fornio, and plant vines. There will also be a portion of the new fagade that still will be recessed and they will be put out flower carts, there is also the roll up garage door located in the center of the fagade that will be open as weather permits. Need to move out the fagade and have the roll up door open to allow light to get to the live plant material. Andrew Wattum noted that Smith and Hawken received a beautification award form the Walnut Creek City Council. There were no other comments from the floor and the public comment was closed. C.Boju6s made a motion to place this item on the consent calendar. The motion was seconded by C.Auran. Comment on motion: this will be a great addition to Burlingame,nice project,encourage applicant to work with Trio salon access at the rear to pick-up products. Chair Osterling called for a vote on the motion to place this item on the consent calendar when plans had been revised as directed. The motion passed on a voice vote 5-0-2 (Crs. Keighran and Keele absent). The Planning Commission's action is advisory and not appealable. This item concluded at 10:10 p.m. 1. 1553 DRAKE AVENUE, ZONED R-1 — APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW AND SPECIAL PERMIT FOR HEIGHT FOR A NEW TWO-STORY SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING AND DETACHED GARAGE(RANDY GRANGE,TRG ARCHITECTS,APPLICANT AND ARCHITECT;OTTO MILLER, PROPERTY OWNER) (47 NOTICED) PROJECT PLANNER: RUBEN HURIN CP Monroe briefly presented the project description. There were no questions of staff. Chair Osterling opened the public comment. Mark Hudak,216 Park Road,Burlingame,noted that there was a support letter from Denise Baliestrieri who could not stay to the end of the meeting. Project needs a special permit for height, but height in Burlingame is not measured in a standard way, measured from average top of curb, not from ambient grade as done throughout the county. Height of this building measured from ambient grade would be 29'. There is only a sliver of the ridge that is over 30'height limit, needs a special permit,not a variance. Project has been designed by a well respected architect,despite where house is located should stand on its own merits. There are 5 bedrooms because that what people buying homes in Burlingame want and are selling very fast. The applicant is asking the Commission to act on this project, it is not going to help to send this project to design review,because the project architect has already created a very nice design, consistent with City guidelines. Please give comments and bring this project back for action, meets all of the code regulations except special permit height. Janet Garcia, 1561 Drake Avenue,Ann Thomas, 1520 Drake Avenue, and Caroline Oushani, 1527 Drake Avenue had the following comments, and were speaking on behalf of their neighbors, the Taylors, 1566 Drake Avenue, Gussonis, 1505 Drake Avenue, O'Neals, 1516 Drake Avenue, McCrums, 1540 Drake �. Avenue and Ochses, 1512 Drake Avenue; at the October 14,2003 study meeting the Planning Commission asked the applicant to look at this project as part of the 4 contiguous properties being developed on this 15 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes July 26, 2004 block, asked for the project to be reduced in size, and asked the applicant to look at impact of the development on traffic and sewer capacity; neighbor handed up pictures taken from the adjacent house at —� 1557 Drake Avenue,from the entrance of this house you look directly at the side elevation of the new house, there is only a 4' side yard,will eliminate daylight,the right side of the house is too massive,it will devastate the value of 1557 Drake Avenue,please look at the option to flip the driveway location,when backing out of 1561 Drake it is necessary to use the driveway at 1553 Drake, including to turn, could not back out of the driveway if there is not driveway located there,would need to at least paint the curb red, applicant did not address the comments made by the Commission at the October 14, 2003 meeting,please take into account that this design does not fit the neighborhood; this project is doubling the FAR on the lot, houses on this block are within 1,800 and 2,000 SF, look at the impact of all 4 houses, Mr. Hudak asked you to consider this as a separate project,but this should be looked at as one large development; the applicant ignored the Commissions requests that were made at the first meeting, there has been no environmental review or reduction in size; applicant continues to play games, the Planning Commission should be offended by the applicant's behavior;the Planning Commission and City Council discussed floor area and house size as an issue at their joint meeting, it is clear that the floor area is an issue with our City Council and that it was made a priority to work on changing the code to reduce floor area allowed in Burlingame;responsibility lies with Commission;neighbor's have asked for two years that the Planning Commission look at this project as a development of 4 houses, the Planning Commission has already granted a height variance for lot#11, to grant approval of this house in isolation is not right; does Commissioner Auran have a listing of a house on Drake Avenue? C. Auran responded that he did but the escrow has closed. Mark Hudak responded to the neighbor's comments: the neighbor's continue to insist that this project be reviewed as a subdivision; however the City Attorney has stated that this project needs to be looked at as a single site and project; issue of floor area has been incorrectly stated, it was concluded that the floor area currently allowed is satisfactory to the City Council or we would be working on new regulations for floor area right now,at the joint meeting it was decided that the Planning Commission and staff would look at the standards for re-emerging lots,but it was decided that the community standard is to leave the floor area ratio as is, until the will of the people in the City changes, need to vote on something tonight. Commissioner disagreed with Mr. Hudak's view of how floor area was view by the City Council. The review of the floor area ratio was not assigned the highest priority, but it was an assignment for the subcommittee to look at. Mr. Hudak stated that he felt that the majority of the City Council believes that the floor area ratio should stay as it is. Commission asked why the driveway can't be switched to the other side. The architect's representative stated that the driveway location was moved because when located on the right side there were three driveways merging together in the corner of the street,created a paved area in the corner,decided to moved the driveway to the left side and add greenery on the right side next to the other driveway. Commission asked why it took 9 months for this project to come back,is not even re-designed. Mr.Hudak explained that the property owner was working on other projects, this property was not his top priority. There were no other comments from the floor and the public comment was closed. Commission discussion: the photo simulation of the block prepared by the architect is very helpful, concerned with driveway changes, it seems to work well now on the right side and benefits the neighbor, look into switching driveway to right side;need to look at this project as a separate isolated project from the other 3 houses on Drake; excellent job on design, although the driveway is located on the left side it looks --� like the architect design the right side that faces 1557 with less bulk,the second story slopes away from the property line and there are two dormers rather than a large two story element as located along the driveway elevation; concerned about how this fits in with the neighborhood, shouldn't be so tall, should swap the 16 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes July 26, 2004 driveway to accommodate the neighborhood, nice design but concerned with height and size; the special permit for height is only for a small portion, but should look at swapping driveway to enhance the traffic flow at the end of the block;well designed project, the massing is located on the driveway side away from 1557 Drake Avenue, concerned with context issues, this is a large house in context of the block, should study the driveway change and how the turn around on the block will be affected, there is an 11'2" side setback on the driveway side, don't need that much width for the driveway, maybe the house can be shift over to the left to create a larger side setback next to 1557 Drake,would like to see the footprint ofthe house approved on lot#11 shown on sheet Al,not sure that design review is the right path for this project, let the architect work out these issues;do a circulation traffic study,need a traffic engineer to review the turnaround space,movements and needs at the end of this block and then revise the plans accordingly, if driveway is retained on left side then right side setback should be increased;why do we need a traffic study,just advise the applicant to switch the driveway location because it allows for a better traffic circulation and gives more light to 1557 Drake Avenue; in response to the neighbor's comments,there is a difference between 3 lots re- emerging with a heritage tree, the City Council resolved this issue by saying that the floor area on re- emerging lots should be stepped down,but this project is a stand alone project,don't want to limit FAR just for this project when the size and design are o.k.; if driveway is flipped,will there be a greater light impact on 1557 Drake?if not then support change;consider mass and bulk issue when looking at driveway change, may need to reduce left elevation. Commission comments and concerns summary: • Look into switching driveway to right side of the lot to accommodate the neighborhood and to enhance the traffic flow at the end of the block; • Study the driveway change and how the turn around on the block will be affected;have a circulation, maneuver study completed by qualified engineer to review the turn around space at the end this �,. block and incorporate conclusions in the plans accordingly, • Concerned about how this fits in with the neighborhood,shouldn't be so tall,concerned with height and size, concerned with context issues, this is a large house in context with the block; • There is an 11'2"side setback on the driveway side,don't need that much width for the driveway,if driveway is retained on left side, the house should be shifted over to the left to create a larger side setback next to 1557 Drake; • If driveway is flipped will there be a greater light impact on 1557 Drake,if not then support change; consider mass and bulk issue when looking at driveway change,may need to reduce left elevation; and • Show the footprint of house approved on lot#11 on sheet Al; C.Auran made a motion to place this item on the regular action calendar at a time when the above comments have been addressed and plan checked. This motion was seconded by C. Bojues . Chair Osterling called for a vote on the motion to place this item on the regular action calendar when plans have been revised as directed. The motion passed on a voice vote 5-0-2(Crs. Keighran and Keele absent). The Planning Commission's action is advisory and not appealable. This item concluded at 11:05 p.m. XI. PLANNER REPORTS - Review of City Council regular meeting of July 19, 2004. CP Monroe reviewed the actions of the Council meeting of July 19,2004. CP also noted that the relocation of the passenger platforms at the Broadway and Burlingame Avenue stations was discussed. CalTrain JPB 17 City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes July 26, 2004 has sent a separate letter to the Commission notifying them of the proposed design for the passenger shelters on the north bound side of the tracks at the Burlingame Avenue station. Commissioners had no comments about the new shelter design. - Confirmed meeting schedule for the Neighborhood Consistency and Bayfront Zoning Subcommittees. The next meeting of the Neighborhood Consistency Subcommittee to discuss zoning issues will be on September 10, 2004 at 10:00 a.m. in conference room A. The next meeting of the Bayfront Zoning Subcommittee will be on August 17,2004 at noon in conference room A. These are working meetings and the binders with the materials will be included in the packet preceding the meeting date. XII. ADJOURNMENT Chair Osterling adjourned the meeting at 11:20 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Michael Brownrigg, Secretary S:\MINUTES\07.26.04.unapproved.doc 18 07-14-04 SUMMARY OF PART ONE OFFENSES PAGE: 1 FOR: JUNE, 2004 F Current Prev Last Actual Actual YTD YTD Crime Classification.................... Current Year.. YTD.. YTD.. Change % Change Murder and Nonnegligent Manslaughter 0 0 0 0 0 Manslaughter by Negligence 0 0 0 0 0 Rape By Force 1 1 3 2 1 50.00 Attempt to Commit Forcible Rape 1 0 1 0 1 Robbery Firearm 2 0 3 1 2 200.00 Robbery Knife 0 0 0 1 -1 -100.00 Robbery Other Dangerous Weapon 0 0 4 4 0 0.00 Robbery Strong-Arm 1 1 2 3 -1 -33.33 Assault - Firearm 0 0 0 0 0 Assault - Knife 0 0 3 3 0 0.00 Assault - Other Dangerous Weapon 0 2 7 6 1 16.67 Assault - Hands,Fists,Feet 0 2 5 3 2 66.67 Assault - Other (Simple) 13 17 110 80 30 37.50 Burglary - Forcible Entry 7 9 43 38 5 13.16 Burglary - Unlawful Entry 13 4 58 26 32 123.08 Burglary - Attempted Forcible Entry 0 0 0 0 0 Larceny Pocket-Picking 0 0 0 0 0 Larceny Purse-Snatching 0 0 0 0 0 Larceny Shoplifting 2 1 16 it 5 45.45 Larceny From Motor Vehicle 31 14 154 108 46 42.59 Larceny Motor Veh Parts Accessories 4 3 30 28 2 7.14 Larceny Bicycles 2 3 11 15 -4 -26.67 Larceny From Building 1 0 8 8 0 0.00 Larceny From Any Coin-Op Machine 2 2 10 14 -4 -28.57 Larceny All Other 24 27 136 111 25 22.52 Motor Vehicle Theft Auto 8 2 62 32 30 93.75 Motor Vehicle Theft Bus 0 0 0 1 -1 -100.00 Motor Vehicle Theft Other 0 1 1 1 0 0.00 i ------- ------ ------- ------- 112 89 667 496 112 89 667 496 07-14-04 MONTHLY SUMMARY OF PART TWO OFFENSES PAGE: 1- CITY REPORT FOR: JUNE, 2004 Current Prev Last Actual Actual YTD YTD Crime Classification.................... Current Year.. YTD.. YTD.. Change % Change All Other Offenses 31 40 238 199 39 19.60 Animal Abuse 0 0 1 0 1 Animal Nuisance 0 0 0 1 -1 -100.00 Arson 4 6 4 6 -2 -33.33 Assists to Outside Agencies 0 0 0 0 0 Bicycle Violations 0 0 0 0 0 Bigamy 0 0 0 0 0 Bomb Offense 0 0 0 0 0 Bomb Threat 0 0 0 0 0 Bribery 0 0 0 0 0 Check Offenses 0 2 3 13 -10 -76.92 Child Neglect/prot custody 3 1 11 8 3 37.50 Computer Crime 0 0 0 0 0 Conspiracy 0 0 0 0 0 Credit Card Offenses 0 0 0 0 0 Cruelty to Dependent Adult 1 0 2 2 0 0.00 Curfew and Loitering Laws 0 0 0 0 0 Death Investigation 3 2 17 16 1 6.25 Disorderly Conduct 1 4 10 20 -10 -50.00 Driver's License Violations 0 0 2 2 0 0.00 Driving Under the Influence 7 7 42 30 12 40.00 Drug Abuse Violations 1 2 23 11 12 109.09 Drug/Sex Registrants 0 0 1 2 -1 -50.00 Drunkeness 2 8 28 30 -2 -6.67 Embezzlement 4 0 11 5 6 120.00 Escape 0 0 0 0 0 Extortion 0 0 0 0 0 False Police Reports 0 0 0 0 0 False Reports of Emergency 0 0 0 0 0 Fish and Game Violations 0 0 0 0 0 Forgery and Counterfeiting 5 6 21 29 -8 -27.59 Found Property 11 8 55 40 15 37.50 Fraud 7 3 20 23 -3 -13.04 Gambling 0 0 0 0 0 Harrassing Phone Calls 6 6 25 24 1 4.17 07-14-04 MONTHLY SUMMARY OF PART TWO OFFENSES PAGE: 2 CITY REPORT FOR: JUNE, 2004 r Current Prev Last Actual Actual YTD YTD Crime Classification.................... Current Year.. YTD.. YTD.. Change % Change Hit and Run Accidents 5 2 32 13 19 146.15 Impersonation 0 0 1 0 1 Incest 0 0 0 0 0 Indecent Exposure 1 1 3 5 -2 -40.00 Intimidating a witness 0 0 1 0 1 Kidnapping 0 0 0 0 0 Lewd Conduct 0 0 2 0 2 Liquor Laws 0 0 5 5 0 0.00 Littering/Dumping 0 0 0 0 0 Marijuana Violations 1 3 13 9 4 44.44 Mental Health Cases 12 9 54 53 1 1.89 Missing Person 6 1 29 10 19 190.00 Missing Property 6 11 47 49 -2 -4.08 Municipal Code Violations 2 9 31 16 15 93.75 Narcotics Sales/Manufacture 0 0 1 0 1 Offenses Against Children 0 0 1 4 -3 -75.00 Other Assaults 13 17 110 80 30 37.50 Other Juvenile Offenses 0 0 2 2 0 0.00 Other Police Service 6 6 40 25 15 60.00 Pandering for immoral purposes 0 0 0 0 0 Parole Violations 0 0 1 0 1 Perjury 0 0 0 0 0 Possession of Burglary Tools 0 0 0 1 -1 -100.00 Possession of drug paraphernalia 0 0 0 0 0 Possession of obscene literature;picture 0 0 0 0 0 Probation Violations 0 0 3 5 -2 -40.00 Prostitution and Commercial Vice 0 0 1 0 1 Prowling 0 0 0 0 0 Resisting Arrest 1 0 3 0 3 Runaways (Under 18) 0 0 0 0 0 Sex Offenses 0 1 1 1 0 0.00 Sex Offenses against Children 0 1 1 3 -2 -66.67 Sodomy 0 0 0 0 0 Stalking 1 1 1 2 -1 -50.00 Statutory Rape 0 0 0 0 0 07-14-04 MONTHLY SUMMARY OF PART TWO OFFENSES PAGE: 3,, CITY REPORT FOR: JUNE, 2004 Current Prev Last Actual Actual YTD YTD Crime Classification.................... Current Year.. YTD.. YTD.. Change % Change Stolen Property;Buying;Receiving;Possess 1 0 1 2 -1 -50.00 Suspended License 1 5 24 14 10 71.43 Tax Evasion 0 0 0 0 0 Temp Restraining Orders 6 3 24 19 5 26.32 Terrorist Threats 4 2 20 11 9 81.82 Towed Vehicle 54 35 213 184 29 15.76 Trespassing 1 2 7 8 -1 -12.50 Truants/Incorrigible Juvs 1 0 3 1 2 200.00 US Mail Crimes 0 0 0 0 0 Vagrancy 0 0 0 0 0 Vandalism 26 42 103 129 -26 -20.16 Vehicle Code Violations 3 3 13 30 -17 -56.67 Violation of Court Order 2 2 8 12 -4 -33.33 Warrants - Felony 0 0 8 5 3 60.00 Warrants - Misd 4 2 30 14 16 114.29 Weapons;Carrying,Possessing 2 1 10 4 6 150.00 Welfare Fraud 0 0 0 0 0 —----- ------ ------- ------- 245 254 1,361 1,177 245 254 1,361 1,177 07-14-04 MONTHLY SUMMARY OF CITATIONS PAGE : 1 CITY REPORT FOR: JUNE, 2004 Current Prev Last Actual Actual Crime Classification. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Current Year. . YTD. . YTD. . Parking Citations 5164 3 , 039 24 , 619 17, 263 Moving Citations 173 201 1, 694 1, 446 ------- ------ -- ----- ------- 5337 3 , 240 26, 313 18, 709 ------- ------ ------- ------- ------- ------ ------- ------- 5337 3 , 240 26, 313 18, 709 BURLINGAME Officer Productivity. . . . generated on 07/15/2004 at 09 : 54 : 19 AM Reported On: All Officers Report Range: 06/01/2004 to 06/30/2004 Data Type Reported on: PARKING Valid All Voids $ All % Officer: ID: Cnt Valid Cnt Voids Valid ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ DAVIS 190 1202 24.08 11 17.46 99.09 DAZA-QUIROZ 634 496 9.94 2 3.17 99.60 GARRETT 501 1014 20.32 18 28.57 98.26 HARRISON 506 1185 23.74 14 22.22 98.83 KIRKPATRICK 502 1094 21.92 18 28.57 98.38 Total 4991 63 Page 1 of 1 CITY OF BURLINGAME BUILDING INSPECTION MONTHLY PERMIT ACTIVITY JULY, 2004 F.Y. 2004 F.Y. 2003 SAMEMONTH THIS YEAR LAST YEAR THIS MONTE LAST YEAR DIFF TO DATE TO DATE DIFF Permit type # Valuation # Valuation % # Valuation # Valuation % New Single Family 1 $435,000 1 $350,000 24.3 1 $435,000 1 $350,000 24.3 New Multi-Family 0 $0 0 $0 .0 0 $0 0 $0 .0 New Commercial 0 $0 0 $0 .0 0 $0 0 $0 .0 Alterations-Res 26 $1,599,050 39 $1,282,500 24.7 26 $1,599,050 39 $1,282,500 24.7 Alterations-NonRes 8 $2,675,107 7 $1,080,500 147.6 8 $2,675,107 7 $1,080,500 147.6 Demolition 2 $0 7 $0 .0 2 $0 7 $0 .0 Swimming Pool 0 $0 0 $0 .0 0 $0 0 $0 .0 Sign Permits 4 $6,350 4 $29,300 78.3- 4 $6,350 4 $29,300 78.3- Fences 0 $0 0 $0 .0 0 $0 0 $0 .0 Reroofing 40 $638,744 31 $288,022 121.8 40 $638,744 31 $288,022 121.8 Repairs 3 $55,000 4 $19,000 189.5 3 $55,000 4 $19,000 189.5 Window Repl 10 $101,635 10 $57,927 75.5 10 $101,635 10 $57,927 75.5 Miscellaneous 3 $27,770 2 $29,000 4.2- 3 $27,770 2 $29,000 4.2- TOTALS...... 97 $5,538,656 105 $3,136,249 76.6 97 $5,538,656 105 $3,136,249 76.6 8/02/04 13:16:44 CITY OF BURLINGAME Portfolio Management Portfolio Summary June 30, 2004 Par Market Book % of Days to YTM YTM Investments Value Value Value Portfolio Term Maturity 360 Equiv. 365 Equiv. LAIF & County Pool 26,705,947.05 26,705,947 05 26,705,947.05 81.65 1 1 2.386 2.420 Federal Agency Issues - Coupon 6,000,000.00 5.960,610 00 6,000,000.00 18.35 974 811 2.745 2.783 Investments 32,705,947.05 32,666,557.05 32,705,947.05 100.00% 180 150 2.452 2.486 Total Earnings June 30 Month Ending Fiscal Year To Date Fiscal Year Ending Current Year 65,266.30 736,672,70 736,672.70 Average Daily Balance 32,371,501.25 28,094,106.55 Effective Rate of Return 2.45% 2.61% 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 all fund types, and availabil' of some of these funds is restricted by law (e.g. Gas Tax, Trust & Agency funds, Capital Projects, and Enterprise funds). = zzoosJE US NAVA, NANCE DIR./TREASURER Portfolio CITY CP Run Date: 08/02/2004 - 11:51 PM (PRF_PM1)SymRept V6.21 Report Ver. 5.00 CITY OF BURLINGAME Portfolio Management Page 2 Portfolio Details - Investments June 30, 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 LAW&County Pool SYS77 77 LOCAL AGENCY INV.FD. 4,258,902.61 4,258,902.61 4,258,902.61 1.469 1.469 1 SYS79 79 S M COUNTY POOL 22,447,044,44 22,447,044.44 22,447,044.44 2.600 2.600 1 Subtotal and Average 26,371,501.25 26,705,947.05 26,705,947.05 26,705,947.05 2.420 1 Federal Agency Issues-Coupon 3128X16Q5 513 FEDERAL HOME LOAN MORTG.CORP. 11/17/2003 2,000,000.00 1,992,500.00 2,000,000.00 2.300 2.300 504 11/17/2005 3128X2NA9 514 FEDERAL HOME LOAN MORTG.CORP, 01/30/2004 3,000,000.00 2,977,800.00 3,000,000.00 3.000 3.000 943 01/30/2007 3136F5TJ0 515 FANNIE MAE 04/27/2004 1,000,000.00 990,310.00 1,000,000.00 3.100 3.100 1,030 04/27/2007 Subtotal and Average 6,000,000.00 6,000,000.00 5,960,610.00 6,000,000.00 2.783 811 Total and Average 32,371,501.25 32,705,947.05 32,666,557.05 32,705,947.05 2.486 150 Portfolio CITY Run Dale:08/02/2004.11° CP PM(PRF_PM2),I -Rept V6.21 Report Ver.5.00 CITY OF BURLINGAME Portfolio Management Page 3 Activity By Type June 1, 2004 through June 30, 2004 Beginning Stated Transaction Purchases Redemptions Ending CUSIP Investment# Issuer Balance Rate Date or Deposits or Withdrawals Balance LAIF&County Pool (Monthly Summary) SYS79 79 S M COUNTY POOL 2.600 354,422.08 0.00 Subtotal 26,351,524.97 354,422.08 0.00 26,705,947.05 Federal Agency Issues-Coupon Subtotal 6,000,000.00 6,000,000.00 Total 32,351,524.97 354,422.08 0.00 32,705,947.05 Portfolio CITY CP Run Date:08/02/2004-11:51 PM(PRF PM3)SynnRept V6.21 Report Ver.5.00 CITY OF BURLINGAME Portfolio Management Page 4 Activity Summary June 2003 through June 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 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 February 2004 4 27,499,689.16 2.557 2.592 2.564 0 0 174 163 March 2004 4 29,579,440.12 2.512 2.547 2.512 0 0 161 146 April 2004 5 31,824,022.87 2.373 2.405 2.318 1 0 184 165 May 2004 5 32,351,524.97 2.412 2.445 2.368 0 0 181 157 June 2004 5 32,705,947.05 2.452 2.486 2.420 0 0 180 150 Average 4 28,418,732.12 2.605% 2.641% 2.615 0 0 115 100 Portfolio CITY CP Run Date:08/02/2004/ PM(PR( I SynnRept V6.21 1\ (\ 2eport Ver.5.00 CITY OF BURLINGAME Portfolio Management Page 5 Distribution of Investments By Type June 2003 through June 2004 June July August September October November December January February March April May June Average Security Type 2003 2003 2003 2003 2003 2003 2003 2004 2004 2004 2004 2004 2004 by Period LAIF&County Pool 92.6 92.6 92.6 96.1 96.2 92.3 93.0 81.8 81.8 83.1 81.2 81.5 81.7 88.2% Certificates of Deposit-Bank Certificates of Deposit-S& Certificates of Deposit-Thrift&Ln Negotiable CD's-Bank CORP NOTES Bankers Acceptances Commercial Paper-Interest Bearing Commercial Paper-Discount Federal Agency Issues-Coupon 7.4 7.4 7.4 3.9 3.8 7.7 7.0 18.3 18.2 16.9 18.9 18.6 18.4 11.8% 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:08/02/2004•11:51 PM(PRF PM5)SyrnRepl V6.21 Report Ver.5.00 CITY OF BURLINGAME Portfolio Management Page 6 Interest Earnings Summary June 30, 2004 June 30 Month Ending Fiscal Year To Date CD/Coupon/Discount Investments: Interest Collected 0.00 54,000.00 Plus Accrued Interest at End of Period 48,883.33 48,883.33 Less Accrued Interest at Beginning of Period ( 34,966.67) ( 13,816.67) Less Accrued Interest at Purchase During Period ( 0.00) ( 0.00) Interest Earned during Period 13,916.66 89,066.66 Adjusted by Capital Gains or Losses 0.00 0.00 Earnings during Periods 13,916.66 89,066.66 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 956.94 672,810.75 Plus Accrued Interest at End of Period 382,460.16 382,460.16 Less Accrued Interest at Beginning of Period ( 332,067.46) ( 407,664.87) Interest Earned during Period 51,349.64 647,606.04 Total Interest Earned during Period 65,266.30 736,672.70 Total Capital Gains or Losses 0.00 0.00 Total Earnings during Period 65,266.30 736,672.70 Portfolio CITY CP Run Date:08/02/2004-y / PM(PRF SymRept V6.21 /` /1 !port Ver.5.00 03BD Portfolio Management Portfolio Summary June 30, 2004 Par Market Book %.of Days to YTM YTM Investments Value Value Value Portfolio Term Maturity 360 Equiv. 365 Equiv. Managed Pool Accounts 745,976.05 745,976.05 745,976.05 100.00 1 1 1.449 1.469 Investments 745,976.05 745,976.05 745,976.05 100.00% 1 1 1.449 1.469 Total Earnings June 30 Month Ending Fiscal Year To Date Fiscal Year Ending Current Year 891.06 51,519.10 51,519.10 Average Daily Balance 759,509.38 3,247,489.76 Effective Rate of Return 1.43% 1.58% 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 by law(e.g. Gas Tax,Trust&Agency funds,Capital Projects,and Enterprise funds). i LOo� J us va, 'Hance Director/Treasurer Portfolio 036D CP Run Date:08/02/2004.11:53 PM(PRF PM1)SymRept V6.21 Report Ver.5.00 03BD Portfolio Management Page 2 Portfolio Details - Investments June 30, 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 745,976.05 745,976.05 745,976.05 1.469 1.449 1.469 1 Subtotal and Average 759,509.38 745,976.05 745,976.05 745,976.05 1.449 1.469 1 Total and Average 759,509.38 745,976.05 745,976.05 745,976.05 1.449 1.469 1 Portfolio 03BD CP Run Date:08/02/2004�+°+ PM(PRF_PM(I Rept V6.21 Report Ver.5.00 04BD Portfolio Management Portfolio Summary June 30, 2004 Par Market Book %of Days to YTM YTM Investments Value Value Value Portfolio Term Maturity 360 Equiv. 365 Equiv. Managed Pool Accounts 18,064,021.06 18.064,021.06 18,064,021.06 100.00 1 1 1.449 1.469 Investments 18,064,021.06 18,064,021.06 18,064,021.06 100.00% 1 1 1.449 1.469 Total Earnings June 30 Month Ending Fiscal Year To Date Fiscal Year Ending Current Year 21,816.45 84,323.85 84,323.85 Average Daily Balance 18,595,687.73 Effective Rate of Return 1.43% Jesus v ,Finance Dir.Treasurer Portfolio 04BD CP Run Date:08/02/2004.11:55 PM(PRF PM1)SyrnRepl V6.21 Report Ver.5.00 04BD Portfolio Management Page 2 Portfolio Details - Investments June 30, 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 SYS85 85 Local Agency Investment Fund 03/12/2004 18,064,021.06 18,064,021.06 18,064,021.06 1.469 1.469 1 Subtotal and Average 18,595,687.73 18,064,021.06 18,064,021.06 18,064,021.06 1.469 1 Total and Average 18,595,687.73 18,064,021.06 18,064,021.06 18,064,021.06 1.469 1 Portfolio 04BD CP Run Dale:08/02/2004•1 S5 PM(PRF_PM2)G+,mRepl V6.21 ,._,)Ver.5.00 f f � CITY OF BURLINGAME Portfolio Management Portfolio Summary July 31, 2004 Par Market Book %of Days to YTM YTM Investments Value Value Value Portfolio Term Maturity 360 Equiv. 365 Equiv. LAIF&County Pool 25,221,968.21 25,221,968.21 25,221,968.21 80.78 1 1 2.518 2.553 Federal Agency Issues-Coupon 6,000,000.00 5,966,800.00 6,000,000.00 19.22 974 780 2.745 2.783 Investments 31,221,968.21 31,188,768.21 31,221,968.21 100,00% 188 151 2.561 2.597 Total Earnings July 31 Month Ending Fiscal Year To Date Current Year 67,829.18 67,829.18 Average Daily Balance 31,843,765.11 31,843,765.11 Effective Rate of Return 2,51% 2.51% 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 of some of these funds is restricted bylaw(e.g. Gas Tax,Trust&Agency funds,Capital Projects,and Enterprise funds). - /z(2� 1,0,q — rJ-oy JESUS N A, FINANCE DIR./TREASURER Portfolio CITY CP Run Date:08/11/2004-11:14 PM(PRF_PM1)SymRept V6.21 Report Ver.5.00 CITY OF BURLINGAME Portfolio Management Page 2 Portfolio Details - Investments July 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 LAW&County Pool SYS77 77 LOCAL AGENCY INV.FD. 2,774,923.77 2,774,923.77 2,774,923.77 1.604 1.604 1 SYS79 79 S M COUNTY POOL 22,447,044.44 22,447,044.44 22,447,044.44 2.670 2.670 1 Subtotal and Average 25,843,765.11 25,221,968.21 25,221,968.21 25,221,968.21 2.553 1 Federal Agency Issues-Coupon 3128X16Q5 513 FEDERAL HOME LOAN MORTG.CORP. 11/17/2003 2,000,000.00 1,994,380.00 2,000,000.00 2.300 2.300 473 11/17/2005 3128X2NA9 514 FEDERAL HOME LOAN MORTG.CORP. 01/30/2004 3,000,000.00 2,977,110.00 3,000,000.00 3.000 3.000 912 01/30/2007 3136F5TJ0 515 FANNIE MAE 04/27/2004 1,000,000.00 995,310.00 1,000,000.00 3.100 3.100 999 04/27/2007 Subtotal and Average 6,000,000.00 6,000,000.00 5,966,800.00 6,000,000.00 2.783 780 Total and Average 31,843,765.11 31,221,968.21 31,188,768.21 31,221,968.21 2.597 151 Portfolio CITY Run Date:08/11/2004-11:14 CP PM(PRF_PM2)SyrnRept V6.21 �rt ver.5.00 CITY OF BURLINGAME Portfolio Management Page 3 Activity By Type July 1, 2004 through July 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 AGENCYINV.FD. 1.604 16,021.16 1,500,000.00 Subtotal 26,705,947.05 16,021.16 1,500,000.00 25,221,968.21 Federal Agency Issues-Coupon Subtotal 6,000,000.00 6,000,000.00 Total 32,705,947.05 16,021.16 1,500,000.00 31,221,968.21 Portfolio CITY CP Run Date:08/11/2004•11:14 PM(PRF_PM3)SynnRept V6.21 Report Ver.5.00 CITY OF BURLINGAME Portfolio Management Page 4 Activity Summary July 2003 through July 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 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 February 2004 4 27,499,689.16 2.557 2.592 2.564 0 0 174 163 March 2004 4 29,579,440.12 2.512 2.547 2.512 0 0 161 146 April 2004 5 31 824,022.87 2.373 2.405 2.318 1 0 184 165 May 2004 5 32,351,524.97 2.412 2.445 2.368 0 0 181 157 June 2004 5 32,705,947.05 2.452 2.486 2.420 0 0 180 150 July 2004 5 31,221,968.21 2.561 2.597 2.553 0 0 188 151 Average 4 28,734,179.44 2.588% 2.624% 2.596 0 0 123 106 Portfolio CITY CP Run Date:08/11/2004-11:14 PM(PRF_PM4)SynnRept V6.21 Report Ver.5.00 r � r CITY OF BURLINGAME Portfolio Management Page 5 Distribution of Investments By Type July 2003 through July 2004 July August September October November December January February March April May June July Average Security Type 2003 2003 2003 2003 2003 2003 2004 2004 2004 2004 2004 2004 2004 by Period LAW&County Pool 92.6 92.6 96.1 96.2 92.3 93.0 81.8 81.8 83.1 81.2 81.5 81.7 80.8 87.3% 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 7.4 7.4 3.9 3.8 7.7 7.0 18.3 18.2 16.9 18.9 18.6 18.4 19.2 12.7% 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 I Portfolio CITY CP Run Dale:08/11/2004-11:14 PM(PRF_PM5)SynnRept V6.21 Report Ver.5.00 CITY OF BURLINGAME Portfolio Management Page 6 Interest Earnings Summary July 31, 2004 July 31 Month Ending Fiscal Year To Date CD/Coupon/Discount Investments: Interest Collected 45,000.00 45,000.00 Plus Accrued Interest at End of Period 17,800.00 17,800.00 Less Accrued Interest at Beginning of Period ( 48,883.33) ( 48,883.33) Less Accrued Interest at Purchase During Period ( 0.00) ( 0.00) Interest Earned during Period 13,916.67 13,916.67 Adjusted by Capital Gains or Losses 0.00 0.00 Earnings during Periods 13,916.67 13,916.67 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 152,372.60 152,372.60 Plus Accrued Interest at End of Period 284,000.07 284,000.07 Less Accrued Interest at Beginning of Period ( 382,460.16) ( 382,460.16) Interest Earned during Period 53,912.51 53,912.51 Total Interest Earned during Period 67,829.18 67,829.18 Total Capital Gains or Losses 0.00 0.00 Total Earnings during Period 67,829.18 67,829.18 Portfolio CITY CP Run Date:08/11/2004•11:14 PM(PRF PM6)SynnRept V6.21 Report Ver.5.00 03BD Portfolio Management Portfolio Summary July 31, 2004 Par Market Book %of Daysto YTM YTM Investments Value Value Value Portfolio Term Maturity 360 Equiv. 365 Equiv. Managed Pool Accounts 424,732.16 424,732.16 424,732.16 100.00 1 1 1.582 1.604 Investments 424,732.16 424,732.16 424,732.16 100.00% 1 1 1.582 1.604 Total Earnings July 31 Month Ending Fiscal Year To Date Current Year 701.02 701.02 Average Daily Balance 559,358.43 559,358.43 Effective Rate of Return 1.48% 1.48% 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 by law(e,g.Gas Tax,Trust&Agency funds,Capital Projects,and Enterprise funds). Jesus Na a, Finance Director/Treasurer Portfolio 03BD CP Run Date:08/11/2004-11:15 PM(PRF_PM1)SynnRept V6.21 Report Ver.5.00 03BD Portfolio Management Page 2 Portfolio Details - Investments July 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 424,732.16 424,732.16 424,732.16 1.604 1.582 1.604 1 Subtotal and Average 559,358.43 424,732.16 424,732.16 424,732.16 1.582 1.604 1 Total and Average 559,358.43 424,732.16 424,732.16 424,732.16 1.582 1.604 1 Portfolio 038D CP Run Date:08/11/2004-11:15 PM(PRF PM2)SymRept V6.21 )rt Ver.5.00 04BD Portfolio Management Portfolio Summary July 31, 2004 Par Market Book %of Days to YTM YTM Investments Value Value Value Portfolio Term Maturity 360 Equiv. 365 Equiv. Managed Pool Accounts 17,456,293.14 17,456,293.14 17,456,293.14 100.00 1 1 1.582 1.604 Investments 17,456,293.14 17,456,293.14 17,456,293.14 100.00% 1 1 1.582 1.604 Total Earnings July 31 Month Ending _ Fiscal Year To Date _ Current Year 22,196.46 22,196.46 Average Daily Balance 17,687,202.52 17,687,202.52 Effective Rate of Return 1.48% 1.48% Jesus Nave Finance Dir./Treasurer Portfolio 04BD CP Run Date:08/11/2004-11:16 PM(PRF PM1)SyrnRept V6.21 Report Ver.5.00 04BD Portfolio Management Page 2 Portfolio Details - Investments July 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 Y 85 S S 85 Local Agency Investment Fund 17,456,293.14 17,456,293.14 17,456,293.14 1.604 1.604 1 Subtotal and Average 17,687,202.52 17,456,293.14 17,456,293.14 17,456,293.14 1.604 1 Total and Average 17,687,202.52 17,456,293.14 17,456,293.14 17,456,293.14 1.604 1 Portfolio 04BD CP Run Date:08/11/2004-11:16 PM(PRF_PM2)SymRept V6.21 )t Ver.5.00 Hag Sustainable San Mateo County (650)638-2323 'k ;5 177 Bovet Road, Sixth Floor Fax:(650)341-1395 E-mail:advocate@sustainablesanmateo.org n San Mateo, CA 94402 Web:www.sustainablesanmateo.org Dedicated to the long-term health and vitality of our region July 20, 2004 Founder MARCIA PAGELS Jesus Nava Board of Directors Finance Director/Treasurer, City of Burlingame Chair 501 Primrose Road RUTH PETERSON Burlingame, CA 94010 Vice Chair, Program RAY MILLER Dear Mr. Nava: Vice Chair, Management RICKI MCGLASHAN We thank the City of Burlingame for supporting the 8th edition of Indicators for a Secretary Sustainable San Mateo County, A Yearly Report Card on our County's Quality of Life. CAROL TANZI We especially appreciate Burlingame's support this year given the general fiscal Treasurer ROSALYN Koo crisis affecting the state's contributions to the cities and counties. Your support CAROL KITTERMASTER helps us continue to meet our goal of annually publishing and distributing the CLEM MOLONY Indicators Report to emphasize the necessity of acting sustainably in order to MARCIA PAGELS maintain and improve the quality of life in this County. SAPNA SINGH Advisory Council One of the goals of the availability of this information is to raise the level of CARLA BAGNESCHI consciousness of the County's citizens about the necessity of factoring the BETH BHATNAGER concepts of sustainability into all decisions. This means that we have to think JILL BOONE and act in a mariner that will preserve the way of life we enjoy here in the JULIA BOTT County for generations to come. Jerry Hill, County Supervisor, has called TOM CRONIN Sustainable San Mateo County "the conscience of the county." EVANGELITo BURGESS RICHARD GORDON JERRY HILL Private citizens, various organizations and government officials have requested ANNE HINCKLE copies for data on specific indicators. We receive frequent requests for copies of DAVID HINCKLE the Indicators Report to be utilized as a reference in university student research. JONATHAN KORFHAGE These are just a few among many of the examples of the utility of the Indicators TED LEMPERT Report to the County at large. The report also helps our own organization set ARTHUR LLOYD goals for developing programs than can measurably affect what the Indicators has KAY MCCANN DOUG MCGLASHAN reported. JANICE ROSSI DEBORAH RUDDOCK Thank you again for supporting this effort. STEPHEN SCHMIDT KEITH WEBER Sincerely, 44lek- "Iaw�l Ruth Peterson Board Chair SUSTAINABLE SAN MATEO COUNTY is a nonprofit public benefit corporation exempt from federal income tax under IRS Code Section 501(c)(3) Serving People with Developmental Disabilities &their Families July 22, 2004 Mr. Jesus Nava, Finance Director City of Burlingame 501 Primrose Road Burlingame, CA 94010-3997 Dear Mr. Nava: On behalf of Parca clients, staff, and volunteers, and Board of Directors, I would like to express my sincere thanks to the City of Burlingame for its recent grant to Parca's Raji House. The funds we received will be used to offset the cost of recreation expenses needed to engage program participants. Our onsite construction project to turn a previously unused detached garage into an exercise and activity room is nearing completion. We are thankful for the City's expert guidance through the long coordination process on this project. As in prior years, we are most grateful for your continuing support, which reflects the City's investment in community-based organizations and the people they serve. We look forward to seeing you later this summer at a Raji House grand opening event. Thanks again. Sincerely, (��tU4-)t)� 6114,6- Diana M. Conti Executive Director 1750 EI Camino Real,Suite 105,Burlingame,CA 94010-3210 Phone 650.312.0730 Fax 650.312.0737 E-mail parca@parca.org Donation pickup 1-877-99PARCA(toll free) www.parca.org M SION Serving San Mateo County Since 1979 BOARD OF DIRECTORS 21 July 2004 Elaine L.Cohen,EdD President Kathryn L. Breaux Vice-President Robert M.Adams III Jesus Nava Treasurer Cl of Burlingame Mary D. Chigos,RN,NP,MA �' g Secretary 501 Primrose Road Stuart P. Coxhead,Jr.,MDiv Burlingame, CA 94010 Member at Large Mervyn R. Blas,RPh Dear Mr. Nava, Al Chamberlain,MD Nancy Copeland Kathryn Diamond Everyone at Mission Hospice joins me in thanking you for your very Judy DiPaolo generous gift of$1,620.00. This donation goes a long way to assist us in our M ellaH.Harris, mission of providing quality, compassionate end-of-life care to terminally in Jame Keck,DnneMin patients in San Mateo County—our neighbors and friends. Brett S.Lytle Danette H.Magilligan,BSN Since 1979, Mission Hospice has helped nearly 4,000 people to live their final Patricia Matthews,MA days in the comfort of their own homes surrounded b family and friends. Helen S. Quetnick Y Y Y Robert E Sawyer Through our nurses' expert pain control and symptom management, our Elizabeth L.Stern,MFT patients are better able to enjoy the time they have remaining with their loved Michael N.Teutschel,CPA ones. Bereavement support for those left behind continues for more than a Helen Lagen year following the death. Consultant to the Board ADMINISTRATION It is through the support of people like you that we are able to continue to Janet Rose,RN,JD provide these important services and more, and we are very grateful. Executive Director Arnold Leff,MD Sincerely, Medical Director Gary Pasternak, al J_ L r n Associate Medical Director (�/� `� Mary Gaspar,RN,BSN Director of Patient Services Janet Rose RN,JD Karlyn Bennehoof,MA Director of Development Executive Director Please consider this letter official receipt ofyour tax-deductible contribution of,$1,620.00. Nogoods or services were provided toyou inconsideration of thisg f. Ourfederal tax identification number is 94- 2567162. This or an.Zation is a 501 c(3)tax-exempt organisation,IRS Section 170(b)(2)(iii)for both federal and state tax purposes T • MISSION HOSPICE,INC.,OF SAN MATED COUN�r� (•. iJ/� L� /> 151 W.20th Avenue•San Mateo,CA 94403•PH:650.554.10g� �{ Aoh u (� www.missionhospice.org•mission.hospice@missionhospice.org RECEDED Chair AUGDave Carbone G 2 2004 13 ElectronicArts COMMUNITY CITY CLI RK'6 CFi-ICE GATE PATH® Vice Chair CITY 11= l Ii Er#�, AA OF NORTHERN CALIFORNIA Niall McCarthy CITY O tt 1G ',,'f "Turning Disabilities Into Possibilities" Cotchett,Pitre,Simon& McCarthy Treasurer Joe GaWgan July 28, 2004 Galligan&Company,CPA's Secretary The Honorable Rosalie O'Mahoney Barry Parker 501 Primrose Road Carr,McClellan,Ingersoll, Burlingame, CA 94010 Thompson&Horn Dear Mayor Rosalie O'Mahoney, Board of Directors Carol ConryOn behalf of the children and adults with disabilities we serve, I want to US.Postal Service thank you for supporting Community Gatepath. The City of Burlingame's Joel Friedman contribution of$4,050 to our Landscaping Services program will help us Accenture grow our landscaping business and provide tools, equipment and training Joe Galligan for our crews. Galligan&Company CPA's Patricia Giosso As a former board member, you know that Community Gatepath has been Coldioell Banker turning disabilities into possibilities for over 85 years. Today we are the Denise Hanson largest non-profit in San Mateo County, and annually we serve over 3200 Kaiser Permanente people with disabilities and their families. Our services include early Norm Jacobi intervention services for children, vocational training and employment Marsh opportunities for adults, and health and wellness programs for seniors. We Mary Janney believe that all individuals have the capability and the right to learn, grow Sterling Court and experience all of what life has to offer. Joyce Molinelli Hillsborough Auxiliary to Please feel free to visit us anytime! I know that you'll find your visit a Community Gatepath heartwarming experience, and you would be proud of our growth. Again, Bryan Neider thank you for your ongoing support. ElectronicArts Reddie Nichols Sincerely, Member of the Community �� L Barry Parker Carr,McClellan,Ingersoll, Thompson&Horn Sheryl Young H nt Adrienne Tissier CEO Bay Relations,Inc. Sheryl Young Hunt Chief Executive Officer 875 Stanton Road Burlingame,CA 94010 Tel:650.259-8500 Fax:650.697-5010 www.communitygatepath.com I Shelter Network Board of Directors Chair Marcia H.Pade July 29, 2004 Vice Chair Ed Everett Treasurer Mr. Jesus Nava Richard Elwood,CPA Finance Director Secretary City of Burlingame Dianne Calvi 501 Primrose Road Past Chair Burlingame, CA 94010-3997 William V.Regan Alicia Carmen Aguirre Dear Mr. Nava: Brian P.Burns,Jr. William L.Butler On behalf of Shelter Network, I would like to thank the City of Burlingame for its $4,050 Albert Camarillo,PhD community funding grant toward our programs for homeless families and individuals. Gretchen Cody We truly appreciate the Town's continued and generous support of our important George R.Corey programs. Karyl Eldridge Cherron R.Hunter The generosity of our donors enables Shelter Network to help nearly 3,000 homeless Eleanor Jimenez children and adults every year as they work toward regaining self-sufficiency. With the Ellen Michelfelder help of our community members, Shelter Network's programs provide housing and David Moore comprehensive support services to help families and individuals permanently break the Ruth M.Peterson David A.Rockwell cycle of homelessness. Every year, over 80% of families completing our programs Ray Satorre succeed in returning to permanent homes of their own. The community's support David B.Weir maintains the critical safety net services that Shelter Network provides and ensures that Emerick M.Woods our community's homeless families and individuals have the resources they need to Michelle Leu Zaccone achieve their goals. Advisory Board Thank you again for the City of Burlingame's generosity and support of Shelter Dr.Maya Angelou Network's programs. We look forward to continuing to work together to help homeless Congresswoman Anna Eshoo families in our community build brighter futures for themselves. T.Jack Foster Roger Hagman George Et Adelaide Keller Warmest regards, - / John Kriewall Et Betsy Haehl Lorraine McLellan Mike Podell Gordon Russell Michele Jackson State Senator Jackie Speier Executive Director Executive Director Michele Jackson This letter confirms Shelter Network's receipt of your 2004 tax-deductible donation. No goods or services were provided or received in exchange for this gift. 1450 Chapin Avenue, 2nd Floor • Burlingame, CA 94010 - phone 650.685.5880 - fax 650.685.5881 , www.sheiternetwork.org 1 ire s �U July 21, 2004 Mr.Jesus Nava,Finance Director City of Burlingame 501 Primrose Road Burlingame, CA 94010 Dear Mr. Nava, I am writing to thank you for the City of Burlingame's grant contribution of$810 to Friends for Youth. Helen Keller once wrote that, "Alone we can do so little. Together, so much." Thank you for joining together with us in providing opportunity and friendship for youth in need. This contribution ensures that Friends for Youth can provide caring mentors and enrichment opportunities to children in Burlingame. By opening new doors of possibility for these young people, we are able to help these at-risk children reach their full potential. Through your support, we support them as they build skills, increase their self-esteem, and grow toward a healthy,productive adulthood. Thank you for your tremendous generosity. This letter serves as your official documentation and acknowledgement of your contribution to Friends for Youth. Friends for Youth is a nonprofit organization under IRS 501(c)(3)tax codes. We are certifying that no goods or services were provided in exchange for your contribution. Please feel free to contact me with any questions regarding Friends for Youth's services, and we look forward to keeping you updated on the successes of our youth participants. Sincerely, L�&ckj 6e-v� Becky Cooper Executive Director 650-368-4465 1741 Broadway, First Floor • Redwood City, CA 94063 9 650.368.4444 tel 0 650.368.4467 fax • www.friendsforyouth.org Comcast Cable Ccomcast 12647 Alc stta Blvd.,Suite 200 P.O.Box 5147 San Ramon,CA 94583 July 28, 2004 Mr. Jesus Nava Finance Director/Treasurer City of Burlingame 501 Primrose Road Burlingame, CA. 94010 Dear Mr. Jesus Nava: In an effort to ensure that your office remains informed of the programming services offered to our customers residing in the rebuilt areas of your community we are sending you this notice. This letter is Comcast's official notice to your office of our intention to adjust some of the Digital and High Definition (HD) programming currently offered on our cable system. Effective September 1, 2004 Comcast will make the following adjustments to the Digital and HD programming: Action Channel Name From Service To Service From To Channel Level Level Channel Add MTV Jams Digital Plus 134 Add BYU Digital Classic 228 Add Nick Too Digital Plus 216 Remove Good Life Digital Premier 123 Remove Ovation Digital Premier 182 Relocate KNTV HD 185 703 Relocate KPIX HD 186 705 Relocate KGO DH 184 707 Relocate KQED HD 188 709 Relocate INHD 1 195 719 Relocate INHD 2 196 720 Relocate ESPN HD 193 723 Relocate HBO HD 197 730 Relocate Cinemax HD 199 732 Relocate Starz! HD 200 734 Relocate Showtime HD 198 736 Retier MTV 2 Digital Classic Digital Plus 135 Retier VH-1 Classic Digital Plus Digital Classic 473 Retier Nick Toons Digital Plus Digital Classic 126 Retier VH- 1 Country Digital Plus Digital Classic 471 Retier Nick GAS Digital Plus Digital Classic 215 Duplicate MTV en Espanol Digital Plus 606 Customers will be notified of the adjustments via a legal ad in their local newspaper and via postcards sent directly to their homes. If you should have any questions please feel free to contact Kath Noe at (650) 289-6794. Sincerely, Vel Mitzi Givens-Russell on behalf of Kathi Noe Director of Government Affairs and Franchising West Bay Peninsula Area 66omcast Comcast Communications Inc. 12647 Alcosta Blvd,Suite 200,P.O.Box 5147 San Ramon,CA 94583 Tel:925.973.7000 August 6, 2004 Fax:925.973.7015 www.comcast.com Mr. Jesus Nava Finance Director/Treasurer City of Burlingame 501 Primrose Road Burlingame, CA. 94010 Subiect: COURTESY NOTICE OF ADDITIONAL PROGRAMMING Dear Mr. Jesus Nava: It has always been our goal at Comcast to ensure that your office remains informed of the programming services offered to our customers who reside in the rebuilt areas of your community. As a courtesy we are sending you this letter to inform you of programming additions. In an effort to enhance the programming services that we offer to our customers Comcast Cable has added two (2) additional programming services to the channel line-ups: ABC NEWS NOW Effective July 28, 2004 we added the ABC News Now channel to the programming services at channel 194. The service will provide viewers with network and local news programming, including daily convention coverage anchored by Peter Jennings. This channel is not available on satellite. Customers who subscribe to the Limited Basic services or above and rent a Digital Control Terminal will have access to view the programming. -- FOX SPORTS NET BAY AREA- HIGH DEFINITION - Effective July 29, 2004 we added the Fox Sports Net (FSN) Bay Area to the High Definition (HD) services on channel 196. FSN Bay Area will broadcast 35 games for the remainder of the 2004 MLB season and is the first Northern California network to launch Oakland A's and San Francisco Giants HDTV. FSN Bay Area HD will be offered on channel 196- the same as INHD2. These HD games will pre-empt the regularly scheduled programs on INHD2. In order to minimize the impact of interrupting programming in progress on INHD2 the following provisions were made: A. Programs that cannot air in their entirety due to the starting time of the FSN Bay Area HD broadcast will be pre-empted (they won't start) and the TV Guide will display "Off Air" during that time B. Either a blank screen will appear or an on-screen message will appear indicating that an HD game will be starting. The addition of these channels will not affect the preceding programming services offered and will not result in a rate increase at this time. If you should have any questions or would like more information, please feel free to contact Kathi Noe at (650) 289-6794. Sincerely' �l Mitzi Givens-Russell on behalf of Kathi Noe Director of Government Affairs and Franchising West Bay Peninsula Area ty Council Y�� please responc ( pity Manager City Attorney D, No Response Required DFinance RECEIVED i . rty Planner V Dir.Public Works August 7,2004 Human Resources AUG 9 2004 Police Chief Fire Chief ❑ On Next Agenda CITY CI ER,'S OFFICE L Parks&Rec CIT Y OF BURLII1N'ME Dear City Council, Librarian PLEASE SEND A COPY OF YOUR RESPONSE TO THE CITY CLERK I received a certified letter from the City of Burlingame this week regarding the sidewalk program. It states that the city is experiencing a budget shortfall. I am writing this letter because I too, am experiencing a personal budget shortfall. Please let me point out the following: 1. When I originally bought this house four years ago I had a well paying job. I lost my job three and a half months after I moved in. Since then, because of the terrible job market in the Bay Area,I have been in and out of four jobs (and at much lower wages). Last year I finally switched careers, since about half of all of the jobs in my previous career were lost. I was grateful for the opportunity, especially given my age. I will be fifty-two this year. As of next month my paycheck will be derived from commissions. My commissions will be low because I am establishing myself, and I will be making very little. I received my monthly paycheck yesterday—it was for about$2500. My mortgage is for over$2700 a month. 2. After I moved into this house, my property value went down. I had my tax bill re- accessed to reflect the change. Last month I received a letter from the county. It stated that they had again re-accessed my property value. It is now about$60,000 more than what I paid for the house. I will be paying top dollar for my property taxes. I have experienced only minimal gains in the value of my house. If I sell the house, I will barely come out ahead, after payment of moving expenses and realtor commissions. In addition to the above financial situation, I am receiving medical care at Stanford. Receiving this letter from the City of Burlingame has only exacerbated my condition. I have barely slept since learning about all this. You mention that the sidewalks around my house present a hazard,which is true. However,receiving this news presents a hazard to my life too. No one seems to be taking that into account. Since you knew about these changes in January,why I am hearing about this in August and with only thirty days to make the repairs? It just seems so cruel. I spoke to Victor yesterday, and he said that my repairs will amount to over$2400, and possibly higher. While this may not seem like a lot of money to many residents in the City of Burlingame, it is a fortune to me, especially given my current situation. I am extremely saddened and depressed by this news. If you can offer me any suggestions,I would appreciate it. Sincerely, Katherine Aird 1048 Balboa Avenue Burlingame, CA 94010 650-375-0919 `:(`SIO —7 b RECEIVED Walut AUG 9 2004 Burlingame ,AveCA '94010 CITY CLEWS OFFICE (650) 343-6556 CITY OF BUR INGAME August 5, 2004 Mayor O'Mahony and City Council 501 Primrose Rd. Burlingame , CA 94010 Dear Mayor O'Mahony and Council, I have enclosed a copy of the letter I (and many of my neighbors ) received this week via certified mail. I usually love Burlingame , butfhis approach makes me ashamed of Burlingame . It treats us as though we are suddenly in the wrong and gives us 30 days to "fix" a huge long-standing City problem. Its tone is one of autocratic ordering. Why the last sentence of this 3-page missive was not the first sentence , I can only guess . If this is to be the new City policy, and other residents are in line to be written to like this , may I suggest a more humane approach? Sincerely, ovl Z �% C Nancy Lechich (Mrs. G.Paul Lechich) /7?y persvnxt C os4 t jW Gtc rn ore �g,"i DISTTO UTION: v� � Council please respond deity Manager ;_6ity Attorney No Response Required Dir.Finance City Planner u.Public Works ! Human Resources ! Police Chief Fire Chief ❑ On Next Agenda Parks&Rec Librarian PLEASE SEND A COPY OF YOUR RESPONSE TO THE CITY CLERK eBULINGAME ftf The City of Burlingame PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT CITY HALL-501 PRIMROSE ROAD CORPORATION YARD Tel:(650)558-7230 BURLINGAME,CALIFORNIA 94010-3997 Tel:(650)558-7670 Fax:(650)685-9310 July 30, 2004 Re: Notice to Repair Sidewalk Within Thirty(30)Days Sidewalk Replacement Project 2003, City Project No.80960 Dear Property Owner, Recent inspection of the sidewalk fronting your property shows that there are defects requiring repairs at this time to eliminate potentially hazardous conditions. Per the California Streets and Highways Code, the adjoining property owner is responsible for all sidewalk and driveway repairs. The City hereby requests that you take immediate action to repair and/or replace the sidewalk in front of your property per City Standards. Please see the attached drawing showing the location and approximate area of sidewalk repairs required in front of your property. In addition,the area of sidewalk repairs/replacement is delineatedwith markings. Property owners can choose from one of the two options for making the necessary repairs as follows: 1. The property owner may arrange to have the work performed by a licensed contractor. In this case, the property owner would pay the cost of the work directly to the contractor. All work shall conform to City specifications and standards. The contractor must obtain a no-fee permit,prior to the start of work, from the Engineering Division of the Public Works Department at 501 Primrose Road. 2. If the sidewalk repairs are not completed within thirty(30) days of the date of this letter,the City will hire the contractor to perform the necessary repairs. The costs of repairs for the individual properties will be forwarded to the County Assessor's Office to be collected with property tax bill after a public hearing is held by the City Council to hear any protests and finalize the costs. The costs will be based on competitive bids received by the City. Based on current prevailing prices,typical costs for removing and replacing sidewalk vary from $8 to$12 per square foot; driveway costs vary from $10 to $15 per square foot; and concrete cutting/grinding costs vary from $40 to $50 per location(5 linear feet,maximum).Actual costs will vary depending on the contractor's availability, market conditions and amount of work involved. If you have any questions,please call me at(650) 558-7242. Sincerely, Victor rngProj tE Enclosure: Repair Diagram S:\A Public Works Directory\PROJECTS\80960\SW.wpd CITY OF BURLINGAME SIDEWALK PROGRAM BROCHURE The program is designed to repair defective sidewalks to eliminate tripping hazards throughout the City. Geographic areas have been identified and prioritized in the program for repairs based on the amount and severity of potential tripping hazards. A tripping hazard is defined as a sidewalk lift of 1/2 inch or more according to the guidelines from the Americans with Disability Act. In the past, the City has financed an annual sidewalk maintenance and repair program by utilizing City general funds. In light of the current budget shortfall, the City can no longer fund sidewalk replacement in this manner. In January 2004, City Council authorized staff to proceed with a modified sidewalk replacement program in accordance with the Streets and Highways Code which requires the adjoining property owners to repair damaged sidewalks. Many neighboring municipalities have already been requiring property owners to repair sidewalks in accordance with this State Law. What does the Streets and Highways Code say? The Code states that property owners shall maintain adjacent sidewalks in such condition that they will not endanger persons or property and not interfere with the public convenience for its intended use. The Code also provides a notification process which includes identification of the type of work needed and the time frame within which the repairs must be completed. How does the City Sidewalk Program work? An area of the City is annually selected for the sidewalk program on a rotational cycle based on a review of the severity and number of hazards. The sidewalks in the area are carefully inspected to determine the appropriate type of repairs. Markings are then placed on the sidewalks to identify the location and extent of the work. Notices are sent to the affected property owners describing the repairs and estimated costs as well as the time frame for completing the work. Property owners have the option to arrange for a licensed contractor and apply for a no-fee encroachment permit to perform the repairs in accordance with City standards. If the work is not performed within the specified time, the repairs are performed by the City at its cost and a bill is sent to the County Assessor's Office to be collected with the property taxes. How is the area of sidewalk repairs determined? The repair area is selected on a rotation cycle list based on hazard priorities. Staff takes into account the coordination and scheduling of other projects to avoid potential construction conflicts with other contractors. What methods are used to repair sidewalks? All sidewalk lifts require full replacement of the existing sidewalk with the following exception: If the sidewalk lift is one and a half inches or less and in good condition, the sidewalk lifts can be removed by concrete cutting or grinding. However, any damage to the sidewalk as a result of cutting or grinding will require the full replacement of the sidewalk. Can I do the sidewalk replacement and repairs myself? No, property owners are not allowed to perform the repairs due to liability and construction quality concerns. In the past, numerous property owners were required to complete the repairs over several times due to the unfamiliarity with construction practices. Property owners are advised to hire a licensed contractor to perform the repairs. An encroachment permit from the Public Works Department — Engineering Division is required. The permit fees are waived for this work; however a refundable bond in the form of check or cash is required to ensure compliance with City standards. The bond is only utilized in the event that the City has to replace defective work performed by the contractor. The bond amount is $300 in most circumstances. What if the sidewalk replacement and repairs are outside the geographic area identified by the City Sidewalk Program? Staff will inspect damaged sidewalks and/or sidewalk lifts outside of the current geographic area identified for repairs at citizens' requests and on a complaint basis. If a tripping hazard is identified, City crews will expeditiously make a temporary asphalt repair in order to protect the public health and safety. Staff will then notify the respective , property owner to perform the necessary permanent sidewalk repair. Does the City perform routine maintenance on sidewalks outside of the City Sidewalk Program area? Yes, City crews will perform temporary asphalt repairs throughout the City prioritized by the severity of the hazard. Will the City remove a tree that is damaging the sidewalk? The Parks Department will determine if a tree is to be removed due to sidewalk damage. In general, it is the Parks Department policy to make every effort to preserve trees. Currently, the City will only remove trees if they are diseased, dead and/or present a public health and safety concern. Who do I contact for answering my questions regarding the program? Property owners with questions regarding sidewalks, repairs and encroachment permits should contact the Public Works Department at sidewalkskburlin ag me.org or call (650)558-7242. Property owners with questions specifically pertaining to trees should contact the Parks Department at(650)558-7330. Why doesn't the City pay for sidewalk replacement and repairs? The City can no longer fund the sidewalk replacement as it has in the past due to budget shortfalls as well as economic uncertainty within the State budget, which may adversely affect Burlingame's tax revenues. CITY OF BURLINGAME NOTICE TO REPAIR SIDEWALK BURLtNGAME WITHIN 30 DAYS PROPERTY OWNER. NANCY L.LECHICH STREET ADDRESS 776 WALNUT AVENUE DATE 5/06/2004 NOTICE NO. 2003-0030 APPROX. SQ.FT. 139.5 w-P.)r BLOCK NO. t LOT NO. 17 NO. OF CONCRETE CUTTING i APN 028-141-220 2.5' LEGEND (X)-SIDEWALK TO BE REPLACED REPAIRS INDICATED ARE DUE TO THE FOLLOWING HATCHED AREA-SIDEWALK REPAIR BY CONCRETE CUTTING CONDITIONS: x_ HOLES/CRACKS IN SIDEWALK DW-DRIVEWAY FH-FIRE HYDRANT -x_ RAISED/SUNKEN SIDEWALK SS-SEWER PP-POWER POLE ASPHALT CONCRETE SIDEWALK 2.6P/L-PROPERTY LINE TR-TREE _ ABANDONED DRIVEWAY PM-PARKING METER WM-WATER METER S-SIGN w O x 776 WALNUT - - -P/L - - - - - - RIGHT OF WAY WIDTH 2_2 20.3' 2.5' i. DW PLANTER AA WIDTH=5_9 RE WALNUT i r � lv S4 i r µ1. NNll s ��d I �` fi MAYOR'S PRESS RELEASE Waiting-Period for Projects denied with Prejudice to remain unchanged for now IN Burlingame/ I expressed interest in reducing the waiting-period for projects denied with prejudice at our July 19 council meeting. The intent would be to reduce construction costs that are escalating by the month, because of steadily-increasing costs of lumber,steel and concrete. I asked the attorney to bring forward a first reading of an amended ordinance at the following council-meeting.In the meantime,our city planner and city attorney both did some preliminary study of such a change,in particular, examining what is done in other cities in the region. They reviewed the comparable ordinances of other cities- 53 cities,in all,from the nine Bay Area counties- sampled across the land from Livermore to Novato, from St.Helena to Morgan Hill.(The big three, SF.,Oakland,SJ were not included). Our current waiting-time of one year is what most cities in the sample adhere to,with 60%of the sample falling in this category. Examples of neighbor- cities in this class are:San Mateo,Foster City,Menlo Park,Millbrae,Palo Alto and Redwood city.32% of this sample had no waiting-period,e.g..,Atherton,Hillsborough,Brisbane, San Bruno,San Carlos and Daly City have no prescribed waiting-period.. 8%required a six-month waiting period.,e.g.,Los Altos and So.San Francisco. The above results make me lean toward leaving the present ordinance in place. Coupled with the customs of other cities,the planning department identified only a small number of denials in the last six years. While the latter years of this period have been economically depressed,renovations and new construction were still booming in Burlingame. In this six-year period,the planning department processed 797 applications that went to final action by the city. Only 3.1%of these were denied without prejudice and 4.5%were denied with prejudice. I have taken input from commissioners and informed members of the development community. This group was split about half and half on changing to six months. Without resounding support for a change,I therefore think it prudent to leave Burlingame's present ordinance unchanged. TIME LIMITS ON REAPPLICATION FOR PLANNING PERMITS CITY No 6 1 year W/o Comment Limit months prejudice provision Alameda X 30-218-8 Atherton X Brisbane X Concord X Only as to reclassifications; otherwise, 2 applications allowed in 3-yr period — 122-179 Corte Madera X X 18.36.120 Cupertino X Daly City X Dublin X X Change of circumstances or conditions — can apply for permission from denial body - 8.96.020 East Palo Alto X El Cerrito X Emeryville X Time limit for Planned Unit Development only 9-4.85.15 Foster City X X Substantially different 17.06.155 Hayward X Unless new evidence or changed conditions justify reconsideration 10-1 .3265/10-1 .3165 Hillsborough X Lafayette X X6-23 8 1 TIME LIMITS ON REAPPLICATION FOR PLANNING PERMITS CITY No 6 1 year W/o Comment Limit months prejudice provision Livermore X Los Altos X 14.80.090 Los Altos Hills X Substantially similar 10-1.111 Los Gatos X Menlo Park X 16.82.200 Millbrae X X By practice Mill Valley X Monte Sereno X Moraga X Substantially same 8.12.160; has express provision on reconsideration in 15 days after decision 8.12.250 Morgan Hill X Time limit only applies to rezoning/gp amendments 18.62.290 Mountain View X Substantially same— A36.80.100 Napa X X 17.68.160 Newark X Substantially same— 17.72.150 Novato X Orinda X Substantially same Palo Alto X Substantially similar 18.77.020 2 TIME LIMITS ON REAPPLICATION FOR PLANNING PERMITS CITY No 6 1 year W/o Comment Limit months prejudice provision Piedmont X X 17.30.4 Pleasant Hill X X 35-27.4 Pleasanton X Substantially same 18.124.140 Redwood City X Substantially similar 42.7 Rohnert Park X X 17.25.015 St. Helena X X Substantially similar 17.08.150 San Anselmo X 10-3.1610 San Bruno X San Carlos X San Mateo X X 27.08.060 Can apply to change to w/o prejudice San Leandro X Substantially same 5.22.20 San Rafael X h 14.21.160 Santa Clara X Santa Rosa X Changes in area that substantially affects property 20.02.252 Saratoga X X 15.70.100/15.55.120 Sausalito X X 10.84.080 Sebastapol X 3 TIME LIMITS ON REAPPLICATION FOR PLANNING PERMITS CITY No 6 1 year W/o Comment Limit months prejudice provision South San Francisco X Time limit only applies to planned unit developments 20.184.140 Sunnyvale X Plan amendment only 19.98.020 changed circumstances Tiburon X X 16-4.3.9/16-4.4.14 Substantial change in circumstance Union City X Walnut Creek X Substantially different or conditions have changed 10-2.4.405 Woodside X X 153.231 Totals 17 4 32 15 53 Total Found No 6 1 year W/o Limit months prejudice provision 4