HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet - CC - 2002.03.181
)
3.
4.
BURLINGAME CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
Rrcuran MBrrrNc - MoNoav, Ma,ncn 18, 2002
PAGE 1 oF 3
* CLoSED SESSIoN
Conference with Labor Negotiator pursuant to Government Code $
54957.6:
City Negotiators: Jim Nantell, Bob Bell
Labor Organizations: Police Offi cers Association
Pending Litigation (Government Code g 54956.9(a):
Crisafi vs. Sargen, San Mateo Superior Court Case No. 355462
Threatened Litigation (Government Code g 54956.9(b)(l), (3)(c)
Claim of Hyatt Regency SFO Hotel
CALL TO ORDER
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG
ROLL CALL
MINUTES - Regular Meeting of February 20,2002, Study Meeting of
February 23,2002 and Regular Meeting of March 4, 2002
5. PUBLIC HEARTNGS rhe may may ltmit speakers ro rhree minutes each
a. Resolution Adopting Residential Traffic Calming program
6. 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. The Mayor may limit
speakers to three minutes each.
7. STAFF REPORTS AND COMMUNICATIONS
a. Introduction of ordinance for zoningcode Amendment for
Building Size in the Burlingame Avenue and Broadway
Commercial Areas, New Conditional Uses in the Burlingame
Avenue Commercial Area, and Change to Zoning Action
Expiration
b. Resolution Adopting cooperating policy/philosophy between the
City of Burlingame and the Burlingame Elementary School
District
CONSENT CALENDAR - Items on the consent calendar are acted on
simultaneously unless separate discussion and./or action are requested by a council
member.
a. Resolution Accepting Improvements, Burlingame Landfill Slopes
and Airport Blvd. Bike Path, project No 9l l7(8)
CiA of Burlingame
CITY HALL.5OI PRIMROSE ROAD
BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA 940 I O
(650) 558-7200
$*agqE;.fED.LCIAN
6:30 p.m. Conference Room A
7:00 p.m., Council Chambers
Approval
8
Public Hearing/Adopt
Introduce
Adopt
Approval
)
\BURLINGAME CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
Rnculan MnrrrNc - MoNoav, Mancn 18, 2002
Plcr 2 or 3
b. Special Fund Permit Request: Burlingame Criterium Race,
Sunday, June 30,2002
c. Lions Club $2,500 Project Fund Donation for new Flagpole at
Easton Library
d. Resolution Approving Agreement for Fire Vehicle Maintenance
and Repair Services with the Town of Hillsborough Fire vehicles
e. Resolution Approving Agreement for Fire vehicle Maintenance
and Repair Services with the Colma Fire Protection District
f. Special Budget Meeting, March 21,2002 at Burlingame
Recreation Center, 850 Burlingame Avenue, 5:30 p'm'
g. Police Officer Association (POA) Contract
h. Authorize city Attorney to Join in Amicus curiae Brief in
Harvest Church vs. City of Concord (A096604) at no cost to City
i. Warrants and Payroll,February,Z}}2
9. COMMITTEE REPORTS
10. OLD BUSINESS
11. NEW BUSINESS
12. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
a. Commission Minutes: Planning, March 11,2002 & Planning
Special Meeting of March 6,2002
b. Department Reports: Finance, February,2002
Fax of Marchg,2OO2, from Fiona Hamilton w/attached email and
fax of March8,z}Oz,to San Mateo Times conceming Planning
Commission Appointments
Letter of March 6,2002, from AT&T Broadband concerning
programming adjustments to cable service for city of Burlingame
Letter of March 6,2002, from Russ Cohen concerning the
Burlingame Historical Society signage and Historical Significant
Properties List
Letter of March 7,2002, from Safe Harbor Homeless Shelter to
City Manager acknowledging the City's $8,000 grant
Letter from Carine Hubsher, owner of Papillon Preschool, 700
Peninsula Avenue, including signature petitions and several
letters from parents concerning green zone parking in front of
school
CiA of Barlingame
CITY HALL - 5OI PRIMROSE ROAD
BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA 940 I O
(650) 558-7200
c.
d.
e.
f.
oD.
BURLINGAME CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
Rrcur,tR Mnrrrxc - Moroay, MAncn 18, 2002
PAGE 3 oF 3
h. Letter of March ll , 2002, from Maureen Hally requesting the
reappointment of Ann Keighran to the Planning Commission
13. ADJOURNMENT
NOTICE: Any attendees wishing accommodations lor disabilities, please contact rhe Ciry 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 wwrv.burlingame.orq. Agendas and minutes are available at this site or listen live
on our LIVE365 Broadcast via the website.
NEXT MEETING _1,2002
CiA of Burlingame
CITY HALL - 5OI PRIMROSE ROAD
BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA 94OI O
(6s0) 5s8-7200
UNAPPROVED MINUTES
BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA
February 20,2002
I. REGULAR MEETING CALLED TO ORDER
A regular meeting of the Burlingame City Council was held on the above date in the City Hall Council
chambers. The meeting was called to order at7:02 p.m. by Mayor Mary Janney.
2. PLEDGE OFALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG
Led by Commander Tom Marriscolo.
3. ROLL CALL
Council Present:
Council Absent:
Baylock, Coffey, Galligan, Janney, O'Mahony
None
4. MINUTES
Vice Mayor Coffey made a motion to approve the minutes of the special meeting of January 30,ZOO2,goal session meeting of February 2,2002 and regular meeting of Fibruary 4,20102; seconded bycouncilwoman o'Mahony, approved unanimously by voice vote, 5-0.
5. PUBLIC HEARINGS
a.the on
for to Aven
Zoned R-l
City Planner Monroe referred to her staff report dated January 24,2002, and recommended a public
hearing be held regarding the appeal of the Planning Commission's decision on the above referenced
project.
Mayor Janney opened the public hearing. Mr. Grove, 941Lakeview, Redwood City, owner of 1409
Los Montes, and Mark Hudak, 2l6ParkRoad, attorney representing Mr. Grove came forward. Mr.
Hudak and Mr. Grove requested council uphold the Planning Commission's decision and approve theproject.
Sue Smith, 1515 Los Montes, the resident who filed the appeal, and Peter Keys, a neighbor of 1509
Los Montes spoke against the project.
There were no further comments from the floor and the hearing was closed.
Burlingame City Council
Unapproved Minutes
1 February 20,2002
b
After discussion, Councilman Coffey made a motion to approve Resolution #24-2002 to uphold the
Planning Commission's decision and design review of a hillside areaconstruction permit for a new
two-story single family house at 1509 Los Montes Avenue, ZonedR-l; seconded by Councilwoman
Baylock, approved by voice vote, 4-1, with councilman Galligan dissenting.
Negative Declaration. General Plan Amendment and Rezoning From Single Familv
Residential (R-1) to Duplex Residential (R-2) for Eieht Properties with Request Modifvins
Application to two Properties. 1224 and 122611228 Paloma Avenue. Followine the planning
Commission Denial of Rezoning Request for Properties on Paloma. Laguna and Capuchino
Avenues
City Planner Monroe referred to her staff report dated January 25,2002, and recommended a public
hearing be held regarding the appeal of the Planning Commission's denial on the above referenced
project.
Mayor Janney opened the public hearing. Jerry Deal, 122611228 Paloma, applicant and owner, spoke
in favor of the rezoning and requested council overturn the Planning Commission's denial.
Debra DeQuant, 1232Paloma, Ash McNealey, 1236 Paloma, Alan Bonkowski, 1304 Lincoln, Linda
Field, 1249 Paloma, Rene Harold, 1240 Paloma, Mark Zuckerman , 1233 Laguna,Daryl Wilson, 130g
Lincoln Avenue, Mary Carson, 1200 Lincoln Avenue, Mary Terrara, 1233 Paloma, spoke against the
rezoning.
Jerry Deal returned to council to respond to some of the concems of the neighbors.
There were no further comments from the floor and the hearing was closed.
Councilwoman Baylock made a motion to deny the negative declaration by Resol ution #23-2002, the
general plan amendment and rezoning from single family residential (R-1)to duplex residential (R-2)
for eight properties with request modifying application to two properties, 1224 and 12261122gpa1oma
Avenue; seconded by Councilwoman O'Mahony, approved unanimously by voice vote, 5-0.
c. ReYiew of the Planning Commission's Denial of the Request for a Variance for a Free
standins Sien at the United Methodist church. 1443 Howard Am"
Subarea B. Burlingame Avenue Commercial Area
City Planner Monroe referred to her staff report dated February 6,2}Oz,and recommended council
hold a public hearing regarding the appeal of the Planning Commission's denial on the above
referenced project.
Mayor Janney opened the public hearing. Brian Zimmerman, President of the Board of Trustees of the
United Methodist Church of Burlingame,T5 DelMonte Drive, Hillsborough, and Charles Cavanaugh,
470 Chatham Road, Burlingame, Dale Butinback, 280 Palm Avenue, and Reverend Nephis Edwar[s,
631 Plymouth Way, spoke in favor of council overtuming the Planning Commission's denial.
Burlingame City Council
Unapproved Minutes
2February 20,2002
d.
There were no further comments from the floor and the hearing was closed.
Councilman Coffey made a motion to overturn by Resolution#21-2002 the Planning Commission's
denial for a variance for sign height for a new freestanding sign at 1443 Howard Avenue, Zoned R-
3lC-1, United Methodist Church of Burlingame; seconded by Councilman Galligan, approved
unanimously by voice vote, 5-0.
A an a
al the an
Mart at I 147 Rollins Road.ned C-l
City Planner Monroe referred to her staff report dated January 15, 2002, and recommended council
hold a public hearing regarding the appeal of the Planning Commission's denial without prejudice on
the above referenced project.
Mayor Janney opened the public hearing. Mr. and Mrs. Greco, owners of lL47 Rollins Road, andMark Hudak, attomey for the owners, requested council approve the application for a conditional usepermit to convert the service bays to a mini-mart at ll47 Rollins Road.-
There were no further comments from the floor and the hearing was closed.
Councilman Galligan made a motion to approve Resolution #22-2002 overturning the planning
Commission's denial without prejudice on an application for a conditional use permit to convert the
service bays of an existing gas station to a mini-m art at 1147 Rollins Road, Zoned,C-l, to include
additional conditions; seconded by Vice Mayor Coffey, approved by voice vote, 4-1, with
Councilwoman Baylock dissenting.
Ordin 8.e.s
of Title 4 and 5 of the Mateo Countv ance Code Conformins
Protection for Fire Protection Systems
CA Anderson referred to his staff report dated February 20,2002, and requested council hold a public
hearing and adopt Ordinance #1680 amending Chapter 8.08 to adopt by reference certain provisions of
Titles 4 and 5 of the San Mateo County Ordinance Code and conforming backflow protection for fire
protection systems.
Mayor Janney opened the public hearing. There were no comments from the floor and the hearing was
closed.
Councilman Galligan made a motion to adopt Ordinance #1680; seconded by Vice Mayor Coffey,
approved unanimously by voice vote, 5-0.
Mayor Janney requested CC Musso publish a surnmary of the proposed ordinance within 15 days of
proposed adoption.
f. Adopt Ordinance #1679 Amendine Title 13 to Clarifv and Affirm Parkine Resulations with
Resard to Street and Public Off-Street parkine
Burlingame City Council
Unapproved Minutes
3 February 20,2002
a.
CA Anderson referred to his staff report dated February 5,2002, and requested council hold a public
hearing and adopt Ordinance #1679 amending Title 13 to clarify and affirm parking regulations with
regard to street and public off-street parking.
Mayor Janney opened the public hearing. There were no comments from the floor and the hearing was
closed.
Councilwoman O'Mahony made a motion to adopt Ordinance #1679 amending Title 13 to clarify and
affirm parking regulations with regard to street and public off-street parking; seconded by
Councilwoman Baylock, approved unanimously by voice vote, 5-0.
Mayor Janney requested CC Musso publish a summary of the proposed ordinance within 15 days of
proposed adoption.
6. PUBLIC COMMENTS
There were no public comments.
7. STAFF REPORTS COMMUNI TIONS
Introduce Ordinance to Limit the Noise Level and Further Limit the Hours of Or.rution ofLeaf Blowers
CA Anderson referred to his staff report dated February L3,2}O2,recommending council introduce theproposed ordinance to limit the noise level and further limit the hours of operation of leaf blowers .
Mayor Janney requested CC Musso read the title of the proposed ordinance. Councilman Galligan
made a motion to waive further reading of the proposed ordinance; seconded by Councilwoman
O'Mahony, approved unanimously by voice vote, 5-0.
Vice Mayor Coffey made a motion to introduce the proposed ordinance; seconded by Councilwoman
O'Mahony, approved unanimously by voice vote, 5-0.
Mayor Janney requested CC Musso publish a summary of the proposed ordinance at least five days
before proposed adoption.
b.I ce Ordinance Amend 9.04 to a 3-Year se for and to
Undate and Fee hedule for Control
CA Anderson referred to his staff report dated February 7,2002, recommended council introduce this
ordinance to amend Chapter 9.04 to conform to County Animal Control Ordinance for dog licenses
and fee schedule.
Mayor Janney requested CC Musso read the title of the proposed ordinance. Councilman Galligan
made a motion to waive further reading of the proposed ordinance; seconded by Vice Mayor CJffey,
Burlingame City Council
Unapproved Minutes
4February 20,2002
approved unanimously by voice vote, 5-0.
Councilman Galligan made a motion to introduce the proposed ordinance; seconded by Vice Mayor
Coffey, approved unanimously by voice vote, 5-0.
Mayor Janney requested CC Musso publish a summary of the proposed ordinance at least five days
before proposed adoption.
8. CONSENT CALENDAR
councilwoman o'Mahony removed item 8a for further discussion.
b. Resolution #12-2002 Authorizing Agreement Amendment No. 2. SCADA Master plan and
contract Document Preparation with Cvbernet consurting
DPW Bagdon recommended council approve Resolution #12-2002 authorizing Agreement
Amendment No. 2, SCADA Master Plan and Contract document preparation with Cybemet
Consulting,CP 9940.
c.
CA Anderson requested council authorize joinder in amicus curiae brief at no cost to City in Oak
Creek Estates vs. Town of Paradise, which is now pending before the California Court oiAppeals.
d. Warrants & Pavroll
ACM Becker requested approval for payments of Warrants #80499 -80644, duly audited, in the amount
of $4,241,223.12, (excluding library checks #80499-80547),Payroll checks 144870-145743 inthe
amount of $1,568,167,50, and EFT's in the amount of $397,787.72 for the month of January, 2002.
Councilwoman O'Mahony made a motion to approve items 8b, 8c and 8d on the consent calendar;
seconded by vice Mayor coffey, approved unanimously by voice vote, 5-0.
Councilwoman O'Mahony pulled item 8a) to speak on the importance of AB 1823.
a. Resolu #ll-2002 to Supnort State Leeislation to the Bay Area nal Water
and ts Wr
DPW Bagdon recommended council approve Resolution #ll-2002 to fix the Bay Area Regional Water
system and protect our residents from catastrophic water outages.
Councilwoman O'Mahony made a motion to approve item 8a); 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.
Burlingame City Council
Unapproved Minutes
5 February 20,2002
a.
b.
10. OLD BUSINESS
There was no old business
I1. NEW BUSINESS
An appeal of the Planning Commission's decision for a property at 1369 Bernal was set for the March
4,2002, council meeting. An appeal was also set for March 4,2002, for a tree removal at 1360
Vancouver.
12, ACKNO GEMENTS
Commission Minutes: Planning, February ll,2OO2; Library, December l l & December 17
200r
Department Reports : Treasurer's, January 3 r, 2002; Building, J anuary, 2002
c. Letter from Father Albert Vucinovich, Pastor, St. Catherine of Siena Church, 1310 Bayswater,
regarding the Interfaith Hospitality Network
d. Letter from Mr. Lynn and Mrs. Betty Trembly, 2103 Carmelita, regarding paving and
maintenance of vancouver Avenue and public work's response
e. Letter of February 7 ,2002 from Mike Harvey's Auto Corurection regarding parking
enforcement on Carolan Avenue and Cadillac Way
f. Letter from Blueprints Printables, Barbara Hewitt and John Basye, 1129 Cortez regarding lack
of audio transmission at council meeting on February 4,2002 and City Manager,si.rponr.
Mayor Janney adjourned the meeting in memory of Loraine Pearce and Katerina Froelich who recently
passed away, and in honor of Chief Gary Missel for his 29 years of service to the City of Burlingame.
Respectfully submitted,
Burlingame City Council
Unapproved Minutes
6February 20,2002
Ann T. Musso
City Clerk
UNAPPROVED MINUTES
Saturday, February 23, 2002
Study Meeting
Burlingame City Council & Burlingame Planning Commission
1. STUDY MEETING CALLED TO ORDER
A study meeting of the Burlingame City Council and Burlingame Planning Commission was held on
the above dateat the Sheraton Gateway Hotel. The meeting was called to order at 9:05 p.m. by Mayor
Mary Janney.
2, ROLL CALL
Council Present:
Council Absent:
Baylock, Coffey, Galligan, Janney, O'Mahony
None
Commissioners Present: Auran, Bojues, Brownrigg, Keele, Keighran, Osterling and Vistica
Staff Present: Brooks, Musso, Nantell
3. OPERATIONAL ISSUES
a. FEES CHARGED FOR PLANNING SERVICES
CP Monroe noted that for many years it has been the policy of the City Council that planning fees
should be priced so that they do not become an obstacle to people participating in the permit process.
This means that the cost ofplanning services is borne by the general fund. Council and Commission
discussed the idea of changing this policy and what principles should be used as a basis for
determining the fees.
b. RECqMMENDATIONS IN CITY COUNCIL AND PLAI\INING COMMISSION
ACTIONS
CP Monroe noted this item was discussed at the November 28, 2001 joint meeting, but due to limited
time, it was suggested it be heard at the February joint meeting. The current practice not to have
planning staff make formal recommendations on projects submitted to the Planning Commission and
City Council is one of long standing. Should it be decided that it is appropriate to institute formal staff
recommendations at this time, it would be helpful for Council to give Planning some guidance as to
how the recommendations and supporting findings of fact be used.
Council and Commission discussed this subject and directed CP Monroe regarding planning
commission minutes and recommendations.
Burlingame City Council
Unapproved Minutes
I February 23,2002
4, CURRENT ISSUES AND SETTING PRIORITIES
a. Planning Status Report: Major Projects and In-Coming Issues
b. Modemization of the Zoning Coe: Multiple Family Districts
c. Second Unit Amnesty Program: Extended or Expanded?
d. Modernizing the Sigu Code Continued: Program for 2002
e. Historic Inventory - Survey of Existing Development
f. Prioritizing the FY 2002-03 Planning Work Program
The Council and planning Commission discussed the above issues and prioritized the FY 2002103
planning work Program as follows:
PRIORITIES
Following the discussion, Planning Commission and Council ranked the proposed Long Range
Planning projects as follows:
5. PUBLIE-COMMENTS,
Leigh Tanton, Linden Avenue, spoke regarding second unit amnesty and parking in his neighborhood'
trrtaiha May, 215 Burlingame Avenue, spoke regarding the_historical inventory. Russ Cohen,
Lexington Avenue, spoke regarding the signage issue and the historical inventory.
6. ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Janney adjoumed the meeting at 11:40 a.m.
Ann Musso
City Clerk
Burlingame City Council
Unapproved Minutes
2
ItemRank
.lrypleq,e+1et-elIrg-se-s]-Ils-qq!!'-e-Element
le Famil
1
S Code for Auto Row and Hotels)
Fee Stud for Fees3
Ba Area Plan U4
Second Unit Revisionf,
Historic6
February 23,2002
UNAPPROVED MINUTES
BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA
March 4,2002
1. B3GULAR MEETING CALLED TO ORDER
A regular meeting of the Burlingame City Council was held on the above date in the City Hall Council
Chambers. The meeting was called to order at7:07 p.m. by Mayor Mary Janney.
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG
Led by Peter Callander.
3. ROLL CALL
council Present: BAYLOCK, coFFEy, GALLIGAN, JANNEY, o,MAHoNy
Council Absent: None
4. MINUTES - None
5. PUBLIC HEARINGS
a' Parks & Recreation Commission's Report on the Feasibility Studv for Recreational Facilities
DPR Schwartz displayed a PowerPoint presentation and reviewed his staff report dated December 1g,2001, recommending council accept and concur with the community center recommendation reportpresented by the Parks & Recreation Commission. He also gave diiection to staff on long-range plan forimproving the community's recreational facilities.
Summations were given by committee member Charles Yoltz and Parks & Recreation Commissioner EdLarios.
Mayor Janney opened the public hearing. Speaking in support of plan option 3: Dan Anderson, 72gVernon Way; Steve Warden, 736 Acacia; Anna Marie Daniels, 51i Howard Avenue; Mary Warden, 736Acacia; and Peter Martindale, 769 Willborough.
There were no further comments from the floor and the hearing was closed.
Councilman Galligan moved to accept the feasibility study option 3 presented by DpR and to moveforward with the project including process of property acquisition. Motion was seconded by ViceMayor Coffey, approved unanimously by voice vote, 5_0.
Burlingame City Council
Unapproved Minutes
I
March 4,2002
Mayor Janney asked Vice Mayor Coffey to present an engraved paperweight/plaque to each committee
member present in the audience as a token of council's appreciation for the many hours of volunteered
time devoted to the meeting and planning process for this community project. Committee members not
present would be presented with the plaque at a later time.
b. Appeal of the Plannins Commission's Approval of Desisn Review. Side Setback and Heisht
Variances for a First and Second Storv Addition at 1369 Bernal Avenue. Zoned 4-1
CP Monroe reviewed her February 25,2002, staff report recommending council hold a public hearing
and take action on request for appeal of the planning commission's February 11,2002, approval of a
design review and variance at 1369 Bernal Avenue'
Mayor Janney opened the public hearing. Mark Hudak, attorney representing applicant/owner Gary
Dietel, addressed council regarding appeal and requested council uphold planning commission's
decision.
patrick & Debra Cunningham, 1365 Bernal, presented photographs of how the addition at 1369 Bernal
would impact their property and privacy. Speaking on behalf of Mr. and Mrs. Cunningham's appeal
were charles Penner, 1364 Bernal and Mike carpenter, 1360 Bernal.
There were no further comments from the floor and the hearing was closed.
Councilwoman O'Mahony made the motion to uphold the planning commission's approval of a design
review and variance at 1369 Bernal Avenue and adopt Resolution 13-2002 approving categorical
exemption, design review and variance for height. Seconded by Vice Mayor Coffey and approved by
voice vote,4-1, with Councilwoman Baylock dissenting.
c. Appeal of the Burlingame Beautification Commission's Decision to Denv the Removal of a
Protected Dawn Redwood Tree at 1360 Vancouver Avenue
DpR Schwartz reviewed his February 22,2002, staffreport recommending Council hold a public
hearing and taken action.
Mayor Janney opened the public hearing. Gary Blythe, property owner of 1360 Vancouver, addressed
the Council and stated."aiorrr for overturning the Beautification Commission's decision to deny
removal of the redwood tree. ln support of appeal was Maria Cava,1356 Vancouver.
There were no further comments from the floor and the hearing was closed.
Councilman Galligan made a motion to overturn the Beautification Commission's decision to deny
removal of tree with the condition that the property owner replant a suitable replacement tree. Seconded
by Councilwoman O'Mahony, approved by voice vote, 4-1, with Councilwoman Baylock dissenting.
d. Adopt Ordinance #1681 to Limit the Noise Level and Further Limit the Hours of ODeration of
Leaf Blowers
CA Anderson reviewed his February 21,2002, staff report recommending Council adopt the proposed
ordinance to further restrict the operation of leaf blowers in residential districts of the City.
Burlingame City Council
Unapproved Minutes
2March 4,2002
Mayor Janney opened the public hearing.
ordinance would be enforced.
Jennifer Pfaff, 615 Bayswater, voiced concern over how
There were no further comments from the floor and the hearing was closed.
Councilwoman O'Mahony made a motion to adopt Ordinance #1681 amending Municipal Code Chapter
10'40 to limit the use of leaf blowers in residential districts. Seconded by Vice Mayor Coffey, approved
unanimously by voice vote, 5-0. The clerk was directed to publish a summary ordinance.
e. Adopt Ordinance #1682 to Amend Chanter 9.04 to Provide a 3-Year License for Do*, uod to
Update License and Fee Schedule for Animal Control
CA Anderson reviewed his February 21,2002, staff report recommending council adopt ordinance to
amend Chapter 9'04 to conform to County Animal Control Ordinance foiaog ficenses and fee schedule.
Mayor Janney opened the public hearing. There were no comments from the floor and the hearing was
closed.
Councilman Galligan made the motion to adopt Ordinance #682 to amend Chapter 9.04 to provide a 3-year license for dogs and to update the license and fee schedule for animal control. Second'ed byCouncilwoman Baylock and unanimously approved by voice vote, 5-0. The clerk was directed iopublish a summary ordinance.
6. PUBLIC COMMENTS
Constance Cohen, 605 Lexington Way; Dan Anderson, 728 Vemon Way; Ken Castle, 1411 DrakeAvenue; regarding dissatisfaction with AT&T and live broadcasts of council meetings. CM Nantellnoted city's attempt to resolve problems with AT&T.
Russ Cohen, 605 Lexington Way; Anna Marie Daniels, 515 Howard Avenue; supporting reappointmentof two incumbent planning commissioners (Keighran and vistica).
7. STAFF REPORTS AND COMMUNICATIONS
a.
CM Nantell reviewed EA Weber's February 25,z}O2,staff report recommending council direct staffregarding the April 7,2002,term expirations of two planning commissioners (Keighran and Vistica).
Councilwoman o'Mahony moved to reappoint the two incumbent commissioners. Seconded byCouncilwoman Baylock, the vote failed 2-3, with Coffey, Galligan, Janney dissenting.
Councilman Galligan moved to open commission application filing to a deadline of March 29,2002, andmake the appointment at the April ls,zo\2,regular iouncil meeting. The motion was seconded by ViceMayor Coffey and approved by 3-2 voicevote, with Baylock and o;Mahony dissenting. Mayor Janneyappointed Vice Mayor Coffey and Councilman Galligan to interview commission applicants.
Burlingame City Council
Unapproved Minutes
J
March 4,2002
b. Msory leArdtqr San l4ateq Courrty]ourism Busruesqlmrroyemeut
District
CA Anderson reviewed his February 22,2002, staff report recommending council appoint advisory
board for the San Mateo County Tourism BID.
Councilwoman O'Mahony made the motion to appoint the advisory board for the San Mateo County
Tourism BID. Seconded by Vice Mayor Coffey, and unanimously approved by 5-0 voice vote.
8. CONSENT CALENDAR
Councilwoman Baylock requested item 8b be removed for separate vote
a. Resolution #14-2002 Authorizins License Asreement Betwegn the Citv of Burlinsame and the
Burlingame Girls Softball Leasue for the Construction. Maintenance. and Operation of
Certain Facilities at Rav Park
DPR February 23,2002, staff report recommended council approve license agreement between the City
and the Burlingame Girls Softball League (BGSL) to allow for facility improvements and the continued
use of Ray Park for softball play.
b.T entative and Final Map for a l2-unit Condominium, P arcel A. Block 17. Map
of Burlinsame Grove - 1237-41 Capuchino Avenue. PM 99-02
PW February 22,2002, staff report recommended council approve map as both tentative and final with
condition that covenants and restrictions for the condominium be approved by the City Attorney and
conform to all approved conditions and city codes.
c. Resolution 15-2002 Approving Professional Services Agreement with Roman & Lousee
Consulting Engineers - Water OualitY Assessment. Job 9953
PW February 21,2002, staff report recommended council approve agreement for services with Roman
and Lougee Consulting Engineers in the amount of $142,950"
d. Status of Easton Branch Renovation Proiect
City Librarian's February 14,2002, staff report and update on status of the Library's Easton Branch
renovation project.
e. Resolution 16- 2002 Acceptins Bavshore Highway" Rollins Road and Skvline Boulevard
Resurfacine Proiect - CP 8023(2)
PW February 21,2002, staff report recommended council accept the Bayshore Highway, Rollins Road
and Skyline Boulevard resurfacing proj ect in the amount of $ I ,41 3,78 1 .
f. Resotution 17-2002 Authorizins Sienatories to City Checks and Drafts
ACM Becker recommended Council approve Resolution #17-2002 authorizing signatories to city checks
and drafts.
Burlingame City Council
Unapproved Minutes
4March 4,2002
I
Councilwoman O'Mahony made a motion to approve Consent Calendar items 8a, 8c, 8d, 8e, and 8f;
seconded by Vice Mayor Coffey, approved unanimously by voice vote, 5-0.
Councilwoman O'Mahony made a motion to approve Consent Calendar item 8b; seconded by Vice
Mayor Coffey and approved by voice vote, 4-0-1, Councilwoman Baylock abstaining.
9. COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS
Council reported on various events and committee meetings they attended on behalf of the City
rO. OLD BUSINESS
There was no old business.
11. NEW BUSINESS
Councilwoman Baylock requested Safeway project be placed on a future agenda for information update.
CA Anderson and CM Nantell requested council specify convenient dates and time for a special meeting
to be scheduled in near future. Council noted March 21, April 8, and April 10, 2\02,at 5:30 p.m. would
be most convenient for potential special meeting.
12. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Commission Minutes: Planning, February 25,2002, Planning Special Meeting, February 19,
2002; Beautification, February 7,2002; Parks & Recreation, February 21,2002; Traffic, Safety
& Parking, February 14,2002
b. Department Reports: Police, January 2002
c. San Mateo County-wide Pollution Prevention Program presentation for Community
Development & water Quality in san Mateo county from city planner
d. Letter of February 1,2A02, from Rita Chaffee concerning increase in parking rates
e' Letter of February 6,2002, from Diane Elwell concerning green zone on Bloomfield in front of
Papillon Preshool
f.Letter of February 12,2002, from Bill & Donna Cerna concerning overnight parking ticket on
Balboa - Police press release attached
g. Email of February 15,2002, from A. Vincenzio conceming signage at Oak Grove and railroad
crossing; response from Assistant Public Works Director
h Letter of February 22,2002, from neighbors of 1204 Cabillo concerning size of house at this
location
Burlingame City Council
Unapproved Minutes
a.
5
March 4,2002
CLOSED SESSION
CA Anderson noted Council met in closed session prior to the meeting to discuss ongoing negotiations
with the Police Officers Association and instructed CM Nantell and DHR Bell with regard to those
negotiations.
13. ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Janney adjourned the meeting at 10:35 p.m. in memory of Terri Rasmussen, former city clerk in
San Bruno; Tom Kinsella, brother of Pat Kinsella; and Milton Snyder.
Respectfully submitted,
Ann T. Musso
City Clerk
vmw
6 Burlingame City Council
Unapproved Minutes
March 4,2002
I
STAFF REPORT
HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL SUBMITTED
February 22,2OO2
APPROVED
PUBLIC WORKS
RESOLUTION ADOPTING A RESIDENTIAL TRAFFIC CALMING PROGRAM
AGENDA
ITEM #
MTG.
DATE
5a--
3t18tO2
TO:
DATE:
FROM
SUBJECT:
BY
BY
RECOMMENDATION:
Traffic Calming Program.
It is recommended that Council adopt the attached resolution approving the Residential
BACKGROUND: Over the last several years, staff and the Traffic, Safety and Parking Commission (TSpC) have
heard from various citizens asking that the City address neighborhood traffic protlems with non-traditional
measures. In response to this concem, staff, in coordination with the TSPC, developed the attached draft
Residential Traffic Calming Program (RTCP) after researching traffic calming procedureJ in other communities.
Traffic calming measures were discussed over several TSPC meetings. Please refer to the attached TSPC minutes.
The feedback received from residents as well as various City deparrnents has been incorporated into the RTCp.
DISCUSSION: The goal of the RTCP is to enhance the quality of life in residential areas by mitigating the
negative impacts of vehicular traffic and thereby improving neighborhood livability. The RTCP identifies numerous
non-traditional measures that could be used locally or regionally to promote safety, lower vehicular speeds, reduce
traffic volumes and enhance pedestrian and bicycle access. In order to accomplish this, ttre RTCp outlines a
collaborative approach for dealing wittr traffic issues and provides a high level o1community participation.
Following is a summary of the RTCP measures, impacts and process. Staff will discuss these further in a brief
presentation to Council.
Measures. The program includes a plan, description, advantages, disadvantages and relative cost for a
comprehensive number of faffic calming measures. The more commonly used meaiures include:
o public education/community outreach
o enforcement
o traffic control signs and devices
o physical features
- speed humps/cushions
- curb extensions: partial street closures/enffance barriers, pinch points, neckdowns, chokers, bulbouts,
angled slow points
- traffic circles/roundabouts
- medians
- cul de sacs
Page 2
Impacts. The program identifies potential impacts that need to be addressed when considering physical features
such as speed humps and traffic circles. These include:
. emergency vehicles response times
o landscape and street maintenance. street drainage and utilities
o traffic diversion
o parking
o liability exposure
o aesthetics
o noise
o transit and utility vehicle access
o air pollution and fuel consumption. property values
Process. The program identifies a very interactive process that requires a consensus of the affected residents
before proceeding with a traffic calming physical feature such as speed humps. The process includes:
o holding an initial conference between residents and staff to identiff the traffic issue(s), the area affected,
as well as explaining the application packet handout
o circulating a petition if required due to the severity of the impact on the neighborhood
o holding an initial neighborhood meeting to discuss traffic issues and potentiaisolutions as well as impactso conducting a preliminary analysis, including obtaining vehicular voiumes, speeds and accident historyo holding a subcommittee workshop to discuss the results of the analysis
o developing a project and identifying the most appropriate traffic calming measure with the subcommittee
' presenting the project to the neighborhood and obtaining a consensus for support
' presenting the project to the TSPC and Council with a recorrmendation as to-priority and fundingo designing and cgnstructing the permanent project such as speed humps or an interimtest project such as
a temporary traffic circle
o monitoring the effectiveness of the project by making field observations, taking traffic counts and
performing speed studies
Recently the City's Traffic Engineer position became vacant. As a result, staff recommends that the RTCp not be
initiated until the position is filled as traffic engineering expertise is essential to the success of the program. Staff
estimates ttrat it will take three months or more to complete the recruitrnent process depending on thi mirketplace.
EXHIBITS: Resolution; Residential Traffic Calming Program; TSPC Minutes for 10/11/01, l llS/Ol, l1ll3l1l
and ll10/02 Meetings
BUDGET IMPACT: Traffic calming measures vary significantly in cost. Staff will include a traffic calming
program in the proposed Fiscal Year 2002-03 Capital Improvement Budget for Council consideration. Funding foi
years beyond FY 2002-03 will be based on the experience gained and requests received over the next 18 months.
650-558-7230
c: City Clerk
TRAFFIC, SAFETY AND PARKING GOMMISSION
Meeting Minutes - Approved
Thursday, October 11, 2001
1. CALL TO ORDER. 7:05 p.m. by Chair De Angelis.
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG.
3. ROLL CALL. 3 of 5 Commissioners were present.
4. CURRENT BUSINESS.
4.1 ACTION ITEMS.
4.1.1 Minutes for september L3, 2001, were submitted and approved.
4.2 DISCUSSION ITEMS
4.2.1 Residential Traffic Calming Program Study - Introduction of Proposed Study Outline
Mr. Erbacher stated that at the Joint Council Meeting, the Commission introduced this program.
Mr. Barekat provided a program outline used in West Sacramento. He stated there will be a
series of meetings to discuss local issues. In the outline are 50 measures which can be
incorporated into a program by a process which starts with a petition from the concerned
neighborhood to ultimate approval by Council. Mr. Barekat stated that the City needs public
input through this Commission over the next few months to formalize Burlingame's program for
submittal to Council in February 2002. Mr. Erbacher stated that area-wide programs are
important since some measures affect other local streets and their traffic flow. Input is also
needed from the Police and the Fire Departments for emergency routes.
Mr. Barekat reviewed the 10 most preferred measures but ensured that this list is not limited; that
the City is open to ideas not even listed amongst the 50. The top 10 measures are incorporated
from several of the four levels of priority. Several petitioners asked for descriptions of the
various measures and Mr. Barekat explained them. He further explained that although the 10
measures are recorlmended initially, programs may be re-evaluated to include more or different
options. Speed humps were discussed at length. Mr. Barekat explained that humps 3 inches high
and 12 feet wide are okay for fire trucks. Humps can be engineered to reduce speed. He also
advised that some of the 50 measures come with landscaping which may be maintained by the
residents.
Mr. Barekat stated that input will be solicited and voted on. A petitioner suggested that the ballot
indicate where each remedy can be viewed to facilitate voting. Mr. Erbacher explained that some
measures will require engineering studies to substantiate installation. Test sites might be utilized
as well. Mr. Erbacher also advised that once a program is presented and approved by Council,
the needed funding can then be incorporated into the City's budget and the program can then be
implemented.
The City of Budingame Page 2
TRAFFIC, SAFETY AND PARKING COMMISSION
Meeting Minutes - Approved
Thursday , October 11,2001
Comm. Cohen asked that the measure listing a "raised concrete median" be changed to a "raised
median" to enable possible landscaping. It was moved and seconded (Comms. Cohen/Mclver)
to move forward with the 10 most preferred measures as drafted by staff, with the change to
"raised concrete median" to "raised median." Unanimously approved by the Commission.
4.2.2 Results of Joint Meeting with Council
Mr. Erbacher advised that Comm. Cohen was the only Commissioner in attendance and that this
meeting is accounted for on the attendance report to Council. Comm. Cohen explained to Council
the Commission's desire to be proactive. Council reaffirmed that this Commission is the sounding
board for the Burlingame Avenue commercial Area parking study.
5. ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF NEW ITEMS
5.1 Petition from Bayswater & Howard residents requesting atraffrc study of the area to determine
whether traffi c-calming measures are warranted
Mr. Barekat suggested that since Bayswater is wide, speed humps would not work to slow traffic.
From the floor, Mrs. Pfaff stated the neighbors don't want street signage like centerline striping.
She likes the idea of the raised landscaped median for a traffic calming effect.
5.2 Howard Avenue - Speed and Trucks (e-mail)
5.3 3138 Rivera - Speed and Signage (e-mail)
5.4 1300 Block of vancouver Avenue - speed concems (petition)
Mr. Barekat advised that if Vancouver is an emergency route, speed bumps cannot be an option.
He stated that although this is a narrow street, it is bare of trees so appears wider. From the floor,
a petitioner stated that people drive fast over the hill although they cannot see over the hill. The
biggest concern is that the neighborhood children play ball in the sidewalk area and run into the
street to retrieve errant balls.
6. FROM THE FLOOR
No comments.
7. INFORMATION ITEMS
7.I From Staffto Commission
The City of Burlingame Page 3
TRAFFIC, SAFEry AND PARKING COMMISSION
Meeting Minutes - Approved
Thursday, November 8,2001
1. CALL TO ORDER. 7:00 p.m. by Vice Chair Mclver. Chair De Angelis arrived later.
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG.
3. ROLL CALL. 5 of 5 Commissioners were present.
4. CURRENT BUSINESS.
4.1 ACTION ITEMS
4.1.1 Minutes for October LL,200L, were submitted and approved.
4.2 DISCUSSION ITEMS
4.2.1 Residential Traffic Calming Program Study - Introduction of Proposed Study Outline
Vice Chair Mclver asked for a chronology of events to implement this study. Mr. Erbacher
advised that through these commission meetings, the City will incorporate Commissioners and
public input into this document. He advised that Council wants this commission to make a strong
recommendation for Council's approval of this outline. Mr. Barekat distributed a draft outline
which included input from October's commission meeting; so that it now includes an updated
traffic calming device (tcd) table, updated costs, impacts of tcd's, their down sides and funding
alternatives. Comm. Cohen asked why signage is not discussed. Mr. Barekat stated that although
we are willing to try anything, signage has a limited temporary effect. Petitioner, Jennifer Pfaff,
suggested signage when approaching a neighborhood to instruct traffic flow. Mr. Erbacher stated
that this is a primer of ideas for specific problems which would need to be studied to determine
if a tcd is warranted. Also a list of locations of where to view already-installed tcd's is
forthcoming. Ms. Pfaff, suggested that staff contact the Traffic Engineer in nearby cities for tcd
site viewing. For example, San Mateo has ten new speed humps near Hillsdale Boulevard and
Saratoga Road. Other cities mentioned having tcd's were Menlo Park and San Carlos.
One resident complained that the dealership personnel and the car transports don't adhere to
signage, like weight limit and speed limit signs. Comm. Cohen recommended an on-going
program to educate them on traffic rules and regulations. Mr. Erbacher suggested adding "on-
going education program for businesses" to the outline. Sgt. Cutler advised that the police
respond to complaints but that there are not enough officers to routinely monitor the area.
Mr. Erbacher suggested adding "special enforcement program" where an area is initially hit hard
with police enforcement.
Mr. Erbacher advised that the Fire Department will be invited to the December commission
meeting for their input on tcd's and on response times. Emergency routes have already been
established for entering Burlingame. Tcd's such as humps, dips and curves affect response time.
Vice Chair Mclver suggested adding lawsuits which sometimes evolve in connection with
The City of Burlingame Page2
TRAFFIC, SAFETY AND PARKING COMMISSION
Meeting Minutes - Approved
Thursday, November 8, 2001
emergency vehicle responses. Sgt. Cutler suggested that the City Attorney review the outline.
Continuing with the review, Mr. Erbacher advised that the Parks Department becomes involved
with current and future landscape maintenance. Comm. Cohen suggested adding a statement
showing the effect a tcd has on property values. Mr. Barekat stated that there is no proven study
showing that a tcd affects property values.
Funding of tcd's was discussed. One alternative is a self-assessment district where the
neighborhood property owners share the costs. Mr. Barekat asked for input on the petition
process. A tcd study starts with a petition, and Comm. Cohen recommended that if a request is
not warranted, the Traffic Engineer should propose workable alternatives rather than turn down
an unwarranted request. A neighborhood commiffee would be formed to attend this commission's
meetings and report back to their neighbors. The final process is balloting before implementing
a tcd or making a recorrmendation to Council. Mr. Barekat suggested sending ballots to the
neighborhood to vote on their committee's recommendation. He stated that included with the
ballot would be a picture and profile of the tcd and the location of a similar existing tcd for
viewing. The vote will be based on the response with one vote per household only.
Next month, Mr. Barekat will present a revised draft outline incorporating tonight's comments
for review.
5. ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF NEW ITEMS
5.1 Petition from Bayswater & Howard residents requesting a traffic study of the area to determine
whether traffic-calming measures are warranted
5.2 Howard Avenue - Speed and Trucks (e-mail)
5.3 3138 Rivera - Speed and Signage (e-mail) - no response from the petitioner as yet.
5.4 1300 Block of Vancouver Avenue - Speed Concerns (petition)
6. FROM THE FLOOR
6.1 Residents from 1225 Oak Grove Avenue requested an extension of a red curb on the west side of
their driveway. They exit from an underground garage and because ofthe slant ofthe driveway and
large parked vehicles, their sight distance is greatly reduced. They also stated that several accidents
have occurred at this location due to the same problem. Mr. Erbacher reported that he had checked
this site and found that there are three City trees and one telephone pole just west of their driveway
which blocks their view; however, extending the red zone might reduce the parking availability by
two spaces. Comm. Evans stated that the commissioners will view this sight and place this item on
the December Agenda as a Discussion Item.
7. INFORMATION ITEMS
The City of Burlingame Page 3
TRAFFIC, SAFETY AND PARKING GOMMISSION
Meeting Minutes - Approved
Thursday, December 13, 2001
residences. It was moved and seconded (Comms. Mayer/Cohen) to move this to an Action Item
immediately; it was then moved and seconded (Comms. Mayer/Mclver) to accept staffs
recommendation for one white zone for both parties to have access to passenger unloading.
Unanimously approved by the Commission.
4.2.3 Residential Traffic Calming Program Study - Proposed Study Outline
Mr. Barekat advised that he has incorporated all comments from the last meeting and included
legal issues and property value issues. He also provided a video of traffic calming devices. He
asked for comments and stated he will have more forms, e.g., the ballot and the petition,
available at the next meeting. The Fire Marshal advised he will interface with Redwood City for
their input. The main concern is the wear and tear on their $400,000 fire apparatus going over
humps or slowing down to avoid vehicle damage. Mr. Erbacher advised that we will review the
outline in January and proceed to Council in February so that, if approved, money can then be
set aside in the budget for traffic calming requests.
Comments included using bullets to avoid inadvertent prioritizing of measures; using italics and
asterisks for emphasis. The petition and guidelines for speed humps will be added for next
month's meeting. Also, a flow chart will be added showing the steps to be followed.
5. ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF NEW ITEMS
5.1 Petition from Bayswater & Howard residents requesting a traffic study of the area to determine
whether traffic-calming measures are warranted
Selective Enforcemezl status prepared by SgL Cutler showed results from November. Nineteen traffic
stops were made on Howard and 9 on Bayswater during peak traffic hours.
5.2 Howard Avenue - Speed and Trucks (e-mail)
5.3 3138 Rivera - Speed and Signage (e-mail)
5.4 1300 Block of Vancouver Avenue - Speed Concerns (petition)
5.5 2415 Adeline Drive - Letter regarding Traffic Concerns related to Sisters of Mercy Locale
From the floor, the petitioner explained the traffic safety concerns for her area with the Sisters of Mercy
having more events causing more traffic and diverting "main gate" traffrc to the service road. Weekend
traffic is heavy, too, due to retreats, weddings and other events at the site. Also, the new parking lot at
Mercy has not reduced on-street parking. Delivery trucks have hit cars parked in the area. The heavy
traffic impedes normal residential traffic on Adeline.
The City of Burlingame Page 3
TRAFFIC, SAFETY AND PARKING COMMISSION
Itleeting Minutes - Approved
Thursday, January 10, 2002
1. CALL TO ORDER. 7:00 p.m. by Chair Mclver.
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG.
3. ROLL CALL. 4 of 5 Commissioners were present.
4. CURRENT BUSINESS.
4.1 ACTION ITEMS.
4.1.1 Minutes for December 13,2001, were submitted and approved.
4.2 DISCUSSION ITEMS
4.2.1 Residential Traffic Calming Program Study - Proposed Study Outline
Mr. Barekat stated there were a few changes made due to last month's comments; and although
the sketches are not yet completed, if the Commission approves the outline, it will be presented
for Council approval next month. The Commission will receive a full copy of the memo to
Council before their meeting. Chair Mclver suggested that the Commission be kept in the loop
in approving the various stages of this program; e.g., in the first paragraph include TSPC
approval and in Nos. 2 & 3 for speed humps. Mr. Erbacher advised, however, that the
Commission will not become involved with removals since they may need to be effected
immediately if the traffic calming device is a liability. He further explained some of the thought
processes involved inpreparing the outline. Mr. Barekat stated that in voting, only one vote per
residence will be counted. If they don't vote, they will not be included in total number of
residents. Chair Mclver stated that Mr. Barekat had done an excellent job in preparing the
outline. It was moved and seconded (Comms. Evans/DeAngelis) to recommend to Council to
approve the Residential Traffic Calming Program Policy and the Speed Hump Policy as prepared
by City Engineering staff. Unanimously approved by the Commission. Mr. Erbacher advised that
the traffic calming program willbe added to the City's website when completed.
Fromthe floor, thepetitionerforBayswaterAvenue askedwhenmoney wouldbebudgeted forthis
progftrm. Mr. Erbacher advised that when staff starts identifying budget needs for the new fiscal
year, this item will be a high profile item for Council approval.
5. ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF NEW ITEMS
5.1 Petition from Bayswater & Howard residents requesting a traffic study of the area to determine
whether traffic-calming measures are warranted
See 4.2.1 above. Also, Sgt. Cutler submitted Selective Enforcemenl results for last month. Fourteen
traffic stops were made on Howard and eight stops on Bayswater.
The City of Burlingame Page2
ORDINAIICE No.
ORDINAIICE OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME
AMENDING VARIOUS PROVISIONS OF THE ZONING CODE TO REQUIRE A
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR FIRST FLOOR OCCUPANCIES GREATER
THAN A CERTAIN NUMBER OF SQUARE FEET IN THE BURLINGAME AVENUE
AND BROADWAY COMMERCIAL AREAS, TO ALLOW HEALTH AND BEAUTY
SPAS AND GRAPHIC ARTS AND DESIGN RETAIL BUSINESSES IN THE
BURLINGAME AVENUE COMMERCIAL AREA, AND TO PROVIDE A TWO-YEAR
PERIOD FOR PLANNING APPROVALS WITH NO EXTENSIONS
The CITY COTINCIL of the CITY OF BURLINGAME does hereby ordain as follows:
Section l.
A. The Burlingame Avenue and Broadway Commercial Areas are the core retail centers
of the City. The City is concerned that their vitality, small-town feel, and inviting pedestrian
nature could be jeopardizedif large retail uses consume street frontage. This ordinance sets first
floor, square-footage review lines to ensure that any larger proposal will serve the pedestrian
ambiance of the Areas and will not worsen the traffic and parking issues in the Areas. The
ordinance shall not be used against a particular occupant from locating its business in the Areas,
but shall only be used to evaluate and limit the size and intensity of the proposed use.
B. The ordinance also defines health and beauty spas and graphic arts and design retail
businesses so that those tlpes ofbusiness can be located in the two Commercial Areas consistent
with Council and Planning Commission direction.
C. The ordinance also eliminates the one-year extension process for planning approvals.
Instead, planning approvals will require that they be put to use within two years. There are no
extensions of the approvals beyond the two years.
Section 2. A new Section 25.08.322-l is added to the Municipal Code to read as follows:
25.08.322-l Graphics arts and design retail business.
"Graphic Arts and Design Retail Business" means a pedestrian oriented retail business
which must include all of the following: is pedestrian friendly including from the sidewalk
vantage a visible retail sales area with at least 25%o of the area of the first floor devoted to retail
3^|2002 Page I
1
2
J
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1l
12
13
t4
15
16
t7
18
l9
20
2l
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
sales oriented to walk-in retail business and with substantial taxable retail sales.
Section 3. A new Section 25.08.336-1 is added as follows:
25.08.336,4. Health and beauty spa
"Health and Beauty Spa" means a personal service business focused on fitness analysis and
training for individuals and semi-private groups not to exceed two (2) persons with a retail sales
component that includes substantial taxable sales.
Section 4. Subsection 25.16.130(a) is amended to read as follows:
(a) Where a use is conditional upon the granting of a variance or the issuance of a
conditional use permit or special permit, such use shall be commenced within a period of two (2)
years onc)Ear from the date of the granting of the variance or the issuance of the conditional use
permit or special permit. ;arrd In the event that such use shall not have been so cofilmenced within
such period, there shall be no rther extensions and such variance or permit shall become null and
void.
@icatioft
Section 5. Section 25.36.030 is amended to read as follows:
25.36.030 Conditional uses requiring a conditional use permit.
The following are conditional uses requiring a conditional use permit:
(a) All permitted uses and all uses allowed with a conditional use permit in the R-1, R-2,
R-3, and R-4 districts, and subject to the same regulations and restrictions applying to those uses
intheirrespective districts, and subject to the building restrictionsprescribed in sections 25.36.060
and 25.04.080;
(b) Public garages;
(c) Gasoline service stations, subject to regulations prescribed in chapter 25.74;
(d) Transportation terminal, depot, station ticket offices and any building or structure used
for the accommodation of passengers;
3fi1/2002 Page 2
1
2
J
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
t2
l3
t4
15
t6
t7
18
19
20
2t
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
(e) Parking lots, subject to the regulations prescribed herein;
(f) Mortuaries;
(g) Financial institutions;
(h) Dry cleaning processing plants;
(i) AnV structure that is more than thirty-five feet in height;
0 C-2 uses in the block described in section 25.36.035;
(k) Certain grocery, drug and department stores as described in section 25.36.036;
(l) Drive-in services or take-out services associated with permitted uses;
(m) Real estate;
(n) h association with a church or other religious or nonprofit institution, provision of
temporary shelter for homeless individuals or families, provided that the facility is located within
a transportation corridor and the use does not occur continuously at any one location for more than
six months of anytwelve month period.
(o) Tanning facilities;
(p) Classes.
(q) Other uses similar in character to those enumerated in this section or section 25.36.020
which will not be obnoxious or detrimental to the neighborhood in which they are located.
Section 6. Section 25.36.040 is amended to read as follows:
25.36.040 Burlingame Avenue Commercial Area and Broadway Commercial Area.
(a) Permitted uses in the Burlingame Commercial Area. Only the following uses are
permitted in subareas A and B of the Burlingame Avenue Commercial Area :
(1) Subarea A:
(A) Retail uses which achieve contiguous, pedestrian-oriented, retail frontage such as drug,
liquor, variety stores, paint and hardware, apparel, accessory, stationery, florists, household
3n1t2002 Page 3
fumishings, and furniture.
(B) Personal services, such as barber and beauty shops, photographic studios, shoe repair,
(C) Above the first floor only: hotels; offices except health services, real estate and
financial institutions;
(2) Subarea B:
(A) All uses permitted in Subarea A,
(B) Nurseries,
(C) Auto supply,
(D) Offices except health service, and except as provided in subsection (b)(2)(E) below,
(E) Computer programming and software equipment rental,
@) Schools, above the first floor only,
(G) Floor covering,
(H) Household appliances.
(b) Conditional uses in the Burlingame Avenue Commercial Area. The following uses are
theonlyconditionaluses allowed in subareas A andBoftheBurlingameAvenue CommercialArea
and shall require a conditional use permit:
(1) Subarea A:
(A) Instructional classes incidental to retail or service use,
(B) Grocery stores and markets,
(C) Gasoline service stations,
(D) Schools, above the first floor only, which operate outside of retail hours,
(E) Real estate and financial institutions above the first floor only,
(F) Public utility and public service buildings and facilities,
(G) Laundry and dry cleaning agencies and processing plants,
(H) Drive-in services or take-out services associated with permitted uses,
(I) Food establishments;
(i) A tirst floor of any buildirrg or structure that lras nrore than 6,000 gross square feet;
(K) Health arrd beauty spas below the first floor onlv.
3fiU2002 Page 4
(2) Subarea B:
(A) All uses requiring a conditional use permit in Subarea A, except financial and real
estate,
(B) Pool halls, bowling alleys and other amusement uses,
(C) Health services,
(D) Residences above the first floor,
(E) Real estate or financial institutions with frontage on Chapin Avenue, Primrose Road,
Donnelly Avenue or the west side of Lorton north of Donnelly Avenue,
(F) Tanning facilities;
(G) Food establishments;
(H) Graphic arts and design retail business.
(c) Nonconforming uses in the Burlingame Avenue Commercial Area. Not',yithstanding
any contrary provisions of Chapter 25.50 of this code, nonconforming uses in the Burlingame
Avenue Commercial Area shall terminate only upon the vacation of the premises by the use
occupying said premises on October I , I 981 ; provided, however, such existing nonconforming uses
shall be allowed to continue despite destruction by catastrophe or natural disaster of the existing
structure, so long as the use occupying the space at the time of the catastrophe or natural disaster
is the use retuming into the new strucfure. New uses in such structures must conform to the
permitted and conditional uses for the appropriate subarea.
(d) Vehicle parking in the Burlingame Avenue Commercial Area. Notwithstanding any
other provision of this code, the following shall apply to vehicle parking requirements in the
subareas A and B of the Burlingame Avenue Commercial Area:
(1) Uses permitted and existing on October l, 1981, shall be exempt from the parking
requirements of this code.
(2) Businesses whose use becomes nonconforming as a result of the creation of this area
shall be exempt from parking requirements until the vacation ofthe premises by the use occupying
the premises on October 1, 1981 .
(3) Anynew development, except reconstruction because ofcatastrophe or natural disaster,
3t11t2002 Page 5
I
2
J
4
5
6
7
8
9
l0
11
I2
13
t4
15
t6
ll
18
t9
20
2t
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
shall provide on-site parking, except that the first floor ofsuch new development in subarea A shall
be exempt from parking requirements if the first floor is used for retail or personal service uses.
(4) Buildings reconstructed after catastrophe or natural disaster shall be required to provide
parking only for the square footage over and above the square footage existing at the time of the
disaster. This parking shall be provided on site.
(e) Prohibited uses in the Burlingume C'ommercial Areu. In addition to the uses prohibited
in C-1 districts and elservhere pursuant to this code, the fbllowing use is prohibited in Subarea A
of the Burlingarne Avenue Commercial Area:
( l) Graphic arts and design retail business.
({) C-ontlttional uses tn the Broudwtty Conunercial Area. In addition to the conditional uses
allowed in C-l districts, the following uses are only allowed in the Broadrvay Commercial Area
pu.rsuant to a conditional use permit:
(l ) A first floor of a building or structure that contains more than 5,000 gloss square feet;
(2) A food establishment.
(g) Prohibited uses in the Broadway Commercial Area. In addition to the uses prohibited
in C-l districts, the following uses are prohibited in the Broadway Commercial Area:
l. Financial institutions;
2. Health service and real estate; and
3. All other offices on the first floor.
4. Psychic services.
(h) Food establishments in the Burlingame Avenue Commercial Area, Subarea A and
Broadway Commercial Area. The provisions of this subsection shall only apply to food
establishments in the Burlingame Avenue Commercial Area, Subarea A, and the Broadway
Commercial Area.
(l) In Subarea A of the Burlingame Avenue Commercial Area, the number of food
establishments shall be limited to those existing and in business on November l, 1998, and at the
locations as shown on the Burlingame Avenue Commercial Area Subarea A Food Establishments
by Type Tables approved by the City Council on October 18, l9gg. A food establishment is a
3/11t2002 Page 6
1
2
J
4
5
6
7
8
9
l0
ll
t2
13
t4
15
l6
t7
l8
t9
20
2t
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
business as defined in Section 25 .08.268 and shall be deemed in business if it was legally open for
business as a food establishment to the public on November 1, 1998.
(2) In the Broadway Commercial Area, the number of food establishments shall be limited
to those existing and in business on November 1, 1998, and at the locations as shown on the
Broadway Commercial Area Food Establishments by Type Tables approved by the City Council
onOctoberl8, 1999. AfoodestablishmentisabusinessasdefinedinSection25.0S"26Sandshall
be deemed in business if it was legally open for business as a food establishment to the public on
November 1, 1998.
(3) The seating area ofthe food establishments described in subsections (l) and (2) above
as shown on the Burlingame Avenue Commercial Area Subarea A and Broadway Commercial Area
Food Establishments by Type Tables approved by the City Council on October 18, 1999, above
maybe enlargedonlybyamendmentto theapplicable conditional usepermit forthe establishment.
(4) A food establishment use classified as a full service restaurant by the Burlingame
Avenue Commercial Area Subarea A and Broadway Commercial Area Food Establishments by
Type Tables approved by the City Council on October 18, 1999 , may change its food establishment
classification only to a limited food service or bar upon approval of an amendment to the
conditional use permit to the establishment.
(5) A food establishment use classified as a limited food service by the Burlingame Avenue
Commercial Area Subarea A and Broadway Commercial Area Food Establishments by Tlpe
Tables approved by the City Council on October 18, 1999,may change its food establishment
classification only to a full service restaurant or bar with approval of an amendment to the
conditional use permit for the establishment.
(6) A food establishment use classified as a bar by the Burlingame Avenue Commercial
Area Subarea A and Broadway Commercial Area Food Establishments by Tlpe Tables approved
by the City Council on October 18, 1999, may change its food establishment classification only to
a full service restaurant or a limited food service with approval of an amendment to the conditional
use permit for the establishment.
(7) A food establishment use classified as a specialty shop by the Burlingame Avenue
311112002 PageT
1
2
J
4
5
6
7
8
9
r0
11
t2
13
t4
l5
t6
t7
18
l9
20
2t
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Commercial Area Subarea A and Broadway Commercial Food Establishments by Type Table
approved by the City Council on October 18, 1999, shall be allowed to change to a different tlpe
of food establishment. A specialty shop may be replaced by another specialty shop at the same
location within the same or less square footage. If a specialty shop is changed to any other
classification the site shall not return to specialty shop use.
(8) A food establishment may be replaced by another food establishment of the same
classification so long as the replacement business is ofthe same classification as that shown forthe
site on the Burlingame Avenue Commercial Area Subarea A and Broadway Commercial Area Food
Establishments by Type Tables approved by the City Council on October 18, 1999, subject to the
conditions of the existing conditional use permit, and it complies with the same conditions as in
the existing conditional use permit.
(9) No food establishment shall occupy a location not shown on the Burlingame Avenue
Commercial Area Subarea A and Broadway Commercial Area Food Establishments by Type
Tables as approved by the City Council on October 18, 1999.
(A) Specialty shops shall not relocate to any other location on the Burlingame Avenue
Commercial Area SubareaA andBroadwayCommercial AreaFoodEstablishmentbyType Tables
list as approved by the City Council on October 18, 1999.
(B) When the total number of food establishments in the Burlingame Avenue Commercial
Area drops below forty (40) for a period of more than twelve (12) consecutive months, the City
Planner shall report this to the Planning Commission and City Council.
(C) When the total number of food establishments in the Broadway Commercial Area
drops below twenty-three(23) for aperiod of more than twelve consecutive months, the City
Planner shall report this to the Planning Commission and City Council.
(10)An existing food establishment, including specialty shops, may be expanded at its
existing location so long as the expansion does not increase the size of the seating area.
(l l) A food establishment shall be deemed out ofbusiness when the premises is occupied
by another business which is not a food establishment.
(12) All food establishments shall comply with the following:
31ty2002 Page 8
I
2
J
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
t2
13
t4
15
16
I7
18
t9
20
2T
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
(A) provide trash receptacle(s) at location(s) and of a design selected by the city;
(B) provide litter control along all frontages ofthe business and within fiftV (50) feet of all
frontages of the business;
(C) apply for a conditional use permit for delivery of prepared food from the premise; and
(D) food sales from a window or any opening within ten (10) feet ofproperty line shall be
prohibited.
Section 3. This ordinance shall be published as required by law.
Mayor
I, ANN T. MUSSO, City Clerk of the City of Burlingame, do hereby certiff that the
foregoing ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the _ day
of-,2002,andadoptedthereafterataregularmeetingoftheCityCouncilheldonthe_
_ day of _,2002, by the following vote:
AYES: COLINCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COLINCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
City Clerk
C :\FILES\ORDINANC\condltusesbg.pln.wpd
311U2002 Page 9
City of Burlingame
Department of Public Works
RESIDENTIAL TRAFFIC CALMING PROGRAM
March 2002
Table of Contents
Background
Introduction
Goals, Objectives and Policies
Measures
Impacts
Process
Funding
Attachments
Measures
Summary Table of RTCp Measures
Application and Information Packet
2
INTRODUCTION
This report identifies the goals, objectives and policies of a residential traffic calming
program. It describes the measures available to implement the program as well as
potential impacts. The report discusses a very collaborative approach involving the
community for processing traffrc calming requests. The report also identifies potential
funding sources.
BACKGROTJND
For decades transportation engineers have tried to increase road capacity and reduce
traffic congestion by widening intersections, adding furn lanes, enlarging travel lanes and
eliminating parking. However, these measures encouraged more cars to use the roadway
and often at faster speeds. In the 1960's, Europeans began to reverse the process by
narrowing trafftc lanes, adding barricades and reducing the intersection size. This new
approach, called "traffic calming," focused on physical modifications to the street aimed
at reducing vehicle speed and traffic volumes and changing circulation patterns in order
to create a more pedestrian-oriented environment.
Many North American cities in the following decades began to use traffic calming in
older neighborhoods to reduce short-cutting traffrc that made residential streets unsafe,
noisy and unpleasant. A number of constraints, such as circles, stop signs, speed humps
and neckdowns were devised to slow traffic and make short-cutting trips longer. Drivers
soon leamed that they were better off driving on designated arterials, and neighborhood
streets gradually became safer and quieter.
With several decades of experience, residential street calming is gaining acceptance.
Cities are facing increased demands for trafiic calming solutions, generatedty safety and
environmental concerns, and by requests from the community that, sometimes
unrealistically, see traffrc calming as the solution to the problems of their neighborhood.
There is rarely a single traffrc calming solution for all situations. There are choices to be
made between types of measures, materials to be used, and neighborhoods to be covered,
along with cost implications.
To be effective, traffic calming measures need to be part of a strategy extending along a
residential street. The aim is to control traffic over an area, not an isolated site, and to be
compatible with street activities and adjacent land uses. Many traffic calming measures
improve safety for people, provide a greater sense of security and increase the
neighborhood livability. Although livabitity has no precise definition, it can be thought of
as encompassing the following characteristics:
3
a The ability of residents to feel safe and secure in their neighborhoods.
o
O
o
a
The opportunity to interact socially with neighbors without distractions or threats.
The ability to experience a sense of home and privacy.
A sense of community and neighborhood identity.
A balanced relationship between the multiple uses and needs of a neighborhood.
The City's Residential Traffic Calming Program (RTCP) represents the commitment to
the safety and livability of neighborhoods. The RTCP provides a process for identiffing
and addressing problems related to speeding, excessive traffrc volumes and safety on
roadways classified as "local residential streets." Under the program, the Public Works
Department (PWD) will work with residents within neighborhoods to evaluate the type
and severity of traffrc problems. The PWD will then process applications for traffrc
calming and implement measures if the required approval by residents, the TSPC, and
City Council is obtained and funding is available.
GOALS, OBJECTMS AI\D POLTCIES
The goal of the City's Residential Traffic Calming Prograrn is to have procedures and
measures that will enhance the quality of life in the city's neighborhoods by mitigating
the negative impacts of vehicular traffic on the residential sheets.
The objectives of the Crty's Residential Traffic Calming Program are as follows:
To promote safe and pleasant conditions for residents, pedestrians, bicyclists and
motorists on neighborhood streets.
To reduce the average speed of traffrc on local neighborhood streets.
To reduce the total amount of vehicular traflic on local neighborhood streets.
To preserve and enhance pedestrian and bicyclist access to neighborhood
destinations.
To encourage citizen involvement in neighborhood traffrc management activities.
To provide a process that will address neighborhood traffic management requests-
The policies of the City's ReslJential Traffic Calming Program are as follows:
o Through traffic should be routed to the major roadways, whenever possible.
o The amount of rerouted traffic that is acceptable as a result of a traffic calming
project should be defined on a project-by-project basis.
o Emergency vehicle access should be preserved.
o Each traffic calming measure will be planned and designed in conformance with
sound engineering and planning practices.
o Uniform procedures will be followed in processing neighborhood traffic calming
requests.
a
o
o
O
a
O
4
MEAST]RES
Using the resources of several local and regional agencies, staffexamined different traffrc
calming measures. Realizing that the city neighborhoods are not all the same and there
are a variety of street designs, staff has compiled a wide ftmge of measures in this
program that will address ditrering traffic conditions.
Traffic calming measures generally fall under two categories - physical and
psychological. In general, wider roads encourage higher vehicular speeds. It is therefore
natural that many traffic calming measures are designed to physically change the width of
the street, such as neckdowns, traffic circles and medians. Also, ,r.**", ,uch as traffic
circles or breaking the road into smaller visual units by changing the surface pavement
cause the driver to slow down. These measures widen the motorist's vision field making
them more aware ofpedestrians and bicyclists.
Separate measures for intersections are justified because most traffic accidents in
residential areas occur at or around intersections. The specific measures adopted at
intersections mainly encourage cautious driving by requiring drivers to slow significantly
before entering the intersection itself.
There are three ways in which physical taffic control measures can be applied: to
sections of roadway, to intersections, and to a defined area of the road network. Traffic
control measures for a road network are applied over a wider area and measures for
specific sections of roadway and intersections within the area form an integrated part of
them. Their primary target is to control through traffic.
Traffrc calming may also be achieved by changing the psychological feel of the street.
Streets using different surface types, vertical landscaping or fturowed lanes create the
appropriate spaces for a relaied, pedestian-friendly feel. These psychological changes
give motorists cues that they are no longer on a major roadway but are in a different
environment tha[is shared with people.
All traffic calming measures have a limited range of effectiveness. To achieve traffrc
calming objectives, some measures may call for certain spacing requirements. If traffic
calming measures are used too sparsely, traffic may be calmed in the vicinity of the
installation, but the overall speed may not decrease. One measure may be used multiple
times or multiple measures may be used in conjunction with one another.
Unfortunately, most traffic calming measures have a very limited effect on reckless
drivers. Some of the roadway measures could potentially aggravate the hazards posed by
reckless or inattentive drivers. It should be noted that the RTCP is intended to mitigate
chronic, predictable speeding problems, not eliminate the occasional speeder during the
late evening or on a weekend.
5
The description, advantages, disadvantages and relative cost for a comprehensive number
of traffrc calming measures are included as an attachment to this report. The more
commonly used measures from this list are as follows:
Public education/community outreach
Enforcement
- traditional
- radar speed monitoring trailer
Traffic control signs and devices
- regulatory signs
- traffic calming signs
- turn prohibition signs
- miscellaneous signs
- rumble strips
- pavement markings
- marked crosswalk
- road striping
- centerline striping
Physical features
- speed humps/cushions
- curb extensions: partial sheet closures/entance barriers, pinch points,
neckdowns, chokers, bulbouts, angled slow points
- traffrccircles/roundabouts
- medians
- cul de sacs
Although the RTCP will focus on these measures, other traffrc calming measures from
the comprehensive list will be considered depending on the circumstances.
IMPACTS
Before the City proceeds with permanent physical features, which are referred to as traffrc
calming Levels 3 and 4 in the attachment, it is important to consider the impacts of these
measgres. While these physical features can be successful, they can also result in
problems more significant than the original concern. In most instances, the benefits are
quite obvious and predictable while the disadvantages can be unexpected. Potential
impacts are as follows:
Emergency Vehicles Response Times
Physical traffrc calming measures have more potential for negatively impacting
emergency vehicles because they control speed and maneuvering. Installation of most
physical traffic calming meurures can significantly worsen emergency response time.
This is especialty true for fre apparatus and ambulances. Because of the heavy weight of
6
a
o
a
a
fire engines and the delicate instruments and patients within ambulances, these vehicles
usually come to a complete halt when encountering ahump.
The City's Fire Department is concerned about the effect that physical features, such as
speed humps, have on response time. Speed humps at isolated locations may not
significantly reduce response time. However, a series of these measures in a
neighborhood could collectively cause serious delays. Therefore, Fire Department staff
needs to be consulted on a case by case basis during the traffic calming process. In
particular, the program should minimize the proliferation of measures in an area so as to
not compromise safety.
The Police Department is concerned that traffic calming devices could pose hazards to
officers responding to emergencies, especially motorcycles at night. Routine activities,
such as pacing speeding vehicles or pursuing violators could also be more dangerous.
Speed humps, in particular, could negatively impact steering and stopping, even at low
speeds. Therefore, the Police Department staff needs to be consulted on a case by case
basis during the traffic calming process.
Landscape and Street Maintenance
Landscaping associated with such measures as traffrc circles will require regular
maintenance. Hand watering requiies intensive labor and, therefore, neighborhood
participation and drought-resistant plants should be encouraged. Plants that require
intensive pruning, fertilization and pest control should be avoided. Plantings should be
low growing and not create a visual obstruction. As a result, Parks Department staffneeds
to be involved in the design of any measure requiring landscaping. Measures such as
speed humps will have to be reinstalled each time a residential street is resurfaced. Also,
curb extensions, such as bulbouts, need to be designed to accommodate street sweeping
equipment as well as large tree maintenance equipment such as aerial lifu and chippers.
Street Drainage and Utilities
A number of traffic calming measures, such as curb extensions, create a significant
impact on street drainage and utilities. As a result, the design may need to include curb,
gutter, storm pipe, manhole relocations and other utility modifications.
Traffic Diversion
There is a potential for traffic calming measures to move, rather than solve, the problem.
The placement of impediments on a particular residential street may merely divert some
or all of that traffrc to other streets. Therefore, it may be necessary to perform a traffic
study to estimate traffic diversion impacts and mitigate them.
7
Parking
It is often necessary to prohibit or restrict on-street parking in order to accommodate a
traffic calming measure. Strong support from residents on the affected street as well as on
neighboring streets is essential to the success of the project.
Liability Exposure
Many traffic calming physical features may result in liability exposure to the City. An
injured party could claim that there was a delayed emergency response because of a
haffrc calming measure. Also, the City could potentially be held liable if a measure
caused a driver to damage property or injure a person. Recent research has shown that
cities have been held liable for not maintaining waming signs and markings in excellent
condition.
Aesthetics
While some traffic calming measures can have favorable aesthetic impacts, others can be,
by their nature, unsightly. Some measures, such as speed humps, pose little or no
opportunity for the incorporation of aesthetics and can have negative visual impacts.
Virtually all traffic calming physical features require reflective devices, signs and striping
that may positively or negatively affect the aesthetics of a neighborhood.
Noise
The noise impact to adjacent residents resulting from vehicles braking or going over and
around haffic calming physical features can have a major impact on the acceptability of
these devices by the residents who are affected by them. The near unanimous support of
residents living immediately adjacent to locations where physical changes are proposed
will be essential to the success of any project.
Other Roadway Users Safety
Traffrc calming measures can often have unintended negative safety impacts on roadway
users such as bicyclists, roller skaters, skateboarders, joggers, pedestrians and parked
vehicles. The design needs to address these potential impacts.
Transit and Utility Vehicle Access
Some traffic calming physical features could potentially impact bus routes and utility
vehicles such as trash trucks. Service providers should be consulted whenever these
measures are considered.
8
Air Pollution and Fuel Consumption
The impact of various traffic calming measures on air quality varies with scope and
design features of each measure. For example, speed humps are designed to be traversed
at 15 to 20 mph rather than requiring a complete stop. Although this increases automobile
exhaust, the impact of such traffrc calming measures on air quality is negligible.
Stopping, accelerating and idling also increases fuel usage. According to a California
study, 173 additional gallons of gasoline would be consumed in one year on a street with
a daily traffic volume of 10,000 vehicles if every vehicle came to a complete halt at a
traffic calming measure.
Property Values
Various studies at the regional and national levels have concluded that the existence of
traffic calming measures such as speed humps would not affect residential property
values in a predictable manner. At this time it is not possible to conclude that there is an
adverse or favorable impact on property values.
PROCESS
It is essential that the affected neighborhood be involved in the traffic calming process in
order to have consensus and acceptance of a traffic calming measure. Although the process
may require a substantial amount of time, it provides for a comprehensive and collaborative
approach to solving traffic problems.
Following is a description of the traffic calming process.
Initial Conference
Resident meets with Engineering Division staff to discuss neighborhood
traffic problems.
Engineering Division staff explains the RTCP and provides the resident with the
attached application and information packet which includes the forms, steps and
timetable for processing the traffrc calming request.
Staffdetermines whether a petition is required for the haffrc calming measure
based on its impact on the neighborhood, budget and staff time.
Engineering Division staffand resident identi$ the affected area.
Petition (if required)
Resident circulates a petition within the identified petition area. Resident obtains
signatures of at least 10 (may vary depending on neighborhood's population
density) households in the petition area to demonstrate an initial consensus.
9
a
a
a
a
a
O Upon obtaining the necessary signatures, resident completes the application
materials and returns them to Engineering Division staff.
Initial Neighborhood Meeting
Engineering staffreceives input from citizens on traffic issues
Various City department representatives, such as Police, Fire and Parks, discuss
the impacts associated with traffic calming solutions
Staffforms a subcommiffee to represent the entire neighborhood
Preliminary Analysis
Engineering Division staff identifies the study area, collects preliminary information, and
completes a traffic analysis. To assist in evaluating the request for traffic calming, the
Engineering Division considers such factors as:
o Minimum Vehicular Volume
o Existence of Cut-Through Traffico Average and 85th-percentile Speedso Accident Historyo Intersection Volume Counts
Neighborhood Subcommittee Workshop
Engineering Division staffholds a neighborhood subcommittee workshop to discuss the
results of the preliminary analysis.
RTCP Project Development
The Engineering Division staff and neighborhood subcommittee evaluate the problem(s)
and propose one or more suitable traffrc calming measures as well as identiff any
impacts. For example, landscaping treatments included in an RTCP project may be
considered based on neighborhood participation in the installation and maintenance of the
desired plantings.
RTCP Project Presentation to Neighborhood
Engineering Division staff schedules a second neighborhood meeting, notifies residents
in the study area and presents the altemative RTCP projects. The neighborhood residents
attending the workshop must reach a consensus on the project.
a
a
a
10
RTCP Project Presentation to TSPC and City Council
Based on the findings of the Engineering Division staff and neighborhood
representatives, staff prepares a report and makes a recorlmendation to the TSPC. The
report includes potential impacts. Representatives of deparftnents affected by the project
are invited to attend the TSPC meeting.
Prior to a CLty Council presentation of certain traffic calming projects (such as speed
humps), staff may conduct a neighborhood-wide survey by sending ballots with
questionnaires to gauge the residents' preference on the installation. Staffthen prepares a
report and makes a recommendation to Council.
Project Design and Construction
With favorable action by the City Council, Engineering Division staff schedules the
design and implementation of RTCP within budgetary constraints. This may require
placing the project in a future capital improvement budget. Certain measures may be
installed for a test period while others may be installed as permanent. Test projects are
monitored and evaluated for the desired effectiveness. A monitoring period, measurable
objectives and performance measures are established on a case by case basis. If there are
insufficient funds for all outstanding traffic calming projects, staff, with input from the
TSPC, prioritizes them based on such criteria as accidents, traffrc volumes, speeds,
pedestrian counts, and school proximity.
Monitoring
Following the installation of the project, Engineering Division staffbegins an evaluation,
including field observations, traffic counts, speed studies and other data collection as
needed. If the project has not met its objectives within the monitoring period following
installation, staff notifies the neighborhood representatives and Council. The staff and
neighborhood representatives may then develop alternative solutions.
FUNDING
The following discusses potential funding sources for a traffic calming program.
City tr'unds
The General Fund can be used to finance a residential traffrc calming program. Traffic
calming projects would need to be evaluated against other general fund projects such as
storm drainage, facilities and parks improvements. The Gas Tax Fund is generally
available for street related improvements. Traffic calming frrnding from this source would
1l
need to be weighed against such projects as sidewalk repairs, street resurfacing, handicap
ramp installation and curb, gutter and bridge repairs.
Outside tr'unds
Few grants, if any, are available for traffic calming purposes. Staffwill, however, apply
for any traffic calming-related grants through the Office of Traffic Safety.
Several cities fund their taffrc calming installations through assessment districts.
Creating and administering an assessment district for a very small project such as speed
humps is probably not cost effective but may make sense for a traffic circle or cul de sac.
Depending on the traffic calming project citizens often donate their time in developing a
neighborhood consensus around a measure. There is also the possibility that residents
could donate professional expertise or funds to finance traffic calming measures if City
resources are limited due to budgetary constraints. In such cases, staff would make a
recommendation to Council on a project specific basis.
t2
I
I
I
I t
MORE
COMMONLY
USED
TRAFFIC
CALMING
MEASURES
PUBLIC BDUCATION
. Education/CommunityOutreach. Traffrc Calming Signs
Education/Community Outre4ch
Description:
Activities that inform and seek to modifu driver behavior. Techniques include
distribution of printed information, meetings and workshops with staff, interaction with
neighbors, signing campaign, enforcement activities neighborhood speed watch, school
programs, parent outreach, etc.
Application:
o In residential neighborhoods.
Advantages:
o Can be relatively effective and inexpensive.o Involves and empowers residents.
o Works well with other mitigation tools.o No negative impact on emergency services; coordination with emergency education
companies may be beneficial.
Disadvantages:
o May not be effective on non-local traffic.o Can be expensive and.ior time consuming.o May take time to be effective.
o Effectiveness may decrease over time.
Variations:
o May also include school and PTA officials.
Special Considerations:
o Neighborhood meetings are typically held in convenient locations and during after-
work hours.o The meetings are intended to promote discussions among residents and with City
staff.o When necessary, interpreters should be provided.
Estimated Cost:
a Varies as to scope.
'c
rltlrttltllrttrllrt
I
Traffic Calming Signs
Description:
Signs informing the public that taffic calming measures have been implemented in the
area.
Application:
o In neighborhoods where haditional calming measures are considered ineffective.o Initially may be considered for residential areas and as part of a larger program that
can be extended to major steets.
Advantages:
o Inform and alert drivers:f oncoming devices.
o Improve safety of the technique/device being used.o Improve effectiveness of the technique/device being used.
Disadvantages:
o More signage on the street may be considered unsightty.o Removal may be necessary to ensure the accuracy of information if unrelated traffic
studies need to be conducted.. May lose their novelty after initial impact and as the motoring public gets familiar
with them.
Variations:
o Messages should change periodically to ensure continuous effectiveness.
Special Considerations:
o School related messages should be used in school zones when the school is in session.
Estimated Cost:
a Can be significant due to the nature of non-standard, specialty signs, size of the
coverage area, and scope ofthe project.
aI
Neighborhood Traffic
Management
Area
III ltrlrllrrI
ENFORCEMENT
o TraditionalEnforcement
o Radar Speed Monitoring Trailer
Traditional Enforcement
Description:
Periodic monitoring of speeding and other violations by police.
Application:
o In residential neighborhoods where speeding problems have been reported.
Advantages:
o Good temporary public relations tool.o Serves to inform public that speeding is undesirable behavior for which there are
consequences.
. Very effective in reducing speeds.o No negative impact on emergency services; may be beneficial.
Disadvantages:
o Effect is not permanent.
o Enforcement is a relatively expensive tool.
Variations:
. May be used in combination with other traffrc calming measures.
Special Considerations:
o Requires frequent enforcement to be successful.o Police units may not be readily available.o 'Often beneficial in school zones.. Typically only streets with documented speeding problems should be initially
monitored.
. May be sued in combination with recently implemented control devices.
Estimated Cost:
Approximately $75 per hour per officer.a
II
I
IIII I I IIIIIIII
o
Radar Speed Monitorine Trailer
Description:
Mobil radar display advises motorists of their speed.
Application:
In areas where speeding problems have been identified, but are not too critical to
require actual police enforcement.
Advantages:
o Educational tool.. Very good public relations tool.o Useful especially in schoot-and construction zbnes where spotispeed reduction is
desired.o No effect on emergency services.o Relatively low cost.
Disadvantages:
o Requires periodic enforcement.o Effective for limited duration.o Unit requires frequent moving that requires personnel.o High initial cost.
Variations:
o May be combined with enforcement downsteam to be more effective.
Special Considerations: *.
o Can cause motorists to speed up to register a higher speed.o Not suitable for remote and isolated areas.. Usually not effective on high volume streets.o Helps alert drivers of their actual speed and provides an opportunity for drivers to
reduce speeds without being penalized.
Estimated Cost:
a Initially, $15,000-$20,000; $250 per day thereafter.
Y
1o.
,
aI
a
a
t
a
l.a
,'a
a
,
I
It
,
I
rSt ,.
,
,a
ra
aa,a
a
a
.aat
aa,
I
a
t
.,
i ta t
I
a
,,
I
t
SF E.E O
L,MIT
2
,t a.
a
ol -.
t-a
e.t
:11./
//,
t,,
.l tt'-'
t.
\r
I I
,lIt:
I IIIIIIIIIIIIII
TRAFFIC CONTROL
SIGNS AND DEVICES
o Centerline Stripingo Miscellaneous Signso Pavement Markings. Regulatory Signse Road Stripingo Rumble Strips. Speed Stripeso Tum Prohibition Signs
Centerline Striping
Description:
lnstallation of centerline stiping on residential sheets.
Application:
a Typically on "through" highways in residential areas as defined in the California
Vehicle Code.
Advantages:
o May force motorists to slow down when traveling on relatively narrow streets.
o May encourage motorists to make slower turning movements at intersections.
o No effect on capacity or flow.
o Low maintenance.
o Relativelyinexpensive.
o No effects on emergency services.
Disadvantages:
. May increase frequency of accidents involving parked vehicles.. May decrease visibility at driveways and intersections.
Variations:
o Solid, dashed or double striping.
o Paint or thermoplastic.
Special Considerations:
Centerline striping typically forces drivers to stay on their half of the street and not
drive over the centerline that may increase the possibility of sideswipe type accidents
involving parked vehicles.
Estimated Cost:
Relatively low.
a
a
rE
at'
a,
I r.'rl t'
\
/
li cl o
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,
I
I
I
I
B
,
a
a
a
t
r
I
I
I
I
r{t
J *,'ttI
a
a
I
ia
a
I
I
!
It
Eil
I
I
I
I
l
I
t
'i
Description:
l.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
I l.
Miscellaneous Sigms
"Slow, Children at Play"
"Slow, Residential Street"
"Local Access Only"
"Domestic Animals Crossing"
Odd-value advisory safe speed, e.g., 19 mph and 9 t/e mph, etc.
"Special Speed Limit Enforcement"*Children Walking to School"
'No Signal Ahead"
"We AreNot Fooling - 30 mph"*35 Children Live on This Block- Drive Carefully"
"Somewhere Ahead Radar"
t
Application:
o Typically unauthorized, homemade signs paid for by residents.
Advantages:
o Insigmficant.
Disadvantages:
o Can be vague and misleading.o Insignificant effect in reducing speeds and volumes.o May create a false sense of security, especially in children.o Lack legal meaning or established precedent for use in basic traffic engineering
practice.
o May create undesirable liability exposure.. Lack of proven effectiveness.
Variations:
a Unlimited.
Special Considerations:
Professionally made signs erected by residents can be misleading and confusing if
they appear to be "official".
Estimated Cost:
a Varies depending on sign, its size and content, etc.
ENTER
LOCAL
ACCESS
ONLY
SPEED
LIMIT
25
RESIDSIIIAL
STREET
Pavement Markings
Description:
Use of various types ofpainted pavement markings to alert drivers to a special condition.
Application:
o Generally installed in advance of a taffic contol device or taffic condition.
Advantages:
o Simple and relatively inexpensive.o No effect on emergency services.
Disadvantages:
o Increasedmaintenance.o Lack self-enforcing qualities.
r Can be unsightly.
Variations:
o Can also be made of thermoplastic.
Special Considerations:
o Must be maintained to be effective.
Estimated Cost:
o Varies as to scope and type.
Regulatory Signs
Description:
l. Speed limit
2. "Speed Checked by Radar"
Application:
o Installed and enforced by ordinance or resolution.
Advantages:
o Remind motorists of the residential status of the street.o Remind motorists that radar is being used to enforce the traffic laws.
o tMay be effective on urban streets where speed limit signs are posted on streets
previously without limits.
Disadvantages:
o Little or no effect on traffic speed and volume.o Not cost-effective.
Variations:
May be used in combination with other traffrc calming devices such as speed radar-
trailer
Special Considerations:
o Must be enforced to be effective.
..1''t
Estimated Cost:
a $700 per sign, including maintenance.
a
j
ti
i
ii
ti
i"I
1ti
{t::(
E
y:{
5
i
t
f4i
\
tt.t
t
i
.{*
I.f
:I
E
.t
!1
*
!lt
1l
1
I
I)
J
dI
It;(
i
t
t
1i
=[
DO
NOT
PASS
KEEP
->
RIGHT
tt
LANE
ENDS0TANE,
AHEAD0
BUSES AND
4 RIDER
CAR POOLS ONLY
6AI+9PM
0
=1{
r
ENTEB
NO
MOTOR
VEHICLES
DIVIDEDE>
HIGFIWAY
ONE
WAY'+PEDESTRIANS
PRON{IBITED va
\j
I
i
:
:
l
I
!
:
i
I
DO NOT
.a'1I
WRONG
WAY
Road Striping
Description:
Highlighting various areas of the road to increase the driver's awareness of certain
conditions, e.g., edge of road striping to create a narrowing/slowing effect while defining
space for cycling.
Application:
o Typically in higher speed and volume residential collector streets.
Advantages:
o Relatively rnexpensive and low maintenance.o May reduce speeds.. Edge treaffnent increases safety of cyclists.
Disadvantages:
. May not be as effective as other more structured techniques.
Variations:
o Can be stiped either with paint or thermoplastics.
Special Considerations:
o Must be maintained to be effective.o Excessive use may be perceived as unsightly and not a wise use of public resources.
Estimated Cost:
a Relatively low.
II
/
,a
a.
II r.
tr.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
B
t
a
t
a
aa
I
Y I
I
t
\I
ta
t
I
I
+,'I
a
I
r.{\.
I
T
I
I
!
tt!
I
i
:
:
i
I
t
:
:
I
I
I
:
I
I
J
i
I
'
I
I
i
t
I
!
I
ot
Rumble Strips
Description:
Paffern sections of rough pavement or raised pavement markers that can call attention to
vehicle speed.
Application:
At locations where a unique traffic situation exists that requires a driver's affention,
e.g., sharp curves, elbow tunu, mid-block crosswalks with limited visibility, etc.
Advantages:
o Relatively inexpensive to install.o Create driver awareness.. May reduce speeds.
Disadvantages:
. High maintenanceo May adversely impact bicyclists.. May be ineffective in reducing vehicle speeds.o Can be noisy by design and are generally not recommended for neighborhood
settings.
Variations:
. They are designed in various shapes, size and colors.
Special Considerations:
Should be initially used as a less restictive taffic calming device and may be
considered for removal if more restrictive measures are installed.
Estimated Cost:
a $600 per lane per set.
o
,
.
a
E
[ffi
i
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
fril
I
I
I
I
I
fr
oooo
o
ooo
oq
oo
oooo
o
o,
oo
t
I
g
I
I
rllr
il
\
Soeed Stripes
Description:
They control speeds by illusion. A series of stripes placed in advance of a trouble spot
and in a logarithmic formation such that as vehicles travel down the roadway, the stripes
appear to get closer and provide motorists with the sense that they are going faster; hence,
they may attempt to slow down.
Application:
o In residential neighborhoods where non-local, cut-through taffic may exist.
Advantages:
o Inexpensive
o May reduce speeds.
o No effect on emergency vehicles.
Disadvantages:
o Not as effective as more structured measures.
o Effect may wear off, as drivers become familiar with the location.
Variations:
o Can be striped either with paint or thermoplastic.
Special Considerations:
May be perceived by those it is intended to help as ineffective due to its novelty
wearing off after a period of time.
Estimated Cost:
a Relatively inexpensive.
a
IIIIIIII
:lt'
/
,,
i
:
,,',,:...
IIIIIIIIIII
Turn Prohibition Sisns
Description:
Signs that can be used to prevent turning movements onto residential streets.
Application:
a Streets where reducing cut-through traffrc is desired.
Advantages:
. May reduce speeds if the movement being prohibited had formerly been used by a driver
population as a "speedy''through route.
o Can be effective in preventing shortcutting during peak traffrc periods.
o A reduction in traffic volume may result in the perception of reduced speed.
o Signifissllt effect in reducing turning volumes.
o Can enhance flow and safety on collector and arterial streets.
o If used without channelization, they have little impact on emergency service operations.
o Relatively low cost if channelization is limited.
Disadvantages:
o Elimination of turning movements may increase the capacity of the street resulting in higher
ffavel speeds and volume overall.
. May require enforcement to be effective.
. May shift traffic to adjacent streets.
o Effectiveness may depend on drivers' acceptance.
o Limited effect on traffic speeds.
Variations:
o 'No Right Turn"
o 'No Left Turn"
Special Considerations:
o Signage can allow a trial period.
o Little or no effect on vehicle speeds.
o Best when used on major or collector streets.
o More effective when applied to certain peak hours.
o May cause access impacts to neighborhood.
o Possible diversion of traffrc to other neighborhood streets.
o Can be difficult to enforce in some areas.
Estimated Cost:
Low - high: relatively inexpensive ($700 per sign including installation and maintenance) to
install, expensive to enforce.
R3-1
24" x'j4"
R3-3
M" x,24"
R3;4
24" x24"
ONLY
a
I
NO
TURN$
PHYSICAL FEATURBS
Speed Humps and Cushions
Curb Extensions
Trafric Circles
Roundabouts
Medians
Cul-de-sacs
Speed Humps
Description:
Speed humps are areas of pavement raised 3-4 inches in height and l0-12 feet long along
the width of a residential steet. The combination of various heights, lengths and
approach ramps will affect the speed a vehicle can comfortably go over the hump.
Discomfort increases as speed over the hurrp increases. They are to be marked with signs
and pavement markings. Speed humps are typically more effective when placed in a
series rather than singularly.
Application:
o Local streets where speed control is desired.o Local streets where cut-through traffic is to be discouraged.
Advantages:
o Reduce vehicle speeds in the vicinity of the h.rmp.
o Better if used in a series of 300' to 500' spacing.
o Self-enforcing.
o Relativelyinexpensive.
o Location can be set to maintain desired speed levels.
o Flexible speed control area.
Disadvantages:
o May create noise particularly if there are loose items in the vehicle or trailer.o If not properly designed, drivers may try to drive around to avoid impact.o Increases emergency response times.o May impact drainage.o Drivers may speed up between humps to make up the lost time.. May damage emergency response vehicles and equipment if not carefully designed.. May divert traffic to nearby streets.
o Required signage may be perceived unsightly.
Special Considerations:
. Should not be sued on critical emergency response routes.
o Should be used in series or in conjunction with other traffrc calming devices to
control speeds.
o Longer designs can minimize impact on long wheelbase vehicles.
Estimated Cost: $8,500 per pair, per location.
1
aIt
a
a
I
I
I
(
I
I
a
,
aaaa ),
a
J
I
I
I
,
I
I
I
I
I
a
t
I
I
t at
a
?
ilt
AA\I
I
a
i,t,
I .l
a
;
!
:
I
I
III
i
I
I
I
l
:
i
I
I
I
I
.i
I
!
I
a
Speed Cushions
Description:
Similar to a speed hump, but only as wide as a standard passenger car axle-width. They
have the same positive speed-reducing effect as speed humps, but they avoid the main
disadvantages for larger vehicles (e.g., buses, fire trucks, etc.). While front and back
wheels of cars have to ride over ttrem, vehicles with wider axle-width than cars can use
them and remain relatively unaffected.
Application:
o In areas where the emergency response time is a critical issue.
Advantages:
o Reduce traffic speeds and volumes.o Relatively easy maneuverability for larger vehicles.o No effect on bicyclists due to the existence of sufficient width on both sides of the
cushions.o Less expensive to build than humps.o Minimal impact on large fre trucks and buses.
Disadvantages:
o Pedestrians may encounter difficulties if they cross exactly at the site of the cushion.o Ideal speed cushion may be difficult to design because vehicles often have various
axle widths.
o Loss of on-street parking space is likely in areas adjacent to the cushions.o Smaller emergency vehicles may be delayed.
Variations:
o Can be made of recyclable material.
Special Considerations:
Local emergency vehicle design standards and size specifications must be taken into
consideration for if different than common practice.
Estimated Cost:
o
o $10,000 per location.
Speed Cush ions iconfigurotions
.-;E Singh Cushions.Wicillv
psircrlrd aatnfry in o iiid p6int t n
onc comqgaaoy c44potir o hliB att,
Such ornrgcnintiienathe fror ol
vchrlcs or wcllor thaircqad oil soore
sur'tad o rm& wi,fi lcss iohnc ol trffic
Mbhlolo Cushions.
oods wfijn orfiions cun
f* wider
bt crr;irtorcd
bfiur rtooiud.
drivcnowt
unlcsr troffic inlo
dthc nod-
H
EE-g
-a
il
-
c
E
ODE
D F
E
EE
EE
E
tltl.t I ltl ll r ll r I I rl
I
I
I
t
I
i
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
:'
i
I
I
,.
I
I
I
-:.r .Zo o-\.
i
i
I
I
I
I
oo
Partial Street Closure (Semi-Divefter)/Entrance Barrier
Description:
Physical blockage of one direction of traffic on a two way street. The open lane of traffic
is signed "One Way" and traffic from the blocked lane is not allowed to go around the
barrier through the open lane.
Application:
o Local streets where cut-through traffic is a concern.o Local streets where vehicles from nearby facility circulate looking for parking.
Advantages:
o Reduces through traffic in one direction and possibly in the other.o Allows two-way traffrc in the remainder of the steet.o Good for pedestrians due to shorter crossing distance.o Provides space for landscaping.o Can be designed to provide two-way access for bicyclists.
o Reduces access for residents.o Emergency vehicles are affected since they have to drive around a partial closure with
care.
. Compliance with semi-diverters is not 100%.. May increase trip lengths for some residents.o Maintenance responsibility, if landscaped.o Will shift traffic to other streets.o Violations by vehicles and bicyclists may increase accident potential.
Variations:
Can be used in pairs to create a semi-diverter, resfricting furns onto the street and
movements across the intersection.
Special Considerations:
o Should not be used on critical emergency routes.o Has little or no effect on speeds of local traffic.. Consider how residents will gain access to street.
Estimated Cost: Moderate to high.
I)isadvantages:
a
1,,
t
I
I
I
,
a
a
t
I
a
'a
t
I{v
-2H - - - -
rJ
-
a
-a----e
.lr a ,a
I
a
(
I
./"---.
t
!!
I
,
I
I
:
a
Pinch Points
Description:
A reduction of the roadway width along the havelway. They may be installed in pairs,
opposite one another, or separately, to cause vehicles to deflect toward the center of the
street.
Application:
Typically at mid-block locations in residential neighborhoods and commercial
districts.
Advantages:
o May reduce $peeds and cut-through traffrc.o Not as costly as chicanes to construct.
Disadvantages:
. May require drivers to pass through one at a time.o May create delays.
Variations:
o May be installed in parallel or staggered, and in a series.
Special Considerations:
o It may be landscaped to appear aesthetically pleasing to gain broader public support.
Estimated Cost:.
. $6,000 to $8,500 per pair, without landscaping.
f
s
IN:l
t
A
Iru,.Ory4d
Neckdowns. Chokers. and Bulb-outs
Description:
Physical curb reduction of road width at intersections and mid-block locations. Widening
of street corners at intersections and extension of curbs onto traffic lanes to discourage
cut-through traffic and to help define neighborhoods.
Application:
t Typically used adjacent to intersections or mid-block locations where parking
becomes restricted.
Can be sued to rurrow roadways and shorten pedestrian crossings.
Advantages:
o May be aesthetically pleasing if landscaped.o Good for pedestrians due to shorter crossing distance and providing a refuge area.r can be used in multiple applications or on a single segment of roadway.o Vehicles typically slow down through ruurow intersection area.. May be useful on streets where sideswipe of parked vehicles is a problem.o Minor effect on emergency services if designed properly.
Disadvantages:
o Unfriendly to cyclists unless designed to accommodate them.o Landscaping may cause sight line problems.o Increased maintenance if landscaped.o Limit all turning movements to one lane thereby reducing capacity.o May not be able to retrofit existing streets where havel lanes are already narrow (e.g.,
lessthan 11 feet).o Cost can be significant.
Variations:
o Mid-block devices often used in corliunction with pedestian heatnents.
Special Considerations:
o curb extensions should not extend into bicycle lanes where present.
Estimated Cost:
Medium to high cost depending on landscaping, pavement treatments and storm
drainage consideration.
a
I
\
I
t
I
I,
I
I
I
I
la
I
aIt
t.
:ri
l'ila
r!
- --
,t
,l .,tt]it ..1.
a
aa
a
t "rr
a
t
I
I
l
I
.t
I
I
I
t
I
t
F
t
t
I
a
a
el
D
,/
ll ra\
a
la\
aa
t
-I
tl
rlalat
a
lltl
iil
li,
alal
trtalarlaIataararltalara.al,raa,trll l.rtll
aaattaralrr
rila
aa.aaaa.aill t'r
araal!
tart,alaaaiatallrla!ar
I
Angled Slow Point(s)
Description:
Angled deviations to deter the path of travel so that the street is not a straight line (by
extending the curb onto the travelway). May be used in a single or double lane
application.
Application:
. Typically at mid-block locations in residential areas.
Advantages:
o Reduces vehicle speed.o More effective when used in a series.
o Minimal inconvenience to local taffic.o Pedestrians have a reduced crossing distance.
o Provides space for landscaping.
e Provides a visual obstruction.
I)isadvantages:
o Landscaping needs to be maintained to ensure adequate visibility.
o Contrary to driver's expectation of unobstructed flow.
. Can be hazardous for drivers and cyclists if not designed and maintained properly.
o Confrontation between opposing drivers arriving simultaneously may create
problems.
o Double lane application is less effective in controlling speeds than single lane because
drivers can create a more straight through movement by driving over centerline.
o Increases areas of landscaping to be maintained by residents.
. May potentially increase accidents by making the roadway more difficult to traverse.
o Cost can be significant.
o Emergency services may be delayed.
Variations:
o May be installed in parallel or offset and in a series.
Special Considerations:
o It may be landscaped to appear aesthetically pleasing to gain broader public support.
Estimated Cost:
. $6,000-$8,500, without landscaping.
4
i
a
t
a
o
o
I
a
a
a)\
I
\
a
-
I
Ia
a
\
.aa a
a
-t
,
I
!a
aa-t
a'
a
a
I
a
0
a
tt
a
tt
a
t
a
a
,l-
--
a
t
t
I
a
a
I
\
I
\
a
aa
a a
a
a
,
I
\
oa
t
I
a
a
t
.rl
a
I
aa
lr-
a.
/
e
Trafiic Circles
Description:
Traffrc circles are raised islands placed in an intersection and produce a physical and
visual break to motorists along straight streets.
Application:
o Streets where speed control is desired.o Intersections where improved side street access is desired.o Typically in residential areas.
Advantages:
o Vehicles typically slow down to maneuver through the traffic circle.o Enhance neighborhoods and gain driver respect iflandscaped properly.o Tend to reduce accidents at intersections.
Disadvantages:
o May require additional right-of-way in retrofit applications.o Deflection of vehicles closer to curb can be hazardous for pedestrian and cyclists.. May necessitate parking limitations on intersection approaches.. May cause anxiety or direct conflict for bicyclists and pedestrians.o Uncomfortable for bus passengers.o Can delay emergency services.o Relatively high cost.
Variations:
Need not always be a perfect circle - oval shaped islands can also be used if
necessary.
Special Considerations:
. Typicallylandscaped.
o Additional signage and pavement markings are required.o Less effective at Tee and offset intersections.o Requires curbside parking restrictions within 30 feet of circle.
a
Estimated Cost High.
)
),:\)i),),t
)i))))),)),,)))))),
))))),
),)),)))))))i ,))),,)))
)*)
,)))))))))))))i)))))))t,),))),)
n
),))))))),)))))),)))),),))))
Traffic Circles
Itaffic Circle - Full Circle
o
?
)
/i---\
(
,
J
,
Roundabouts
Description:
Raised circular islands (similar to medians) placed at intersections. Drivers tuavel in a
counterclockwise. Drivers travel in a counterclockwise direction around the circle.
Modern roundabouts are "yield upon enfiy", meaning that vehicles in the circle have the
right-of-way and vehicles entering the circle must wait to do so until the path is clear.
They are similar to traffrc circles, but provide a deflection on the approaches to facititate
movements into the roundabout.
Application:
o Steets where speed control is desired.o Intersections where improved side-street access is desired.
Advantages:
o Reduce accidents by 50 to 90 percent when compared to 2-way and 4-way stop signs
and traffrc signals by reducing the number of conflict points at intersections.o Reduce speeds at intersection approaches.
o Longer speed reduction influence zones.
o Provide space for landscaping.
o Cheaper to maintain than a traffic signal.o Effective at intersections extended in more than three directions.o Provide a freindly environment for cyclists.
r Do not restrict movements, but make them more difficult.
Disadvantages:
o May be restrictive for larger vehicles if designed for a low speed. Providing a
mountable apron minimizing this limitation.o May require additional lighting and signage.o If left turns by large vehicles are to be recommended, then right-of-way may have to
be purchased.
o Initial safety issues as drivers adjust.. May increase volumes on adjacent streets.o Maintenance responsibility exists, if landscaped.o Can delay emergency services.o Relatively high cost.
Yariations:
o With or without neckdowns.
o With and without diverter islands.
o Different sizes and dimensions.o Barrier curb and gutter face or tapered/mountable face.
Special Considerations:
o Need to be used in series or in conjunction with other traffic calming devices.o Should not be used on critical emergency response routes.. May require extensive signing.
o Maintenance concerns associated with plowing, sweeping and asphalt maintenance
around roundabout.
o May require educational campaign and leaming period.
Estimated Cost:
. Higtr, especially if right-of-way acquisition is necessary.
\\
\
1
aat=rt
FTn
E=i4F
l=f
II
ru[
a
M d x[[
tu
:
I
!
Mid-Block Median
Description:
A raised island or barrier in the center of the roadway with one-way traf,fic in each
direction.
Application
Used on wide streets to narrow each direction of travel and to intemrpt sight distances
down the center of the roadway.
Advantages:
. Provides a refuge for pedestrians and cyclists.. May improve streetscaping if landscaped.o Provides barrier between lanes of traffic.. May produce a limited reduction in vehicle speeds.
I)isadvantages:
. May reduce visibility if over-landscaped.o Increasedmaintenance.
o May require reconstruction or relocation of manholes, utility vaults and similar street
features.
o Can delay emergency services depending on design.o Cost can be significant depending on design.
Variations:
o Medians of various lengths can be constructed.o Can be constructed mid-block only to allow all furning movements at intersections.o Can be extended tlirough intersections to preclude left turns or side street through
movements.
Special Considerations:
o Vegetation should be carefully designed not to obscure visibility between motorists,
bicyclists and pedestrians at intersection and pedestrian crossing areas.r Maintain l2-foot wide lane minimum on each side.o Maximum length bet-w9en access points should be 200' to accommodate emergency
response - turning radii for a fire truck should be maintained at these breaks.
Estimated Cost:
a High cost to construct, landscaped, and maintain.
t I
I
l
I
I
I . a -.
.i . r'
t-Er
II
I
I
I
,ll
II
r
I
i
I
I
I
I
I
Culde-Sac
Description:
street closed to motor vehicles using planters, bollards, or barriers, etc.
Application:
o On residential sheets used as a cut-through route or linkage between two or more
shopping disticts.
Advantages:
o Effectively eliminates through traffic.o Reduces speeds ofthe remaining vehicles.. Improves safety for all the steet users.o Pedestrian and bike access maintained.
Disadvantages:
o Limits emergency vehicle access and increases response times.o Limits residents' access to their properties.. May be perceived as inconvenient by some neighbors and an unwarranted restriction
by the general public.. May increase trip lengths and traffrc volumes on other streets.o Public street closures are often controversial.
Variations:
o Pedestrian and bicycle access may be provided.o Can be designed to provide emergency vehicle access.
Special Considerations:
o While creating a cul-de-sac, the dead-end street should not exceed more than 600 feet
in length.o Should not be considered on critical emergency response routes.o Impact to nearby streets should be considered.
Estimated Cost:
a $20,000-$30,000, with landscaping.
I
I
I
I
II
I
II
I
t
r ..t I I t I IIIII|IIIIIII
With culde-sac at
peripheral location,
outside tratfic is barred
rather than trapped.
Culde-sac on short
block minimizes
backing difficulties
of large vehicles.
Cul-De-Sac
Cul-De-S ac Location Implications.
With cul-de-sac at
internal location,
outside traffic will
wander into the
neighborhood and
be trapped.
Culde'sac at midblos{<
rnay surprise vehicles
from both directions.
Midblock treatments.
best used only at land
use transition points.
Cul-de-sac on long
block creates
difficulties for large
vehicles which may
have to back out.
ffiffi'mffiffiM
Arterial
Loeal
Local
E
C)oJ
GooJ
E(,oJ
itsooJ
fro
3
G
C)oJ
1
)
I
-
I I
OTHER
TRAFFIC
CALMING
MEASURES
Deviation/Chicanes/Sernentines
Description:
A curved street alignment can be designed into new developments or retrofitted in
existing rights-of-way. The curvilinear alignment requires additional maneuvering and
reduces drivers' line-of-sight.
Application:
. Any steet where speed confrol is desired.
. Any street where reduced line-of-sight is preferred.
Advantages:
o Impose minimal inconvenience to local traffic
o Pedestrians have a reduced crossing distance.o Provide large area for landscaping.
o Provide greater visual obstruction.o Cost of device is limited by length.o A very effective method of changing the initial impression of the street. If done
correctly, drivers will not be able to see through. Appears as a road closure yet allows
through movement.
o Accepted by public as a speed control device.
o Aestheticallypleasing.
Disadvantages:
o Increases the area of landscaping to be maintained by residents.
o Cost is greater than many other devices; therefore, the devices should be installed
during street reconstruction or initial design.
. May create opportunities for head-on conflicts on niurow sheets.
Variations:
o Oflset curb extensions.
o Systems of devices alternating from the center to curbside of the road.
Special Considerations:
o Cannot be used where right-of-way is limited.
o May require removal of on-street parking.
Estimated Cost: High
_t. .
I
Chlcaue. Mid-Block
Chicaue. Usiug Throating at Intersections
t
I IIIII IIIIIIIIIIIII
a
*
I rr
t-
a
tIa
I!
a t
aII
I
I
aa
t
t
tI
a
a
a
ar
t
a
t
a I
?
I
a
Ia
a
\
a
t,
t
a
l.
a
a
a
a
Ia
a
€
a
\
I
\
I
0.I
la a a.r lo a
a !
t
?
a
t
\
I
I
a
I
a
,
a
!
I
,
.t trt
a'
I
I0tIa
t
I
aa
t
a
t
ta
,
l,I
I
I
a
,,
a-
a
0t
a
a
a.l ,
,
a
a a
t
O.ar.
0
a
l1
,4.\
o\
i
a
a
\
,r/
,/
aa
a
a
aI
trl
rlF
a
a
Angle Parkine
Redesign of on-street parking sp4ces. Arranging parking at an angle to the curb provides
more parking per unit of curb length than parallel parking.
Advantages:
o Creates additional parking spaces, therefore increasing capacity.
o Narrower travel lanes may force drivers to slow down.
Disadvantages:
May increase the frequency of certain type of accidents. For example:
a Backing out of diagonal spaces increases the potential hazards to through
traffrc and bicyclists, as well as pedestians in areas without sidewalks.
a Pulling into spaces at an angle may increase potential for vehicles to jump
curb onto adjacent sidewalk, landscaping or property.
Variations:
a Various angles and layouts.
Special Considerations:
The number of parking spaces installed at an angle increases as the angle increases,
until at 90 degrees almost 2.5 times as many stalls are available per unit of curb
length compared with parallel parking.
Estimated Cost:
Relatively low to moderate with signage and striping.o
o
TE
Curb
'17'I Cwb
l83
Curb
l1 t2'r1
a3
L
g'g g'8 9'8 9,E
g'5
5d
I
Jtt*-
a.F
{,
90"
t
HHIT
,
i
Il
I
'
,:
:
i
.
:
i
,
:
i
:l i:'
a<o
a
Gateway TreatmentlEntry (Neighborhood ldentification) Island
Description:
Treatment to a street that includes signs, banners, landscaping or other structures that
he$ to communicate a sense of neighborhood identity. May include a raised island in the
center of a two-way street that identifies the entance to a neighborhood.
Application
Placed in a roadway to define the enty to a residential area and/or to narrow each
direction of travel and intemrpt sight distance along the center ofthe roadway.
Advantages:
o Positive identification of a change in environment ftom arterial road to residential
street.
o Will likely reduce entry speed.
o Can reduce pedestrian crossing distance.
o On wider streets provides space for landscaping the median.
o Helps give neighborhood a sense of identity.
o Allows neighborhood creativity and participation in design.
Disadvantages:
o Maintenance and irrigation responsibility.
o Cost can be significant.
. Speed reduction limited to entry point.
o Can delay emergency services depending on gateway design.
Variations:
o Can incorporate neighborhood identification signing and monumentation.
Special Considerations:
o Care should be taken not to restict pedestrian visibility at adjacent crosswalk.
Estimated Cost:
Varies substantially depending on extent and construction materials. Generally, low
to medium cost to install, landscape and maintain.
o
.i
+
i
a --
Humps at Entrance/Exit of Non-Priority Streets
Description:
Installation of humps to define desired street use and character.
Application:
o Typically at the entrance to a gated community.
Advantages:
. May discourage non-local traffic from entering minor residential streets.
o Self-enforcing.
Disadvantages:
. May be confusing to some drivers.
o Speed reduction limited to entry point.
o Minor delay to emergency vehicles.
Variations:
Since typically installed at the entrance to a private property, it may be designed as a
"bump" instead of a "hump".
Special Considerations:
If installed at a gated community, the hump location should be in accordance with the
operation of the gate.
, Estimated Cost:
$4,000 per hump.
a
a
o
/
l
I
I
I
I
i
t
I
I
:
i
i
I
I
l
:
I
I
i
I
l
I
i
:
I
!
1
i :: l
I
i:
I
i
!
.
:
:
:
I
l
l
i
I
i
Intersection Humn/Raised Intersection
Description:
A raised plateau where roads intersect. The plateau is generally 34 inches above the
pavement. It is elevated to be flush with the top of the curbing and the approaches are
ramped like speed humps.
Application:
o Streets where speed reduction is desired.o Street where discouragement of cut-through haffic is desired.
Advantages:
o Slows vehicle in the most critical area and thbrefore helps to make conflict avoidance
easier.
. Highlights intersection.o Pedestrian safety benefits.o Aesthetically pleasing if well designed.o Effective speed reduction at intersection, better for emergency vehicles than speed
humps.
I)isadvantages:
o Increases difficulty of making a turn.
o Increasedmaintenance.
o Requires adequate signage and driver education.
o Speed control area limited to within approximately 200'of intersection.o Increases emergency vehicle response time.
o Increases noise due to acceleration and braking.
o Cost can be significant.
Variations:
o May be made of recyclable material.
Special Considerations:
. Special signing required.
o Should not be used on critical emergency response routes.
Estimated Cost:
High cost of construction and storm drainage.
1
,
I
I
I
a
l'Ia!
F---
- -
t.
-€----
e
.! t .. 1
at
6eD&
I
I
I
I
,
I
I
I
I
rII
I
Iatr
Ir
Landscaping
Description:
Use of street trees, medium treatment, corner treatments, decorative signs, park benches,
pathways, color, etc.
Application:
o Typically in residential areas.
Advantages:
o Can be used to make drivers aware of speed.
o Improves aesthetics and gives neighborhood an opportunity to be creative with their
response to traffic concerns.
o Alerts drivers to change in conditions.
o No effect on emergency services.
Disadvantages:
High maintenance responsibility. This can be mitigated if the neighborhood is
responsible for maintaining the landscaping
Cost can be significant depending on type and landscaping.
Variations:
o Unlimited.
Special Considerations:
o Works best when installed with other traffic calming measures.
Estimated Cost:
o Varies depending on extent and materials.
a
a
a
\
\
\.
I
a
t
tl
,
,
a
tI
lr i
I
it
t
,a
rya.
a
-i
a
a
Lane Narrowing
Description:
Street physically narrowed to extend sidewalks and landscaped areas; possibly adding
medians, on-street parking, etc. (Similar to neckdowns, but used at mid-block locations.)
Application:
Typically in residential areas or central business districts where a pedestrian friendly
atmosphere is desired.
Advantages
o Not a significant inconvenience to drivers.
o "Minimal inconvenience to local traffic.
. Good for pedestrians due to shorter crossing distance.
o Provides space for landscaping.
o Slows traffic without seriously affecting emergency response time.
o Effective when used in series.
o Single lane narrowing reduces vehicle speed and through traffic.
Disadvantages:
o Double lane narrowing not very effective at reducing speeds or diverting through
traffic.
. Only partially efflective as a visual obstruction.o Unfriendly to cyclists unless designed to accommodate them.
o Conflict between opposing drivers arriving simultaneously could create problems.
o Cost can be significant.
Variations:
o In certain conditions, lanes as naffow as 9 feet may be considered.
Special Considerations:
o Periodical modifications can be made over time to meet initial budgetary constraints.
Estimated Cost:
. Varies as to scope and size.
I
.a
!
I
a
i
t.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
trtr
\
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t\
,
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
II
II
I
Modified Street Design
I)escription:
Combination or synthesis of various techniques. Each site must be reviewed on a case by
case basis. Intemrption of the sight line of a street causes motorists to slow down and can
also mean that they are compelled to widen their field of visiorU becoming more aware
that there may be pedestians and bicyclists near the ffaffrc way.
Application:
Typically in residential areas or central business districts where a pedestrian friendly
atmosphere is desired.
Advantages:
Site specific.
Disadvantages:
r Site specific.
o Can be costly
Variations:
o Unlimited.
Special Considerations:
o Not to be installed on major emergency routes.
Estimated Cost:
o Varies with each project, but typically high.
t-.,"t
I I II
Narrow traffic Lanes
Description:
Nalrowing lanes requires restriping the pavement to reduce the width of the lanes
(usually to l0 ft wide).
Application:
. Typically on roadways where large vehicles are not normally present.
Advantages:
o Reduce speed.
o Force drivers to exercise caution.
Disadvantages:
r Increase the number of certain types of accidents (e.g., sidewalks, head-ons, etc.).
. May cause delay.
o Limited effectiveness if wide pavement area and unobstructed visual path remain.
Variations:
o In certain conditions, lanes as nilTow as 9 feet may be considered.
Special Considerations:
o The remaining portion of the road can be used to create bicycle or parking lanes.
o Additional striping helps define neighborhood streets by adding centerlines and
edgelines.
o Raised dots can be used on curved areas.
o Can be altered over time.
o Possible to use as an intermediate step to more definite traffrc control devices.
Estimated Cost:
$1,000 to $3,000.a
I
I
l
I
I
I
;l
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
taa
,
a
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
at
I
-lI]arZlr:
t
I
t
a
t
a
a
t +rt
a
a
I
I
I
!
I
I
T
T!
lr!
,:i
!
I
-\_,
a
Offset Cross Intersection
Description:
Extension of the curb area at all corners within an intersection to limit movements and
intemrpt sigh lines.
Application:
o At locations where right-of-way considerations are not a factor.
Advantages:
o Reduces traffic speed through intersection.
o Aesthetically pleasing if landscaped and designed properly.
o Miaoreffect on emergency vehicles if designed adequately.
Disadvantages:
o Little effect on trafftc volumes.
o Must be maintained if landscaped.
o Limits sight distance.
. Speed reduction limited to intersections.
o Cost can be significant.
Variations:
With or without a central island which may be designed in shapes other than a circle.
Special Considerations:
o At locations where the intemrption of sight lines would not create safety concerns.
Cost:
. High with extensive modifications of curb areas for all corners.
Raised/Iligh Visibili8 Crosswalks
Description:
Flat-topped speed hurnp shaped device, built as a pedestrian crossing.
Application:
o Local streets where speed control and pedestrian crossing designation are desired.
o Local streets where cut-through traffic is to be discouraged.
Advantages:
o Slows traJfic
o Increases pedestrian visibility in the crosswalk.
o Clearly designates the crossing.
o Requires minimum maintenance; pavement markings must be maintained.
o Minimal impact on snow removal.
Disadvantages:
o Increases emergency response times.. May damage emergency vehicles if not carefully designed.. May increase traffic noise in the vicinity of crosswalk.. May create drainage issues where raised crossing extends from curb to curb.
o Pedestrians may develop a false sense of security.
Variations:
Pavement treatment without the raised hump to create a pedestrian crossing focal
point.
Special Considerations:
. Appropriate near schools and recreation facilities.o Should not be used on critical emergency response routes.o Needs to be sued in conjunction with other traffic calming devices to control speeds.o If a new crosswalk location, it may reduce available on-street parking.. May require extensive signing.
Estimated Cost:
o
Moderate, approximately $5,000 each.
a
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,
I
\
a
O tt
a
t
ta
t
I
I
I
l
I
I
I
I
t
I
t
I
,
I
i.l
4
t
iiiiiiilllliiiiiii
.:a
t::1..
rlr1..a?!
I
itsl
it ,l
I
a
Texfured Pavement
Description:
A change in pavement texture (e.g., asphalt road to bridge crossing) that helps to make
drivers aware of a change in the driving environment.
Application:
Typically installed in central business dishicts if bricks or cobblestones are used to
create apedestrian friendly and pleasant shopping atnosphere.
Advantages:
o Can be aesthetically pleasing.
o May be sued to define pedestrian crossing.. Some speed reduction effect, especially when combined with vertical shifts.o A clear contrast can be provided for different intended uses of the available space.
Disadvantages:
o Increasedmaintenance.o Rough surfaces such as granite are noisy at speeds above 15 mph and thus may be
unsuitable where people live nearby.
. Rough surfaces are potentiallyhazardous for cyclists and pedestrians.
o Pedestrians may develop a false sense of secudty.
Variations:
a Can be made of cobblestones or bricks as commonly practiced in some European
countries.
Special Considerations:
o Pavement made out of certain materials can be noisy to those residing nearby.
Estimated Cost:
o Moderate to high.
a
a
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
,
a
a
(
I
t ll I*a,I
aI
I
a
a
I
I
I
I
a
t
ar
I
t
alr
a
a
alt
a
t
t
a
a
a
i
t
a
tll1
tr t
II
.-
T
I
a
l
I
I
I
I
t
I
i
i
Diagonal Diverter/Road Closure
Description:
A barrier placed diagonally across a four-way intersection, intemrpting traffic flow across
the intersection. This type may be used to create a maze-like effect in a neighborhood.
Application:
r Local streets where cut-through traffic is a problem.
Advantages:
o Substantially reduces and potentially eliminates through traffic.
o Provides an area for landscaping.
o Reduces traffrc conflict areas.
o Increases pedestrian safety.
o Can include bicycle path connection.
o Vehicles are forced to slow down to traverse intersections.
o Improves traffic safety in the immediate vicinity of the barrier.
Disadvantages:
o May inconvenience residents gaining access to their properties.
. May inhibit access by emergency services.
. May divert through traffic to other local streets.
o Alerted traffic patterns may increase trip lengths.
o Speed control area limited to within approximately 200' of intersections.
o Landscaping must be maintained.
Variations:
o Traversable diverters that a]low access for emergency response vehicles.
Special Considerations:
o Provide pedestrian and bicycle access through barriers.
o Should not be used on critical emergency response routes.
. Consider how residents will gain access to street.
o Has little or no effect on speeds for local traffic.
Estimated Cost:
a $25,000 to $35,000.
a
I
I
I
I
I
I
---!-o_r
_@
I
iH
I
I
-------
I
!
Forced Turn/Restricted Movement Barriers/Diverters
Description:
Barrier island that prevents certain movements at an intersection.
Application:
o Streets where reducing cut-through traffic is desired.
Advantages:
o Change driving patterns.
o May reduce cut-throughtaffic significantly.
o May be attractive if landscaped.
I)isadvantages:
. May increase trip lengths for some motorists.
o Can be aesthetically unathactive if not landscaped.
o May increase response times for emergency vehicles.
o Maintenance responsibility if landscaped.
o May shift traffrc to adjacent streets.
o Limited effect on speeding.
Yariations:
Medians on major street that allow left and right turns in, but restrict left tums out or
straight across movement from side street.
Special Considerations:
o Should not be used on critical emergency response routes.
o Have little or no effect on speeds for through traffic.
Estimated Cost:
o $15,000 to $20,000 each depending on size and scope.
a
I
,.
at' :
i
a
^
1
I
X'orced Turn Channelization
I)escription:
Installed in the form of traffic islands to prevent traffic movements at an intersection and
at the same time allow certain turning movements.
Application:
a Appropriate at both 3-legged and 4Jegged intersections with design modifications
accordingly.
Advantages
o Effective with full compliance.o Most effectiVe at an intersection of a major street and a residential street where the
major street is unafFected by the channelization.o Prevents traffic flow from one neighborhood to another across the major street.o Can be used on residential streets to permit furning movements other than those
possible with a diagonal diverter.o Increases traffic safety.o Aesthetically pleasing if landscaped.
Disadvantages:
. May encourage turning movements in opposite direction.o More likely to be violated within a neighborhood since the possibility of enforcement
is minimal.
o Minimal direct effect on speeds other than the required slowing for tuming.
Variations:
o Possibilities to vary traffic control with stop signs.
Special Considerations:
o Can require modifications to drainage system.. May impact on-street parking.
Esfimated Cost:
a $15,000 to $20,000 depending on size and scope.
a
a
a
a
t
I
t
t
t
I
a
a
I
a
I,.
.a
'a
a
:
!
I
i
I
I
I
!
,
i
I
I
'I
!
. j :a
.a'a lr:
o
l
i
I
i
I
I
I
,
i
I
I
I
i
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
l
.
i
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
.4.
a
:..a.
a.
4..
a
:
I
I
i
4-Way Star
Description:
A 4-way star is the installation of four islands at an intersection that narrow the travelway
tlrough the intersection.
Application:
o At intersections where the traffic calming efifects of narower streets are desired.
Advantages:
o Athactive if landscaped.
o May affect driving patterns.
o Provides pedestrian refuge area.
o Creates a visual break in the sfaight steet.
Disadvantages:
o Left turns are still possible.
o Fire engines may have diffrculty traversing the intersection.o Not as effective as similar devices since not significantly altering driving habits.
Variations:
o Small central islands may be added to further restrict movements.
Special Considerations:
o If the prohibition of left turns is desired, traffic stars may be preferable.
Estimated Cost:
. $15,000 to $20,000 per location.
),)
)t
)
,,
,,)
) .,,.
)
<->
I
I
I
?
I
I
I
I
-<.-
)
-->-
I
4-Way Star
III
)
,
)
)
)
))))
)))))
)))))))})
))
,
)
.)
)
)
)))))))))))))
)))))),))
)
)
)
)
)
)
,' *
))))
)),,)))))))
))
)r
):
)
)
)
)J
) .'.,
j
I
t
IIIIII
Modified/Realigned Tee Intersection
Description:
Realigns a Tee intersection to make the *through movement" a fuming movement.
Application:
o Streets where it is desired to redirect traffic to another facility.
o Streets where slowing traffrc as it enters the neighborhood is desired.
Advantages:
o Reduces vehicle speed.o Reduces through taffic along top of the Tee.o Enforces changes in priority from one street to another.o May provide space for landscaping.o No effect on emergency services if used appropriately.
Disadvantages:
o Can cause confusion regarding priority movements.
o Increased maintenance if landscaped.o Cost can be significant.
Variations:
o Stop signs control on one leg.. Stop sign control on all three legs.
o Neckdowns at the intersection.
Special Considerations:
o Drainage.
o Potential for redirecting to adjacent local streets.
. May change stop configuration and affect emergency response times.
o If landscaped, maintenance concenm may exist.
Estimated Cost:
a $25,000 to $35,000, with landscaping.
L
-
-: _" ,.
\
\-=
a
One-Way Streels
Description:
Converting a two-way street to one-way separations.
Application:
In residential areas near central business dishicts (downtown) where short blocks
exist.
One-way street conversions are usually used in combination with other one-way
street conversions in the same area.
Advantages:
o Tend to be safer for vehicles due to lack of friction from opposing traffic flow.
o Can facilitate traffrc through an area.o Can open up ruurow streets for more resident parking.
. Can maintain reasonable access for emergency vehicles depending on location.
o Maze effect of one-way traffic discourages through traffic.
r Reduce the frequency of head-on collisions.
o Relatively low cost.
Disadvantages:
o Can lead to increased vehicle speeds.o May result in longer trip lengths.
. May increase emergency response times and volumes on other streets
o Initial safety conceflls as drivers adjust.
. May be confusing for occasional drivers.
. May have more stops and starts.
Variations:
May provide one exclusive lane in opposite direction for public transit buses and
emergency vehicles when necessary.
Special Considerations:
Changing the traffic flow pattem with one-way streets should be considered only in
areas where a documented high percent of cut-through traffic and alternative routes
exist.
Residential access should be considered in conversions.
a
a
a
Estimated Cost: Relatively low-with signage and striping.
i
i
I
,
t
I
I
,
,
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
t
I
,
I
a
,
a
a
,a
I,
a
,
a
a
a
t !
a
I
t a. ala.r.
!
a
I I
,
I
I
\/
,
I
I
I
Mid-Block Street Closure
Description:
Street closed to motor vehicles using planters, bollards, or barriers, etc.
Application:
o Local streets where cut-through traffrc is the major concem.
Advantages:
o Eliminatesthroughtraffic.
o Reduces speed of the remaining vehicles.
o Improves safety for all the steet users.o Pedestrian and bike access maintained.
Disadvantages
o Reduces emergency vehicle access.
o Reduces residents' access to their properties.
. May be perceived as inconvenient by some neighbors and an unwarranted restriction
by the general public.
. May increase trip lengths.
. May increase traffic volumes on nearby streets.
Variations:
o Pocketparks.
o Maintain emergency access.
r Provide bicycle and pedesrian access.
Special Considerations:
r Should not be used on critical emergency response routes.
o Consider impacts to adjacent streets.
r Consider emergency response requirements.
Estimated Cost: Relatively low, with signage and striping.
a
I
I
,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
cfficc
a t
t
I '4
I u
;:g
?
I
Traf;frc Stars
Description:
Islands at the center of intersections to narrow the travelway through the intersection.
Application:
o Streets where reducing cut-through traffic is desired.
Advantages:
r Left tums are not allowed.o Athactive if landscaped.
o May affect driving pattems.
Disadvantages:
o May create difficulty for large vehicle turns.o If not landscaped,friy be aesthetically unattractive.o Maintenance required if landscaped.o Emergency vehicles response time may be delayed.
Variations:
. Sharp comers may be modified to minimize impact.. May be landscaped to appear aesthetically pleasing.
Special Considerations:
o Manholes and other utility features should be taken into consideration.
Estimated Cost:
o $15,000 to $20,000 each.
I
I
,l
\
-ax
t'
-E :':r
Traversable Barriers
Description:
A barrier placed across any portion of a street that is traversable by bikes, pedestrians,
inline skaters and some emergency vehicles, but not to motor vehicles.
Application:
o Local streets where cut-through traffic is a problem.
Advantages:
o Reduce or eliminate cut-throughtraffrc.o Self-enforcing.
r Maintains continuous routing opportunities.o Pedestrian and bicyclist friendly.r Not as restrictive as street closure.
Disadvantages
o May inconvenience residents gaining access to their properties.
o Depending on design, it may be subject to violation by unauthorized vehicles.o Altered traffic pattems may increase trip lengths.. May redirect traffic to other streets.
Variations:
. May be landscaped to appear aesthetically pleasing.
Special Considerations:
o Should not be used on critical emergency routes.o Consider how residents will gain access to street.
Estimated Cost:
a Moderate to high.
-I
I
.I
I
a
',at I
,
i e.,
a.
t
-
F _!F
t: l"'l
I
,I
Woonerfs
Description:
Streets that are raised to the same grades as curbs and sidewalks on which pedestrians,
cyclists, children and vehicles share a corlmon space. In a Woonerf, the division between
street and pedestrian area is abandoned and the principal integration between motor
vehicle users and pedestians is adopted at the expense of reducing both the space for cars
and driving speeds which have to be left at walking pace.
Application:
o In neighborhoods with mixed land use - residential and commercial.
Advantages:
o Reduce non-local and through traffic.o Effective speed contol measure.. Slows vehicles to the pace of pedestrians.
Disadvantages:
o Expose pedestrians to the vehicular traffic.o Limited use to very low-volume and local access streets only.. Significantly affects traffrc flow.o Limits emergency response services.o Relatively high cost.
Variations:
o If space is limited, angle paxking may be provided.o Creative use of landscaping features may help gain public's acceptance.
Special Considerations:
Initially, residents may resist accepting pedestrians and bicyclists sharing common
space with vehicular traffic - public education may be helpful.
Estimated Cost:
o High.
BEFOEE AND
I
-.---. ;::.r;.: ;,, 1:..". " - --.
IIIIIIIIIIIII
,,' r, '
I
Flashing Yellow Beacon
Description:
Self-explanatory.
Application:
Typically in school zones and where pedestrian activity and special traffic conditions
exist.
Advantages:
Effective in reducing average speeds in school zones if timed with the presence of
children.
Disadvantages
o Ineffective if continuously present (flashing).
. May tend to encourage a false sense of security in pedestrians.
o Relatively high cost for a measure that is only effective for a limited amount of time
each day.
Variations:
o May be set to flash constantly or at specific times.
Special Considerations:
o Source of electricity.
Estimated Cost:
o Relatively high.
:..
SCHOOL
V1JTIEN
CHILDREN
ARE PRESENT
20
SPEED
ORWHEN
LIGHTSARE
FI.ASHING
SCHOOL
l/vHEN
CHII.DREN
ARE PRESENT
20
SPEED
ORWHEN
UGHTSARE
FI.ASHING
Lower Posted Speed Limit
Description:
Posting the speed limit lower than the designated speed limit.
Application:
o In residential areas and school zones.
Advantages:
o Under certain circumstances, it may lower speeds.o Clearly defines speed limit.
o Acceptable by neighborhood.
o Relatively inexpensive to install.
Disadvantages:
o Little or no efflect on occasional speeders.
o Inconsistent with mandatory state and national guidelines.
o Police and the courts may have diffrculty enforcing citations when the posted speed
limit is substantially lower than the prevailing speed of traffic.
o Can be ignored by motorists.
o Requires on-going enforcement.
o Added signage to neighborhood that may be perceived as unsightly.
Variations:
o Odd-value advisory speeds, e.g., 19 and 9 3/n mph, etc.
Special Considerations:
o A traffrc analysis is needed to establish speed limits lower than 25 mph.
o Motorists have a tendency to disregard unrealistically low speed limits.
Estimated Cost:
$700 per sign, including installation and maintenance.
,
a
SPEED
LIMIT
.;.
Marked Crosswalks (Various Types)
Description:
Self-explanatory.
Application:
o Typically installed at locations where pedestrian activity is anticipated.
Advantages:
o Channelize pedestrianmovements.
o Ef[ective in athacting pedeshians.
Disadvantages:
o Ineffective and unsafe if installed at uncontrolled intersections and mid-block
locations.
. May create a false sense of security in pedestrians.
o Higher frequency of pedestian related accidents at marked crosswalks than unmarked
crosswalks.
o Little effect on driver behavior or on the vehicle accident rate at an intersection.
Variations:
o Yellow crosswalks in school zones.
o Various high-visibility types including zebra,pelican, staggered striping, etc.
Special Considerations:
o High visibility crosswalks may be more difficult to maintain than regular crosswalks.
o Existence of pedestrian activity must be identified when installation is being
considered.
Estimated Cost:
$1,000 to $5,000.a
t
!
Multi-Way Stop Signs
Description:
Installation of stop signs at all intersection approaches for speed control purposes
Application:
o Non-arterial street intersections.
Advantages:
o Slow haffrc near intersection approaches.o Relatively inexpensive to install.
Disadvantages:
o Speed control area limited to within approximately 200' of an intersection.o Must be enforced to be effective.o Unnecessary stopping of motor vehicles adds to noise, fuel consumption and
emissions.
o Installation of unwarranted signs may contribute to the disrespect of all stop signs and
promote "rolling stops" where drivers merely slow down at the sign.
Variations:
o Two-way stop signs may be considered.o Installing two-way stop signs at the intersection of two similar streets and after a
period of time reversing the stop controls by installing the signs on the crossing
street's approaches.
Special Considerations:
o Most public agencies discourage using stop signs for the purpose of speed control.o Should not be used on critical emergency response routes.o Local govemment agencies must establish their own warrants or significantly modiff
Caltrans' guidelines since the State criteria are difficult to meet in most residential
neighborhoods.
Estimated Cost:
a $1,500 to $2,500 per location, including pavement markings
Trafric Signals
Description:
Traffrc signals are valuable devices for the control vehicle and pedestrian traffic.
However, since they assign the right-of-way to various traffic movements, traffic signals
exert a profound influence on traffic flow.
Application:
o At intersections where waranted.
Advantages:
o Provide for the orderly movement of traffrc.
o Can increase the traffic handling capacity of an intersection if properly used.
o Reduce the frequency of certain types of accidents, especially the right-angle type.
. Can be coordinated to provide for continuous or nearly continuous movement of
traffic along a given route.
o Can be used to intemrpt heavy traffic at intervals to permit vehicle and pedestrian
traffic to cross.
o No effect on emergency vehicles if pre-emption is installed.
I)isadvantages:
. May cause excessive delay.
. May encourage violation of the signal indications.
o Use of less adequate routes may be induced in an attempt to avoid them.
o May attract traffrc from two-way stop control intersections with long delays.
o Accident frequency (especially the rear-end type) can significantly increase.
o High design, construction and maintenance costs.
Variations:
o In timing and phases sequence.
Special Considerations:
o The use of traffic signals for the purpose of speed control is not generally advised.
Estimated Cost:
r High, especially if right-of-way acquisition is required.
.i5 -.i :i,.*.:r'i.: ::r-;
?
': ,*.it. :!, :j:l'irli:. l
Red Lisht Radar-Camera Enforcement
Description:
Use of cameras to photograph motor vehicle signal violations and mail drivers/owners
citations.
Application:
o Sfteets with speeding problems.
o Intersections with traffic signal non-compliance issues.
Advantages:
. Very effective in metropolitan areas.o Speed enforcement with minimal staffing.o May have widespread effectiveness due to mobile nature, difficulty to participate, and
widespread application.
Disadvantages:
. May create legal issues regarding privacy concerns.o Public perceptions related to invasion of privacy.o vehicle owners may receive the citation when they were not driving.o Legal issues need to be addressed before implementation.
Variations:
May move equipment around and use at other intersections to make system more cost
effective if initially shortage of funds exists.
Special Considerations:
o Typically used at busy intersections.o Legal jurisdiction must be defined.. May assess fines without points against driver license.. May contract service to private providers.
Estimated Cost:
a Moderate cost to implement system. May be low cost if contracted.
a
ofTraffrc Safety
I
rl af(rl, ll{rl !ixhl }trr:rirrl (iutrt,ailn trrtq.trrllliltilrilrrtirrr.t,rx
'i
I
l'
I
I
I
I
I
I
T
t
I
I
I
I
!
T
T
T
T
T
I
ST]MMARY
TABLE OF
TRAFFIC
CALMING
MEASURBS
IIIII'{tttt
RESIDENTIAL TRAFFIC CALMING PROGRAM TECHNTQUES AND MEASURES
(NOT lN PRIOR|TY ORDER)
1 Education Possible Possible None None No Change None No Varies
1
Traditional
Enforcement Yes Possible None None No Change None No $40/hour
1 Regulatory Signs lnsignificant No None None No Change None No $600 per Sign
1 Radar-Trailer Yes No None None No Change None No $15,000
1 Rumble Strips Yes Possible None None Significant None Yes
$600 per lane per
set
1
Narrow Traffic
Lanes Yes Possible None
Some
Constraint No Change None Yes $1,000-$5,000
1
Miscellaneous
Signs lnsignificant lnsignificant No No No Change None No $600 per Sign
1
Turn Prohibition
Signs No Yes Yes
Some
Constraint No Change None No $600 per Sign
2 Road Striping Possible No None None No Change Possible Low Varies
2
Centerline
Striping Possible Unlikely No No No Change None No Varies
2
Pavement
Marking Possible No No No No Change None Yes Varies
3 Chokers Yes Possible None Yes No Change Yes No $8,000 - $10,000
3
Gateway
Treatment Yes Yes Yes None Decrease None No $15,000 -$20,000
III II I I
, irr r:lMPAcirs, iOFTION ,::
RESIDENTIAL TRAFFIC CALMING PROGRAM TECHNIQUES AND MEASURES
(NOT rN PRrORrry ORDER)
Modified Tee
lntersection Yes Possible None No No Yes Possible $35,0003
Yes Yes No Change NoneOne-Way Street No Yes No $3,ooo-$6;oo03
None Yes Yes3
lntersection
Hump Yes No Yes $7,000-$10,000
Possible Some Constrainl No Change Yes Yes3RoundaboutsYes $20,000-$35,000
Possible None Yes
lncrease
Possible Yes Yes $75,000-$100,0003
Deviation/
Chicanes Yes
Possible None Yes Unknown Yes Yes $6,000-$8,5003Angled Slow Point Yes
Yes Yes None Yes lncrease Yes Yes $8,500 per Pair3Speed Humps
Yes Yes Yes lncrease No No $4,000 per Hump3
Humps at street
Entrance Limited
Yes Yes No Change Possible Significant3LandscapingYesPossible Varies
Yes
Modified Street
Design Yes Possible Yes lncrease Possible Significant Varies3
Yes Minor Yes lncrease Yes Minor
$6,000-$8,500
Per Pair3Pinch Points Yes
Yes Yes Yes lncrease Yes Yes3Speed Cushion Yes $8,500
ttrllll)lt
,:r :.:, :.,1
,POtLUTION.: ' .:i i,; ,COSf| ';
Yes
None
IIIII
RESIDENTIAL TRAFFIC CALMING PROGRAM TECHNIQUES AND MEASURES
(NOT tN PR|OR|W ORDER)
4
Textured
Pavement Possible No Yes Minor Yes 5000/linear footlncrease
4 Yes Yes Total Yes Decrease Yes No $20,000-$35,000
4
Diagonal Road
Closure Yes Yes
Left or Right
Turn only Yes Decrease Possible No $15,000-$25,000
4
PartialStreet
Closure Possible Yes Yes Yes No Change Yes No $3,000-$5,000
4 Street Closure Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes $50,000-$100,000
4 Radar-Camera Yes No None None No No
$50,000 per
lntersection
4 Mid-Block Median Yes Yes Yes No No Change Possible Yes High
4
Offset Cross
lntersection Yes Yes Possible Yes No Change Yes Significant High
4
Forced Turn
Barriers/Diverters Yes Yes Yes Yes No Change None Yes $3,000-$5,000
4
Forced Turn
Channnelization Yes Yes Yes Yes No Change None Yes $5,000-$7,500
4 Traffic Stars Yes Yes Yes Yes No Change None Yes $10,000-$15,000
4
Traversable
Barriers Yes Yes Yes Yes No Change None Yes $7,500 - $10,000
tlrrrrllltlllllllll
Possible
Cul-de-sac
Decrease
No
RESIDENTIAL TRAFFIC CALMING PROGRAM TECHNIQUES AND MEASURES
(NOT lN PRIORITY ORDER)
4 Woonerf Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Significant $50,000
4
Flashing Yellow
Beacons Limited Possible No No No Change None No $50,000
1ll,'i,..:r;,=;G.6 iiiirriiiir i
Yes
t I r I I I l r I I I I I I I ) I I I
TRAFFIC
CALMING
APPLICATION
INFORMATION
PACKET
&
The City of Burlingame
fl P U,(E'I
q
PPi
,.
t
l.:',.''a?a.
7:l
ewffi
'b** *,W-ry i*
The City of Burlingame
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
Tel:(65O1 558-723O
Fax:(65O1 685-931O
DATE:
CITY HALL.5Ol PRIMROSE ROAD
BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA 9401 0.3997
Website: www. burlinganrc.orq
RESIDENTIAL TRAF'F'IC CALMING PROGRAM
RESIDENT TRAFFIC CALMING APPLICATION
PHONE:
CORPORATION YARD
Tel:(65O1 558-7670
NAME:
ADDRESS:
LOCATION:
DESCRTPTTON OF PROBLEM(S):
When completed, please retum to:
City of Burlingame
Public Works Department
Engineering Division
501 Primrose Rd.
Burlingame, CA 94010
Attention: Tralfic Engineer
Phone: (650) 558-7230
()
The CiA of Burlingame
RESIDENTIAL TRAFFIC CALMING PROGRAM
RESIDENT TRAFFIC CALMING APPLICATION
We, the undersigned, hereby petition the City of Burlingame to evaluate (street) between
(street) and streeQ for traffic calming.
The best dayltime of the week to conduct the traffic study would be
RESIDENT NAME
(PLEASE PRrNT)
ADDRESS PHOIYE NT'MBER SIGNATT'RE
CONTACTPERSON
A minimum of l0 households (one signature per household) are required to demonstrate support and start
the process. When completed, please return to:
City of Burlingame
Public Works Department
Engineering Division
501 Primrose Rd.
Burlingame, CA 94010
Attention: Tralfic Engineer
Phone: (650) 558-7230
TYPICAL RESIDENTIAL TRAFFIC CALMING PROGRAM
PROJECT TIMELII\TE
TIMELINE* CUMULATIVE TIMELINE
Traf fic calming requests
Pre-application conference
Petition circulation (if required)
Receip of RTCP application
Preliminary analysis/Priority ranking 4 weeks 4 weeks
Neighborhood workshop 4 weeks 8 weeks
Development of RTCP Project 8 weeks 16 weeks
STEP
Presentation of RTCP Project
to neighborhood
4 weeks 20 weeks
TSPC presentation 4 weeks 24 weeks
Balloting process 6 weeks 30 weeks
City Council presentation and action 4 weeks 34 weeks
Project design and implementation 24 weeks 58 weeks
Monitoring Ongoing
Follow-up evaluation within one year
*All times are approximate and may change dependent on the complexity of the project.
The CiU of Burlingame
PRE.APPLICATION CONFERENCE
(RESIDENTS AND STAFF)
PETITION CIRCULATION
DENTS)
RTCP APPLICATION
SUBMITTED
NEIGHBOURHOOD
WORKHOP
IDENTS &
PRELIMINARY
ANALYSIS
(STAFF}
DEVELOP RTCP
OPTIONS
AF
CONSENST'S EIITABTISHED
PASSES TSPC
PASSESCIIYMIINCIL
DISCUSS POTENTIAL
MEASURES WITH
NEIGHBORHOOD
RESENT RTCP OPTIONS
TO TSPC
IAIDIOPISfiITMtlilfl,CITY COUNCIL
PRESENTATION
PROJECT DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION END OF
PROCES
MONITORING
PROCESS COMPLETED
STAFF REPORT
TO:
DATE:
FROM:
AGENDA
ITEM #
MTG.
DATE
HONORABLE MAYORAND CITY COUNCIL SUBMITTED
L8.2002 APPROVED
CITY
EXPIRATION.
BY
BY
SUBIECT:ZONING CODE AMENDMENT FORBUILDING SIZE IN TfE
BROADW AY COMMERCIAL AREAS, NEW CONDITIONAL
COMMERICAL AREA,AND CHAIIGE TO ZONINGACTION
AVENUE A}[D
IN THE BURLINGA]VIf, AVENUE
Action Introduction of Ordinance:
City Council should review attached ordinance and Proposed Changes to Zoning Regulations Report and
indicate whether you wish to introduce the proposed changes for amendment to the zoning code (chaptet 25
of the Municipal code). A public hearing o" tir" proporJ changes will beheld at the second reading, April l,
Zooz If you wish to introduce the propo-sed ordinance changes the following actions should be taken:
A. Request city clerk to read title of the proposed ordinance.
B. Waive further reading of the ordinance'
C. Introduce the p.opor"d ordinance. (Set for public hearing on April 1,2002)
D. Direct the city clerk to publish a summary of tn. ordinance at least five days before proposed
adoPtion.
Planning Commission Recommendation
The planning Commission recommended by individual_vote that: (1) the zoning code be 11end.e.d to add
Health and Beauty ipur ur a conditional use below the first floor in Subarea A and to add Graphic Arts and
Design Retail Businesses as a conditional use in Subarea B by voice vote 6-0-1 (C. Bojues absent); (2) the
zoning code provisions in Subarea A and B of the Burlingaml Avenue and Broadway commercial areas be
amended to require a conditional use permit for new construction with foot prints of greater than 6000 GSF in
Subareas A and B and greater than 5000 GSF on Broadway by a voice voJe of-6-0-l (C. Bojues absent); and
that the zoningcode nJ be amended to change the current regulation which allows approval under the zoning
code to be valid for one year with a one yeaiextension, approved by a roll call vote 5-l-l (C. Auran
dissenting, C. Bojues absent).
At their meeting, after apublic hearing, prior to their vote the commissioners discussed issues relating to the
proposed ordinance changes. The discussion included:
o concern that adding a conditional use for building size might create ambiguity for a developer when
the use proposed for a structure is permitted;
o concern that the term "substantial'l when used to define level of retail sales, is not included in the
Graphic Arts and Design Retail business definition;
o the iact that group instirction in Health and Beauty Spas is most consistently addressed in the code by
requiring thai such activity get a conditional use permit as a class incidental to the primary retail
sales/personal sales business;
,ANNf,',R
,ZONING CODE AMENDMENT FOR BUILDING SIZE IN THE BURLINGALIE AWNUE AND BROADWAY
COMMERCIAL AREAS, NEW CONDITIONAL USES IN THE BARLINGAME AWNUE COMMERICAL AREA, AND
CHANGE TO ZONING ACTION EXPIRATION MARCH 18' 2OO2
o Noted that one year after a planning approval is plenty of time for even a major project to get a
building permit if they are serious.
o One commissioner commented that atwo year approval without extension is needed by some complex
projects with approvals required by other agencies'
BACKGROUND:
During the Fall of 2001, a number of issues were discussed by the City Council and Planning Commission
which would need changes to the zoning regulations to accomplish. These issues included:
o Finding a mechanism which would allow public review of new large retail spaces in the key
commercial areas before new structures are built.
o Clarifying "pedestrian oriented" as it applies to specific uses eligible for Subareas A and B of
the Burlingame commercial area.
o Modifying the time limits on zoning action expirations to simplify administration for
applicants.
The planning Commission has been working with staff since January developing appropriate approaches and
provisions to address these items (Minutes of the Planning Commission January 14, January 28, and February
25,2OOZ). Attached is a report on the Proposed Changes to ZoningRegulations, March 4,2002, which
reviews the suggested changes and annotates the intention of each and how it would work.
Summary of Proposed Zoning Changes
The following changes are proposed to be made to the zoning code to address the issues identified.
Protect "Pedestrian Orientation" of Burlingame Avenue and Broadway Commerical areas
1. Require review of new large footprint buildings in the Burlingame Avenue and Broadway commercial
areas to insure that the General Plan's objective to retain the present scale and pedestrian orientation
of these commercial areas is maintained.
a. Require a conditional use permit for any new structure in Subareas A and B of the Burlingame
Avenue commercial area which has a first floor gross square footage of 6000 SF or more;
b. Require a conditional use permit for any new structure in the Broadway Commerical Area
which has a first floor gross square footage of 5000 SF or more.
Clarifu Qualifications of Personal Service Businesses which are Considered "Pedestrian Oriented"
2. Add a new conditional use to Subarea B, Burlingame Avenue commercial area:
a. Graphic Arts and Design Retail Business, to implement codification of determination made by
City Council regarding 247 California Drive (located in Subarea B).
b. Prohibit Graphic Arts and Design Retail Businesses in Subarea A.
c. Add definition to the code to establish that Graphic Arts and Design Retail Businesses shall be
required to include a pedestrian friendly retail area Q5% of the first floor) visible from the
street in order to be allowed in Subarea B.
3. Add a new retail personal service (pedestrian oriented), Health and Beauty Spa as a conditional use to
Subarea A, Burlingame Avenue commercial area.
ZONING CODE AMENDMENT FOR BUILDING SIZE IN THE BARLINGAME AWNUE AIVD BROADI'YAY
COMMERCIAL AREAS, NEW'CONDITIONAL U,ST.S IN THE BURLINGA]YIE AWNUE COMMERICAL AREA' AND
7HANGE TO ZONING ACTION EXPIRATION MARCH 18', 2002
a. Health and Beauty Spa is defined as a personal service retail use. Because its "pedestrian
orientation" is more iimited than walk-in retail sales areas, this use would be allowed only
below the first floor.
b. Definition of Health and Beauty Spa will be added to the code establishing it as a retail
personal service use for individuals and groups of two customers (like a beauty parlor) with a
ietail sales component which has substantial taxable sales.
c. An operator wishing to have group instruction, for example, how to use specific equipment,
*ay apply for a sefarate conditional use permit (already required) for classes incidental to a
pe.mitied use. An incidental use is one whose income does not exceed 25o/o of the total
revenues of the business.
Two Year Term on Planning Approvals, No Extensions
4. Remove the one year approval with one year extension provision, and replace it establishing that
planning approvals u.. ,u[id for two (2) years from date of city action. No extensions beyond the two
years will be allowed.
The proposed Changes to Zoning Regulations Report, March 4, 2oo2 draft (attached), shows the specific
wording of each p.o[osed change-and-includes an innotation for each change. The annotation describes the
thinkin[ and doiumentation for- each proposed revision and the issues associated with each change. Also
included at the end of the report is a taUle which documents the analysis of the size of the existing single and
multiple tenant spaces and existing first floor footprints of buildings fronting on Burlingame Avenue and
Broadway.
ATTACHMENTS:
proposed Changes to ZoningRegulations: Size of Retail Buildings, Add Conditional Uses to Subarea A and
B, Change Time Limits for Planning Actions, Draft March 4,2002
Table: Analysis of Single and Multiple Tenant Space occupancy and First Floor Footprint of All structures
except Banks Jn Burlingurn" Arr"nue and in the Broadway Commercial Area, January 2002.
Planning Commission Minutes, February 25,2002
Planning Commission Minutes, January 28,2002
Planning Commission Minutes, January 14,2002
Corresp-ondence to Planning C o mmi s sion on Chang e in Zoning Regul ation s :
Karen Scheikowitz, owner of Pilates Studio, 1110 Burlingame Avenue
W. Gregory Mendell, Kerns of Burlingame,235 Park Road, with attachment
Ordinance
Draft: March 11,2002
(witt r. C. Revisions)
Proposed Changes to Zoning Regulations
Size of Retail Buildings: Burlingame Avenue Commercial Area
Subareas A and B and Broadway Commercial Area
Add Conditional Uses to Subarea A: Graphic Arts and Design Business
and Health and Beauty Spa
Change Time Limits for Planning Actions
Below are proposed amendments to the text of the zoningchapter of the Municipal Code
which would address size of retail businesses in Subareas A and B of the Burlingame
Avenue and Broadway Commercial Areas; the addition of two conditional uses in
Subarea A and B of the Burlingame Avenue Commercial Area; and a change to the length
of time a planning approval is valid before a building permit is issued. Included are
annotations explaining the reasoning behind each change and, where pertinent, how
numerical standards were determined. Planning Commission recommendation is noted rz
italics at the end of each section.
Size of Retail Buildings in the Burlingame Avenue Commercial Area
Amend CS. 25.36.040 Burlingame Avenue commercial area and Broadway commercial
areas
Add to:(b) conditional uses (l) Subarea A
(J) Maximum gross square footage for the first floor of anybuilding or structure
of 6,000 GSF.
Annotation:
Over the past year concem has been expressed about large retailers taking over
Burlingame Avenue (Subarea A) and changing the pedestrian-oriented, "small
shop" character of the Avenue by creating a more auto oriented regional
shopping center ambience. This change in orientation increases the demand
for longer term parking in the area and makes the downtown less supportive of
the local service community needs. The purpose of this review of buildings with
first floor footprint over 6,A00 GSF is not to discourage retailers, but to protect
the "community shopping" pedestrian character of the area. lt is suggested that
a review line be established for first floor footprint in Subarea A. By making this
footprint a conditional use, any property owner or developer may request a
conditional use permit with Planning Commission review for a larger footprint.
As proposed this review line would also extend to all new construction in
Subarea B. Study of the existing building footprints for properties fronting on
Burlingame Avenue showed that the present first floor building footprints range
from 1,125 GSF SF to 19,805 GSF with the median building size being 7,288
GSF. However, the data collected also revealed that single tenant buildings
were substantially smaller. (See attached table) Review of existing buildings
occupied by single tenants showed the range in terms of size being 1,125 GSF
to 10, 717 GSF, with the median size being 6,266 GSF. Because the average
tenant space in the multiple tenant buildings is about 2,204 GSF, it appeared
rmit
rEAS A
that buildings less than 6,000 GSF could be effectively used by either multiple or
single tenants. Much smaller than 6,000 GSF might be too restrictive in terms of
long term flexibility of use. Some buildings in Subarea A, such as 1420
Burlingame Avenue (about 7,000 GSF) have been used at different times by
multiple tenants (3) and later by a single tenant (Abercrombie and Fitch). Based
on these numbers using 6,000 GSF as a review line for replacement building
first floor footprints seemed appropriate.
It should be pointed out that because all conditional uses in Subarea A are also
considered to be conditional uses in Subarea B, a new building with a first floor
footprint greater than 6,000 GSF in Subarea B would also require a conditional
use permit, unless it is stated otherwise in the code. Subarea B is an important
player in establishing the sense of mass and scale in the downtown area, even
though in Subarea B new construction would have to provide parking to code on
site which would serve to moderate the size of the buildings. For these reasons,
the Planning Commission felt that extending the review line for building footprlnt
should be extended to Subarea B as well.
Planning Commission Recommendation: approve a conditional use pe
for new buildings with a first floor footprint of 6,000 GSF or greater in Suba
and B of the Burlingame Avenue commercial area.
Size of Retail Buildings in the Broadway Commercial Area
CS 25.36.040 Conditional Uses requiring a conditional use permit.
Add subsection (f):
A first floor ofa building or structure that contains more than 5,000 GSF
This subsection (f) would also bring over the conditional use of food establishments from
Section 25.36.030.
Annotation:
lf it is desirable to review the size of new first floor building footprints in the
Broadway Commercial Area in order to protect the neighborhood service
shopping orientation of the area, then the mdx,,num building footprint of this
area should also be subject to a conditional use permit. Study showed that the
present first floor building footprints in the Broadway Commercial Area range
from 900 GSF to 9,950 GSF, considerably smaller than on Burlingame Avenue.
The median existing first floor building size was 3,600 GSF. However, the first
floor spaces of single tenant buildings ranged from '1,350 GSF to 7,806 GSF;
with a median size ot 4,992 GSF. (See table attached) Since the average
tenant space in multiple tenant buildings was about 600 SF, it seems appropriate
to base the review line on the single tenant median size. This way a building with
a first floor footprint of less than 5,000 GSF could be used by either a single
tenant or multiple tenants. Based on these numbers 5,000 GSF for a review of
a first floor footprint seemed appropriate.
At study the Planning Commission determined that buildings over a certain size
in the Broadway Commercial area should be reviewed for the same reason they
should be in Subareas A and B, to promote variety and a good mix of pedestrian
oriented retail sales opportunities. The commission felt that the premise for
measurement also should be the same, the first floor footprint of the proposed
2
Proposed Changes to Zoning Regulotions March 11, 2002
Proposed Changes to Zoning Regulations March 11,2002
building.
Plan n i ng Gom m ission Recommendation i gpplov_e^a cond itional. u se permit
for new Suildings with a first floor footprint of 5,000 GSF or greater in the
Broadway commercial area.
Add Conditional Uses to Subarea A, Burlingame AYenue Commercial
Area
Graphics Arts and Design Business
CS 25.36.040 Burlingame Avenue corlmercial ar:ea and Broadway coflrmercial area
Add to conditional uses Subar eaB (25.36.040 (b) (2) (H)
(H) Graphic Arts and Design Retail Busiiiess;
Add new subsection, Prohibited uses in Subarea A (CS 25.36.040) new (e)
(e) Prohibited Uses in Subarea A. h addition to the uses prohibited in C-l
districts and elsewhere pursuant to this code, the following uses are prohibited
in Subarea A of the Burlingame Avenue commercial area.
(1) Graphic arts and design retail business.
Add to definitions section: 25.08.322-l - Graphics Arts and Design Retail Business:
"Graphic Arts and Design Retail Business" means a pedestrian oriented retail
business which must include the following: is pedestrian friendly including from the
sidewalk vantage a visible retail sales area with at least 25% of the area of the firstfloor
devoted to retail sales oriented to walk-in retail business and wilft substantial taxable
retail sales.
Annotation: a, !
City Council recently made a determination that a Graphics Arts and Design
Retail Business which includes certain criteria meets the intention of "pedestrian
oriented" retail business appropriate for SubareaB (247 California Drive) of the
Burlingame Avenue commercial area. This policy needs to be included in the
zoning code.
As suggested here by the Planning Commission, Graphic Arts and Retail Design
businesses would be allowed in Subarea B with a conditional use permit but
would be prohibited in Subarea A. Prohibition in Subarea A is suggested to
avoid future confusion in administering the code because the definition includes
the term "pedestrian oriented". The Planning Commission felt that while such a
business as described in the definition might be appropriate in Subarea B which
is a transition area between retail and office uses, this use would not be
appropriate in Subarea A which is exclusively retail and retail personal service
uses. The definition of graphic arts and design retail business needs to be
included in the municipal code so that the required criteria can be consistently
applied to other qualified businesses.
3
Proposed Changes to Zoning Regulttions March 11, 2002
At study the Planning Commission recommended adding the term "retail" to the
definition as well as a requirement that 25o/o of the first floor area be required to
be in retail use visible from the street. The reason given for the changes was
that most graphic arts and design businesses do not have a retail component.
Planning Commission Recommendation: approve adding the definition for
graphic arts and design retail business as a conditional use in Subarea B, as
amended with 25o/o of the first floor area devoted to retail sales; and prohibiting
such use in Subarea A of the Burlingame Avenue commercial area.
Health and Beauty Spa
Add to conditional uses (25.36.040 O) (1) Subarea A
(K) Health and Beauty Spa, below the first floor only
Add to definition section: CS 25.08.336-l Health and Beauty Spa
"Health and Beauty Spa" means a personal service business focused on fitress
analysis and training for individuals and semi-private groups not to exceed two (2)
persons with a retail sales component which includes substantial taxable sales.
Annotation:
As the result of a code enforcement on Burlingame Avenue the Planning
Commission directed staff that since the pattern of use and parking of a fitness
consultant could be similar to that of a beauty parlor, we should study how such
a use could be allowed in Subarea A in areas which are less dependent on foot
traffic. The proposed provisions would allow such use only in basement areas.
Only if the services included goods sold requiring retail taxable sales and only if
two or fewer clients area served by a professional unless the operator has a
conditional use permit for group instruction incidental to the primary retail
business use. There would be no limit on one-on-one consulting services (as in
a beauty parlor) but there would be a limit on group service/instruction e.g. a
maximum of three people at a time. Each such business, would require a
conditional use permit which would include a public hearing before the Planning
Commission aftd notice of all property owners within 300 feet. Since this
designation would be a retail designation (personal service) the parking
requirement would be 1:400 SF, However because this use is allowed only
below the first floor in Subarea A, if such a use is proposed to replace an existing
use which is not retail it would be required to provide parking to code on site or
receive a parking variance.
At study the Commission discussed the fact that a group of 3 was not
economically viable for an activity like yoga. So if yoga were to be included the
number should be increased to 6 persons. Staff would note that while a beauty
parlor may have six operators working at one time, no operator could work on six
people at one time. A second observation is that the cunent zoning regulations
for Subareas A and B require a conditional use permit for "instructional classes
incidental to a retail or service use". A class is defined in CS 25.08.185 as " a
group of three or more persons meeting regularly for study, instruction,
discussion counseling or similar activity." Administration of the code would be
complicated by having a group instruction standard for health and beauty spas
while requiring a permit for all other businesses with groups of three or more.
4
Proposed Changes to Zoning Regulations March 11,2002
Another way to address this is to require Health and Beauty Spas to apply for a
conditional use permit for group instruction incidental to the personal service use.
lf this were the case, the group activity would have to represent less than 25%
of their income from the business activity. The conditional use permit for
instructional classes incidental to retail use grew out of a concern for parking
impacts. Both Home Chef (an application for retail sales and cooking classe-s)
and Gymboree (an application for a retail store with a children's fitness/gym at
the back of the store) were denied because of the parking demand created by al!
attendees arriving at the same time and overlapping those departing. The cify
had also expe_rienced a serious parking problem for many years generated by
the Donnelly Square Women's Gym, an operation which also included
individua! trainers. lndividual attention is what differentiates a spa from a gym.
Thus, if this definition is to clearly make that point, the size of "group" needs to
be carefully considered.
Planning Gommission Recommendation: approve Health and Beauty Spa as
a pedestrian oriented retail use below the first floor in Subarea A as defihed and
as revised cs a one-on-one (to a maximum of two people per each'professional
on site).personal service. Group activity must be incidental to the piimary retail
use and will require a conditional use permit.
Change Time limits for Planning Actions
CS 25.16.130 Time limits for exercise of variance, conditional use permit, special
permit, or condominium permit
Presently Reads:
(a) Where a use is conditional upon the granting of a variance or the issuance of a
conditional use permit or special permit, such use shall be conlmenced within a
period of one year from the date of granting of the variance or the issuance of the
conditional use permit or special permit, and in the event that such use shall not have
been so commenced within such period, such variance or permit shall become null
and void. The commission is authorized to grant an exteniion, or extensions, for a
period not exceeding one year upon application. r> r
Should Read:
(a) Where a use is conditional upon the granting of a variance or the issuance of a
conditional use permit or special permit, such use shall be commenced within a
period of two years from the date of granting of the variance or the issuance of the
conditional use permit or special permit. In the event that such use shall not have
been so cortrmenced within such period, there shall be no extensions and such
variance orpermit shall become null and void.
Annotation:
This.change would mean that all zoning actions, except condominium maps,
would be good for two years from the d-ate of action. There would be no
extensions. granted.. Th.e applicant will.hav.e two years, following the last city
Scliq!'' on the prolect, within which to submit plans and get a buiEing permit.' lf abuilding Permit is not.issue{ for.ths project within two y-ears, the Citlyrs planning
approval action would be voided. To build the project 6fter expiratioh tde
5
Proposed Changes to Zoning Regulations
U:Voninglssues\PCSRetaitSize,DeIBACA,timelimitRevfor3.. 02.doc
March 11, 2002
applicant would be required to go through the planning approval process again.
One of the reasons that Planning approvals expire is that developers have the
right to build under the Califomia Building Code requirements in effect at the time
th-ey apply for a Planning permit. With this proposed change the application
would 'b'e-"qrandfathered-"'under the California Building and Fire code for 2 years
from city adtion, but no additional extension would be possible. Moreover, this
eliminat'es the chance that the applicant may fail to understand that they must
apply for an extension before the end of the first year after action. This
rdduirement seems to be a particular problem foi homeowners handling their
owh permits. Second apprbval actions on projects, even major ones, usually go
fairlv'ouicklv since in mobf cases the environmental work has been done; the
focris bf sei;ond review is generally on changes to the project required by
changes in the Califomia Building and Fire Codes, and other project changes
suggested by the applicant.
A Final note on the subject of time limits. ln September 20-00r CS 25.16.130.(b) - ,
was amended to extend condominium permit approvals so that they expire with
the tentative map. This was done becduse the State changed the duration of
Tentative Maps hnd it was procedurally cumbersome to review a condominium
oroiect whenihe tentative itap was still valid. Tentative maps run for three
vedrs because thev cannot bd replaced with a Final Map until the project is built.
Since most condoirinium projecti take about a year to build to the point at which
a final map can be prepar6d ind filed, the timing on expiration of the
condominium permit will be consistent with the [roposed two year expiration for
all other planning permits.
Planninq Gommission Recommendation: that the one year time limit on
zoninq a-pprovals not be changed. The Commissioners feit that one year was
sufficieni iime for a motivated applicant, even with a major project, to complete
the requirements for receiving a building permit.
6
. Tablc: Analysis of Single and MultifleTenant Space Ocorpancy ad FirstFloor
Footprint of All Structres Except Banks on Burtingame Avelnre ad in the
Broadway Commerical Area, larrwary ZAUZ
Sonrce: Burlingame Planning D@artment, larruary 20ff2
tt l.4-gldoc
BurlingameAvenue
Street Frontage
Broadwey Commercial
Area
Area Totals
FirstFloorR€tail (SF)295,154 160,578
Number of Structures 46 4t
RanseSize ofBldg- (SF)ttat- 19,805 900 - q8s0
AverageBldg Size (SF)6,416 3,91',1
MedianBldg Size(SF)7?-sE 3,600
Itrmber ofTenants 9l 86
Average Tenant Space (SF)3243.4 1,867
Single Tenant Buitdings
Number of Structures (7o)26 l3
Range-Size ofBldg CSF)1,125 -lo,7l7 1,350 - 7,806
AverageBldg Size (SI)4.695 4,141
Mdian Blde Size (SF)6,266 4,992
Multiple Tenant Buildin gs
ltrmber of Strucfures (7o)20 (42Yo)2E (67/o)
No. Tenants in M-TenBldg.65 72
Average Tenants/Bldg-3.25 2.57
Range-Size ofBldg (SF)2250- 19,804 ?-5OO - 9850
AverageBldg Size (SF)7,lg-4 5,953
Median Blds Size (SD _E,290 _1,706
Ave. Sire M-Tenant Space 2,2M 595
City of Burlingame PlawingCommission Mimies rebiuary 25, zooz
shall finishedorconvertedtolivingareaofanytlpe. Theunimprovedareashallbewalledofffrom
the basement area and shall be through adoorno 5' x 3ii whosedfign meets
between two o6sqqncies,all requirements of the Califomia and Fire Codes for
and storage; and 5) thatthe shall meet all the of the California Building and Fire
Codes, 1998 edition, as aurended the City of Burlingame.motion was seconded by C.
Comment on the did a lot of this project the first time through
review process; this is of a house with a the addition really does fit the
architecture on the goodjob.
Chairman for a voice vote on to approve the design review to alter
werethe windows
advised.item concluded at 8:07
7. 1204 AYEI\IT]E - ZONED R-l _ APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW AMENDMENT
REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL PERMIT FOR HEIGHT A}.ID DECLINING TMIGHT ENVELOPE
FORA NEW TWO.S TORY HOUSE WITH A DETACTUu CaneGE MIKE WILSON, APPLICAI'IT
AND PROPERTY OWNER; JAMES CHU, CHU DESIGN & ENGR., INC., DESIGNER) (61 NOTICED)
PROJECT CATHERINE KEYLON
This item was continued until the applicant submits additional required information requested by the
Planning Departrnent, staff reviewed the information and public notice will be sent.
t-
ffi zoNrNG''CoDE *.nnnxnwNT FoR BUTLDING sIzE IN BTIRLINGAME AvEIYITE AI\D. BROADWAY COMMERCIAL AREAS, NEW CONDITIONAL USES IN THE BURLINGAME
AVENUE COMMERCIAL AREA, AND CHANGE TO ZONING ACTION DGIRATION (NOTICED BY
NEWSPAPER)OJECT PLANNER: MEG OE
Reference staffreport ,02.25 .O2,with attachments. CP Monroe presented the report, reviewed the proposed
code changes and changes suggested by the Commission at study.
Chairm_#r,Vistica opened the public hearing. There were:3 romments from the public on this item and the
public hearing was closed.
Commission comments and discussion noted:
Code does not currently have a square footage limitation on permitted uses, fear that by adding
language regarding squarc footage limits on conditional uses will create an ambiguity in the code. if a
permitted use goes in, but it is over the marimum squffe footage allowed, would it need review?
The code changefor stze would only apply to new buildtngs with afirstJloor gross squorefootage of
6,000 SF or more in the Burlinganre Avenue commercial area and 5,000 gross squarefeet or more in
the Broadwoy Commercial Area Any new building more than these square fuotages would be
required to opplyfor a conditional use permit, regardless of the use. A new building would also be
required to go through the Commercial Design Review process. No ambiguity is createdbecause the
purpose of conditional uses is to identifi the uses which, with review, ean be allowed in the zone. This
requirement applies to new construction only, not a change tn tenant or use in an existingbuilding-
The motion on a 6-0-1 (C. Bojues absenQ.
a
6
, City of' Burlingame P liltning Commission Mimttes Febntry 25, 2002
Concerned with limiting semi-private group classes to 6 people with retail component, especially in
areas below the first floor, where the only concern is pmking; are we micro-managing businesses; in
Pilates case there are only a few people in each class and there is no real impact on parking; does 3
people per class include the instructor.
A group tnstruction use in Subareas A and B ond on Broa&try now requires a conditionol use permit
and must be incidental to retail actiity (not more than 25ok of the business revenue). Ifwe identified
Health and Beauty Spos as a personal service retail use and allowed spa that wished to hove groqp
instruction to applyfor a conditional use permit tt would clmify the definition. Presently the definition
as written exempts Heolth and Beauty Spasfrom conforming to the definition of group instruction
This could create o code administration problem in thefuture. But taking the exemption out would
eliminate yoga class, for example, as a Health and Beauty Spa personal semice use, since yoga is
primarily a group activity not incidental to a primary retail use.
a
a
a
a
Notice that health and beauty spa definition states tliat there should be aretail sales component which
includes "substantial" taxable sales, why is this not included as part of the definition for graphic arts
and design business?
City Council looked at the definition of a graphic arts and designretail business and determinedthat
these businesses already p6y a substantial tm. Their concern in defining Graphic Arts ond Design
Businesses as retail wasfocused on these businesses having a retail appearance on the streetfrontage.
Commission noted that to be determined to be retail the Graphics Arts and Design Business *oild
have to hove qt least 25o% ofthe area ofthefirstfloor not onlyvisiblefrom the street but olso devoted
to retail sales.
Do not agree with changing Planning Commission approvals to two years without extension; if
someone is serious about a project one year is enough time for an applicant to get building permit
issued; should keep one year approval with option of one year extension.
Agree with need for two year approval, sorneprojects are very complex and need that time to put the
project together for submittal.
To clarifr the recommendations to Council, the action on the zoning amendment recommendations were
split up and three separate votes were taken.
Graphic Arts and Design Retail busineises and Health and Beauty Spa definition//class size
Chairman Vistica moved to recommend the zoning code amendment to City Council, to add the definition
of Graphic Arts and Design Retail business which would be a new conditional use in Subarea B an
prohibited in Subarea A and; to establish a new personal service use, Health and Beauty Spq as a pedestrian
oriented use below the first floor only in Subarea A ofthe Burlingame Avenue commercial areq and when
the business has substantial retail taxable sales and a business need for group instruction require an
accompanying conditional use perrnit for a group instruction. The motion was seconded by C. Keigbran.
7
City of Burlingame Platming Commission Minutes
Chairman Vistica called for a voice vote on the motion to recommend to City Council addition of a new'
personal service use, Health and Beauty Spa, which could include group instruction with a conditional
use permit. The motion passed on a 6-&l (C. Boju6s absent) voice vote.
Planning Approvol Term
Chairman Vistica moved to recommend to City Council that the provisiors for extending planning
commission actions as presently defined in the zoning code remain unchanged ad that the Planning
Commission approval term of one year, with the applicant option of requesting a one year extension be
retained. The motion was seconded by C. Keighran.
Chairman Vistica called for a roll call on the motion to recommend to City Council that the provisions
for extending planning commission actions as presenfly defined in the zoning code remain unchanged.
The motion passed on a 5-1-l (C. Auran disseming, C. Boju6s absent) voice vote .
Building Footpirx in the Burlinganu Avenue Commercial Area aad the Broadway Commercial Area
Chairman Vistica moved to recommend the zoning code amendment to City Council to require a
conditional use permit for any new structure in Sub Areas A and B of the Burlingame Avenue
Commercial Area which has a frst floor gross floor area of 6,000 SF or more and require a conditional
use permit for any new structure in the Broadway Commercial Area which has a first floor a gross
square footage of 5,000 SF or more. The motion was seconded by C. Keighran.
Chairman Vistica called for a voice vote on the motion to recommend the zoning code arnendment
requiring a conditional use permit for buildings over a given size in the Burlingame Avenue and Broadway
commercial areas to City Council. The motion passed on a 6-0-l (C. Bojuds absent) voice vote. Appeal
procedures were advised. This item concluded at 8:38 p.m.
Ix. DESIGNREYIEWSTUDYITEMS
9. t2t6P AYEI\II,JE - ZOIYED R-l _ A}PLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW AND SPECIAL
FORDECLINING rT ENWTOPE FOR A FIRST AND SECOND'STORY ADDITION
DEAL, JD & ASS TES, APPLICANT AND GNE&, ASIILEY MCNEELY AND
A ODABASHIAN,PERTY OWNERS (76 NOTI PROJECT PLANNER: CATIIERINE
Planner Keylon presented the proj ect descri There were no questions of
Chairman V opened the public comment.Odabashian, property 1236 Avenue,
and Jerry
the floor
project designer, 1226 were present. There no other from
the public hearing was cl
The had the following comments and concems to be
)
8
plans:
by applicant
retruary zi, zooz
!srlG2
an(
col
)mu
City of Burlingame Planning Commission Approved Minutes
There were comments from the Commission.
This was set for the regular calendarwhen all the
vIIr.
2000 DAvrs
VARIANCE A FIRST AND
January 28, 2002
work completed the information has been and reviewed
Department. This item at 7:30 p.m.
)r ZONING CODE AMENDMENT FOR BUILDING SIZE IN BURLINGAME AVENUE AND
BROADWAY COMMERCIAL AREAS, NEW CONDITIONAL USES IN T}M BURLINGAME AVENUE
COMMERCIAL AREA. AND CHANGE TO ZONING ACTION EXPIRATON.
CP Monroe presented a sunmary of the staff report. Commissioners asked: how is "substantial taxable
sales" defined for Graphic Arts and Design Businesses, and since this is to be located in a pedestrian
oriented area shouldn't the use title include the term "retail" since most graphic design businesses have no
retail component; suggest add requirement to definition that25Yo ofthe floor area be devoted to retail sales
space. Concemed about review of large footprint buildings; for health and beauty spas, three people for an
instruction group is aot big enough to be an economic unit, should be 6 people maximum; text on limitation
for size of first floor space on Broadway should be the same GSF of frst floor as in Subarea A, Commission
discussed whether the review line for size in Subareas A and B and on Broadway should be approved with a
"sunset". Conclusion was that development would occur slowly enough and the sunset be so long as a
result, that it did not make sense to have a sunset requirement. There were no further comments on the
proposed zoning regulation changes.
Chairman Vistica noted that this item should be set for public hearing on the next available agenda when the
commission had time for the item. This item concluded at7:40 p.m.
VII. ACTION ITEMS
.ITEMSON CONSENT CALENDAR ARE CONSIDERED TO BE ROWINE. THEY ARE
ACTEDON UNLESS CTION IS REQUESTED BY THE APPLICANT,
A MEMBER
TO ADOPT.
PUBLIC ORA PRIORTOTHE THE COMMISSION VOTES ON THE MOTION
documenthas been completgil,
by the Plaltrrrrg
All calendar items moved to the Calendar
_ZONEDR.l_CATIONFORDESIGN ANDLOTCOVERAGE
sToRY ADDTTTON (DEAL, JD & ASSOCIATES,
r . if
DESIGNER;SUSANBOWEN,owNERS) (S2NOTTCED)
staff report,l.28.02,attachments. Planner the report, reviewed and
Five were suggested for
Vistica the public hearing. Susan Bowen, property present.
Commissioner this item was moved offof consent calendar to the regular calendar to
allow the owner explain the variance request,not understand the unique of this
property that a variance. Applicant stated the house has a courtyard which limits where
could add-on. Proposed porch adds character to the front. When you enter at the fron! you have to walk
J
they
City of Burlingame Planning Commission Minutes January 14,2002
. Provide building heights and finished
and right ofthe subject house);
elevations of the adjacent (two houses to the left
This was seconded by C. Boju6s.
Commenton this is a well-handled design given view is blocked bywhat is now, due
to the smail lot in Burlingame the Commission cannot privacy nor does address
privacy, feel that will be minimal.
Chairman Vistica called voice vote on the motion to place this the regulm action calendar
the requested information provided. The motion passed on yoice vote 7-0. The Planning
Commission's action is not appealable. This item concluded l:40 p.m
X. PLANNERREPORTS
Review of regular January 7,2002.
CP Monroe the planning covered at the Council meeting.
Review of Special Commission Study on Housing Element of
December l9,200l,and City Council Review.
There were no comments on this item.
Discussion of Amendments to ZoningRegulations to C-l Subarea A, Tenant Size, Definitions and
Timing on Permit Expiration.
Commission and Cp Monroe discussed draft ofproposed zoning changes. After some discussion the
commission suggested that this item be brought back to the commission at study for additional
review. Cp Monroe said she would try to get this item with the comments noted on the next
commission agenda.
Chairman the meeting at 12:20 a.m.
Respectfully submiued,
Joe Boju6s, SecretarY
4:.
xr.
rranqurssl.l4
t6
ITEl,l G8 - Zonlng Code Amendment
PC Meeting - 2125 /02
To the Members of the Planning Commission:
COMfiIgIYlqll1gN RECEIVEB
AfTEB PREPARAI]ON
FEB 2 0 2002
OFSIAFF R€POFIT'
Thank you for making the minutes of the January 18th and 28th 2002
meetings of the City of Burlingame Planning Commission available to me.
I appreciate your proposed addition to the definition section (CS
25.08.336a) Health and Beauty Spa, that'Health and Beauty Spa means apersonal service business focused on fitness analvsis and t'raininq for
individuals and semi-private qrouos'. Althouoh. reoardino the initi;l
proposed limitation oi groupdto two or three-ctient-s, t definitely aqree with
the concerns raised in the minutes of January 28th, that "for hrialth and
beauty spas, three people for an instruction lqroup is not bio enouqh to be
an economic unit, should be 6 people maximlm.'' I believelhowerTer, that
the intent of the original wordinrg on January 18, proposing ihat "All sircn
businesses shall have groups of two (2) to three (3) clients, scheduled no
closer than every fifteen (15) minutes', can be achidved by limiting groups
to six, but scheduling groups no closer than thirty (30) miriutes. Thet
modification would sratisfy the needs of my busine-ss bn the lower level of
1110 Burlingame Avenue, without increasing the demand for parking.
Since there is virtualty no 'foot traffiC on the basement level of 1'110
Burlingame Avenue, and stri.ctlyretail businesses have had an extremely
difficult time being suMMng in this location, I have had very limited su@ess
in.promoting tfe retpllsale-s portion of my business. (Revtinue from my
retail.product.line which inclddes fitness machines, eluipment, and a
clothing line, is significantly less than the income qentlrated fr6m oersonal
fitness training, and curreritly represents a small dbrcentage of overallrevenue). I am therefore concerned about the wordinq eioressed in the
January 18,2W2 minutes that a Health and Beauty Sp,-a heive "a retail
sales component which includes substantial traxabfe shles". Since thephrase "substiantialtaxable sales" is vague and subiective. wouldn't it ber*preferable to make the requirement tha[such businbsses ienerate taxabre
sales?
I believe that approval by the City of Burlingame of the reclassification of
my business as a health spa with a mnditional use permit for classes not
to exceed 6 people, on the basement level of Subarba A, will permit small
businesses like mine to co-exist with the larger businesses on street level,
while maintaining the character and charm d'f Burlingame Avenue.
As an update, I am currently a very active member of the Burlinqame Lion,s
Club and I'm soon to become an aAive board member. I also aontinue toparticipate in other philanthropic endeavers forthe City of Burlingame.
Karen Scheikowitz, ownerof the pitates Studio RECEIVED
C ITY OF BURLINGAME
PLANNING DEPT.
,%,_
FINE JEVELRY
January 15,2002
Mrs. Meg Monroe
Burlingame CityHalt
501 Primrose
Burlingame, Ca 94010
'l
Dear Meg:
I am sending you a copy ofa letter to the editor u/hich got buried after September 11.
Actually, I sent a copy ofthis letter to th Phnning Comnissi<m but thy lost it. Today I
have made an addendum as the situation in Burlingame is getting worss, not better. I
hope you aod the Planning Comrission will seriously consider my ideas. Having been in
hsiness here for dmost 30 years (July is the date!), I've seen it all-
W. GregoryMendell
Propietor
o,* Cc Burtingame Planning Commission
Ralph Osterling
,aS -s -""S i* *i$I s.€
.,5o-
231patkRoad, Burlingame, California 94010 . Phone (650) 348-7557 . Fax (650) 348-5774 ' Enail: kernsinc@aol-com
@
Best wishes for a heafthy, happy and peaceful 2002,
Sepember 7,2N1
To The Editor:
As a business owner in downtown Bulingame I was very distressed to read about the
City C.ouncil wantirg to limit the size ofbusinesses. Unfortunatety with huge rents
and/or building prices, the old p stores cannot afford to come h"k to
at this time. Would eryty storenonts be preferred?
I do, however, believe that history will once again repeat itselfin tbe years to corre. Do
anyofthe Council rnernbers rememberleryBrothrs and Moftgomery Wards? These
were two giant stores at their time u,hich were eventuall5r divided rrp t,t*n tfog economic
times were right.
Please, Iet's not bave rnore government interventioiinto doi,imtouniffiinesses. I still
believe Burlinganre is_al exceptional place to strop. The sheets are bgsy and even though
the ecorCImy has definitely slowed a bq Burlingarre is still the bot plrc" to shop.
Iftbe City Council 1r1"t to he$ the busiress economy wty don't ftey put rent control
on all buildings used for retail sales. I think that would be muchmre Ueien"A to
everyone.
W. Gregory Mendell
Kerns Fine Jewelry
January 15, 2ffJl2 Addendum
As you carl see, the first btter was written September 7,2f}[/1. Since September I l,
2001, our business has slowed coasiderably. And as ofJanuary t4,2Di,we have heard
rytbiog but negative comments about the raise in parking nites; None..qfthis is good for
the economy or tlle business in Burlingame. Please t y 6 do tb. right thhg for the
busines pmple in Burlingare. We need the city to lrclp promote tt" oo*-y herg, not
dictde wfu tlrey thiok sbuld be kept out.
Every new vacancy rneaff; fewer shoppers, drinkerg and eaters in Burlingame. Not to'mentionpeople using services such as banls, travel agems, etc. We have-boen very lucky
to hdve been a destination crfy in ttp past. [rt's try to keep it that way.
I
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
l0
1l
t2
l3
t4
15
l6
t7
l8
l9
20
2t
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
ORDINAIICE No.
ORDINAIYCE OF THE CITY OT'BURLINGAME
AMENDING VARIOUS PROYISIONS OF THE ZOI\IING CODE TO REQTJIRE A
CONDITIONAL USE PER]VIIT f,'OR FIRST TLOOR OCCUPAI\ICIES GREATER
THAI\I A CBRTAIN NUMBER OF SQUARE FEET IN TIIE BURIINGAME AVEI\T]E
AI\ID BROADWAY COMMERCIAL AREAS, TO ALLOW HEALTH AIYD BEAUTY
SPAS AIID GRAPHIC ARTS AI\[D DESIGN RETAIL BUSINESSES IN TIIE
BIIRLTNGAME AVENUE COMMERCIAL AREA, AND TO PROVIDE A TWO-YBAR
PERIOD FOR PLAI\INING APPROVALS WITH NO EXTENSIONS
The CITY COIJNCIL of the CITY OF BURLINGAME does hereby ordain as follows:
Section l.
A. The Burlingame Avenue and BroadwayCommercial Areas are the core retail centers
of the City. The City is concerned that their vitality, small-town feel, and inviting pedestrian
nature could be jeopardized if large retail uses consume street frontage. This ordinance sets first
floor, square-footage review lines to ensure that any larger proposal will serve the pedestrian
ambiance of the Areas and will not worsen the haffic and parking issues in the Areas. The
ordinance shall not be used against a particular occupant from locating its business in the Areas,
but shall only be used to evaluate and limit the size and intensity of the proposed use.
B. The ordinance also defines heatth and beauty spas and graphic arts and design retail
businesses so that those tlpes of business can be located in the two Commercial Areas consistent
with Council and Planning Commission direction.
C. The ordinance also eliminates the one-year extension process for plarming approvals.
Instea4 planning approvals will require that they be put to use within two years. There are no
extensions of the approvals beyond the two years.
Section2- AnewSection25.08.322-lisaddedtotheMunicipalCodetoreadas follows:
25.08.322-1 Graphics arts and design retail business.
"Graphic Arts and Design Retail Business" means a pedestrian oriented retail business
which must include all of the following: is pedestrian friendly including from the sidewalk
vantage a visible retail sales area with at least 25o/o of the area of the first floor devoted to retail
31tU2002 Page I
I
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
l0
1t
t2
13
t4
l5
l
161
t7
l8
l9
20
2t
22
23
24
25
26
27
28)
sales oriented to walk-in retail business and with substantial taxable retail sales-
Section 3. A new Section 25.08.336-l is added as follows:
25.08.336AHealth and beauty spa
"Health and Beauty Spa" means a personal service business focused on fitness analysis and
haining for individuals and semi-private groups not to exceed two (2) persons with a retail sales
component that includes substantial taxable sales.
section 4. subsection 25.16.130(a) is ambnded to read as follows:
(a) Where a use is conditional upon the granting of a variance or the issuance of a
conditional use permit or special permit, such use shall be cornmenced within a period oftwo (2)
years ofic)rcaf, from the date of the gfanting of the variance or the issuance of the conditional use
permit or special perrnit. Fld h the event that such use shall not have been so commenced within
suchperiod, there shall be no further extensions and such variance orpermit shall become null and
void.
iom
Section 5. Section 25.36.030 is amended to read as follows:
25-36-030 conditional uses requiring a conditional use permit.
The following are conditional uses requiring a conditional use pemrit:
(a) All permitted uses and all uses allowed with a conditional use permit in the R-1, R-2,
R-3, and R-4 disticts, and subject to the same regulations and restrictions applying to those uses
in theirrespective districts, and subject to the building restrictions prescribed in sections 25.36.060
and 25.04.080;
(b) Public garages;
(c) Gasoline service stations, subject to regulations prescribed in chapter 25.74;
(d) Transportation terrninal, depot, station ticket offices and anybuilding or structure used
for the accommodation of passengers;
3/t!20[,2 Page2
I
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
ll
t2
l3
l4
15
t6
t7
t8
t9
20
2t
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
(e) Parking lots, subject to the regulations prescribed herein;
(f) Mortuaries;
(g) Financial institutions;
(h) Dry cleaning processing plants;
(i) Any skuchre that is more than thirty-five feet in height;
O C-2 uses in the block described in section 25.36.035;
ft) Certain grocery drug and departnent stores as described in section 25.36.036;
(l) Drive-in services or take-out services associated with permitted uses;
(m) Real estate;
(n) In association with a church or other religious or nonprofit institution, provision of
temporary shelter for homeless individuals or families, provided that the facility is located within
a hansportation corridor and the use does not occur continuously at any one location for more than
six months of any twelve month period.
(o) Tarming facilities;
(p) Classes.
(q) Other uses similar in character to those enumerated in this section or section 25.36.020
which will not be obnoxious or detrimental to the neighborhood in which they are located.
Section 6. Section 25.36.M0 is amended to read as follows:
25.36.M0 Burlingame Avenue Commercial Area and Broadway Commercial Area.
(a) Permiued uses in the Burlingame Commercial Area. Only the following uses are
permitted in subareas A and B of the Burlingame Avenue Commercial Area :
(l) Subarea A:
(A) Retail uses which achieve contiguous, pedestrian-orientd retail frontage such as drug,
liquor, variety stores, paint and hardware, apparel, accessory, stationery, florists, household
3^u2002 Page 3
8
9
l0
1l
t2
13
l4
l5
t6
t7
l
18l
19
20
2t
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
I
2
3
4
5
6
7
furnishings, and fumihre.
@) Personal services, such as barber and beauty shops, photographic studios, shoe repal,
(C) Above the first floor only: hotels; offices except health services, real estate and
financial institutions;
(2) Subarea B:
(A) All uses permitted in Subarea Ao
@) Nurseries,
(C) Auto supply,
@) Offices except health service, and except as provided in subsection (b)(2)@) below,
@) Computerprogramming and software equipment rental,
@) Schools, above the first floor only,
(G) Floor covering,
(H) Household appliances.
@) Condttional uses in the Burlingame Avenue Commercial Area. The following uses are
the onlyconditional uses allowed in subareas A and B ofthe Burlingame Avenue Commercial Area
and shall require a conditional use permit:
(l) Subarea A:
(A) hst'ctional classes incidental to retail or service use,
@) Grocery stores and markets,
(C) Gasoline service stations,
@) Schools, above the first floor only, which operate outside of retail hours,
@) Real estate and financiat institutions above the first floor only.
(F) Public utility and public service buildings and facilities,
(G) Laundry and dry cleaning agencies and processing plants,
(H) Drive-in services or take-out services associated with permitted uses,
@ Food establishments;
(J) A first floor of any building or structure that has more than 6,000 gross square feet;
(K) Health and beauty spas below the first floor only.
3ltv20a2 Page 4
I
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
t2
13
t4
l5
l6
t7
l8
19
20
2t
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
(2) Subarea B:
(A) All uses requiring a conditional use permit in Subarea A, exce'pt financial and real
estate,
@) Pool halls, bowling alleys and other amusement uses,
(C) Health services,
@) Residences above the first floor,
@) Real estate or financial institutions with frontage on Chapin Avenue, Primrose Road,
DonneltyAvenue or the west side of Lortonnorth of DonnellyAve,nue,
(F) Tanning facilities;
(G) Food establishments;
(H) Graphic arts and design retail business.
(c) Noncodorming uses in the Burlingame Avenue Commercial Area. Notwithstanding
any contary provisions of Chapter 25.50 of this code, nonconforming uses in the Burlingame
Avenue Commercial Area shall terminate only upon the vacation of the premises by the use
occupying said premises on October 1 , 198 I ; provided, however, such existing nonconforming uses
shall be allowed to continue despite destruction by catastrophe or natural disaster of the existing
stnrcture, so long as the use occupying the space at the time of the catashophe or natural disaster
is the use returning into the new structure. New uses in such structures must conform to the
permiued and conditional uses for the appropriate subarea.
(d) Yehicte parking in the Burlingame Avenue Commercial Area. Notwithstanding any
other provision of this code, the following shall apply to vehicle parking requirements in the
subareas A and B of the Burlingame Avenue Commercial Area:
(l) Uses permitted and existing on October l, 1981, shall be exempt from the parking
requirements of this code.
(2) Businesses whose use becomes nonconforming as a result of the creation of this area
shall be exempt from parking requirements until the vacation ofthe premises by the use occupying
the premises on October l, 1981.
(3) Any new developmen! except reconstruction because ofcatastrophe or natural disaster,
3ltrn002 Page 5
7
8
9
l0
l1
t2
l3
t4
l5
t6
t7
18
19
20
2t
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
I
2
3
4
5
6
shall provide on-site parking, except that the first floor ofsuch new development in subarea A shall
be exempt from parking requirements if the first floor is used for retail or personal seryice uses.
(4) Buildings reconstructed after catastrophe or natural disaster shall be required to provide
parking only for the square footage over and above the square footage existing at the time of the
disaster. This parking shall be provided on site.
(e) Prohibited uses in the Burlingame Commerctal Area. In add.ition to the uses prohibited
in C-l districts and elsewhere pursuant to this code, the following use is prohibited in Subarea A
of the Burlingame Avenue Commercial Area:
(l) Graphic arts and design retail business.
(f) Condttional uses in the Broadway Commerctal Area. In addition to the conditional uses
allowed in C-l districts, the following uses are only allowed in the Broadway Commercial Area
pursuant to a conditional use perrnit:
(1) A first floor of a building or structure that contains more than 5,000 gross square feet;
{2) A food establishment.
(g) Prohibited uses in the Broadway Commercial Area. kr addition to the uses prohibited
in C-l districts, the following uses :re prohibited in the Broadway Commercial Area:
1. Financial institutions;
2. Health service and real estate; and
3. All other offices on the first floor.
4. Psychic services.
(h) Food establishments in the Burlingame Avenue Commercial Area, Subarea A and
Broadway Commercial Area. The provisions of this subsection shall only apply to food
establishments in the Burlingarne Avenue Commercial Area, Subarea A, and the Broadway
Commercial Area
(l) h Subarea A of the Burlingame Avenue Commercial Are4 the number of food
establishments shall be limited to those existing and in business on November l, 1998, and at the
locations as shown on the Burlingame Avenue Commercial Area Subarea A Food Establishments
by Tlpe Tables approved by the City Council on October 18, 1999. A food establishment is a
3nU2002 Page 6
I
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
l3
l4
l5
16
t7
l8
l9
20
2t
22
-23
24
25
26
27
28
business as defined in Section 25.08.268 and shall be deemed in business if it was legally open for
business as a food establishment to the public on November l, 1998-
(2) In the Broadway Commercial Area, the number of food establishments shall be limited
to those existing and in business on November l, 1998, and at the locations as shown on the
Broadway Commercial Area Food Establishments by Type Tables approved by the City Council
on October I 8, I 999. A food establishment is a business as defined in Section 25 .08.268 and shall
be deemed in business if it was legally open for business as a food establishment to the public on
November l, 1998.
(3) The seating area of the food establishments described in subsections (l) and (2) above
asshownontheBurlingameAvenueCommercialAreaSubareaAandBroadwayCommercialArea
Food Establishments by Tlpe Tables approved by the City Council on October 18, 1999, above
maybe enlarged onlyby arnendment to the applicable conditional use permit for the establishment.
(4) A food establishment use classified as a full service restaurant by the Burlingame
Avenue Commercial Area Subarea A and Broadway Commercial Area Food Establishments by
Tlpe Tables approved by the City Council on October l8,l999,may change its food establishment
classification only to a limited food service or bar upon approval of an amendment to the
conditional use permit to the establishment.
(5) A food establishment use classified as a limited food service by the Burlingame Avenue
Commercial Area Subarea A and Broadway Commercial Area Food Establishments by Tlpe
Tables approved by the City Council on October 18, 1999, may change its food establishment
classification only to a full service restaurant or bar with approval of an amendment to the
conditional use permit forthe establishment.
(6) A food establishment use classified as a bar by the Burlingame Avenue Commercial
Area Subarea A and Broadway Commercial Area Food Establishments by Tlpe Tables approved
by the City Council on October 1 8, lg99,may change its food establishment classification only to
a full service restaurant or a limited food service with approval of an amendment to the conditional
use pennit for the establishment.
(7) A food establishment use classified as a specialty shop by the Burlingame Avenue
3ltl12002 PageT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
l0
11
t2
l3
l4
t5
l6
17
18
19
2A
2t
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Commercial Area Subarea A and Broadway Commercial Food Establishments by Type Table
approved by the City Council on October 18, 1999, shall be allowed to change to a different type
of food establishment. A specialty shop may be replaced by another specialty shop at the same
location within the same or less square footage. If a specialty shop is changed to any other
classification the site shall not return to specialty shop use.
(8) A food establishment may be replaced by another food establishment of the same
classilication so long as the replacement business is of the same classification as that shown for the
siteontheBurlingameAvenueCommercialAreaSubareaAandBroadwayCommercialAreaFood
Establishments by Tlpe Tables approved by the City Council on October 18, 1999, subject to'ftre
conditions of the existing conditional use permit, and it complies with the same conditions as in
the existing conditional use permit.
(9) No food establishment shall occupy a location not shown on the Burlingame Avenue
Commercial Area Subarea A and Broadway Commercial Area Food Establishments by Tlpe
Tables as approved by the City Council on October 18, 1999.
(A) Specialty shops shall not relocate to any other location on the Burlingame Avenue
CommercialAreaSubareaAandBroadwayCommercialAreaFoodEstablishmentbyTypeTables
list as approved by the City Council on October 18, 1999.
@) When the tolal number of food establishments in the Burlingame Avenue Commercial
Area drops below forty (40) for a period of more than twelve (12) consecutive months, the City
Planner shall report this to the Planning Commission and City Council.
(C) When the total number of food establishments in the Broadway Commercial Area
drops below twenty-three (23) for a period of more than twelve consecutive months, the City
Planner shall report this to the Planning Commission and City Council.
(10)An existing food establishment, including specialty shops, may be expanded at its
existing location so long as the expansion does not increase the size ofthe seating area.
(l l) A food establishment shall be deemed out ofbusiness when the premises is occupied
by another business which is not a food establishment.
(12) All food establishments shall complywith the following:
311u2002 Page 8
I
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
l0
11
t2
13
l4
15
t6
t7
18
L9
20
2t
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
(A) provide hash receptacle(s) at location(s) and of a design selected by the citg
@) provide litter control along all frontages ofthe business and within fifty (50) feet of all
frontages of the business;
(C) apply for a conditional use permit for delivery ofprepared food from the premise; and
(D) food sales from a window or any opening within ten (10) feet ofproperty line shall be
prohibited.
Section 3. This ordinance shall be published as required by law.
Mayor
I, ANN T. MUSSO, City Clerk of the City of Burlingame, do hereby certiff that the
foregorng ordinance was inhoduced at a regularmeeting of the City Council held on the _ day
of . 2A02, and adopted thereafter at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the _
_day of . 2002, bythe following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
City Clerk
C :\FILES\ORDINANCbondltusesbg.pln.urpd 4
3nU2W2 Page9
STAFF
REPORT
AGENDA
ITEM #7b
XIf; 3-rB-02
TO:Honorable Mayor and Council Member SUBMITTED
BY Jim Nantell
DATE: March 13,2002
APPROVED
FRoM: James Nantell, City Manager (558-7205)
SIIBJECT: Resolution Approving Cooperation Policy/Philosophy Between the City of Burlingame and the
Burlingame Elementary School District
Recommendation: Recommend that the Council adopt resolution approving the Cooperation
Policy/Philosophy between the City of Burlingame and the Burlingame Elementary School District.
Background: For many years the City and School District have been holding regular quarterly City/School
Liaison meetings with representatives of the City Council and School Board of Trustees as well as executive
staff members. This ongoing opportunity to discuss issues of mutual concem has been a key element of
maintaining what I believe has been a model City School District relationship and one that (as a long-term
resident) I feel has served our community residents well.
With the changes in key staff positions in recent years and more recently with the changes in many elected
positions, the members of the Liaison Committee suggested that we develop a written philosophy that would
clearly state the nature of our relationship as a continued guideline for the future of our cooperation efforts to
best serve the community.
There is only one risk that I feel I should caution both parties on. That is, sometimes a written policy statement
can lead to over zealousness on someone's part, for what they view as the best of intentions, to focus too much
on the detail at the expense of the spirit of an agreement. It is important that we remember the long-term
relationship and benefit to the community is what we seek. Therefore just because in any one or two years we
may find one agency contributing financially more to the relationship is not a reason to lose sight of the long-
term give and take that has resulted in such a good relationship. The attached policy has been written with an
attempt to keep the relationship strong and flexible while providing ongoing dialogue opportunities to ensure
that over the long-term neither party is shouldering too much of the financial burden on behalf of the other.
Finally, it is also important to remember that much of the cooperation between the two agencies is in the area of
facility improvements for community use. Determining who should be responsible for what portion of the
improvements is often not a very precise undertaking. All of this is to caution that we be careful not to become
too fixated on the net annual financial figures but rather the net annual value to the residents of the City of
Burlingame.
Attachments
c: Burlingame Elementary School District
BY
STAFF REPORT
HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
March 1'l , 2OO2
PUBLIC WORKS
AGENDA
ITEM #
MTG.
DATE
Va--
3t18tO2
TO:
DATE;
FROM:
SUBMITTED
BY
APPROVED
BY
SUBJECT: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING, BURLINGAME LANDFILL SLO
PROJECT NO. 9117(81
S AND BIKE PATH - CITY
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that Council approve the attached resolution accepting $619,738.74 in
improvements to Landfill Slopes and Bike Path by Misan Construction, Inc..
BACKGROLIND: August 4,2001Council authorized a $590,645 contract with Misan Construction, Inc. to do the
following:
o Airport Boulevard Bike Path and Slopes - Constructing a new bike path from the Double Tree Hotel to the mid-
point of the landfill along Airport Boulevard, adding fill to the base of the landfill slope, planting trees to provide
some visual screening of the native grass mid-slope area, and installing drought tolerant plants and low fencing
along the roadway.
o Airport Boulevard Baystde and Dog Park Entrance Enhancements - Placing drought tolerant plants in the area
adjacent to Airport Boulevard between the existing bayfront bike path and the roadway and placing additional
mounds and tree plantings near the dog park entrance to enhance the overall appearance.
o Anza Boulevard Golf/Soccer Center Entrance - Reconfiguring the parking area and adding landscaped islands and
perimeter landscaping; constructing a concrete walkway from the Anza Boulevard path up to the Golf/Soccer
Center; and reconstructing the Anza Boulevard entrance and adding planting and signage.
o Double Tree Hotel Slopes- Installing hotel requested improvements consisting of drought tolerant native bushes
in the mid-slope area with temporary irrigation. (Hotel sharing one half of the cost.)
A total of $29,094 (5%) in contract change orders and added quantities were approved by staff. These mainly consisted
of replacing additional Airport Boulevard curb and replacing failed plants along the lagoon bike path.
The project contract has been completed satisfactorily.
EXHIBITS: Resolution; Final Quantities
BUDGET IMPACT: There are sufficient funds in Account No. 320-71171 for this contract
Frank C. Erbacher
Assistant Director of Public Works
(6s0) ss8-7230
City Clerk
Misan Construction, Inc.
c
s : \A Public Works Directory\staf f ReporEs\9ll?8AcceptMiaan. sr. upd
STAFF REPORT
AGENDA
ITEM #
MTG.
DATE
8b
3-18-02
TO:Honorable Mayor and City Council SUBMITTED l,--BYDATE: March 13, 2OO2
AP
FROM Executive Assistant (558-7 2O4)
City Manager's Office
SUBJECT: Specia! Event Permit - Bicycle Race in Burlingame Avenue Area -Sunday, June 30, 2OO2
Attached is an application from Michael Yessik with Peninsula Velo Bicycle Club for a special event permit
to hold a bicycle race in downtown Burlingame on Sunday, June 30,2002, from 5:00 a.m. to 3:00 p,m.
The proposed course includes portions of Lorton, Howard, Park, Burlingame, Primrose, and Bellevue
Avenue. The course would be posted "No Parking," but no towing would be authorized unless the course is
physically blocked, Traffic would be allowed to circulate except when a specific race or heat was in
progress. This special event has been held for the past twelve years with few complaints. Last year, in
response to some concerns raised by the Burlingame merchants a number of improvements were
implemented. Both the merchants and the race sponsors think those improvements successfully
addressed previous concerns and they will be continued again this year.
As last year, the proceeds from the race will benefit the Burlingame Community for Education. Staff has
reviewed the application and recommends approval with the following conditions:
1 . That the applicant coordinate with the police department including (1) hiring four officers [3 officers
and 1 sergeantl, and (2) a race radio for the police sergeanU
2. Per recommendation of the Police Department Traffic Division, that the 2-hour parking limit in City
Parking Lot 'M' (next to the bicycle shop) be strictly enforced on Sunday, June 30,2OO2;
3. That all residents and merchants in the area of the race be notified two weeks in advance with a
reminder the night before the race;
4' That the applicant submit a $1 million insurance liability policy in a form acceptable to the city attorney
prior to the evenu
5. That the applicant rent and place any required barricades and tape off the race area with their own
equipment; and
6 That the applicant is responsible for posting all "No Parking" signs and for all clean up including removal
of all signs, barricades, and participant or spectator debris.
V [U:\Council ARs\BtKERACE.wpd]
Attachments
c: tVlichaelYessik
Chamber of Commerce
BY
lL
FEB 6 2002 D
ss5'
TELj (6s0)E -7204
FNC (6s0) 3{2€386
SPECIAL EVENT PERMIT APPLICATION
. FOR ANY TEMPORARY CLOSING OF ANY CITY STREET OR USE OF CITY SIDEWALK OR PROPERW.
APPLICANT INFORMATION
FAX #: 6tb-3,tY-7 t B<>
@hv$ttgsf Wurltngam
C]TY HALL - 501 PRIMROSE'ROAO
BURLINGAME CAUFORNA 9401&3997
Address:
Representing eganNguL4 VFI-O
lnsuranceCarrier: l,/oATt( ftmaltclt-lv glEct'+LTY Limits: 4<*rrunt//t*t/at.,,tv
EVENT INFORMATION
Date(s): Tut€ SA, ZoL Staging Time:o e oo Starting Tirne: O7 Oo
Ending Time:
B tcYc r 6 AA-c{
I 104 De-staging Time: /-fd o
Event Purpose:
Numberof Participants:€oo
Number of Equipment:
Type tactors,crew,participantslz L/Oo LLr <z loo S uP?oR f
Type: ifrAg.rc*ars, F -rvc , ?LAT Folyt, creug
Location: 5ftrtE t5 ?RotYl5 - f'ra T*Ltlft t-t*P
tf o FFtcEA SPolice Service(sl (s45 officer hourli
ATTACHMENTS
Please attach the following information with this application:
- Letter of intent (detailed description of event);
- Map of street(sl/area to be closed;
- Petition of property owner(s) affected by event/closure;
- Barricade plan (if appropriate); and
- Certificate of insurqnce.
I agree to hold harmless the City of Burlingame, its officers and employees, whether elected or appointed, from any and
all liability arising from the event planned and described above. Further, I understand that prior to the issuance of any permit as
described above, t shall fil6 a certificate of insurance with the City Manager naming the City, its officers and employees,
whether elected or appointed, as additional insured, and that I must pay all City costs prior to the issuance of this permit.
Date: &-G-q\Applicant's Signature:
Page 1 ot 2
Company/Agency.Name: PiltMgaLA VELO cY*lMa CJqE Daytime Phone: 6€0-3VV-g tSo
ContactPerson: 14 lcil+EL YE<Stt<
I af ehPUctt q/n t/8,, A u e.uur * a E A4o a
Any Hazardous Activity ? ltf so, descibe.) BtcvC tg- A rcrp6- (*S r PA *A,e*S )
Parking Permit(s) Requested:
Attachment To special Evcnt Permit Application for the Burlingame criterium Bicycle
Raccs for SundaY, June 30' 2002
peninsula velo cycling club has continued to work closely with the Burlingame chamber of
a;;;;.;", ",
*"il ,, ih" downtown merchants, to enhance this event for the Burlingame
community and to minimize any possible negative impact:
Firstly, all ofthe improvements made for last year's event will be continued in 2002. The major
items initiated last year are as follows:
l. The race will be a fund raiser for the Burlingame community for Education.
2. signs will be posted to instruct residents and shoppers on how and where to park' 'fhe
co'urse marshals will be trained to help cars get to parking and get past closed streets'
3. Traffic control at the Chapin/Donnelly intersection will be designed to facilitate parking
in the DonnellY lots..
4. The race announcer will promote the stores open during the race'
5. All of the streets will be open to normal trafftc no later than 3:00 PM'
6. Athletes who come to race will park in a designated area away from the downtown
parking.
Given last year's experience Peninsula Velo is committed to not only continuing these effolts, but
to enhancing them through better training of marshalls at the closed intersections, even more signs
for parking and directions, and special signs for designated merchants.
Peninsula Velo is also ptanning greater advance publicity ofthe event to the Burlingame
community, so that residents are informed about the event as much as possible, including the
information that it witl be possible to patronize all ofthe open stores in the area on race day.
As usual, Peninsula Velo will provide complete course security, including snow fencing,
barricades, safety tape, hay bales, and course marshalls.
A map of the course is shown in the attached course marshal instructions. This map also shows
the tocation of the barricades, the location ofthe course marshals, and the plan for handling any
traffic on the course. In addition to the barricades, the course will be protected by fencing caution
tape, and signs. As noted, there will be an additional marshal assigned to the Chapin/Donnelly
iniersectionin order to facititate the use ofthe Donnelly parking lots.
Application has been made for the Certificate oflnsurance. The insurance carrier and covetzge is
ur rt o*n of the application. The certificate will be supplied shortly, as soon as it is issued by the
company.
vv \Jt \rJ t- tltFtl\\, I aFrt_\)
The course marshals insure a safe and exciting event for the participants
and the spedators. They assist pedestrians, and even c.trs at one location, to
safely cross the course while races are in progress. They keep the course free of
obstacles and provide racers with an early waming about changing conditions.
$/ithout @urse marshals, these races srm olv would not take
Positions 18. 19 & 20
Light pedestrian traffi c
control.
Posilions 20.2'1.22- 23,24.25 &26- Traffic control of
cars wanting to leave driveways and enter course. When
riders are not approaching. direct cars to exit the course
quickly onto Califomia Ave at position 28. Cars cannot
go bach/vards to the exit onto Chapin at position 17.
Positions 15.{6 & 17 + J}
lmportant car traffic
control crossing. Allow
cars to cfoss between
Donnely and Chapin
only, and not continue
on the course. Watch
position 14 to tell when
no riders are mming.
Auto exit onto Chapin.
Positions 10. 11.
12.13. & 14. Heavy
oedestrian traffic
Ankol. Watch the
marshals ahead of
you to tell when riders
are approaching.
Positions 8 & 9
Control of cars that
might try to enter the
cou6e. Auto exit
onto Primrose.
fr oonnety
Position 27 t 30.
27 is a 'spottel-
for the pedestrian
crossing at position
31 & 32. Position
30 contiols car traffc
trying to enter the
@urse.
Position 28 & 29.
Moderate Pedestrian
control and auto exit
onto Califomia Ave
Position 31 & 32.
Heavy pedestrian
traffic control. Must
coordinate with
position 27 to know
when riders are
approaching.
Positions 1 & 2
Heavy pedestrian
traffic control.
Positions 3 & 4
Control of cars that
may try to enter
onto the course.
@
BelleYug a
+
Cha pln
I
-f
+
,t fg6rm
rl Burllngarne Aye 't +.FIt'r AD+
c
o-cc:
d
I I%ffi
Ho,Yard AYe +
eeft lal.?evq li--leo.rb5nN6
Sr. 4,5 7:00 45 min
Msr 45t/55+7:55 45 min
Sr. i 8:50 45 min
Mst iGf 4,5 9:45 45 min
Mst 35+ 1,2,1 t0:40 45 min
Kid's Race-4 evens I l:i5 45 min
Wm t,2,j/.V35t t2:30 45 min
Pro 1,2 l:t0 t hrimin
Category Slarl D[mtion
t6
l
o(?(L
-il
Report to your Position 10 minutes before your shift starts to receive
instructions, vest, flag, and whistle from the marshal you are relieving. Return
all equipment to the registration table at the end of the last shift. Thank You.
NAME POSITION_
SHIFT START TIME FINISH TIME
Positions 5,6 & 7
Light pedestrian
traffic control.
Parklng for Shops and Restaurants
The race course is closed to parking from SAM until 3PM, but
parking is available on allside streets outside the course inctuding
the Caltrain parking ac'.oss Califomia. The parking lot behind the
Copenhagen Bakery is also available and includes handicapped
spaces. Access to this lot is at Chapin Avenue and Primrose where
course marshals will usher cars through between race traffic.
To drive around the course from Califomia Drive to El Camino
Real, the best route is either Bayswater Ave from the south or Oak
Grove Ave from the north.
OAK
AR:? Nv.
Official Program
and
Kids
6hollenge
June 24th,200{
Mst.45+/55+'t 7:50 40 mln $20018100 613
Sr.3 8:40 45 min $300
Mst. 30+,4/5 9:35 45 mln $200 6
Mst.35+.'U2t3 10:30 45 min $300 6
Kld's Race,4 -12 11:25 30 min Ribbons All .
Women 1/2/3, 35+', 4't l-Z-:tO aS mn $eOOltOOlW
Pro 112 1:05 60 mln $1200 10
Surllngam. Conmuntly
a
,
)
Start PlacesCategoryDuration Value
lta
r-l r
Vh\5w r
Itr Educatlon
I
w
Pcnlnluh Volo
CycllnE Club
RtcE ilStoRY
Th6 rBcent history of bicycle racing on the peninsula is both
varied and colorful. ln the late 70,s and early go,s the penin-
sula Velo Club promoted the only ,'all women,s" stage race
in the country sponsored by Self Magazine. This raie
included the old "Pinky's" road course that wandered thru
Pescadero and the La Honda hills on the coastside. Some
of the course was on dirl roads that turned to mud with the
coastside fog.
During the mid 80's the crilerium and circuit locations var-
ied. Some races were held near the Burlingame Recreation
Center and Washington School while one year there was
even a circult race thru the residential area of Burlingame
ln 1983 the race included Mary Ann Martin from Colorado
who went on to become the flrst (and only American) win-
ner ol the Tour de France Feminine.
ln 1987 the Peninsula Velo Club became promoter of the
Burlingame Criterium on the present ',downtown,, course.
The course was immediately popular and in .1999 and '90
was sponsored by Coors ("Silver Bullet Criterium,,). Since
then the charm of downtown Burtingame, the tight challeng-
ing turns, and lhe long fast sprint finish have produced
many exciting memories for racers and spectators.
TIIE COURSE
rr.\h/
:..,r
A
Ayi
A N!* OlD trao ot ltt! !{ot
Bianc,lni
Spoitr ilor al nt
lll Skaates-l lnc.
Plumbing e Hydronic!
NDE;"W
II
zoF
,
I
The 0.7 mile circuit starts at the intersection of Burlingame and
Lorlon Avenues, and runs southward down Lorton. A fast right tum
onto Howard is followed immadiately by another right tum o;to
Park Rd. The short straight up park is one of the few sections
where positions can be advanced before the next series of turns.
The Park/Primrose Chicane is created by a tight left turn onto
Burlingame Ave. and a sharp rjght tum onto primrose. The
brick sheet surfaces and tightness of the tums demand expert
bike control. As the riders continue past the old library build_
ing, they begin a graduat turn atong Betview Ave. tt ii very
fast section has traditionally been where fierce bat es for
position occur. The road narrows and the flrst riders thru the
comer have the best chance to win the sprint.
RNCE STRATEOY
R€cers typic€lly stay in a tight pack lof peleton) where the shielding ftom wlnd
allo,vs.a fast pace. Th€ stronger riders then periodically attack, or speed-up and
force th€ pack to chase them. SomEtimes, several riders ioin an attdck to fdrm a
br€ak and separate form thg pack. Now the riders in the pack can block for a
team member In the break, and make it harder for other ridors to chase. Or, they
tr
,t;
iri
L-)ffi
a traqt
I ,\ATHJC
Sponsors
g
'o 0
r)..
..43,.
a
might.try to bridgo up to the break and join it. lt is also common for team
^ - membeB to protsct their best sprinterio they will be fresh for the linish.
_ Often,- the main pack will remain togither, and tfren the linish is decided by aflold sprint,^which is why bicycle raciri'g is so exciting. There coutd oe as mdny
as 60 riders jockeying for position on thE lastlap to sprint for the yiclory.
Summit
Financial
Advisors
$ffi
KID'S CH
EVENT
Prizes'-
Ribbons
i
Ribbdns ,
':
PenlnsulaVelo
Gyc{lng Club
.l l
tll
Education
AGENDA 8c
STAFF
REPORT
ITEM #
MTG.
DATE 3lL8l02
To: Honorable Member SUBMITTED
BY _Jim Nantell
DATE: March 13,2002
APPROVED
FRoM: James Nantell, City Manager (558-7205)
SUBJECT: Lions Club $2,500 Contribution for New Flag Pole at Easton Library
Recommendation: Recommend that the Council accept the Burlingame Lions Club donation of the new flag
pole for Easton Branch Llbrary.
Background: As the Council knows the Burlingame Lions Club has been a long-standing community service
organization in the City of Burlingame. The City has frequently benefited ftom their generosity. As noted on
the attached letter from Lions Club President Jack Vanetten, they have once again generously offered to make a
contribution to the City to be used to purchase a new flagpole for the Easton Library. The Library Board of
Trustees has recently voted to accept the donation and we urge the City Council to do the same.
Attachment: Letter from Lions Club President Jack Vanetten
BY
ffiW
WE SERVE
BURLINGAME LIONS CLUB
P. O. Box 206
Burlingame, CA94011
(650) 344-LrON
CLUB MEETING
Thursday - 12: l0 P.M.
Burlingame Lions Hall
990 Burlingame Avenue
February L2,2002
City Manag!
City ofBurll
501 Primrosi
Burlingame,
Dear Jim:
For many years the Burlingame Lions Club has contributed countless hours of time and provided
monetary support to the Burlingame Public Library System. In the past, our club has purchased large
print books and has helped with the children's sumrner reading program. The Lions Club has also
purchased and donated the beautiful brass drinking fountain for the main library branch when it was re-
modeled. Our contributions to the library over the years have been so extensive that a room in the
Easton Branch Library was, and continues to be named, the "Lions Lair." So far this year the
Burlingame Lions Club has contributed $2,100.00 to our libraries.
Each year, the Burlingame Lions Club designates $2,500.00 to a'?resident's Project Fund". As
the current president, our club would be honored to contribute the President's Project Funds toward
the purchase and installation of a new flagpole at the new Easton Branch Library. I have spoken with
City Librarian Al Escoffier and Library Board President Mary Herman regarding this matter and they
have given their approval for our funding of the flagpole project. Al Escoffier has informed me that the
purchase and installation of the flagpole would not exceed the $2,500.00 allocated for this project.
Since the City of Burlingame is currently in the process of finalizing plans to fund and to re-furbish
the Easton Branch of the Burlingame Public Library the Rurlingame Lions Club felt we could assist
both the city and library by oFsetting the funding required for the flagpole project, especially during
these difficult economic times.
The Burlingame Lions Club hopes that you and the members of the City Council will approve and
accept our offer to fund this project. We feel that this is an outstanding patriotic endeavor that will
benefit our childrerL our citizens and of course, the Burlingame Community. The Burlingame Lions Club
would also respectfully request that the Easton Branch Library room designation "Lions Lair" remain
following the re-modeling project.
I
AGENDA
ITEM #8L
3-/8-ov-STAFF REPORT
Honorable Mayor and City Council SUB
March 12,2002
Fire Department
MTG.
DATE
TO:
BY
DATE:
FROM:
BY
SUBJECT: Agreement for Fire Vehicle Maintenance and Services
Recommendation:
It is recommended the City Council approve/ by resolution this amendment to the Agreement
dated April 19, 1999 for provision of maintenance and repair of Town of Hillsborough Fire
Vehicles.
Backqround:
The Fire Department has been providing vehicle maintenance and repair services to the
Hillsborough Fire Depaftment for many years. This service was formalized in an agreement
dated April 19, 1999. This agreement expired this year. This resolution would approve an
amendment that would automatically renew the contract each year unless written notice is
given to the contrary at least 30 days in advance.
Exhibits:
Agreement for Maintenance and Repair Seruices
Budoet Impact:
No change to existing budgets
ffiW
AGENDA
ITEM #8-s--
STAFF REPORT
TO:Honorable Mayor and City Council
DATE: March 12,2002
MTG
DArE 3-/8-a >-
BY
FROM:Fire Department
SUBJECT: Agreement for Fire Vehicle Maintenance and Refdir Servicei
**"oP"/r,^67
Recommendation:
It is recommended the City Council approve, by resolution this amendment to the Agreement
dated March 1, 1999 for provision of maintenance and repair of Colma Fire Protection District
Vehicles,
Backoround:
The Fire Department has been providing vehicle maintenance and repair services to the
Colma Fire Protection District for many years. This service was formalized in an agreement
dated March 1, 1999. This agreement expired this year. This resolution would approve an
amendment that would automatically renew the contract each year unless written notice is
given to the contrary at least 30 days in advance.
Exhibits:
Agreement for Maintenance and Repair Services
Budqet Imoact:
No change to existing budgets.
ffiW
STAFF REPORT
AGENDA BrITEM #
MTG.
DATE 3/t8/02
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AI\D CITY COUNCIL
BY
DATE:
APPROVED
FRoM: Rahn Becker, Assistant City Manager
650-558-7222
SUBJECT: Study Session for Budget Meeting
RECOMMENDATION: Set 5:30 p.m., Thursday, March 21,2002 at Burlingame Recreation Center for
budget study meeting.
BACKGROUND: At the mid-year review session, staffindicated that a follow-up meeting in March would
be scheduled to update revenue figures and receive final guidance form Council for preparation of the budget
Staffrecommends the meeting be set for the above time and location.
BY
STAFF REPORT
AGENDA
ITEM#
MTG.
DATE 3lt8l02
8g
TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AI{D CITY COUNCIL suBMrrrED z 11
BY
u^"u /fu9- 64-4
DATE:March 13,2002
FROM:Bob BelI. Human Director BY
suBJEcr: Police Officers Association (POA) Agreement
RECOMMEITIDATION:
Staff recornrnends that the Council approve one of the two tentative agreements between the City and the
Burlingame Police Officers Association. The proposal that is subject to Council approval will be daermined
by vote of the Police Officers' Association. The vote is to be completed by the morning of Monday, march
18,2002 and staffwill advise Council which of the two attachedproposal is subject to their approval.
BACKGROT]ITID:
The POA represents the City's police officers. The POA labor agreement expired on December 31, 2001.
The City and POA have been meeting since November to negotiate the terms of the new agreement. Staffhas
also met in closed sessions with the City Council to discuss negotiations and get Council authorization for
settlement offers. Based on these meetings and City Council direction, the City and Union negotiators were
able to craft two proposals that the Union is submitting to a vote. Both of the proposals meet the City's
interests of being fiscally responsible, achieving larbor rnarket competitiveness and maintaining parity
between the labor groups. The details of the two proposals are as follows:
Proposal #1 - (Exhibit A Afrached)
Term - Four (4) yem agreement effective 01101102 - 12131105
Salary Increases - In the first yem of the agreement, a 6.5%o insrease would be granted to the Unit.
This would place the Unit fifth (5h) in the San Mateo County survey mmket. This is departure fromthe
Crty's compensation philosophy to place units third in the survey market. However, the Association
requested that the City and Union review options that would secure them the California Public
Employee's Retirement (CaIPERS) *3ya @ 50" retirement enhancement while keeping the City
competitive in terms of recruitment and retention. This option keeps the police officers' compensation
above the market average. During the term of the contract, it represants a projected salary savings of
$204,000 over third in the rnarket placernent.
Retirement Enhancements - In the first year of the contract, the City has agreed to contract for the
CaIPERS 3% @ 55 benefit formula. This is the same benefit granted to the Firefighters in last year's
negotiations. The City has also agreed to prrovide the CaIPERS 3% @ 50 benefit enhancement in July
of 2A04. Again, this agreement is being made with the understanding that the Police unit's salaries
will not be placed third in the market, but rather, above median. All other Units in the City have been
placed at 3m in the county survey market.
I
t
BUDGET IMPACT
r The first year cost of this agreement is expected to be $164,200. The total cost of the four-year
agreement is projected to be $1,700,000.
Proposal #2 - (Exhibit B Attached)
r Term - A two (2) year agreement effective 0l/01102 - l2l3ll03
. Salary Increases - In the first year of the agreement, an 8.58% increase would be granted to the Unit-
This would place the Unit third (3rd) in the San Mateo County survey market. This is consistent with
both the City's compensation philosophy and practice with other labor units. The second year increase
would keep the group at 3d in the market with a minimum 3olo increase.
r Retirement Enhancements - In the first year of the contract, the City has agreed to contract for the
CalpERS 3% @ 55 benefit formula. This is the same benefit granted to the Firefighters i1!1s1le1r's
negotiations. As with the Fire Union, the City agreed to provide the Unit the advantage of 3* Market
placement with the 3% @ 55 benefit enhancement during the term of the agreement.
BI]DGET IMPACT
, The first year cost of this agreernent is expected to be $214,200. The total cost of the two-year
agreement is $610,287.
Obviously, the main difference between the two proposals is in retirement enhancements. The Union was
informed bV Crty negotiators that costs associated with retirement enhancements above and beyond the
CalpERS Zy" @ 3S opion would have to be shared with the City. Additionally, the Association was informed
that any additional enhancement would be implemented in the second half of the agreement- Proposal A
achieves both of these interests. The Union negotiators also felt that Proposal#2 met mary of their interests
and wanted the option of presenting both to a ratification vote to their membership. The earliest such a vote
could be coordinated is Widnesday, March 13,2OO2 and with the voting process corrpleted and tallied by the
morning of Monday, March 18, 2002. As previously mentioned, Staff will advise the Council prior to the
Councii meeting which of the two proposals is subject to Council approval in tonight's meeting.
ATTACHMENTS:
Exhibit A - Resolution & Proposal 1 - 4 Year Tentative Agreement
Between the POA and City of Burlingame
Exhibit B - Resolution & Proposal2 -ZYeat Tentative Agreement
Between the POA and City of BurHngame
RESOLUTION NO
RESOLU"flON OF TIIE CITY COIJNCIL OF TIIE CITY
OF BURLINGAME APPROVING CHANGES TO THE MEMORA}IDUM OF
T'NDERSTA}IDING BETWEEN T}IB CITY OF BURLINGAME
AND THE BURLINGAME POLICE OFFICERS' ASSOCIATION A}{D AUT}IROIZING
TIIE CITY MANAGERTO E)(ECUTE THE
MEMORNADUM ON BEHALF OF T}IE CITY
RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Burlingame:
WIffiREAS, the City of Burlingame and the Burlingame Police Offtcers'
Association have met and conferred in good faith on the terms and conditions of
enployment as provided by State law; and
WffiREAS, the City and the Association have reached agreeflrsnt on certain
changes to be made to the existing terms and conditions of eruployment and
menrorandum of understanding between the City and the Association; and
WHEREAS, the proposed changes are fair and in the best interests ofthe public
and the errployees represented by the Associatiou
NOW, THnREFORE,IT rS RESOLVf,D AI{D ORr}ERED:
l. The changes in existing salary of the enployees represented by the Burlingame
Police Ofiicers' Association as contained in Exhibit B herEto are approved.
2. The City Manager is authorized and directed to execute the terrns contained in
Bxhibit B into the Mernorandum ofUnderstanding between the Burlingame Police
Officers' Association and the City of Burlingame.
MAYOR
I, AI{N MUSSO, City Clerk ofthe City of Burlingarne, do hereby certifythat the
foregoing resolution was introduced at aregular meeting ofthe City Council held on
day of March,2002, and was adoptedthereafte,r by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
CITY CLERK
Exhibit B
TDNTATTVE AGREEMENT BETWEEN
CITY OF BURLINGAME AIID
BURLINGAME POLICE OFFICERS' ASSOCIATION
TWO-YnAB AGRESMENT
1. Term - 0ll0ll02- l2l3ll03 (2 years)
2. Salary - Effective All0ll02- 8.58% salary increase
(places Unit 3d in survey Market)
Effective 0l/01/03 - Tie to 3d in market with a3Yofloor
3. Differentials:
a) Shift Differ€ntials: The City will provide 60/o for B and E watch and
4o/o for D watch. When department moves to all 12 hours shifts, will
provide 6ok for shifts that work from 18:00 * 06:00 hours.
b) Conputer Specialist Pay: The Citywill maintain al5Yo premiumpay
to the Unit member assigned as the Police Department's Computer
Specialist.
4. UniformAllowance - Year I - $850, and increase $35 per year each subsequent year
of contract. (Tentative Agreernent signed January 4,2002\
5. Medical:
Effective Date Active Enployee Contribution
ot/ouo2 $s8o
01/01/03 $630
+Retiree medical contribution to rernain tied to active employees during term
6. Education Certificate - Interrnediate: 5%o, Advanced=l%o
7. Tuition Reimbursement * $2000 ayear plus $500 forbooks/conputer equipment
(Tentative Agreement signed January 4,2002)
8. PERS Retirernent - Effective ASAP after ratification of contract City will inrplement
theSYo @ 55 retirement benefit enhancement for members ofthe
POA.
9. FTO -the City will convert the 5.0 hours of comp time to ut l8.75Yo differential when
enployees are assignedto performFTo duties.
10. Direct Deposit of Paychecks - The Finance Department will implement the direct
deposit of paychecks ASAP.
11. Inspector Pay - the City will pay 7o/o mspedor pay
12. Service Recognition - The City has convened a task force to address a new service
recognition program. The City will meet and confer with the Union on the committee's
recolmRendations. The Association can determine at that time if they would like to
participate in the program. It is the City's intent to institute a program that will provide a
means ofrecognizing service with an award or cash equivalent.
13. Personal Time Off- Effective 01/01102 the City will grant 24 hours of PTO
14. Bi-Lingual Pay - 5o/o of pay upon designation as a bi-lingual service provider
(Tenative Agreement signed 01104102)
15. Life Insurance - Effective ASAP $75,000 term life insurance provided by the City
(Tentative Agreernent signed 0l I O4l 02)
16. Vacation - Year 1- 4 : 4 hours of vacation accrual per pay period
Year 5- 9 : 4.93 hours of vacation accrual per pay period
Yem 10-14 : 6.46hotrs of vacation accrual per pay period
Year 15-19 :7 .45 hours of vacation accrual per pay period
Yem 20 :7.45 hours of vacation accrual per pay period.
On an employee's 20ft anniversary date with the Citn the arployee will
receive a one-time allotment of 16 hours of vacation in his/her vacation
accrual bank. This will be provided to current active police errployees
that have 20 or rlore yezrs of continuous serYice effective 0ll0ll02-
17, Long Tsm Disability - In lieu of providing LTD plan coverage to the Unit, the City
will make a contribution to each nremb er's 457 deferred compensation plan.
18. COLA (PERS Retirement) = 2o/o
19. Effective ASAP after ratification of the contract, the City will provide GC Section
21024 - Military Service Credit as Public Service.
20. Sick Leave Incentive - Effective 0ll0ll02,the City agrees to provide Unit mernbers
4 days offof vacation or straight time pay for the use of one day or less of sick leave in a
calendar year. The City also agrees to provide Unit members 2 dap offof vacation or
straight time pay for the use of tlree dap or less of sick leave in a calendar year.
21. Deferred Corrpens ation (457 plan) - The City will contribute $30.00 per pay period
to an employee's deferred compensation plan.
22. The City will offer IRS Section 125 Health Care and Depandent Care
Refunbursement plans to the Association.
AGENDA
ITEM #
MTG.
DATESTAFF REPORT 3t18t o2
TO Honorable Mayor and SUBMITTED
BY
D ATE: March 8.2002 APPROVED
BY
FROM:Larrv E. Anderson- Citv ttornev
SIIBJECT:
AUTHORIZE CITY ATTORNEY TO JOIN IN AMICUS CURIAE BRIEF IN HARWST
CHARCH VS. CITY OF CONCORD (A096604) AT NO COST TO CITY
RECOMMENDATION:
Authorize joinder in amicus curiae brief at no cost to the City in, which is now pending before the California
Court of Appeal.
DISCUSSION:
This case will help determine the scope of a city's authority to use conditional and special use permits in any
meaningful fashion. In the pending case, Concord set forth specific limitations on the use of shopping center. A
religious organization decided that it wanted to convert parts of the shopping center to office, convention, and
other uses. The City of Concord denied these applications.
The trial court determined that the City of Concord could not apply general planning principles in reviewing
these applications, but instead had to have specific planning standards that the planning commission was bound
to follow.
The trial court's decision would effectively diminish city discretion to deal with changing circumstances and
respond to concerns. It is recommended that the City of Burlingame join other members of the League of
California Cities in the amicus brief in this case.
Attachment
February 25,2002, memorandum from McDonough, Holland & Allen
s'{,
McDonough, Holland & Allen
A PROf ESSIONAL COBPOAATION
MEMORANDUM
California City Attomeys
Tom Douvan and Kara Ueda
RECETVED
t,lAI? . , :i0
CIW OF BURLINGAI'E
ClrY ATTOB'{EY
TO:
FROM:
RE:
DATE:
Request to Cities to foin as Amicus in Haraest Church zt. City of
Concord, No. 4096604 (1st Dist.).
February'25,2002
The Board of Directors of the League of Califomia Cities is urging cities to
join an amicus curiaebrief in Haraest Church,,t. City of Concord. This memorandum
details the background of the case and why the issues raised are of major
significance to cities.
Summary of the Facts and Issues Presented
This case involves the standard of review for a city's land use approval
process. Specifically, the case is about a city's discretion to regulate the use of a
major retail establishment in accordance with the city's general plan goals of
promoting and retaining retail businesses within the retail establishment.
Harvest Church acquired property on the second floor of a shopping center in
the City of Concord and intended to use it for church facilities. The first floor of
the shopping center contains a number of retail businesses.
After purchasing the property, Harvest Church filed two applications for
Zoning Administrator's Permits. Harvest desired to use the space for business
operations, church services and other church uses. Both of the applications were
denied. Then, Harvest submitted an application to use the space for an
events/conIerence center with ancillary religious use. The Planning Commission
rejected the project, and Harvest appealed to the City Council. The Council
denied the application and made eight findings. In addition to receiving
opposition from existing businesses at the shopping center, the City believed that
the Church's use would not be consistent with the retail center, would not
promote business uses and that parking would be inadequate. Therefore, the
project was found to be inconsistent with the General PIan and Redevelopment
Plan Policies favoring regional commercial uses at this location.
The trial court found that the City abused its discretion in denying the
application. The court found that the record did not contain substantial evidence
to support the City's findings. The court also found that the City denied the
church due process for not having standards in its code for the Planning
Public Law:-Non Clieit Folder: ATTORNEYS:UEDA:AMICUSBRIEFIIARVEST CHURCH
McDonough, Holland & Allen Page2
Commission to follow while the code did contain standards for the Zoning
Administrator.
The amicus brief will focus on three issues:
(a) The trial court found fault with the City for not making its general plan
consistent with its zoning. The brief will emphasLe that a city's
general plan acts as a city's guiding planning document, and zoning
irust betonsistent with the general plan, not the other way around.
(b) Courts in cases like this one ihould use the "no reasonable person" or
"deferential"standard.
(c) The court treated comments made by individual councilmembers
during the council meeting as evidence of legislative intent.
Specifically, the court relied on comments by three councilmembers to
the effect that parking was not a problem, even though the adopted
council resolufion concluded that parking was inadequate. Relying on
comments individuals make during open discussion and deliberation
of an issue ignores the reality that legislators often gather more
information and change their minds.
Why This Case Merits City Attention
This case involves fundamental planning issues that affect all cities. This
decision, if allowed to stand, will make it more difficult for cities to make
discretionary land use decisions under their ownguiding planning documents.
This case hai the potential to result in a published appellate court ruling.that -affects the degree of deference courts pay to cities in their land use-decisions-. By
focusing on tfie three issues stated above, we hope to highlight to the court the
importahce of a city's general plan and its discretion in following its own
zuiaine planning document. Additionally, the decision has the potential to
Ir,derfii.,e prblic debate if the appellate iourt accepts the use of legislators'
comments made as legislative intent, even if the ultimate vote or resolution is
different from the sentiments expressed during deliberations.
Form and Deadline for Joinder
The brief will be filed in Mid-April, 2002' Accordingly, if your city is
willing to join as art amtcus party, please complete and return the enclosed
conseit form by facsimile or first class mail as soon as possible. We would
appreciate receiving the authorization form by March 78,2002.
Conclusion
If you need any further information, please do not hesitate to call or e-mail
either of us. Kara may be reached at (916) 444-3900 or Kueda@mhalaw..com.
Tom may be reached it (510) 273-8764 or Tdouvan@mhalaw.com. We look
forward to receiving your support.
2
MEMORANDUM
McDonough, Holland & Allen
A Pfi OFESSIONAL COFPOBATIOI]
FacsimileMethod of Transmission:
TO:
AUTHORIZATION TO JOIN AlvfrCUS BRIEF
Kara K. Ueda
McDonough, Holland & Allen
555 Capitol Mall, 9' Floor
Sacramento, California 95814-4692
(91.6) 4M-3900
Fax (916) 444-8334
Subject:
You are authorized to add the City (Town) of
as a party in the amicus curiae (friend'of-the-co urt) brief in Ha raest Church tt. City
of Concord , in which the Board of Directors of the League of Califomia Cities
urges Ca lifo rnia cities to join. The case is currently on appeal to the First District
Court of Appeal.
Hantest Church tt. City of Concord (No. 4095604)
Authorization toloin Amicus Curiae Btiel
The Citv understands that this brief is being prepare d ot a pro bono basis under
the supervision and guidance of an attomey from the League's Legal Advocacy
Committee. The Ci, further understands there will be no cost to the City- ..
associated with joinder in this brief. This authorization extends only to adding
the City's nam e'to lhe amicus curiae briet to be submitted at the prese-nt stage of
the litifation. Supplemental authorization will be necessary to add the City's
name to any further briefing efforts.
From:
Signature
Printed Name State Bar No.
Street Address
Zip CodeCityState
tr First Class Mail
Pubtic Law:-Non CIient Folder: ATTORNEYS rUEDA:AMICUSBRIEF/HARVEST CHURCH
1r
Agenda nen ?L
Meeting Date 3 -r 8- o A
$2,023,990.66
Ck. No. 81 136 - 81662
Excludes Library Cks. 81 136 - 81 181
RECOMTVIENDED FOR PAYMENT APPROVED FOR PAYMENT
Payroll for February 2002
$1,663,687.28
Ck. No. 145744 - 146634
.EFTS for February 2002
$396,757.09
-ELECTRONIC FUNDS TRANSFERS
EFT'S INCLUDE: State Withhotding
SDI (State Disabitity)
PERS- Heatth Benefits
Retirement
S:\Fl NEXCEL\M ISCELLAN EOUS\COUNCt LCKS.XLS
I
03-08-2002
CITY OF EURL!NGAME9ARRANT REGISTER
FUND RECAP . 01-02
PAGE 11
A14OUNT
212,725 .23
311 ,481 .93
132.95
137,81'1 .18
153,386.00
I]AME FU}ID
101
320
326
327
526
527
528
529
618
619
620
621
731
734
896
GENERAL FUND
CAPI TAL IMPROVEMENTS FUND
IIATER CAPITAL PROJECT FUND
SEI,JER CAPITAT PROJECT FUND
!/ATER FUND
SE!/ER FUNO
SOLID IIASTE TUNO
GOLF CE},ITER TUND
SELF I }ISURANCE TIJI/D
FACILITIES SERVICES FUIID
EOUIPMENT SERVI CES FUIID
INFORMATION SERVICES FUND
TRUST ATID AGENCY TUND
STATE ORA},JTS FU}.ID
UTILITY REVOLVIXG FUND
36,216.54
2,380.00
8, 119.28
1,671.90
1,538.18
102,696.00
1 ,731 .83
?.1 ,206.77
1,505.52
634.03
TOTAL FOR APPROVAL
HOIIORAELE I.IAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL:
$999 ,237 .64
TTIIS IS TO
I NCLUSI VE,
THE AI.'OUNT
OFFICIALS,
ACCORDANCE
CERTIFY THAT THE CLAII'IS LISTED ON PAGES NUTIBERED fROI.4 1 IHROUGH 11
AND/OR CLAII.iS I,IUMBERED FRO4 8153I THROUGII 8'1662 INCLUSIVE,TOTALI}.IG I I,I
OF 5999,?37,64, IIAVE EEEN CHECKED II.I DETAIL AND APPROVED 8Y THE PROPER
AND IN MY OPINIOII REPRESENT FAIR AI'IO JUST CHARGES AGAINST THE CITY IN
I.IITH THEIR RESPECTIVE AMOUNTS AS IlIDICATED THEREON.
RESPECTFULLY SUEMITTED,
FII'IANCE DIRECTOR
APPROVED FOR PAYI'IENT
DATE
COUNCI L DATE
(
CI TY OF BURLINGAI.IEHARRA}'IT REGISTER
03t08/02
VEIIOOR DETAI Lr*' Denotes h8nd Hritten Checks
PAGE 10
Al'l0UNT
500.00
f95.00
2,080.00
300.00
511 .?3
250.00
918.00
773.40
12,500.00
75.01
78,996.59
56.00
$999,237 .61
NUI,48ER NAME
8',]651
81652
81653
81654
81655
a1656
81657
81658
81659
81650
81661
81662
TOTAL
ROBERT ALFARO
MI SCELLANEOUS
JITL OUIGLEY
CO}ITRACTUAL SERVICES
CHARLES I ZMI RIAN
OEPOSIT REFUNDS
MYRON GROSSI.IAIJ
DEPOSI] REFUNDS
CHRIS ROGERS
CAPITAL EAUIPI.IENT
UI,I ITED METHOD I ST CHURCH
H I SCELLANEOUS
I.IARK ANKENI{AN
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
REED AND GRAHAI'I INC.
I.I I SC. SUPPL I ES
MISC. SUPPLIES
KELLIIIG,IIORTI{CROSS & NOBRI GA
UTTTIIY BILLING EXPENSE
SEI'ER BILLING ALLOCATION
AERC. CO,l
t.I I SC, SUPPLIES
COAST CRANE
HISC. SUPPLIES
HUESARD PUBLISHIi]G
TRAI X I NG EXPENSE
23513
23515
23516
23517
23518
23519
235?O
23521
23521
23526
ACCOUNT
500.00 731 22525
195.00 101 68010 220 1160
2,080.00 731 ??520
300.00 731 22520
541.23 'to'l 64250 800
250.00 101 36600
918.00 101 58010 220 1340
00
00
0
0
6
6
228.62
544.78
526 69020 120
527 66520 120
25
25
526 69020 715
527 66520 716
75.04 619 64460 120 5120
78,996.59 520 80310 120
56.00 526 69020 260
23514
CI TY OF BURLINGAI.IEL'ARRANT REGISTER
03/08t02
VENDOR DETAILr*r Denotes Hand lrritten Checks
PAGE 9
AMOUNT
168.00
320.00
603.11
17,353,00
8,551.75
1 ,056.00
16,205.76
548.00
720.00
750.00
48,129.24
234-B
NUHBER NAI.iE
81635
81636
81610
81641
81644
81645
81647
81518
81649
41637 rIRST AUTOI'IOT IVE DISTRIBUTORS
GAS, OIL & GREASE
81638
JAMES YARBOROI,IGIi
COTITRACTUAL SERVICES
ROBERTA RESTANI
CON]RACTUAL SERVICES
PE}IIIISULA FORD OF SAN BRUNO
CAPITAL EOUI PI.IENT
}|USCO SPORTS LIGH]I}IG
CAPITAL EOUIPTIENT
I'IERI T RESOURCE GROI.JP
TE}IPORARY E',IPLOYIiIENT SVC.
PI TNEY BOI,JES
CTTY HALL I'IAI}ITENANCE
I,JAI F MIJLLINS
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
SA}I FRANCISCO EXAI.IIXER
MISC. SUPPLIES
SECURITY SOLUTIONS
COIITRACTUAL SERVICES
CRESCO EOUI PI.IEIIT REIITALS
RENTS & LEASES
AIM I}ITERNET M,/TRKETIIIG
COiITRACTUAL SERVTCES
ACCOUNT
168.00 101 680'10 220 1580
320.00 101 68010 220 1341
603.11 101 65200 201
17,353.00 620 66700 800
2279a
22A2a
22857
22494
22924
22931
23128
23366
23367
?3112
?3170
2350'l
75.00
30.00
101 65100 110
101 65100 2ZA
23076
81642 DTARCY & HARTY COISTRUCTIo , INC 21092
PROFESSTONAL & SPECIALIZED S
81643
8,551.75 320 80190 800
1,056.00 101 64420 0't1
548.00 621 61150 200
720.00 101 680!0 220 1344
182.00 101 64400 120
7s0.00 618 61520 038
18,129.21 320 80430 220
238.13 101 68020 180 2200
129.00 101 68010 220 1460
81650 ICE CEI{TER OF SAII I{ATEO
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
23512 840.00 101 68010 220 1462
840.00
81639 PITNEY 8OI,'ES
OFFI CE EXPENSE
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
16,205.76 327 7a5J2 210
'105.00
182.00
129.00
23290
81646 THE PRACTICAL SOLUTIONS GROUP
I.IISCELLANEOUS
NUMEER IIAI4E
81620
41621
81623
41627
81528
81629
aM'1
41632
CITY OF BURLINGAI4EU'ARRANT RECISlER
03/08t02
VENDOR DETAIL
'*r oenotes Hand Liritten Checks
PAGE 8
AHOUNT
600.00
2,666.00
133.00
81 .71
709 .38
7,956.42
71 .31
u3.44
181,83
176.48
82,791.53
520.00
21399
81624 CITICORP VENDOR T INANCE, INC.
EOUIPI4ENT I'IAI NT.
21521
81626
JONATI{AN TURNER
COIITRACTUAL SERVICES
REED EOUIPI{ENT CO
EAUI PI{ENT MAINT,
GHAC PAYI'IEIIT PROCESSING CENTER
CAPITAL EAUIPI.IENT
UNI SOURCE I{AINT.SUPPLY SYSTEI,IS
I,{I SC. SUPPLIES
AI.iER I CAI,I ASPIIALT
CONTRACIUAL SERVICES
8 1 ENTERPRISE CORP.
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
ACCOUNT
1,090.00 101 51560 210
600.00 101 68010 220 1460
133.00 101 68010 220 1580
709.38 101 64250 110
ON CAI.4ERA PRODUCTIONS 21177
PROFESSIONAL & SPECIAL I ZED S
NANCY LOCKE
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
VB GOLF LLC
11I SCELLANEOUS
RECREATIOTI PROGRAI'I EXPENSE
PROIESSI OTIAL & SPECIALIZEO S
21195
?1209
21948
21980
22006
22188
22107
22s98
6,187.65
I t560.3?-9r.55
529 36717
529 68030 213
619 64460 210 5220
22660
71.31 529 68030 200 4200
813.44 tol 66100 800
484,83 526 69020 120
176.44 101 65200 203
3,328.00 320 80232 220
8?,791.53 120 80270 220
520.00 896 20281
81631 BURL INGAI.4E FAi.IILY PET HOSPITAL
I.I I SC. SUPPLIES
22773 329.32 101 65100 120
329.32
1,090.00
3,328.00
41622 CoultTY oF sAN r'tATEo
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
81625 CORPORATE EXPRESS OF THE I,IEST, I 218'19
OFFICE EXPEIiSE
2,666.00 101 55 t50 220
81,71 101 65200 200
81630 CUTTERS EDGE
FIRE APPARATUS i.IAINT.
81633 SAN
'1ATEO
REGIONAL NETIJORK, INC. 22759
UTILITY EXPENSE
CI TY OF BURLII'IGAI,IEL/ARRANT REG I STER
$/oat02
VENDOR DETAI L!*r Denotes Hand Hritten Checks
PAGE 7
180.00
46.44
4,505.r2
579.00
12,613.56
530.59
567.00
176.00
3,933.64
200.00
1,556,62
NUi.IBER NAME
81605
81606
81608 KUSTO{ STGNALS, INC.
CAPITAL EOUI PI.IENT
81609
81610
41611
81612
41614
81617
81618
180.00 101 65300 220
46.44 101 66210 260
4,505.52 734 6519' 800
579.00 101 61250 lto
1,159.50 101 68010 ,120 1322
CCII INCORPORATED
OTFI CE EXPENSE
EL CAMINO CTIARTER LINES INC
MISC. SUPPLIES
AFFINIlEL CO}IMUN I CAT I Oi/ S
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
coMr4u I cAI I 0N S
JULIO }IORAN
CONTRACTUAL SERVI CES
SPORTS CHOICE
I.I I SC. SUPPLIES
JASOI'I GI LMORE
COIITRACTUAL SERVICES
CIUCCI COIISULTING GROTJP INC
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
19791
19827
20055
20094
20105
20216
20301
20547
20564
20823
20845
20926
21063
KAIHY KARAS
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
41607 DELTA SAFETY SUPPLY CO
TRAINING EXPENSE
AT&T UIRELESS
CO.II.IUN I CAT I ON S
81613 ARLETTE PETERSON
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
530.59 101 66100 160
567.00 101 6a010 220 1317
176.00 101 680'10 220 1580
298.10 520 15000
3,933.64 101 68010 120 1581
200.00 101 6ao10 220 1346
81616
SAN MATEO CREDIT UIIION
I.4I SC. SUPPLIES
L I BRARY-. BOOKS AND
'.IAPSTRAVEL & MEETINGS
398.57
739.05
4'19.00
101 67500 120
101 67500 129
101 67500 251
81619 ESA ENVI RONI'IENTAL SCIEI'ICE ASSOC
OEPOSIT RETUTD
21160
17,A06.77 731 22590
17,806,n
19812
ACCOUNT
320.00 10'l 68010 220 1312
11,711.08
932.18
320 80410 220
621 61450 160
AMOUNT
320.00
1,159,50
298.1081615 },HELEN ENGINEERING CO., TNC.
SUPPLIES
CITY OF BURLIIIGAMEI,IARRANT RECISTER
03/08/02
VENDOR DETAI Lrfi Denotes Hand tlritten Checks
PAGE 6
NUI.IBER NAI'18
8',t589
8'1590
81591
81592
81593
8159/.
81595
81596
81597
8',I599
8't600
8',]601
8'1602
BAY ALARM
PROFESSIONAL & SPECIAL IZED S
81598 ACCESS UNIFORI,IS & EMBROIDERY
I,I I SC. SUPPLIES
PR IDE PAI I'II
BLDG. & GROUNDS MAINT.
COLORPRINT OIGITAL
OFFICE EXPE}ISE
PENINSULA DIGITAL II.IAGI NG
LIBRARY..BOOK BINDING
iI I SC. SUPPLIES
SPRING DOI.'N EOUESTRIAN
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
LABOR READY, INC.
TE}IPORARY EI,4PLOYMENT SVC.
LYNNE FIRESTONE
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
DEAI,{ IS AUTO BOOY &
14ISCELLA EoUS
}IATURCLEAN
I.I I SC. SUPPLIES
PRETERRED ALLIANCE
PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S
SAN FRATICISCO PLUI.iBING
DEPOSIT REFUNDS
!/I LSEY & HAM
PROFESSIOIIAL & SPEC IAL I ZED S
ERIC GIESEKER
CONTRACTUAL SERVlCES
ACCOUNT
121.51 101 68020 190 2200
375.80 526 69020 110
113.85
132,95
320 80231 1
326 80320 1
23
20
116.00
542.40 526 69020 011
619.90 618 61520 601
1,488.38 527 66520 120
310.55 619 64460 210 5110
216.40 101 61120 210
500.00 731 22520
1,196.38 320 78290 210
176,00 101 68010 220 1580
65.00 101 68010 220 1460
17411
17497
17534
17872
18659
18830
18854
18990
19025
19312
19397
19491
101 68010 220 1462
AI,4OUNT
121.51
375.80
576.a0
't 't6.00
542.10
399.00
619 .90
1,488.38
310.55
76.35
216.40
300.00
1,196.38
176.00
63.00
81604 CREATIVE INTERCONNECT
co0r.ruN I cAT r ol{ s
19768 224.36 101 65200 160
228.36
18716
18795
399.00 101 68010 220 1231
76.35 101 64350 120
81603 RICH POLONSKY
CO},/TRACTUAL SERVICES
19761
CITY OF BURLI}IGAME
!1 ARRA}IT REGISTER
03/08t02
PAGE 5
AII1OUNT
I ,680.00
210. 00
246,38
703.63
1,585.36
473.00
3,015.00
4,098.48
70.36
293.11
360.00
720.aa
192,26
NUi.IBER I'IAME
81571
81577
81578
81579
81580
81581
81s82
81583
81584
81585
09979
81575 ALERT DOOR SERVICE, INC.
PROFESSIONAT & SPECIAL I ZED S
41576
LEONA }IORIARTY
CONTRACIUAL SERVI CES
PIP PRINTIIIG
BLDG. & GROUNDS MAII{T.
ROMEO PACKIiIG CO
MISC. SIIPPLIES
COI{MAI R I{ECHAN!CAL SERVICES
PROTESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S
THE I{AGI C PRESS CORP.
OFFICE EXPENSE
GEORGE !/. GIPE, PH.D.
PROFESS IONAL & SPECIALIZED S
INVENSYS I.IETERING SYSTEMS
CAPITAL EOUIP}IENT
RECHARGE ' EI.I
OFFI CE EXPEIISE
ROYAL I,'IIOLESALE ELECTR I C
11I SC. SUPPLIES
JUDY PI SANO
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
ROBERIS & BRUNE COMPAIIY
II I SC. SUPPLIES
ACCOUNT
1,680.00 101 68010 220 1311
2't0.00 619 61460 210 5150
703.63 101 68020 120 2200
117.63
241 .92
n.09
2a.97
1,119.75
473.00 619 64460 210 5110
195.79 101 68010 110 1100
3,015.00 320 80130 210
1,098.48 526 59020 803
70.36 101 65200 110
291,11 619 64460 120 5150
560.00 101 68010 220 1460
720.88 101 67500 129
192.26 527 66520 120
CHIEF BI LL REILLY
OFF I CE EXPE}.ISE
I.i I SC. SUPPLIES
UN I FoRMS AND EOUIPI,IENT
DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS
TRAI NING EXPENSE
101
10'l
101
101
101
10620
1131A
'l 1568
11773
13759
't3950
11111
14523
14855
15196
16052
16169
65200 110
65200 120
65200 110
61200 240
5t500 260
81586 RECORDED BOOKS, LLC
LIBRARY--BOOKS AND }4APS
815a7
8'1588 SYDIIEY I'IALKOO
SMALL TOOLS 70.31 620 66700 130
70.31
VENDOR OETAIL!*r Denotes Hand lfritteh Checks
195 ,79
246.38 101 65100 190
10059
16347
CITY OF BURLIIIGAMETIARRANI REG I STER
03/08/02
VENDOR DETAI Lr*' oenotes Hand tlritten Checks
PAGE 4
NUI.{BER NAiIE
8',I561
81562
81563
81564
81565
81566
8'1568
81569
81571
81572
AMOUN'T
3,237.71
220.00
165.09
138.5?
1,2B0.00
185.63
292.61
706.00
311.42
2,562.00
91.10
ACCOUNT
BURLI IIGAI{E REC. DEPT./PETTY CASH
OFF I CE EXPEIISE
MISC. SUPPLIES
COMMUN I CAT IONS
8LDG. & GROUNDS I,IAINT.
EAUIPI'IENT I,4AINT,
PROFESSIONAL & SPECIAL I ZEO S
CONTRACTUAL SERVI CES
DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS
IRAVEL & MEETINGS
03910
03964
09072
09088
09130
09147
09248
09270
0939?
09133
09163
00
07
66
55
00
00
00
00
46
24
210
19
624
4
61
886
290
115
HORI ZON
I.I t SC. SUPPL I ES
41567 I'ALIER GRENN
COIITRACTUAL SERVICES
B. E.I . ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES
l,l I SC. SUPPLIES
BERNI CE INN
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
POM INC.
OFFICE EXPENSE
IEST ING ENGI XEERS, INC.
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
SAII iIATEO COIJNTY SHERIFF'S OFC.
PRISONER EXPENSE
GRAPHIC CONTROLS CORP.
iI I SC. SUPPLIES
138.5? 619 64460 120
1,280.00 101 68010 220 1311
502.76 101 6A020 120 2ZOO
485.63 101 68010 220 13/.1
706.00 320 78?90 220
311.42 101 65200 112
2,562.00 101 65100 291
91.10 526 69020 120
BURLINGAME REC. DEPT./PETTY CASH 03910
}II SCELLANEOUS
T]EST GROUP PAYIIENT CTR.
MISC. SUPPLIES
815rJ SEOUOIA UNION HIGH SCHOOL
OFF I CE EXPENSE 593.50 10't 65100 110
595.50
101 6S010 110 1100
101 68010 120 1690
'101 68010 160 1100
101 680'10 190 1100
101 68020 200 2100
101 64420 210
101 68010 220 1344
101 68010 240 1100
101 58020 250 2',100
502.76
220.00 731 22543
165.09 101 64350 120
?92.61 320 80480 110
81570 LIFE ASSIST
SUPPLIES
09720
CI IY OT BURLINGAMEt.,ARRANT REGISTER
03/08/02
VENOOR DETAI Li*r Denotes Hand l,/ritten Checks
PAGE 3
NUTIBER NAME
81557
81558
81559
SKYLINE SUPPLY CO., INC.
OFFICE EXPENSE
,4I SC. SUPPL I ES
I,IISCELLA}IEOIJS EXPENSE
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
OTFICE EXPENSE
I.I I SC. SUPPLIES
I.IISCELLANEOUS EXPENSE
OFFICE EXPENSE
MISC. SIjPPLIES
TRAINING EXPENSE
HAAG N IIAAG
OTF I CE EXPENSE
TIMBERLINE TREE SERVICE,
CONIRACTUAL SERVI CES
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 950
34,A6 101 58020 110 2300
53.52 tol 58020 150 2200
03574
03500
INC.03760
03764
1,654"80
146.08
1 ,427.62
626.62
617.12
13/r.50
380.61
58.56
-127.17
62.81
101
101
101
320
526
526
526
5?7
527
620
65300
66100
64560
80430
59020
69020
69020
66520
66520
66700
'110
120
290
220
I 't0
r20
290
110
120
260
ACCOUNT AMOUNT
1,98',1 .95
31.
9 ,283 .76
53.52
7
1
76
00
8'I550 TOMARK SPORIS, IIIC.
SMALL TOOLS
101 68020 220 2300
320 76010 220
CITY OF BURLINGAME!/ARRANT REGI SIER
03/08/02
VENDOR DETAILr*r Denotes HEnd l.hitten Checks
1,489,15
69,606.00
101 66210 800
320 80310 120
PAGE 2
AI.IOUNT
856.00
1 ,877.26
156,00
10,167.13
6,180.52
886.57
129,891 .0B
139,918.O0
8,273.96
3,020.00
NUI4BER NAI.IE
81515
81546
81547
81548
81549
8'1550 P
I'IANPOL]ER
TEMPORARY EI'IPLOYI,4ENT SVC.
856,00 620 15000
1,877.26 101 66210 1?0
456.00 101 65300 011
Ho!/ARD JONES BATTERIES, INC, 02625
SUPPLIES
K & !/ DISCOIJNT LIGHTING & SUPP
MISC. SIJPPLIES
US FILTER
HISC. SUPPLIES
SI4ALL TOOLS
MI SC. SUPPLIES
N IXON.EGL I EOUIPMENT CO.
CAPI TAL EOUIPME}IT
MISC. SUPPLIES
G. & E.
MI SCELLANEOUS
UTILITY EXPEIISE
8,876.00
703.9',1
587.2?
526 69020 120
526 69020 130
527 66520 120
0?645
02819
03028
0305/.
03145
03179
03355
03380
03171
03536
81551 PERSONAL AUARDS, INC.
I.I I SC. SUPPLIES
81552
81553
81554
81555
I,IARGAREI PRE}IDERGAST
CO}ITRACTUAL SERVICES
SAiI FRANCISCO gATER DEPT.
gATER PURCIiASES
SAN iIATEO COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL
COI'ITRACTUAL SERVICES
SAN I.IATEO UNION I{IGH
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
6,066.49
1 14.03
101 66210 173
496 20280
640
380
526 69020 233
s28 66600 210
886.57 101 58010 120 1580
721.88 101 68010 220 1341
129,891.08 526 69020 171
139,948.00 101 64560 220
4,273.96 t01 68010 220 1690
2
00
00
71 ,095.15
724 -Ba
ACCOUNT
02880
81556 SEOUOTA ANALYTICAL LABS
I.I I SCELLANEOUS
PROFESSIONAL & SPECIAL I ZED S
NUII1BER NAME
41532
81533
81535
81536
81537
81538
8t 539
81540
81541
81542
81513
327 79180 210
527 66130 190
527 66530 210
527 66530 800
PAGE 1
AMOUNT
87 ,321 .76
178.37
312.85
35.72
142.83
130.00
2,301.67
'107.00
103.73
196.88
118,827 .83
447.13
CITY Ot BURLINGAI,4E!,ARRANT REGISTER
03/08/02
VEIIOOR DETAILr*r Denotes Hsnd !ritten Checks
81531 * PEHINSULA FORD OF SAII BRUNO
l.l I scE L LAN EC[..rS
CAPITAL EOUI PI.IENT
GRAY I S PAIiIT, BURLINGAI{E
TRAIF I C CO}ITROL I.'ATERIALS
[tI SC. SUPPLIES
3,302.00
84,019.76
618 64520 604
620 66700 800
44.56
129.81
101 66210 22?
619 61160 120 5220
61.50
251 .35
320 A0410 220
6?1 61150 190
ACCOUNT
35.72 620 't5000
11?,83 101 56210 \20
130.00 101 32100
2,301.67 101 6/+530 151
107.00 101 10700
103.73 101 65200 140
496.88 101 68010 220 134'1
22891
01025
01030
01236
0'1250
01551
01637
0'1663
02027
02014
021 10
02160
02261
ACTIOII CLEAN ING SERVI CE
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
BLOG. & GROIJNDS I.IAI NT.
T]HITE CAP
MISC. SUPPLIES
CITY OF EURLIIIGAI.IE
MI SCELLANEOUS
BURLINGAI.IE CHAI'IBER OF COI'IMERCE
CHAiIEER OF COMi'iERCE PMI.
BURLINGAI.IE RECREATIO}I DEPT.
RECREATTON EXPENSES
L. N. CURTIS & S0l,rS
UII! FORI.IS AND EOUIPI.IEIIT
!/ACEK DEI{NAOUI
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
TEDERAL EXPRESS
l'4I SC. SUPPLIES
GRANITE ROCK COHPA}IY
STREET RESURFACING EXPENSE
US FILTER OPERATING SERVICES
PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S
BLDG. & GROUNDS I,IAI NT.
PROFESSIONAL & SPECIAL I ZED S
CAPITAL EOUIPMENT
605
819
240
132
21
11
10
2
12
09
63
69
15.25 526 69020 120
81514 HASELBACI{ SURVEYI NG IT.ISTRUMENT
MISC. SUPPLIES
0?110 75.78 3?0 A0?10 120
75.7a
81534 BAYSHORE I NTENNATIONAL TRUCKS
SUPPLIES
447.13 101 66210 226
03-01-2002
THIS IS TO
INCLUSIVE,
THE AMOUNT
0Fr IctALs.
ACCORDANCE
CI TY OF BURLINGAUEt,IARRANT REGISTER
FUND RECAP . OI.O2
PAGE 8
AMOUNT
1A,901 .63
96,136.31
079.22
272.99
871 .71
448.87
940.91
500.94
423.26
917.86
31 .59
769.33
NAIIlE FUND
101
320
526
527
529
618
619
620
621
731
736
896
GENERAL TUND
CAPITAL II'IPROVEMENTS TUND
!/ATER FUND
SE!/ER FUND
GOLF CENTER FUND
SELF INSURANCE FUND
FACILITIES SERVICES FUND
EOUIPMEIIT SERVICES FUND
INFORII1ATION SERVICES FUNO
TRUST AND AGENCY FUNO
BURLINGAI.IE TRAIN SHUT]LE PROGRAM
UTILITY REVOLVING FUND
5
6
10
8
3
1
1
117
TOTAL FOR APPROVAL s332,391.62
HOI.IORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL:
CERTIFY THAT THE CLAI}IS LISTED OI1 PAGES NUI.IBERED FROi4 I THROUGH 8
AND,/OR CLAII'IS NUI.4EERED FROITI 81425 THROUGH 81530 INCLUSIVE,TOTALI}IG IN
OT 9332,394.62, HAVE BEEN CHECKED IN DETAIL AND APPROVED BY THE PROPER
AND IN MY OPINION REPRESEIIT FAIR AND JUST CHARCES AGAII,IST TIIE CITY IN
I.,II T}I THEIR RESPECTIVE AI'IOUNTS AS INOICATED THEREON.
RESPECTFULLY SUBI,IITTED,
FINANCE OIRECTOR
APPROVEO FOR PAYMENT
COUNC I L DATE
OATE
CITY OF BURLINGAI.,|EI]ARRAIiT REGISTER
03/01/02
VENDOR DETAILr*r Denotes Hand !/ritten Checks
PAGE 7
AI4OUNT
17,565.97
500.00
512.00
190.00
3,109.13
911.11
38.53
28,905.85
168.33
675 .00
766.70
1 ,607 .20
352.00
500.00
1 ,435.00
81515 CRITICAL SOLUTIONS, INC. 23035
PROFESSIONAL & SPECIAL I ZED S
81516
ACCOUNT
17 ,565,97 320 76010 210
500.00 731 22525
512.00 101 65100 220
190.00 526 69020 190
T. RANDOLPH GRANGE
I{ISCELLANEOT',S
PI TNEY BOL'ES
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
IHE I'4OBI LE STORAGE GROUP
BLDG. & GROUiIDS I.IAINT.
OTT I CE DEPOT
OFF I CE EXPENSE
CAPITAL EOUIPI,iENT
JO AIIN COOPER
MISCELLANEOIS
NELLY }IOORE PAINT CO
BLDG. & GROTJNDS MAI NI.
TIARRIS DESI GN
PROFESSIONAL & SPEC IAL I ZED S
KAR PR@UCTS
SUPPLIES
LONE STAR LANOSCAPE
COIITRACTUAL SERVICES
DATASAFE
OFF I CE EXPEI'ISE
GARY HASLAI.I
COIITRACTUAL SERVICES
KORALEEN EI]TERPRISES
l'11SC. SUPPLiES
NUI,4BER NAI,IE
41517
81518
815',t9
81520
81521
8',1522
8',]523
81521
81525
81526
81528
81529
23112
23124
23138
23153
24204
23211
?3329
23314
23375
23410
23506
23507
23508
23510
1 ,745,49
1 ,363.91
101 68010 110 't100
101 68010 800 1100
SCVB IIOUSING
TRAVEL & I'IEET INcs
81527 KAREN SCHEIKOIIITZ
CONTRACTTJAL SERVICES
911.11 101 64250 010
38,53 101 68020 190 2200
28,905.85 320 75110 210
168.33 620't5000
675.00 320 80140 220
766.70 101 64200 110
1,607.20 527 66520 250
352.00 101 6AU0 220 1t61
500,00 101 680'10 220 158'l
56.6A 526 69020 120
BAY AREA REFRIGERATION AND AIR C 235'I'I
PUTIP EOUI P}{ENT REPAI R
81530
TOTAL
1,435.00 619 64460 230 51a0
c332,394.62
56.58
CI TY OF BURLINGAI.IEIJARRANT REG I STER
03/01/02
VENDOR DETAILr*' Denotes tland lJtitten Checks
PAGE 6
A}IOUN T
19,298.00
158.69
170.00
96.00
600.00
600.00
1,398.00
605.00
440.00
330.00
250.00
500.00
260.00
96.00
81506 i4ILLS PEIIINSULA HEALTH SERVICES
PROIESSIONAL & SPECIAL I ZED S
TRAI N I NG EXPENSE
803.00
595.00
101 64420 210
101 65200 250
NUI.IEER NA}IE
8'1500
81502
81503
81504
81t05
8',I510
8',]51 1
81512
22718
22751
81507 SAN MAIEO OAILY JOURiIAL
I.i I SCE L LAN EOI,'S
22A04
81508 VALI CoOPER AND ASSOCIATES, INC. 22813
PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S
81509
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPO 22723
t'{ I SC. SUPPLIES
I,{ I CHAEL LAZARUS
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
COUNTY OF SAN I.IATEO
COIIIRACIUAL SERVICES
ROEERTA TAVAKE
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
I,4ATT LENNON
COI'ITRACTUAL SERVICES
KATIIRYN PAGE ASSOCIATES
PROTESSIOIIAL & SPECI AL I ZEO S
CARL DEOUANT
COXTRACTUAL SERVICES
KATI LOUKIANOTF
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
ACCOUNT
19,298.00 320 80232 220
15a.69 10'l 58020 160 2200
170.00 101 68010 220 1451
96.00 101 66100 120
600.00 101 68010 220 1581
600.00 101 68010 220 1581
605.00 731 22543
440.00 320 76110 210
330.00 320 80370 210
250.00 '10'1 68010 220 1581
500.00 101 68010 220',I581
260.00 101 65100 220
96.00 619 61160 210 5180
22559
??591
22672
22747
22415
22907
22921PI TNEY BO!/ES
COI.ITRACTUAL SERVICES
815'I3 gESTERII EXTER}.IINATOR COI.IPANY
PROFESSIOIIAL & SPECIALIZEO S
-70
983
00
81514 cPs
iI I SC. SUPPLIES
PERSON}IEL EXAiII I,IATIONS
2f005
101 61120 1?0
101 64420 121
913.25
81501 VERTZoNr/TRELESS
cot4tlu I cAT I0NS
22842
23001
CITY OT BI.JRLINGAMEUARRANT REG I STER
03/01/o2
VEIIDOR OETAILr*r Denotes Hahd tJritten Checks
PAGE 5
AMOUNT
533.69
1 ,059.82
643.69
1,600.00
2,111.50
40.00
12,016.55
120.09
700.00
1,200.00
250.00
631 .32
888.84
500.00
CIIIGULAR I,'IRELESS
colilltuN I cAT I oil s
81486 IIII LEUR SI.IITH ASSOCIATES
PROFESSIO}.{AL & SPECIALIZED S
GRE6 BARNES
CONTRAC]UAL SERVICES
21769
81187 CORPORATE EXPRESS OF THE UEST, I 218'19
OFF ICE EXPENSE
81488
ACCOUNT
533.69 101 66100 160
1,059,82 320 80180 210
643.69 '!01 65200 110
1,600,00 101 68010 220 1581
2,114,50 619 64460 220 5190
/*0.00 619 64160 210 5160
NUMBER NAI.IE
81485
81489
81490
81191
81193
81191
81495
81496
21747
21885
21936
21917
21948
21980
2?048
22051
22102
22178
2?354
A&LJANITORIALSERVICE
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
PROVIOENCE PEST TERI.IITE
PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S
VB GOLF LLC
CO}ITRACTUAL SERVICES
UI SCELLANEOUS
RECREATION PROGRAI'I EXPENSE
1 ,440.00
8,951.45
1 .625.10
10't 68010 220 1584
529 367'15
,29 68030 213
22429
120.09 529 68030 200 1200
700.00 101 68010 220 1581
1,200.00 101 58010 220 '1581
250.00 101 68010 220 1581
631.32 526 69020 120
888.81 101 65200 800
500.00 101 58010 220 1581
J I I.I STOCKI.]ELL
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
MARK I1EYERS
CONTRACTUAL SERVI CES
BR IAIi BRINKERI{OFF
CO}ITRACTUAL SERVICES
ROBERTS AND ERUNE
IrlI sc. SUPPLIES
AM97 CASCADE FIRE EOUIPI4ENT
CAPITAL EOUIPI'IENT
81498 ERIC SYMANSKI
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
81499 TECHNOLoGy,El,tclt'lEERIi/c & coNsTRU 22435
I'tISC. SUPPLTES 195.00 6?0 66700 120
195 " 00
8'1492 REED EOUIP}4ENT CO
EoulPltEliT A I itT.
NUI.|EER tIAItlE
81470
81471
81172
81173
81174
81175
81177
81178
81479
81480
81481
8148?
81483
PENINSULA CORR IOOR
RENTS & LEASES
RENTS & LEASES
RENTS & LEASES
101 66210 180
526 69020 180
527 66520 1A0
PAGE 4
AMOUNT
518.93
95.00
92.61
3,755,00
19A.67
272.15
113.05
1,555.00
2,O99.45
24,705.t 7
114.09
700.00
960.00
600.00
CI TY OF BURLINGAi{EL/ARRANT REGISTER
03/01/02
VENDOR OEIAILr*r Denotes Hand Lrritten Checks
I.II NOLTA BUSINESS SYSTEMS
E0UIPHENL.lAI l.lT,
AUTO4OTIVE ENVI RONMEI]TAL SERV.
l,l I SC. SUPPL I ES
BLACK iIOTJNTAI I.I SPRI}.{G IIATER
MISC, SUPPLIES
JOI NT
19131
191A1
19330
20060
?0216
20246
20301
20631
20724
20938
21140
21126
2',1169
ACCOTJNT
518.93 101 65200 200
95.00 620 66700 120
92.64 527 66520 120
251.66
251 .67
251 .67
GE CAPITAL
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
ATF I N ITEt COMIIUNICATIONS
COI1MUNICAT IONS
C!/EA - CALI FORNIA IJATER
TRAVEL & I4EETINGS
SPRIIIT PCS
coitluN I cAT I0Ns
UTILITY EXPENSE
HARD I SO}'I KO'IATSU IVELICH &
PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALI ZEO S
OUICK MIX CONCRETE
SIDEI,IALK REPAIR EXPENSE
RICK KALBHEIIN
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
JACKIE COOPER
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
OLEN SIUON
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
498,67 101 68010 220 1100
272.45 621 64450 160
3A1.46
3'l .59
101 65200 160
736 64571 160
527 66520 160
896 20281
330.12
I ,769 .33
21,705.17 320 76010 210
111.09 101 66?10 219
700.00 101 68010 220 1581
960.00 101 68010 220 1342
600.00 101 58010 220 ,!58'l
21656
175.07 529 58030 180 4100
175.07
8'1476 AT&T I.'IRELESS
coflt{uNIcATI0Ns
COIIMUN I CAT I ON S
21477
1,555.00 527 66520 250
8',11u PoRToSA}i
RENTS & LEASES
CIIY OF BURLINGAMEIIARRAIIT REGISTER
03/01/02
VENDOR DETAILr*r Denotes Hand Uritten checks
PAGE 3
NUMBER IIA}4E
81454
81155
81456
81157
81459
8'1160
81161
81165
81457
8',I168
I(ATHY DEJESUS
COI.ITRACTUAL SERVICES
8,1458 I4ETRO MOBI LE COMi.|UN I CAT I ONS
RADIO I.4AINT.
COI'II'IUN I TY GATEPATII
PROTESSIONAL & SPECIAL I ZED S
I.IUN I CI PAL MAI IITENANCE
SUPPLIES
r.t I KE SUTTH
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
PRIDE PAINT
BLOG. & GROU}IOS I.4A I NT .
RAYI4ONO STOKLOSA
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
GEORGE I{ASTALIR
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
DEAN I S AUTO EODY &
MI SCELLANEOUS
PRUOENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY
COIITRACTUAL SERVICES
ACCOUNT
206,25 101 66210 210
240.31 620 15000
52.00 101 68010 220 1589
2,127.11 101 65200 205
992,43 101 68020 190 2200
2/.0.00 101 68010 220 1/,60
78.00 101 68010 220 1589
678.00 s25 69020 011
20.57 527 66520 120
952,40 618 64520 604
700.00 101 68010 220 1581
209.60 526 69020 110
106.79 101 65200 220
240.00 101 68010 220 1460
lBOBB
81462 LABoR READY. tNC.
TEI'IPORARY EMPLOYMEIIT SVC.
18659
81463 PLASTI -PR INI, INC
IIII SC. SUPPLIES
18791
81161
16575
16629
16696
17402
17545
18795
18959
18990
19027
19044
AIIlOUNT
206.25
240.34
52.00
507.00
2,127.11
992.83
240.00
78.00
578.00
20.57
952.10
700.00
209.60
106.79
STEVEII BAUH
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
A1166 ACCESS UNIFOR}IS & ET1BROIDERY
UNI FORMS A}ID EOUIPMENT
PEGGY GUARALDI
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
81469 ANG NEgSPAPERS
PUBLICATIOI'IS & ADVER]ISING
19083 56.10 101 64200 150
56.40
507.00 101 58010 220 1311
240,00
16637
CI TY OF BURLINGAMEI.'ARRA},IT REGISTER
03/01/02
VENDOR DETAI Lr*' Denotes Hand Uritten Checks
176.70
77 .76
2,898.66
595.65
lo I ..,0
219.12
829.74
120
203
222
260 2300
120
260
PAGE 2
AMOUNT
3,156 -20
7,496.47
4 ,979 .49
1 ,680.00
225.00
965.77
1,150.81
2,812.00
70.36
3,003.59
208.11
1 ,257.00
NUI,4BER NAHE
81411
41442
a1413
CALLANOER ASSOCIATES
PROFESS IONAL & SPECIALIZED S
ABAG - LIABILITY
CLAI MS PAYHENTS
09161
09518
09790
09979
10101
10?56
13758
11007
14523
15595
15827
16085
101
101
t0t
101
526
526
620
66210
65200
66?10
68020
69020
59020
15000
ACCOUNT
3,156.20 320 71171 210
INTERSTATE TRAFFIC
MISC. SUPPLIES
FIRE APPARATUS MAINT.
TRATF I C CONTROL MATERIALS
TRAI N ING EXPE}ISE
I.I I SC. SUPPLIES
TRAI N I NG EXPENSE
SUPPLIES
81111 LEONA I.IORIARTY
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
81445 oARYL 0. Joi/ES, r C.
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
81446 AUGUST SUPPLY, IuC
IIl I SC. SUPPLIES
81117 DANKA OTTICE I}IAGING CO
OFF I CE EXPENSE
81148
81449 RECHARGE I EIIl
OFFICE EXPENSE
81450 ALL CITY I,IANAGEI,iENI
CONIRACTUAL SERVICES
81451 I,,I D LINEN SERVICE
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
8115?
1,680.00 101 68010 220 1344
225.00 101 65200 220
965.77 101 65200 111
1,150.81 621 61150 110
777.06
1 ,032,47
777 .06
255.11
70.36 101 6t200 110
5,003.59 101 65100 220
208.11 101 55200 220
E L E CT RO- I'IOT I OII INCORPORATED
PUMP EOUI P}IENT REPAI R
PIJMP EOUI PMENT REPAIR
PIJI,4P EOUI PMENT REPAIR
PROFESS IOIIAL & SPECIALIZED S
101 66210 230
526 69020 230
527 66520 230
619 61160 210 5110
TELEKEY SCADA SYSTEUS IIIC.
MI SCELLANEOUS EXPENSE
MI SC. SUPPLIES
628.50
628.50
526 69020 290
527 66520 120
81453 I.{ASATOSHI MOR!TA
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
16164 99.20 101 68010 220 1462
99.20
7,496.17 61a 64520 601
a
NUMBER NAME
81428
81429
81430
81132
81433
81434
81435
81436
81438
81439
269.90
1 ,663.5s
12.10
101 67500 ',I20
101 67500 129
101 67500 160
PAGE 1
Al'lOUllT
1 ,945 .55
20.71
17a.00
158.10
178.61
941 .74
768.00
72.53
10.23
2,016. 00
700.00
146,A12.
407.36
CITY OF BURLTNGAME!,4 R R A N T R E G I S T E R
03/01/02
VENDOR DETAIL
'*r Denotes Hahd l,,ritten Checks
ACCOUNI
8.1126 * SAN MATEO CREDIT UNION
MISC. SUPPLIES
I I BRARY..BOOKS ANO I.IAPS
coMltuil t cAT I0Ns
2',I063
01059
01663
02027
02119
02261
02645
02819
03002
03054
03175
03235
03431
03964
81427 ALAN STEEL & SUPPLY CO.
BLDG. & GROUNDS MAINT.
SANDRA POEE
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
81137 DOROTHY RADYK
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
EURLINGAME RECREAT IOTI DEPT.
RECREAT ION EXPENSES
L. N. CURTIS & SONS
FINE APPARATUS I.IA I NT.
GENE EVANS
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
GRANITE ROCK COMPANY
STREET RESURFACI NG EXPENSE
K & t,I DISCOUI'IT LIGHTING & SUPP
},I I SC. SUPPLIES
t'lAN POI,IE R
IEMPORARY EMPLOYMENT SVC.
NATIONI,'IDE !/IRE & BRUSH MFG.
SI,'PPL I ES
GAS & ELECTRIC
SAN MATEO COUNIY CONVENTION &
M I SCELLANEOUS
I.'EST GROUP PAYTIENT CIR.
PROFESS IONAL & SPECIALIZED S
20.71 101 58020 190 2200
478.00 '101 10700
158.10 101 65200 203
720.00 101 68010 220 1342
'178.61 101 66210 226
941.7A 101 66240 120
758.00 101 65300 011
72,53 620 15000
10.23 527 66520 170
2,016.00 101 68010 220 '13110
700.00 101 68010 ?20 1344
116,812.86 731 22587
407.36 101 64350 210
81440 SAFETY KLEEII CORP.
RENTS & LEASES
09168
203,51 101 6a020 180 2200
203.51
720.00
02-22-200?
CITY OT SURLINGAI'IEI,JARRAN] REGISTER
FUNO RECAP . 01.02
PAGE 9
AMOUNT
GENERAL FUIID
CAPIIAL IMPROVEMENTS FUND
!iATER CAPITAL PROJECT TUND
I]ATER FUIID
SEtlER FUIIO
GOLF CENTER FUND
SELF IIISURANCE FUND
FACILITIES SERVICES FUND
EOUI PMENT SERVI CES FU}.ID
INFORI.IATION SERVICES FUNO
TRUST AND AGENCY FUIID
UTILITY REVOLVI}IG FUTID
OEBT SERVI CE FUND
NAME
TOTAL FOR APPROVAL
FUND
101
320
326
526
527
529
618
619
620
621
731
896
930
76
98
8
21
170
516-48
209.56
132.32
590.95
176,63
335.09
4,999,53
1 ,131 .77
23,230.59
25,713.00
8,050.33
43,965.91
1,000.00
$485,382. 19
{)gtr-,,,) vo' P ex' (|111
r{IatsAa=-
THIS IS TO
II,ICLUSIVE,
THE Ai{OUNT
OFF I CIALS,
ACCORDANCE
fio oRABLE |'4AYOR AND CITY COUNCIL!
CERTIFY THAT THE CLAIMS LISTED ON PAGES NUMBERED FROH'I THROUGH 9
AND/OR CLAII,{S NUMBERED EROI.4 81317 THROUGH 81425 INCLUSIVE,TOTALTNG IN
OF $18',382,19, HAVE EEEN CHECKED IN DETAIL AI,ID APPROVED BY THE PROPER
AND IN MY OPINION REPRESENT FAIR AND JUST CHARGES AGAII,IST THE CITY IN
I]ITII THEIR RESPECTIVE AMOUNTS AS INDICATED THEREON.
RESPECTFULLY SUBI{ITTED,
FINANCE DIRECTOR
APPROVED FOR PAYI.IENT
DATE
cotNcIL DATE
81421 AII4 I}iTERNET }4ARKETING
COIITRACTUAL SERVICES
81422 cJ's DELr
MISC, SUPPLIES
A1423 VIRGINIA CULBERTSON
I.I I SCELLAI,JEOUS
81121 EPS, rNC.
DEPOSIT REFUI'IDS
81125
CI TY OF BURLIIIGAMEI,{ARRANT REGISTER
02/22/02
VENDOR OETAI L
'*r Denotes Hand Uritten Checks
ACCOTJNT
?3501 258.00 101 68010 220 1160
23502 322.00 101 65200 120
23503 125.00 731 2252s
23504
300.00 731 22520
23505
NUI'IBER |IAME
TOTAL
EBER ELECTRONIC SUPPLY
OTFICE EXPENSE
CAPITAL EOUIPMENT
42
00
101 54350 110
101 64350 800
PAGE 8
AMOUNT
258.00
322.00
125.00
300,00
963.12
s4a5 ,382.19
13
950
CI TY OT BURLINGAI,|E
I.'A R RAI,1 T REGISTER
02/?2/02
VENDOR DETAI Li*r Denotes Hand llritten Checks
PAGE 7
AMOUNI
'1,000.00
35,625.00
51,667.13
60.01
216.34
4,501,88
70.00
113.86
322.00
500.00
292,28
50.00
325.00
NUI.4BER NAME
81405
81106
81107
81109
81410
81411
81412
81413
81414
81115
41419
81417 DAI,JNPHOTOGRAPHY
ttIsc. suPPLtEs
BotsE cAscAoE oFFICE PRooucTs co 23306
OFF ICE EXPEIISE
BOI'IOLOGI ST I X
OTHER DEBT EXPENSES
OIRECTV
GAS & ELEC]RIC
MISAN CONSTRUCTTON, Il,tc.
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
NORTRAX
SUPPLIES
IiIETROTECH
SMALL TOOLS
LONE STAR LANDSCAPE
COI,ITRACTUAL SERVICES
AASHTO
OFFICE EXPENSE
RED !'I}.IG SHOE STORE
lRAINIIIG EXPENSE
DOUG TIILLIAiIS
CLAIMS PAY}'IENTS
IVAII MERZAGORA
MI SCELLAIIEOUS
ACCOUNT
1,000.00 930 66a30 764
51,43 526 69020 170
330.99 101 61150 110
35,625.00 320 40190 220
54,667.13 320 71171 220
60.01 620 15000
216.31 526 69020 130
/+,501.88 320 80110 220
70.00 10r 66100 110
143.86 526 690?0 260
322.00 618 54520 601
500.00 731 22525
292.28 '101 64100 120
50.00 731 22525
125.00 't01 370'!0
23088
23?53
233?6
23335
24337
23375
23446
23494
23195
23196
23497
23498
23499
81420 ELIZABETH VILLAGOIIEZ
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
23500 411.75 101 68010 220 1347
81108 scAPES, rr,rc.
COIITRACTUAL SERVICES
23328
8,14'16 RICK ESCOBAR
MISCELLANEOUS
81418 JIRAYR KOUROUYAN
MISCELLANEOUS
51,43
330.99
CITY OF BURLINGAT'IE
IIA R R A N T R E G I S T E R
02t22t02
VENDOR OETAILr*r Denotes Hand llritten Checks
PAGE 6
AUOUN T
240.00
5,971 .78
13,896.00
234.00
776.68
25.88
1 ,607 .35
291-99
312.84
't5,600.00
294.00
273.00
22,271.44
1 ,677 .53
NUHBER NAI.IE
81389
81390
81391
41392
81393
81394
81395
81396
a1397
81399
81400
81401
81402
TUR80 DATA SYSTEIIS, tNC.
MISCELLANEOUS
SAII MATEO COUNTY COIITROLLERS OIF ?1897
MI SCELLANEOUS
A&LJANITORIALSERVICE
CONTRACTIJAL SERVICES
CI{RISSY HOLMES
CONIRACTUAL SERVICES
AMERICAN VAN EOUI PI.{ENT INC.
CAPITAL EOUIPT'IENT
AT&T
UTILITY EXPENSE
ROBERTS AND BRUNE
MISC. SUPPLIES
GHIRARDELLI ASSOCIATES
PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALI ZED S
CHRIS MI LANO
COI{TRACTUAL SERVICES
JAMES YARBOROUGH
CONTRACTIJAL SERVICES
240.00 101 6ao10 220 1312
5,971 .7E 101 37010
13,896.00 101 37010
234.00 619 64450 220 5170
n6.64 620 66700 800
25.44 496 202A1
1,607.35 101 66210 120
294-99 526 69020 260
312.84 101 68010 150 1450
50.00 101 64250 240
15,600.00 5?6 69020 210
294.00 101 68010 220 1580
273.00 101 68010 220 1580
22,271.44 620 66700 800
4,677.53 61a 64520 210
INDUSTRIAL SAFETY SUPPLY
TRAINING EXPEIISE
AI4ERICAN BUSINESS C0,ll'!UN I CAT I0N S 22559
PUBLICATIONS & AOVERTIS I }IG
21723
2'1767
21936
22138
22178
22676
22769
??793
23019
PEI'IINSULA FORD OF SAN BRUNO
CAPITAL EOUIPMENT
81403 RoPERS, AJESKI,KoHN & BE},ITLEY
PROFESSIONAL & SPECIAL IZED S
ak04 MERIT RESOURCE GROTJP
TEI"IPORARY EI.IPLOYI.4ENT SVC.
23076
1,056.00 101 64420 011
1,056.00
50.0081598 CALIFORNIA IIUNICIPAL BUSINESS TA 22506
DUES & SUSSCRIPTIONS
ACCOUNT
22894
22034
22251
CITY 0F BURLINGAI'IE!/ARRAIIT REGISTER
02/22/02
VEIIDOR DETAI Lr*r Denotes Hahd Uritten Checks
PAGE 5
AMOUNT
751 .08
208.00
548- 53
352.00
376.O2
335.09
6,350.24
600.00
910.74
266.00
1 ,201.s0
61 .00
264.00
NUMBER NAIIE
81375
81376
81377
81378
81379
81382
81383
81385
8't 386
81387
ACCOUNT
751.08 101 65500 260
81380 K.1'!9 OF CAL I FORN IA, INC.
BLDG. & GROUNDS I.IAI NT.
8',t381
COUI'ITY OF SAN II1ATEO
MI SC. SUPPLIES
JULIO MORAN
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
LARRY ANDERSON
I.I I SCE L LAT,I EOUS
CATHERI NE J.TI. NILI.IEYER
'.I
I SCELLANEOUS
ROMAN & LOUGEE, INC,
PROFESSIONAL & SPECIAL I ZED S
REIIEE RAI4SEY
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
OUICK I.IIX CONCRETE
TI I SC. SUPPLIES
S IOEI,IALK REPAIR EXPENSE
FRISCO OEL ROSARIO
COI{TRACTUAL SERVI CES
F I LTERFRESH COFFEE EXCELLENCE
BLoG, & GRoUl.loS At NT.
TRACY SIRI
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
69.34
69.33
69.33
101 66210 260
526 69020 260
527 66520 260
209
700
10't 66210 120
101 66210 219
352.00 tol 68010 220 1580
376.02 101 64350 031
335.09 529 68030 190 4200
6,350.21 326 79530 210
600.00 l0l 68010 220 1231
LYNX TECHNOLOGIES
TRAII.IING EXPEI'ISE
TRAIIIING EXPEIISE
TRAIIIING EXPENSE
20437
20501
20548
20564
20716
20801
20924
20963
21136
21140
21112
21623
21685
92
266.00 101 68010 220 '1580
1,204.50 101 68010 ?20 1347
51.00 621 64450 190
264.00 101 68010 220 1345
81388 LISA COFFARO
COIITRACTUAL SERVICES
?1713 320.00 '101 68010 220 1346
320.00
81374 VI CENTE OUINTANA
TRAI N I NG EXPENSE
175.00
81381 JONATHAN TURNER
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
21399
548.53 101 68010 120 't320
175.00 731 22525
CITY OF BURLINGAiIE
I,,lA R R A N T R E G I S T E R
02/22/02
VENDOR DETAI Lr*r Denotes fiand llritten Checks
PAGE 4
NUI.IEER NAME
81358
81359
81350
81363
8137'1
81372
17195
81361 ACCURATE I.IAILtNGS, INC
TRAFFIC CONTROL MAIERIALS
17623
81362
cI'rTAS CoRP. #464
Ui/I FORI,IS AIID EOUIPT.IENT
METRO MOEI LE COI,4MUII I CAT IONS
RADIO I1A I NT.
STANDARD REGISTER
EOUIPTIENT II1AI T.
CAL I FORN IA PNEUI'IATIC TOOL CO
MISC. SUPPLIES
STEL/ART AI'ID STEVENSON
FIRE APPARATUS MAII.IT.
ERIC GIESEKER
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
PO,JER !'ASHING SERVICE
PROFESSIONAL & SPECIAI.1ZED S
ALL FENCE COII1PANY, INC.
S IDEI'ALK REPAIR EXPENSE
BLDG, & GROUNDS IAINT.
ACC0UiIT
751.18 101 68020 140 2200
268.80 101 65200 205
3,560.28 101 64250 200
1,608.35 1O1 66210 222
69.33 ',tot 65200 203
678.00 526 69020 0'r 1
1,558.35 101 68010 120 1587
20.40 101 5/.400 120
5,',t07.50 101 61350 210
6,533.09 731 22118
50-00 620 66700 120
395.00 101 68010 220 1580
2,n8.20 101 66210 210
750.00
350.00
10't 66210 219
526 69020 190
GOETZ BROT'IERS
MISC, SUPPLIES
81366 ANG NEISPAPERS
I'tISC. SUPPLIES
81367 LIEBERT CASSIDY UHITI4ORE
PROTESSIONAL & SPECIAL I ZEO S
81364 LABOR REAOY, INC.
TEI,IPORARY EI4PLOYMENT SVC.
81565
81368 IMAGEIIAX, INC.
I.I I SCELTANEOUS
81370
16911
17402
17741
179A3
'18659
19045
19083
19095
19145
19181
19191
19564
19710
751 .18
268.80
3,560.28
r ,608.36
3,747 .32
69.33
678.00
1,558.35
20-10
5 , 107.50
6,533.09
5 0.00
396.00
2,778.20
'1,100.00
DELTA SAIETY SUPPLY CO
MISC. SUPPLIES
19827 88.26 527 66520 1?0
88.26
AI4O{JNT
3,787.32 526 69020 12O
81369 AUTO,IOTIVE EXVI ROIIIIENTAL SERV.
I.I I SC. SUPPLIES
CITY OF BURLINGAIIEUARRANT REGISTER
02t22/02
PAGE 3
81342 ANA FITZGERALD
COI,ITRACTUAL SERVICES
NUI'IBER NAI4E
81343
81347
81348
81356
160.00 101 68010 220 134?
AMOUNT
160.00
1,10'1 .85
480.00
127 .50
263.46
5,448.00
?23.12
100.00
24.06
5,771.25
8,000.00
300.00
1 ,7a2.0a
09990
81344 ALERT OOOR SERVICE, INC.
PROFESSIOIIAL & SPEC IAL I ZED S
10059
81345
BARKER BLUE REPROGRAPHICS
tI I SC. SUPPLIES
MISC. SUPPLIES
},I LI.IA BURGESS
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
8I346 COMMAIR I.IECHAI,IICAL SERVICES
PROFESS IONAT & SPECIALIZED S
480.00 619 61160 210 5160
4?7,50 101 68010 220 1344
53.17 619 61460 210
'180
263.86 101 68020 260 2300
5,448.00 621 64150 ?OO
223.12 896 20281
67a.4s 101 65200 260
100.00 101 66210 210
28.06 101 66210 1?0
5,774.25 101 30100
8,000.00 101 61560 220
300.00 '10'1 55100 291
1,7A2.0A 126 73171 210
0997'
1 1610
13641
13758
13940
11214
14411
11750
'15159
15792
16131
475.07
626.78
320 73070 120
526 69020 120
DANKA OFF ICE IMAGING CO
CI TY IIAL L IIAINTETIANCE
81349 AT&r
UT I LITY EXPENSE
8'1350 IGITI'I MARSHALL
TRAINING EXPETISE
DEI,IEY PEST CONTROL
PROFESS IONAL & SPECIALIZED S
81352 oAY-TII.|ERS, rNC.
HISC. SUPPLIES
81353 HIIIDERLI TER, DE LLAMAS
ItI SCELLANEOUS
81354 !/I NTER SHELTER
CONTRACTUAL SERVI CES
81355 PARK-GILMAN CLmrCS, rNC.
PRI SONER EXPENSE
B ISHOP COI,'PANY
TRAI II ING EXPENSE
STETSON ENG INEERS INC.
PROFESS IONAL & SPECIALIZED S
81357 SYDNEY MALKOO
SI.IALL TooLS
16347
54.11 620 66700 130
54.11
VENDOR DETAIL
'*r Denotes Hand tlritten Checks
ACCOUNT
53.17
678.45
'11773
14338
NUMBER NAI.iE
81330
81331
81332
81333
81334
81337
81318
101 66210 170
526 69020 170
527 66520 170
896 20280
PAGE 2
Atl0UNT
40,905.10
22.03
18.35
3,143.01
3,258.08
665.25
1 ,692.71
a57 .35
939.77
CITY OF BURLIIIGAHEI,IARRANI REGISTER
02/22/02
VENDOR DETAILr*r oenotes Hand Llfitten Checks
ACCOUNT
P, G. & E.
GAS & ELECTRIC
GAS & ELECTRIC
GAS & ELECTRIC
UlILITY EXPENSE
P0 INC.
EOU IPI.IENT MAINT.
CAPITAL EOUIPI,4EI,JT
COIITRACTUAL SERVICES
03054
03197
03206
03536
03547
03760
03910
09019
097?0
213,79
1 ,105,67
275,00
6.00
515.00
652.26
121.12
367.24
1 ,711.43
-2,019.60
2,000.88
10't 68010
101 68010
101 68010
101 68020
101 68010
101 68020
101 68010
731 22515
177.88
177.90
1n .88
40,371.44
PUMP REPAIR SERVICE CO.
PUI.IP EOUIPMENT REPAIR
PUTNAI4 BUI CK PONTIAC GMC
VEHICLE MAINT.
SEOUOIA ANALYTICAL LABS
I'lISCELLAi,tEOt S
MISC. SUPPLIES
SNAP ON TOOLS
SI.IALL TOOLS
JEAT BUCKS
CO}ITRACTUAL SERVICES
3,024.00 527 66520 230
22,03 101 65200 202
1,595,00
183.00
526 69020 233
527 66520 120
81335 TII'IBERL INE TREE SERVICE, INC.
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
81336
i8.35 520 66700 130
3,143.01 10'r 68020 220 2300
BURL I }IGAI,4E REC. DEPT./PETTY CASH
OFFICE EXPENSE
}1ISC. SUPPLIES
UNI TORiIS AND EOUIPMENT
EOUI PI.IEIT IIIAI NT.
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
TRAVEL & I.IEETINGS
CAPITAL EOUIPI.IEIIT
I,i I SCELLANEOIJS
110
120
140
200
220
250
800
1100
1321
1691
2200
1460
2200
l't01
665.25 101 6a010 220 13t1
0924A
81339 ocE'-BRUNIt{G, lt/C.
PROFESS IOI.IAL & SPECIALIZED S
09193
81340
101 65400 200
101 65400 800
320 80480 220
SEOUOIA UNION HIGH SCHOOL
OFT I CE EXPEIISE
857.35 101 66'100 210
939.77 101 65100 110
81311 INTERSTATE TRAFFIC
MISC, SUPPLIES
09790 939.60 320 80290 120
939.60
3,021.00
1,n8.00
NUI,|BER NATIE
81317 ALP INE A!/ARDS, INC.
MISC. SUPPLIES
81318 A-C CONTROL SERVICES
PUMP EOUI PI4ENT REPAIR
81320 BILLIS UPHOLSTERY
FIRE APPARATUS I4AINT.
41321 ED!'ARD COTIERFORD
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
81322
ACCOUNT
1,397.51 101 68010 120 1580
359.10 527 66520 230
262.38 101 6t200 203
100.00 '101 68010 220 1460
81319 AI{TECH ELEVATOR SERVICES
EOUIPI,IE}IT TlAINT.
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
201.00
229.00
101 55400 200
619 6t 460 220 5110
01052
01061
01078
01337
01756
01862
02110
02157
02171
02184
02261
02645
03002
PAGE 1
Ar40u|./ T
1 ,397 .51
359.10
430.00
262.38
100.00
?0,234.00
165,',I30.00
104.00
882.60
3,315.50
240 -43
135 .60
145.06
US FILTER OPERATII'/G SERVICES
CO}ITRACTUAL SERVICES
81324 EI.II}IG IRRIGATION PROOUCTS
MISCELLANEOUS
81325 BRADLEY D. FLOYO
TRAINIIIG EXPE}ISE
81326 !/ATER/F I NAI,JCE PETTY CASH
I,I I SCELLANEOUS
81327 GRANITE ROCK COMPANY
STREET RESURFACI NG EXPENSE
CITY OF REDI,IOOD CITY
cofir.{u r'r I cAT I oN s
CI TY HALL I.IAINTENANCE
K & I,J DISCOUNT LIGHTING & SUPP
MISC. SUPPLIES
NATIONUIDE !'IRE & BRUSH t,4FG.
EOUI P}IEIIT I.IAI NT.
64450 160
64450 220
166,130.00 527 66530 220
104.00 101 68020 192 2200
882.60 101 65100 260
3,345.50 896 20282
240.83 101 66210 226
435.50 619 64460 120
115.06 527 66520 200
6?1
621
41323
81328
81329
CITY OF BURLINGAMEt,JARRANT REGISTER
02/22t02
VENDOR DETAILr*r Denotes Hand Britten Checks
400.00
19,831,.00
02- 15- 2002
CITY OF BURLINGAMEI,'ARRANI REGISTER
FUNO RECAP - 01.02
PAGE 11
AI'lOUNT
291,56
599.67
823.14
961.14
615 .69
101.82
603.21
084.01
444,24
203.58
078.42
711.00
860.05
NA}.1E fUND
10'1
320
526
527
529
618
619
620
625
731
736
896
GENERAL FUIIO
CAPITAL I'4PROVEI,IENTS FUND
I,JATER FUND
SE}'ER FUND
GOLF CENTER FUND
SELF INSURANCE FUND
FACILITIES SERVICES FUND
EOUIPME}IT SERVICES FU}ID
INFORMATION SERVICES FUIID
FIRE MECHANIC SERVI CES FUND
TRUST AND AGENCY TUND
BURL INGAI.4E TRAIN SHUTTLE PROGRAI,4
l'JTILITY REVOLVIi/G FU}ID
78
59
16
3
2
3
6
3
8
7
TOTAL FOR APPROVAL
IiO}IORABIE I.IAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL:
$215 ,306.37
(sws.oo) tlD spc+--zq,-ffi
TIiIS IS TO
I },ICLUSIVE,
IHE AI4OI,|NT
OFFICIALS,
ACCORDATICE
CERTIFY THAT THE CLAII.IS LISTED ON PAGES I.IU}IBERED TROI.I 1 THROTJGH 11
AND/OR CLAIMS NUMBEREO IROM 81182 THROUGH 81316 INCLUSIVE,TOTATING tI,I
OF 9215 ,306.37 , IIAVE BEEN CHECKED IN DETAIL AND APPROVED BY THE PROPER
A}IO I}i I,IY OPINION REPRESENT FAIR AND JUST CHARGES AGAINST THE CITY IN
IJITH TIIEIR RESPECTIVE AI'!OI,'NTS AS II.IDICATED TIIEREON.
RESPECTTULLY SUB}IITTED,
FIiIANCE DIRECTOR
APPROVED FOR PAYMENT
DATE
OATECOUNCI L
NUMBER NAI4E
81303
81301
81305
8131',l
81312
81314
8'1315
81316
KRISTA TANANTINO
COIIIRACTUAL SERVICES
BRt,ICE BARGHAI{I]
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
PAT BELDING
COIITRACTUAL SERVICES
JITI PERTSCH
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
TAMARA YOI,NG
MI SCELLANEOUS
SUSAN PRISANT
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
CITY OF BURLINGAMEIJARRANT REGISTER
02/ 15 /02
VENDOR DETAITr*r Denotes Hand Uritten Checks
PAGE 10
AIIIOUNT
5,372.45
223.11
75.78
653.12
2,207 .?2
478.r9
240.00
300.00
250.00
300.00
3'1.86
556,50
LEGALIXK LOS ANGELES
PROFESSIONAL & SPECIAL I ZED S
CHEI,I OUIP
TRAI IIING EXPENSE
JUDY'S FLAG CI TY
MISC. SUPPLIES
81507 F I LEI'IAKER, INC.
Col,ll4UN I CAT I0llS
81308
81309
81 310
PROFESSIONAL COMMUNICATION INSTA 23485
cotrll,{uN I cAT I oN s
J. L. TAI,ITON
OFFICE EXPE}|SE
ACCOUNT
5,372.45 101 64350 210
75.78 619 64460 120 5150
2,207.22 101 65150 160
210.00 10't 65300 110
300.00 '101 68010 220 1580
250.00 101 68010 220 1580
300.00 101 58010 220 1580
300.00 101 68010 220 1580
300.00 101 58010 220 1580
31.86 526 2?500
556.50 101 6A010 220 1347
23480
23181
23182
23183
23484
23186
23447
23488
234A9
23190
23491
23192
23493
TOTAL $215 ,306.37
81305 E-SPEC
MI SCELLANEOUS
8,1313 CLYDE MOSHER
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
??3.44 526 69020 250
653.42 731 22560
178.59 101 65150 160
300.00
300.00
CITY OF EURLINGAME!,ARRANT REG I STER
02/ 15/02
VENDOR DETAI Lr*r Denotes Hand lrritteh Checks
PAGE 9
NUI.IBER NAI.IE
81288
81289
81290
81291
81292
81293
81298
81299
81300
8',I301
al294 CANON FIIIANCIAL SERVI CES, INC.
CITY IIALL MAINTENANCE
8129'
81296
81297
CODY CROSBY
COIITRACTUAT SERVICES
MISA CoNSTRUCTt0N, I l,tc.
DEPOSIT REFUNDS
I.IORTRAX
SUPPLIES
SAN FRANCISCO EXAI.IIIIER
I'II SC. SUPPLIES
THE PRACTICAL SOLUT IONS GROUP
iII SCELLANEOUS
RECALL- TOTAL INFORMATION MGI4T
COIITRACTUAL SERVICES
TOIIY CHEDID
MI SCELLANEOUS
M ISCELLANEOUS
KIIIGSTON TICKN IGHT INC
MISCELLAIIEOUS
VICTORIA SMITH
[IISCELLANEOUS
ACCOUNT
f,00.00 101 68010 220 1580
750.00 526 22501
150.98 620 15000
2,590,00 6',18 64520 038
5,448,00 621 64450 200
500.00 731 22525
CRESCO EOUI PI.iENT RENTALS
REIITS & LEASES
MISC. SUPPLIES
'157.55
53,05
101 58020 180 2200
527 66520 120
TO{ BO!'EN
MI SCELLANEOUS
23293
23335
23366
23367
23111
23136
23470
23172
?3473
?3175
23476
23177
AI4OUNT
300.00
750.00
150.98
3/r8.80
2,590.00
45.00
5,&A.OO
210,60
500,00
307.42
2,000.00
14.70
s00.00
101 36500
731 22525
SAN MATEO COUI{IY HEALTH SERVICES 23474
T1I SCELLANEOUS
LEADERSHIP STRATEGIES
IRAINING EXPENSE
307.42 614 61520 231
2,000.00 101 64120 262
44.70 5?6 22500
500.00 731 22525
20s.92 526 22500
348.80 101 64400 120
45.00 101 65300 220
360.00
375.00
23328
rJ5.00
8'1302 scoTT PIAZZA
I.IISCELLANEOUS
23478 205.9?
CITY OT BURLINGAMEI,IARRANT REGTSTER
02/15102
PAGE 8
AI.4OUNT
300.00
340.00
8,744.00
147.00
126.00
350.00
350.00
550.00
350.00
3,042,71
50,000.00
49.69
81?72 ARCH I/IRELESS
COMMUI] I CATIONS
PAUL KAPUNIAI III
DEPOSIT REFUNDS
J.TI. RIDGUAY CO.
CAPITAL EOUIPiIENT
PARKI NG COI.IPANY OF AI.4ERICA
CO}ITRACTUAL SERVICES
NUMEER NAME
81273
81?71
al275
81276
81277
81279
VENOOR DETAI L.*, Dehotes Hand !/ritten Checks
22089
ACCqJNT
312.95 't01 65300 160
300.00 731 22520
310.00 529 68030 800 1200
8,744,00 736 64571 220
147.00 10't 68010 220 ,1580
126.00 101 68010 220 1580
3t0.00 101 68010 220 ,t580
350,00 101 68010 220 1580
400.00 101 68010 220 1580
350.00 101 68010 220 1580
350.00 lot 68010 220 1580
3,012,74 101 65100 220
50,000.00 320 76010 120
19.69 529 6a030 200 2200
175.00 101 64420 210
??253
22115
22500
22769
?2793
22A37
22834
22811
22814
22847
22a65
22895
23015
231s6
CHRIS iII LANO
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
JAHES YARBOROUGH
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
81278 ttErL stltTlt
COIITRACTUAT SERVICES
KEN DIEKROEGER
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
81280 ALAII PATRICK
COIITRACTUAL SERVICES
81281 JERRY KEOHANE
CONIRACTUAL SERVICES
41282 OAVE I.IICHAELIS
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
81283 HEI]LETT PACKARD CO.
CONTRACTUAI SERVICES
81284 MARSTEN SIREET PARTNERS
Il I SC. SUPPLIES
81285 MEEHAN BATTERY
EAUIPI.IENT I'IAINT.
81286 Tr-c ADr.t I ISTRATORS
PROFESSTONAL & SPECIAL IZED S
81?A7 DANIEL SCHOEIITHALER
DEPOSIT REFUNDS
23?7a
300.00 731 22520
300.00
312.95
400.00
175.00
NUI.IBER IIA}'IE
81260
81261
41262
81263
81264
81268
81269
DU-ALL SAfETY
TRAI}II NG EXPE',ISE
TRAIN I NG EXP€IISE
TRAI N I NG EXPENSE
21399
21125
21126
2154a
21613
INC.21634
21717
21814
22006
22a34
101 66210 260
526 69020 260
527 66520 260
PAGE 7
AIIOUt,J T
't33.00
300.00
350.00
350.00
1 ,258.75
275 .00
1,208.22
8.63
1 ,362.50
2 ,375 .40
843.44
2,483.00
CITY OF EURLINGAI'IEI.IARRANT REGISTER
02/15/OZ
VENDOR OETAIL
'*' Denotes Hand LJritten Checks
41259 JONATHAN TURNER
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
ACCoU T
135.00 101 68010 220 1580
300.00 101 680'10 220 1580
350.00 101 68010 220 1580
350.00 101 68010 220 1580
ROBERT SINCLAIR
CONIRACTUAL SERVICES
RICK KALEHENN
COIITRACTUAL SERVICES
8I LL LINDSELL
CONTRAC]UAL SERVICES
FI LTERFRESH COFIEE EXCELLE},ICE
BLDG. & GROUNOS I,4A I NT.
SERVI CES,
EOUI PHEI{T
EOU I PI.IE },I T
EOU I PI.,IE II T
EOUI PMENT
EOUI PMENT
27s.00 621 64450 190
ARAI'{ARK IJN I FORI'I
UNI FORI.IS AND
UIi I FORI{S AND
u[I FOR]|S A[0
uNt toRr/rs ANo
UII I TORMS AI.JD
101
526
527
619
6?0
66240
69020
66520
61160
66700
503.51
377.62
377.62
395.86
323,10
357.75
88.32
43.17
140
140
'140
140
140
81266 CINGULAR !/tREIESS
CoMMU I CAT I 0|t S
81267 NETUORK TELECOI1PUTING
}IISC. SUPPLIES
COIIIRACTUAL SERVICES
58.63 526 69020 160
2
250
50
00
101 6E010 120 1460
320 80430 220
GII1AC PAYIIENT PROCESSIIIG CENTER
CAPI TAL EOUIPiIENT
E1270 Ai{ERICAN VA},I EOUIP}4EI.JT INC
CAPITAL EOUIPI.IENT
IEDA
PROfESS IONAL & SPECIALIZED S 2,375,40 101 64120 210
813.44
'01
66't00 800
2,483.00 520 66700 800
JI}I STOCKI.'ELL
CO}ITRACTUAL SERVICES
2204A 400.00 101 68010 220 1580
1+00,00
21623
81265
21981
CITY OT BURLIIIGAMEI,iARRANT REGISTER
02/15/02
VENOOR OETAI L
'*r Denotes Hand Utitten Checks
ACCOUNT
PAGE 6
AMOUNT
18,130.00
400.00
80.00
648.26
275 .00
939.91
3,886.80
250.00
526.24
176.00
417.00
2,181.00
175.00
NUIIiBER IIAME
81244
81249
81254
81255
ALL FEIICE COMPAiIY,
MISC. SUPPLIES
RENTS & LEASES
RENTS & TEASES
81215 VERDIS EALDRIDGE
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
81216 ART D0LL0SS0
CONTRACIUAL SERVICES
OELTA SAFETY SUPPLY CO
MISC. SUPPLIES
400.00
80.00 101 680',t0 220 1460
215.00 101 66100 210
275.00 731 22525
959.91 620 15000
3,886.80 101 65100 800
250.00 320 80510 220
526.24 621 64450 200
176.00 101 68010 220 1580
101 66210
5?6 69020
5?7 56520
161.00
183.00
70.00
INC.19710
19756
19827
199?4
19990
20055
20060
20216
20561
20706
20783
20801
?0
80
80
6,043.31
6,043.33
6,043.33
101 680't0 220 1580
19814
81247 AI{ENICAN SOCIETY OT CIVIL ENGINE 19821
DUES & SUBSCRIPTIO}IS
81248
81250 UTILITY AERIAL INC
SUPPLIES
8',I251 KUSTOT'I SIGNALS, INC.
CAPITAL EOUIPI'IENT
81253
81252 PEN IIISUTA CORRIDOR JOINT
COiITRACTUAI. SERVICES
ED NEALE CONSTRUCTION
I.I I S CE I. LAN EOU S
GE CAPI TAL
CITY HALL MAIIITENANCE
JULIO MORAN
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
Itl I CRO I,JAREHOUSE
OIT I CE EXPENSE
cot'I.,ruN I cAT r 0N s
COMI4UNICAT IOIIS
81256 IBS BUI LO I IIG ITAINTENANCE CO.
CONIRACTUAL SERVICES
81257 CATHER I IIE J.M, NILMEYER
MI SCELLANEOUS
2,'181.00 619 64460 220 5',t80
175.00 731 22525
81258 FRANCOTYP. POSTAT IA, INC.
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
20967
94.7? 101 65100 220
90.7?
648.26 527 66520 120
215.00
'101 64200 110
527 66120 160
621 64450 160
a
CITY OF BURLINGAMEt,JARRANI REGISTER
02t 15 /0?
VENDOR OETAI Lr*' Denotes Hand Hritten Checks
PAGE 5
AMOUNT
400.00
5,000.00
71.10
11,674.07
813.60
120.00
62.89
375.00
39.37
910.21
800.00
52.80
3,600.00
198.00
NUMEER NAI'IE
81228
81229
81230
81231
81234
81235
81236
81218
81240
81241
41242
18565
81?32 LABOR READY, INC.
TEITPORARY EI.,IPLOYMEIIT SVC.
14659
81233
NICK FLERES
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
HOSPI TAL CONSORT IUI,4 EDUCATION
TRAI II I NG EXPENSE
LES VOGEL DODGE
SUPPI.IES
cou TY 0t SAll ilATEo
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
L I I'IDA LENORE
COI/TRACTUAL SERVI CES
CARPENIER RIGGI}IG &
SUPPL IES
CALIFOR}IIA CITIES S8 90 SERVICE
DUES & SUBSCRIPTTONS
THE PERSONAL TOUCH
HISCELLANEOUS EXPEXSE
!/I LSEY & HAI,4
PROFESS IONAL & SPECIALIZED S
ERIC GIESEKER
COIITRACTUAL SERVICES
ACCOUNT
400.00 '101 68010 220 '1580
5,000.00 't01 65200 260
71.10 620 15000
11 ,671.07 101 64540 220
813.60 526 69020 011
120.00 101 68010 220 1460
62.89 620 15000
375.00 101 64250 210
39.37
'?6
69020 160
VERIZON I.IIRELESS UESSAGING SERVI 18763
COMI4UN I CATIONS
81237 SAII I1ATEO RENTALS
8LDG. & GROI'NDS }IAINT.
EOUI PI,IENT I.IAI NI.
189.00
751.21
101 68020 190 2200
526 69020 200
18191
18387
18478
18747
14753
18767
18956
19083
19284
19397
19491
MIKE HURLEY
CO}ITRACTUAL SERVICES
81239 ANG NEL/SPAPERS
PUBL I CAT IONS & ADVERTISING
800.00 101 68010 220 1580
52.80 101 64200 150
566-69 101 64560 290
3,600.00 320 78290 210
198.00 101 68010 220 1580
41243 BAY AREA BUSINESS CARDS INC
OFFICE EXPENSE
19588 73.62 101 65200 110
73.62
566.69
1a729
CITY OF BURLINGAI.,IE!,ARRAI.IT REGISTER
02/ 15 t02
VENDOR DETAILr*r Denotes Hand Lrritten Checks
526 69020 230
527 66520 230
PAGE 4
2,381.50
2,970.00
4,073.36
161,11
6,537 .60
4?1,',t4
93.84
1,800.00
?66.47
22.00
169.11
26.71
500.00
ACCOUNT
81211 ELECTRO.T.IOTION INCORPORATEO
PUI.IP EOUIPI.IENT REPAIR
PUI.IP EOIJIPI.IENT REPAI R
41215 8AY AREA AIR OUALITY
OIHER AGEIICY COIITRIBUTIONS
NUIIIBER NAME
81216
81217
41214
81221
81222
81223
81221
41225
81226
ALL CI TY i1ANAGE}IEXT
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
2,970.00 521 66530 270
4,073.36 101 65100 220
14007
14358
15595
15739
16015
16351
16190
16629
17128
1rJ88
17495
17620
101
101
619
620
620
1 ,190.75
1 ,190.75
I1I LLBRAE LOCK SHOP
OFF ICE EXPE}ISE
MISC. SUPPLIES
t4tsc, suPPLtEs
SUPPLIES
EOUI PMENT l,lAI NT,
3.79
36.48
5.39
64,62
52,83
65100 110
55400 't20
64460 120
15000
66700 200
VALLEY OIL CO.
SUPPLIES
81219 UPTI}iE RESOURCES
OFFICE EXPEI.ISE
81220 DA]APRINT CORPORAT IO}I
PROTESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S
6,537.60 620 15000
421.14 101 64400 110
93.84 320 78290 210
1,800.00 101 58010 220 1346
266.17 527 66520 120
?2,00 101 68020 120 2200
169.11 620 1s000
26.71 101 6/.250 110
500.00 101 64420 ?40
LINDA HOECK
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
I,iUN I CIPAL I.IAI IITENANCE
I'I I SC. SUPPLIES
GOLDEI.I NURSERY
14I SC. SUPPLIES
SUPERIOR TRANSI{ I SS I OI'I S IIIC
SUPPL IES
STATOARD REGISTER
OFFICE EXPENSE
PERS PUBLIC AGENCY COAL I T ION
DUES & SIJBSCRIPTIONS
81227 T00Ls EXPRESS
t'tI SC. SUPPLIES 164.86 1O1 662tt0 120
161.A6
AI.IO.JNT
18027
i
CITY OF BURLINGAMEI.IARRANT REGISTER
02/15t02
VENDOR DETAI L!*r Denotes Hand llritten Checks
292.?8
225 .28
39.55
744.16
1?1 .21
36.98
120
130
190
219
120
130
120
130
120
1?0
1200
192 2200
z2?
't20
150
120
130
120 5180
PAGE 3
AMOUNT
22.63
60.02
297 .00
3,586.95
2,116.43
717.36
1,500.96
624.50
210.40
STERICYCLE, INC.
SUPPL tES
81206 A8A6 - LIAEILITY
CLAII.IS PAYTIENTS
NUMBER NAI,iE
81204
a1205
81207
81208
81210
RD OFFICE SOLUTIONS
OFIICE EXPENSE
09213
09139
09518
09560
09670
10077
101
101
'101
10'l
320
527
527
529
619
68020
68020
68020
&210
7&90
69020
66520
66520
68030
64460
ACC0UIT
22.63 527 6n520 110
60.02 101 65200 112
297.00 618 64520 601
SAN I.IATEO LAIIN MOI,]ER SI]OP
BLD6. & GROUIIDS I.{AI NT,
EOUIPMENT iIAINT.
CAPITAL EOUIPI,IENT
239,51
449,58
2,897 .
101 68020 190 2200
101 68020 200 2200
101 68020 800 2300
ORCHARO SUPPLY HAROL/ARE
MISC. SUPPLIES
SI.4ALL TOOLS
BLDG. & GROI'NDS I4AINT.
SIDE!/ALK REPAIR EXPE}ISE
11I SC. SUPPLIES
SI.IALL T@LS
t.II SC. SUPPLIES
S}IALL TOOLS
MISC. SUPPLIES
HISC. SUPPLIES
639 .26
338.22
2200
2200
220093.A4
62.76
158.98
274.49
63,55
68.17
226.00
187.56
81209 3 T EOUIP}IENT CO.
I.I I SC. SUPPLIES 747.36 527 66520 120
10557
11101
81212 IDEAL RESTORATIVE ORYING, INC, 11352
PROFESSIONAL & SPECIALIZED S
CAL.STEAT1
I.I I SCELLANEOI'S
TRAFFIC CONTROL I'IATERIALS
MISC. SUPPLIES
S},IALL To0LS
}IISC. SUPPLIES
SMATL T@LS
I't I SC, SUPPLIES
'101
101
526
526
527
527
619
68020
&210
69020
69020
66520
66520
61160
628.50 320 79020 210
210,10 61a 64520 210
81213 ELECTRoNIC IltNoVATIot'ts, INC.
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
13615 700.00 101 65100 220
700.00
41211 MEYERS, llAVE, RIBACK, SILVER
PROTSSS IONAL & SPECIALIZED S
I
CTTY OF BURLI}IGAI4EI,IARRANT REGISTER
02/ 15 t02
NUMBER I,IAI,4E
81191
81192 NATIONIJIDE !/IRE & BRUSH I.TG.
EAUIPI.IENT I.IAI NT.
81193 DAVE NIGEL
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
81195 1,. u. & t.
GAS & ELECTRIC
81',I96 PACITIC BELL
UTI LITY EXPENSE
81197
81198 PUI4P REPAI R SERVICE CO.
PUI,IP EOt',IPI,{ENT REPAIR
81199 SEOUOIA ANALYTICAL LABS
11I SCELLAIIEOUS
81200 sYllPRO, INC.
EOUI PiiE}IT I,IAI NT.
81201 T II,4BERL I NE TREE SERVICE, INC.
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
81202
MI LLBRAE LUMBER CO.
I.I I SC. SUPPLIES
BLDG. & GROUNDS I.IAI NT.
SIOE!/ALK REPAIR EXPENSE
MI SC. SUPPLIES
t,II SC. SUPPLIES
66210 1
58020 1
66210 2
69020 1
66520 1
20
90
19
20
20
02898
03002
0304'l
03054
03080
03106
03197
03536
03705
03750
03821
55.61
781.17
316.51
15.09
18.90
78.05
111.65
325.37
-248.70
101
10'1
101
526
527
ACCOTJNT
PAGE 2
AMOUNT
1,217.31
72-53
100.00
637 -3?
51.94
7,850.05
266.37
3,021.00
2,190.00
2, 165 .00
2,357 .28
125.00
2200
72,53 101 652'10 200
300.00 '101 68010 220 1580
617.32 320 7a490 120
54.94 526 69020 170
7,860.05 896 20281
101 65200 127
101 65200 203
620'15000
62' 65213 203
U S POSTAL SERVICE
OTF I CE EXPENSE
3,021.00 527 66520 230
2,190.00 526 69020 233
2,165.00 10't 64250 200
2,357.2A 101 68020 220 2300
125.00 621 6t 150 110
146
581
892
11
03
72
81203 LYI]GSO GARDEN MATERIALS
SIDEL'ALK REPAIR EXPENSE
I'I I SC. SUPPLIES
I'IISC. SUPPLIES
09143
101 66210 219
320 78490 !20
526 69020 120
2,619.a9
03019
VENOOR DETAILrrr Denotes lland U.itten Checks
PAITERSOII PARTS, I IIC
T I RE.. SUPPL I ES
FIRE APPARATUS I'IAI NT.
SUPPI"IES
FIRE APPARATUS I.IAI NT.
81194 PACI FIC NURSERIES
MISC, SUPPLIES
r'\
IIUIiIBER NAME
8'I'I82
81183
81 184
81185
81189
81190
526 69020 't20
526 69020 130
527 66s20 120
PAGE 1
AII1OUNT
259,17
208. 10
?,257,01
201 .74
53.42
952.02
2,400.00
629.89
611.10
CI TY OF BURLINGAII{EIIARRA}'IT REGISTER
0z/ 15/02
VENOOR DETAILr*, Denotes liard llritten checks
ACC0U T
ACE HARDL/ARE
OFTICE EXPENSE
I.I I SC. SUPPLIES
si.{ALt- TooLs
BLDG. & GROUNOS I.IAI NT.
VEHICLE MAINl.
FIRE APPARATUS I'IAI IIT.
I.I I SC. SUPPLIES
S ALL IOOTS
t.I I SC. SUPPLIES
101
101
101
101
101
'101
01027
01507
020?7
02157
02248
02665
02755
02819
a1 .27
61 ,76
132.50
1 ,876.05
15.98
44.33
45.12
65200 201
65?00 202
65200 203
15000
66700 120
66700 ?60
65213 203
s -34
73.20
55.41
4.37
15.32
7.33
34.38
2.92
60.90
60
21
18
12
65100 110
65400 120
66210 130
65200 190
65200 202
65200 203
HARBOR SAND & GRAVEL
}1I SC. SUPPLIES
BURLINGAI.IE AUTO SUPPLY
GAS, OIL & GREASE
VETIICLE UAIIJT.
FIRE APPARATUS iIA I I.IT.
SUPPL IES
MISC, SUPPLIES
TRAI N I NG EXPENSE
FIRE APPARATUS I.IAINT.
LAUSON PR@UCTS, INC.
I.IISC. SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
}iANPOLIER
TEI'IPORARY EI'IPLOYMENT SVC,
208.10 101 66210 120
10't
10'l
101
620
620
620
625
L. N. CURTIS & SONS
UNI FORMS AND EOUIPMENT
81 186 EI'IIIG IRRIGATIO}I PR@UCTS
}II SCELLA}IEOUS
8,I187 9.!i. GRAINGER, INC.
CAPITAL EOUIPt{EilT
EOUI PiIENT I.,IAI NT.
I,i I SC. SUPPLIES
81I88 KAVANAGII ENGINEERING
PROFESSIONAL & SPECIAL IZED S
201.71 101 55200 140
53.12 101 68020 192 2ZO0
2,400.00 320 80560 210
698
226
246
101 66210 120
620 15000
'101 680'10 800 1101
526 69020 200
619 64460 120 5180
614.10 101 65300 011
I
01313
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION LINAPPROVED MINUTES
501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, CA
Monday, March lI,2O02
Council Chambers
I. CALL TO ORDER Chairman Vistica called the March ll,2002,regular meeting ofthe Planning
Commission to order at 7:05 p.m.
il. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Auran, Boju6s, Keighran, Keele, Osterling and
Vistica
Absent: Commissioner Brownrigg (arrived at8:12 p.m.)
StaffPresent: City Planner, Margmet Monroe; Planner, Ruben Hurin; City
Attorney, Larry Anderson; City Engineer, Syed Murtuza
III. MINUTES The page 7, parugraphs 7 and 8 of the minutes of the February 25, 2002
Planning Commission meeti4.g were anoended to read:
"Graphic Arts and Design Retail businesses and Health and Beauty Spa
definition//class size
Chairman Vistica moved to recommend the zoning code amendment to City
Council, to add the definition of Graphic Arts and Design Retail business
which would be a new conditional use in Subarea B an prohibited in Subarea
A and;to dl,e+v establish a new personal service use, Health and Beauty Sp4
as a pedestrian oriented use below the first floor only in Subarea A of the
Burlingame Avenue commercial area, and when the business has substantial
retail taxable sales and a business need for group instruction require an
accompanying conditional use permit for a group instruction."
The February 19, 2A02 Special Planning Commission meeting minutes were
approved as mailed. The minutes of the February 23, 2002 Joint City
Council/Planning Commissioa meeting vraedistributed at the meeting and
will be included for action at the March 25,2002, Commission meeting.
IV APPROVAL OF AGENDA CP Monroe noted that the Commissioners had received an amended agenda
with a fourth Planners Report on discussion of dif[erent types of Planning
approvals added. Chairman Vistica indicated that C. Brownrigg was
unavoidably detained an wished to participate in the discussion/action of item
4, 1204 Cabrillo Avenue, so he set that item for 8 : I 5 p.m. Other items on the
agenda would be followed in order until 8:15 p.m.
Jerry Deal, 1228 Paloma Avenue spoke noting that he felt that
Commissioners Stan Vistica and AnnKeightan deserved to be reappointed to
the commission; they had eamed that right by virtue of their experience and
creativity. He served I I years on the commission and the best 3 years was
the commission on which Stan and Ann sat; they should be allowed to
V. FROMTHEFLOOR
City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes March I I 2002
continue "to do good for the city''. There were no other comments from the
floor.
YI. STT]DY ITEMS
1440 CIIAPIN A\TENUE #IOO _ ZONED C-1, SUBAREA 81 _ APPLICATION FOR CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT FOR A REAL ESTATE USE (ALLAN BERNARDI, REA4AX DOLPHIN REAL ESTATE,
APPLICANT; CORTINA INVESTMENTS LM., PROPERTY OWNER) PROJECT PLANNER: RUBEN
HURIN
Planner Hurin presented a summary of the staffreport. Commissioners had the following questions and
comments:
' Can applicant clariffthe maximum number of independent contractors who will be onthe site at anyone
time;
' Application notes that-there will be no increase in the number of clients in 5 years, please clarifu;. Tenant list shows a REiIVIAX office in Suite 360. Will this offrce be moving to Suite 100 or is the
proposed ofEce a supplement to the existing office? If supplement, now will the two work together?
' Charles Schwab was originally approved for 17 employees in Suites 100 and 101, now their space is
being reduced by half. Will the number of employees in Suite 101 (Charles Schwab) decrease by
moving out of Suite 100?
' Noted that there are no regularly scheduled meetings. Can applicant provide a count of the number of
group meetings held in the past 6 months in their current office.
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 7:15 p.m.
VII. ACTION ITEMS
CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEMS ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR ARE CINSIDERED To BE RIUTINE. THEY ARE
ACTED ON SIMULTANEOUSLY WLESS SEPARATE DISCUSSION AND/ORACTION IS REQUESTED BY THE APPLICANT,
A MEMBER OF THE PUPLIC ORA COMMISSIONER PNOR TO THE TIME THE COMMISSION VOTES ON THE MOTION
TO ADOPT.
Chairman Vistica asked if anyone in the audience or on the Commission wished to call any item off the
consent calendar. There were no requests.
2a. 1236 PALOMA AYENUE _ ZONED R.l _ APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW AND SPECIAL
PERMIT FOR DECLINING HEIGHT ENVELOPE FOR A FIRST AND SECOND STORY ADDITION
(JERRY DEAL, JD & ASSOCIATES, APPLICANT AND DESIGNER; ASHLEY MCNEELY AND
ELISA ODABASHIAN, PROPERTY OWNERS (76 NONCED) PROJECT PLANNER: CATHERINE
KEYLON
1310 BT RLTNGAME AVENUE - ZONED C-1, SUBAREA A - APPLICATION FOR CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT AMENDMENT TO EXTEND TTIE HOURS OF OPERATION AND INCREASE THE
NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES (ZUBEYIR DUYGU, STELLA MIA RESTAURANT, APPLICANT;
GENSLER FAMILY. PROPERTY OWNER) ( NOTICED) PROJECT PLANNER: RUBEN HURIN
1
2
2b.
3.
4.
City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes March I I 2002
C. Keighran moved approval of the consent calendm based on the facts in the stalf reports, commissioners
cornments and the findings in the staffreports with recommended conditions in the staff reports and each by
resolution. The motion was seconded by C. Boju6s. Chair called for a voice vote on the motion and it
passed 6-0-1 (C. Brownrigg absent). Appeal procedures were advised.
VIII. REGULAR ACTION ITEM
I2O4 CABRILLO AVENUE - ZONED R.l _ APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW AMENDMENT
AND SPECIAL PERMIT FOR HEIGHT AND DECLINING HEIGHT ENVELOPE FOR A NEW TWO-
STORY HOUSE WITH A DETACHED GARAGE (MIKE WILSON, APPLICANT AND PROPERTY
OWNER; JAMES CHU, CHU DESIGN & ENGR., INC., DESIGNER) (6I NOTICED) PROJECT
PLANNER: CATHERINE KEYLON
Chairman Vistica noted that this item had been moved on the agenda and would be heard at 8:15 p.m.
834 WALNUT AVENIJE - ZONED R.l _ APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW AND SPECIAL
PERMIT FOR DECLINING HEIGHT ENVELOPE FOR A SECOND STORY ADDITION (SCOTT AND
LESLIE WITH, APPLICANTS AND PROPERTY OWNERS, JERRY DEAL, JD & ASSOCIATES,
DESIGMR) (T l NOTICED)IROIECT PLANI\IER: RIJBETLHIJRIN
Reference staff report,3.ll.02, with attachments. Planner Hurin presented the report, reviewed criteria and
staff comments. Six conditions were suggested for consideration.
Chairman Vistica opened the public hearing. Jerry Deal, designer, 1228 Paloma Avenue and Scott With,
property owner, 834 Walnut Avenue, were available to answer questions. The applicant noted that the
Commission's concerns expressed at the last review had been addressed, more trees were added on site and a
roof plan was provided along with documentation. There were no further comments and the public hearing
was closed.
C. Osterling noted that he had a telephone conversation with the applicant regarding the trees and discussed
the changes to the plans. He then moved to approve the application, by resolution, with the following
conditions: 1) that the,project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted tottre Planning Departnent date
stamped February 28,2002, sheets 1, 5, and 7 anddate stamped February 8,2002, sheet 2 through4, and 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, which would include adding or
enlarging a dormer(s), moving or changing windows and architectural features or changing the roofheight or
pitch, shall be subject to design review; 3) that the conditions ofthe City Engineer's February 4,2002,memo
shall be met; 4) that three Pittosporum undulatum (Victorian Box) (5-gallon container size) shall be planted at
the rear of the site and one landscape tree shall be planted in the front yard and one in the rear year as shown
on the Site Plan (Sheet l), date stamped February 28,2002; the new trees to be planted in the front and year
yards shall be chosen from the offrcial street tree list; 5) that the project shall comply with the Construction
and and meet recycling requirements; any partial or full demolition of a structure, interior or exterior, shall
require a demolition permit; and and meet recycling requirements; any partial or full demolition of a structure,
interior or exterior, shall require a demolition permit; and 6) that the project shall meet all the requirements of
the Califomia Building Code and California Fire Code, 1998 edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame.
The motion was seconded by C. Boju6s.
aJ
City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes March 11 2002
Chairman Vistica called for a voice vote on the motion to approve. The motion passed on a 6-0-1 (C.
Brownrigg absent). Appeal procedures were advised. This item concluded at 7:20 p.m.
5. 1433 BERNAL A\TENUE _ ZONED R.l _ APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW AMENDMENT FOR
A NEW TWO-STORY SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING AND DETACHED GARAGE (CHI-HWA SIIAO,
APPLICANT AND PROPERTY OWNER; JAMES CHU, CHU DESIGN & ENGR. NC., DESIGNER)
TNOTICED) PROJECT PLANNER: ERTKA LEWIT
Reference staff report , 3 .ll .02, with attachments. CP Monroe presented the report, reviewed criteria and
staff comments. Five conditions were suggested for consideration. Commission asked would there be safety
hazard if water flowed at full capacity in the smooth concrete trench along the right side of the property; CE
Murtuza noted that there have been no problems reported with water capacity in similar trenches throughout
the city. Commissioner asked if, because the house was designed within inches of the maximum height
allowed, it would be appropriate to add a condition to surveythe elevation of the first floor; CBO Cullum
suggested that the foundation and roof ridge be surveyed, can add this as a condition. There were no further
questions of staff.
Chairman Vistica opened the public hearing. James Chu, designer, 39 W. 43'd Avenue, San Mateo, was
available to answer questions. He noted that the proposed changes are an improvement to this project,
revised the floor plan layout and added more exterior details. Commission noted that the landscape plan
calls for Japanese boxwood along the right side of the property and three new Island Date palm trees at the
right rear corner of the property, suggest replacing palm trees with trees from the city's official tree list,
Japanese boxwood should be replaced with the same species as the existing shrubs along the right side
property line; designer noted that this landscape plan was previously approved and no changes are proposed,
but noted that these changes could be made; Commission asked why the entry porch was reduced in width
from 5' to 4' wide; designer noted that a narrower width was more in proportion with the front of the house.
There were no further comments and the public hearing was closed.
C. Keighran moved to approve the application, by resolution, with the following amended conditions, noting
that this is an improvement to the original design, the roof over the front bay window was changed from
composition shingle to copper, and arched vents and a lead glass window were added: l) that the project
shall be built as shown on the revised plans submitted to the Planning Departrnent date stamped February25,
2002, sheets Al through ,A.3, and the site and landscape plan submitted to the Planning Deparhnent and date
stamped May 22,2001, sheet Al, 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 basement, 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; 3) that the height
of the foundation and roof ridge shall be surveyed by a licensed surveyor and shall be reported to the Chief
Building Official before a foundation and framing inspections are completed; ifthe height ofthe foundation
and/or the roof ridge is not consistent with the approved plans, the applicant shall correct the height to
comply or immediately stop all work on the site and apply for a design review amendment; 4) that the three
island date palm trees at the rear of the property shall be replaced with 3 tree species selected from the city's
offrcial tree list, and that the Japanese boxwood shrubs along the right side ofthe house shall be replaced
with the same species as the existing shrub's along the right side property line; 5) that the conditions ofthe
City Engineer's, Fire Marshal's, Chief Building Official's March 19, 2001, memos and the Recycling
Specialist's February 25,2002 memo shall be met; 6) that the project shall comply with the proposed
demolition and construction recycling ordinance recently approved by the City Council; and 7) that the
4
6,
City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes March 11 2002
project shall meet all the requirements of the Califomia Building Code and California Fire Code, 1998
edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame. The motion was seconded by C. Auran.
Comment on the motion: this is a big improvement over the original design, noted a mistake in the staff
report, table indicates that the height will be 29'-11", plans show 29'-3" from average top of curb, height
should be confirmed and corrected.
Chairman Vistica called for a voice vote on the motion to approve. The motion passed on a 6-0-l (C.
Brownrigg absent). Appeal procedures were advised. This item concluded at 7:30 p.m.
3O3O HILLSIDE DRIVE - ZOIYED R.l _ APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW, HILLSIDE AREA
CONSTRUCTION PERMIT AND SPECIAL PERMIT FOR A NEW, TWO-STORY SINGLE FAMILY
DWELLING WITH AN ATTACHED GARAGE (KENNETH ROBY, ALADDIN HOMES, APPLICANT;
DAWOOD AND BATOUL JAMSHIDNEHAD, PROPERTY OWNERS ; REZA NOROUZI, MEMARIE
ASSOCIATES. DESI ) (34 NOTICED) PROJECT PLANNER: CATHERINE KEYLON
, Reference staff report , 3 .ll .02, with attachmerts. CP Monroe presented the report, reviewed crited,a and
staffcomments. Six conditions were suggested for consideration. Commissioner noted that the site drops
approximately 40' from the street to the building site a33Yo grade on the driveway and is concerned that it
cannot be used by emergency vehicles, can this be corrected? CE Murtuza noted that it would involve
extensive re-grading of the site and that it could affect adjacent parcels; CP Monroe noted that this is an
existing legal lot and it is not required that the slope of the driveway be made conforming unless more lots
are created; owners are aware of access problem.
Chairman Vistica opened the public hearing. Goulam Mazad,architect, noted that improvements have been
made, reduced the height of the entry porch from 21' to I 1'-Z",the site is 55' below the street level, will
only see part of the house from Hillside Drive, roof will be screened by large trees, reduced the plate height
from 12' to 10' and the overall height from 28'-9" to 24'-2" from existing adjacent grade, and two guest
parking spaces were added. Commission noted that before there were avariety of designs inthe fagade, all
those details have now been lost, all see now is stucco with lots of windows, no design; the architect noted
that there is no specific style in the neighborhood, tried to match style of existing houses in the
neighborhood, reduced the size of house from 8,000 SF to 5,600 SF; Commission asked what type of
;windows areproposed; the architectnotedlhat double-glazedwindows, havenotpicked specific s'ylcr;these
are not construction plans, some details are not provided on plans; Commission noted that even though the
house will not be visible from the street, design review still looks at the overall design.
Further discussion: Commission asked where was the 500 SF eliminated when FAR reduced from 6,300 SF
to 5,700 SF; the architect noted that the overall room sizes were reduced; concerned with the window trim,
foam stucco molding and wood trim shown on the plans, drawings do not clearly show what window trim is
intended; architect noted that the owner plans on using traditional wood stucco mold, but it is not drawn as
such on the plans; concerned with the flat roof at the middle of the house, there will be leaves falling on the
roof, creates a potential for leaking, have you tried to pitch the entire roof? The architect noted that an effort
was made to keep the height of the structure down, which required a flat roof; Commission noted that the
roof will be seen as you approach the house and will clearly be seen from across the canyon; architect
pointed out that a large existing tree will screen the view to the house from the street, a perspective drawing
was shown to all Commissioners.
5
City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes March I I 2002
Earl Dilley, 3028 Hillside Drive, originally bought property and later subdivided it into three lots, is
concerned with the entry, suggested that the driveway be widened, never understood what happened with the
roadway extension at Adeline Drive, this area could be developed with more houses, owner gave land to the
city, city didn't think it was appropriate to build more houses there; CE Murtuza noted that there are no plans
for street improvements in this area. There were no further comments and the public hearing was closed.
Commission discussion: visited the site and spoke to the neighbors that live directly above this site, discussed
the story poles, previously objected the project, but after seeing the story poles they are pleased with this
proposal because the ridge will be below their line of sight, neighbors are very happy with the removal of
some large trees, will now provide a better view, this is a good example of design review in action, tumed a
project that was out of scale with the neighborhood into a good project.
C. Osterling moved to approve the application, by resolution, with the following amended conditions: l) that
the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Departrnent date stamped February
15,2002, sheets A-0 through A-8, C- I through C-2, andl- I , site plan, floor plans and building elevations; 2)
that traditional wood stucco mold shall be used for window trim on all windows; 3) that the property owner
shall be responsible for reconstructing the driveway access from the street to this site and in such a maruter
that access to adjacent properties served by the easement remains viable; this improvements shall be installed
prior to scheduling final building inspection; 4) that the applicant shall apply for and receive tee removal
permits for all trees noted for removal on the plans dated February 15,2002;a tree and root protection plan
shall be submitted as part of the building permit application and shall be reviewed and approved by the City
Arborist; tree and root protection devices shall be installed and inspected by the City Arborist prior issuance
of a demotion permit and shall remain in place during construction; 5) that any increase to the habitable
basement floor area and any changes to the size or envelope ofthe first or second floors, whichwould include
expanding the footprint or floor area of the structure, repiacing or relocating a window (s), adding a dormer
(s) or changing the roof height or pitch, shall be subject to design review; 6) that the conditions of City
Engineer's February 19,2002,Ju1y23,2001 and April4,200l memo, the Fire Marshal's February lg,2OO2,
March 30, 2001 memo, the Recycling Specialist's February l9,2002,March 28,2001 and the CityArborist's
July 10, 2001 memos shall be met; andT) that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California
Building and Fire Codes, 1998 edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame. The motion was seconded by
C. Auran. G I
Comment on the motion: agree that the project has come a long way, house is still large but more realistic for
the site, is modest in details but would suggest that traditional wood stucco mold be used and appropriately
scaled, could have built a larger house allowed by FAR, house does not intrude on views; the design can be
improved, design review consultant stated that the details were lost in the redesign to reduce the size, should
add more details, needs fine-tuning, camot support the motion; the details should work with the revision to
the window trim. The maker and second of the motion agreed to add a condition requiring that traditional
wood stucco mold be used as window trim.
Chairman Vistica called for a roll call vote on the motion to approve the project with amended conditions.
The motion passed on a 5-1-1 (C. Keighran dissenting, C. Brownrigg absent). Appeal procedures were
advised. This item concluded at 8:10 p.m.
6
City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes
IX. DESIGN REVIEW STUDY ITEMS
7
March 11 2002
232 DWIGHT ROAD _ ZONED R.l - APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW FOR A FIRST AND
SECOND STORY ADDITION (BART GAUL, APPLICANT AND PROPERTY OWNER; J & M
DESIGN. DESIGNER)OIECT PLANNER:ERIKA LEWIT
CP Monroe briefly presented the project description. There were no questions of staff. Chairman Vistica
opened the public comment. Bart Gaul, applicant and property owner, Z3?DwightRoad, was available to
answer questions. The Commission asked what are the proposed plate heights on the first and second floors
and what is the size of the new camellia to be planted in the front yard? The applicant noted that the first
floor plate is 10' above curb level and the second floor plate height is7'-6" above the second floor finished
floor; the camellia is a 5-gallon container size; Commission asked if the intent is to replace all of the
windows and what type of window and window trim will be used? The applicant noted that he intends to
replace all of the windows, a traditional wood stucco mold will be used for window trim, the windows will
be casement with true divided lights.
C. Brownrigg arrived at 8:12 p.m.
Mike Escobar,2}9 Dwight Road, noted that he is in support of the project, reviewed the plans, many of the
houses on Dwight Road have a layer-cake appearance, asks that the Commission approve this project.
The Commission had the foltowing comments and concerns to be addressed bythe applicant and noted on
the plans:
. Suggest planting a Saratoga in the front yard, it is a larger scale tree and is faster growing, use same
species as in rear yard;
. Concerned with the design of the house, this is a great start;
. Concerned with the choice of windows, they are all the same size and shape, the windows should be
studied and modified to add interest;
. Concerned with the layer-cake look, there is no variation, design could be developed more, there is a
better way to integrate the first and second floors by extending wall usually 2 floors in some places,
there is no variation in the first floor eave it is a straight line across the band around the house;
declining height envelope can cause a layer-cake look, Commission can grant an exception for
declining height envelope to encourage better architecture;
There were no other comments from the floor and the public hearing was closed.
C. Keighran made a motion to place this item on the consent calendar noting the applicant has done a nice
job, do not see too many cases where the applicant is willing to change the existing windows, feels that the
second story flows well and that the house will have a lot of light with the amount of windows. This motion
was seconded by C. Auran.
Comment on the motion: applicant should consider comments made regarding the design of the house.
Maker of the motion noted that she did not want to amend the motion, feels that suggested changes are major
and that it would take away from the preferred proposal.
7
3.
City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes March I I 2002
Chairman Vistica called for a roll call 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 5-2 (Cmsrs. Bojuds and Vistica
dissenting). The Planning Commission's action is advisory and not appealable. This item concluded at8:20
p.m.
1204 CABRILLO A\TENUE _ ZONED R-l - APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW AMENDMENT
AND SPECIAL PERMIT FOR HEIGHT AND DECLINING HEIGHT ENVELOPE FOR A NEW TWO-
STORY HOUSE WITH A DETACHED GARAGE (MIKE WILSON, APPLICANT AND PROPERTY
OWNER; JAMES CHU, CHU DESIGN & ENGR., INC., DESIGNER) (61 NOTICED) PROJECT
PLANNER: CA KEYLON
Reference staff report , 3 .ll .02, with attachments. CP Monroe presented the report, reviewed criteria and
staff comments, action alternatives and seven conditions suggested for consideration. She suggested
amendments to conditions 2 and 3 addressing the fact that work would be stopped if more money was
needed to pay the constructionconsultant and that the dead spaces created to exempt FAR requirements on
the second floor should never be converted to any kind ofuseable or living area. Commissioner asked ifthe
window in the second floor walk-in closet was larger than shown on the plans? Asked ifthe commission has
the authority to require that this entire structure be rebuilt. CA noted that the commission could deny the
current request and require the applicant to build the structure as approved, or could direct some other
course. There were no further questions of staff.
Chairman Vistica opened the public hearing. Charles Rible , attorney, 3130 Los Saba and Mike Wilson,
1204 Cabillo property owner, were present. Mr. Wilson noted that he was a builder on the East coast and
this was his first project in Califomia,. His attorney noted that Mr. Wilson was unaware of local
regulations; foundation contractor had advised that the site not be graded out, knew would raise the building,
but it is only a foot over allowed height and they can cut the roof without it affecting the design. Higher
house also affected the declining height envelope on the right side, however, the design fits the
neighborhood, have the two dormers at the front which works with the neighborhood, the declining height
exception is a small violation and you still have a good design. Removed French doors from exterior
because the buyer has children and thought that the doors were a safety hazard,they were replaced with
casement windows throughouf; on the side of the house they cannot be seen, and there is less window facing
the neighbors. The owner/builder did not think changes made on the inside would make a difference, did not
know about the FAR; is now proposing to block off different space which meets the needs of the new
owners better. With these changes the FAR and lot coverage is compliant. The 13 inch extra height can be
addressed. The exterior chimney next to the driveway was not installed because paving a 9 foot driveway
would mean removing the established shrubs which separated the site from the neighbors . Nine feet is too
nzrrrow any way. Can add the chimney now if Commission wants.
Commissioners asked: is Mr. Wilson a licensed contractor; not in California, licensed builder in New
Jersey. Has he built any houses for anyone else in Burlingame; no. When applied for amendment for two
changes to the plans in January it was made clear how important it was that all changes to the approved plans
be reviewed by the Planning Commission; and now in March there are 13 more changes that were not
brought forward then. This shows disrespect for the Commission and for the City ofBurlingame. These are
major changes not shown on the plans-being requested now: 2'9" increase in height, Jecfining height
exception ofmore than 100 SF, change in roofing material from hardy slate to composition, failure to install
chimneys and dormers. How did this happen? Wilson responded no other house on the street has hardy
8
City of Burlingame Planning Commission (Jnapproved Minutes March t t 2002
slate roofing, used weathered wood. Attorney noted that when came to the city for first amendment these
items were in place. Wilson noted left out chimney on the left by the driveway to improve the driveway
access to the garage and keep the existing shrubs. The framer forgot to put on the dormers, he can do it now.
Did not want to bury the house, would cause one to step down into the front door, have to install sump
pump which would be a problem if the electricity failed during a storm, would flood under the house or even
into the first floor. Blame the contractor for giving him bad advice, which caused the height limit to be
exceeded by l3 inches and the declining height envelope to be exceeded.
Asked the applicant if he was present at initial public hearings in June 2001. Mr. Wilson noted he was.
Noted in the minutes the neighbors expressed concern about the height of the project. Yet you agreed not to
do the grading which raised the foundation2.S feet. Mass and bulk issue cannot be addressed by clipping
roof ridge, shoving building up caused all the eaves to protrude at a higher point, increased visual bulk;
conditions and stamp on building plans clearly state "build according to plans". You are now before the
Commission for the fourth time, you have no respect for either planning or building departments. How
often did you check the site during construction. Mr. Wilson noted that he stopped by every day or every
other day during construction and worked directly with the subs. How gpnfident are you about the quality of
the construction given the erors now documented? Did not have problem in New Jersey had an experience
set of subs; have been doing this since he was 15. Are these plans the final proposal for the conskuction?
Mr. Wilson siad, yes, the building is sheet rocked, trimmed, the cabinets are in, the marble is in the
bathrooms, the hardwood floors are not installed. How big is the window in the second floor closet? The
window installed is 3 x4, the plans call for a2x4,have that window and will install the smaller window. Did
not want to sink the house, if did would need a retaining wall at the driveway and would loose the shrubs;
framer decided to raise the house; chimneys could be installedthey arejust decorative. How do youpropose
to treat the voided spaces? Wilson noted he would have them filled with blown-in insulation. Could these
walls be removed in the future? Wilson noted that they could. Attorney noted that as originally approved
there were voided spaces on the second floor, all the applicant is asking is to relocate them to improve the
interior design. Commissioner noted that he was disappointed, cannot believe that being from out oftown is
ajustification for doing what you want.
Neighbors commented: Bill Tiedeman, 1205 Cortez;Kathy and Tom PoseS 1208 Cabrillo; Pat Harding,
1205 Cortez;Tom Pazone, 3862 Knotta Ave. Belmont. They noted how can an unlicensed contractor take
out a building permit. CBOCullum noted that Hawk Electric took out,*re permit, they are licensed; will
need to talk to CSLV about situation; building code requires with building permit, compliance with all local
regulations, including zorrjrng, so this construction was a violation of the Building code as well. Raising the
house, raised the windows on the rear of the house, block sunlight in back yard and reduce privacy, if 3 feet
lower windows would be behind shrubs and no view, less light impact. Applicant is responsible; would like
to see house removed and built as it was approved and based on the building permit. If the driveway was so
tight that he could not put in the chimney, that says something about the size ofthe building; I will live with
this next door for years. Trusted that the building would be built as shown on building plans which went to
city to check, public notice was first indication that plans were not being followed; husband a licensed
contractor, spoke to applicant, expressed how important height was to them; feel betrayed. Ifrequire the roof
to be hacked off, how will it look; does not look anything like the approved plan now; neighbors concerned
but not want to come forward. Prospective buyer, in escrow, understand concern, all ofthese changes were
made 7-8 weeks ago; we did not want French doors happy with change to casements because of children,
wantthe shrubs to be retained along the driveway forneighbors privacy, so removal ofchimneyfine; agreed
to remove window in kitchen because neighbor wanted, not as nice a room without the window; the house is
very private, the second floor windows do not look into the neighbors yard; the garages at the rear (12A4 and
9
City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes March I I 2002
one behind) match, increases privacy. What Wilson did was not right but was not malicious; the changes did
not cheapen the neighborhood.
Neighbor noted did not benefit from the window removed in the kitchen, it is behind a fence so could not see
it. Can't see into backyard now because have not trimmed the hedges during the construction, when do trim
will see directly into the windows. Garages are back to back with alley between, but house is so tall it looms
over their lot and yard.
Applicant and his attorney responded: Attorney noted that applicant could put plants along perimeter of site
at rear to block views. Wilson noted that there are evergreen trees at the rear now, will not trim and they will
continue to grow; houses are close in Burlingame. Attorney noted that city requirement for an overseeing
contractor employed by the city will insure that changes are made and applicant gets better advise.
Commissioner noted that there are one or two trees in the back yard not enough to screen neighbor, city
should not have to hire overseer to correct this problem, if the contractor had read the plans there would have
been no problem. Wilson noted that he made all the changes to improve the quality of the project. There
were no fuither comments from the floor. The public hearing was closed.
Commissioner cofirments: concerned about the current status ofthe property, should be boarded up, it is an
attractive nuisance now, with loose dirt and erosion potential, it represents a violation to several municipal
code sections, this should be addressed immediately. Troubled by the extent ofthese problems, can notjust
clip the roof, what will that do to the design, big impact on the neighbors, the house is too big inside cannot
control future expansion into these areas; neglecting to follow the plans is not a hardship for a code
exception. A lot of these problems flow from the fact that the house was built to the maximum of all the
requirements to get the maximum sale price. Would like to see design reviewer look at roof, don't know if
can put heavier material on it, should bring house within height and declining height.
Further Commission Comment: There is a solution for the height and bulk issues, reduce the buildingby 2
feet 9 inches by cutting down the second floor walls and lowering the plate line until the original height and
declining height envelop are met (about a 5 foot plate should do it) This would also reduce the voided areas
inside by placing them in areas with ceiling heights less than 5 feet. Could approve with a condition that the
plate Iine be brought down so that the roof peak meets the elevation from top of curb originally approved, --
this would mean reconstruction of the second flo.or only, first floor would not be affected. Commission
would need to see the appearance of the resulting building, need to prepare drawings for review. CA noted
that commission could act tonight or continue the item and ask for more information or refer to design
reviewer with direction. Would suggest that applicant prepared revised plans and elevations based on lower
second floor plate heighq commission can review these at design review study and then can direct to design
reviewer or to action .
Commission comment continued: lowering the plate line would also address the FAR issue on the second
floor; yes. Many things need to be fixed, do not want to send a message that after the fact we will accept any
and all changes, think idea of sending to design review is a good one, there are 13 items to be fixed, want the
frnished project to be as close to the plans originally approved as possible.
Commissioner asked, and commission agreed, that a determination be made that all areas with ceiling
heights of 5 feet or more inside a house or accessory structure would be counted in the FAR calculation.
10
City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes March 11 2002
Comment continued: Understand why would want French doors converted to casement windows ifyou have
children, the design reviewer should take that safety issue into account. Asked staff if there was an architect
on the project. CP Monroe noted she did not know. If the architect is not Mr. Chu, who is familiar with city
requirements, then design reviewer participation is necessary. Important that the existing property be
secured and made safe while this issue is being resolved. Design reviewer can look at applicant's proposal
but he cannot design house back to the original. Applicant should be directed to find an architect and submit
plans with the second story plat height reduced. Bringing down the plate will affect the whole mass of the
structure, need to see elevations.
C. Boju6s moved to continue action on this application until the applicant retums with elevations and floor
plans for a house with a second floor plate line lowered so that the roof ridge and building envelope are the
same as it was on the originally approved plans and the voided areas over 5 feet in height have been
eliminated; the proposal will be returned to design review study and the commission will direct it disposition
from there. The motion was seconded by C. Osterling.
Comrnent on the motion: CA noted that the applicant can decide what he would like to do, what you deciCe
tonight can be appealed. The motion does not address the chimney along the driveway, if its presence keeps
people from using the driveway then it does not need to be installed; its OK to replace the French doors with
casement windows. Think there should be a landscape plan added which addresses the neighbor's privacy,
the site needs a construction fence immediately and erosion control. The remedy is to get a commitnent to
make what is physically on the site conform to the plans approved; this project affronts all those in the city
who conformed to their approved plans, cannot make findings for the height, the declining height, the
increase in mass or bulk, request should be denied.
._. : I :tl.
Chairman Vistica called for a roll call vote on the motion directing that the item be continued and the
second floor plate reduced so that the height of the structure meet that originally approved with the
declining height envelope requirement met and the FAR met by the area inside with ceiling heights over
5 feet with revised plans and elevations submitted to design review study for review and further actionby
the commission. The motion passed on a 5 - 2 roll call vote (Cers. Keighran and Keele dissenting).
This item concluded at 9:50 p.m.
i8. 1133[ABRILLO AVENUE - ZONED R.l - APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW FOR A FtrRffi
AND SECOND STORY ADDINON (DAVE HOWELL, PENINSULA BUILDING DESIGN,
APPLICANT AND DESIGNER; JIM AND KATHY WARD, PROPERTY OWNERS) PROJECT
PLANNER: ERIKA
CP Monroe briefly presented the project description. There were no questions of staff.
Chairman Vistica opened the public comment. Dave Howell, designer,2825 Hillside Drive, and James
Ward, property owner, were present to answer questions; designer noted that he has been working with the
applicant on this project for 4 years, looked at different designs and worked with several contractors, crucial
element is the interior roof cricket, this area of the roof is not visible from the street, without the cricket the
roof would be 2 feet taller, bulk of building is mitigated because the lot is 75' wide, maintaining12' ight
side setback and 24'-4" Ieft side setback, uncovered deck is set back 8 feet, deck is approximately 18"-20"
above grade.
ll
City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapprwed Minutes March I I 2002
Commission asked why is a9' -0" ceiling height needed in the basement; designer noted the ceiling height in
the existing house is 8'-6" wanted to keep same, the basement will contain a rumpus room and exercise
equipment will be stored in the basement, the ceiling height in the basement will not affect the bulk of the
building, the grade will be excavated to the accommodate the new basement areas, the existing basement has
a '7'-5" ceiling height, walk through laundry room and step down three steps to new basement area.
Applicantnotedthatportions ofthe basementwill be back-filledto aceilingheightof5'-l l"to complywith
FAR, asked what is required to backfill; staffsuggested a concrete floor is needed which cannot be removed
easily. The applicant should check with the building department for rat proof requirements.
Further discussion: Commission pointed out that the first floor level is the same throughout the house, noted
that there is a sump pump in the existing basement, and new sewage pump will be added adjacent to the
powder room, suggested that the laundry room should be relocated to a more central location, but it is
entirely up to the applicant; Commission asked if the uncovered deck is counted in FAR, staff noted that
because it is uncovered and is less than 30 inches above grade, it is not counted in FAR or lot coverage;
generally discourage second story decks, but given the size of the lot, the distance from the property line, and
the consistency with the design the deck is appropriate.
Robert Smith, I 137 Cabrillo Avenue, noted that his lot is also one and a half lots wide, is in support of the
project, and that he would like to see every effort to protect the oak tree which is located between the
properties. There were no other comments from the floor and the public hearing was closed.
C. Brownrigg noted no changes were suggested and made a motion to place this item on the consent calendar
noting that this is an elegant design which conserves the older house, but that it is at the maximum FAR
limit, and therefore asked that the applicant carefully adhere to these plans. This motion was seconded by C.
Keighran.
Chairman Vistica called for a voice vote on the motion to place this item on the consent calendar. The
motion passed on a voice vote 7-0. The Planning Commission's action is advisory and not appealable. This
item concluded at 10:20 p.m.
9. 116 COSTA RICA AVENUE _ ZONED R.l _ APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW AND
VARTANCES FOR SECOND FLOOR SIDE SETBACK, LOT COVERAGE AND FLOORAREA RATIO
FOR A FIRST AND SECOND STORY ADDITION (GARY AND MARY ANN MCHOLS,
APPLICANTS AND PROPERTY OWNERS; JERRY DEAL, JD & ASSOCIATES, DESIGNER)
PROJECT PLANNER: RUBEN HI]RIN
Planner Hurin briefly presented the project description. Commissioner asked if this revised project is
completely different than that which was approved in 1998; staffnoted that the previous project included a
second story addition at the rear ofthe house. Commission asked if staffhas confirmed that the basement is
unimproved; staffnoted that they have not been in the basement, but that the applicant has indicated that the
basement is unimproved, basement is only used for storage and to house mechanical equipment presently,
water regularly flows into the basement. There were no further questions of staff.
Chairman Vistica opened the public comment. Jerry Deal, designer, 1228 Paloma Avenue, noted that this is
an unusual circumstance, no FAR variance was required four years ago for the previous design, codes
regarding basements have changed since then, basement ceiling height varies from 6'-8" to 7'-0",there are
ducts hanging from the basement ceiling, currently have water problems in basement, the proposed addition
t2
City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes March I I 2002
complies with FAR regulations without the basement, basement counts in FAR since it rises 3'-6" above
grade, new design creates 30 SF of additional lot coverage, the existing house currently exceeds the
maximum lot coverageby 245 SF, deck at the rear is more than 30 inches above grade, could lower the
height of the deck and comply with FAR but would be very expensive to do so, existing side setback is 3'-
0", only the staircase requires a variance, but because it qualifies as a window enclosure this area complies
with declining height envelope exception, 120 Costa Rica Avenue has a similar problem with FAR and was
granted a variance.
Mary Ann Nichols, property owner, 116 Costa Rica Avenue, submitted letters signed by seven property
owners in the neighborhood in support of the project, would like to stay within the craftsman style of the
house.
The Commission expressed a concemed with the second floor stairway and asked if it could be placed so
that a side setback variance is not required? Can the applicant describe the exceptional circumstance on the
property for the side setback variance? Designer noted that the existing side setback is 3'-0" and he felt that
aesthetically this was the most appropriate place to the exterior desig4 to locate the stairway , a5' -0" setback
is possible but would loose square footage in the house.
Ed Bohnert ,124 Costafuca Avenue, Troy and Tracy Otus, 120 Costa Rica Avenue, spoke noting that they
are in support of the project, reviewed the proposed plans, their laundry room is next to the proposed
stairway and there is no privacy issue. There were no other comments from the floor and the public hearing
was closed.
C. Osterling noted that there are a number of variances requested, but feels that these variances are
appropriate given the effort to keep what exists now, and made a motion to place this item on the consent
calendar. This motion was seconded by C. Keighran.
Comment on motion: when returns a condition should be added that the second floor side setback only
allows a stairway to be built, should be noted that these variances were looked at very closely and that it is
important to preserve the character of the existing structure.
Chairman Vistica called for a voice vote on the motion to place -this item on the consent calendar. The
motion passed on a voice vote 7-0. The Planning Commission's action is advisory and not appealable. This
item concluded at 10:40 p.m.
10. 520 FRANCISCO DRIVE _ ZONED R.l - APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW AND SPECIAL
PERMIT FOR GHT FOR A FIRST AND STORY ADDITION
Planner Hurin briefly presented the project description. There were no questions of staff.
Chairman Vistica opened the public comment. Tom Hallendorl property owner, 489 W. Maple Way,
Woodside, noted that all of the windows will be replaced with true divided light windows to match the style
of the round-top window on the front of the house which will be retained, intent is to match the addition with
the existing character of the spanish style house built in the 1930's. The Commission had the following
comments and concerns to be addressed by the applicant and noted on the plans:
13
City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes March 1l 2002
Concemed with the four new clear-story windows on a blank wall on the North Elevation, large wall
should be broken up;
Concerned with the length of the wall on the North Elevation, needs to be articulated, like
articulation on South Elevation, normally in this style see some ornamentation added to a long wall,
there are several ways to handle this wall, some suggestions include adding decorative tile, inset
windows, attic vents similar to front of house, also suggest modiffing the footprint along this side of
the house so there are ins and outs to create some articulation;
Size of new windows shown on the North Elevation are not consistent with windows shown on the
floor plans, please correct;
would like to see larger scale trees or plantings in the front and right rear area of the lot to help
screen the addition, existing front and right rear landscaping is light; and
Looks like a box attached to a box, do not suggest increasing the height of the structure.
There were no other comments from the floor and the public hearing was closed.
;
Commission discussion: suggested changes are relatively nrinor, architect could easily add articulation to the
building face and interest with landscaping, the addition is set in nicely and is not visible from the street; feel
confident that the architect can apply the suggestions.
C. Bojuds made a motion to place this item on the regular action calendar when the suggested revisions have
been made and plan checked by staff. This motion was seconded by C. Osterling.
Comment on motion: more comfortable with bringing back to regular action, there is a lot of flexibility
possible here, recommend architect listen to the meeting tapes. Make and second to the motion agreed to
the amendment to place this item on the regular action calendar.
Chairman Vistica called for a vote on the motion to place this item on the regular action calendar when plans
had been revised as directed. The motion passed on a voice vote 7-0. The Planning Commission's action is
advisory and not appealable. This item concluded at 10:50 p.m.
X. PLANNERREPORTS
a
a
a
,
a
Review of City Council regular meeting of March 4,2002.
cP Monroe reviewed the council actions at the March 4,2002,meeting.
FYI - Minor changes to an approved design review project at207 Clarendon Road
Commission acknowledged the proposed changes as being consistent with the approved design. It
was noted that the project at l2A4 Cabrillo indicates a need for elevation checks to confirm height
compliance during construction . Staffnoted that they would work with the Building Deparknent to
arrive at a set of policies which could be added as conditions to projects when they "push" the height
limit or stay within the height limit by grading or other alteration to the site. The suggestions willbe
discussed with the commission.
FYI - Change to roofing material for an approved design review project at l423Balboa Avenue
Commission acknowledged the proposed changes as being consistent with the approved design. It
was noted that staffdiscretion should be limited to very minor changes to approved plans. Staff
noted that minor changes such as these can be brought forward to commission for review in a matter
t4
t
City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes March I I 2002
of a week and a half, depending upon meeting dates. Generally that works well for applicants.
Discussion of Different Types of Planning Approvals
CA handed out a copy of a report he prepared for the City Council on the types of decisions that the
Commission can make. There was a brief discussion.
XI. ADJOURNMENT
Chairman Vistica adjourned the meeting at l1:20 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Joe Boju6s, Secretary
S:\MINUTES\unapprwedminutes3.l l.doc
l5
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION UNAPPROVED MINUTES
SPECIAL MEETING
501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, CA
Wednesday March 6,2002
Council Chambers
I. CALL TO ORDER Chairman Vistica called the March 6, 2002, special meeting of the Planning
Commission to order at 7:00 p.m.
II. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Auran, Boju6s, Brownrigg, Keighran, Keele,
Osterling and Vistica
Absent: Commissioners: None
Staff Present: City Planner, Margaret Monroe; Senior Planner, Maureen
Brooks; City Attorn ey, Larry Anderson
III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA There were no changes to the agenda.
ry. STUDY SESSION
1450 HOWARD AVENUE, ZONED C-2, SIJBAREAS A AIID B AI\[D R-3 - PUBLIC COMMENT ON
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW 69,747 SF
COMMERCIAL BUILDING FOR SAFEWAY AND WALGREEI\IS; PROJECT INCLUDES REZONING,
CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS, PARKING DIMENSION VARIANCE FOR PROJECT PARKING LOT
AND PARCEL MAP FOR LOT MERGER AND RECONFIGI.]RATION OF LOTS; PROJECT ALSO
INCLUDES RECONFIGURATION OF CITY PARKING LOTS (RICHARD S. ZLATUNICH,
CP Monroe presented a brief summary of the staff report. She noted that thiq is a public comment session to
receive input on the Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the project. Commissioners asked:
regarding the 9'x 19' foot parking spaces proposed, is a unistall space commonly used in developments in other
cities; can other alternatives be proposed in the EIR. CP Monroe stated that we will ask the environmental
consultant to look into the issue of the size of parking spaces used in other cities, and noted that the suggestions
for alternatives would be evaluated and it might result in another alternative.
Chairman Vistica opened the floor to public comments, and noted that the Environmental Impact Report is a
tool designed to measure the impact on the environment, and comments should be related to anything that you
think is not addressed in the EIR.
Scott Benedict, representing Community Gatepath of Northern California (formerly Poplar Recare); Mary
Hunt, 725 Vernon Way; CliffWoods, owner of building at220-234 Primrose Road; Dan Anderson,728 Vernon
Way; Russ Cohen, 605 Lexington Way; David Kinkead, L24Lorton Avenue; Arnold Ruff; Sam Malouf, 712
Vernon Way; Jess Roat, 101 Lorton #5; Darlene DeMaria, l0l Lorton; Angela Johnson, Ralston Avenue;
Joanne McCardle, Ralston Avenue; Charles Yoltz,725 Vernon Way; Jeptha Wade, 500 Almer Road; Jennifer
Pfaff, 615 Bayswater Avenue; Annamarie Holland Daniels, 515 Howard Avenue; Ralph Nielsen, 1226
Burlingame Avenue; Betty Wade, 500 Almer Road; and Bob Lugliani commented on the Draft EIR:
I
City of Burlingame Planning Commission (Inapproved Minutes March 6' 2002
GENERAL
. support project, Safeway now employs people with disabilities, disabled employees have not been laid off;
wittr ttre-project they will be able to place more people at this site, disabled employees can get to the site by
bus;
o have looked at the new Safeway store in Dublin, it would fit in here, the corner is a disgrace now, needs to
be improved;
o plans haven't changed since 1997 when public commented on the appearance, size, orientation and impact
on small businesses in the area, still show a 230' long wall;
o there are larger grocery stores near enough in Millbrae and San Mateo, don't need store this big, Safeway in
San Mateo is +Z,OOO SF, Safeway doesn't need to sell flowers; there are shops in area to get flowprs, deli
items;
o Safeway is asking for a lot, what are they doing for Burlingame in exchange;
o in recent process used for selecting the Community Center site, the most important part of the process was
reaching rorr.nrrr, started with a divided community and hostile feelings and ended up with consensus; it
is apparent this project is divisive, we should try to strive to become a united community, urge the
Commission and Safeway to work harder to reach consensus su .he project is something we can be proud
of;
o a plan this size is madness, looks like something Costco would build in a warehouse area, Safeway needs to
rernodel present store, but this proposal is designed to suck money out of the business community;
AESTHETICS, COMPATIBILITY, MASS AND SITING
. support a new Safeway, site needs developing, but this is the wrong proposal for this town;
o how does the proposed building relate to other buildings in the area, how is it compatible with the uses in
area and on Burlingame Avenue;
o project conflicts with the streetscape plan, DEIR states there is a lack of public entrances on Primrose which
creates expanses of blank wall, but doesn't state it is significant effect, why not;
o proposed structure would be nice East of 101, but is far too large at this site, other grocery stores back East
t uui Uuitt two-story stores, if you added another floor on the existing store would be big enough and would
have a store that fits in with room for parking, this does not allow for enough parking, needs to be addressed
in the DEIR;
o this proposal tums its back on Burlingame Avenue, this is a "="ll town, the proposed store would serve a
community of 200,000 people, way beyond our village, proposal should integrate and enhance the area
around it;
. in Los Altos, Safeway was faced with same issues, the store there fits the "village" character of their
downtown, this proposal does not fit in; do need new Safeway, but not this size and configuration;
. long walls on Primrose and Howard would discourage pedestrian activity;
o this plan doesn't look like Burlingame, it is too big, have to remove protected trees, egress is wrong, hope
Safeway goes back to drawing board;
PARKING
. where will people park during construction;
TRAFFIC AND ACCESS
thought of having a right tum onto El Camino Real is scary, cannot see around trees, this is a poor plan;
truck traffic for Safeway will increase from 20 a day to 29 a day, a 50o/o increase by this proposal, should be
considered signifi cant;
Walgreen's sometimes attempts to unload large semis on Primrose, have been stopped by Police, the noise
levels are intolerable and affects operations of existing businesses;
2
a
a
o
a
o
City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes March 6, 2002
concemed about the loading zone as proposed, is it safe, trucks will block driveway, area is already
congested;
concemed with impact on Ralston, will there be more trucks than now, why is Ralston figuring so
prominently in the plan;
widening Howard will not help problems of tmcks on Primrose and Fox Plaza Lane;
TREES
. oppose removal of 3 heritage trees and the eucalyptus on El Camino Real;
WEB BASED DELIVERY
o Safeway is intending to go into web based delivery business, will the proposed store be a hub, will they
store and deliver from this facility, there will be small trucks in and out all day; Safeway has made a big
investment in on-line shopping, if this is what they foresee in the future, there is no need for a bigger store,
this additional use should be addressed in the DEIR;
DELAWARE STORE
o what is the impact if Safeway on Delaware in San Mateo closes, with the proposed larger store, what is the
fate of the Delaware store and what will the impact on traffic be if all those customers are now coming to
the new Safeway;
ALTERNATIVES
o dismayed did not look at alternative of expanding the existing building and keeping the orientation to El
Camino Real;
o what happened to the alternative proposed ayear ago that showed orientation of the building to Howard
with the public parking on the Primrose side of the site and the building set back to El Camino Real, don't
see it in alternatives in the EIR.
There were no further comments and Chairman Vistica closed the public comment session. Commissioners
commented:
GENERAL
o disappointed that there are no changes since we saw this originally, several issues.not addressed;
o there is obviously concern about this project with a large turnout on a rainy night;
. concerned that numbers presented by applicant regarding square footage of shopping per capita are
misleading because it ignores the stores we have access to on our borders in Millbrae and San Mateo, the
numbers are misused;
o do we really need a store that offers 10 brands of cornflakes; this fills Safeway's needs not community's
needs;
o like to point out that commission has been voicing concerns about this project for several years and has
been ignored, all this concern has been voiced but the DEIR does not find any significant impacts, needs to
be revisited;
AESTHETICS, COMPATIBILITY, MASS AND SITING
o the City's Commercial Design Guidebook states that the mass and bulk of the building should be in scale
with the area and land uses nearby, should respect pedestrian activity, project does not do this, address in
DEIR;
o store is offering everything imaginable, flowers, deli, bank, this will impact businesses on Burlingame
Avenue, need project that blends in with architecture on Burlingame Avenue;
3
,
a
City of Burlingame Planning Commission (Jnapproved Minutes March 6, 2002
o should be oriented to Primrose, Howard and Fox Plaza Lane so that people can shop at Safeway and also go
to small businesses for other shopping;
. concerned with aesthetics, when you enter Burlingame from Millbrae on El Camino Real, the first thing you
see is the open parking lot at Burlingame Plaza, think we are creating the same bad thing here, can the
building be reconfigured so it is more approachable from Burlingame Avenue;
. this building will make Fox Plaza Lane feel like an industrial alley, site could be configured to use Fox
Plazal,ane to funnel shoppers onto Burlingame Avenue and Primrose Road;
o EIR doesn't address current pedestrian flow and how it would be changed, now broken up with parking lots,
this is an area where people can shop, then go across the street, this project has a wall all along Primrose,
have to walk around the block to other stores;
o ESA is an excellent firm, would like ESA to address the size of the store and its relation to the needs and
size of the community, why is this size store necessary;
o not necessarily opposed to size if it is done correctly, big box retail is not the right solution;
o the initial study in the back of the Draft EIR noted that aesthetics was considered potentially significant, but
this is not mentioned elsewhere;
. regarding land use and planning, need to consider if the project divides an established community,
comments from the commission indicate that the project would do just that;
. regarding compatibility with the General Plan, the Open Space Element talks about micro-scale open spaces
that occur between buildings, which can use focus, form, texture and color to create spaces which should
link together, this project does not do that and it is not addressed in the DEIR;
PARKING. should look at parking proposed, the applicant is proposing a large facility that results in a decrease in
parking over what is existing now, how is that explained as not being a significant effect;
o Safeway should consider underground parking like Draeger's in San Mateo;
o where will employees park and how will it be enforced;
TRAFFIC AND ACCESS
o Traffrc analysis in EIR compares this project to Safeway in Pleasanton, had to go that far to find one of
comparable size, should look for comparison at Safeways in San Mateo and Millbrae rather than Pleasanton,
which is where the Safeway corporate headquarters are located, Safeways in San Mateo are 35,000 SF and
22,000 SF, one in Millbrae is 36,000 SF and one in Belmont is 25,000 SF, we are a smaller City and this
proposal is bigger than all of these;
. very concemed about the location of the loading dock, report says they don't expect an increase in the
number of trucks, find that difficult to believe;
o there were various hours stated in the EIR for when deliveries would occur, would like to know what time
of day deliveries are expected, will itbe24 hours a day;
. concern with queuing at Howard and El Camino for access to the site, with people turning right off El
Camino Real will back up into the bus stop area;
. concern with impact on truck deliveries to merchants on Primrose;
. concern with right turn on and off the site from El Camino Real and impacts of this access on residents on
Ralston;
o need to evaluate traffic if the Safeway store on Delaware in San Mateo closes and those customers come to
this store;
TREES
o concerned with trees being removed, we are a city of trees, can the large trees to be taken out be replanted
somewhere else on the site;
4
,
i
City of Burlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes March 6, 2002
WEB BASED DELIVERIES
o the EIR has no reference to the proposal for web-based home deliveries, needs to be articulated in the report
there would be less pedestrian shopping, more small trucks, higher trip volume and more large kuck
deliveries;
ALTERNATIVES
o project includes Walgreen's and Wells Fargo, would like to see alternative that just includes Safeway, and
closer to the size of those in neighboring cities;
. we need to look for consensus, should look at alternative 2,many of the concerns expressed have been
mitigated, would like to see an expansion of that put on the table;
o would like to see another altemative that shows pedestrian access to building near corner of Primrose and
Fox Plaza Lane so it can be an extension of downtown
Commissioners noted that they would like to commend people for coming out, this is an important project and
input is crucial, encourage people to attend future meetings and look forward (o comments; encourage people to
submit written comments, read the document and consider it carefully; note that this is a first step in the
process, the comment period on the Draft EIR ends March 25,2002,written comments can be submitted to the
Planning Departrnent until 5:00 p.m.; the consultant will prepare a response to comments document, that
document and the Draft EIR will make up the Final EIR. The Final EIR and the project will be the subject of
future hearings. We will make every effort to keep the public informed of the process.
FROM THE FLOOR There were no public comments.
ADJOURNMENT
Chairman Vistica adjourned the meeting at 8:35 p.m.
Respectfu lly submitted,
Joe Boju6s, Secretary
v
VI.
5
I]NAPPROVEDMINUTES3, 6
,
((
GITY OF BURLINGAME
Portfolio Management
Portfolio Summary
February 28,2002
Par Market
Value
Book
Value
'/t ol
Poilfollo
Days to
Maturlty
YTM
360 Equlv.
YTM
Value Term
lnvestments
365 Equiv.
LAIF & County Pool
CORP NOTES
Federal Agency lssues - Coupon
lnvestments
14,774,368.54
3,000,000.00
15,000,000.00
14,774,s68.54
3,090,000.00
15,249.650.00
'14,774,368.54
3,027,780.00
15,000,000.00
45,04
9.23
45.73
1
1,596
1,717
I
517
1,334
s.193
5.929
5.370
3.237
6.011
5.444
32,774,369.il 33,1 14,018.54 32,802,148.54 100.00%933 6s8 4.41 4.503
Total Earnlngs February 28 Month Ending Fiscal Year To Date
Current Year
Average Dally Balance
Effective Rate of Return
120,097.58
32,5'11,370.62
4.82%
funds to meet Burlingame'sPursuant to State law, there are sufficient available
some
RAHN A. BECKER, FINANCE DIR./TREASURER
't ,187,633.79
35,011,233.23
5.10%
expenditure requirements for the mming 6 months. Total funds invested represent consolidation of all fund types, andis restricted by law (e.9, Gas Tax, Trust &Agency funds, Capital Projects, and Enterprise funds).
Portfolio CITY
CP
PM (PRF_PMI) SymRept V5.02f
Run Date: 03Yl 1/2002 - 09:55
(
1^
CUSIP lnvestment# lssuer
Average
Balance
CITY OF BURLINGAME
Portfolio Management
Portfolio Details - lnvestments
February 28,2002
P'urchase
Dale Par Value
Stated
BookValue Rate MoodysMarket Value
YTM Daysto
365 Maturlty
Page2
Maturity
Date
LAIF & Gounty Pool
77 LOCAL AGENCY INV.FD.
S M COUNTY POOL
Subtotal and Average
7,916,001.33
6,858,367.21
7,916,001.33
6,858,367.21
7,916,001.33
6,85E,367.21
2.880
3.650
2.880
3.65079
15,769,304.91 14,774,368.54 14,774,368.il 14,774,368.il 3.237
GORP NOTES
0739028MS
37042R2C5
487
489
BEAR STEARNS CORP
GENERAL MTRS ACCEP CORP
Subtotal and Average
03/02/1999
04/20/1 999
2,000,000.00
1,000,000.00
2,077,500.00
1 ,012,500.00
1,997,500.00
1,030,280.00
6.1 50
6.750
6.1 79
5.685
732 03t0212004
101 06t10t2002
3,027,780.00 3,000,000.00 3,000,000.00 3,027,780.00 6.011 517
Federal Agency lssues . Goupon
31 331 LKK3
3133M3TS4
3133M7Y75
3133MF2D9
3133MHJ62
3133MLMH5
3136F0Y29
FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANK
FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK
FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK
FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK
FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK
FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK
499
476
488
4S8
504
505
502
0611312001
03/1 7/ 1 998
03t22t1999
0512412001
09t28t2001
o2126t2002
08t28t2001
2,000,000.00
1,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
4,000,000.00
2,02't,240.00
1,037,190.00
2,1 03,1 20.00
2,016,880.00
2,005,620.00
2,008,120.00
4,057,480.00
2,000,000.00
1,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
4,000,000.00
5.800
6.020
6.000
5.630
5.550
4.000
5.420
5.600
6.020
6.000
5.630
5.550
4.O02
5.420
1,565
3E1
752
'1,545
1,672
1,001
1,641
06/'13/2006
0311712003
03t222004
0512412006
0912812006
11t26t2004
oa2al2006FANNIE MAE
Subtotal and Average 13,714,285.71 15,000,000.00 15,249,650.00 15,000,000.00 5.444 1,334
Total lnvestments and Average 32,511,370.A2 32,774,368.il 33,1 {4,018.54 32,802,148.54 4.503 6s8
)
Portfolio CITY
CP
PM (PRF-PM2) symr ).ozr
Run Date: 03/1 12002 . 09:55
)
1
1
((
CITY OF BURLINGAME
Portfolio Management
lnvestment Activity By Type
February 1, 2002 through February ZB, ZOO?
(
Page 3
CUSIP lnvestment # lssuer
Beginnlng
Balance
Stated
Rato
Transactlon
Date
Purchases
or Doposits
Sales/Maturltles
or Wlthdrawals
Endlng
Balance
LAIF & County Poot (Monthly Summary)
77 LOCAL AGENCY INV.FD.79 SMCOUNWPOOL
2.880
3.650
0.00
69,356.98
2,000,000.00
0.00
Subtotal 16,70s,01 {.s6 69,358,98 2,000,000.00 14,774,368.il
CORP NOTES
Subtotal 3,027,780.00 3,027,780.00
Federal Agency lssues - Goupon
3133MO2z5 494
3133MLMH5 505
FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK
FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK
Subtotal
6.250
4.000
02t08t2002
02/26t2002
0.00
2,000,000.00
2,000,000.00
0,00
15,000,000.00 2,000,000.00 2,000,000.00 '15,000,000.00
Total 34,732,791.58 2,089,356.98 4,000,000.00 32,802,1.l8.54
Portfolio CITY
CP
PM (PRF_PM3) SymRspt V5.02f
Run Oate: 03/1 1/2002 - 09:55
Month
CITY OF BURLINGAME
Portfolio Management
lnvestment Activity Summary
February 2001 through February 2002
Yleld to Maturlty Managed
360 365
Number
of Securltles
Purchased
Number
of Securltles
Matured / Sold
Page 4
Average
Days to MaturltyEndYear
Number of
S6curltles
Total
lnvosted Equlvalent Equlvalent
Pool
Rate
Average
Term
Fobruary
March
Aprll
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
January
February
2001
2001
200't
2001
2001
2001
200'l
2001
2001
2001
2001
2002
2002
17
15
14
14
13
15
14
15
12
12
12
11
11
35,707,733.22
34,010,264.54
37,255,372.54
38,758,088.25
36,085,177.06
38,447,819.42
38,002j67.12
34,930,381.22
32,614,594.78
33,056,179.95
35,671,743.12
34,732,791.56
32,802,148.54
5.994
s.963
5.737
5.609
5.431
5.396
5.287
5.352
4.8E0
4.812
4.629
4.497
4.441
6.077
6,046
5.817
5.687
5.507
5.471
5.361
5.426
4.948
4.879
4.694
4.559
4.503
5.979
s.869
5.417
5.200
4,767
4.632
4.484
4.214
3.809
3.683
3.474
3.232
3.237
1,053
998
931
948
989
1,047
1,089
1,289
1,028
1,014
940
928
933
3
2
2
1
2
0
2
0
3
0
0
1
1
3
0
1
1
,|
2
1
1
0
0
0
0
1
727
688
671
695
7U
817
860
,020
791
763
691
662
658
Average 13 35,544,189.33 5.233%5.306%4.461 11 1,014 754
Portfolio CITY
CP
Run Oate: 03/1 1/2002 - 09:55 )PM (PRF-PM4).Io,v5.02f
(
CITY OF BURLINGAME
Portfolio Management
Distribution of lnvestments By Type
February 2001 through February 2002
Page 5
February
2001
March
200,t
Aprll
2001
June
2001
January
2002
February
2002
Average
by Perlod
JulyMay August September2001 2001
October November December
2001 2001 2001
lnvestment Type 2001 2001
LAIF & Gounty Pool 34.3 36.9 42.4 41.9 40.4 36.2 38.1 26.9 41.7 42.4 467 48.1 45.0 40.1%Certificates of Deposit - Bank
Gertlflcates of Deposit. S & L
Certiflcates of Deposit-Thrift & Ln
Negotiable GD's - Bank
GORP NOTES 8.5 8.9 8.1 7.8 8.4 7.9 8.0 8.7 9.3 9.2 8.5 8.7 9.2 8.60/oBankers Acceptances
Gommerclal Paper - lnterest Bearing
Gommerclal Paper - Dlscount
Federal lssues . Goupon s7.3 54.2 49.5 50.3 51.3 55.9 53.9 @r.4 49.1 48.4 44.9 43.2 45.7 51.40/o
Federal Agency lssues - Discount
Treasury Securitles -Coupon
Treasury Securlties - Dlscount
Mlscellaneous Securities -
Mlscellaneous Securitles - Discount
Non lnterest Bearing lnvestments
Mortgage Backed Securities
Mlscellaneous Dlscounts -At Cost 2
Miscellaneous Dlscounts -At Cost 3
Portfolio CITY
CP
PM (PRF_PMs) SymRept V5.02f
Run Date: 03/1 1/2002 - 09:55
((
CITY OF BURLINGAME
Portfolio Management
lnterest Earnings Summary
February 28,2002
February 28 Month Ending Fiscal Year To Date
Page 6
CD/Coupon/Discount lnvestments:
lnterest Collected
Plus Accrued lnterest at End of Period
Less Accrued lnterest at Beginning of Period
Less Accrued lnterest at Purchase During Period
lnterest Earned during Period
Adjusted by Capital Gains or Losses
Earnings during Period
170,900.00
275,273.32
365,373.3s)
0.00)
876,050.00
275,273.32
337,083.33)
0.00)
80,799.99
0,00
814,239.99
1,250.00
80,799.99 815,489.99
Pass Through Securities:
lnterest Collected
Plus Accrued lnterest at End of Period
Less Accrued lnterest at Beginning of Period
Less Accrued lnterest at Purchase Durlng Period
lnterest Earned during Period
Adjusted by Premiums and Discounts
Adjusted by Capital Gains or Losses
Earnings during Period
0.00
0.00
0.00)
0.00)
0.00
0.00
0.00)
0.00)
0,00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00 0.00
Gash/Checking Accounts:
lnterest Collected
Plus Accrued lnterest at End of Period
Less Accrued lnterest at Beginning of Period
lnterest Earned during Period
0.00
356,216.62
316,919.03)
441 ,647.29
356,216.62
425,720.11)
39,297.59 372,143.80
Total lnterest Earned durlng Perlod
Total Capital Galns or Losses
120,097.58
0.00
1,186,383.79
I,250.00
Run Date: 03/1 12002 - 09:55
Portfolio CITY
CP
Total Earnings during Period 120,097.58 1,187,633.79
PM (PRF-PM6))*v5.02f
((
((
(
(
(
(
((
))
t
((
Par
95BD
Portfolio Management
Portfolio Summary
February 28,2002
Book
Value
o/o ot
Portfolio Term
Days to
Maturlty
YTM
360 Equlv.
YTM
365 Equiv.lnv€stments Value
Federal Agency lssues - Coupon
lnvestments
800,000.00 828,000.00 802,000.00 100_00 1,756 563 4.995 5.064
800,000.00 828,000.00 802,000.00 100.00% 1,756 563 4.995 5.064
Total Earnings February 28 Month Ending Fiscal Year To Date
Cunent Year
Average Daily Balance
Effective Rate of Return
Pursuant to State law,
of
Rahn Becker, Finance Director/Treasurer
3/t ,
3,416.67 27,333.34
802,000.00 802,000.00
5.55% 5.12%
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
funds is restricted by law (e.9. Gas Tax, Trust & Agency funds, Capital Projects, and Enterprise funds).
Portfolio 95BD
CP
PM (PRF_PM1 ) SymRept V5.O2fRun Date: 03/1 12002 - 09:56
Market
Value
CUSIP lnvestment# lssuer
Average
Balance
95BD
Portfolio Management
Portfolio Details . lnvestments
February 28,2002
Purchase
Date Par Value Market Value
Stated
BookValue Rate
YTM Daysto
365 Maturlty
Page2
Maturity
Date
LAIF
79 LOCAL AGENCY INV. FD.
Subtotal and Average 0,00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.000 0
0.00 0.00 0.00 5.707 5.707
Federal Agency lssues . Coupon
3133M5Q89 485 1112411998 800,000.00 828,000.00FEOERAL HOME LOAN BANK
Subtotal and Average 802,000.00 800,000,00 828,000,00 802,000.00
802,000.00 5.125 5.064 563 09/15i2003
5.064 563
Total lnvestmenB and Average 802,000,00 800,000.00 828,000.00 802,000,00 5.064 563
Run Oate: 03/1 1/2002 - 09:56
Portfolio 95BD
CP
PM (PRF-PM2) Sy, b.ozr/))
(
98BD
Portfolio Management
Portfolio Summary
February 28,2002
Par Market
Value
Book
Value
'h ot
Portfollo Term
DaW to
Maturity
YTM
360 Equiv.
YTM
365 Equlv,lnvestments Value
Federal Ag€ncy Coupon Securities
lnvestments
1 ,710,000.00 1,775,185.20 1 ,710,000.00 100.00 1,826 3S0
390
5.977 6.060
1,710,000.00 1,775,'t85.20 1,710,000.00 100.00% 1,826 5.977 6.060
Total Earnings February 28 Month Ending Fiscal Year To Date
Current Year A,015.27 69,155.05
Average Daily Balance 1,71O,OOO.0O 1,Z1O,OOO.O0
Effective Rate of Return 6,1,1% 6.07%
Pursuant to State law, there are sufficient available funds to meet Burlingame's expenditure requirements for the
of is restricted by law (e.9. Gas Capital Projects, and Enterprise funds).
RAHN BECKER, Finance Director/Treasurer
coming 6 months. Total funds invested represent consolidation of all fund types, and
Tax, Trust & Agency funds,
"/t ^
Portfolio 98BD
CP
PM (PRF_PM1 ) SymRepl V5.02fRun Date: 03/1 1/2002 - 09:57
(
CUSIP lnvestment # lsguer
Average
Balance
98BD
Portfolio Management
Portfolio Details - lnvestments
February 28,2002
Purchase
Date Par Value
Stated
Book Value Rate Moody'sMarket Value
YTM Daysto
365 Maturlty
Page 2
Maturlty
Date
Managed Pool Accounts
80 LOCAL AGENCY INVEST FUND
Subtotal and Average
0.00 0.00 0.00 5.124 5.124 I
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.000 0
Federal Agency Goupon Securities
3133M3XEO 478 FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK
Subtotal and Average
03/26/1998 1,710,000.00 1,775,185.20 1 ,710,000.00 6.060 6.060 390 03/2612003
6.060 3901,710,000.00 1,710,000.00 1,775,185.20 1,710,000.00
Total lnvestmonts and Average r,710,000.00 1,710,000,00 1,775,185,20 1,710,000.00 6.000 300
Run Date: 03/1 1/2002 - 09:57
)
Portfolio 9EBD
CP
PM (PRF-PM2) syml ).ox)
v
((r
01 BD
Portfolio Management
Portfolio Summary
February 28,2002
lnvestments Par
Value
Market
Value
Book
Value
'A ot
Portfollo
Days to
Maturlty
YTM
380 Equlv.
YTM
365 Equlv.Term
Managed Pool Accounts
Federal Agency Coupon Securities
lnvestments
't0,654,520.33
1 , t 00,000.00
10,654,520.33
1,115,807.00
10,6s4,520.s3
1,100,000.00
90.64 1
1,826
2.841
5.474
2.880
5.s509.36 't,628
11,754,520.33 11,77O,327.33 11,754,520.33 100.00%172 153 3.087 3.130
Total Earnings February 28 Month Ending Fiscal Year To Date
Cunent Year
Average Daily Balance
Effective Rate of Return
Pursuant to State law, there are sufficient available
29,609,'t6
11,909,520.33
3.24%
funds to meet Burlingame's expenditure
288,795.05
requirements for the coming 6 months, Total funds invested represent consolidation of some of these funds is(e.9.& Agency funds, Capital Projects, and Enterprise funds).
I
Rahn A. Becker, Finance Dir./Ireasurer
Portfolio 01BD
CP
PM (PRF-PMl) SymRept V5.02f
Run Date: 03/1 1/2002 - 09:58
,l
/,'/'^
01 BD
Portfolio Management
Portfolio Details - lnvestments
February 28,2002
Purchase
Date Par Value
Page2
CUSIP lnvestment# lssuer
Average
Balance Market Value
Stated
Book Value Rate
YTM Days to
365 Maturlty
YTM Maturlty
Date300
Managed Pool Accounts
81 Local Agency lnv. Fd
Subtotal and Average
08/09/2001 '| 0,654,520.33 10,654,520.s3 10,654,520.33 2.880 2.841 2.880
10,809,520.33 10,654,520,33 10,654,520.33 10,654,520.33 2.441 2.880 1
Federal Agency Coupon Securities
3133MGQR0 503 Federal Home Loan Bank
Subtotal and Average
08t15t2001 1,100,000.00 1,1 15,807.00 1,100,000.00 5.550 5.474 5.550 1,628 08/15/2006
1,100,000.00 5.474 5.550 1,8281,100,000.00 1,{ 00,000,00 1,t I 5,807.00
Total lnvestments and Average 1 I,909,520.33 11,754,520.33 11,770,327.33 11,754.,520.33 3.087 3.130 153
)
Portfolio 01BD
PM (PRF-PM2) Sy, ):;
Run Date: 03/1 1/2002 - 09:5P
ce
crl
ch
Flona Hanrilton
Ioll Crescerrt Avenue
BurtirrgcrilG; GA g4oro
Tel: (6io) yl-t4rA
Fax: (650) l,d,l,.2;6,t't
Ermaih Fionaliz@aol.corn
Fax
To:Council Members (6so) r42-sBc6
Frorrr: Fiona Hamilton (oso) u?,,-2,c,a7
Ilate Mareh gthr 2oo2
I am attaching an email that I have sent to each of you today
and I would appreciate a resPonse.
As iltustrated by the audienee's reaction ln tlre Councit
meetffirrg, there aae meny Burlingame residents who are
outrtged and Goneerned. Perhaps lrou could put this malter
on tlre agenda of the next Council meefrrg and orplain this
..charadert. Maybe audience members coutd aslt questions?
Thank yog and I toolt lomard to lrearilg trom lrou.
CITY CLERK'S OFFICE
CIW OF BURLINGAME
(
DIS TRIBU'I'IUN:
City Council
City Manager
City Attorney
please respond
l-: No Response Required
- Dir. Finance
i City Planner
r Dir. Public Works
. Human Resources
, Police Chief
r Fire Chief
I Parks & Rec
I Librarian
PLEASE SEND A COPY OF YOUR
RESPONSE TO THE CITY CLERK
On Next Agenda
1'd 1.892 EIE OS9 I +uol I T uIeH euo r I dgl : Zo eo Eo JeLl
t
RECEIVED
MAR 1 1, 2002
lltan 9S OZ O2: 4OP F i ona Ham i I ton + 1 650 343 2687 p."
Fiona
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Mary Janney
Rosalie O'Mahony; Cathy Baylock; Mike Coffey; Joe Galligan
A Charade
MAR
U
Fox5qn Moteo times.doc
Dear Mayor 'Janney
I emailed you earlier t.his week but, after watching the "unIive" couneil meeEing again
Eoday, I flel I must reiEerate my opinion and ask for some clarificaEion about our
',demLcratic,, process, I admire Mri. O'Mahony because she cares about Burlingame and, for
EhaE reason, I respect her opinion, Is it a "charade" and a "disgrace"? Was she
overstating tshe situat.ion?
I have a1so faxed t,he newspapers and asked Ehem to keep Burlingame residenEs compleLely
and utterly informed. This is very imporEant.
I do have some questions which perhaps you could clarify for me :
1'oneofmyConcerns,asalsostaLedinthene\^Ispapers'isthatthecommissj.onershave
been punisfrld for disagreeing with a development. project. Is Lhis the case? Please say
no, blcause differencei of opinion are rvhat make the democratic process work-
2. f agree that the Commission should be opened up for everyone - to everyone who cares
about Burlingame. The int.erviewing proc"=i should also be open and noE conducted by only
two council mernbers. We are ,"ry Lon.erned t.hat Ehe planning commissioners are not chosen
to be mere puppets of the Council. This would be a traversty. Can you assure us that
t,here will be no puppeLs and only applicants who eare about. Burlingame are appointed? And
vrill chey be alloived to ha.." a pLrso.ral agenda that t,hey care about Burlingame?
3. As sEated in my attached letEer Eo the newspaper, we vrant to be informed as soon as Mr'
Galligan ,rdiscovers,r Ehe personal agendas. plLaie inform me. I am a very fair person and
u., -""r="trion like this, should be iLarified immediately, don't you think? It will afso
be very helpful to each and every applicant for Lhe Commission.
As a concerned, Eax paying twenty-one year Burlingame residenE, I look
answers Lo my questions 1, 2 and 3. I would also appreciaEe a response
Mrs. Baylock and Messrs' Coffey and Gal1igan. Thank you'
RECEIVED
2002
forward to your
from Mrs. o'Mahony,
11
1
CIW CLERK'S OFFICE
CIW OF BURLINGAME
J"lar OS OZ O2:4Op Fiona Hamilton + 1 650 343 2687
(650) ,48-4446
(6so) t4r46a7
p.3
;
'!
;i
Fiona Hamilton
Io5 Crescrent Avenue
Burlingamer CA g4oro
Tet3 (650) ,474.4rA
Fax: (650) ,4ra,ba7
Ernail: Fr onaLiz@aot.co m
ClTY
crw
CLERK'S OFFICE
OF BURLINGAME
Fax
To:The San Mateo Times
From: Fiona Hamilton
I)ate: March 8th, 2oot
I'B'A rrUE ALL OlrEB AGAIN
Thank you for your coverage of, rtlre reappointments tor Ptanning
Gornrnissiotlers. I tepcd the Council rneeting so I sould take anolther
looh at the ..cltarade, and (disgraceD, a grrote trom a Couneil rnenilrer.
Orre council merrrber aGcused rthe oornmissioners o,f having personal
agendas - ie it an agenda for tlre good ol Burlingame? Of ciorrrse loyalt5r
to Bur$ngame is rvhy each and every council rnember and planning
comnrissioner should be elected. It is simple realty!
TYhen Galligarr lras r.discoveredtt these personal agenda.sr please inlorrn
us. This rvould be hetfrlul to prospective appEcants [or the Planning
Comirlf,ssion. Also witl the nenr conrrnissioners bo allstned to disagree
withthe Council? Of course vye hopc the trro "unblesedtt intetrairyers
are fair and . heaven torbid - do not have personal agendas of, their
ow-n!! LJnless it is because they cafe about Burlirrgarne!
Two aommissioners are being sent to the penart5r box because tthey
disqreed wittr sotne mernbers oE the Council on a development
propcf g;1l rrre be sending dissenters to the Gutag. Heaven lorbid.
please coryer tlris ..democratictt proeess so all Burtingame residents GaIr
be futly irrformed. This is verar irnportant' Thank lroll'
Fiona Hamiltont Burlingame
\C ' *st.Cu,u[ffiCn
EGEIUE
MAR €, 2002
tqalY^
i<ts<I
--
.-7
#,'**;:,
Cciry Rnomey
P.O. Box 5147
San Ramon, CA 94583
DISTRIBUTION:
please respond
March 6,2002
Mr. Rahn Becker
Assistant City Manager
City of Burlingame
501 Primrose Road
Burlingame, CA. 94010
t1 No Response Required
! Dir. Finance
f r City Planner
L Dir. Public Works
ll Human Resources
I Police Chief _/
f Fire Chief /On Next Agenda
! Parks & Rec
ll Librarian
PLEASE SEND A COPY OF YOUR
RESPONSE TO THE CITY CLERK
Dear Mr. Becker:
The purpose of this letter is to inform you of programming adjustments being made to
AT&T Broadband's cable services in the City of Burlingame. The changes will be effective
on April 9,2002.
AT&T Broadband will be migrating channel 33- HBO; and channel 19- Showtime from
the analog tier to the Digital tier of seruices.
These changes will not result in a modification of the current cable television rates.
Please contact Ms. Noe with any further questions at (650) 631-0191 extension 375.
Sincerely,
\r,tdre J1$cMtr
Mitzi Givens for
Kathi Noe
AT&T Broadband
Director of Government Affairs and Franchising
West Bay- Peninsula Area
Ktl/mg
^VVa\lp Recycled Paper
6rycoun"ir
{g;fiMunus,
E/City Anomey
n Dir. Finance
I Police Chiel
D Fire Chief
! Parks & Rec
rr Librarian
PLEASE Sf,ND A COPY OF YOUR
RESPONSE TO THE CITY CLERK
DISTRIBUTION:
please respond
&dnlNext Agenda
-r No Response Required
! City Planner
D Dir.PublicWo.kr-
E Human Resources
TE8 BI'NLINGAI(E EISTORICAL SOCTDTT NO. BOX I4{. BI'RTINGAT'
3/6/02
Burlingame City Council
Burlingame City Hall
501 Primrose Avenue
Burlingame, CA 94OLO
Re: Historical Significant Properties List for The City of Burlingame
Dear Mayor Janney, Council members,
I would like to thank you for the opportunity to speak at the public
comment section of last Saturday's joint planning/council meeting on
the subjects of signage and The Historical Significant Properties List.
However, in light of some of the feedback that the city received from
their consultant, Mr. Bill Sugaya of Carey and Comp"ny, a member of
The Burlingame Historical Society contacted Mr. Sugaya.
During their conversation it became clear that Mr. Sugaya was
unaware that much of the data has already been catalogued by The
Burlingame Historical Society, nor was he aware of the volunteer
potential of the society, nor was he aware that the society was
willing to contribute 10%o of the cost of the project. In fact, he was
unaware of the very existence of The Burlingame Historical Society.
Mr.Sugaya has since revised his cost estimate from $200,000 to
$30,000- $36,000 and his staff time estimate to minimal. These
estimates are consistent with those the Burlingame Historical Society
has received from Mitch Postel, Director of The San Mateo County
Historical Association.
Given this news I would respectfully request the City discuss funding
this impoftant document.
I recognize that there may be questions or misconceptions that
remain regarding the features and benefits of such a list. Per a
ftPlftfagt_
e
TEB BITRLINGAI(& EISTORICTTII SOC'ETr P,O, BO@
conversation with members of The Burlingame Historical Society,
Mitch Postel has agreed to moderate a discussion with experts from
The Office of Historic Preservation and yourselves at your
convenience. I would be more than happy to arrange such a meeting
or you may contact Mitch directly at 650-299-0[04.
Burlingame must become pro-active in promoting its cultural and
architectural heritage. I implore you to send the message that You,
our current leaders, are proud of how our past leaders envisioned
Burlingame.
Wouldn't it be nice to point with pride to more than just the library
and the fire station as shining examples of how we respect our
heritage? This is a project that can be implemented without
impeding the progress of any other project on the city's priority list.
Mayor Janney, Councilmembers, Planners, there is no time like the
present to promote and preserve our past.
Russ Cohen, President
The Burlingame Historical Society
cc: City Manager Jim Nantell
City Planner Meg Monroe
Safe Harbor
SAFE HARBOR HOMELESS SHELTER
PO. BOX 783
SAN MATEO, CA94401
SUPPORTED BY:
Congressmon Tom Lontos
Stote Senotor Jockie Speier
Assemblymon Lou Popon
Son Moteo County Boord of Supervisors
Mork Church
Richord Gordon
Jerry Hill
Mike Nevin
Rose Jocobs Gibson
Redwood City - City Council:
Richord S. Cloire, Moyor
Son Moteo City Coungil:
Sue Lempert, Moyor
Jon Epstein
Corole Groom
John Lee
Cloire Mock
Hillsborough City Council:
John Fonnon, Moyor
Chorles F. Adoms
Tom Kosten
Kitty Mullooly
D. Poul Regon
Doly City City Council:
Corol Klott, Moyor
Modolyn Agrimonti
Adrienne Tissier
Sol Torres
March 7, 2002
James Nantell
City Of Burlingame, General Account
501 Primrose
Burlingame, CA 94010
Dear Friends:
We wish to acknowledge your grant of $8,000.00 this season and
express in the name of our board, staff and shelter clients a very
sincere thanks for your support. We appreciate the fact that you
are sharing in our commitment to provide a safe place of warmth
and comfort for those who have no other place to stay this winter.
For the past thirteen years, the San Mateo Armory has been the
home of the emergency winter shelter and has housed the 90 men
and women from November through March. Last year the
County of San Mateo constructed a perrnanent location for the
shelter at 295 North Access Road in South San Francisco. We
reopened the shelter this year on November 19, 2001, and with the
support of the county and the community we hope to keep it open
year round. Also, we have changed the name Winter Shelter to
Safe Harbor.
In addition to providing shelter and a warm meal, Safe Harbor wlll
also address the many challenges faced by the homeless in San
Mateo County. This year clients will be offered counseling,
referrals to job training, and life skills courses. In addition, Safe
Harbor will house an on site substance abuse treatment program.
We at Sarnaritan Hcuse and San Matec County Safe Harbor feel,
privileged to operate this shelter on behalf of the people in our
community most in need. We are honored to have you as
someone who shares our concern for our homeless neighbors.
Respectfully,
Denis Lewis
Director of Operations
Geetha Thaker
Shelter Director
(Among others)
P. S. In compliance with Internal Revenue Service regulations, we confirm that your gift was in exchange
for nothing but goodwill: you received no good or services for your donation. Samaritan House is
classified as a 501 (c) (3) non profit organization. Please keep this receipt for your tax records. Thank you.
MAR - 8 2002
IR
$
To the Honorable Mayor Janney; Vice Mayor Coffey; Councilwoman Baylock; Councilman
Galligan; Councilwoman O'Mahoney; Crty Manager Nantell; Traffic, Safety and Parking
Commissioners Russ Cohen, Lisa De Angelis, James Evans, David Mayer, James Mclver,
With parking on the Burlingame side of Peninsula Avenue being a current topic with the city
"o*.il, we as concerned parents, of children who attend Papillon Preschool at7A0 Peninsula
Avenue, have a few suggestions for resolution.
Currently, the 700 block of Peninsula Avenue is considered a school zone; as per the 25 mph
'then children are present" sign on the westbound 600 block of Peninsula. We have
approximately 40 feet of greer-'o24 minute parking" in front ofthe school, also on the westbound
side of Peninsula Avenue. Due to the tiny parking lot at Papillon and the fact that some 80+
families share that area during peak drop-offand pick-up hours, we respectfully request that the
crty keep Papillon Preschool in the "school zorre" that it is currently. This allows parents to park
on Peninsula when Papillon's lot is full. We as parents can easily gather our children, secure
them in our cars and are on our way well within the allotted 24-minute time. On any given day
this can average as little as only 8 minutes from the time we pull up to the school, to the time we
depart.
However, if the city has decided to change the zoning for this particular area then may we kindly
suggest that agreen "24 minute zone" be placed on Bloomfield Avenue? At present, there is
approximately 45-50 feet on the southbound side of Bloomfield Avenue that is adjacent to the
school and the school's playground that could be utilized as a24-mtntie drop-offand pick-up
parking. Since this areaaheady borders the school, this is also an ideal locale to use for such
purposes.
We as parents are only asking for a few feet of green zones for picking up and dropping offour
children. We understand that parking in Burlingame can be dfficult at times but this is only
during daytime hours and it's to conduct legitimate business in our lovely city.
A majority ofthe families of Papillon students are hard working, tax-paying residents of
Burlingame. Burlingame residents or not, rumy of us frequent businesses in the area strictly due
to the closeness and convenience to Papillon.
We understand that the City Counsel must do what is best for Burlingame but as residents who
bring additional revenue to the city, solely because we choose Papillon to educate our children,
we feel we must speak out on this situation Please let the signatures below speak as our voice.
@ll[orzresho/I
Corine E. Hubsher
700 Peninsula Ave.
Burlingame, CA 94010
(650) 340-7241
a .a-
Richard C. Berra
Kristi Cotton Spence
Ellen L. Wrnick
Gretchen M. Wallacker
Bpnna . SPENCE
REGISTERED LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP
Attorneys at Law
1650 Bonel PLACE, SutrE t20
Snru Mnreo, CAL|FoRNTA 94402
Telephone: (650)349.9920
Facsimile: (650) 349.9907
Brooksley Spence Wylie
Of Counsel
March 11,2002
Fax and Mail
Traffic Commission
City of Burlingame
501 Primrose
Burlingame, CA 94010
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
I am writing to you concerning the issue of parking for the Papillon Preschool located at
700 Peninsula Ave., Burlingame, California.
I have been a resident of the San Mateo/Hillsborough/Burlingame area since my birth 60
years ago. As such, I am familiar with the needs and traffic flow on Peninsula Ave. My
,. granddaughter, for whom we have legal guardianship, is a student at the Papillon Preschool.
It is vital to the safety and welfare of the children and families of the Papillon Preschool
to use the three parking places on Peninsula Ave. Most of the children in the preschool arrive
and are picked up in a fairly concentrated time frame. (Between 7:30 A.M. and 9:00 A.M. and,
between 5:00 P.M. to 6:00 P.M.).
The preschool has a parking lot, but it is often full during those periods. The overflow
parking must park on Peninsula. Parents escort their young children to and from their cars. The
closer the cars can get to the front door, the better it will be. Removing additional parking to
around the corner and onto Bloomfield will substantially increase the possibility that a child
could be hit by a car on Peninsula Ave.
I have driven on Peninsula in the above-meptioned morning and evening hours for many
years and I have not seen any increased difficulties arising by reason of the cars parked on
Peninsula. Traffic flow on Peninsula is not being adversely impacted by these cars.
I believe it would be foolhardy for the parking places on Peninsula to be eliminated and
to require these very small children to walk a substantially longer distance. Please ensure that
those parking places remain, for the safety and welfare of the children at Papillon preschool.
March 11,2002
Page 2
KCS:kjp
I will be happy to answer any questions.
Very truly yours,
Kristi
Papillion Preschool
700 Peninsula Ave.
Burlingame, CA 94010
AOL.COM I AOL Mail
^6,noran ere
Page I of 3
1EI:qI
EilE@Eil@@ @@@
dffrsrlom
@
Send the lCs Your Day Bouquet'^'
samc day dclivcry availablc $29 n'
@nolrv\ail'"
EI @ @rotr@
Although I am not a Burlingame Resident I have chosen to do business in your fine
Gity in several different arenas and I must say no matter where you go, you always
face the parking challenge. Wth the parking in front of Papillon Preschool being a
cunent topic with the city counsel, as a concerned parent I have taken it upon myself
to become informed with the situation.
You may ask yourself why would a Belmont Resident care about parking on
Peninsula Ave. One of the most important avenues of business I conduct in
Burlingame is the education and daytime care of rny child, I have chosen Papillon
Preschool, 700 Pcninsula Ave. as my child's educator and daytime caregiver as it is
bne of the finest preschools available. You and the sunounding neighborhood of
Papillon may not be aware ofwhat myself and 80 other fanilies have discovered in
this fine gem of a school. However, I do find it distressing that since I do choose to
do business in Burlingame and have chosen Papillon for the most important task of
educating and caring for my daughter, I am not even permitted a 5 minute parking
space on the street in which to drop her off and pick her up when the parking lot is
crowded.
Papillon Preschool is a quality and loving environment for any tiny person to start
their education. Papillon has chosen the important task of preparing and nurturing
children to grow into strong and healthy membels of society. This is vastly different
from the previous tenants. I understand that before Papillon moved into 700
Peninsula location in 1995, that the previous tenants permitted may lay within the
neighborhood. But I think the sunounding neighbors can agree that even though the
children may take walks that are strictly supervised by the capable Papillon staff,
there is no activity going on that is remotely similarto the previous tenants.
We as parents are not ask ng for anything complicated. Basically all we are asking
is for a few overflow parking spaces to patronize a wonderful little business in which
we spend our hard-earned money on, in the City of Burlingame. lt's just a few
innocent pick-up/dropofi passenger parking spaces. ldeally the current spaces in
front of 700 Peninsula Ave. are the simplest solution for this overflow parking. Wrth
some families having multipule children getting th6m inside can be a challenge. We
all know how easily they can wiggle their little hands free to explore. The idea of
having to make your way around the busy comer of Bloomfiold and Peninsula is a bit
unsettllng. Keeping these parking spaces as close to the school entrance as
f- lnclude
original t6xt
in R€ply.
E
Address Eook
subj : Mayor
Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2OO2 L1291L7 PM Eastern standard
Erom: SMRESIII
To: RobinLRichardson
http://aolmail.aol.com/mail.dci?id=1&count=1&box=ead&list:1- 1&read.x=1 3/12/02
ll
Keep As NBw
Reply
ffi
lt*11.,#t
Reply All
E-
E!
"AOL.COM I AOL Mail
is inherent to the children's safe$. lf Peninsula Avenue isn't safe enough to warrant
any curlc parking than maybe the city should evaluate the speed limit and the
potential need for speed bumps.
An option would be to having 24 minute green curb parking on the west side of
Bloomfield adjacent to the building. However, ftom what I learned from the 2114 City
Council meeting the neighbors are against this. I must then ask how can a
and healthy Burlingame business not be permifted to park adjacent to the only two
available sides of their building?
Truthfully how can the Bloomfield residents be so selfish? | am sure the Bloomfield
Residents all hope and dream that they can pull right up in front of their house and
park, but this is 2002 and the population here on the peninsula does not warrant this
type of leisurely parking. The Residents should be parking in their driveways. These
residents should be encouraging safety in their neighborhood, not wasting your time
hting over atew 24 minute, from 8 am to 6pm Monday through Friday Parking
Furthermore if the objective of the City of Burlingame is to keep Peninsula Ave. safe
by eliminating parking on the north side of the street than no business should be
singled out.
be to
oowniiiaJ Atif
AOL Pricino Plans_
Clearly the only
keep the green
in the neighborhood
the need for speed
Page 2 of 3
realsolution to keeping harmony
curb where it is now and consider
control through speed bumps.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Stacey A. Murray
reilI m 1ot1 m
AA! ,Aqscss-N-unnlss
AOL Affiliate Network
About AOL
About AOL Anywhere
Feed back
Careers@AOL
Link to Us
Advertise with Us
AOL Anvwhere Help_
AOL Anywhere
Search
Web Channels
Site Index
Copvriqht @ 2OO0 America Online, lnc.
Keep As l.lev,r
http://aolmail.aol.com/mail.dci?id:1&counFl&box=ead&list:1-1&read.x:l 3lt2t02
a
Page I ot I
!t
From:
lo:
Sent:
Subject:
fvi
<KChung@RoPers.com>
<lenfant@Pacbell. net>
Tuesday, M arch '12,2002 9:15 AM
FW: Papillon PreschoolParking in
---Original Message-----
From : fi efgyOuotsq* [mailto :MCFFY@aol' com]
Sent: Monday, March 11,2002 8:56 PM
To: Kehung@ropers.com
Subjecr ie: Fapiiton Preschool parking in Burlingame
Dear Kristina:
Thank you for your e-mail regarding the subject item. Having raised a
iairly large famity, I understaia your concern and your thoughfful analysis
of this situation.
It is my understanding that the Traffic, Safety, and Parking Commission will
have this on their frnarctr 14th agenda. This will provideyou with an
"pp"*rity to bring your issues-to the Commission that is responsible for
*.h ,utt.rs. Pleale-try to attend this meeting together with other
concerned parents.
I will follow the minutes of this meeting. Please feel free to contact me
if you have any questions regarding the commissions actions.
Sincerely,
Mike Coffey
3l12/02
Page I of2
pacbell
From:
To:
Cc:
Sent:
Subject:
'VN/cathyb" <cathyb@baylock.com>
<KChunj@nopers.com>; <maryjanney@aol.com>; <mcff@ad.com>; <cathy@baylock.oom>;
<joegallign@aol.com>; <rosalieomahony@earthlink.neF; "'MGR-Nantell, Jim"'
<jnantell@burlin game.org>
<lenfant@pacbell. net>
Monday, March '11, 2002 6:35 PM
RE: Papillon Preschool parking in Burlingame
Thank you for writing. I will send a copy of my response to the City
Manager. I believe, having read the Traffic, Safety and Parking minutes,
that Commissioner Cohen asked the City Engineer to look into a cut into the
curb on Peninsula as well as looking at the Green zone on Peninsula. The
commission will discuss this item at their monthly meeting Thursday, March
14th at7 p.m. (City Hall, conference room A). You are welcome to attend
the meeting and make your comments there.
Again, thank you for writing
Cathy Baylock
---Original Message-----
From h n Imailto:KChung@Ropers.com]e c
Sent: Monday, March 11, 2002 5:36 PM
To: maryiannev(Daol.com; mcffy@4aLgqm; cathv@bavlock.com;
ise&aXlcl@ael@m ; ro!?l ieomahony@earthl ink.net
Cc: lenfant@pacbell.net'
Subject: re: Papillon Preschool parking in Burlingame
Dear Mayor Janney, Vice Mayor Coffey, Councilwoman Baylock, Councilman
Galligan, and Councilwoman O'Mahony:
I am a parent ofa child who currently attends Papillon Preschool,
located at 700 Peninsula Avenue in Burlingame. I write to express my
concern regarding the City's apparent decision to fo6id parking along
Peninsula Avenue next to the preschool. While I do not necessarily disagree
with that new rule due to the danger it poses because of heavy traflic in
that area, new problems will arise if no altemative parking arrangements
are provided. To avoid these problems, the City should create a "green
curb" along Bloomfield Road, directly behind the Preschool.
Papillon has approximately 85 students, consisting ofbabies as
young as three months old to pre-kindergarden children. During popular
drop-off and pick-up hours, roughly 7-9 a.m. and 4-6 p.m., the Preschool's
seven spots in its parking lot are not capable ofproviding enough room for
all ofthe parents'cars. Reducing the parking solely to this small lot
will certainly result in more congestion along Peninsula Avenue as cars are
forced to stop, wait, then start again and make one or more circles around
the block until space is available. The drop-off and pick-up times coincide
with the busiest traffrc periods on Peninsula Avenue.
The best solution is to create a "green curb" along Bloomfield Road
Nbr',
3t12/02
,
Li
I
directly behind Papillon Preschool. I understand some ofthe residents on
Bloomfield Road have already voiced objections to the creation ofa green
curb. The only reason cited is their concem that long term parking will no
longer available to them. In particular, they argue they will no longer be
able to park their cars on the street in front of their own homes. This
reasoning, frankly, makes no sense. First, residency does not give anyone a
"right" to use a public steet as a personal driveway. Second, these homes
all have garages and/or driveways of their own which, presumably, were
designed for the very puryose of parking one's own cars.
Conversely, allowing a green curb in that area would greatly benefit
Burlingame and its commuters as a whole by reducing the taffic problem that
promises to erupt without some Papillon Prcschool parking, as well as ensure
the safety of the parents and children associated with Papillon - a number
of which incidentally, are Burlingame homeownen. lmagine a parent who has
two children, ages twenty-two months and three months. The juggling
required to hold on to a wandering toddler fast on his feet while
simultaneously carrying a baby in a heavy carseat and hanging on to diaper
bags and exna gear for both is a feat. Add to that having to walk three
blocks from the Preschool because there is no closer place to park, and you
have created a situation fraught with potential dangers to both mom and
kids.
It is no surprise that over the last five to ten years, especially
with &e burst of business in Silicon Valley, Burlingame has been
transformed into an even more popular and, consequently, busier place to
live and work. Papillon Preschool has been, and continues to be, a
temendous asset to this city. Even the Bloomfield Road residents who have
written to you seem to agree the heschool is a positive addifion to
Burlingame. To accommodate the changing needs of this wonderfi.rl city, as
well as continue to encourage the development and growth of businesses such
as Papillon Preschool, compromises are necessary. Therefore, I respectfrrlly
ask the City's council members to reconsider the parking situation near
Papillon Preschool and to create a "green curb' behind the school on
Bloomfield Road.
Thank you for your time.
Sincerely,
Kristina H.
Chung McCleary
323 Dwight
Road
Burlingame,
cA 94010
Page2 of2
3/12/02
Page I of2
bell
From: <Kchung@RoPers.com>
i;;"" ..arvJiin-.vei"ot.com>; <mcW@aol.com>; <cathy@baylock'com>; <ioegallign@aol com>;
<rosalieomahony@earthlink. net>
Cc: <lenfant@Pacbell.net>
Sent: Monday, March 11 ,2002 5:36 PM
subiect: re: Papillon Preschool parking in Burlingame
6-"i rtilyotlu#"y, vice Mayoi Coffey, Councilwoman Baylock, Councilman
Galligan, and Councilwoman O'Mahony:
I am a parent of a child who currently attends Papillon Preschool,
located at 700 Peninsula Avenue in Burlingame. I write to express my
concem regarding the City's apparent decision to forbid parking along
peninsula ivenui next to ttre pieschool. While I do not necessarily disagree
with that new rule due to the danger it poses because ofheaYy taffic in
that area, new problems will arise if no altemative parking arrangements
*" prorided. To avoid these problems, the City should.create a "green
"*b" ulo.rg Bloomfield Road, directly behind the Preschool'
Papillon has approximately 85 students, consisting of babies as
yoi.g as three i"onths old to pre-kindergarden childr-en. During popular
d.op--off *d pi"k-up hours, rougNy 7-9 a.m. and 4-6 p.m., the Preschool's
seven spots in its parking lot are not capable of prwiding. enough room for
all of the parents' iars. Reducing the parking solely to this small lot
will certainly result in more congestion along Peninsula Avenue as cars axe
forced to stop, wait, then start again and make one or more circles around
the block uniil space is available. The drop-off and pick-up times coincide
with the busiest traffic periods on Peninsula Avenue.
The best solution is to create a "green curb" along Bloomfield Road
directly behind Papillon Preschool. I understand some ofthe residents on
Bloomfield Road have already voiced objections to the creation ofa green
curb. The only reason cited is their concem that long term parking will no
longer available to them. In particular, they argue they will no longer be
abl6 to park their cars on the street in front of their own homes' This
reasoning, frankly, makes no sense. First, residency does not give anyone a
"right" to use a public steet as a personal driveway. Second, these homes
all-have garageJ and/or driveways of their own which, presumably, were
designed for the very purpose of parking one's own cars.
Conversely, allowing a green curb in that area would greatly benefit
Burlingame and its commuters as a whole by reducing the tafflrc problem that
promises to erupt without some Papillon Preschool parking, as well as.ensure
ihe safety of the parents and children associated with Papillon - a number
of which, incidentally, are Burlingame homeowners. Imagine a parent who has
two children, ages twenty-two months and three months. The juggling
required to hold on to a wandering toddler fast on his feet while
simultaneously carrying a baby in a heavy ca$eat and harging on to diaper
bags and extra gear for both is a feat. Add to that, having to walk three
blocks from the Preschool because there is no closer place to park, and you
have created a situation fraught with potential dangers to both mom and
3/t!02
It is no surprise that over the last five to ten years' especially
with the burst of business in Silicon Valley, Burlingame has been
nansformed into an even more popular and consequently, busier place to
live and work. Papillon Preschool has been, and continucs to be, a
tremendous asset to this city. Even the Bloomfield Road residents who bave
written to you seem to agree the Preschool is a positive addition to
Burlingame. To accommodate the chaoging needs of this wonderfrrl city, as
-
well as continue to encourage the devclopmeat and grounh ofbusinesses such
as Papillon Preschool, comp,romises arc necessary. Therefore' I rcspec6rlly
ask the City's council members to reconsider the parking situation near
Papillon Preschool and to crcat€ a ngreen curb' behind lte school on
Bloomfield Road.
kids.
Thar* you for your time.
Sincerely,
Kristina H.
Chung McCleary
323 Dwiglt
Road
Burlingame,
cA 94010
Page2 of2
3/1U02
Page 1 of3
4
pacbell
From: <KChung@RoPers.com>
To: <cathyb@baylock.com>
Cc: <lenfant@Pacbell.net>
Sent: Tuesday, March '12, 2002 9: 14 AM
Subject: RE: Papillon Preschoolparking in
Thank you for your prompt response. I will do my best to attend the meeting
on March l4th.
---Original Message---
From : VN/cathyb [mai lto : cathyb@baylock. com]
Sent: Monday, March 11,2002 6:35 PM
To : KC hung@Ropers. com ; maryj anney@aol. som ; mcffy@aol . com ;
qalhy@beflask-q9lq; iaaga[lg!@aal-aa&; rosalieomahony@earthlink.net;
'MGR-Nantell, Jim'
Cc: lcnfa$@pacbell.net
Subject: RE: Papillon Preschool parking in Burlingame
Thank you for writing. I will send a copy of my response to the City
Manager. I believe, having read the Traffic, Safety and Parking minutes,
that Commissioner Cohen asked the City Engineer to look into a cut into the
curb on Peninsula as well as looking at the Green zone on Peninsula. The
commission will discuss this item at their monthly meeting Thursday, March
14th at 7 p.m. (City Hall, conference room A). You are welcome to attend
the meeting and make your comments there.
Again, thank you for writing.
Cathy Baylock
---Original Message-----
From : KQhuag@Bspprsian [mai lto : KC hung@Ropers. com]
Sent: Monday, March 11,2002 5:36 PM
To : ruaryjanasy@aol-qam ; m cffy @ aol . com ; cathy @b ay I ock. com ;
y_osgal I ign@aol, com ; rosali eomahony@.earthli nk.net
Cc : lenfant@pasbell net
Subject: re: Papillon Preschool parking in Burlingame
Dear Mayor Janney, Vice Mayor Coffey, Councilwoman Baylock, Councilman
Galligan, and Councilwoman O'Mahony :
I a{n a parent of a child who currently attends Papillon Preschool,
locqted at 700 Peninsula Avenue in Burlingame. I write to express my
conaQq regarding the City's apparent decision to forbid parking along
Peniqq$p Avenue next to the preschool. While I do not necessarily disagree
with that new rule due to the danger it poses because of heavy traffrc in
that area, new problems will arise if no alternative parking arrangements
are provided. To avoid these problems, the City should create a "green
curb" alolryEloomfield Road, directly behind the Preschool.
3/12/02
Papillon has approximately 85 students, consisting of babies as
young as three months old to pre-kindergarden children. During popular
drop-off and pick-up hours, roughly 7-9 a.m. and 4-6 p.m., the Preschool's
seven spots in its parking lot are not capable ofproviding enough room for
all of the parents' cars. Reducing the parking solely to this small lot
will certainly result in more congestion along Peninsula Avenue as cars are
forced to stop, wait, then start again and make one or more circles around
the block until space is available. The drop-off and pick-up times coincide
with the busiest traffic periods on Peninsula Avenue.
The best solution is to create a "green curb" along Bloomfield Road
directly behind Papillon Preschool. I understand some ofthe residents on
Bloomfield Road have already voiced objections to the creation ofa green
curb. The only reason cited is their concern that long term parking will no
longer available to them. In particular, they argue they will no longer be
able to park their cars on the street in front ofthet own homes. This
reasoning, frankly, makes no sense. First, residency does not give anyone a
"right" to use a public street as a personal driveway. Second, these homes
all have garages and/or driveways of their own which, presumably, were
designed for the very purpose of parking one's own cars.
Conversely, allowing a green curb in that area would greatly benefil
Burlingame and its commuters as a whole by reducing the taffrc problem that
promises to erupt without some Papillon Preschool parking, as well as ensure
the safety of the parents and children associated with Papillon - a number
of which, incidentally, are Burlingame homeowners. Imagine a parent who has
two children, ages twenty-two months and three months. The juggling
required to hold on to a wandering toddler fast on his feet while
simultaneously carrying a baby in a heavy carseat and hanging on to diaper
bags and extra gear for both is a feat. Add to rhat, having to walk three
blocks ftom the Preschool because there is no closer place to park, and you
have created a situation fraught with potential dangers to both mom and
kids.
It is no surprise that over the last five to ten years, especially
with the burst of business in Silicon Valley, Burlingame has been
transformed into an even more popular and, consequently, busier place to
live and work. Papillon Preschool has been, and continues to be, a
tremendous asset to this city. Even the Bloomfield Road residents who have
written to you seem to agree the Preschool is a positive addition to
Burlingame. To accommodate the changing needs of this wonderful city, as
well as continue to encourage the development and growth ofbusinesses such
as Papillon Preschool, compromises are necessary. Therefore, I respectfully
ask the City's council members to reconsider the parking situation near
Papillon Preschool and to create a "green curb" behind the school on
Bloomfield Road.
Thank you for your time.
Sincerely,
Page 2 of 3
3112102
Kristina H.
Chung McCleary
323 Dwight
Road
Burlingame,
cA 94010
Page 3 of 3
3/12/02
Carol Yasuda-Tenones
2583 Wentworth Drive
San Bruno, CA 94066
March 5, 2002
Tratfic, Safety, Parking Commission:
Russ Cohen, Lisa 0e Angelis, James Evans, David May6r, James Mc lver,
501 Primrose Avenue
Burlingame, CA 94010
Dear Commisioners;
I am writing as a concerned parent and patron of Papillon Preschool. My son Cooper attended the Preschool
program from ages lhree to five, currently my daughter Kathleen, who is lhree years old attends the Preschool. ln the
four years that I have patronized Papillon I have developed a wonderful relationship with the Director Corine Hubsher
and the teachers who work at the school.
I wanl to express that the sole need for the school is a place to drop off and pick up children. I think that if the
neighbors think aboutjust that situation and not view this as an infringement on their'turf, then the solution should
be pretty simple. The school is open Monday through Friday during business hours of 7:00 am lo 6:00 pm. The
reason the hours are such is that parents of the childrsn who attend the school work tor a living and need to be at
work somewhere between the hours of 8:00am to 5:00 pm. They drop off their kids before work and pick them up
after work. The peak time that the parking lot is full is the drop off and pick up times. Since the lot is full, there are
going to be cars that need a place to park for 10-'15 minutes. Allowing a green curb on Bloomfield will be safe- off
busy Peninsula Avenue and smart- adjacent to the school building.
The impact to the neighborhood should be mlnimal. The Bloomfleld neighbors probably follow a similar pattern and
leave for work and come back home. For mysell the times I am home and need parking for potential friends who
visit, are the times when I am home. Those limes are evenings and weekends. The Preschool is not open during
those times and would not impact tho noighborhood at all during those times.
Neighbors believe that the parking lot is not being utllized. During p€ak hours the parking lot does become full.
Neighbors believe that a green curb on the Bloomfleld Avsnue sids of the building would jeopardize street parking.
The part of Bloomfield in question is adjacent to the Preschool building, not ln front of homes. lf the concem is slaff
parking, many of the statf do not drive cars in, but get dropped off or take public transportation, thereby minimizing
the impact of staff parking.
Enrollment at the Preschool isn't going to change. Whether you approve a green curb on Bloomfield or Peninsula or
not, the fact remains there are children who need to get dropped off and picked up. I will continue to patronize this
Burlingame business for another year and a half, until my daughter graduates from the Preschool. I believe other
families will also continue to patronize the school. So in respect for safety of atl the families who patronize this
business the approval of a green limited time parking curb should be considered.
Respectfully,
rul,2fY\/>- -,'
Carol Yasuda-Terrones and
Richard Tenones
Stacey A MurraY
305 Old County Rd., # 144
Belmont, CA 944,,.2
650-591-4981
February 22, 2002
Homayoun Barekat
Traffic, Safety and Parking Commission
501 Primrose Rd.
Burlingame, CA 94010
Papillon Preschoolt business hours are from 7am-6pm, so you @n imagine the amount of
parents dropping off and picking up their cfiildren. As it stands anyone who park on the street
in front of 700 Peninsula risks the chanoe of receiving a ticket even though this curb is clearly
Although I am not a Burlingame Resident I have chosen to do business in your fine city in. . .
severai different arenas, ttre most imporEnt being the education and daytime care of my child. I
have chosen Papillon Preschml as my child's educator and daytime caregiver as it is one of the
finest preschools available. You and the surrounding neighborhood of Papillon rnay not be aware
of what myself and 80 other families have dis@vered in this fine gem of a school. However, I
do find it distressing that since I do choose to do business in Burlingame and have dpsen
Papillon for the moat important task of educagng and caring for my daughter, I am.not even
peimifted a 5 minute parking space on the street in which to drop her off and pick her up when
the parking lot is crowded.
With the parking in front of Papillon Preschool belng a current topic with the dty @unsel, as a
concerned parent I have taken it upon myself to become informed with the situation. From what
I have lea;ed the local neighbors may have had an upsetting experience by the past tenanb of
700 Peninsula Ave. But unlike the previous occupants of this building, Papillon Preschool is a
quality and loving environment for any tiny person to start their education. Papillon has chosen
the important task of preparing and nurturing children to grow into strong and healthy mem_bers
of socibty. This is vasuy different from the previous tenants' I understand that before Papillon
moved into 7OO Peninsula location in 1995, that the previous tenanb permitted may lay within
the neighborhood. But I think the surrounding neighbors can agree that even though the
children may take walks that are strictly supervised by the capable Papillon staff, there is no
activity going on that is remotely similar b the previous tenants.
We as parenb are not asking for anything @mplicated' Basically all we are asking is for a few
overflow parking spaces to patronize a wonderful little business in which we spend our hard-
earned money on in the ciry of Burlingame. Ifs Just a few innocent pick-up/dropoff passenger
parking spaces. Ideally the current spaces in front of 700 Peninsula Ave. are the safest for this
overflow parking. With some families having multipule children getting them inside can be a
drallenge. We all know how easily they can wiggle their little hands free to o(plore' So having
these spaces as close to the scfpol as possible is inherent to their safety. These spaces are
already there in front of the school and are in the safest possible locatlon for the children and
parents of the sdlool.
=.-
painted green. Six months ago this wa.q not even an issue' If the laws have changed then a
notification should nare-Ueen-made to tne scnool so the parenq could be made aware of the
change. Also the olor of if,e curb should trave been changed from the current green to red' If
indeed this change nai ueJn mide and *" *ilr no ionge, hive the option of parking on Peninsula
then parents may be ;;r*d i" prrk on the *r$, ria.-or Peninsula Avenue risking their safety by
crossing this very busy street. I, as a. ?alent of Papitton, I am open to th9 green curb being
olace on Bloomfield, but to receive a ticket now wnln the curb on Peninsula is clearly green with
l+ ,inrt" parking labeling seems a bit uncalled for'
An option would be to having 24 minute green curb pa1kt-ng on the west side of Bloomfield
adjacent to the buifOing. Hoir,,ever, from-wnat t learned from the 2tL4 Citrt @uncil meeting the
nuighbo.s ure againsiihis. i muit tten ask how can a legitimate and healthy Burlingame
business not be p"rritt"O to park adjacent to the only twb.available sides of their building?
From what I understand Bloomfield is a public street ind although there are taxpaying residents
inii iir. there, papillon's owner is a taxpaying businesswoman.who is being forced by the
neighborhood, to noieven Ue allowed do fhr[ adjacent to her business. We are not asking to
tuf. u*uy p.ifing from in front of someone's home, we are asking to be. permitted to park from
the peninsuh groomield *rn", north to the end of
'Papillon's playground from 8am-6pm for 24
minutes increments.
After reading Mrs. Elwell's petition and letter it is my opinion that she was misinformed as to
where the potentiat ;1!g; IurU woulO be plaed. oire to her assumption of the plaement of said
potential curb I 63n ino"oand why the gloomfield neighbors would want to fight this curb. From
what I understand tne lreen curb would run adjacent to Papillon from the end of the red zone to
the end of the PlaYground area.
I have read the letters of the local neighbors and have to say that they are truly emtellishing the
purfing situation in a1 forms. Rrst of att the schoot has a firm drop off policy. tlt3!-t!e children
ffirf U" Oropped off by 9:30 AM. Seondly between the.hours of 10AM and 3PM the parking
i"ir.v u"
",i.rpty,
this is due to the simple fact that no children are arriving or leaving during
these hours.
If the objective of the city of Burlingame is to keep Peninsula Ave. safe by eliminating parking gn
the nortti side of the street than no-business should be singled out. Clearly the only real solution
to keeping harmony in the neighborhood and avoiding any additional spending which may put
the city over budget would be to keep things the way they are'
Thank you for Your consideration.
Stacey
March 5,2002
Ms. Homayoun Barekat
Traffic, Safety & Parking Commission
501 Primrose Road
Burlingame, CA 94010
Dear Ms. Barekat:
I am writing this letter to contribute my viewpoint to the parking issue on Peninsula Avenue in front of
Papillon Preschool. I have lived in Burlingame since 1997 and have been a Burlingame homeowner since
1998. When I fust moved to the Bay Area in 1992, I originally settled in Fremont. However, when I
became employed at a business in San Mateo in 1996, I decided to move across to the Peninsula. I was a
homeowuer in Fremont and had a brand new 3-bedroom 2-bath house, which I sold, and then moved to a
one-bedroom apartnent in Burlingame. The rent on my one-bedroom apartnent was higher than my
mortgage had been on my house! Why was I willing to do this? Because I felt that what Burlingame had to
offer as a community was worth the increase in price and decrease in size. When I fust saw downtown
Burlingame Avenue, I fell in love and knew that this was the place for me to relocate to. I have not once
regretted this decision.
I am now the owner of a 2-bedroom l-bath house in Burlingame. This is the place that my husband and I
have chosen to raise our family. We have a 2-yeat old son who attends Papillon Preschool full-time.
Papillon Preschool is a wonderful daycare/preschool center located at 700 Peninsula Avenue in
Burlingame. Papillon has been a wonderful addition to our family. However, parking has always been an
issue. There are approximately 80 families whose children attend Papillon, however, there are less than ten
parking spaces in the parking lot. Most families drop off their children in the morning between 7:30 and
8:30 and pickup in the evening between 5:00 and 6:00. With so many cars coming and going at the same
time, there is no way that the 8 or 9 spaces in the parking lot can accommodate everyone needing
somewhere to park their car. This is where the spots in front of Papillon on Peninsula Avenue are very
important. If the parking lot is full, parents will usually park in the next closest place which is on Peninsula
Avenue. When bringing children in and out of the school, it is very important to minimize the distance that
parents should have to walk with their children in order to keep them safe from oncoming traffic. This is
especially true for some of the parents who have multiple children attending Papillon. If Peninsula Avenue
on the Burlingame side were to become a no-parking zone, that would severely limit the amount of spots
for parents to park. We would be forced to park on Bloomfield or Arundel, or even worse, on the San
Mateo side of Peninsula and then dodge cars to run across the street. Very unsafe!! All it would take is for
one child to dart out into taffic and we would have a tagedy!!
As a Burlingame resident and taxpayer, I feel that parking is a big issue everywhere in Burlingame. Please
don't punish people that are patronizing Burlingame businesses for the benefit of traffic that just happens to
be passing through on a main offramp from Highway 101. I feel that the best solution is to continue to
allow parking on the street on Peninsula Avenue. This solution will cause the least disruption to the
homeowners on Bloomfield and Arundel and also provide the safest alternative for all of the parents and
children that have greatly benefited from attending Papillon Preschool.
Sincerely,
Lisa Fiveash
836 Linden Avenue
Burlingame, CA 94010
a.
/\-c-1-
I165 Bay Laurel Drive
Menlo Park, CA 94025
February 26,2002
Burlingame City Council
501 Primrose Road
Burlingame, CA 94010
Gentlemen:
I am a concerned parent writing regarding the ill-fated green zone located in front of Papillon
Preschool at7O0 Peninsula Avenue in Burlingame. My daughter has attended Papillon since she
was 4 months old; she is now a student of the pre-K progr.rm. As a former l5-year Burlingame
homeowner (in this very same neighborhood) and as a recipient of parking tickets for the24-
minute green zone,I feel compelled to write.
Papillon Preschool serves the needs of some 80 families. There are 7 parking spaces available.
Most parents probably spend an average of 10 minutes each morning dropping offtheir child on
their way to work. Mornings are an especially busy time, and there have been several mornings
where I was forced to park in the 24-minute green zone. To eliminate the green zone would be
an injustice to parents. Lest we (and our neighbors) forget, the children about whom we are
speaking range in age from 3 months to 5 years. To require parents to park anywhere but in the
direct vicinity of the School would be abominable.
After receiving the most recent ticket for parking in the green zone,I spoke with Sgt. Cutler of
the Burlingame Police Department. Although Peninsula Avenue is clearly wide enough for two
cars, she informed me that the green zone will be removed, as there is an issue of safety. (The
City would never want a vehicle to be rear-ended as parents and children were exiting it.)
The City proposed changing the green zone to Bloomfield Road. Our Bloomfield Road
neighbors did not like that idea, for fear that they may not be able to park in front of their homes
so readily. Perhaps our Bloomfield neighbors should step outside their homes to see that the
green zone would be installed in front of Papillon, not in front of their homes. Their argument
that School employees may park in front of their homes was weak. For their information,
employees work during business hours, the same hours in which the majority of the public works
(i.e., between 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.). Any persons who are not so working, who may be so
lucky as to be retired or staying at home, could surely park in their own driveways. When our
working Bloomfield neighbors returned home at the end of the day, the Papillon employees
would have, themselves, left. For that matter, how do our Bloomfield neighbors even know they
Burlingame City Council
February 26,2002
Page2
are Papillon employees parking in front of their homes: perhaps they are the general public,
people from the accompanying apartment/duplex buildings, employees from the San Mateo side
of Peninsula Avenue, etc. Shame on our Bloomfield neighbors for their display of self-
centeredness!
I believe the City should reinstall the green zone on Bloomfield Road. If the City is unwilling to
do this, my suggestion would be to install speed bumps on Peninsula Avenue directly prior to the
existing green zone. The City could then safely retain said green zone. (This remedy works
quite well in my current residential neighborhood.) It also would not hurt to lower the speed
limit on Peninsula Avenue.
I urge you to carefully consider this most important request. Thank you for your courtesies.
Very truly yours,
t
1-'-->
1650 Borel Place, Suite 120
San Mateo,CA94402
January 27,2002
Burlingame Police DePartrnent
1111 Trousdale Drive
Br:rlingame, CA 94010
Attention: Sgt. Cutler
Dear SgI. Cutler:
Re: Parking Citation #8U409712
I am writing to complain about the aforementioned parking citation, a copy of which is
enclosed.
My daughter attends the pre-K program at Papillon Preschool, located at 700 Peninsula
Avenue, Iiurlingame. Approximately 80 fu*ili.t belong to this school. There are six parking
spaces for the school. elong Peninsula Avenue, there are'No Parking - 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m."
signs. However, directly in front of the school is a 24-minute green zone'
On Wednesday, January l6,2}O2at approximately 8:10 am., I arrived at the school to
drop offmy daughter on my way to work. It being a busy moming time for drop-offs and there
being rro uruituUte parking spu"Lr,I was forced to park in the green 24-minute zone. I was inside
ttre school for no more thanien minutes, having to leave to be at work by 8:30 a.m. When I
exited the building, much to my dismay, a police officer (Offrcer McKague) was parked behind
my car. The Direiior of Papillon, Corine Hubsher, was conversing with this officer. I went off
to work. I later contacted Ms. Hubsher who advised me that the offrcer did issue a parking
violation, which he delivered to her.
One can only wonder why the City of Burlingame installed a 24-minute green zone if it
apparently serves no prrporr. We are talking about a preschool, where parents must drop off
tt "i. pr""ious children on th.ir way to work. It is logical, therefore, that parents are there for
moments only; to be there more than a few moments would thwart the intent of dropping one's
child off in a timely maruler so as to get to work on time'
Burlingame Police Dept.
January 27,2002
Page2
I request that you reconsider the issuance of this parking violation (and all future parking
violations). The 24-minute green zone was created by the City to alleviate a parking predicament
for one of its business ta:<payers. Shouldn't the City let it serve its purpose?
I appreciate your courtesy and consideration.
Very truly yours,
J. Stewart
Enc.
;i rrloa 4 afuer dhi h 5a4 4l'u'1 tDffir-ld hct'v"
c\tvrtrr4ll lhx- +it1't ,';;;a Cuil*" hoL ''1^t.d1
1'
Nd iL
a
Bu. 40e? 12 9llL..?lSgIhlnLH*F-
G7,
a2*2-
i:r
7oo -12..2 ; f;.r, ,a 1' .'/ -€'-<
;OmCenS @rmeurs:
l-D.l -7t
.1:..tf t. gc.m
o 2 6/c520.tr s. u!{. oooE l3.t(lloB 4. lll[ cooE 1336.60
tr 5. lrli'COoEIUSru.fl 6. ltto. @o€ t35-q,
. o 7.lllm.@oE!3,sO{0tr a nilt cooE liuBuo
o. 9. lltil cooE 1uill'10
. E to. me cooe tr.as.o/o-u. nrrcooe tgrom'o rz ul0.cGta,l,tooo l& nfi. c@E t1g0l5
E 14. ntil. oooc t$eo{o
Cl ll c1c26m
FEGEINATUI EXPCS)
'.trro
'tr t?.'oi8.' trr0..tr a.r. E 21.o2.|.. O2a
cl,c 2250€ffi
AHolc
clrc
orc
c1|c
c1tc
r HINPANloG
2ronP floG
rctux{uE
IO PAfi$G AITfITTE
ToP f,0IGSPECFED Kms
ilof il Dm{ATE IPACEpnrvmpmrvwoooaan
REPEAT UCTAIIOI
REZltIE
PAnmE Nrcl{ALK
a.omcffitavAY
PAf,olB O{ SDErlAtX
MEEPASKTG
toTwllril rr 0F ctn8
o6rt[.E) PffUon
Fn€ HttMrr ' PAtr( W,tl ls
upu,71
?,511
OI}IB
wl aEo b€
Fz
o2d
U6dr hou b ]€qr€61 xr
rcslts ot tro intat lB,,ta*''
rlYT YIAF I
wV lo lo l.-I
3
3
t
i
$
BAIL
$ 10.(n
s 1r.0o
r5.00
20.m
2..6
25.m
50.00
120.00
oA'AGEi.lcYBAOGE }{'.sG.sccnoN
rEt salisrled tritr
coo
I
February 21,2002
To Whom it May Concern:
Re: Green P?rking Zone oroposed in,front of Papillon Preschool
Dear Sir/Madam:
This serves to address the current proposal to add a green parking zone on Peninsula
Avenue, in front of Papillon Preschool. As a parent of a child who attends Papillon, I am wholly in favor
of this proposal.
lnitially, Papillon Preschool is attended by children ranging in age from 3 months to 5
years of age. There is one small parking lot for use by the parents as they are dropping offand picking up
their children. For anyone that arrives at a time that the parking lot is full, the only other options are to (l)
park in the surrounding residential neighborhood; or (2) park across the street and 'Jaywalk" to the
preschool. I do not believe that either option is appropriate.
Due to the parking by the residents of the area, and surrounding businesses, there is often
no parking on the "side streets" adjacent to the preschool. I do not believe that forcing a parent with a
small child to walk scvcral blocks with that child is an appropriate altcrnative. Nor do I believe that
'Jayrvalking" with a small child should be considered. The only other option is to create the proposed green
zorle so that parents may drop offand pick up their young children in a safe manner.
I have seen several letters from residents and surrounding busincsses criticizing the plan.
One major criticism appcars to be that it will creatc more traffic on an already busy Peninsula Avenue.
This criticism is without rnerit. The proposed green zone will actually lessen traffic in front of the
preschool, which is located on a busy part of Peninsula. Currently, due to the scarcity of parking, many
parents "line up" in their cars in front of the school to wait for another parent to exit so that they can park.
This of course causes a traffic back up until the parent finds parking By creating more available "drop
offl' parking, this problem will be avoided.
There is simply no rcason to deny the proposal for the additionalgrocn zono. It is not
dctrimental to the neighborhood-it rvill lessen traffrc. Although some lctter rvriters who criticize this
proposal sccrll to think that it greatly affccts them, truthfully it does not. The surrounding businesses who
could not park in front of the preschool in the first placc, still rvould not be able to park therc. The status
quo rvill be maintained rvith thc exception of Papillon, rvhich lvould havc gained additional (although short
tcrm), SAFE parking for thc parents and childrcn. Thosc businesses in the area that bclieve that thcy need
more parking can petition for their oun additional parking zone in front of thcir business if they so require.
As to thc rcsidents of thc arca, thcy rvill actually have lcss r,vorries as parents rvill no
longcr scck to park in front of thcir housc. I am ccrtain that thc saurc people who criticize the green zone,
also criticizc those rvho park in front of their home. In short, it is the appropriate solution for all
corrccrncd.
Unfortunately, I rvill not be able to attcnd thc upconring mecting on this issue. Horvever I
invitc 1,ou, or your collcagues, to contact me to discuss this letter further at any time. Tharrk you for your
considcration.
)/ours,
R.
(650) 69(r-8350
Mary Janney
Mayor, Burlingame City Council
501 Primrose Road
Burlingame, CA 94010
March 11,2002
RECEIVED
f',,AR l Z llt,Z
8ffsiHfii,,$5['fiE
Dear Mayor Janney,
I am saddened and confused by the recent allegations made in The Independent
regarding Ann Keighran of the City Planning Commission.
As one of Ann's former teachers, I have always found Ann to be very forthright and
honest in her dealings with others. She is not one to be pressured by politics or self-
interest in whatever she does. Also, as you know, she is a very capable woman. The
excellence of her previous work on the commission reflects her deep concern for the City
and its people. I would think that she is the type of person best suited for this position.
I urge you to vote for her continuance as a commissioner
Sincerely yours,
Maureen Hally, RSM
please resPond
Attomey il No ResPonse Required
r-t D,i( Financey'city Planne,
il Dir. Public Works
I Human Resources
U Police Chief
! Fire Chief I On Next Agenda
n Parks & Rec
! Librarian
PLEASE SEND A COPY OF YOUR
RESPONSE TO THE CITY CLERK
ew
)